Were I the GM, I would only allow it when, say, a Zen Archer reaches 9th level and can threaten opportunity attacks with the bow. That said, since the ZA can still kick with a bow in his hands, I guess they already provide a flank.
Scabby the Knoll wrote:
I'm going to be playing in Legacy of Fire and was thinking about playing a druid with a focus on summoning creatures, buffing spells, and terrain control. The APG comes out and the Dm for the adventure path recommends I take a look at the summoner. At first glance it sounds cool enough but, when I started to dig a little closer I find something missing. As I see it the Eidolon is all there is. A summoner basically sicks it on whoever and then sits back and does nothing. yes at 7th you can just hold and an action and dispel but it seems like the actual character is not doing much. Help me understand.
For flavor, make your eidolon some kind of Djinni themed creature.
For the love of god, play a middle-eastern type. I am in a LoF campaign and I feel the other players missed out by making totally generic fantasy types.
Magic dog sweater.
Wait...people stand on their heads all of the time. People used to wear gravity boots. You should never fall unconscious from being upside down for less than several minutes. What I might do is require fortitude checks to avoid a cumulative hit penalty. Like, every round that you are upside down you must make a fort save or be at -1 to hit. This remains cumulative as you fail further tests. The penalties go away at +1 per round when you right yourself.
Character gets mad and stops going to church. I would only pick up another deity if he sees one that fits him much better. Otherwise he may pay homage on special days, before a voyage at sea, when getting married and things like that.
Another tack would be to decide that the clergy of Abadar are not perfect and try to change the system. You could be like a modern Catholic who believes that the church should condone birth control. You are still an Abadarite, but you have a hot button issue with the way the clerics handle healing.
It specifically states that it happens because the witch is lighter than other people. This is a fun flavor ability based on the old practice of weighing a woman or seeing if she floats to determine whether she is a witch. I'm not sure how that is supposed to translate into casting on fellow players. The wording could be more clear, but the intent is clear. If you try it among strangers they might allow it, but you are going to get some eye rolls.
I liked that 3.5 encouraged more diversity in character races. In playing PFRPG with multiple groups, they are very human heavy, or even exclusively human. Back in the day the same sets of people played as thrikreens, warforged, grey orcs, aasimar, and others. And frankly, I miss it. It is my personal preference that PFRPG blundered on non-standard characters.
For me, that totally depends on the campaign. IMHO few players even play an Elf according to her race, let alone a Thrikreen or Whisper Gnome. Dwarves seem to go okay. On the other hand, if you either have great roleplayers or a mostly strategic/combat campaign I'm with you.
I miss the variety of prestige classes, but I support the idea that they should not be mechanically superior to base classes, just different.
Well, the Hobgoblin could be a fun addition to an adventure. No Hobgoblin is going to be a willing servant forever. You player can cow him for awhile, but he'd basically rabbit at the first or second opportunity. You needn't be a jerk and have him stab the character in his sleep. Talking about it too much is probably a mistake.
"I should be able to cow the hobgoblin into being my slave."
"Okay. What do you say?"
Player makes it good.
"Okay. He seems terrified. He starts burying the bodies like you said and then prepares to carry your gear like you said."
That leaves you much more leeway than "Okay, he's intimidated. Now he's your slave."
As for the dungeon, throw up a legal or social barrier to his ownership. If a farmer's field has killer bees on it and he isn't using it because it is so dangerous, I don't get to own the field because I go kill the bees. The king, council, ancient landholders or whatever should show up and say that it belongs to them (assuming it's not some crappy worm hole or something). If he objects you could plague him with lawyers. He thinks hobgoblins are bad! I recommend playing it all out in a separate session. If he gets through that, send a tax collector. If he gets through that, let him have the place.
hello, my name is ninja wrote:
Well, you can do whatever your gm will let you get away with. Nothing anywhere says that the improvised weapons get any special qualities at all, and the rules do include stats for improvised weapons. I submit that by designing and building a weapon with special qualities, even if it is made out of bits and pieces, it is a custom exotic weapon. Improvised weapons are just that, improvised -- not designed. If your gm lets you flurry with this thing you are designing, it'll "break" the class a little. On the other hand, the class is weak so that might not be so bad.
Just balance the encounters based on the rest of the party and give them slightly more xp.
Richard Leonhart wrote:
By the way, the character might know that he is evil and be able to live with it. Basically, he is sacrificing his own soul to save others. "These actions damn me, and I know it. But the good people of the world will sleep peacefully and never know what it cost me."
You know how in fiction heroes often stop themselves because they don't want to be like their enemy? This guy went the other way.
Your Paladin is an Inquisitor with pally abilities then.
By the way, might makes right is a deliberately cynical saying (if often true). The entire point of the paladin's code is to place his might at the service of right, not the other way around.
Eric Mason 37 wrote:
I agree with this one, and think that every other thing that the players wanted should be denied. This is the only one that isn't clearly power gaming.
Okay, I totally love your summoner.
Respectable Hobbit wrote:
I was thinking Neutral Good or Chaotic Good for alignment.
I made a witch recently and assumed that the patron was also kind of a minor diety that the witch sort of worshipped. If that doesn't work, pick one that would not mind competing with the patron for the character's affection and loyalty.
james maissen wrote:
Wisdom of the flesh is a great trait for this as well. The bonus being that Irori is a great god for a monk. In my case, I took it for trapfinding rather than stealth, which could seem cheesy but I worked it into my background well enough.
As for playing well with others, you are correct that there is no serious synergy with group members, but just about any archer has that issue besides the bard. A ranged damage dealer rarely hurts the situation, though. In group fights you can always switch targets to kill whatever is closest to death. No party really needs an archer, but that's the curse of almost any "pure" striker type.
I went over this a bunch when making my current game character. I eventually decided that Arcane Archer is a trap. You are going to have a magic bow, so the +1 imbue won't do anything (your imbue doesn't stack with a +1 bow or +1 arrow, and you can't add other powers to a weapon until it has +1 on it. Imbue is typed unlike the arcane strike bonus). You are going to have a magic bow that does holy or shock or whatever damage, but eventually your AA is going to get that too, so that does stack nicely. The burst attacks are nice. You won't get tons from the ability to center spells on your arrows because your caster level is low. It's not useless but it's not awesome sauce. In return you lose all of the monk bonuses including ac, movement, high saves, extra attacks from the 15 flurry bump AND from using ki points (plus other cool uses of ki like short term ac bonuses), more ki points, more perfect shot uses, the ability to threaten with a bow etc.
Finally, you have to PLAY this character. Straight monk makes for better RP and there will be several levels on the way up during which you will be weaker than you would have been if you had not multiclassed, because you don't have the cool AA powers yet. So, assuming your campaign actually goes on long enough to get you to the top, you might be marginally more powerful at the end but you'll be weaker at points on the way up.
IMHO, AA is a bard prestige class. If AA is what you want most, I would go Arcane Duelist bard. With the arcane strike you will be in the same ballpark (a bit weaker to hit, one point better damage) as the monk, get the bard's underrated casting and have much better synergy with the AA class. Take weapon of ancients or whatever it is called for your .5 elf to get longbow. If you just want to be a badass archer, there are many routes including monk.
I am really liking my monk. He's the party scout and, via some good selections for traits, non-magical trapfinder and lockpicker. I got so many free feats that I have feats to burn. We're level 5 and he hasn't taken forever to come to fruition. Starting at level 3 I became a nice, fully effective member of the party.
Sir Dante wrote:
It has been clarified many times by Paizo people on these boards that the monk levels stack with other class bab increases on your flurry. The reason that they say "monk levels" is just meant to say "rather than your monk bab." Thus AA bab bonus stacks with monk level for flurry attack bonus. You do, however, have to get the fourth level and 8th level increases in number of attacks by being a monk, since that is a special ability granted for being a monk (by giving flurry increases = to twf increases). Some searching should find the references fairly easily and you could print or send a link to your GM or something to make sure he or she is with you on this.
As for Wizard, may I suggest qualifying for AA with a single level of bard, arcane duellist variant. At first level you get arcane strike as a bonus feat which more-or-less negates the bab you lose for taking a level of an arcane class.
Just a comment about the sleeping part. Waking up the Wyverns before you kill them is the kind of act that gets Paladins called "Lawful Stupid." Giant lizards aren't exactly enemy champions seeking trial by combat. Indeed, the only remotely evil act I see in the whole situation is failure to track and kill the suffering escapee.
Adventurers kill a lot of sentient creatures. No actual nonevil person racks up a body count like that. Sentience is just less precious in a fantasy universe.
Anyway, at this point I would save things by making him a special little atonement quest that makes his character the center of attention for a bit with a small, individualized reward if his pally genuinely seems to have learned his lesson. Maybe save some beasts that are only harassing a community because their habitat is being destroyed or something.
Also, I would have less of a hair trigger if the paladin generally acts good and doesn't do things like tell lies (besides white lies). Too often the very fact that paladins have a code makes people look too closely at every action sometime. He killed some monsters. That's what adventurers do.
Monks have to submit to the discipline of an order for many years to develop their skills. I think lawfulness is a perfectly reasonable requirement. Depending on how your group plays, this doesn't have to be a big deal. If a character shows even a bit of restraint some of the time and gives a small nod to authority now and then, she'll be a paragon of la2w in most gaming groups.
Do masterwork arrows and bows not stack? I would think that quality workmanship would apply from each item, unlike magic, which is imparted to the arrow from a bow.
Edit: Looked that up...it doesn't. Sigh. Must be a game balance thing, because i would think that a quality arrow would still be sharper or whatever when fired from a quality bow.
Conveniently, masterwork Durable arrows also cost 7gp each. Elves of golarion.
Thanks for that. When I can shop, I will prioritize the archer gear when shopping and just see what wanders along otherwise. I( am playing a non-greedy Zen Archer Monk, anyway, and will try with him to avoid the candy store mentality that people often have about loot.
I was just curious if lets say you were a rogue/wizard could you use shocking grasp and then on the next round strike with a rapier or dagger and add the shocking grasp damage?
Well, since the fact that metal is conductive is the basis of the idea, the fact that electricity isn't going to sit around in a piece of metal, stored for even a few seconds, might also come into play. I mean that it wouldn't just hang around in a weapon for a round, waiting to be discharged.
If you do allow it, just for fun, I'd say that if the player misses they have a chance of being shocked (save or drop weapon) or something like that. On a critical miss, I'd make the player eat the spell.
You can be super smart and totally slow to react. I doubt that the same could be said for someone with really fast reflexes. Acting in the moment is about doing what you already know how to do, what you are trained to do, and doing it reflexively.
Buffy acts before Giles. Han acts before C-3P0. Spock...well, Spock rolled all 18s, didn't he?
James Jacobs wrote:
Well, there's hope then. Our GM has said he plans to go with the listed treasure, so I guess that when I have a chance to buy I had better play it safe and get my bow on.
Basically, is there much in the way of archery gear in this series? 2 and up, that is? Specifically in the House of the Beast on through the end?
I am playing an archer in such a campaign. I don't want to know what there is, where it is, who has it or anything like that. I really just want to know IF there is some archer love in the treasure heaps.
I can see being Lawful Good and following a CG deity. The Deity may be chaotic, but she has tenets and the paladin still believes in the letter of those tenets and that what is written in the holy books is an absolute guide to living her life. About the only thing that that might change would be the stance on lying for a paladin of a trickster deity, and even then the pally would not be about lying for personal gain, but rather to to enact tricks in the general style of said deity. Such a paladin might uphold a standard like that in the Declaration of Independence and hold those self-evident truths above temporal law. They kind of do so anyway when they do stuff like free the slaves of some Gnolls, whose society allows them to own slaves and stuff like that.
And yeah, the Antipaladin is kind of for fun and, maybe, the occasional evil-themed campaign. Well, and for NPCs. A lot of the stuff in the APG seems aimed at NPCS.
People like to insist that archers need high strength, like that 2 points of damage per round if you had a fourteen is make-or-break. Eventually you will get a damaging bow, plus deadly aim and that will dwarf your strength bonus.
That said, your stats mean you can do anything but melee, really. If you can get a gm to go for it, you could be a pally of Sarenrae and take the dervish feat. That would be awesomeness.
Charlie Bell wrote:
I had my first game with this yesterday. It went decently, and I was an acceptable damage add. Kind of a one trick pony, but I climbed up things with the slippers of spider climbing and did my turret impression. Thanks for the advice. Those slippers are gold, plus as a bonus it has the whole "Crouching Tiger" climbing the walls thing covered for a monk. No if only our fighter-type was any kind of a tank.
Arcane Archer for humans? That I'd like to find.
So, I am about to join a Legacy of fire campaign, and I want to try out the new Zen Archer Monk. Starting level is 5 so I get to avoid the worst of the "growing pains" years. My restrictions are: 20 point buy, no stat below 12 (for rp purposes I'm not going to pile every last point into WIS. Dips into another class are okay, but not so long as to cripple my flurry of blows progression (assuming that flurry is better than just using rapid shot and manyshot).
Also, 10,000 gold to spend on magic.
Party has cleric, fighter and sorc.
Should probably be human, but I am open to a particularly good Arcane archer build using half elf or the racial heritage feat (which is better for my roleplaying background).
Currently I am thinking 12,14,12,12,17 (+1 for fourth level), 12 for stats. Feats (including freebies and bonus feats): improved initiative, toughness, deadly aim, precise shot, wpn focus: longbow, point blank shot zen archery, point blank master and either rapid shot or dodge.
For gear I was thinking of a +2 headband of intellect, wand of mage armor, an efficient quiver, some durable arrows and then trying to cobble together some kind of bow if I have the cash. Might have to skip the quiver for now to do that.
Any thoughts (besides make a fighter or ranger instead)?
As much as every part of my logical thinking brain cries "No!", RAW states:
If the answer wasn't "no" they would have just referenced the human favored class bonuses instead of printing new ones.
Joan and Francis are great calls: battle and nature respectively. Crazy Horse could just be battle as well, in a world that had moved beyond armor he might get some kind of riding ability instead.
I have this idea of an oracle as someone who is simply beloved of certain spirits, the type which would be determined by revelation. They just hang around the character and sometimes do their will, grant them blessings etc.
I worked a bit on a witch/oracle build to fill both skillmonkey and party face roles. You dump str, leave dex at base, jack up INT, have a middling score in cha. 1st level you get witch, cackle and feat: extra hex - fortune. You take Practised caster or whatever that trait is called to avoid losing caster levels. Also get a trait that gets you diplomacy. Then two oracle levels, knowledge oracle. Get the revelation to apply cha to reflex and ac and the one to get all knowledge skills as class skills. Then back to witch. As a variant, you can switch Int and Cha, oracle-witch-sorc instead.
Flavor text: You are beloved of spirits and they grant you powers, but they also haunt you for refusing to become evil. Works especially well with a sorc domain that has a flavor from a group of outsiders, such as abyssal or fey.
I didn't use it because at some point it crosses from working to get a concept in into min-maxing. Also, it's more powerful if you just go sorc/oracle, but the real flavor I wanted was witchy. I just went straight witch instead.
Kevin Andrew Murphy wrote:
Well, I don't think that it would be awesome to the party to do that all of the time, but you have just created a really great adventure hook IMHO.
A: You could totally make it work otherwise in your world, but if the players started keeping stuff anyway, you would have to come up with relatives and a legal system devoted to transferrance of inherited property. Also, you would have to provide another way to make a living, like doing things for pay. That's getting kinda close to the players' real lives.
B: In historical times, armies were often paid in loot, and the soldiers were just doing what was normal and expected by looting. Of course, they did a lot worse than that, and no matter how accepted it was other elements of sacking a city were plain old evil.
C: Look, you just killed the evil necromancer and cleansed his tower of its taint. What are you going to do, just leave stuff there? Maybe so the next evil necromancer has a head start, or bandits or orcs can clean the place out instead of you? This guy lived entirely outside the laws, and you don't have to post a notice in case his third cousin wants his wand.
God I hated it when people played pallys that way. On the other hand, I hate it just as much when they don't heed their alignments at all. A paladin is the perfect device to bring out the wanker either way.
Evil Genius Prime wrote:
I used to think that alignment was a bad idea. I mostly have run Warhammer, which is alignment-free and never missed it. It does simulate the world represented by a lot of fiction, though. In a world where gods exist and even compete, I can see that some clear divisions regarding people's codes of conduct might arise and be helpful. Think of the way that Europeans used to just equate being a Christian with being a good person, part of the one true church. Well, being lawful good or whatever alignment you are is a bit like that.
In addition, it isn't the straight jacket that a lot of people seem to imagine. If you are chaotic good, you aren't really restricted to that just because you wrote it on your sheet. You do what you want, and take the alignment shifts that come along with that. The exceptions are Clerics, Paladins and Monks. Clerics should just choose a god with an alignment that they can live with (rather than for a favored weapon or some such). Paladins and Monks who can't be at least fairly good or lawful (in a game where you can still be good or lawful while killing people and taking their stuff, that shouldn't be that hard)just shouldn't take the class.
My final defense of alignment is this: A lot of perfectly nice, reasonable players turn into stealing, murdering, torturing psychopaths in the game world. Alignment can, once in awhile, help just a teeny bit in containing that.
Charles Evans 25 wrote:
I think that you found your answer. They aren't limited except as written in the text.
Veiled Nail wrote:
If the question is coming up at character creation, you could take that trait that gives you +2 cl that can't exceed your overall level.
If you are playing with GM who tends to kill familiars, don't play a witch. Discuss it with your GM first. I just did that for my new witch. Basically "Look, I won't endanger my familiar by using it to cast, apply touch spells or scout dangerous areas if we can just assume that it is smart enough to climb into a shoulder bag or whatever when danger is afoot."
If you use your familiar for flavor and the basic bonuses, a GM shouldn't attack it. Your wand-using Quasit or touch-delivering celestial falcon, on the other hand, is fair game.
As for witches not being intelligence-based, it really depends on what book/movie/whatever the witch is in. Witches who cast via complicated spells are INT - based (eye of newt and all that). Witches who call upon gods or devils would be Wis-Based. Witches who primarily call on spirits would be Cha-based.
Of course, one could say that all three are just flavored versions of the Wizard, Cleric and Summoner.
Accepting a surrender and then not following up is not Lawful. Lawful characters keep their word, don't make capricious turnarounds. On the other hand, you say the Sorc and Bard wanted this guy dead. Was that from the start? Did they ever explicitly or implicitly accept the surrender or were they just held at bay by the argument with their comrades?
Either way, associating with these two when not absolutely necessary should cause alignment shifts for good characters.
I would just assume that it is mithril-shod or tipped. Still a wooden staff, but you can whack that vamp.