Byronus's page

Thanks for the reply, Pizza Lord! I haven't played Pathfinder for a while and only came across your reply today; forgive my tardiness.

The game I'm GMing is on hiatus (hence my absence), and your answer verifies the plausibility of a sub-plot I have in mind. ;)

Thanks for the help. :)

Couldn't you do all of that with just the hat of disguise?

You could. True. You could change your clothing AND appearance with the Hat.

With the Glamered Armour would only allow you to change the clothing, but it would have the Armour Rating.

Clarification: Can Glamered Armour be made to appear like other armour? Can I make my Glamered Leather look like Chainmail, to pose as a member of the Town Guard?

For weapons, it is situational, allowing one to sneak weapons into any location.

For armour, it has way more utility: Infiltrate an enemy encampment by mimicking their uniforms; arrest anyone by faking membership to the Town Guard; rub elbows with Nobility by looking the part; sneak into a temple by copying their flowing robes.

A Bluff check would be required for most of these things, but I'm sure Circumstance bonuses would apply if Glamered Armour is used.

I imagine a Bard with Glamered Armour and a Hat of Disguise could infiltrate anywhere.

Really? That makes the Glamered enchantment WAY more powerful than I imagined.

Thanks for the quick response.

I browsed around and couldn't find a clarification on this; sorry if I happened to miss the answer somewhere on here.

Does the Glamered enchantment allow the wielder vary the appearance of their item? Or is the illusion decided upon at item creation, and fixed?

I think, considering the price tag, it's a fixed illusion.

Am I correct?

I know I'm resurrecting an old thread, but I thought I'd chime in for those (like me) who come across this thread by searching the forums:

I don't understand why it's been suggested someone else is required to Take 20 on a Sleight of Hand (SoH) check.

The character using SoH ALSO HAS Perception! They can evaluate how well the item is hidden with their own Perception checks. Also, since a Perception check is a Move Action and a SoH check is a Standard Action, both actions can be performed in the same round, allowing one to Take 20 on BOTH Skill Checks simultaneously, within the same 2 minutes.

So, a character tries to hide a dagger in their boot, and frisks their own boot to see if they can find it. They do, and reposition the dagger slightly to make it harder to detect, but they find it again. The character fails to hide the items multiple times, as per the Take 20 rules, as they Perceive the quality of their own work throughout the 2 minutes.

Am I crazy? It says "Your Sleight of Hand check is opposed by the Perception check of anyone observing you or of anyone frisking you." Why can't that Perception check be your own?

:Byronus

Wow. NO takers. :(

Hey everyone,

I'm working on an idea for a game I'm running and wanted to clarify something with the lovely peeps of the Paizo community:

Can a Ghost's Malevolence ability allow it to possess a dormant Android awaiting a new soul for Renewal?

The Android race has many complicated exceptions, and I wasn't sure how things applied to this particular scenario.

Thanks,

Byronus

This message board is GOLD. Thank you, everyone.

Byronus wrote:

A shame. I like it when the PCs are scrambling in terror. :(

Good players will role play appropriately.

** spoiler omitted **

I use the hero point system and award hero points when characters really portray their characters in a realistic way. This encourages the players to act their characters appropriately rather than me telling them how their characters react based upon a die roll.

Hero Point system? Sound interesting. Can you please elaborate, or provide a link?

A shame. I like it when the PCs are scrambling in terror. :(

No.

Which makes perfect sense. You need nerves of titanium or lack of wits to willingly become an adventurer.

Which begs the question: If ADVENTURERS have nerves of titanium, what do the regular, NPC folk have to roll against when they see the swarm of zombies shambling through the mists towards them? :P

EDIT: I'm kidding, people. I guess I'll have extrapolate DCs based on a Fear spell Magical Trap... :/

So, and there's nothing in place for a terrifying RP scenario to impose Shaken/Frightened/Panicked penalties on the players?

EDIT: Are there any guide lines for setting these DCs? I'm kinda new to GMing Pathfinder... :/

I've ready everything regarding Haunts, Sanity and Madness, the Fear Spell, Magical Traps, and the Paizo Messageboards, and haven't found ANYTHING regarding regular, conventional scary stuff.

What would be the DC for walking into a slaughterhouse? Or watching a loved on be murdered in front of you? And how long will the Shaken/Frightened/Panicked effects last for?

Is there a source I'm overlooking?

:Byronus

Thanks Jeraa, and everyone who chimed in.

:Byronus

Quote:

The Fighter and Rogue catch up, round the corner, slam into the door. Interaction means they each get a Will save, which they both fail.

They can't "slam into the door", as the door isn't there. They would pass right through.

Gotcha. Hence the line: "Figments cannot make something seem to be something else." The hallway is just empty space, so they would simply pass through the door because empty space is what's actually there.

Quote:

The Fighter backs up and tries to knock down the door by Charging into it with his shoulder. His Strength check results in a 16, which is less than 21, so his shoulder slams into the door without budging it.

The fighter running through the door he was trying to knock down counts as an interaction, so he gets a Will save to disbelieve. Even if failed, he is still through the illusion as there was actually nothing there to stop him.

Same with the rogue - attempting to pick the lock is interacting with the illusion, and he gets a will save to disbelieve.

In the case of the Fighter, I can see how the Illusion would be spoiled, as he's physically throwing himself at the door. But, would the Illusion persist after he flew through it, or would it vanish?

If the Rogue were by himself and trying to pick the lock, and he kept failing his Will save, would he just be thinking his Disable Device check failed until he tried something else?

It just seems strange to me that the player is forced to use his check against a DC that doesn't exist, just to have the DM prompt him/her to make a Will save. Or does the DM make the Will save in secret?

Thanks,

:Byronus

I was reading up on Illusions and came across [u]this[/u] line:

Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive saving throws to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion.

Does that mean that ANY check can be used to disbelieve an illusion, after a Will save fails?

For example: A Sorcerer is fleeing down a long corridor from an enemy Fighter and Rogue. He rounds the corner, casts "Silent Image" to create the image of a large, locked door to bar their path. He even casts "Ghost Sound" to emulate the sound of a door slamming, the rattling of keys, and turning of the lock.

The Fighter and Rogue catch up, round the corner, slam into the door. Interaction means they each get a Will save, which they both fail.

Let's say the DC of the Door illusion is 21; perhaps the DM makes it slightly higher for clever use of "Ghost Sound" to make the "Silent Image" more convincing; who knows?

The Fighter backs up and tries to knock down the door by Charging into it with his shoulder. His Strength check results in a 16, which is less than 21, so his shoulder slams into the door without budging it.

The Rogue then tries to pick the lock on the door illusion. He rolls a Disable Device Skill check with a result of 25, which beats the door's DC 21, and the door vanishes in front of them, and they proceed on their chase.

So, would the Strength and Disable Device checks be used in this manner to dissipate the "Silent Image?"

Totally lost,

:Byronus

Theranon wrote:

For example I've used to being able to do all the feat locked combat maneuver stuff without having to "unlock" each damn one. So playing a warrior feels more like you either specialize on one maneuver or suck donkey balls doing it.

You can use all the Core and APG maneuvers from the beginning, no feats required. Usually they will result in an attack of opportunity, but with good armor / reach weapon / provoking AOO anyway etc. that's less of an issue.

+1. Reach is definitely your friend. You can provoke AoOs all you and, unless they have Reach as well, you get away with your attack for free. It's particularly useful for Tripping guys running by you, and Sundering ranged weapons.

Just remember to have a Gauntlet, Armour Spikes, or the Improved Unarmed Feat so you can deal with enemies go get in on you. Consider the Combat Reflexes Feat as well.

But, you are right: Focusing on ONE Maneuver and getting all the Feats associated with it will be WAY more useful as it eliminates the AoO and makes the maneuver viable at later levels. Too bad there's such a Feat Tax involved in specializing. :(

EDIT: Just remember to have high STR and DEX values, and stick to a Full BAB class if you want to be any good at Maneuvers. I've had a disappointing time with my Battle Cleric of Zon-Kuthon. :P

:Grimlock

Per RAW, it applies for every attack you make, no questions asked. When you hit with an attack, you make a Bull Rush attempt. That's it. Them's the breaks. If you don't like it, don't take the feat.

Shield Slam is a prerequisite for Shield Master, which is almost essential for a character who fights with a shield. RAI makes sense. If only they included the word "may."

:Grimlock

I'm a little rusty on Bull Rushes, but I thought you could always elect to follow a Bull Rush?

Yes, you can. But sometimes it's not tactically sound, such as when you're in a choke point. ;)

Grimlock

To re-iterate, does a player with this Feat HAVE to Bull Rush with every Shield strike?

I was working on a Core-Only, Two-Weapon Ranger who utilizes a Main-hand Heavy Shield/Light Off-Hand Weapon combo, in conjunction with the Stand Still and Step Up Feats. I want to be able to stick to enemies like glue and beat them up on a Full-Attack, and only use the free Bull Rushes when near walls/surfaces to knock enemies prone.

It'll be difficult to keep enemies close when you push them away with every Shield Bash.

Thanks in advance,

Grimlock

What are you ultimately trying to accomplish?

Are you trying to make it so that when you attack enemies that they don't notice? Or that people around them don't notice?

I can tell you that it simply isn't possible, as attacking breaks stealth.

I'm thinking about attacking/capturing someone in a room that, potentially, has guards outside, or patrols nearby. I wouldn't want the Whip crack to alert anyone nearby, who would hear and react accordingly.

I was considering a permanent Silence spell, but I'm not sure if Permanency will work.

There's also the Oil of Silence, which is used for firearms. Perhaps the GM can make an exception and say it can be used on Whips.

Thanks, again, for the help, guys. :)

:Byronus

A whip makes that loud crack when it strikes. Is it possible to make it so a whip can be used quietly, so it can be used by Roguish types? I have a Bard character in an intrigue-heavy campaign, and want to be able to utilize whips without granting Perception checks each time I do so.

Thanks,

:Byronus

I do have a Rules Question as well. If a Monk has no offhands when using a unarmed strike then should my Kasatha be throwing out his attacks at a penalty at all? I mean when fighting unarmed all of his unarmed strikes are considered primary handed attacks according to that ruling.

I believe there are no off-hands during a Flurry of Blows. For all other attacks, the off-hand penalties apply.

@Ajaxis: I can't believe how quickly this idea got derailed on the first reply. :P I already imagined this to be a difficult, Feat-starved build before, and now.... :(

@Secret Wizard: It's Core only, sir, but I appreciate the advice nonetheless. I've toyed with the idea of a Chaos/Destruction Gorum Cleric, but never considered him for a Shield-build.

It's starting to look like a Shield-fighting character would be best suited for a TWF Ranger, wielding Heavy Shield and a light weapon. :/

Hey all,

I've been recently toying with the idea of a Cleric who focuses on fighting with a Heavy Shield as their primary weapon. Yes, I understand it's not the best build, but I like the idea of using Shield-bashes to maintain good Armour Class while freeing up the other hand for wands and spell casting.

Paremeters:
i) Human;
ii) Support/Battle Cleric themed;
iii) Positive Energy Channeling;
iv) PFS legal;
v) CORE ONLY.

Concerns:
i) The Two-Weapon Fighting Feat is a prerequisite for a lot of Shield-fighting Feats, and it has a DEX requirement of 15. Some will probably suggest taking a 2-level dip in Ranger in order to get the Two-Weapon Fighting Feat from the Ranger Combat Style, thus avoiding the DEX requirement. Even though I'll have a better BAB and access to the Ranger spell list, I'd like to try to do it WITHOUT Multi-classing and maintain full Cleric casting levels. If that means the character only takes "Improved Shield Bash" along with "Power Attack" and friends, so be it;

ii) While this character will have no problems using Wands, they'd need to remove their Heavy Shield in order to use Rods. This build would, therefore, rely on non-Rod tactics;

iii) Point-Buy Arrays:
a) 14, 14, 14, 14, 10, 10 or;
b) 15, 14, 14, 14, 12, 7.

Posible Themes:
i) Kellid Priest of Zon-Kuthon, serving the Silver Crusade: A poor victim goes mad after losing their entire family to the Worldwound, and uses their pain and loss to fuel the destruction of the demonic hordes;

ii) Ulfen Priest of Torag;

iii) A Starknife-throwing Priest of Desna;

iv) Taldan Priest of Calistria, serving the Sovereign Court: A fallen Noble seeks to subvert those who wronged them through manipulation and intrigue. [I like the idea of Shield & Whip combo, but this story is probably best suited for a Bard character];

I'm reading several Build Guides while awaiting your replies, but would appreciate any information, especially regarding Deities and Domains.

Thanks in advance,

:Byronus

Wait a minute:

You get the +3 to your attack roll for the Shocking Grasp melee touch attack if the opponent is wearing metal armour, probably because metal conducts electricity.

But, if a Magus channels the Shocking Grasp through their weapon, shouldn't the +3 apply at all times if the weapon is made of metal?

I'll take a guess:

Your character is threatening an Easy enemy but can reach a Difficult enemy with a 5-foot step. So, you want to Full-Attack and use the +1 attack on Easy target, take your 5-foot step to threaten the Difficult enemy, and then use the +6 attack on them. Correct?

I discovered the Watch Trick, among other Tricks, on d20pfsrd.com. What is their source?

:Byron

Yes, I understand it involves the Perception skill. That's why I capitalized "Perceive" on the OP. :)

I'm playing Core-only PFS. I take it the Watch option isn't available to me, then.

Thanks for the prompt reply.

:Byron

I wanted my Ranger character to have a dog as a pet (non-Animal Companion) to watch over the adventuring party as they rested. The dog would hang out downwind of the camp and Perceive any enemies downwind from it, using it's Scent ability, as well as sight and hearing, to detect enemies approaching the encampment from that angle. Once detected, it would bark to warn it's master. An extra set of eyes never hurt, right?

I'm not sure what Trick would apply. I want the dog to Seek out threats, but to Stay stationary, so those two Tricks seem to make the most sense. But aren't those two actions covered in the Guard Trick? The wording of Guard seems to imply that animals with that Trick will put themselves in harm's way when performing that function. I don't want the dog in danger; I just want to be warned of possible danger.

So, which is it? Guard, or Seek+Stay?

:Byron

Tricky.

I've always understood that Step-Up was designed to counter opponents you threaten who disengage from you with a 5-foot Step, typically into a square you don't threaten. I never even considered the possibility of using Step-Up to avoid being flanked.

As Claxon said, the "away" part is the problem. You moved away from one threatened square onto another threatened square, but you never moved away from the enemy. You went from being beside them, to being beside them at a different location.

Since Step-Up is used to "close the distance when a foe tries to move away," and there is NO distance to close with your 5-foot Step, I'd say the GM was incorrect.

I've always understood that the Move Action required for wearing the shield is referring to the time it takes to slide your shield hand through the straps, grab the handle (if applicable), and use your other hand to tighten the straps to your forearm. That, to me, would be one Move Action. I would even argue you'd need your other hand free to secure the straps, too.

If the shield is slung on the shoulder, I'd say it's a Free action to bring around to be secured.

I have to agree with Beopere. If you looked up the class description of Summoner it's literally that.

Also, who run Barter town?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089530/

It looks good.

If you can hold and use something as large as a bow without penalty AND without losing your shield bonus, you're fine.

You'd then be carrying a weapon in your shield hand, which I believe would negate the AC bonus. The description of Bucklers indicates you lose the bonus when you use your shield hand, which I believe includes holding a torch or lantern, or a weapon, or just about anything. You'd have to check with your GM regarding their definition of use.

Could a character with Sleight of Hand use that skill instead of the Steal Maneuver?

Drawing a weapon from an adjacent companion isn't covered, I don't think. I'd probably allow it as a standard action (or a move action with Quick Draw). Slightly less economical from an action economy perspective

Thanks for the quick reply; I neglected to look into Combat Maneuvers.

I was going to suggest that, perhaps, Drawing a Weapon on an Ally would be the same as Retrieving an Item, a Move Action that provokes an AoO. The Ally would, of course, have to be aware of your intentions via a Free Action heads-up. Taking it would otherwise require a Steal Maneuver.

Fair?

EDIT: The Deliver trick: Brilliant! That would make more sense to me, though, if the Wolf would be bringing in a weapon in it's mouth. If it's worn on a specially designed scabbard, a Come command would be sufficient to bring him close enough for the Skirmisher to draw it.

Hey all,

I'm helping my friend with his first Pathfinder experience. He's decided on a Skirmisher (Ranger Archetype) with a Wolf as his Animal Companion. He presented an interesting question:

Can I keep a sheathed weapon on my Wolf, as a back-up, and Draw it from him when he's next to me?

I wasn't sure how to answer him, and thought I'd present the question to you all here.

Drawing a Weapon is a Move Action that does NOT provoke and Attack of Opportunity (AoO). Common sense would dictate that the weapon is worn by the person drawing it. So:

i) How would one handle a player drawing an Ally's weapon?;
ii) How would one handle a player drawing an OPPONENT'S weapon?

Thanks,

:Byronus

I couldn't find an answer for this in a forum search, so I started this thread. Here we go:

Let's say a character who can cast Teleport has a very large, unique TENT. It's interior is a garish combination of olive green and neon orange, and it's large enough to be considered a small marquee. This tent is used every time the party breaks camp, so it is "very familiar" to him.

Scenario: The adventuring party is hired to rescue someone. They set up the TENT in a forested area a few miles away from where their kidnapped victim is being held, leaving their horses and a few allies behind to keep watch over everything. The rest of the party proceeds on foot, sneaks into the enemy camp, and find their charge.

Can the Teleport spell be used to get the players and the kidnap victim out of the enemy camp by Teleporting to the TENT?

The TENT is a place "very familiar" to the caster, one that could be potentially set up anywhere, plus the garish colours of the TENT's interior means it's unlikely they'd be Teleported to a "Similar Area" instead (AKA the wrong tent), as the colour scheme is so unique.

Could that same TENT be set up on the deck of a ship instead?

Thanks in advance,

:Byron

Byronus wrote:

The dilemma I'm having is whether it's wise to have Cleric who uses Acrobatics, as the ability to successfully utilize Acrobatics means Armour Class has to be sacrificed somewhat.

I've played a few of acrobatic clerics. Magda is a 10th level acrobatic reach cleric. I find acrobatics works great up to about level 5, but later begins to fail more and more. Clerics have no way to boost acrobatics skill to keep up with high CMD foes.

Perhaps if Acrobatics were a Class skill for Clerics, it would be a different story. :(

Also, clerics have a few tricky ways to accomplish the same effect (move while avoiding AoOs, set up for AoOs) that are more reliable and don't rely on acrobatics. E.g. Grace spell, Plant (growth) subdomain. If you can move without taking AoOs you will rarely take a Full Attack, which is a much better defense than extra AC. So mobility > AC, unless your plan is to deliberately stand up front and take hits.

Perhaps it's better, and more economical, to grab the "Dodge" and "Mobility" Feats, instead of "Skill Focus: Acrobatics", the "Acrobatic" Feat AND build up your Acrobatics skill. At the very least, you'll save the skill points.

Read Multi-Armed under Kasatha. It designates specific hands as off-hands for the purposes of using them in combat.

Specific penalties for doing so are listed under the Multi-Weapon Feat. The Feat itself is NOT necessary to make the attacks, but it will lessen the penalties if taken.

Also, it appears the Calikang uses their arms like shields, boosting AC, but they are able to perform Slams with them.

Here's my $0.02:

A) Do you get no extra attacks with off-hand weapons (UNLESS you take Multi-weapon fighting)

You ALWAYS get extra attacks with all additional arms, even without the Multi-Weapon Fighting Feat. The Feat only reduces the penalties.

B) Replace Two Weapon Fighting with Multi-weapon fighting (per the feat description)

The Feat says that MWF replaces TWF for multi-armed creatures. It seems to me like a game balance decision by the developers based on common sense.

TWF, to me, is a special kind of combat training developed by the 2-armed citizens of Golarion. I'm sure an intelligent creature with more than 2 arms could put their extra arms behind their back and intentionally train themselves to be proficient at TWF, though it would seem counter-intuitive for a multi-armed creature to do so.

Still, if your GM is allowing a 4-armed creature in the first place, one proficient at TWF isn't an impossibility.

IF ALLOWED, I would calculate all of the TWF attacks normally, and then add an additional off-hand attack for the arms NOT used during TWF:

A BAB +16, STR 10, 4-armed creature wielding 4 non-magical daggers, making a Full-Round Attack Action:
i) NO Training: 4 attacks at +10/+6/+6/+6;

ii) MWF Feat: 4 attacks at +12/+12/+12/+12;

iii) TWF Feat only: +14/+9/+4/-1 and +14 TWF off-hand, and +6/+6 untrained off-hands from remaining, non-TWF arms;

iv) TWF and MWF: +14/+9/+4/-1 and +14 TWF off-hand, and +12/+12 untrained off-hands from reamining, non-TWF arms;

v) TWF, ITWF, GTWF, and MWF: +14/+9/+4/-1 and +14/+9/+4 TWF off-hand, and +12/+12 untrained off-hands from remaining, non-TWF arms;

Plus, any Primary Natural Attacks can be added as Secondary Attacks at BAB -5, which is +11.

This should NOT be allowed.

:Byronus

The only thing I can think of is if someone uses Lunge, but that extra Reach ends on YOUR turn, so all AoOs would have to be provoked by you, such as from Greater Trip, for it to work.

I appreciate all the replies; you guys are awesome. :)

I guess I may have, in my attempt to catch your attention, written a misleading thread title, as I wouldn't necessarily considering having a higher-than-average movement rate as being mobile per se. :(

The dilemma I'm having is whether it's wise to have Cleric who uses Acrobatics, as the ability to successfully utilize Acrobatics means Armour Class has to be sacrificed somewhat.

The Mithral Breastplate suggestion is brilliant, as it provides a solid Armour Class while only penalizing Acrobatics checks with 1 point of Armour Check Penalty.

Since Mithral Breastplate acts as Light Armour for the purposes of movement, a Cleric of the Travel Domain, with Longstrider cast, is looking at 50 feet of movement per round. This translates into 25 feet of Acrobatic movement through threatened squares while avoiding the +10 penalty to the Dice Check against the opponent's Combat Manoeuver Defence. ;) This is killer for a Reach Cleric.

That being settled, I have a question: Why is it recommended NOT to enhance the Armour? Yes, there are spells that can provide excellent bonuses to buff the Cleric's defences, but doesn't a heavily enhanced armour free up a Cleric's spell-casting slot to cast something else?

Also, regarding Feat selections, and considering the CORE RULEBOOK ONLY limitation, I have the following choices in mind: Power Attack, Toughness, Skill Focus (Acrobatics), and Scribe Scroll. I'm not sure if Scribe Scroll is a good choice, since this is planned as a one-shot session. Thoughts?

Thanks again for everything,

Byronus

Thanks for all the input, guys. Keep it coming. :)

I happen to be currently playing a Fighter/Druid, also of the Weather Domain, and got a lot of my answers from Treantmonk's Guide to Druids which is an excellent Core-Rulebook-only Build Guide.

You seem to be playing what Treantmonk refers to as a "Wild Mystic", which is particularly tough to play in the earlier levels. Summoning is simply NOT worthwhile early on as the casting time is too long and the duration is too short. Summoning starts to become much better around levels 4 or 5, when the creatures you bring to combat actually hang around for the entire fight.

Since your character is currently hunting bandits in Chrulwood, your best abilities against them are Woodland Stride and Trackless Step, which will allow you to move faster than them within the woods, and without being tracked. Add a few ranks to your Stealth skill and apply the "Stealth and Detection in a Forest" rules, and you should be able to pick them off one at a time.

If any of these bandits happen to be Rogues, use Faerie Fire. ;)

Even though it's going to be a one-off session, I still want to hint to the rookies about the continuous, story-telling element of RPGs.

Despite the short game-life of my Cleric, I have written a fairly elaborate back-story for him I will elude to the players during our session. Cayden Cailean, the deity, is very important to this back-story, so worshipping a concept is not in the cards for him.

Concept worship is a killer option, but not to be explored here. :) Thanks, axatillian.

My first Cleric will be for a one-off introductory session that'll give some curious people their first taste of Pen & Paper RPGing. I'm a more experienced player and decided on making a Cleric just to help keep the rookies alive. I expect the other TWO players will probably have martial characters: Fighters and/or Rogues.

I suspect there will only be THREE players and the GM. We will be using the Core Rulebook ONLY, and characters will be at level FIVE.

The plot, as I understand it through a brief discussion with the GM, will be simple: the players have successfully escorted a trade caravan to a town in a hostile area, and are hanging out in a tavern after getting paid, when the nearby Goblin(?) hordes will storm the city in an night-time raid. Our mission would be to help escort a local sailing merchant at the tavern with us to the docks so we can sail away to safety on his ship, while the town burns to the ground around us.

I've really enjoyed reading Brewer's Guide to Reach Clerics and was thinking along those lines, though I do find his build to be particular Attribute intensive. Perhaps a Reach Battle Cleric build would be better overall, focusing on STR and WIS without any dump stats. I don't know...

What I HAVE decided is the following:
Class/Level: Cleric 5;
Race: Varisian Human;
Alignment/Deity: Chaotic Good worshipper of Cayden Cailean;
Domains: Good & Travel
Preferred Weapon: Longspear;
Feats: Power Attack + 3 others.