Blueskier's page

92 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 92 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Does the Mount trait still exist? If so, what are the disadvantages in mounting a companion without it?
Is there anything to allow goblins to mount dogs/goblin dogs/wolves?


DarkOne the Drow wrote:
Asgetrion wrote:
Heh, having lived most of my life close to the Arctic Circle I'd say that -11 C or even -20 C is hardly "severe cold" in my books. Then again I *love* cold, and +20-25 C is severe heat for me. :)

Here is a wonderful example. People from different regions of the world have different norms of comfort with regards to temperatures. 25+ C is passing out temperature for me, and many others, yet at -14 C is no hassle to be outdoors. There you go to other regions of the world 40 C is the normal and comfortable for those native to the region, yet are freezing (almost going into shock when temperature drop below 25 C).

Yeah, I was reading this whole conversation in Buenos Aires with 11 C while wearing 2 shirts, a sweatshirt and a jacket and freezing my ass off, just longing for the warm embrace of Asmodeus in hell.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Ok, short and sweet, are sneak attack damage dice doubled when you score a critical hit?
I can't for the life of me find a ruling about this

Nettah wrote:

Monster Hunter does already give you a free action recall knowledge on the monster since 1.3 update, so Automatic Knowledge is even more useless.

Oooohhhh, I missed that. The issue is solved then. Thanks!

Hey, so I just noticed, and sorry if anybody has already pointed it out, but you just can't make Hunt Target work with Automatic Knowledge and Monster Hunter, which is weird because Ranger is supposed to be the class specialized in identifying enemies.

Basically, Monster Hunter gives you a (pretty minor) bonus against hunted enemies when you critically succeed at identifying them. So, you have to first declare your Hunt target, and then try to identify them. But Automatic Knowledge lets you identify as a free action triggered at the start of your turn, and it's pretty much the only skill feat to boost this particular thing.

Anybody else finds it odd that THE one skill feat tailor made for monster hunters does not work with THE monster hunter class with the Monster Hunter class feat?

If you don't like spamming Treat Wounds, just add +1 to the dc for each attempt, which also makes sense and adds to verosimilitude. That plus using the hard dc of the enemy that damaged you makes it a competitive check that can't be repeated indefinitely. Presto. You don't have to use ridiculous things like stamina or hero points or short rests or whatever.
Also, you can't always take 40 minutes to heal and not have the enemies ambush you

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Really? I mean, we did have thosee moments in mid or high level pf1 when we rolled high and declared "my attack is about twenty/thirty highyish" and the GM would just say "ok, you hit". But now modifiers are much much simpler, there's less buffs, it just feels easier to know exactly how much you rolled. I haven't played higher than lvl 7, though, so maybe that's it

Ultimatecalibur wrote:
Tridus wrote:

The real problem here is that there's only a narrow range of numbers where you won't wind up with a specialist banging out critical successes and everyone else banging out critical failures frequently. That leaves the game keeping everyone in that narrow range, and thus it doesn't feel like you're progressing at all or that your "legendary" skill character is actually particularly better than the guy who took the basic two day course in how to do the same thing.

No the problem is tied to two major factors: Factoring gear into DCs and Poorly Zeroing DCs.

Consider that there are 3 primary factors that determines the chance someone succeeds or fails on an at level check. They are Ability, Training and Gear.

  • Ability - The characters Ability score bonus. This variable goes between -1 and +7. A 9 number spread.
  • Training - The characters training in the skill. This currently varies between -4 and +3. An 8 number spread
  • Gear - The characters gear. Due to how badly designed armor is this varies between -5 and +5, an 11 number spread. On checks not influenced by ACP the gear modifier is between -2 and +5, an 8 number spread.

All 3 combined leads to a spread a 26(23) number spread of -10(-7) to +15. A 26 number spread with a d20 random variable means that a check cannot be designed to test both extremes. If gear isn't factored in we end up with a 17 number -5 to +10 spread that can have checks test both extremes and gear becomes a benefit.

The recently updated DCs are badly zeroed as the zeroes on most DCs shift as levels rise assuming characters have gear and ability scores that they may not have. Medium DCs start at an assumed bonus of +2 and then grow to an assumed bonus of +6, Hard DCs start at +4 and end at +9, Incredible go from +5 to +13, and Ultimate start at +7 and end at +17. Instead of an increase letting you succeed at harder checks they let you maintain the same level of difficulty.

A character optimized for a skill will end up with a +15 bonus (+7 from ability, +3 legendary training, +5 item).

Some skills can get a bigger bonus. Demoralize can get to 16 (because it has a feat for +2 but only goes to a +4 item) or 17 against orcs and goblins; Craft can get to +17. Goblins can get to +16 with Handle Animal with wolves or goblin dogs, and I'm sure there are other such little oddities.

That means you sometimes keep up with Ultimate dcs, always beat Incredible dcs and rolls all over Hard dcs (the treadmill, not the actual checks). That is without consumables, buffs or anyone assisting you. I don't think there is a problem with that. Ultimate dcs are outliers, who cares.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
NemisCassander wrote:

I have filled out all of the surveys, even though my group has stopped the playtest due to lack of interest, and the chances of playing PF2E when it launches is basically nil.

I will say, though, from someone with a background in how to write (and analyze) survey questions, the devs need to seriously work on writing their survey questions. Without imputing nefarious intent, it is very clear (to me, at least) the expected response to most of these questions, and I would guess that the survey results are biased because of this.

Again, I am not imputing blame here, and I doubt the devs are even aware of the bias in their questions and selected answers.

Should the designers wish to discuss this, I am easily reachable here.

Can you provide a few examples of this, so someone who does not have any training on this can see what you mean?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

My group has decided to use the hard DC of the enemy that damaged you (if more than one enemy, the highest one). The rationale is that a higher level enemy has more powerful weapons or causes more vicious injuries, and it parallels nicely with the recovery DC when dying

2 people marked this as a favorite.
ClanPsi wrote:

Penn: Yeah, but that only solves the problem specifically for Goblins taking that specific racial feat. Everyone else is screwed.

Actually, It doesn't really solve the problem. Goblins could already select a wolf; both cavalier dedication and Steed Ally (paladin) have the caveat that for cultural reasons a GM can allow a different kind of animal, and goblin lore points to them hating horses. It's not really a problem if your GM is reasonable.

The problem is that the wolf still does not gain the mount trait, so it cannot use any non land speed while you mount it. Why do you care? Because paladin mounts gain the ability to fly

Quandary wrote:
I don't understand why Goblins need special Wolf Mount access, those don't seem equally "Goblin Iconic" as the Goblin Rat-Dogs. This isn't against Rough Rider granting it's bonus to Wolves if you manage to acquire Wolf Mount via some other non-Goblin specific means... But better approach would be non-race-specific means to gain Wolf Mount via Ranger/Druid Class Feat or something.

This update to Rough Rider lets you choose a wolf if you are a paladin/cavalier. And eventually, when Goblins of Golarion is published, it will be updated again for the Goblin Dog animal companion

6 people marked this as a favorite.

High level combat takes 20 minutes IF you are an experienced player. 5 noobs (including the dm) that have to look up rules in a pdf in the middle of combat take a lot more time. And that is what's happening, we're all noobs in pf2

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey, there. This is just a long rant with little in the form of analysis or suggestions. This just the tale of a goblin and his dog

So, I made myself a goblin paladin for a homebrew campaign. I'm still level 2, but I'm planning my build up to 20.
On level 3 I'm going to pick steed ally, but as goblins hate horses, I'm picking a goblin dog (technically a wolf, but it's supposed to stand in for any canid). The problem is, it doesn't have the mount trait, and there is no way for it to gain it.
There is only one mount (the horse), and it's an animal goblins are known to hate. I've looked for solutions, but to no avail:

1-there are goblin dogs and riding dogs in the bestiary. They don't have the mount trait

2-there is a goblin ancestry feat that looks tailor made for this fluffwise, but it fails crunchwise because it doesn't give your mount the "mount" trait:
Any creature that will bear your weight can
become your loyal steed, and you know how to coax even the
strangest beasts into service. You gain the Ride feat, even if you
don’t meet the prerequisites. You gain a +1 circumstance bonus
to Nature checks to Handle a goblin dog or wolf mount. For more
about the Nature skill, see page 152.

3-There are many paladin class feats that empower your steed, including the option to have a specialized companion. (As an aside, specialized companions gain by default +2 to their int bonus. The paladin exclusive specialization, auspicious, gives +2 to their int bonus. By RAW, your steed gains 4 to int bonus and reaches companions the equivalent of an intelligence of 10/ end aside). So, lucky me, there's a specialization just for this: Racer, but IT UNBELIEVABLY DOES NOT GIVE THE ANIMAL THE MOUNT TRAIT

Sooooo, it kind of feels that the game is fighting against the concept, and it really really shouldn't, because goblins are kind of paizo's thing. They wanted them to be core. They are little and angry and funny and ugly and scrappy and they love fire and they hate horses and dogs. I'm not usually uptight about respecting the canon fluff, and in fact I usually don't even read it. But this time you (paizo) succeeded! I actually care about goblins and want to play as a goblin and want it to feel like a goblin. And the damn rules won't let me!

Proposed solutions, because I'm not just going to rant:
A- first of all, please clarify that auspicious does not give +4 int bonus. Or clarify if it does

B-please just do one of these:
1-just give the wolf the mount trait
2-add the mount trait to the benefits of Rough Rider
3-add the mount trait to the benefits of theracer specialization
4-add the mount trait to one benefits of one of the paladin steed feats
4-add a riding saddle item that lets you add the mount trait to the animal

Any of these would do. You got me good, paizo. I'm hooked on your silly, horse hating goblins. Just let me play that concept.
You will make a goblin and his dog very happy

Mathmuse wrote:
Blueskier wrote:
Scythia wrote:
High is the category suggested for most checks.
Citation needed.

page 274: "Often, a ritual requires additional secondary skill checks to represent specific facets of the ritual, with a high-difficulty skill DC of twice the ritual’s spell level.

page 295: "For monsters, the GM will use a high-difficulty skill DC of the monster’s level (see page 336)."

Page 327: "If you’re not sure how difficult something significant should be, use a high-difficulty DC for the party’s level."

Page 336: "Many tasks use the high-difficulty DC for their level, but circumstances adjust this. For trivial, low, and high DCs, a character with the amount of skill described in the following paragraphs likely has a greater than 50% chance of success, thus allowing more critical successes."

Also page 336: "A high-difficulty skill DC can be overcome by a character who has increased their proficiency rank in a skill but doesn’t have a high score in the associated ability (like if a typical rogue were attempting an Athletics check). This is the default difficulty in Pathfinder. High-difficulty DCs are a good choice for skill checks that require only one character succeed for the party to benefit." (emphasis mine)

Page 336-337: "For most tasks that low-level, everyday NPCs might attempt, the level of the check is 0–2. For example, using a log to cross a river is tricky but still reasonable for a normal person, so it’s a high-difficulty level 1 check (DC 14). Based on that, you might decide that Balancing across a rickety bridge, which is easier for an ordinary person, is a highdifficulty level 0 Acrobatics check (DC 12). If the bridge or log were covered in moss, you might adjust to severe."

Page 337: "When a character Crafts an item, use the high-difficulty DC for the item’s level as a baseline—for example, the DC for a common level 5 magic item is 21. If the item is uncommon, you might increase the difficulty to severe and rare to extreme."

Page 337:...

Wow, that was a lot more than what I had assumed. Thanks for taking the work to compile it

I don't have the pdf right now, what does the quote from 295 refer to?

Still, I'm not sure how that translates to actual play. For example, and this is obviously pure anecdote, I'm playing a paladin, specializing in diplomacy, intimidate, craft (repair) and athletics (trip). Most of those are "opposed" checks, so the dc is set by the enemy (repair is the item's low dc). I'm just not so sure that you'll be making most of your checks against high dc through a campaign

Scythia wrote:
StratoNexus wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
I like the tight math, but think it's currently calibrated with a lower chance of success for PCs than is ideal. And changing this is very doable.

I agree. Keeping the variance smaller than PF1 is a good goal and while I would prefer a variance that is slightly larger (~4 points more) the current range can work for my games. An adjustment to the difficulties I think can make this system robust and fun as opposed to robust and a bit punititive.

Scythia wrote:
Let's look at a lv 15 character. At 15, the DC for a level appropriate skill check is 35, basically 20+level.
Scythia wrote:
Literally doing everything they could to be good at a skill gives them slightly less than half a chance to succeed. Anyone who hadn't focused every bit of available resources on that skill would have an even worse chance. Additionally, 11 or higher means that the +10 = crit rule is effectively meaningless to the character.
To be fair, 35, is the High difficulty, but I agree with your point. In my opinion, if you have focused on a skill to the extent that you have done everything you are able to improve it, then the Extreme difficulty (which would be 40 at level 15) is what should be 50/50.
High is the category suggested for most checks.

Citation needed.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Qazyr wrote:

I'm curious how having a problem with /ˈdiːmən/ and /ˈdiːmən/ and not with /koʊm/, /bɑm/, and /tuːm/ makes us silly.

It's just a joke because they are written the same way and they are pronounced differently, while demon and daemon would not be pronounced differently if English just had a systematic way of translating letters to sounds

Andy Brown wrote:

However, Command an Animal starts with this:
You issue an order to an animal that’s obeying you, either because you previously used Handle an Animal successfully (see below) or you have the Ride feat (see page 170).
Neither Animal Companion or Minion rules explicitly override this

But that is precisely what Command replaces. All of that is the usual effects of Command an animal

N N 959 wrote:
Blueskier wrote:

Do you have to use the Handle Animal first to then Command your animal companion. I'm assuming that you don't, but I can't find it anywhere



The relevant part of the Animal Companion rules state this right at the beginning,

p.284 wrote:
Animal companions are loyal comrades who follow your orders. They have the minion trait, so they gain 2 actions during your turn if you use the Command an Animal action to command them; this is in place of the usual effects of Command an Animal.

Emphasis mine.

What are the usual effects?

Command Animal p.153 wrote:

You issue an order to an animal that’s obeying

Concentrate you, either because you previously used Handle an Animal successfully (see below) or you have the Ride feat (see page 170). Most animals know the Leap, Seek, Stand, Stride, and Strike basic actions. If an animal knows an activity, such as a horse’s Gallop, you can command the animal to perform the activity, but you must spend as many Command an Animal actions as the activity’s number of actions. The animal uses the action you command.
This means that for Animal Companions, you use one Command an Animal to get them to use their 2 normal actions.

I had read that, but my perhaps too legalistic interpretation was that Handle Animal was a requirement for Command, not an effect, so it was not replaced by that wording.

Rereading the action now, my interpretation just doesn't make sense

2 people marked this as a favorite.
shroudb wrote:

you, as a player, don't even need to know, but as a DM it's a very, VERY handy table to keep open in front of you at all times.

This is kind of off topic, so I'm sorry about this, but I just found this reasoning very very wrong. I'm only writing this because the designers seem to share this notion that I find really weird, and with really impractical consequences in the way information is organized.

I need to know the dcs when I'm making a character. I need to know precisely how much of my scarce resources to allocate in each thing I'm going to try to do.
If my concept is of a great crafter, good swordsman and mediocre swimmer, for example, I need to know how to organize my skills/abilities/whatever so as to actually be a great crafter, good swordsman and mediocre swimmer. If, for example, a modest resource allocation on "swimming" can only get me to the level of "lousy swimmer", then maybe I don't want to build my pc that way, because I rather be a mediocre performer than a lousy swimmer. And all these decisions are made at character creation, so the dcs should not be in page 330 in the DM section.
Dcs being hidden in the middle of the book only accomplishes longer times when creating characters
/end rant, carry on

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Flames of Chaos wrote:

So in Pathfinder 2, you can only use your animal companion on a turn you want to access their abilities? (action 1, handle animal, action 2 command animal, action 3 animal companion gets their 2 actions)

Nono, the worst possible reading still gets you to spend 2 actions (one to Handle, one to Command) to get two animal actions in return.

The reason I assume it is a mistake is that 2 actions to cast a spell plus an action to command lines perfectly with a turn, giving you the chance to use your 2 main "things"

Do you have to use the Handle Animal first to then Command your animal companion. I'm assuming that you don't, but I can't find it anywhere


Yeah, I know the sturdy shield becomes broken at 2 dents. that's why you shouldn't use it a third time, else it becomes destroyed and you lose it forever

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alchemaic wrote:
Rameth wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
It seems via the twitch stream last Friday that a shield with hardness 3 blocks an attack that deals 3 damage it takes a dent. And if the shield is used to block and the attack would deal 6 damage the shield is destroyed (2 dents) and the user still takes 3 damage.
In the stream he didn't actually clarify what we've been talking about. So we still don't know which way it works. All he did was restate what was already in the book. He didn't talk about reduction in damage first or after the fact or not at all.

I believe he did say that the shield gets dented and the rest of the damage passes through, which would be "hardness isn't applied to the shield at all". The problem is pinning down that exact line in a 3 hour livestream.

And I just managed to find it. Timecode is 2:47:05 at

JB: Alright so you shield block?
EK: Yep.
JB: He is going to do 9 points of damage, so that's reduced by the hardness of the shield.
EK: Which is 5.
JB: Which is 5.
EK: Which means I'm going to take 4 points of damage.
JB: So you take 4 and the shield is dented.
EK: Correct.

As an additional bonus, I also got my question answered which is if you can shield block with the knowledge of how much damage you're going to take. Just need that noted in the rules now.

I did not expect that. This means that hardness is actually hp for the shield (and not what we usually refer to as hardness, that is, a damage reduction), and "number of dents" is just an hp multiplier.

This makes shields worse than the alternate way some (most?) of us were running it. I haven't played in high level combat yet, but at lvl 7 a Sturdy Shield with hardness 10 would have been dented by pretty much every single attack, which means that after 2 rounds (when it's broken and you don't want to risk having it destroyed) the only thing it does is prevent you from wieding a bigger weapon

Primal Summons and Storm Retribution don't add spell points. Those are typos, right?

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
Blueskier wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
All I want to know is: Did the healer Barbarian have the Cleric multiclass archetype?
Yep. Some of you guessed it right away because I described her as unhealthily obsessed with Gorum.
Cool, so martial classes are dead then. If you don't have spells, you can borrow them from a class who does. Sigh...


Mundane character concepts are dead. Which is good. Being non-magical is not a character concept that is level appropiate after lvl 5

Yes yes, caster fans are always happy when other people get their toys taken away because their way is the only right way to play, I'm fully aware by now.

Don't put words in my mouth, it makes it look like you are arguing in bad faith.

All my characters in 10 years of pf, except for an alchemist in like 2010, have been martials. That means their primary method of combat resolution was to stand in front of the biggest enemy and sword them in the hit points. What martial does not mean is that they have no access to magical effects or ways of interacting with of magic. A barbarian that can dispel with his axe or a fighter that can enchant his weapon with x-bane are martial characters.
Having a character that cannot interact with magic except by failing will saves is not a character concept that is level appropiate after lvl 5. Yes, I know I said it before, but I'm repeating it because that is what this conversation should be about, instead of you misrepresenting my argument

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
All I want to know is: Did the healer Barbarian have the Cleric multiclass archetype?
Yep. Some of you guessed it right away because I described her as unhealthily obsessed with Gorum.
Cool, so martial classes are dead then. If you don't have spells, you can borrow them from a class who does. Sigh...


Mundane character concepts are dead. Which is good. Being non-magical is not a character concept that is level appropiate after lvl 5

Don't forget that gripplis have a similar FCB, but with druid spells.

I'm playing a shaman right now, and the best offensive options, in my opinion, are the entangle variants, especially burning entanglement, bestow curse,, stinking cloud and divine favor/power if you got the build for it

I don't understand the confusion. The RAI ís clear enouģh to me: you can use this to use a glaive and still benefit from all the things that require you to wield a one handed weapon, such as the class features from swashbuckler, duelist, magus and that fighter arhetype.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm playing a fighter right now. Mutation Master 13. It's pretty cool: I wield an elven spear with a shield, because I have 3 arms; I can fly very fast, cause the mutagen keeps my dex really high so I can use a light armor and still have good ac (36 with mutagen on); I am the face of the party, albeit my skills aren't very good, I'm just better tan the rest; Cut from the air & smash from the air let me use my 11 attacks of opportunity per round to cover my party when they are wounded; Warrior spirit lets me have bane on demand, but also Greater Distracting, Planar, Heretic, Treasonous & Mimetic, all of them situationally great weapon qualities. I can sneak, trip, attack at range, ignore dr and lock down casters (disruptive + spellbreaker + greater disrupting) all with moderate success.

All in all, I like my character and I don't get bored because I can do a bunch of different things. I'm not a batman wizard, of course, but it's nice.

However, that required going through a bunch of different books, spending hours scanning for useful feats & weapon qualities, choosing a weird weapon (reach + finesse) that determines my race (elf) and so reduces my hp and my dpr, because 1d8 20x3 is not very special.

So my point is that you can make an interesting fighter, but the cost in time and effort is really tough. And you still can't do anything overtly significant. I can't teleport to the other side of the world, I can't créate a demiplane, I can't heal, I can't overcome a trapped door. Stamina points are a joke; they don't do anything, just a bit more damage here and a bit more damage there. Advanced armor training it's also kinda bad. Apart from the one that gives you skills and the one that lets you craft magic arms & armor, the rest just don't do anything.

So, yeah. I don't think the fighter is in an disadvantageous position compared to the other martials. I don't think paladins, rangers & barbarians are head and shoulders above it. So, in this respect, I think fighters are done. Fixed.

Of course, casters are another story. M/C D, etc.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've had a deathmage 10(3rd party gish)/paladin 1. No, not paladin 2, just one level

If you want your players to hate him just steal their items...

Hi everyone. I'm looking for items and/processes to submit my character that change him in some way. He's a mutation warrior 8 obsessed with chaging his body. He's already got wings and I'm planning to grow a 3rd arm at lvl 11, but I want more.
Storywise, he's an elf who belongs to a lineage that has a kind of claim to a throne, so the family's tradition is to start periodical civil wars, kinda like the blackfyres from SoIaF. My character wanted to break with all that so he started to abandon his "cursed flesh". He worships Lamashtu and prays for deformities.
So, I'm looking for items or rituals that change my character's body in some way, like the demonic implants, for example. Is there anything similar to that?
I have 100 k to spend, but realistically about 84k because I'm probably buying the Gloves of Dueling. Also, we are using the ABP from unchained, in case that's relevant.

What's this? Has there been an errata or faq?

Ravingdork wrote:
RDM42 wrote:

If you are spending $40 to $60 to get just one feat then, well, I don't feel that sorry for you.


There are AT MOST ten things in any given book that are of immediate use to me. Other things might become useful later on as I make new characters and realize new synergistic combinations, but for the most part, ten to start is pretty fair I think.

Hear, hear!

About 80% of spells, weapons, magic items and traits are pretty much unusable. Feats are worse, some of them actually do nothing. Classes are better, as I think all or most of them have something nice. I'd say about half of the archetypes are playable. YMMV, of course, but for some of us most of the mechanical content in books is never going to be played. And if the ones that are played are nerfed...

SheepishEidolon wrote:
Blueskier wrote:
Nerfing the jingasa while leaving the big six unscathed seems like a terrible move IMO

The big six got adressed in Unchained, and groups who tried seemed to be rather happy with it.

Maybe an Unchained II book (with more OPTIONAL rules) is a better way than steady errata, even if it delays corrections by a year or more.

Yeah, we actually use the Automatic Bonus Progression when we are not playing a published AP. It's pretty good, but it has some problems, like the slow progression of weapon bonus and the fact that it kinda screws classes with incorporated enhancement boni, like the hunter, occultist, mammoth shaman, etc. I still miss the jingasa, though.

Are people even buying head slot items, nowadays?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't know about you, but using a jingasa was fun for me. Splat surfing is fun. Navigating through an endless amount of useless items until I find one that is not crap is fun, because I get to experience a kind of "player level up" (as opposed to a "character level up"). Everytime a char of mine bought a jingasa I felt good, because I had found out about a cool, powerful option.

In contrast, everytime I buy a ring of protection or a cloak of resistance (items with the same dominance in their respective slots) I feel like I'm being forced to buy an uninteresting item just so my char doesn't die. Nerfing the jingasa while leaving the big six unscathed seems like a terrible move IMO

You seem to be waaaaaaaay angry about this. Why is it?

So, I compiled the votes because I have waay to much time on my hands. Some people voted for more than one, and it's ok because whatever.

10 Arcanist, Oracle
9 Druid, shaman (big surprise for me, I thought it wasn't widely liked)
8 sorcerer
7 witch
6 cleric, wizard
4 summoner (if people are voting for it, then it counts)
1 poor psychic

I have to say I expected the Oracle to be up there, but the arcanist is a surprise. The wizard scored a lot lower tan I thought it would.

I'm really glad the shaman was up there with the best of them. I try to play shamans for every campaign I start, but most of the time I get discouraged when I check the mess that are the archetypes. I keep waiting for carification on how some of its class features work.

It´t doesn't include Ultimate Intrigue, though, or any book out since march, more or less, so yours is still useful

Some suggestions, some of which have already been mentioned:

The feat Planar Focus gives you aditional foci to choose. Fire adds a nice amount of damage to every attack and earth gets you a nice burrow speed.

Remember you can change the last TW feat you've taken, so Coordinated charge is available at lvl 14 using the lvl 12 slot.

Improved spell share is a nice TW feat that lets you cast buffs on your AC and yourself as a single action. During combat, it is useful for spells like Energy resistance/protection, Vine Strike, Bristle, Delay/neutralize poison, and probably some other ones I'm forgetting.

Sincé you are going to basically bend over backwards to ensure flanking every round, the Menacing weapon property is useful.

It is, the thing is that spell lists are already compiled in or

Shaman, even though its archetypes are so weirdly written that it's embarrasing. It was never proofread, that much is clear. It's too bad that they didn't correct any mistakes in the ACG errata

TristanTheViking wrote:
Blueskier wrote:
Okay, just so you can point me to the sentence I've obviously missed: the ítem mastery feats are not combat feats, so you cannot choose them with Barroom brawler.
You use martial flexibility/barroom brawler to take the Advanced Weapon Training feat (which is a combat feat), choosing the item mastery option, which grants you one bonus item mastery feat.

Ah, excellent! I knew there was something


Okay, just so you can point me to the sentence I've obviously missed: the ítem mastery feats are not combat feats, so you cannot choose them with Barroom brawler.

cartmanbeck wrote:
Totally true. And besides, the clarification that you can't stack Fort save bonuses from different classes in PFS for this build really hurt it. It's best to stick to a home game with this. I can't wait to make a character with these options myself!

I thought everyone used fractional saves. You don't?


In that case, yeah, totally agree with everything in this thread.

What do you mean scorpion and mantis don't work?

Yeah, it was the elixir. Thanks!

1 to 50 of 92 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>