Cowjuicer's page

Wizards don't have to go first. They just have to cast when their time comes.

I find all the initiative stuff out there to be a big trap. Everyone's desperately trying to be first to win... but if you're properly prepared, you essentially win initiative because you made it hours/days/months/years ago.

Ultimately, that's why I choose schools other than Divination. A Transmutation/Necromancy specialist makes a great gish. In the proper campaign, Enchanters win--no one ever opposes them. With the proper GM, Illusion is Universalist Plus, and gets to eat everyone's lunch while they think they're eating something else.

Right now, I'm playing a Banisher. Loads of fun. Not nearly as offensive as some of my other characters, but always carrying various get-out-of-jail-free cards.

I'm not disagreeing with you here - I think Illusion is wonderful in the right circumstances - but as a player, I want abilities that I can use without having to worry about what my GM does or doesn't react to properly.

This leads me to pick something like Divination, because it lets me make the choices. To be fair, however, I usually am a Diviner in name only - I load up on other spells every morning instead (as the actual Diviner spells also tend to fall into the trap of "the GM is the ultimate arbiter of usefulness.") The abilities are just too neat to pass up.

There is a better way than merciful item sundering.

1. Be a Drunken Brute barbarian (APG archetype). Every round you drink an alcoholic beverage, you can rage without spending a round of rage.

2. Get the Flask of Infinite Sake (I believe that's the name), an item that can be found in one of the Jade Regent books (I'll go check to see which one).

3. Muzzle yourself with the Flask of Infinite Sake.

4. Drink constantly. (Perhaps combine with a Ring of Sustenance to obviate the need for breathing and eating.)

5. Infinite rounds of rage.

If the monks I've played with are any indication, he will want to leverage his super-speed (especially if they hit 4th level halfway through and he unlocks ki points) in order to run around spreading the news and maybe even grabbing citizens to rush them out of danger.

He does not have Dimensional Dervish, the third and final pre-req for Dimensional Maneuvers. He has the other two (Dim. Agility and Dim. Assault).

Berselius wrote:

A Demigod? CR 9?

+1

And with a CR 10 master to boot.

I would maybe think about changing it to a flawed aspect of the demigod. Something you can maybe develop plotwise. Fighting a demigod is borderline epic.

I understand - thank you. I've been playing it up as a demigod in-game, but of course the summoner isn't going to get the actual thing. He'll get an emissary, or part of it, or whatever - and those will be the stats seen here. I'll change the name, though, to avoid the silliness.

EDIT: Woops. My apologies if this counts as a necromancy. Forgot how long I've been away.

I understand this may not be what you're looking for, but I heavily encourage checking out the RPG Weapons of the Gods for all your crazy kung-fu needs.

Keep in mind that, especially with larger than normal groups, single monsters generally fare poorly as tense boss battles. If you have 6 players, that means that the PCs will have 6 standard, 6 move, and 6 swift actions every round vs the boss's 1 standard, 1 move, and 1 swift action every round. Even if the boss's attack is as effective as two or three PCs attacks, the outcome is pretty much inevitable.

There are two easy ways around this problem. The first is to "cheat" and give the boss extra initiative rounds. Players may well cry foul over this. The second is to give the boss helpers, whether that be summoned creatures (appropriate for demons and devils, among others) or just cannon fodder minions. Anything that can make the PCs use their actions on something other than the boss and give the boss additional pseudo-actions will really help level the playing field.

That said, a boss that is a great deal tougher than the party can still be a threat as a single standard enemy. The CR range for this is usually average party level +4 or +5. I'd bump that to +5 or +6 for a 6 person party. More if they're optimized with high attack bonuses and ACs or have casters that really know their stuff.

These guys are ... well, they range from "I know enough to pump my casting stat, grab the big six, and use control spells" (witch) to "I'm a 7th level cleric and I still use my 1d6 electric attacks from first level" to "What do you mean, I have to roll a dispel check when I hit with my dispelling bomb?" to "As long as my animal companion is completely fine, I don't care what happens" (raptor-loving druid) to "Hi, I'm the Barbarian and I've used rage on precisely 1 occasion."

Their stats may be decent, and they know a bit about grabbing the right items - but optimized? No way. And they're not noobs, either. They're just kinda have to be prodded to use up their powerful spells and limited resources such as Rage. I'm sure whipping out the Orcus mini will help change that ... I'm really worried about discouraging them and having the boss battle play out like a dispirited slog; at the same time, I want this to feel dangerous.

@ SmiloDan: just realized I'd need a CL of 18 to quicken that teleport. Eurgh. Although, given that he only has one level-based attack spell and I'm not planning on using it much, I guess it'd be OK to boost it.

After today, I realized that the main fighter actually has a 23 AC. The other one will probably have a few more points than that. Everyone else is around 20.

Quote:

I'm a huge fan of Improved Initiative and the Fort/Ref/Will boosters, but I feel that Great Fortitude might be overkill here (swapped it for Flyby Attack). Now that I have another feat to play with I'm kinda at a loss. I guess Power Attack could be pretty useful - clear off some of that wicked Attack Bonus and throw on some more damage, but then I run the risk of blowing through tons of HP very quickly.

I don't know what spells the witch uses, but you don't want to be failing saves. That evil eye hex is going to be doing debuffs anyway. Then there is the misfortune and sleep hexes to worry about. I don't know what your players have though. If that witch is played right it can make a monster into easy pickings for everyone else.

I did not notice this in your first post-->Even withe only 6 people these will be easy fights if you bring them in one at a time. They probably won't last 2 rounds. It would probably be better to bring both monsters in or have a CR 10 monster with minions so they can't focus fire on the big monster.

Quote:

So: what feats would you recommend & is there any real way to get around the "hitting everyone but the fighters on a 2" problem? Even dumping some of his massive STR wouldn't help much.

There is not much you can do about that. I am assuming the others will be staying out of melee though so it should not be much of an issue. I would get a commitment if possible so I would be sure as to who would show up. That +26 will be brutal if the fighters don't show up especially if they have to go into the CR 10 fight right after that. I would have a weaker version of both monsters ready in case you only get four people.

Is there a reason why you can't get advance notice of who will be there?

PS:If the fighters show up take power attack. If they don't then take vital strike. It is not the best feat but seeing you roll 8d6 will probably have an intimidating affect on them. :)

We had a session today. The next session will be this beastie - and probably its CR 10 wizard master, if I take some other in-thread advice about putting the two together.

I don't know who's coming yet because we have ~11 player characters and they interchange fairly freely. In addition, we probably won't play this next game for at least three weeks.

As far as your comment about "won't last two rounds" - I dunno about that. Against an optimized party sure, but my players' characters aren't exactly the best at fighting. Case in point: the cleric mentioned in my response to SmiloDan (see below) who uses his level 1 lightning attacks from his domain. >_>

If you have an extra feat to throw around, maybe try Quicken Spell-like Effect for some extra action economy? You might have to finaggle the CL of the beastie to be legit, but it might be worth it.

And maybe throw in some minions. Even squishy ones can be effective, and might be fun for the PCs....it's always fun to 1-shot a foe...or multiple foes in the same round.

Although only your wayward fighters are getting multiple attacks due to BAB. Does anyone use Rapid Shot, Two-Weapon Fighting, or claw/claw/bite? Does anyone have access to haste? Otherwise, the action economy constraints of your BBEG aren't going to be AS bad as they could have been....

Oh my god, quicken his natural Teleport SLA? Awwwww yeah. I think I might do that ... that might be very very useful.

The Inquisitor uses Rapid Shot religiously. I don't think I've ever seen him NOT use it. There is no access to haste, no use of two-weapon fighting, and (almost certainly) no use of claw/claw/bite. These characters are not highly optimized at all. Moderately or "naturally" optimized at best - they know to get stat-boosters/Cloaks of Res/other Big Six stuff, they know to pump their casting stats, etc. - but there's no real system mastery evident. As an example: the cleric LOVES to use his piddly 1d6+3 lightning attacks from his domains. They're essentially straight-up useless (and thanks to energy resistance, often truly useless) but he does it anyway.

Damn, I forgot a couple characters!

Human Barbarian 7
*Half-Elf Monk of the Four Winds 7 (twinked for the Perception skill, of all things, with a bonus of about 25)

The Barbarian will probably be present, which may help on the raw damage front. The Human Fighter made a rare appearance today and was putting out 1d12+18 with each Power Attack - he was the main contribution to party power by far due to energy resistance and high save bonuses making the alchemist and witch struggle a bit.

Did you include the -4 attack penalty gargantuan creatures get? That would bring the attack bonus down to +22.

Compared to other CR 9 monsters, an attack bonus of +22 is still somewhat high, and its average damage if all attacks hit (94.5) is very high. And it isn't two-handing the heavy mace, which it looks like it could.

Edit: The stats other than attack and damage are well in line with CR 9 monsters.

If it's going to be using flyby attack, and only getting one mace hit per round, then the damage is within range (even if it two-hands the mace), and I'd deem it "close enough". If it's going to be full-attacking often, then you might try to tone down the damage.

Making the mace a non-magical light mace would make it +20 to hit, and 3d6+12 damage per hit, which gives 67.5 damage if all attacks hit. This is still better than nearly all CR 9 monsters, but one or two are kind of close to that attack/damage combo.

I did not include that, so I will - thank you. I was indeed planning on flyby attack with the mace - perhaps with Vital Strike to intimidate them a bit, as per wraithstrike's suggestion :)

The attack bonus seems to be to high, but you should also tailor things to your group which means if the AC of group is in the 30 range then go with it.

CMB and CMD should not be only 3 numbers apart. I did not do any math, but that just looks wrong.

You should have 6 feats, not 5.

The 4d6 for the mace is correct.

PS:I decided to do the math.
Now to figure out CMB and CMD
BAB=12
str mod=12
size bonus=4
CMB=28
CMD=CMB(28)+10+dex mod(3)=41

Thank you Wraithstrike. I should have caught CMD but it was 2 AM when I finished the other day.

As far as hitting that AC: well, the two fighters are definitely around there. The alchemist, who often serves as the tank since the fighters come less often, can get up to 25-27 with his own buffs, and the witch can further add to that. However, the others really aren't at that level.

I'm a huge fan of Improved Initiative and the Fort/Ref/Will boosters, but I feel that Great Fortitude might be overkill here (swapped it for Flyby Attack). Now that I have another feat to play with I'm kinda at a loss. I guess Power Attack could be pretty useful - clear off some of that wicked Attack Bonus and throw on some more damage, but then I run the risk of blowing through tons of HP very quickly.

So: what feats would you recommend & is there any real way to get around the "hitting everyone but the fighters on a 2" problem? Even dumping some of his massive STR wouldn't help much.

For your purposes, here is the party. People who don't show up as often are marked with *. Usually I cut off entry to a session at 6 people.

*Dwarf Fighter 7
*Human Fighter 7
Elf Witch 7 (Deception, probably the most powerful character beside the Alchemist)
Human Alchemist 7
Tengu Sorcerer (Shadow) 4/Oracle (Bones) 3 (ouch)
Human Cleric of Gozreh 7 (Air, Weather)
Half-Orc Inquisitor of Irori 7 (not sure on domain b/c he never uses his powers - he likes to plink away with his +1 shock corrosive bow)
*Gnome Druid (Water domain) 7
*Gnome Druid (raptor animal companion) 7

In reality, our lineup is usually Alchemist, Witch, Inquisitor, Sorcerer/Oracle, Cleric, one of the Druids.

I wanted to use my Orcus, Prince of Undeath miniature that I picked up earlier this year. He's Gargantuan, so I had to make my own monster. This will be fought by a level 7 party of over-large size (usually six people) and will be followed by a CR 10 encounter consisting of a quite powerful wizard (and anything he summons).

Yuthos, the Demigod of Blood CR 9
LE Gargantuan outsider (devil, evil, extraplanar, lawful)
Init +7; Senses darkvision 60 ft., see in darkness; Perception +18
AC 22, touch 10, flat-footed 19 (+3 Dex, +6 natural, +7 armor, -4 size)
hp 174 (maxed* 12d10+54)
Fort +12 (good), Ref +8 (bad), Will +12 (good)
DR 10/good; Immune fire, poison Resist acid 10, cold 10
Speed 40 ft., fly 60 ft. (good)
Melee Blood Lord’s Scepter +26 (4d6+1d6 acid (blood)+14)
Spell-Like Abilities (CL 9th)
At will—greater teleport (self plus 50 lbs. of objects only), invisibility (self only), vomit blood (DC 20 Reflex) (as cone of cold, but dealing acid damage, and appearing as a torrent of blood)
3/day—wall of force (describe as “a churning barrier of fresh blood”), enervation
Str 34 Dex 16 Con 22 Int 14 Wis 18 Cha 18
Base Atk +12; CMB +28; CMD 31
Feats Improved Initiative, Wingover, Flyby Attack, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes
Skills Bluff +16, Craft +2, Fly +14, Intimidate +14, Knowledge (planes) +14, Knowledge (religion) +14, Perception +16, Sense Motive +16, Spellcraft +14, Stealth +3
Languages Infernal, Homebrew 1☻, Homebrew 2☻, Homebrew 3☻, Celestial, telepathy 100 ft.
Treasure Blood Lord’s Scepter (+2 Gargantuan corrosive heavy mace), +1 Gargantuan breastplate

*We use maximum HP for all creatures - the players wanted it for themselves and agreed to have it apply to everything.

☻: Homebrew languages that replace Common.

The only thing I'm really unsure about is the damage dice for the Gargantuan heavy mace. I had to make a guess based on the weapon-resizing tables in the Equipment chapter of the CRB.

Ah, that's brilliant! Thanks, folks - my BBEG's job just got that much easier. This fight is starting to look a little too hard after all - but hey, they deserve a nice terribly-difficult fight now and then, so it might as well be the last fight of the campaign!

Target creature's Intelligence and Charisma scores each drop to 1. The affected creature is unable to use Intelligence- or Charisma-based skills, cast spells, understand language, or communicate coherently. Still, it knows who its friends are and can follow them and even protect them. The subject remains in this state until a heal, limited wish, miracle, or wish spell is used to cancel the effect of the feeblemind. A creature that can cast arcane spells, such as a sorcerer or a wizard, takes a –4 penalty on its saving throw.

By my understanding, the bolded section means that any spellcaster hit by feeblemind is unable to cast spells, not just one who uses INT or CHA to cast. Is this correct? I believe I am backed up by part of the spell specifically calling out arcane casters as having a worse effect happen to them than normal - leaving me with the thought that divine casters (including our WIS-based Clerics, Druids, and Inquisitors) cannot cast during the feeblemind either, although they are not subject to the -4 save penalty.

Adventurer's Armory pages 26 to 27.

Thank you very much. Unfortunately we don't use this book in my campaign ... but, then again, I think I'm allowed to have a couple tricks up my sleeve for the "final boss" - and I already do have one or two (that aren't gray areas like this one). An exceptionally-potent black tentacles will be the least of their worries. >:D

Alchemical Power Components

An alchemical power component is an alchemical item used as a material component or focus for a spell in order to alter or augment the spell’s normal effects. What follows is a sample of these effects; your GM may allow other combinations.
Spells followed by an (M) expend the alchemical item as a material component;
Spells followed by an (F) use the item as a focus and do not expend it.
In both cases, the alchemical item does not have its normal effect and does not affect any other parameters of the spell. You cannot use the same item as both a focus and a material component at the same time.

Much Googling and checking of the PRD and PFSRD (as well as the 3.5 SRD) cannot lead me to these rules. I'm particularly interested because HeroLab tells me that using X tanglefoot bags while preparing/casting black tentacles will allow me to reroll X attack rolls on the black tentacles' grapples. That would be useful indeed for the BBEG I have planned to run in an upcoming game, but I want to be able to point to somewhere I can cite this rule from.

Would any of you be able to point me in the right direction?

I'd have no problem with it. Strength Surge is fine, and you'd still need to threaten before getting anything out of Mighty Swing.

I can't dot this thread fast enough. That "soft cover" rule, in particular, is going to have my player's archer inquisitor peeing himself. And I learned about the "single charge in surprise round" rule, and the "sneak attack applies multiple times rule" to boot! I'll keep my eye on this topic for sure.

I really like this! Mechanically, it's one free potion a day; unlike potions, it can be a Personal spell and can be higher than 3rd level. You only get one, so make it count! Off the top of my head, I can't think of any really munchkin ways to use Eggs, but I'm sure there's some personal spell/above-3rd-spell that would get funky with the Egg wording.

I think that would be worth a feat for a strange wizard concept. You are a genius.

I continue to be amused that the proof that VoP isn't that bad is to subvert it every way possible.

Ok I don't have magic items but all my gold goes to the wizard who makes a billion potions and constantly casts spells on me and gives me the potions and I have a super powerful artifact that radiates magic and I have lots of spells cast permanently on myself with all my gold and I've never given away a single coin to the poor but aren't I pure in my poverty?

+1

In my home game, I would allow story-based acquisition (that is, not through a direct combat) - but not all the time and not with a perfect success rate.

I have a couple of questions about the Ancestral Weapon revelation from the Ancestors Oracle mystery.

The revelation allows you to summon a simple or martial weapon, which you are proficient with. Can I choose a different weapon each time, so long as it is "from your family's history"?

Also, if I choose to summon a composite longbow, is the strength rating forever +0, as the "default" longbow? Or can I ask for my ancestors to provide one appropriate to my strength at the time?

--DP

I'd allow the composite bow (and any other strength-rating weapons, if there are any) to change as your strength changes.

I think I'd make you stick to just one weapon for the revelation, though. Maybe one melee and one ranged if we talked about it beforehand.

My first thought is: no more Wizard lich after UM.

Why's that? I have UM, but I haven't internalized all of it. What did I miss that leads to "no more Wizard lich"?

Cowjuicer wrote:

Why the hell would I ever want to play a character that isn't a straight caster?

Well.. because he might be as fun to play as the caster... ?

I understand that. I was being more than a little hyperbolic - there's definitely love in the Cowjuicer juice-sack for Fighters, I promise. It just seems like there are so many more crazy interesting things to be done with spells. Take your Fighter buddies along for the ride, too, but all the cool effects are focused on Bob Wizardly. It ties into Cirno's "narrative power" hypothesis.

Thank you for reminding me that I should call out my hyperbole though. I changed the other post.

Agreed. Sean K. Reynolds was complaining on the gunslinger boards a while back about how his cleric couldn't melee like a fighter, barbarian, or paladin, and that wasn't fair. I've been terrified ever since.

Ditto, Ashiel. I'm firmly behind Cirno's interpretations on most things as well.

At 13th level, a fighter's money has been sunk into save-boosters, weapons, armors, stat-boosters, etc. He can swing a sword three or four times per round, make a few skill checks really well (if he's spent his paltry points in a smart fashion), hit things for nice damage all day long. OK. I won't deny that being the big tough guy is fun, but ...

The 13th level cleric or wizard chucks some money into demiplane creation and can then chill in his own personal mini-world.

Why the hell would I ever want to play a character that isn't a straight caster?

EDIT: I know it's hard to tell over the Internet, so I'd like to call out that I am exaggerating. Of course there is room in my heart for Fighters and half-casters like the Magus (which is probably my favorite class after Cleric).

Matthew, perhaps there's a regular meeting-spot for poor monks.

Brother Gerat of the Leaping Stag order comes to the meeting-spot with the +2 frost kama and hands it to Rinalda, acolyte of the enlightened way, who is on her pilgrimmage to challenge the Gorilla Kings of Sargova. As he leaves, he takes with him the +2 flaming burst amulet of mighty fists that Cousin P'takka, troglodyte padawan of the Swampfang order, no longer needs. P'takka humbly thanks Gerat for relieving him of the burden of the amulet, and goes in serch of a fellow poor monk who might have something to help him with his people's pesky lillend problem.

I think this was supposed to be a joke, but it's got my creative gears whirring. A sacred meeting spot where monks of all faiths and schools can place one or more items each, to be shared among all the other monks for the greater good, and take one item each, to better achieve their goals and attain enlightenment. If a monk dies, his stuff is sold and tithed.

Cold Ice Strike is not overpowered for it's level. It's like delayed blast fireball, with considerably less range, lower damage cap, and without the ability to delay, which is a 7th level spell.

While I understand your arguments, one must not forget that Cold Ice Strike is a swift action. That alone makes it worth having - just toss off some extra damage with that swift action without bothering with Quicken Spell and its caveats.

Something fun!

- Be a rogue

- Take Skill Focus (Knowledge: Dungeoneering)

- Take Eldritch Heritage to get a monkey familiar

- You now have a monkey that can pick locks almost as well as you do, in addition to being better at hiding (massive size bonus to Stealth, along with all your ranks) and being able to get into more tight spaces and such - all without risking your own skin.

TALK ABOUT A SKILL MONKEY, HURR

Holy wizard balls. So there. The guys might meet a pirate at some point and that's an incredibly sick way to do it. Thanks, man!

Ashiel wrote:

Monsters I just won't use? Hmmm, that's a tough one. I'd say about 90% of the monsters found in 3.5 products like the Monster Manual II, III, IV, and V. Mostly because I felt a lot of them were kinda stupid, poorly thought out, or (worst of all) mechanically trash. The stupid/poorly thought out can be revised, and refluffed, but if I have to do that and change the stats & CRs around...well I'll just make a new monster.

Aye! Same here.

To that I'll add about 50% of the monsters from most 3.5 supplements. Tomb Tapper? I'll stick with my vargouilles, thank you...

'findel

In my case, at least, it's because I don't like the idea of dark elves (or dark dwarves, or deep gnomes, and so on). My homebrew world doesn't have any of those. I haven't used dark folk yet either, but I think the more powerful ones are kinda cool, so maybe I'll throw them in or maybe they won't exist.

Srry to say this but you can't do that, Pali is only for LG characters Assasin is any evil, however you could go into anti-Pali to get the pali abilites.

In, quite literally, the third line of text in OP's post, he mentioned that he was using a homebrew variant of the assassin where he was allowed to play non-evil.

Seriously, dude. Third line of text. Is it that hard to read what he wrote?

On topic: I'm partial to adamantine, because I like to play fighters who smash objects and other stuff often ("I'm going to break down the door, and break open the treasure chest, and then BREAK OPEN SOME FACES!"). However, ghost touch may be more useful - depends if you plan on fighting lots of incorporeal undead or not. That will be mostly up to you, but for what it's worth, I'd take adamantine and then get Ghost Touch later if you end up needing it.

As far as specific weapon: I'm partial to morningstars - two types of damage with a d8 and almost anyone can use them - as well. However seeing that you want a light martial or simple weapon, maybe grab a bow and some arrows so you can contribute at range and fight with a shortsword?

It's definitely something I'd support - the more forward-compatible the wording of something is, the better.

well I was thinking of doing a mounted eidolon character. So my eidolon would have mounted combat feats and ride me around... I was just wondering if this cost me the ability to cast verbal component spells ;)

I love this concept, it's the reverse of the summoner riding his eidolon around - hilarious!

Of course, the meta-game-y feel could be removed by having the party be Pathfinders, or employees of some other organization / ruler / guild / society, whose 'loot' is to be handed over to the organization, in exchange for level-appropriate gear, as they 'earn status in the ranks, thanks to their contributions' or whatever.

That's more or less exactly what I'm doing in my game. Keeps me sane, helps stop the issue of "we found magic armor and swords and bows for the melee monsters, but the wizard gets jack-shit", allows me to increase or decrease party wealth as needed - and even though they might outgrow the Pathfinders*, there's always barons and kings that could use an adventuring party on retainer.

*or my homebrew equivalent, but whatever.

I am loath to have extra races detailed mechanically in my games. However, for this kind of concept, I'd do something simple like the following:

Take a human. Give him low-light vision, a STR or CON bonus, and slam attacks for 1d6, but give a DEX penalty and a further penalty on DEX-based skills.

A bit underwhelming, maybe, but the flavor should carry it.

I don't think you guys understand just how excellent this thread and its ideas are. The quality of discourse presented here is just ... phenomenal. You've gone and mostly fixed the Gunslinger, you understand that? A couple more tweaks here and there, and it's gone from a class I think is worse than the Monk to something I'd love to play!

I understand that you're angry, but I think you've misplaced your anger. You should be pissed at your GM instead. From your story, I can name several instances where he does not use the rules as written, and has screwed you over in this manner (Summon Monster being used alongside a move, doesn't reference rules on Fear, doesn't allow for the save vs. fear). Maybe it would be a good idea to speak with your GM about the importance of either A) using the rules as written or B) informing your players beforehand if you are changing the rules.

Blame my iPod for having TF2 music on it.

For those of you who wouldn't gnash your teeth at someone attempting such a feat, how would you adjudicate "rocket jumping"? That is, the use of an explosion's blastwave to increase one's jumping height or distance.

It could be anything from the action movie-ish "don't jump until the background is exploding" shot or someone intentionally using certain types of alchemist bombs or other such things to pull off a particularly improbable jump.

Hmm ... assuming it's an alchemist bomb, I'd have them take the damage and they'd get an extra five feet of air per d6 of bomb damage.

You are a god among Pathfinder fans. This tool is wonderful.

Unfortunately, because I have a netbook and not a full-size laptop, when I run my games, I cannot use the tool - it will not scale down beyond a certain smallness!

Is there any way you could adjust this - or perhaps place another "generate" button near the top of the window?

I would buy an Android version as well.

I hope this does not become another exception based class ala the summoner.

Oh god, I hope the same thing. The summoner is a pain.

I don't see why Paizo can't just introduce feats and and equipment to turn vanilla or even archetyped fighters into gun-using fighters, but I'll reserve judgment until the final product comes out. Not looking good at this point though.

Tomorrow I begin running my new campaign. The country it is set in is inspired by Russia, Ukraine, and similar countries, with names and geography to match. The campaign style is "points of light"; that is, settlements, whether big or small, are mostly separated by dangerous wilderness with only the brave or foolish traveling between civilized areas. Of course, out in the woods and swamps and abandoned keeps is where the treasure lies.

Not sure if this is the best thread location for this discussion, but since I'm killing time waiting for the big reveal, I'll bite...

What is this big reveal you speak of?

Would love a copy too, please.

How to make any character a barbarian.

** spoiler omitted **

I love the Angry Marines. Those and the Reasonable Marines are the funniest 40k stuff to come out of the Internet.

Would you say that this feat is balanced? Because I think it's rad and want to allow it in my upcoming West Marches-style game.

I would rule that you can simply choose to use your bow instead of the unarmed streak for an AoO in unarmed-strike threatening range. The ability is saved from uselessness because, as others have said, a bow-focused Monk variant is probably going to have a powerful bow.

In the end, it simply allows for mixing it up.

Couldn't we just sidestep the OP's entire question by having the paladin LoH himself before or after the full attack? Same outcome either way, without having to worry about whether a swift action can interrupt a full one.

In my opinion, if you took EWP for a weapon, you can use it however you like.

I'm afraid I haven't used E6, but I'd like to thank you very much for bringing it to my attention, as it's a very cool idea.

Perhaps the two viewpoints can meet halfway: the night hag still needs gems, but as a result of being naturally talented at binding souls, she can use cheaper gems for the same effect?

Not supported by RAW in any way, just a compromise.

Hu5tru wrote:

wait wait wait, command, a first level spell breaks the control of dominate, a fourth level spell? where is the balance in that?

Protection from evil is first level and gives persons a new save and then immunity if they save. It also gives them immunity from all mind controlling effects regardless of level. Gonna fight a magic using bad guy then drop protection from evil on the fighter types (and rogues probably).

I think his call was more or less correct as command only lasts one round.

It's a shame the cleric popped Protection from Evil on the ranger, for whatever reason. That monk is gonna need it when we wrap the fight up Monday night. :D

I would be more comfortable with your suggestion of using 3d4 to up the minimum and average damage. I also think you need to drop disarm as reach gives you a 10 ft donut and not a 10 ft diameter circle so in balance terms you are not giving up very much.

Alternatively you could require a second feat to use it. E.g. Combat reflexes

You could Instead give it a chance to crit the user on a 1 similar to kickback injuries from real chainsaws.

Hmm. I want to keep the disarm idea, but I'll definitely give it critical kickback - with no save, naturally. Natural 1 = you're taking 6d8, and that could be a hefty chunk out of any Fighter's HP.

Clocksword (self-winding)
10 lbs
400 gp
2-handed
2d8/x3 slashing damage
Requires EWP (clocksword) to use
Special: disarm
Special: +2 on sunder attempts
Special: On a natural one, the wielder of this weapon takes damage as if he or she had dealt himself or herself a critical hit.

It takes a feat, it's expensive, and it can mess you up - but it has high average damage, it has some useful non-HP-damage applications, and there's the "cool factor."

After much deliberation, I will be sticking with 2d8 - d4s just don't roll well. I figure the possibility of sticking yourself for a nice little chunk of HP counters that out.

And in the end, so what if it's a little OP compared to most weapons? The character won't have it for too long anyway and I like the flavor a lot.

Were I suggesting this for your game, karkon, I would absolutely swap the damage for 3d4 and cut out disarm, but I'm pretty sure that it won't make waves in mine. Thanks, everybody!

Cowjuicer wrote:

EWHM wrote:

karkon wrote:

This is not balanced at all. 2d8 damage plus a x3 crit plus trip plus disarm is too much for one weapon.

I think a better version would drop the trip and disarm. Drop the damage to 2d6. You can keep the x3 crit and possibly make it 19/x3. You could also add a minor beneficial effect such as always defeats wood hardness and/or causes sparks when fighting an opponent in metal armor which may cause flammable objects to burst into flame.

Yes, the problem is that (falcata excepted), exotic weapons kind of suck given how much you have to pay (a feat) for them. If you base this weapon off a greatsword, a normal exotic weapon could do 2d8 instead of 2d6. x3 instead of 19-20/x2 is generally considered kosher. The trip/disarm would be in excess of the normal exotic weapon guideline though. Thing is, exotic weapons are half a feat better than martial ones, they real all ought to get an overhaul excepting the racial ones that people don't generally pay for proficiency in explicitly.

Yes, I was using the necessity of the feat as part of my balancing. It could be added up like this (+ is better, * is neutral, - is negative):

+ disarm quality
* x3 crit instead of 19-20/x2
- costs a lot more
- requires EWP

I think I could stick the 2d8 back in and be okay.

If an exotic weapon's main ability is to do more damage than a standard weapon then giving it stats to do two more than a similar sized weapon would put it in line with weapon specialization. I am assuming this is a two-handed weapon. Ransuers are 2d4 X3, and they have disarm so an exotic weapon should be 2d6 x3, and disarm seems fair. I might even allow the weapon to strike as a reach or nonreach weapon with a -2 penalty. I figure if I have to pay a feat for a weapon it should be a good weapon.

With regards to the bold part: you are saying that if all it does is do another step of damage dice, it's not worth it?

Yes it is 2-handed; that was in the OP but I forgot it here.

Compared to the ranseur, this weapon gains one step of dice (2d6 as opposed to 2d4), and it loses reach. However, given that one must pay a feat for it, I think it would be okay to give it something else - specifically, I'd like to bring the damage dice up. I could use 3d4 instead of 2d6 (same max, higher min), perhaps - but if I'm spending a feat, I want it to be better than the greatsword and the ranseur

For example, the curve blade has the crit range of a rapier (18-20/x2) and does 1d10, but it is also two-handed. The rapier has the same crit range and is one-handed, but is 1d6. Between the rapier and the curve blade, the damage is two dice higher but there is a feat tax and the two-handed necessity.

My v3 of this weapon reflects a similar change between the ranseur and the clocksword. Two dice higher, but it loses reach and costs a feat. 19-20/x2 is comparable to x3.

Clocksword (self-winding)
400 gp
10 lbs
2-handed
2d8 slashing
x3 crit
Requires EWP (clocksword) to use
Special: disarm

Is this more balanced now? If not, would bringing the crit down to x2 fix it?