CrazyGnomes's page

Anguish wrote:

1} As has been said, it's - by definition - an improvised weapon; 20/x2.

2} It's only a hundred pounds. Equivalent of a large dog or typical child. That falling on a bull even from 55 feet high isn't apocalyptic. Sure, an anvil is (much) more dense, but still, the potential energy isn't all that high.

Cool story though. Good thinking.

You are assuming this is a normally sized anvil. This may not be a valid assumption.

Are you suggesting an extra large, less dense 100 lb. anvil? Or a smaller, unusually dense 100 lb. anvil?

An indeed, as written, the Skull & Shackles Adventure Path has already made be uncomfortable more times than any other AP published by Paizo (Shattered Star and Reign of Winter are the only ones I haven't read yet), and I'm just at the beginning of the second volume.

You might need to read Rise of the Runelords again, especially The Skinsaw Murders and The Hook Mountain Massacre, to refresh your memory. Serial killers and backwoods rapists, for me at least, trump piracy.

If a creature casts invisibility, then it is invisible (undetectable by vision, concealment, +20/+40 bonus on Stealth checks).

If it is affected by glitterdust, then it is still "invisible" but is also visibly outlined for the duration and takes a -40 penalty on Stealth checks.

If it is affected by glitterdust and then casts invisibility, the same situation applies: the creature is both "invisible" and visibly outlined. Glitterdust doesn't negate invisibility, that's what invisibility purge is for. But invisibility also doesn't negate glitterdust, they both remain in effect.

So what does it mean to be both invisible and visibly outlined? Well, the creature is definitely detectable by vision: they're covered in sparkling golden particles. Maybe not identifiable, but certainly detectable. The bonus and penalty to Stealth checks negate each other, so either a net +0 while not moving or -20 while moving.

And as far as concealment...I'd say that the visibly outlined but invisible creature still has total concealment (line of effect but no line of sight) since an enemy can only see the outline, not the actual creature. It would be similar to a creature with blindsense: they can tell that the invisible enemy is there and can even pinpoint their square, but they still have a 50% miss chance against the invisible enemy and are denied their Dexterity bonus to AC against attacks from the invisible creature.

Flat-Footed is defined as before a character gets to act. Yet, even after a character can act, that character can be flat-footed again! (Feat: Shattered Defenses) How is that possible? A "Reasonable Person" would realize it is not possible. So somewhere, Flat-Footed DOES NOT just mean before a character gets to act.

Now, if you dissect "flat-footed" we find it has two effects. 1) The flat-footed individual does not benefit from a dexterity bonus to his AC. 2) The individual cannot make Attacks of Opportunity.

So, if someone invisible is attacking you, you cannot 1) benefit from a dexterity bonus to AC or 2) make Attacks of Opportunity towards the invisible person.

Therefore, while quite likely incorrect, it is clearly "Reasonable" to say that an individual is flat-footed in regards to attacks from invisible enemies as all the effects are equal and as we have previously established that the need to be "before on acts" is not universal.

Flat-footed is not defined as "before a character gets to act," it is defined as "unable to react normally to the situation." Mechanically, the character loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity.

"A character who has not yet acted during a combat" is given as a cause of the flat-footed condition. It does not specify that it is the only cause, allowing for the existence of the seven-branched sword weapon, stag's helm magic item, or Shatter Defenses feat.

Also, "if A (flat-footed) then B (denied Dex to AC) and C (can't make AoOs)" does not mean "if B and C then A."

More ideas:

Remove Studied Strike and revert to Sneak Attack. Reduce the increase of Sneak Attack so that it maxes out at 5 or 6d6 damage at the end cap.

Alter Studied Combat so that on top of the current insight bonus to attacks,it allows you to spend a point of inspiration to deny the target its DEX for that round. Only allow this to be used once per target.

This lets the Investigator take advantage of the normal positional Sneak Attack but grants him a much-needed attack bonus and also gives him a way to get some precision damage at will, albeit limited in scope and usage.

I actually think this is a really good direction to take for Studied Combat. Bring Sneak Attack back instead of Studied Strike, give it at level 1, and have it increase every 3 levels instead of every 2. Make it so that any target that is being studied is considered flat-footed to the Investigator, that way the Investigator can use 1d6 worth of Sneak Attack as normal 1-3 and then at 4th, when they reach 2d6, they have Studied Combat to allow them to use it without flanking/feinting/etc.

You could even make it so that there's no inspiration point cost, just have it make the target flat-footed instead of giving an insight bonus. Not only does it make targets easier to hit (except high armor/low dex characters, which seem like the types that would be a challenge for Sherlock Holmes-style combat anyways) it allows the Investigator to do combat maneuvers like dirty trick against them without fear of AoO (as long as they don't have Combat Reflexes or Uncanny Dodge).

Making the enemy flat-footed also meshes very well with Sap Master, which seems fitting for an Investigator.

Scavion wrote:

Ouch. Not as good as a Rogue in dealing damage. Thats a pretty harsh limit.

I would like to further add in my support for a debuff oriented Studied Strike. That would amplify his role as "supporting a party."

The problem with making the Investigator a debuffing class is that it will likely never hold up to what the casters can do.

So you hit one target and give it a couple -2's. It isn't particularly impressive when a caster could, just as easily, give -2's to or completely disable an entire swath.

I'd rather the Investigator be subpar at debuffs compared to a Wizard than be subpar at damage compared to a Rogue. Both because it feels much more thematic to me and I'd rather have the potential of the class be capped compared to debuffing god-wizards, rather than the often less-than-stellar combat rogue.

ubiquitous wrote:

Is there any chance you can comment on the duration of it?

Mreikon wrote:

As Studied Combat is worded currently, it does nothing without Int of at least 18, because effects that last 1 round end at the beginning of investigator's next turn.

As of right now, this is correct. Don't dump Int, and try not to take Int damage. :)

It doesn't seem to be a matter of just not dumping Int, since an Investigator with 17 Int (+3 modifier, divide by 2, round down...1 round duration) spends a standard action to use Studied Combat, which lasts until the beginning of his next turn, preventing him from taking advantage of Studied Combat except on AoO's. And a 17 Int is already higher than the Investigator needs to cast his max level spells. The 17 Int Investigator is actually no better off than one with 7 Int, as far as the duration of Studied Combat is concerned.

The Quick Study and Studied Defense Talents just feel like they are adding insult to injury.

Quick Study should be built into Studied Combat from the start, you shouldn't need to waste a talent to bring the action economy within reasonable limits and after a certain level, you shouldn't need to spend inspiration for a swift action Studied Combat.

Studied Defense makes me think of the similarity to Smite Evil again, except that instead of getting a bonus to hit and AC simultaneously, the Investigator has to choose and needs to waste a talent just to get that choice.

Studied Combat/Studied Strike still seem like they are coming too late, leaving the Investigator a bit underwhelming in combat 1-3. Reading the mechanics of Studied Combat, it made me think of a Paladin's Smite Evil. Using that as a comparison, it seems weak.

PROS:
*Works on non-evil creatures
*No per day limit, can be used unlimited times as long as there are new targets
*Potentially scales to a higher attack roll bonus (+10 at level 20 Investigator, an equivalent paladin would need a 30 Charisma)

CONS:
*Only one target at a time
*Lasts only for a number of rounds equal to half Intelligence modifier, instead of until the target is dead
*Cancelled as soon as Studied Strike is used
*Cannot be used again on the same target within 24 hours
*Standard action to use instead of swift
*Starts at 4th level instead of 1st
*Only applies to melee attack rolls, not ranged
*Doesn't provide a damage or AC bonus
*Attack roll bonus is insight instead of untyped, so it won't stack with other insight bonuses
*Potentially starts with a lower bonus (+2 vs. 3-5 for a Paladin with decent Charisma)

Since Studied Strike can only be performed against the target of Studied Combat but also cancels Studied Combat when used, it seems to be a worse option than Sneak Attack. In addition to requiring a standard action to set up, Studied Strike can't be used multiple times if you have iterative attacks or two weapon fighting. And even if you wanted to spend another standard action to set yourself up to Studied Strike again, you can't target the same enemy for another 24 hours.

While I still love the Investigator, the replacement for Sneak Attack, as currently written, is very underwhelming. The duration on Studied Combat seems far too short, even without Studied Strike cancelling it, and the overall bonus is fairly minor.

Given that I'm running Rise of the Runelords for two different groups at the moment and how much fun it is with the antics they get up to in and around Sandpoint, this would be an instant buy for me.

Another player was looking into working with catfolk's natural weapons and, using HeroLab, came up with a way to have 4 1d8 claw attacks at full BAB.

His plan is to make a catfolk fighter with the Cat's Claws alternate racial trait (2 primary attack claws, 1d4 damage), Catfolk Exemplar racial feat with Sharp Claws manifestation (claw attacks are now 1d6, allows Aspect of the Beast feat w/o prereqs), Aspect of the Beast feat (grow 2 more primary attack claws, now also 1d6 damage), and finally Improved Natural Attack (increases all 4 claws to 1d8 damage).

Is this build legitimate, as HeroLab seems to suggest? The only related info I was able to find from an official source was here, suggesting that additional bite attacks can't be stacked, but not whether the same is true with claws. Anyone able to find something else in the rules/errata/FAQ?