Cazin's page

I would go with Lore Warder Fighter 1 (gives weapon proficiency and weapon focus), Separatist of Zursvaater (travel domain plus one other) then monk X.

Travel domain gives +10 movement, a domain spell that grants another +10 movement and the ability to ignore difficult terrain. Now you are the shock troop, getting to the enemy in a single movement.

Consider:

1: Separatist of Sarenrae to take the travel domain, granting +10 movement.

2. Racial Herritage: Halfling and the monk archetype Underfoot Adept. The FAQ's on tripping indicate that all weapons can be used to trip and when doing so you use weapon stats on the attack. This makes your trips finessed (depends on dex, not Str) so you are an uber-tripper. Follow this up with an heirloom weapon with trip +2. Now trip attempts are actually +4 better than attacks made with the scimitar as part of the flurry.

Is it worth it to consider a level dip in Oracle? With the right mystery/revelation you get to use your charisma modifier in place of you dexterity modifier for AC and reflex saves. Why bother?

Benefit: You get to stat dump dexterity . An Aasimar could have stats:

Str 18, Dex 7, Con 15, Int 11, Wis 7, Cha 18.

With a headband of charisma +2 you get +5 to all saves and a +10 dexterity bonus to armor. Why bother? Now your armor of choice is darkleaf padded armor giving a bonus of +1 and a maximum dex bonus of +10. This is same AC as mithral Kikko, BUT it only costs 770gp instead of 4030gp. This means you can afford it at character level 2, and you will be able to buy brawling darkleaf leather +1 for 4770gp, which PFS lets you do at character level 7. This is earlier entry into brawling armor than you would otherwise get, and the armor is 3200gp cheaper.

Also, this character would take the feats cornugon smash and intimidating prowess to have massive intimidation skills. Oh, and maybe the trait unnatural presence to intimidate animals and vermin.

Net Cost: -1 BAB, -3 initiative, -3 ranged attacks, only 1 AoO and later access to paladin abilities...

The flurry build would now look like P1, O1, M1, PX

Is it worth it? (Am I a munchkin for even suggesting it?) I think I will play your flurry build next, and I am not sure...

What about Oracle 1/Magus X. The oracle would have the nature mystery and Nature's whispers revelation to use charisma in place of dexterity for AC and saves. Now you can stat dump Dex and run around in a chain shirt with Charisma giving AC bonus.

ParagonDireRaccoon stats for his DD works here too:
Str 14
Dex 10
Con 14
Int 16
Wis 10
Cha 16

Running around in a chain shirt with an AC of 17, casting arcane spells and using divine wands? Why not?

You can go to the forums' advice section, then guide to class guides and finally open the document Getting X to do Y for an extensive list of ways to use charisma and Intelligence for weird things.

I am a player at Peyote's table, playing with the squirrel master. For me, the hard part is that he argues with the GM instead of graciously saying "it's your game, I'll follow your rules. Can we talk about source books, rules and mechanics sometime before next week's game?"

He is fun and pleasant, and most of his actions are designed around supporting other characters. He does use items in really creative ways and sometimes that is really fun. He always brings candy to share.

Here are some more details on squirrel abuse:
He made up his own complex trick way beyond a squirrel's ability: "I order you to follow this fellow about, and should he become unconscious, pour this potion down his throat." He treats the squirrel as equipment, so we never consider attacks of opportunity. When the squirrels fled from fear effects, he insisted that he found them later, because equipment is never lost unless it is destroyed.

And I have to reiterate, I don't mind him trying to break a rule, but I do mind the arguing with the GM at the table.

Sorry if someone else posted this advice; I do not have the time to read this thread deeply.

Here's what I do: research the whole thing out on D20pfsrd (easier to navigate), copy the rules having to do with my archetypes, feats and traits and paste into a word document with source citation notes. The whole thing is presented in the order in which I will gain access to the needed rules.

Then I send the document to the GM and ask him if my interpretation of the rules of my build is correct, and to discuss it with me. If we agree on what the rules mean before play, then there is no impact on the quality of the game at the table. This only takes about 1 hour of GM thought time, so most GMs would agree to this.

Oh, and avoid rules that are still debated in the message boards, or ask the GM to arbitrarily choose his interpretation before play begins and accept whatever he says.

AndIMustMask wrote:

some MT builds i've made--look them over for some ideas if you'd like: neither are early-entry (though they can easily accommodate that with some level-switching), both are quite powerful.

ULTIMYSTIC THEURGE** spoiler omitted **

- - - - - - - - - -

MYSTIC THEURGE - NECROMANCER EDITION** spoiler omitted **...

nice one1

Yes, Wizards access spells one level earlier. There are ways of synergizing with wisdom and charisma, but not with intelligence. Here are three options for synergizing:

This makes a few builds:
1. Wisdom all the way: Cleric 1, Empyreal sorcerer 2, monk 3, MT 4+, use magical knack for sorcerer. You cast from wisdom in both classes and get your wisdom bonus added to AC.
2. Charisma all the way: Wood/Lore Oracle 1, any sorcerer 2-3, MT 4+. You cast only from charisma and charisma replaces dexterity for AC, so you can dump it.

The draw back to both of these builds is slower access to high level spells. These builds must be focused on level 1 arcane spells to be fun to play early on. Magic missile with toppling spell, snowball and shocking grasp are three good choices.

Consider:

A civilization shattering catastrophe occurred a few hundred years ago and all folks blame the magic users for it. About half of the land mass is in a state of anarchy, and the rest is controlled by a variety of organized civilizations. Martial orders including paladins and inquisitors exist specifically to investigate reports of magic users and hunt them down. These orders are based in the good and neutral dominated civs. In a few evil civilizations magic users are captured and enslaved. Also, each civ has a favored religion, and worshippers of non-state religions are likewise actively hunted down.

Consider some actual magic limiting rules:
1. No summoning functions.
2. No teleportation, dimension door, blink or similar spell accessing other planes or dimensions function.
3. Animating undead requires a tough caster level check unless the creature in question gives consent to being animated this way.
4. Limit spell levels available. Maybe no spells above 7th level work.
5. Consider identifying one or two types of magic that are particularly weak. All spells of the weakened schools occupy a spell slot one level higher than normal. (Examples: all illusions spells or all spells with the light descriptor.)

Whatever rules you settle upon, be sure your players know them long before character creation.

As for the ultimate goals of the world/game play, think about fantasy novels that you've read. Rip off wholesale any themes that appeal to you. Also, the theme that is appropriate will have to evolve in response to the game choices your players make. What they do in the first five levels will tell you which side of the power fault lines they stand on, and which direction your story line should bend.

Good luck!

I would like to respond to the subject of this thread, rather than the specific case which you pose and has been well discussed.

Taking the position that a player should be regarded negatively for having done the out of the game room work of building an effective character seems to undermine the whole point of the game to me. Knowing how to play a character at the table is half of the skill set that qualifies a player as effective, off table skills are the other half. As has been mentioned earlier, it is not whether the player is effective that matters, but whether they play to team success and fun or for personal success at the expense of others. "I killed the big baddie to save your life" is much different than "I killed the big baddie all by myself and you didn't even get to hit him, ha ha!"

In my opinion, almost all min/maxed characters have weaknesses to balance their strengths. What matters is that the players at the table have complimentary skill sets to deal with whatever comes up. As a Charisma dump dwarf Zen archer player, I am grateful when the party face saves me from triggering an unnecessary battle or when the blaster mage fries a whole boat load of baddies.

My point is this: min/maxing is not bad, playing selfishly is bad. It is just that poorly designed characters have one less avenue for bad players to ruin table fun.

We are negotiating the game world for our next homebrew game right now. So far we have:

4 gods (LG, LN, LE and N) created a little pocket dimension and stocked it with only one world, nothing else. This world is a hollow sphere, and all folks live on the inner surface, with the sun being at the center of the sphere. The sun is a disk bright on 1 side, dark on the other that rotates once every 24 hours. The gods made this world to be a little chess board to play with the mortals. As such, they wanted to minimize outside influence, and the potential for the locals unbalancing their game world.

We have agreed upon the following:
Planar Lock is permanently on the entire plane. No plane shifts, astral spells or teleports work.

Because of this, no summoning works at all.

Any creatures present that normally have an outsider subtype are instead modified to have the native subtype.

Gun powder does not work in this world.

We won't use any combat maneuvers other than trip.

Divination or other scrying methods from outside the plane will detect a solid, dead planet.

Divination or other scrying from inside the world will detect that the universe ends at the outer edge of their planet, and will not reveal the existence of other planes or dimensions.

Raising dead requires a skill check: D20 + CL + Stat versus DC of 15 + HD + months dead to create the undead unless the creature consents to being raised.

The world was originally stocked with non chaotic races, and any chaotic creatures that are present are small in number.A cataclysm of some kind occurred hundreds of years ago, destroying all high level casters and all known writings concerning magic. The world has civilizations separated by vast regions of frontier/wildlands. Most everyone is either wary of spell casters or outright hostile to them, since they were somehow responsible for the cataclysm.

We will use less than a complete list of races in this world, and less than a complete list or archetypes, but all races and all archetypes that the players want to play will be included in game world design.

We will probably start in a frontier area, weeks travel away from any major city. The town will be small (500 people?), isolated and struggling to get by. The flavor will be like any small town from a Clint Eastwood spaghetti western. Since there is no functioning teleportation magic, the town really is isolated an on its own.
We do not have any names or any geography yet.

I plan to ask the players to each create a character who has lived in the town for at least two years, and to write an extensive character background working in traits and relating them to previous experience. Each player will also be asked to describe their characters motivations and short term goals based on these back stories. Characters with more complete stories will be awarded more starting gold on character creation.

Based on what the players write, I will create the hundred mile radius surrounding the frontier town. The story line for the first three levels will have to do with reconciling conflicts in their stories, and resolving short term goals.

Well, that's all we have so far, and we'll be posting ideas to each other for another week or two until we finalize the rules and create characters. I would love any suggestions folks have for this world, and I plan to read all the posts in this thread to see other folks' ideas.

Thanks, Meibellum, for starting this!

Cazin.

And so we come back to Slimguage's arguments: when using a thrown dagger as an improvised weapon, you are not using it as a dagger and weapon focus, dagger does not apply.

I do agree with you that there is no RAW on this topic.

To take your argument to a logical extreme, Suppose a fighter with weapon specialization in long bows becomes a monk of the empty hand and then throws the bow. Would the +2 damage from specialization apply to the thrown bow? The same conclusions should apply to any improvised weapon.

If we conclude that improvised weapons do not use proficiency, focus or specialization of the weapon being mishandled (used in an improvised manner), we come to the next line of argument to try to make this archetype playable:

1. Do Throw Anything and Catch Off Guard count as weapon proficiencies for thrown and melee improvised weapons? Could one take focus or specialization in improvised weapons?

2. Do the magical enhancements on improvised weapons apply when they are used improvisationally? Is that +4 flaming bastard sword now a +4 flaming club?

I believe that the answer to 1 is no and the answer to 2 is yes.

Monks of the empty hand are proficient with the shuriken only. A monk of the empty hand treats normal weapons as improvised weapons with the following equivalencies (substituting all of their statistics for the listed weapon): a light weapon functions as a light hammer, a one-handed weapon functions as a club, and a Two-handed weapon functions as a quarterstaff.

I take this, combined with the language for improvised weapons to mean that:

My interpretation is that B only applies when you do not have a weapon proficiency with a weapon. So if you have staff proficiency, you cannot use the staff as an improvised weapon.

Allowing proficiency and weapon focus combined with improvised weapons opens up all kinds of cheese. My favorite flavor of this cheese involves throwing fragile items as improvised weapons and using disposable weapon feat to auto confirm critical threats.

I interpret RAW to be that disposable weapon requires weapon focus, weapon focus requires proficiency and you are inherently not proficient with weapons used as improvised weapons, congealing this cheese cold in its tracks...

Both classes are 3/4 BAB classes. When you took the first level as inquisitor you already paid the BAB tax by taking a level with a BAB increase of +0. You may take levels 2, 3 and 4 and receive a +1 BAB at each level gain. Consider the benefits gained at each level on inquisitor, and take it if it is very helpful.

Here are the thoughts I would have were I playing your character:

Inquisitor Level 2: OMG, my own Dwarven Zen Archer is salivating at the +7 initiative you would gain for 1 more level as inquisitor. How can you not take that???

Inquisitor Level 3: Look at the teamwork feats in detail, and the characters you play with. The teamwork feats are only effective if your party is composed in a way that you could take advantage of this perk AND your teammates would be willing to do things your way, working as a team. This is a social decision that should be made with the other folks you campaign with. This is probably not worth taking, but it depends on what your party thinks.

Inquisitor Level 4: 2 second level spells and another judgment. Meh... Who cares? Let the caster cast, you gotta shoot... Don't take this level.

The campaign I'm playing in involves us later on being the leader of some faction, country, nation, or something, and I'm not sure how a loner could lead a country.

My advice: play a true loner who lives by a code that you have in real life. The GM then has the meaty material for game design: make story hooks that give your character a reason to get involved. Hey, maybe you rescue the princess and marry her not to rule the kingdom, but because it was the right thing to do. Don't want to rule? Hey buddy, you are stuck with the job now that you rescued that lady. So many fantasy books are based on a character who is intrinsically a loner but is forced into involvement. (It is usually the villain who actually wants to rule.) They even say that the best leader is the one who doesn't want to lead.

Let your GM have the fun of writing the story around you. Relax and enjoy it. Play it real.

Good luck!

Is there any other monk build easily played 1 to 20th that pulls its weight?

I am currently considering starting a hungry ghost/quiggong monk with a 1 level dip in Bard/Dervish of Dawn archetype and a 1 level dip in Cleric of Seranrae/separatist archetype with the travel domain.

The Bard dip lets me get the feat dervish dancer for free (Use Dex in place of strength for both to hit and damage with a scimitar). I stat dump strength in favor of dexterity.

The Cleric level gives me scimitar as my god's favored weapon and +10 base speed. I take the feat Crusader's flurry. This lets me flurry with my god's favored weapon.

Ta Dah! I am a level 3 character with strength 8 and dexterity 19 who uses dex for melee combat and AC. My weapon gives a crit on 18-20, I ki leach and spend those tasty ki points on extra attacks, barkskin and scorching rays (from the Quinggong archetype).

Draw backs:
1. I am at a net -2 BAB from level dips.
2. I have little to no range weapon ability, but I have high mobility due to the travel domain and monkish ways.
3. It is a bit of a challenge to roll play a hungry ghost monk of a good god, but hey, internal conflict makes for some of the best roll playing.

P.S. I admit that my weapon of choice be a quarterstaff but that doesn't mean I won't use anything else Joex

On being thiefy: There is a trait (Wisdom of the flesh, Irori) that lets you pick one Str/Dex/Con skill, make it work off of Wisdom and makes it a class skill. Consider making disable device a class skill that uses wisdom.

On other weapons: you need good range combat potential. There are a few monk weapons that can be thrown. Consider Lungchuan Tamo (Hidden Daggers). You can throw them as part of a flurry of blows and they do either piercing or slashing damage. Between your staff and 10 or 20 throwing knives, you'd be able to cover all damage types.

You get staff proficiency for free and their is a trait to get an exotic weapon proficiency for free: heirloom weapon.

If you want increased movement to get into range to use your staff, consider a 1 level dip as a cleric with the travel domain (+10 movement, a spell that increases movement another +10 for an hour). You could be a level 6 human with a movement speed of 70! (and when that mage drops a haste spell, they won't even know what hit 'em.)

Yes, I admit, I have spent way to many hours thinking about monk builds...

Enjoy!

Consider:

Weapon Adept - gain +1 to hit and +2 damage with your favored weapon, and perfect strike (roll twice) replaces stunning fist.

Martial Artist - Weird but cool. Use monk level to qualify for fighter feats. Make a wis check as a swift action for a +2 on all attacks that round, and bypasses DR and hardness. Also, crits easier and stunning fist DC harder.

Drunken Master - Extra ki for drinking. Maybe fun for player to roll play, maybe annoying for rest of party...

Hungry Ghost - Good flavor for the sinister, free ki point whenever you confirm a crit or drop an opponent. Unfortunately, the quarter staff is not a great crit hunting weapon.

In all cases consider adding the Quinggong to your archetype. You want to give up high jump or slow fall for barkskin. There are also some good higher level ki powers you can get like breathing fire and what not.

This character will never be as good at damage as a well tuned fighter or barbarian. If the other players are min/maxing their characters, you will feel below par hanging with them.

The draw back to focusing in the quarterstaff is that it is a double weapon. When enchanting a double weapon you need to pay to enchant both ends (twice the price). On the other hand, a monk may have all attacks come from one single weapon during a flurry. For this reason, you are better off focusing on a non-double weapon.

If she wants cool martial arts flavor, go through the eastern weapons list and take the heirloom weapon trait to get proficiency in this exotic weapon for free. (I mean, come on, who doesn't want to fight with a double chicken saber? Ironically, not a double weapon...)

Good luck!

What are the kinds of attacks he is weak at? Can he do all types of damage bypassing all types of DR? Swap out some of the monsters in the future encounters so that he can do little to contribute.

If he is min/maxed, he must have some stat at 7 or even 5. If so, add a magical effect to some location that persists until the objective is complete. Make everyone roll stat checks of that type to succeed in something. Even better, make it so a failed stat check results in lowering that stat by 1 for the next 24 hours (and don't tell anyone it is temporary). Consider rolling this stat check every hour until the objective is complete. I guarantee you, a character down to 3 in some stat will freak out.

It is the GM's responsibility to creatively improvise the scenario so it is fun and challenging, regardless of how min/maxed the characters are. Get creative.

What does a cestus do for a monk? From the APG:

Benefit: While wearing a cestus, you are considered armed and your unarmed attacks deal normal damage. If you are proficient with a cestus, your unarmed strikes may deal bludgeoning or piercing damage. Monks are proficient with the cestus.

Drawback: When using a cestus, your fingers are mostly exposed, allowing you to wield or carry items in that hand, but the constriction of the weapon at your knuckles gives you a –2 penalty on all precision-based tasks involving that hand (such as opening locks).

My guess is that a level 1 monk with a cestus may choose to do either:
A. Use the cestus as a weapon for d4 damage with crits at 19-20/x2
B. Use unarmed attacks, and the cestus allows the unarmed attack to do their standard damage dice of D6, but with the ability to count as piercing.

Questions 1: Is that right?
Question 2: Does a monk with a cestus doing unarmed damage get his critical threat improved to 19-20/x2 from using the cestus?
Question 3: Does a cestus made with adamantium allow the monk's unarmed attacks to count as adamantium for overcoming DR?
Question 4: If the cestus is enchanted, do the monk's unarmed attacks get the enhancement bonus?
Question 5: Since the hand may hold something, would a monk with a cestus on both hands still have free hands for Crane Style?

Thanks!

Why use armor when you could be a monk too?

I have been thinking of a MT too and have come up with the following build idea:

1/2 elf with drow magic for darkness (2nd lvl wiz spell)
1 level as a Cleric of an elven god (Player Companion: Gods and Magic states elven clerics are pantheistic and may choose domains from any elven god (page 48)) and choose trickery domain. FAQ states copycat is a cleric spell since it is gained by a cleric class, so that satisfies divine caster 2nd level.
1 level as an Empyrial sorcerer (wiz based caster).
1 level as a sohei monk (wis bonus applies to AC, can act when surprised, +1 initiative, monk bonus feat choice: dodge for +1AC more)
Lvl 4+ as Mystic Theurge.

I start with Wisdom 18 and Dex 14.

At character level 4 my Wisdom is 19, I use that wand of Mage Armor to keep me constantly armored (1 charge lasts 1 hour) and my AC is 10 + 1(Dodge feat) +4 (wis) +2 (dex) + 4(mage armor), or AC 21.

At character level 8 my wisdom is 20, I have a headband of wisdom +4 and my AC is 10 + 1 + 7 + 2 + 4, or AC 24. I could also buy minor magic items to improve my AC another +1 or +2.

How's that sound?

Possibly monk / sorcerer though the stats for that would suck.

You could choose the Empyreal sorcerer blood line which uses Wisdom in Place of Charisma. Why not go with crossblooded Orc/Empyreal?

After some consideration, I've decided to go with swashbuckler rogue, with an eye toward the 'master chef' prestige class from 'the quintessential halfling'.

I didn't expect it to, but I ran the numbers and it looks like this little guy will be a force to be reckoned with! Who knew!

I would seriously consider a monk of the empty hand/underfoot adept (another monk kit) Think pint sized Jackie Chan.

Here are a few things to consider:
Fighting trait:
Surprise Weapon: You are skilled at fighting with objects not traditionally considered weapons. You gain a +2 trait bonus on attack rolls with improvised weapons.
Equipment trait:
Rough and Ready: When you use a tool of your trade (requiring at least 1 rank in the appropriate Craft or Profession skill) as a weapon, you do not take the improvised weapon penalty and instead receive a +1 trait bonus on your attack. This trait is commonly used with shovels, picks, blacksmith hammers, and other sturdy tools — lutes and brooms make terribly fragile weapons.
Combat Feat:
Equipment trick, rope: Tangle (Throw Anything): You can throw a coiled length of rope as a ranged weapon. If you hit with a ranged touch attack, the target becomes entangled. It can cut or burst the rope, or escape with a DC 15 Escape Artist check. The rope must be unsecured to use this trick.

Good luck!

Dragon Ferocity requires acrobatics 5 ranks and stunning fist. If you want only four levels as a monk, they better be as a master of many styles/quinggong. The many style kit lets you ignore the prerequisites of Dragon Ferocity. This would also let you pick up the crane riposte at higher levels and have both styles active at once.

You all are going back and forth and in circles on this topic. This is because both sides of the argument are totally legit, and it is going to take a judgment call from some higher authority type.

Having read through most of the thread, I believe it all comes down to one question:

Is the long bow a two handed weapon?
Argument in favor: It clearly says it takes two weapons to use.
Argument opposed: The weapons are broken down into categories: one handed, two handed and ranged. Rules about two handed weapons apply to any weapon in the category of weapons called "2 handed weapons."

As someone who is going to start playing a Zen archer in a month, I had already given up on playing crane style since I do not want to piss off my GM by arguing for it.

I am grateful to you, Driver 325 yards, for being the curmudgeon (or as my therapist friend says "therapeutic irritant") that pushed this issue. If you get a positive ruling, I get to take crane riposte.

a battle cleric has the BAB of an evenly split fighter/wizard, can wear armor (and bring some healing) and would actually be a full caster instead of half... just some thoughts.

A cleric kit: theologian of the Fire domain. This adds the following spells to his cleric spell book: 1st—burning hands, 2nd—produce flame, 3rd—fireball, 4th—wall of fire, 5th—fire shield, 6th—fire seeds, 7th—elemental body IV (fire only), 8th—incendiary cloud, 9th—elemental swarm (fire spell only).

This would be a passable "F/M/C combo".

Mario IS a hero, and DON'T CRITICIZE HIM!!! :3

On a serious note, I can't believe this thread has turned into debating the definition of evil in the form of petty squabbles. Though, on the flip side: yay, my thread has tons of posts.

On to the debate: is negative energy unnatural? The only place I'd see it as particularly unnatural is in the positive energy plane.

Is something evil simply because it is unnatural? Are zebra mussels evil because they're an invasive species? No, they had no choice.

Likewise, mindless undead are mindless beings created of a neutral, though perhaps disliked, substance (negative energy), so why should they be proclaimed evil?

I believe that animating the corpse of someone/something without its consent is inherently evil along the lines of defiling graves and/or bodies. Most folks practice necromancy in fundamentally evil ways.

Question: Is a zombie a tool or a creature of evil?

Test: If an animated zombie is told to follow the orders of Bob the farmer, and it always does what Bob says, no exceptions, it is a tool. If instead it goes rogue and kills kids and bunny rabbits, then it is evil. Forget about definitions, how do they behave in the gaming world?

Conclusions: If zombies don't go rogue and are tools, not killing machines, if the person consented to be zombified before death and if the cultural standard of the local community is that consenting to zombification is OK, then there are some circumstances where it is not evil to make undead, and those undead are not evil.

How do zombies act in the game world? I am not experienced enough with PF to know this answer...

The point is not to build the best fighter ever, but to build an effective character you'd love to play. I don't believe that monks are better than fighters, but that they are more fun to play. Sure, you have to troll through the various archetypes, races and traits to find a great combo, but then that's half the fun!

When comparing/debating monks and fighters, why not agree to a standard benchmark build? How about level 12 PFS legal with 108,000gp worth of treasure?

My favorite Monk builds are:
1. Oread Zen Archer with Quinggong tweaks.
2. The Halfling trip monkey: Underfoot adept/Martial Artist.
3. Empty handed monk of the sacred mountain with traits to get +3 to hit with improvised weapon.

Here is my Oread Zen Archer build at level 12:

Stats:
Strength 18
Dexterity 14
Constitution 10
Wisdom 21
Intelligence 8
Charisma 5

Kit Abilities:
Flurry of Blows with Bow only, Perfect Strike, Weapon Focus with Long Bow, Use monk level in place of BAB for CMB, Use Wisdom (not dex) for bow to hit,Point Blank Mastery, Ki Pool, Slow Fall, 1 ki to cast barkskin, 1 ki to convert arrow damage to unarmed value, Weapon Specialization with Composite Long Bow, If 1 ki, can deny death, AOO with bow, 3 ki to ignore total concealment and total cover, even firing around corners, spend 2 ki to cast dimension door

Feat Choices:
Toughness, Precise Shot, Point Blank Shot, Deadly Aim, Deep sight, Improved Precise Shot, Mobility, Improved Critical, Pinpoint targeting, Clustered Shots

Equipment choices with 108,000 gp budget: 
+4 Adaptive Composite Long Bow (33.1kgp)
Headband of Wisdom +6 (36kgp)
Belt of Strength +2, dexterity +2 and constitution +2 (16kgp)
Amulet of natural armor +3 (18kgp)

Statistics:

HP = 99 AC = 29 Flurry ABs: +21/+21/+16/+16/+11 d8+17 each Move@60’
15 perfect strikes a day 15 ki points Barkskin is AC5, lasts two hours
30 feet range is +1/+1 on attacks

Can you make a better archer kit? Spec it out to level 12, 108,000 gp and post for comparison. I would love to see it and compare...

A well designed game could set the context for non-evil necromancy. Imagine the following context:

A good party is fighting against impossible odds to save an isolated village from the claws of marauding monsters. Biff the Valliant (the town hero and an NPC) suffers grievous wounds and vile poisons. As he lies dying, he knows that the party's cleric (Golarion the Glorious) is not high enough level to save him, but can create undead. With his dying breath, Biff asks Golarion to raise him as a zombie so that his remains can save the innocent villagers.

Is this evil, or is such self sacrifice inherently good?

Once the precedent is set, couldn't an isolated community grow to embrace the idea that donating your remains for use by the community is a good act? (Imagine zombie gardeners pulling plows to feed the hungry...)