CAHaugen's page

I love to make unique gear for my players, but I'm a little stumped on what I should have this one's Enchantment Bonus set at.

I wanted to add Touch of Idiocy to a weapon. The script goes as follows:

>Upon a successful Critical, the wielder may choose to forgo the extra damage dice from the weapon and deal +1 damage to either the victim's Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma. Additionally, up to three times per day the wielder may forgo all additional damage (Such as multiplying the Strength modifier, Enchantment bonus, Weapon Specialization's +2 bonus, or Power Attack) and instead deal 1+1d4 damage to either the Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma.

I was considering making this into a mace, and calling it the Bewildering Bludgeoner

It's going to be a Heavy Mace, so I know that the cost is going to be at least 312gp (Since it must be Masterwork, and it's base price is 12gp).

But I've no idea what to price this at. Obviously +1 is way to low, and if it weren't for the second part of the 1+1d4, I'd say a +2 seems decent. However, the first part is not scripted to be used "3/day", rather it can be used as many times as a critical is scored. This, to me, pushes it up to a +3 - despite the fact that a Heavy Mace only crits on a Nat 20.

So I'm stuck between the +2 and the +3 at this point. +2 seems a tad to low, but +3 seems a bit to high. So I go to the second portion, and this to me feels like a firm +3. However, 1+1d4 is a TON of ability damage, and it can be used 3/day so that's a potential of 3-12 ability damage just on that aspect alone, not to mention all of the tiny +1's you may rack up. That's seeming a lot more like a +4-5 at this point...

Now I question, should I really have the second part on there to begin with? Well the issue is that the +1 is fine, but Nat 20's are so hard to come by that it makes it feel... side-stepped. Not to mention you are sort of giving up a lot, for rather little.

The reason I have the second part set at 1+1d4 is because I'd feel terrible if the player forgoes ALL of the extra damage and still just rolls a 1. I want to give some leeway. But that leeway does end up in more ability damage... And we all know ability damage trumps health damage.

So what's your opinions? Should I just keep the first half and put it at a +3 bonus, should I keep all of it at a +5 bonus, or just the second part (1+1d4 at 3/day) and have it be a +4 bonus?

I don't see why "concealed weapons" couldn't apply to natural weapons. Hiding your hands behind your back that have claws and hiding your dagger behind your back is largely the same thing.

You might want to apply a penalty due to the nature of the natural weapons that are being hidden, however.

I agree that tucking your hands into your cloak or wearing gloves (or a scarf over a bite, etc) ought to function similarly with a small penalty.

I just read this because our party has recently added in a Catfolk Rogue who wants to use her claws (She took Catfolk Exemplar: Sharp Claws) and we were discussing whether or not her Claws can be concealed. Since it's still a rather general topic without a real answer, might I suggest an alternative?

I know the game is largely based upon fantasy, though elements of realism do exist. I'm sure people have watched the show The Walking Dead. In Season 3 (Though I could be wrong), Rick is at odds with the bikers whom are attempting to r*** his son and kill him. Rick is held captive by their leader and is taunting him. Rick's solution is to bite at the man's throat.

Now, if we flow this into game mechanics. what would have been happening is that the man holding Rick would have been using Grapple. Since he was also Intimidating him, we can theorize he would have been able to use Greater Grapple to secure him as a Move Action, allowing him the Standard Action of Intimidate. Rick would have used Sense Motive, and would have succeeded (Most likely due to a Morale Bonus due to watching his son become Helpless).

Now we ask the question; Are Natural Attacks able to be "Concealed"?

When Rick bit the man's throat to kill him, the issue isn't whether or not he "concealed" his "natural weapon", rather whether or not he "concealed" his "intentions". This is not a Sleight of Hand or Disguise Check. It's a Bluff Check.

Rick essentially used Sneak Attack + Bite + Bleeding Attack. While I'm not entirely sure if you are allowed to use Sneak Attack upon someone who is Grappling you, mechanically you should be allowed since you can make a single attack. If your opponent is being Flanked or is Flat-Footed, you should be allowed. In this case while neither were truly the case, that's just a topic for future discussion.

So the point here is that we have a "real"-life element of combining these two instances. Sneak Attack and Natural Weapons.

It is because of this example, I would feel far more comfortable with making it a Bluff Check. Just because you CAN bite someone doesn't mean you WILL bite someone. Likewise with claws. Lots of creatures have claws, but honestly how many actually use them? Wolves don't have a Claw Attack. And yet, they have some pretty nasty claws on their feet and are more than able to grab onto prey, scratch with their hind legs, or even dig holes in the ground.

In short, what you're really asking isn't whether or not you are able to somehow hide the fact you have an anatomy general to your racial type, but whether or not your general anatomy poses a threat. To me, that's a Bluff Check.

If you can succeed a Bluff Check, yes, I would say they are "concealed".

As for hiding them in clothing, that's a Circumstantial Bonus. A lot of people don't play with all the extra Bonuses that the game offers. In our party, we do. If you are wearing mittens, sure your claws are hidden more. A +2 CB is reasonable for this. Now if you're wearing something far more sturdy such as iron gauntlets... well, can your claws really penetrate the iron fingers to scratch your opponent? Probably not. Therefore, I'd say you lose your claws but gain the gauntlet damage in place.

To give the other side of this coin, while you may be trying to conceal your intentions, your opponent is trying to spot them. If you're a 5' bipedal cat, it's probably safe to say you have claws of some kind. Someone might be granted a +2 Insight Bonus toward their Sense Motive to overcome your Bluff, knowing you're a freaking giant cat.

This all gets very mechanical and most people wouldn't bother with it. But honestly it's these little modifiers that really make-or-break certain situations.

So...

A swallowed creature keeps the grappled condition, while the creature that did the swallowing does not.

Instead of attempting to break or reverse the grapple, you can take any action that doesn’t require two hands to perform, such as cast a spell or make an attack or full attack with a light or one-handed weapon against any creature within your reach, including the creature that is grappling you.

I guess that's that. Though I personally still feel that they should have the Staggered Condition. Still, the tradeoff of being digested in stomach acid is pretty rough. And honestly, you're not looking at much damage to escape... Kinda weird if you think about it.

"Swallow whole would be a horrible ability if the swallowed creature could simply full attack the creature itself from within (as the stomach's AC would virtually always be lower than the creature's normal AC)."

I personally agree. I have no read the full content of this page, but in my opinion the character in question who was swallowed should also have the Staggered Condition.

Also:

the alchemist can create this liquid catalyst from small amounts of chemicals from an alchemy lab, and these supplies can be readily refilled in the same manner as a spellcaster's component pouch.

I'd love to know what exactly we have to buy and restock to make these bombs. I get it, they are magically infused with a little of our aura and that is why the Alchemist and only the Alchemist can use it.

But if that's the true case, it's all about the Alchemist's aura, then we're basically the D&D equivalent of Marvel's Gambit. What is the Material Component for Bombs?

After all, I highly doubt Fire Bombs, Immolation Bombs, Acid Bombs, Sonic Bombs, and Void Bombs have the same base components... or DC's for that matter.

Seems to me like the general idea was build for the Alchemist, but none of the math was...

It states under “Alchemy” the following -

“An alchemist can create three special types of magical items—extracts, bombs, and mutagens (…) Mixing an extract takes 1 minute of work (…)An extract is “cast” by drinking it, as if imbibing a potion (…)The Difficulty Class for a saving throw against an alchemist's extract [See latter] is 10 + the extract level + the alchemist's Intelligence modifier. (…) [Continued via Bomb (Su)] Bombs are unstable, and if not used in the round they are created, they degrade and become inert (…) In order to create a bomb, the alchemist must use a small vial containing an ounce of liquid catalyst—the alchemist can create this liquid catalyst from small amounts of chemicals from an alchemy lab, and these supplies can be readily refilled in the same manner as a spellcaster's component pouch. (…) Most alchemists create a number of catalyst vials at the start of the day equal to the total number of bombs they can create in that day—once created, a catalyst vial remains usable by the alchemist for years. (…) [Continued via Mutagen (Su)] It takes 1 hour to brew a dose of mutagen, and once brewed, it remains potent until used.”

This essentially states that it takes you one minute of work to make an Extract (Essentially a Potion), while: Brewing a potion takes 2 hours if its base price is 250 gp or less, otherwise brewing a potion takes 1 day for each 1,000 gp in its base price. [Brew Potion]

This makes little sense. So an Alchemist can brew an Extract (potion) in 1:120th of the time?

Swift Alchemy and Instant Alchemy apply to Alchemical Items, such as Sunrods and Thunderstones. Not to Extracts, Bombs, and Mutagens. I’m fine with this. So you create an Extract (Potion only you can use) in a minute, and a Mutagen in an hour. Unless this is RAI, in which case Extracts, Mutagens, and Bombs are also Alchemical Items - in which case we can suddenly go from:

Extracts: One minute to 30 seconds (Swift Alchemy) to 6 seconds (Instant Alchemy)

Mutagens: One hour to 30 minutes (Swift Alchemy) to 6 seconds (Instant Alchemy)

But nothing is listed for Bombs. No time frame is listed. At all.

Additionally, no DC is listed for Bombs. Even for Splash, unless you have something like Evasion, I don’t see a DC for avoiding it.

How long does it take to brew Bombs? If you brew 12 Bombs in the morning, are you making all 12 together or separately and one at a time? If I wanted 12 Extracts, that's 12 minutes of work. So do we just assume each Bomb takes 1 minute of work, so 12 Bombs is also 12 minutes? I understand you are making the Bombs during the Standard Action, so that they do not become inert, however you still create the liquid catalysts at the start of the day. How long does this take?

Does this also follow along the lines of being an Alchemical Item, so;

Bombs: One minute to 30 seconds (Swift Alchemy) to 6 seconds (Instant Alchemy)?

Also, what the heck is the Craft (Alchemy) DC for any of this??

And finally, you can only create a specific number of catalyst vials for your Bombs per day, which I'm totally fine with. But once created, they remain active for the Alchemist for years.

Doesn't this RAI that you could spend a full month crafting Catalyst Vials and essentially have hundreds of Bombs ready for use in a single afternoon? You are not limited PER USE OF BOMBS PER DAY, but PER CREATION OF BOMBS PER DAY. Since they remain active for years, you could theoretically store craploads of CVs. The Bombs become inert upon mixing for use, but as long as they aren't mixed, you can have tons of them?

I wasn't sure if this would be best suited for Rules, or Homebrew, so I'm merely putting it into General.

This isn't a thread on how to build Enchanted gear. Rather, is there any "method" to creating new Enchantments to be put on the gear?

With the Race Builder, and with Homebrewed Classes / Feats, it's pretty clear people like to come up with new things.

Is there any established method for creating new Enchantments to place on items?

For example, let's say I want to put Frost Fall on a Warhammer. My character gets surrounded and uses a Standard Action to strike the ground with great force, radiating a chilling frost that deals 2d6 Cold Damage in a 5' radius and possibly becomes Staggered for 1 Round.

I'd even be willing to drop Frost Fall's 2d6 down to 1d6, to keep it in line with the already-existing Enchantment Frost uses. This way, it's almost like using "Cleave", only with Cold Damage. While some may argue that you should use the Spell's Damage as is, I'd argue that it could be "deluded" to become more liberal and along the lines of pre-existing standards.

Now, personally, I'd argue that is a +4 Enchantment Bonus. I say this because for a +2 Enchantment Bonus you can get Icy Burst. This is dependent on (really) whether or not you score a Critical and, furthermore, what your Multiplier is.

For a +3, I could see dealing some sort of radial damage. However, being that it's also able to Stagger, I'd have to push this up to a +4, since that's an additional effect.

Basically;

>+1 for the 1d6 Cold that Frost offers.
>+2 for the additional Critical Cold Damage that Icy Burst causes.
>+3 would have been for Frost Fall, had it only been a Radial effect.
>+4 because it's not just a Radial effect, but also Staggers.

What do you all think? Does this seem fair? Sort of a progressive flow based upon not just the strength, but each new addition that the Spells bring?

First and foremost, nothing says that an opponent must accept the Challenge. Is there a Will Save they should be making here? What I mean is, what happens if the PC has this glorious moment where they raise their saber toward a revered frost giant and challenges him to formal combat, and the frost giant just ignores it and continues with his rampage?

Also, since Challenge is a formal dual, can this benefit from Performance Feats? I mean, technically you've no crowd to sway, though you are arguably fighting To the Death, or with the party, Toward a Goal. I suppose this question is really more two-sided, than one.

If you are in active combat for survival, can you benefit from any Performance Feats?

If you are in an act of Performance Combat (Such as a brawl at a bar), can you benefit from Challenge Bonuses?

Okay, so a rather interesting point was made at work.

I'll spare you the bulk and write it out this way;

>Eastern Weapons: Nodachi; TH sword dealing P or S.
>Improved Trip + Greater Trip
>Tripping now activates an AoO against opponent
>Opponent is now Prone; -4 AC against melee attacks
>For your AoO (Whether it's resolved prior or latter isn't the topic at hand), you motion to attack
>Piercing
>Suppose you land a Critical (The 18-20 + Improved Critical makes it 15-20, or a 25% chance, so that's pretty set)
>Impaling Critical + Improved Impaling Critical
>Your opponent is now physically stuck on your sword, while on the ground
>Must succeed a Grapple Check to remove
>You also have Improved Grapple & Greater Grapple
>Your chances at beating their Grapple Check is greater
>Your opponent is now both Prone and Grappled, with your weapon skewered through them

Does this now further count as being Entangled - allowing you to move the Grappled Condition into Pinned?

Systematically it makes sense. If your opponent is laying on the ground with a sword through their gut and they can't move, that should count as being Pinned, right?

I understand many will use this argument;

"A pinned creature is tightly bound and can take few actions. A pinned creature cannot move and is denied its Dexterity bonus. A pinned character also takes an additional –4 penalty to his Armor Class. "

But if you've a sword sticking through you, and you are on the ground, and you've failed a Grapple to remove it, then you may not be "tightly bound" but you most certainly aren't moving anywhere. It's like holding down your steak with a fork. That sucker's stuck there.

So we must examine Entangled;

"The character is ensnared. Being entangled impedes movement, but does not entirely prevent it unless the bonds are anchored to an immobile object or tethered by an opposing force."

What this tells me is that if you are on the ground and a sword is stuck through your gut (Possibly into the soil below you as well), you are now staked to the ground. It's like being nailed to a tree; You are stuck. You can't move. Period. The PC holding you there is the "opposing force" that you are "tethered" to.

So, in this instance, does the victim suffer from the following;

>Prone
>Grappled
>Entangled
>Pinned

And if so, what does this look like against their stats? I understand Pinned is a more sever form of Grappled so their stats don't stack, but what about stacking with Entangle and Prone?

It should also be added that if a player wanted to, either with the above-mentioned Feat or not, you'd be able to use a crossbow or bow as a club.

I'd personally allow them the stats of a Club; 1d6 x2 and Fragile since they are made of wood.

I'd allow for Light Crossbows & Shortbows to be Martial One-Handed, but require Heavy Crossbows & Longbows (Composite as well) to be Two-Handed. This helps demonstrate their size, weight, and bulk.

If the weapons are crafted from metal, I'd allow the Fragile condition to be removed (Unless it's of Brass / Lead / Gold, in which case it stays).

Double Crossbows could deal 1d8 for their additional weight.

I'm sure someone would try to "swing & fire" their crossbow (Applying toward rifles as well). That'd be up to the DM todecide.

I'd also allow for your Enchantments to roll over into melee as well. So if you're being flanked and don't have time to load your weapon, clock them over the head with it and call it good.

"....or you could just take the Weapon Versatility feat. (...) but honestly, how many people would even use different types of melee weapons after this feat?"

Well, to answer that, sometimes you want a specific build or use of Feats, and yet you want a certain weapon. It comes down to flavor, more so than mechanics. However, having stated that I do have one instance where it makes the difference.

Behold, the Falcata. A One-Handed Exotic sword. What makes this weapon so special? Well, to begin, as a One-Handed, it can be wielded as a Two-Handed Large, knocking it's mundane 1d8 up to a 2d6. Now, normally this is only a Slashing weapon. So again, what makes this so special? It's the CTR. As far as I'm aware, it's the only weapon with the very special 19-20/x3. It's very easy to see how this would become an instant favorite in various Fighter builds. But sometimes your Slashing weapon just isn't cutting it, so why waste time changing to a spear or a hammer when you can just skewer your opponent, or side-bar them with the handle?

While mechanically it's not very noticeable, when you consider encumbrance, the need to enchant multiple weapons, the time it takes to draw or sheathe various weapons... It's a lot easier to just stab a zombie, or crack apart a wooden frame with a solid well-placed ram from the pommel.

Not to mention that this would technically fulfill the requirements for various Damage Type-based Feats.

In example, Impaling Critical requires you to have a Piercing weapon. Well, perhaps you are really favoring your now Large +1 Keen Falcata, with it's 2d6+1 Damage, it's +x1.5 Strength, and it's now 17-20/x3 CTR. But can you impale with it?

Well, now you can.

See, it's not about how the Feat itself works, but how you use it.

Hope that makes sense.

"The d20 PFSRD site does have a Community Custom Creations section; as for how to play around with that, you'd have to contact them, not Paizo."

Ah, okay thanks. I had actually thought these two websites were inter-related. Anytime I search Google for content and questions it always links me both sites. Anyway that's a huge help, thank you.

Is that possible? I didn't think it was, since Paizo is a company that lists and sells their own and 3rd party content. That was, until I came across the Corgi, Dire.

Notice how the link provided has the tag "Fanmade". Does that mean we can create & upload our own content? If so, how would one go about doing so?

Sort of an older-post now, and I only skimmed through half of it, but my group tends to prefer the single-class idea, but advancing with Archetypes. With enough diligence you can find a race suited for a particular class and archetypes.

When it comes to fleshing them out, you've got an entire slurry of feats to choose from. In my experience people tend to pile on the "Damage Feats" the most, which lands a serious problem for them later on. Yeah, it's awesome to land 89 damage hit-after-hit (Just a random number) but what happens when your class no longer functions properly?

Take the Rogue for example. If the DM really wants to be a prick, you'll be up against undead and constructs. Good luck with that precision damage. Or the Barbarian. Ability Drain = Sluggish Barbarian.

Classes are designed around a simple basic function. A smart DM will use this to his/her advantage. When your basic foundation crumbles, you're left with a heaping pile of filler.

When you consider Racial + General Feats, such as bumping your AC to allow for different TYPES of AC (Retaining more in a greater diversity), boosting Saves, and finishing with a few different styles of attacking, you'll build a base archetype class just as powerful as any multiclass. Only now, you gain it's full rewards, and not just a mere glimpse of what it can do.

In example, I recently built a Monk who can have some 45 AC without wearing any armor at all. True, it costs some Ki, but that's why I took the Extra Ki feat early on and chose a race with a Wisdom Modifier, and that's why I pooled Ability Points into Wisdom.

How'd I land some 45 AC without wearing any armor?

Monk: x4 Archetypes:
Master of Many Styles
Monk of the Iron Mountain
Monk of the Seven Winds
Qinggong Monk

Race: Briarborn

Granted, the Race is a 3rd Party but our DM allowed it since it's published. I took +2 Flaws & +2 Traits, giving me an extra edge with the vast majority of the Feats being Racial. But onto the AC. The AC itself is a constant-growing thing, taking into account the various Monk AC aspects.

At 20th Level I'd gain a +3 Dex & +4 Wisdom.

The Monk gains a natural "Class AC" of +5.
With both Dexterity and Wisdom, that is a total of +7.
My Briarborn get's a +2 Racial AC.
Add this on top of the Base 10 AC, and you're already at +24.

So, where's the rest?

+4 Dodge from the 3rd Party Feat; Unarmored Specialist.
Ki Power: Barkskin = +5 Enchantment.
Vow of Silence = +2 Insight.
+1 Natural Armor from Iron Mountain.
Iron Limb Defense = +4 Shield.

So far we are at +40. Now I know you may be thinking, "But CAHaugen! You can't stack +2 Racial Natural Armor with the +1 Natural Armor from Iron Mountain!" and while yes you are correct, my DM declared it's okay since these are "two types" of Natural Armor. The +2 is RACIAL and the +1 is a CLASS ABILITY. He declared that since they are coming from both the Race and the Class, they should stack. Either way, it's only +/-1, so it's not that big of a deal.

This is furthered by another +5 AC when using Dance of a Hundred Cuts from Seven Winds, for a total of +45.

Spice things up with the possible DR 8/- from Iron Mountain in addition to the Briarborn's Gift of the Darkwood for DR 3/Adamantine, and now you're packing on some serious resistance. I know it's not "8+3", rather it's eight in general and three applied toward Adamantine.

Pepper with a little Oaken Fortification and you add some Resistance 25% against Sneak Attack & Critical.

Now you're packing up to +45 AC for a few Ki, got some hefty DR, and Resistance and all without wearing a single thing.

I've still got Feats, +2 Traits, and Class Abilities to flesh out combat.

As long as you take the time to explore options and work the mechanics, there really isn't any reason to multiclass other than for flavor purposes.

"Alternatively, a master of many styles may choose a feat in that style’s feat path (such as Earth Child Topple) as one of these bonus feats if he already has the appropriate style feat (such as Earth Child Style). The master of many styles does not need to meet any other prerequisite of the feat in the style’s feat path."

I guess I misunderstood this. I thought it meant that so long as you meet the prerequisites for the first Style Feat, such as Earth Style Child, you are good for the rest.

Well that certainly makes things a lot simplier. Thanks everybody.

I had tried finding the answer on Google, and multiple forums came up about the same issue, people believing that you must meet prerequisites for the 1st-tier Style Feat. That's the whole reason I posted this question; Couldn't find a direct answer online.

I feel an acceptable errata involving the Ranks issue is that you CAN take these Styles early, but for each Rank you are lacking, you take a -1 Penalty on the action you are attempting to preform.

So at 1st Level you can take Boar Style. However, you won't have +3 Intimidate Ranks yet. At most, you can have +1. So when you attempt to use Boar Style, you take a Penalty on your strike equal to your missing Ranks.

+0 Ranks = -3 Attack.
+1 Ranks = -2 Attack.
+2 Ranks = -1 Attack.
+3 Ranks = No Penalty.

Does this seem like a fair system? It's a pretty heavy one, in my opinion. Being a 1st Level Monk with a BAB +0, taking a -3 Attack? Ouch.

So, I've run into a bit of a snag and I'd like an answer.

MoMS grants you the use of Style Feats, and you do not need to meet the prerequisites 2nd- and 3rd-tier Feats, however you must still meet the prerequisites for the 1st-tier Feats.

That is, once you've qualified for the initial one in the Feat Tree, you're golden for the rest.

My issue is that since it replaces the Monk's Bonus Feats at 1st, 2nd, 6th, 10th, 14th, & 18th Level, a snag happens.

At 1st and 2nd Level you really do not qualify for anything. Unless you are a Human and dumping additional Feats into your build that you may not actually want, you can't take a single one.

The only ones available at these early stages are:

Crane Style, only if you take Dodge as a Bonus Feat
Panther Style, only if you take Combat Reflexes as a Bonus feat
Snapping Turtle Style, without the need of a Bonus Feat

But what if I don't want any of these? Am I forced to take something I really do not want? I have no plans on taking Dodge or Combat Reflexes, so this means the rules force me to take Snapping Turtle Style, and I have no plans on following through with the STS Tree, so why should I lose 1/6th of my Style Feats due to a broken game mechanic?

I know it comes down to House Rules, but the issue remains. Many of these Style Feats offer the use of it without an additional Feat already in place, however it's at the cost of +3 Ranks in some Skill. Several of which are not even Class Skills.

Since you can't have more Ranks then Levels, this means that to qualify for the majority of these Styles, you must be at minimum 3rd Level, dumping Ranks into something you may not even desire. Now that you've lost your Ranks, you can't even take a Style until 6th Level since that'd be the next one where it's available at. So now you have 1st and 2nd Level clustered with stuff you may not want, finally at 6th you get something you actually enjoy, and now you only get 10th, 14th, & 18th left to optimize your character.

That's a serious problem; Being forced into a corner with things you don't want, waiting until nearly half of your ECL to get something you like, and losing so much potential when you only have three options left, which are strewn out over the next eight Levels.

Has anyone else run into this horrible mechanic before?

I was really wanting to look into the following:

Boar Style: The Bleed Damage is just to worth it.
Djinni 1, 2, & 3: Surrounding myself in a field of electricity and zapping all adjacent foes in a single strike that deals both my Unarmed and Elemental Fist? That's just friggen awesome!
Dragon 1 & 2: The whole difficult terrain thing could come in handy, but the real gem is in Ferocity where it states: "A monk with this feat can use Elemental Fist as if he were a monk of the four winds.".

Looking at the Monk of Four Winds, it states:

"At 5th level, and every five levels thereafter, the monk increases the damage of his Elemental Fist by 1d6 (2d6 at 5th level, 3d6 at 10th level, and so on)."

But because of this crappy Skill Rank thing, and because of this crappy forced-Feat issue, I have no choice but to take Styles I do not want.

Are there any errata involving these rules? Is it possible to crunch out the Ranks ahead of time to prevent this stupid system from breaking down? Or, more likely, are we allowed to simply "not choose" a Style until we later meet the prerequisites?

What I mean is, simply not take one at 1st and 2nd Level, and later on at say 3rd or even 6th Level when you're good and ready with your Ranks you "fill in" those previous ones that you left vacant?

I know Fighters can "retrain" Feats later on. Can Monks do that too? Honestly the idea of "retraining" has always been stupid to me too. Yeah, sure maybe Weapon Focus sounded great at the time but now it's crap. Well if you took the time to build your character, you may have seen that you didn't actually need it in the first place, so you SHOULD be able to negate it until later use.

Thoughts on this?

Noticed there are no Pin-tree Feats. Decided to Homebrew some up for y'all. Hope you like them. Feel free to modify for personal use.

Improved Pin: "With a powerful kick to Haggard's knee, Jorik buckles Haggard's defenses and slams him to the ground."
Prerequisites: Str +13, Improved Grapple, Improved Trip, BAB +4
Benefit: After you successfully initiate a Grapple, on your next Round if you successfully make a Grapple Check, you may Pin your opponent under your own body weight. You do so by, generally, kicking out one of their legs and slamming them to the ground to climb on top and use your body weight against them. You may only do this to a creature your Size or smaller. When you do this, you may apply any Trip Bonuses, in addition to your normal Bonuses, you have as a CMB when making your attempt to Pin your opponent. Tripping an opponent does not provoke an Attack of Opportunity*.
Normal: You do not apply your Trip Bonuses as a CMB toward Pinning. Pinning may also trigger an Attack of Opportunity.
Author's Notes: According to Core Rulebook Page 199 & this reference document, Pinning does not grant you any special CMBs. Essentially, when you Pin, it's merely your Grapple CMB against their Grapple CMD. That means that Improved Pin allows you to gain at least a +2 to your CMB with Improved Trip, or even more if you have Greater Trip or other aspects which grant you a Trip Bonus.
Attack of Opportunity*: While I know of no rules in which case making a Pin provokes an Attack of Opportunity, it's fair to say it probably does since most other CMs also do. While Pinning is an extension of Grappling, it is also a whole new movement as well. Consider, if you will, the difference between applying a chokehold and an armbar. If you apply a chokehold in real life, to prevent an Attack of Opportunity, you may engage in a stance allowing you to view all opponents or position yourself in such a way that you can shift your opponent into harm's way for you. Conversely, an armbar surrenders you to the ground as well as your opponent. To be absolutely specific, this puts you into the Prone Condition, in which Despite pinning your opponent, you still only have the grappled condition, but you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC. (Under Pin:. While there is nothing in RAW that states you become Prone, you do lose your Dexterity Bonus. Because of the way these mechanics play out, I wanted to alleviate tension by clearly stating you no longer provoke Attacks of Opportunity while Pinning, regardless of if you would have or not. I'm certain someone would argue that Improved Grapple only applies it's "No AoO" to Grapples, and not Pins - Two different mechanics with two different penalties.

----------

Greater Pin: "Jorik's raw strength outmatches Haggard's arm as it begins to contort and snap."
Prerequisites: Str 16, Improved Pin, BAB +8
Benefit: When you make a successful Pin, you may deal your choice of 1d4 Strength or Dexterity Damage to your opponent. This is in addition to any attacks you are capable of making. For each Size larger you are than your opponent whom you are Pinning, you increase the damage one step higher.
Normal: Pinning does not, itself, cause any damage.

Greater Grapple

Once you have grappled a creature, maintaining the grapple is a move action. This feat allows you to make two grapple checks each round

Now first I interpret that as you can make 2 grapple checks per round using both your move and standard(2nd Move) to make 2 grapple checks.

so maintaining the grapple is the move leaving you with a free standard action you can do whatever you want with.

so can you throw a vital strike with your std action on your grappled foe ? allowing you to hit hard while he can't do anything much

Greetings. I'd like to point out something under the FAQ, to answer this question:

Q: If I critically hit with a Greataxe(1d12+6) while using Vital Strike what damage do I roll?

A: 4d12+18. Which is (1d12+6)x3 plus 1d12 for vital strike.

Q: Can you use Vital Strike with a bow or thrown weapon?

A: Nothing in the feat suggests you can not so yes you can.

Q: Can you combine Cleave and Vital Strike?

A: Both of these feats now require a standard action to use and as you only get one per round you can not combine the two feats.

Q: Deadly Stroke is defined as "you deal double the normal damage" with an explicit exception regarding critical hits "The additional damage and bleed is not multiplied on a critical hit. ". Does that mean that the additional dice from Vital Strike are also doubled?

A: You can not combine Deadly Stroke and Vital Strike as they both are worded to use a Standard Action. As they both are standard actions and you only have one standard action a round it does not work.

This was posted (Or at least updated) on 08/20/2010 which is prior to this whole thread's posting date of 08/27/2010.

Now, we turn to the Editor's Note block of Vital Strike:

No. Vital Strike can only be used as part of an attack action, which is a specific kind of standard action. Spring Attack is a special kind of full-round action that includes the ability to make one melee attack, not one attack action. Charging uses similar language and can also not be used in combination with Vital Strike. - This was posted November, 2012.

This means that, according to the official Editor's Block which was posted two years after declaring that Vital Strike does not work with other specifically listed Standard Actions, as it has been categorized as a Standard Action itself, the only way you may use Vital Strike during a Grapple is if your attack is NOT considered a Standard Action.

So, to finish, we must look toward Greater Grapple to decide whether or not this is the case.

It states: Normal: Maintaining a grapple is a standard action., which tells me that unless you have Greater Grapple, you may not use Vital Strike as an attack option.

This, in turn, means that if you successfully use your Move Action to sustain a Grapple, because your Grapple no longer requires a Standard Action, and since you may only take one Standard Action at a time, you are allowed to still make a Standard Action of your choosing.

And since Vital Strike is a Standard Action, and you've maintained your Grapple with a Move Action, this means that YES, you can in fact use Vital Strike during a Grapple; If you have Greater Grapple and maintained it with your Move Action.

I've been reading a lot about Rage Cycling. You know, the whole "ending Rage prematurely just to Rage later", bit?

I guess people want to abuse the 1/Rage idea. There are a hefty amount of Rage Powers and the like that specifically state 1/Rage, and they want to abuse it with the whole start-n-go method.

Well, do people forget that as a Barbarian, you have a little thing that specifically states:

but can otherwise enter rage multiple times during a single encounter or combat.?

Seems to me that the answer was put there all along: "can otherwise enter rage multiple".

I believe this is case-closed. Pathfinder isn't SRD, where you only get so many Rage/Day.

If that were the case, if you ended a Rage prematurely and started it up again later, that would be a second Rage. So if you only get three Rage/Day, and you start-stop-start, that's two of them for 'ya.

But this ain't SRD; It's Pathfinder. And Pathfinder solved this little problem loooong before Rage Cycling became an issue.

Seriously I just learned about RCing like an hour ago and I've already spotted this. How are people still arguing about it?

Now, if y'all want to get technical, you might conclude that you are still going off of the same "Rage", since you can only Rage for so many Rounds per day equal to 4 + Con Mod. If this were the case, however, the description of such Rage Powers and such would have read as 1/Day, not 1/Rage. A "Rage" is defined by getting bonuses and penalties to become a more brutal fighter. If you enter such a state of modification, you've entered a Rage. And if you happen to enter a Rage three times during the same Encounter, then you've Raged three separate times; Each time allowing such an attack to happen again since it is "1/Rage", and not "1/Day" or "1/Total Rage Rounds Allowed".

So, combining RAW and RAI, it seems to me that yes, you are in fact allowed to start a Rage and use Mighty Swing, end said Rage, and later on when you re-Rage, you may use Mighty Swing yet again. Doesn't matter if this is the a few Rounds later or 23 hours later. It only matters that it's a new Rage.

The reason I say both RAW and RAI are in agreement (Probably a rare occasion) is because it specifically states under the Rage Rules that you are allowed to Rage multiple times during an Encounter / Combat (RAW), and the Rage Powers (Such as Mighty Swing) state nothing about being limited to the number of times per day, merely times per Rage (RAI).

Thoughts?

You should probably check out the section in the Bestiary on Advancing Monsters, as it covers how templates, class levels and other things adjust a creature's CR.

For how class levels adjust CR, see 397 and 398 of the Core Rulebook.

Keep in mind that CR is not an exact science and is more of a general guideline.

Thanks, that's some great advice.

The chart in question is found here.

However, that's basically useless for PC races. ... (which are terribly unbalanced, BTW, but probably more or less accurate on this one), 14 RP makes the race advanced, and a perfectly reasonable PC race with no level adjustment.

Thank you. As I said, I'm freshly new to Pathfinder and enjoying it far more. I know there have been similar building tables for "balanced" Classes, though those are seriously out of balance. An "average" Class is something like 215 Class Points; 3.5 Class Builder. It really sucks because if you wanted to build a typical "Fighter" with a minimum d8 HD (Which no "Fighter" should have such a low HD, in my opinion), it costs:

• 20 CP for d8
• 10 CP for Simple Weapons
• 15 CP for Martial Weapons
• 10 CP for Light Armor
• 15 CP for Medium Armor
• 20 CP for Heavy Armor

So just that basic spread, you've already spent 90 CP. Almost half, just to get him to use normal gear that anyone can wield.

Glad to know Pathfinder, while clunky, is a bit more smoothed out.

I know there is a table that exists for encounters, but when dealing with a single homebrew creature, is there a method to figure out what it's CR should be, along with it's XP?

What I mean is, where is the line between something with a CR +7 and a CR +8? At what point does adding a few more to Strength suddenly drive it up a whole "Level"?

I'm looking at using ARG's Race Builder to create a type of Giant that I'd like to make flexible enough for either a PC or an NPC.

The issue I'm stuck at is that I can't for the life of me figure out it's CR. So far I haven't worked out the full stats for the creature; Only it's qualities and traits as a playable race. Once that's finished, I can adapt it with proper Feats / Ability Scores for a particular Level.

Which raises a question, is CR directly related to your ECL? What I mean is, should someone with an ECL of 10 be expected to fight things with a CR of 10? Is the "CR" essentially the "ECL" for NPCs?

Because if not, I have no idea how to factor it. If I wanted, for example, to scale up a monster by four or five levels, adding in new Feats, raising it's Skills and HP, and possibly adding a point or two to it's Ability Scores, how does this effect the CR?

I suppose you'll want to know what my Race's layout is, right? It's not a finished product, and I'm considering taking things out, so just bare with me on it for now.

I wanted to build something around Charging. Minotaur's work well, but I felt limited. So I took their general concept, and mixed it with an Ogre. Essentially Rankor are lumbering violent brutes who cover themselves in animal hides and mud to protect themselves from the harsh winds of their environment. They have large horns which they use to make very deadly charges. Often, in combat, they will bellow out a tremendous howl and sling fair-sized boulders at their opponents to try and drive them into narrow spaces or bluffs. Once their opponents are trapped, they charge in at full speed at their now-shaken foe. Typically Rankor merely ware Hide Armor, so it offers little true protection. Their general weapon of choice is either boulders or their gore, however they also carry mauls or axes. About 99% of them are Barbarians, while their Chieftains are always Druids (They are very attached to and protective of their lands).

Rankor; RP 14

“A distant howl thunders across the open jagged terrain. What seems like an earthquake suddenly trembles the ground. High above the horizon you notice a boulder hurled with great velocity, and just under it a giant brute charging with horns lowered at you.”

Type: Humanoid (Giant): +1 RP

Size: Large: +7 RP

Movement: Slow Speed: -1

Ability Score Modifiers: Mixed Weakness: -2 RP

Language: Standard: 0 RP

Racial Traits: Defensive Racial Traits: Fearless: +1 RP

Monstrous Racial Traits: Standard Traits: Mountaineer: +1 RP

Monstrous Racial Traits: Standard Traits: Terrain Stride: +1 RP

Offensive Racial Traits: Standard Traits: Terrifying Croak (Howl): +2 RP

Offensive Racial Traits: Advanced Traits: Natural Attack (Gore): +1 RP

Offensive Racial Traits: Monstrous Traits: Powerful Charge: +2 RP

Offensive Racial Traits: Monstrous Traits: Rock Throwing: +3 RP

Senses Racial Traits: Advanced Traits: Light Blindness: -2 RP

So, to recap the Rankor are Large Giants who howl, hurl boulders, and charge. They live in mountainous environments, sudden bright lights blind them, and they are fairly strong (+6 Strength), with poor mobility (-4 Dexterity), and decent communication (+2 Charisma; For Intimidate).

Going off of just this, without Feats / Levels / Ability Scores, what would a fair baseline CR be for it?

I'm to use to 3.0 / 3.5 with the Level Adjustment system. I moved to Pathfinder because it's more flexible, so I'm still figuring out this Challenge Rating system.

In my experience, I've seen similar things be LA +1 or LA +2, depending on it's full stats. Does this equate to a CR +1 or a CR +2?

Having actually rolled for it's stats (Because I'm awesome like that), and after it's Racial and Size Modifiers, they came out to be:

Strength: +22
Dexterity: +09
Constitution: +17
Intelligence: +07
Wisdom: +10
Charisma +18

Greetings, I'm posting this question in Su/HR/Hb because I'm not entirely sure if it's an actual concrete rule or not, so it may need to be housed.

If one player were to be using a Large character, while another is using either a Medium or Small, could the smaller character effectively use the larger character as a Mount?

If so, anyone know the mechanics that would be at play? For example, if a Dwarf or a Halfling wanted to ride a Minotaur PC, how would this work?

I suppose the same applies if a Halfling wanted to mount an Orc?

I mean, is this even possible? It seems rather game-breaking if the smaller character is a build to optimize Mounted Combat while the "mount" were optimized for Charge / Rage / Bull Rush, but we needed clarity on it all.

So, in conclusion, I would say that Vital Strike cannot be combined with Spirited Charge. Despite Mounted Skirmisher.

Too bad, I wanted this to work :P

I agree with Wasson here. If we begin to delve deep into the rules to become gamebreaking, we can assume that a character who uses their Mount to Charge, they could also make a Charge themselves, or a Sunder, or even Fly if they have it. Hell, they could preform a Heal Check, they could play their banjo to cast spells, they could craft a friggen wagon wheel.

If we address that it's the Mount who is Charging, and not the player, than this infers that the player is able to do anything they want. That's game-breaking.

The player could do set a handstand (Balance DC probably 10) as a Standard Action and moonwalk it to the horses ass as a Move Action, then spank it as a Free Action.

If you want to get super technical, if it's the Mount who is Charging, the player could initiate an Overrun. So the Mount Charges, but doesn't move through an opponent's square, yet the player does? So what, the Mount stops immediately and the player flys like a person through a windshield?

Damn, the player could make a Stealth Check while on the Mount. What, the bandits see the giant lumbering pony but not the man with the huge f***ing lance?

Give me a break. It's utterly gamebreaking. I understand the concept; It's the Mount's momentum - the reason you deal extra damage - but it's your precision which counts - Vital Strike. I understand this. And I agree fully and wholly.

Except for one thing. You, as a PC, are using the Sprinted Charge ability. It is your special ability, thus your special action. Vital Strike only applies when you make a single attack as a Standard Action, not as a Special Action. If that were the case, you could use Vital Strike during a Sunder, which you can't.

If your idea is to work, I would argue your Mount must have Sprinted Charge. After all, it's your Mount who is doing all the legwork. This frees you up to line up a Vital Strike, rather than spending all your energy and focus on riding.

I see how mechanically it all works, but realistically I disagree.

I know this has already been discussed, and I am looking for a simple answer to the solution I found.

A friend of mine in our campaign asked about enchanting his Claw attacks. We weren't sure if you could do this according to SRD / Pathfinder, so we looked stuff up.

We happened upon the Amulet of Mighty Fists. We rather liked this idea of gaining a +1 - +5 Enchantment Bonus to Natural Weapons, but now we're curious as to how far this extends.

The +5 appears to be an unscripted Bonus; It offers no additional changes other than the +5 to Attack. So is it possible to further enchant the AoMF with the +5 Vorpal?

If it is possible, how much more would this cost, if any? I remember seeing that AoMF's +5 Enchantment Price is a total of $150,000. A bit rich for our blood, but if it means for no additional cost he can use Vorpal on his Claw attacks, I think he may be interested. But if we have to pay out $150,000 just for the AoMF's +5 Attack Bonus (Since that's what it essentially is), and then pony out an additional $200,000 or whatever it would be for the extra +5 Vorpal, that's really extreme and we simply want to know which is the proper way to do this.

== EDIT ==

So the price I posted may be wrong. I think the text I was reading it from was incorrect. I found that it might cost only $100,000 to buy it at a +5 Bonus and that it costs $50,000 to make it at the +5 Bonus - A combination of the two would result in the $150,000 that I found. Now I question it's actual value.

Additionally I found it applies to both Attack and Damage? Is this accurate? I thought Enchantment Bonuses applied only toward Attack Rolls?

Lastly, it states; Alternatively, this amulet can grant melee weapon special abilities, so long as they can be applied to unarmed attacks., which Vorpal is listed under in the next text block that is linked.

So now I'm a little confused as toward the price, and whether or not this information is indeed correct?

Got bored at work and began thinking about the Dwarvenforged and Elvencraft Armor and Weapons. I began realizing how I've yet to read anything on Orcish Armor and Weapons. Thought it'd give it a go and create a system for them. A bit overpowered, but I feel it captures the essence of what an Orc truly is.

Orcish Armor and Weapons;

Warforged Armor and Warforged Weapons.

Orcs are brutal, there’s no doubt about that. But the question of their brutality arises when their methods of carnage and chaos are simply mundane. Now, with seasoned experience, a smith can forge armor and weapons the way Orcs do; Fiercely.

Orcs have taken to calling their methods by several different names, depending on the tribe you associate it with. Bloodskin, Ironhide, and Vileflesh are typical names for armor, whereas Crushing, Fierce, and Brutal are typical names for weapons. All-in-all, the actual “art” (assuming it can be called that) of forging anything the way the Orcs do is generally called “Warforged” by the rest of society.

Warforged Armors and Warforged Weapons have a very unique method of crafting them. They are typically uneven in both thickness and width. Their edges are usually sharpened, even if that particular edge isn’t meant to be. They are excessively heavy, making them very difficult to wield appropriately. They tend to be bulky and cumbersome as well. But all of this comes with a great benefit. They have astoundingly high defense and tend to multipurpose themselves in the midst of combat. Each item must be crafted as a Warforged item during it’s initial creation. Although crude and completely ignorant in any typical design, a true Warforged item is always a Masterwork item because Orcs may be dumb, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t smart. A Warforged piece of Armor costs an additional 1,200 gold, whereas a Warforged Weapon costs an additional 650 gold. For Double Weapons, the price is doubled. Although some Orcs wield Shields, in their general society a Shield is considered pathetic and a symbol of weakness. Therefore, there is no such thing as a “Warforged Shield”.

Firstly, Warforged Armor can never be Light. It can be considered Light if it is a Medium suit of armor that has the material made of Mithral, but something such as Leather can not be made in this fashion. Additionally, in order to benefit from Warforged’s bonuses, it must be made of metal. Crystal, stone, bone, wood, leather, scale, coral, and other similar materials do not count. When attempting to make a Warforged suit of Armor, add an additional +10 to the Craft (Armorsmithing) DC. Warforged Armor must also be some sort of “plate”; Chainmail and such that drapes can not be Warforged. A suit of Warforged Armor benefits from it’s drawbacks. Firstly, it’s Dex AC, if any, is reduced by one if Medium, or two if Heavy. However, for each point the Dex AC is penalized, the AC is improved by the Dex AC loss plus one. So a Medium Warforged Breastplate will have an AC of +7 and a Dex AC of +2, rather than +5 and +3. Additionally, a Warforged suit of Armor comes complete with your choice of Armor Spikes or Armor Razors. However, you must still have the appropriate Feat to use them without penalty. They are only considered Exotic if the suit of armor you are attempting to craft as Warforged is Exotic. They deal 1d4 for armor of Medium Size and 1d6 for armor of Large Size. Every Size greater than Large scales the damage up appropriately according to Weapon Size Damage. Rather than functioning by physically adding them to the armor per normal, they are forged from the flanges and creases of the armor’s natural physique. However, the additional thickness of the metal and the corrupted flanges cause it to be both heavier and bulkier. Your ACP is increased by -2 for Medium and -3 for Heavy. Your ASF increases by 10% for Medium and 20% for Heavy. The weight is also increased by +5 pounds for Medium and +10 pounds for Heavy. Lastly, the overall HP increases for the Armor by +10, regardless of it’s size or type.

A Medium Warforged Breastplate, therefore, has the following stats;

+1 Medium Warforged Breastplate;

AC: +7
Dex AC: +2
ACP: -6 (-5 with +1 Masterwork)
ASF: 35%
Weight: 40 lbs
Health: 35 HP.
Additions: Your choice of Armor Spikes (Piercing) or Armor Razors (Slashing) for 1d4 Damage.

A Warforged Weapon is actually a very unique design. The additional Craft (Weaponsmith) DC is +10. More often than not people assume Orcs do not understand basic fundamental mechanics, so a sword is often crooked or bent or an axe is often riddled with large cracks. The ironic truth of the matter is, they are crafted like this on purpose. A Warforged Weapon is of Masterwork Quality, despite the fact they do not appear to be so. They are carefully forged in such a manner that they are faulty in both design and function. But this is exactly what they want. A Warforged Weapon must be mostly metal. A sword can be Warforged, but a spear can not. For Hafted weapons, such as a greataxe or a halberd, because the head of the weapon is large enough, it can be Warforged. Essentially, if the weapon can naturally be thrown (Throwing axes, throwing knives, spears) or fired (Ammunition, arrows, bolts), then it can not be Warforged. This is because all weapons which are Warforged gain the Fragile component, which means that on a Nat 1 the weapon becomes Damaged (Rather than waiting to be Sundered below ½ HP), or if it is already Damaged it becomes Destroyed. This is in regardless of the fact most often a Masterwork Weapon can not be Fragile. The reason for these weapons becoming Fragile is that the Orcs have found a way to take this damaged quality and create even more carnage from them. When a Warforged Weapon becomes Damaged, it deals extra damage due to it’s fractured make. A “Fractured” Warforged Weapon loses it’s +1 Attack Bonus gained from it’s Masterwork Quality, but gains +2 Damage instead. On a Confirmed Critical this additional Damage is multiplied. Additionally, the weapon deals a number of Bleed Damage equal to 1 x Critical Multiplier. So a Fractured Warforged Greatsword will deal +4 Damage and +2 Bleed Damage on a Critical, while a Fractured Warforged Greataxe will deal +6 Damage and +3 Bleed Damage on a Critical*. It’s Critical Threat Range also increases by +1 (After modifiers such as Improved Critical). By breaking their own weapons, Orcs have found a way to make them even more lethal. However, a Fractured Warforged Weapon costs an additional 100 gold to repair, and an additional Craft (Weaponsmith) DC of +5. If the weapon is Destroyed, it can not be used – per normal rules. Additionally, because the Orcs purposely want their weapons to become Damaged, their Hardness is reduced by -2, however their overall HP remains in tact. This means it has physically less tensile strength, but it’s overall strength remains the same. While a Warforged Weapon retains it’s status as either an Exotic or a Non-Exotic Weapon, once it becomes Fractured, it becomes Exotic and the wielder succumbs to the appropriate penalties. Orcs treat Fractured Warforged Weapons as if they are not Exotic, and Half-Orcs still treat it as if it were Exotic but only suffer a -2 Attack Penalty rather than -4 if they do not have Exotic Weapon Proficiency.

*While many may argue that a Bludgeoning weapon can not cause Bleed Damage, it must also be understood that your Bludgeoning weapon is now Damaged; It has been riddled with cracks and full sections may have shattered off, making it quite sharp despite being blunt. So yes, it actually can. But it retains it's "Bludgeoning" type, since that's it's primary method of dealing damage.

A Medium Warforged Greataxe, therefore, has the following stats;

+1 Medium Warforged Greataxe;

Status: Martial Two-Handed
Attack Bonus: +1
Damage: 1d12
CTR: 20 / x3

Fractured Medium Warforged Greataxe;

Status: Exotic Two-Handed
Attack Bonus: None
Damage: 1d12 + 2
CTR: 19-20 / x3 (+3 Bleed Damage on Critical)

Pricing: I chose the 1,200/Armor and 650/Weapons because it literally "felt right". For adding in the qualities I have, I originally went with 900/Armor and 500/Weapons, but those felt to low. So I increased it to 1,200/Armor which I feel quite content with, and the weapons I jumped around a bit, but ultimately you are paying for something which gains no benefits until it's Damaged, which is literally one step from no longer being of any use. I settled on 650/Weapons only because of the potentially high Bleed Damage that you can cause on a Critical. If anyone feels this these are either to high or to low, just let me know and I'll fix it. I work very long 12-hour days in a factor, so I apologize if I don't remain "up-to-date" on it all.

This is true. If using the official rules, you also can't buy stats down below 7 and stat points aren't 1 for 1. Buying a stat from 10 to 16 costs 10 points, for example. Rules found here...pay particular attention to the table.

Completely skimmed over that. Not sure what I was reading.

Anyway, a quick check of math and I get the following results:

Strength: 10
Dexterity: 10
Constitution: 10
Intelligence: 10
Wisdom: 10
Charisma: 10

I can reduce Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma to 07, giving myself +12 more points to spend. We've already agreed this is going to be an Epic Fantasy, so that's in addition to the +25 that I had already been using. We know this because our DM plans on us getting to 25th or so Level. Therefore, I begin with +37 Ability Points.

So now I have the following:

Strength: 10
Dexterity: 10
Constitution: 10
Intelligence: 7
Wisdom: 7
Charisma: 7

Keeping in mind that I can not set a single stat under 7, nor above 18, I need to be wary of where I place points. However, reading the rules, it states After all the points are spent, apply any racial modifiers the character might have.

Remembering that my Racial Modifiers are all over the damn place, I need to set up my math so that I benefit from them in the greatest way possible. Starting off with 18 Strength, and gaining my +6 is pretty nifty, but is it really worth spending 17 points? No, in fact it's so not worth spending 17 points that I'd rather only spend 5. So, here's what I'll be spending and where, along with what it becomes before my Racial Modifiers.

Strength: 10 + 5 = 14
Dexterity: 10 + 13 = 17
Constitution: 10 + 17 = 18
Intelligence: 7
Wisdom: 7
Charisma: 7

5 + 13 + 17 is 35. Hot dog! I got two whole points left! Oh boy oh boy what to spend them on! Oh, I know! I could have an Intelligence of 08! Or a Wisdom of 08! Or a Charisma of 08! The choices! -.- Doesn't matter. None offer positive Modifiers anyway, and if I play to my profile, an Uldrath is usually quiet and reserved (Charisma's out), and my Barbarian Class gets 4 + Int (Minimum of 1) Skill Points, so that's a minimum of 5 per Level, so since I won't be getting up to at least an Ability Score of 12, Intelligence is out. That leaves Wisdom. Pepper in some Racial Modifiers...

Strength: 14 + 6
Dexterity: 17 - 4
Constitution: 18 + 2
Intelligence: 7 - 2
Wisdom: 8 N/A
Charisma: 7 - 4

And we get...

Strength: 20
Dexterity: 13
Constitution: 20
Intelligence: 5
Wisdom: 8
Charisma: 3

So, ironically, I ended up with [i/]BETTER[i] Strength and Constitution! Too bad my Dexterity sucks butt. But with the total of +5 Ability Points you gain throughout the career of your 20 Levels, I can pool those into Dexterity and end up with;

Strength: 20
Dexterity: 18
Constitution: 20
Intelligence: 5
Wisdom: 8
Charisma: 3

Or, ironically, almost the EXACT SAME THING. One less Intelligence and Charisma, but who cares.

Thanks everyone for the posts. Learned a lot.

Currently taking the Mithral Breastplate idea and exploring more advanced options. I just learned of something called an "Agile Breastplate" which has the following stats;

Agile Breastplate: 400gp / +6 AC / +3 Dex / -4 ACP / 25% ASF / 20'-15' / 25 lbs.

It's from something called Advanced Gear. It's Medium.

With Mithral, it becomes:

+1 Mithral Agile Breastplate: 4,550gp / +6 AC / +5 Dex / 0 ACP / 15% ASF / 30'-30' / 13 lbs.

And, while I'm at it, I can make it Dwarvenforged as well:

+1 Dwarvenforged Mithral Agile Breastplate: 5,450gp / +8 AC / +5 Dex / 0 ACP / 25% ASF / 30'-30' / 13 lbs.

Expanding on this with the Dastana, which is Light Armor, I can make:

+1 Dwarvenforged Dastana : 1,075gp / +3 AC / 0 Dex / 0 ACP / 15% ASF / (No movement penalties) / 05 lbs.

The Dastana won't benefit from either Mithral or Adamantine, since it won't boost Dex (Not like I need the extra Dex), and the DR 1/- that the Adamantine would provide would be meaningless as the Barbarian eventually gets DR 5/-, and from what I've read DR doesn't stack.

To be honest, I am not quite sure if the breastplate would become a +1 or a +2 with it being both Mithral and Dwarvenforged. Similarly, I have no idea if the Dastana would become +1, either.

I say this because in the text, it states;

A special type of armor can be forged by a skilled dwarven armorsmith, similar to masterwork armor.

What this tells me is two things:

1.) It must be a "special type" of armor. Perhaps it must already be Masterwork? Perhaps it must be of a particular material? But nothing states what "special" explicitly means. Therefore, I must assume it is at least more-than-normal; Or Masterwork.
2.) It states that it is similar to masterwork, which tells me that while it is NOT Masterwork, it effectively has stats LIKE Masterwork.

Because of these, it leads me to believe that in order to be Dwarvenforged, you must pay the additional price for something to be created Masterwork, however once that is paid the actual Dwarvenforged isn't. This confuses the heck out of me, because that's like paying for something that is (in stats), but isn't (on paper).

That's why I don't know if the +1 Mithral Agile Breastplate would actually become a +2 Dwarvenforged Mithral Agile Breastplate, or if it would retain the +1. Not that it matters, since the ACP is reduced to 0 as it is, but still. Along with the Dastana, the Dwarvenforged armor costs an additional 900gp. So with the Dastana being a mere 25gp, I would need to fork out 925gp for the set. But referring to 1.), if it must be "special", I may need to fork out an additional +150gp for it to be Masterwork as well.

That's how I interpret it, but I have no idea if this is correct.

All-in-all though, that would total out to +15 AC. +8 AC, +4 Dex, and +3 Shield. I think that's pretty cool. And with the Dastana rather than an actual shield, I can wield my Morningstar in one hand and retain my Shield Bonus, but also have the Off-Hand open for a Claw Attack, or as a Free Action I can lose my Shield Bonus and wield my Morninstar two-handed, gaining those benefits to Damage, Sunder, and Disarm.

My Race is an Uldrath (AEG: Source; Mercenaries...)

And just in case anyone looks this brute up, yes I know he is actually Lawful Good whereas the Barbarian specifically states that you must be a Non-Lawful character. The backstory I have for him changes this to Neutral-Good, thereby technically allowing him to be a Barbarian. And yeah, I'm a little set on him even with those wacky Modifiers since he's Large, has Claws, +2 Natural Armor, and is a freaking bear-lion. Nothing better than that. (Actually he's just a super hairy caveman with tusks as stated in the textblock, but bear-lion works just as well, too.)

Hello, I am new to this site and I thought I'd open with a question I skimmed over many times.

Is Medium Armor worth it?

I am making a Barbarian. Typically speaking the Barbarian is not proficient in Heavy Armor, but that's nothing a Feat can't fix.

My question though is should I do it?

I see a lot of potential for Medium Armor, but I constantly see it being down-graded, and I'm trying to figure out why.

I looked at Ringmail versus Fullplate; Specifically the AC / Dex. I don't need the Spell Failure, and the Movement Speed will be essentially the same so it's not an issue. The ACP also is an issue, but not entirely.

So I look at Ringmail's +4 AC / +4 Dex and Fullplate's +8 AC / +1 Dex.

When I see this, I notice that Fullplate is higher by a single point, but it costs an additional Feat in order to take (Armor Proficiency; Heavy).

However, the benefit would be that during times where I may become Flat-Footed, I only realistically lose -1 AC with Fullplate, granting me a full +8 against those pesky Rogues and such.

Meanwhile, with Ringmail, I see that I'll literally lose half of my total AC. Additionally, I also see that having a Dex of +4 puts me at an Ability Score of 18, in order to take full advantage of it.

This is where I get stuck. It's obviously leaning toward the idea of Fullplate at the cost of that Feat. But here's the thing; Dexterity is very crucial.

At a +4 Modifier, that's +4 to Initiative, and an additional +4 to Reflex Saves - Something the Barbarian could greatly take advantage from seeing as his is on the 0-6 scale.

So on one hand, Fullplate offers more protection at the cost of a Feat, while Ringmail offers potentially only half of the protection, though benefiting Initiative and Reflex.

But something else I must take into consideration is the fact that in order to even get to +18 Dex, I'm going to have to spend vital Ability Points into it - Something which could be far better suited in Strength, Constitution, or even Charisma for Intimidation Checks if I so chose.

So is it better to spend a Feat and get a more-protective armor, or is it better to spend the Ability Points and get more bang for my buck, so to speak?

By the way, we have elected to do the Point-Buy system. I think that's what it's called. The one where you start off with "25 Ability Points" and all six of your Ability Scores are at 08, and instead of rolling 4d6 minus the lowest roll you can merely place as many points as seen fit into each of your six Abilities; Capping out at 18.

Since we are doing this, I've already done the math on what it would look like. My Race is an Uldrath (AEG: Source; Mercenaries - DM okayed multiple sources so long as they are published). With his Modifiers, he has the following:

Strength 08 + 06 = 14
Dexterity 08 - 4 = 04
Constitution 08 + 2 = 10
Intelligence 08 - 2 = 06
Wisdom 08 - N/A = 08
Charisma 08 - 4 = 04

With me potentially bumping them to:

Strength 14 + 4 = 18
Dexterity 04 + 13 = 17
Constitution 10 + 8 = 18
Intelligence 06 + N/A = 06
Wisdom 08 + N/A = 08
Charisma 04 + N/A = 04

As I progress along at 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, & 20th Level I would spend +2 in Strength, +1 in Dexterity, and +2 in Constitution giving me 20/18/20 - That's how I'd get the +4 for the full use of the Ringmail's Dex AC.

That's why I am on edge a bit as to whether or not Ringmail is actually worth it. The Dex will spread to Initiative, Reflex, and if I take Combat Reflexes it even allows additional AoOs - An awesome bonus for a Barbarian. But as you can see, I'd literally be spending +13 of my 25 Ability Points just to get to there. Sure, there are other Medium Armors that offer more so of a +5 / +3, making me spend less in Dexterity, but that point still remains. Is it actually worth it? Or should I just opt for the Feat and be done with it?