Crispy Britches's page

What's the deal with Barbarians? Where does all that rage come from? You'd think disemboweling orcs would be therapeutic, but it just seems to make them angrier! You disembowel more orcs, you go up in level, yadda yadda yadda - you rage even more! I really don't see the attraction. You'd think they could just have a beer and mellow out... but then drinking seems to set these guys off, too! You ever walk into a tavern with a barbarian and NOT have the evening end in a fight? Is there anything that WON'T set them off? It's like going into a frothing rage is their answer to everything!

Are the orcs invading? RAAAAGE! Evil wizard with a doomsday device? RAAAAGE! Parking Ticket? RAAAAGE!

"I'm sorry Mister Cohen, it's after eleven, we're no longer serving breakfast."

"RAAAAAAGE!"

Personally I don't think anyone with those kind of anger issues should be allowed anywhere near an axe.

/Seinfeld

+1

Get a Spiked Gauntlet or, even better, Armor Spikes. Then when someone gets within 5' and can't be gotten away from, stab them with the spikes.

The advantage of the armor spikes vs. the gauntlet is that you count and holding the polearm with both your hands for any attacks of opportunity that might arise after you took your hand off the polearm to punch the enemy.

Well, some groups lets you take off a hand and return it as free actions, but if you want to reduce friction, just go with the armor spikes.

Yep that was the solution we reached, of course that requires you to get a second weapon enchanted and even then it does significantly less damage than the polearm, which is 2-handed and supported by feats.

You're right for the most part. The idea here is that the pointy, dangerous end of the stick is at the far end of the pole, and the pole is too long to wield effectively if you try to pull the pointy end in closer. Each square is 5 feet. A reach weapon for a medium creature would need to reach across ten feet of space.

Also, in game terms, reach is a HUGE benefit in that creatures without it will (generally) provoke an aoo just getting close enough to attack you. WIth the right feat, you can use that aoo to prevent them from getting closer and on your turn you can take a 5 ft step back, effectively preventing them from closing.

Hi Magicdealer,

I have been playing a polearm fighter in my campaign, and I have had bad luck with this tactic - perhaps this is just because my GM is sinister - as many melee types have the "Step Up" feat - this basically hoses you completely.

A thoughtful and relevant response

Hi Icedeep,

I hear what you're saying and Wraithstrike brought up a similar point.

I think the language in my original post was a bit sloppy and that there are 2 main issues here; PC abilities and NPC abilities.

Addressing PC's, I agree that GM changes to spells and feats should be transparent with regards to the players. However, as is so often the case in life, things work just fine until they don't and it can be difficult to foresee problems before they arrive. You gave an example of changing power attack, which I would probably not like that as the player, but I think it falls within the GM's prerogative to balance the game for their group.

Having said that, changing the way player abilities work is not always the right solution, it really depends on what is causing the perceived imbalance / problem.

With regards to NPCs, I think we just have different opinions here. An Epic battle just doesn't feel very epic if it ends with a lucky crit, and when a recurring villain dies early in the adventure it can mess up the story. I will be the first to agree that this is in effect a kind of railroading, but I'm not sure that's entirely a bad thing. It kind of depends on whether you see the players as the center of the story, or as a cog in a much bigger machine.

In any case, thanks for your response and keeping the tone civil.

I disagree. Things should always be consistent. That does not mean the DM can't change anything*, but they should be made known to the party. I would rather DM than play under a DM who makes up stuff as they go along. At least that way I know what is going on. This is not a rant against a DM's authority. It is a rant against too many changes that nobody knows about.

*Everyone has house rules.

I hear what you're saying, and I agree that consistency and transparency are important, you don't want to just be changing things on the fly. However, I don't think that there is any problem with running things one way for a while, recognizing that it is causing problems to your game, and then changing it for subsequent games.

That being said, I respect your point of view, I think we just have different opinions.

Hey your welcome to do whatever you want in your game. I was just simply stating if it wasn't laid out in a "custom rules sheet" or "house rules sheet" before hand that certain spells/ablities are completely open to you changing them on a whim I would walk out when that happened.

I know this is a bit off topic, but I have to say that I whole-heartedly disagree with this sentiment. Maybe it's just more difficult for me to find games, but if I left the table and walked out just because the GM made a ruling I didn't like I would never get to play.

There is no reason why things have to be 100% consistent all of the time. If something that was working in your game for levels 1-6 starts to cause problems 7+, then I don't see any problem in changing the adjudication on a spell or ability.

Also, maybe this is just my old-ness coming through, but I don't think that it's the GM's role to get browbeaten by rules-lawyers. Sometimes GM's have to fudge rules or makes up new things to keep the story going or to keep an encounter interesting.

I am in a campaign where we are about to go on a very difficult mission and have a few days of down time. I am currently playing a 16th level wizard (for the sake of ease assume I have access to all wizard spells). As our situation is dire and my GM likes to through very difficult fights at us I am considering using planar binding to get two efreeti to serve me. Assuming I succeed and that the two have to grant me all of their wishes for two days (12 wishes in total) I was hoping for some advice on how to request two things.

The first is I wish to raise the intelligence of my wizard. The second I would like to gain some information (safely, and quickly) about the demi-plane we are about to attack.

For the first the best I have come up with so far is 'I wish to be significantly more intelligent than I am currently, with no harmful or unwanted changes to my mind or person'

For the second I have no idea. All of my scrying spells have failed, and this has me worried about going in blindly.

So any advice would be appreciated. Also feel free to rip into my wish just like a good efreeti would.

One more thing, I have considered using touch of idiocy on the efreeti before they grant me my wishes. I have to think dumber efreeti would be less effective at distorting my wishes. Thoughts?

Hi OP,

I think the suggestion to ask your GM how they will interpret the rules is the thing to do, assuming that your character has enough of the appropriate knowledge skill to understand wish-craft, otherwise your character is basically shooting in the dark on this.

With regards to debuffing your genies pre-wishing, I think it is a reasonable interpretation of RAW to say that such blatant aggression against the genie will only increase its desire to twist your wishes. In fact, I would probably assume that anything you bind is probably going to be none to happy about being called to the material plane by some puny mortal with delusions of grandeur.

You have mentioned in subsequent posts that your character is always very careful, doesn't like to go in blind and what not. Given this, I can only interpret the fact that all your divinations are failing as a method for the DM to push you a bit out of your comfort zone. This isn't necessarily a bad thing as it can create a memorable experience or challenge you as a player to develop tactics that are more than scry and prepare for what's coming. If this is the case, then my guess is that simply second-hand scrying through a summoned intermediary (no matter the mechanical method) is unlikely to be any more successful.

To address the ongoing argument on this forum re: the use of wishes through planar binding.

Using a 6th level spell to access a 9th level spell, multiple times per casting at a significant cash discount without any repercussions seems like an obvious no-go to me both from a game design and a GM's perspective. nuf said

Paizo will not be going to PAX East this year. Sorry!

-Lisa

Oh Bummer!

I'm sure it will still be a fun time.

Hello Forums!

SO I'm happy to say that I'll be heading to Boston for PAX East next week and I was wondering if Paizo will have a presence there, or if anyone from the forums is planning on running any games...

Wow, so many responses!

I have to say I'm pretty torn between making a sort of bomb focused Alchy and one with a little more melee oomph; but I guess that's just something I have to figure out.

Thank you all for contributing to the thread, this has definitely given me some good ideas and perspective on what to do with my alchemist.

about a gnome

Hi Canor,

Thanks for posting!

Your character sounds really fun, and it's cool that you've gone with a race/class combination that isn't "optimal" (ie. your racial stat bonuses aren't the same as your classes core stat).

Gnome power!

Any more Alchemist players out there? I mean come on! Who ever heard of role-players that didn't want to gush about their characters....

A lot of good advice

Hi Kenji,

Thanks for your response!

It's definitely nice to get some feedback from people who have actually been playing Alchy's in game as opposed to just the theory crafting.

Hi Forums!

So we're finishing up an AP in my current group which means it's time to make a new character (HUZZAH!)

I have *loved* the idea of the alchemist ever since I first read about it and I'm thinking of trying one out.

If any of you forum-lurkers are playing an Alchemist now I'd love to hear a bit about your characters, and:

(1) What works / doesn't work? Any words of wisdom for an aspiring mad-scientist?

(2) What role do you end up playing in the party?

(3) Do you feel that you meaningfully contribute to combat? If so, how? If not, why not?

(4) What are your favorite Alchemical items?

^ agree with just about everything posted here.

For a battle cleric, I think glory is a huge get as a domain as well, bless weapon is a *really* good spell if you get a high crit range weapon.

He's going to be either a human, half-elf or a half-orc, adding the +2 ability score bonus to Wisdom [already figured in] regardless. 25 point build, starting at 2nd level.

Strength 14
Dexterity 12
Constitution 14
Intelligence 14
Wisdom 15 (all ability increases will be pumped into this)
Charisma 14

I was likely going to start him out with a level of fighter for the weapon and armor proficiencies and the feats (especially with a human) and then going straight cleric from there. Would this be a wise choice? I'm new to clerics so would not getting that 20th level of cleric be a big loss overall?

Hi Chuck,

First of all, I agree with the general feedback of not "dipping" fighter for weapon and armor profs. Many of the simple weapons are just fine, and don't forget that a cleric is also proficient with their deity's favored weapon.

Second, I'm going to disagree with the "pump-wisdom" crowd. I think there are a lot of ways to play a cleric that don't require maxing the DC of your spells, but you need to recognize that this will limit your options.

Race-wise, I've always liked dwarves for martial clerics - gets you battle axes, heavy picks, and warhammers as weapons, plus if you're planning on going the heavy armor route anyway the lower base speed doesn't matter.

If you go for a half-orc you'll get falchion and greataxe.

As a human you can use the extra feat to buy heavy armor proficiency or martial weapons proficiency, incidentally if you do go human I would recommend lowering your intelligence to 12 and spending those points elsewhere (as you feel appropriate).

As for your thought about getting to 20, you're starting at level 2 and in my experience very few, if any, games last until max level. When I'm starting a new character I usually try and get him to more or less where I want him by level 5-7.

Fireball Attack = Only ranged weapon can have the Fireball Attack ability. As a standard action or move action once per round; one can pull back the bow string, speak the command word, and release the string. This creates the same effect as a Fireball spell cast by a 5th level caster. Range: 600 feet or until hitting a solid barrier or creature. Damage: 5d6 damage (Reflex save for half). Area of Effect: 20 foot radius spread. See spell Fireball for other effects.

Moderate evocation; CL 5th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, Fireball, Caster level must be bonus x 3; Price: +4 bonus.

Ok, so first thing is, an item that allows an attack w/ a move action would definitely not fly in my game.

Pricing wise a bow that only fires this and has no other enchantment is a use-activated item that should cost spell level (3) x caster level (5) x 2,000 = 30,000g

You cite the rule * If a continuous item has an effect based on a spell with a duration measured in rounds, multiply the cost by 4. If the duration of the spell is 1 minute/level, multiply the cost by 2, and if the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply the cost by 1.5. If the spell has a 24-hour duration or greater, divide the cost in half.

However fireball is duration: Instantaneous

from the PRD

Instantaneous

The spell energy comes and goes the instant the spell is cast, though the consequences might be long-lasting.

So I think you don't warrant the 50% discount here.

Give that a +4 weapon is 32,000 I think you're about right

Cool.

So how do we get together? I'd at least like to sit in once, just to give it a shot

Hey Billza,

Looks like this forum doesn't support PMing (or I just can't figure out how to send one)

Send an email to dcpathfindergame@gmail.com

::edited for spelling

OMG - Replies *Starts Hyperventilating*

Our game floats a bit due to schedule conflicts, but we generally play on Wednesday or Thursday Nights from 7pm - 10:30; or on Sundays 11-5.

We usually play at my place about 3 blocks from the Eastern Market metro Stop.

Our current game is ROTRL, we're level 10 - 25 pt buy. The current group is:

Sigfried: Fighter 8 / Paladin 2 & his cohort Relic Cleric 8
Torval: Warlock 9 / Fighter 1
Trogdor (the burninator): Sorcerer (draconic) 10
Euris: Oracle (heavens) 10 & his cohort Perella Sorcerer 8

The player that is leaving is playing an Oracle, but any class would be welcome

tlc_web - Re: a full-blooded orc, you'd have to ask the DM but I don't see why not, he is generally pretty accommodating to player ideas

Billzabub - As mention we usually play once a week, although it's not uncommon that weeks get skipped if there are scheduling conflicts. Re: Pie, usually pizza... I know it's a cop out

I'm not exactly sure what you're looking for, but from what I see I'd probably describe it as a "low magic item" campaign (not a "low magic" campaign). YMMV, of course.

I think this is a good point, it might be helpful to describe more specifically what is meant by "low-magic"

is it:

1) eliminating the so-called "christmas tree" effect?
2) limiting the power of PC/NPC casters?
3) reducing the presence / impact of magic and magic items in the campaign world?
4) ...?

Shameless bump for more players!

Still looking for 1-2 players for Pathfinder in Washington, DC.

There will be punch and pie!

Wouldn't this "low magic" feel you are seeking simply be accomplished by a few house rules or campaign restrictions.
Ask your players to stick with the martial classes.
Control how much you give out magic item wise.
Don't use creatures that are too fantastical or have heavy lists of spell abilities.
What more do you need.

Hi Cinderfist,

I think the OP is trying to come up with a way to house-rule low magic, and is just crowdsourcing ideas.

Although I guess I personally fall in the "low magic" camp, I think it's because magic has gone from being something fantastic so something mundane - and, as Mok mentioned, that there can be more entertaining ways to overcome challenges than just sifting through all the spells until you find the one that solves your problem.

I personally don't do "generic" (ie. +1 shortsword)items when I dm, every item has a history and some flavor to it.

To me low magic is...

1. Spells/scrolls/spellbooks are hard to come by/controlled...

2. Magic items are rare/controlled by kings/nobles...

4. Any item not created will need to be recieved from the kings/nobles, or quested for...

3. Spellcasters are forced into guilds...

5. Spell components, and items needed for items creation must be quested for...

+1

From a semantic perspective I wouldn't call this "low-magic" but I wholeheartedly agree with the approach.

Magic is dangerous, it makes sense that any well functioning society would have to have some way of dealing with it to avoid being usurped by every group of adventurers gone bad.

I'm not from Paizo but I'll be at PAX east - I know the D&D guys are setting something up, would be cool to have a pathfinder game as well

Hi Brian,

With regards to your question, I think that the idea of tiers is overplayed, and in most games I have played the "lower tier" classes have contributed meaningfully to the party.

I'm not sure if these have been mentioned and if they have I'm sorry to repeat.

1) Design encounters with mixed enemy types, some with high saves / SR and some without. While many will (rightly) point out that casters have options to deal with such opponents, the resulting dynamic (in my experience) is that players want to get the most bang for their actions. Thus, the casters will naturally go after the guys more likely to be affected by spells leaving the other party members an opportunity to shine against the "hard" targets.

2) Archers - don't underestimate the power of a few readied actions to totally mess up a caster's day. A related point to this is to not clump up groups of enemies.

3) Ambush! - In my experience many DM's suffer from "one-encounter-at-a-time-itis" eg. if you're in room 4 of the dungeon, you only deal with the critters from that room even though room 5 is 30ft away and filled with kobolds! The natural result is that players get in the habit of placing their characters so the fighter types stand up in the front with the big bads and the casters stand "safely" in the back. Don't be afraid to have a few critters join the fight after combat heats up.

4) Skills - Try and design encounters (incl. RP encounters) where skills come into play. While many will (rightly) point out that spells can substitute / are superior to skills, the fact is that they cost character resources that would be used elsewhere. Combined with an earlier point about not allowing the 15min adventuring day, the use of magic as a skill substitute becomes a drain on better-allocated party resources or very expensive (if scrolls/ consumables are used).

Hope that helps

Hi Kevida,

I can see how sometimes dice rolling can slow down the game (15d6 damage... empowered... grumble grumble)

My first thought when I read this is that this makes DR a lot more powerful, since you can't count on the spiky rolls to help you punch through.

So after reflecting on your suggestions I think that I might scrap the whole class exclusivity thing. Many people have mentioned that they this would detract from their fun as a player, and really that's why we play these games to begin with.

I do like the idea of having some Archetypes be origin specific. In the interest of not having to create 7 different sets alternate features for every class, I am leaning towards designating 2 favored classes for each Civ and creating unique thematic archetypes.

I'd love to get some feedback on what should be the favored classes for each Civ. Off the top of my head

Gaul FCs: Druid & Barbarian
Greek FCs: Oracle & Fighter
Eqyptian FCs: Cleric & ??
Phoenician FCs: Rogue & ??
Atlantean FCs: Wizard & Sorcerer
Persian FCs: Summoner & Rogue

Love to hear feedback or other ideas

::edited for spelling

Hi Calandra,

Thank you for your response.

Re: The Greeks - I hear you on Athens vs. Sparta, I was definitely thinking Athens when I picked those skills. For the most part I have been trying to choose 1 skill that is a perform / profession and 1 that is a "hard skill". I like the idea of Intimidate for Spartans, can you suggest a knowledge or profession that would be appropriate?

I'm disinclined to separate out Macedonians and other Hellenic peoples if only to keep things (relatively) simple and cut down on rules bloat.

Re: Classes - I'm still on the fence about this. From a campaign world perspective I really like the idea of Atlantis being the sole place for "classically" trained wizards that jealously guard their power, and that this is what ultimately leads to their downfall. Characters from other civs that wanted to be arcanists could be sorcerers. That being said, If I have a player that has a cool idea for an Egyptian or Greek wizard, I guess they could have just trained in Atlantis. In any case I am generally pretty flexible if players have a cool idea.

Re: Party Composition - my hope is that the party will end up from a diverse set of Civs (one of the reasons I was thinking of imposing class restrictions) primarily because I am planning to have conflicts break out and I think that will make for some interesting role playing opportunities. As for how they all met up, it would depend on the characters my players choose, they could all start as slaves on a galley, or serendipitously visit the same port when plot device X descends, or attend/compete some great civ-spanning event (like the fantasy version of the Olympics).

Hi Hi,

I agree that the Minor and Major Magic Rogue talents can be underwhelming, and as a rogue player I would *much* prefer to have the ability to cast the spells like a wizard or sorcerer than to have an SLA.

From a "balance" perspective I think your suggested mechanic is more powerful than the x/day SLA's because it would give the rogue caster levels which can be used to qualify for other feats (like arcane strike), or cast spells from scrolls.

That being said, given the low opinion of rogues generally expressed on these boards an increase in power might not be a bad thing.

Just my 2cp.

OMG Poison Elves, I haven't seen that comic in YEARS.

Hi Bwang, DM Wellard;

Thanks for the idea,

I like the idea of a Macedonian Cavalier - very flavorful

Re: Skills like fly, I had been considering something similar whereby different Civs would have a choice of 1-2 skills that based on their background could (a) be taken as a class skill, or (b) if it's already a class skill you get a +2 bonus.

Skills wise I was thinking (just off the top of my head):

Phoenicians: Profession (Sailor) & Appraise
Greeks: Perform (Oratory) & Diplomacy
Egyptians: Knowledge (Engineering) & Heal
Barbarians: Survival & Knowledge (Nature)
Persians: Knowledge (Planes) & Ride
Atlanteans: Knowledge (Arcana) & Spellcraft

If you think these are dumb or have any suggestions comments I would love to hear your thoughts.

-Crispy

Hi Forums,

...

Standard player races would not be available, instead players would choose from the civilizations that were active in the Mediterranean at that time, plus Atlantis (fantasy yey!). The list I've come up with so far are Greeks (Sparta & Athens), Phoenician (incl. Carthaginian), Persian (incl. Anatolian), Egyptians, Atlantean, Barbarian (Gaul?). Each Civ would have it's own racial traits and religions based loosely on history

...

Sorry to be a bit defensive but no-where has ANYONE suggested changing attributes based on racial lines.

Not sure why this thread has gotten derailed in that direction

I don't think you should use different attributes for different groups of humans. The ability to put the bonus feat, attribute points, and skills into anything you want lets you write up the individuals of each area exactly the way you want.

That said, if you start doing stuff like, "Athenians get a +2 WIS bonus because of their love of democracy and philosophy, while Nubians get +10' to their base move or +2 strength" is pretty freaking offensive.

If those are the rules you want, you can find them in the Conan RPG.

Hi Crane,

I don't think it was ever suggested to give different attributes based on race.

That being said I am not sure why it would be patently offensive to provide racial bonuses based (loosely) on the strengths of the civilization in question.

Thanks for the Conan tip though, I will definitely check it out

Thomas LeBlanc wrote:

3. Nubians (Rangers, Witches), Greeks (Oracles/Bards), Egyptians (Alchemists, Death Domain Clerics), Phoenicians (Swashbuckler Rogue, Sorcerer w/ Aquan Bloodline, or Aquatic Druid) and add Barbarian to Gauls

Instead of restricting classes to the races, why not give them options for choosing them as favored classes?

Hi Spyder,

Thanks for your response.

I am thinking back to 3e and IIRC favored class was a benefit related to multi-classing. As MCing has been more or less discouraged in PF do you have any thought on what the kind of benefit is reasonable?

Just off the top of my head I was thinking maybe one additional hp or skill point / level... I dunno...

Hi Guys,

Thanks for your responses and ideas.

Thomas -

I love your idea of having the gods meddle with the adventuring party has a very 'Odysseus' feel to it.

Tribuchet -

I hear what you're saying about not being too restrictive with the classes, this may have just my hamfisted way of encouraging the players to choose varied backgrounds (leading to some interesting role-playing opportunities if say, the Persians were to attack Greece or something like that). I'll have to marinate on this a bit more...

As for the race suggestions, thank you very much! I had sort of lumped the Nubians in with the Egyptians (and to some extent the Carthaginians) in my mind but I think you're right to suggest that they deserve to stand alone.

Re: expanding options to Civs beyond the Mediterranean, I'd like to keep the game more or less bounded geographically(not to mention that's a lot of lore your's truly needs to get familiar with).

Thanks again for your feedback, I found it very helpful!

Shameless bump for more players!

Hi Forums,

So I've recently been noodling around the Idea for a campaign world that is basically a fantasy version of the Mediterranean world during the Hellenic Period (500-200BC). The campaign would be kind of a sand-box, the players could go slaying ancient mythological creatures, be pirates, get involved in wars, and such.

Standard player races would not be available, instead players would choose from the civilizations that were active in the Mediterranean at that time, plus Atlantis (fantasy yey!). The list I've come up with so far are Greeks (Sparta & Athens), Phoenician (incl. Carthaginian), Persian (incl. Anatolian), Egyptians, Atlantean, Barbarian (Gaul?). Each Civ would have it's own racial traits and religions based loosely on history (ie. Greek clerics would choose domains based in the Greek pantheon of gods, Egyptian clerics on a different pantheon.)

What I'd like to do is to restrict each race to certain class choices that are thematic to their history (ie. every starting race would have 4-5 options), in addition to exclusive access to one class. For example, only Persians would have the option to be Djinni Binders (summoners), only Gauls could be Druids, only Atlanteans could be Wizards, etc.

So a few questions I guess:

(1) Does this idea sound fun (would you want to play in this game?)

(2) I'm sure that there are many people out there that are more knowledgeable that I when it comes to this Period, do you think that my list of Civs is appropriate

(3) With the exception of the 3 that I mentioned I haven't come up with the "thematically exclusive" class for Greeks, Egyptians, and Phoenicians?

(4) Any general thoughts / feedback?

Hi Paizo Forums!

We've got a weekly (ish) Pathfinder game going in Washington, DC and we're looking for 1-2 more players to replace some of our friends that are moving away. We're all guys between 25-30 and we play on Wednesday or Thursday evening, and sometimes on Sunday.

We're currently playing the RotRL AP and we're a bit over halfway through (lvl 9).

If you're looking for a fun, laid-back Pathfinder game and you're in DC please PM me.

Hope to hear from you!

Only the enhancement bonus itself.

Ah too bad!

Thanks for the reply.

Hi Forums,

Just a quick query about Greater Magic Weapon - can you use the spell to give a weapon special properties that are + enhancement bonus equivalent?

For example:

Let's say a level 12 wizard casts GMW on some arrows, do they have to be +3 arrows, or could they be +1 ghost touch, or +2 flaming, etc...

Thanks in advance!

Hello Forum People (again)

Thanks for all of your great advice, you've definitely given me some great ideas on how to improve my chances via rays.

Are you allowed to use 3.5 material? There's a feat in Lords of Madness (the abberations book) called parrying shield (I think) that allows you to add your shield bonus to your touch AC, and it is listed as a feat that a fighter can take as a bonus feat.

There's also a feat (I think it's called divine shield) that allows you to add your charisma bonus (as a deflection bonus) to your shield bonus, which would boost your touch AC even more once you had the parrying shield feat.

Cool - thanks for the suggestion, I almost like that feat better than shield ward since it has fewer pre-requisites.

There really is not much of a defense against rays and other non-incorporeal touch attacks. Deflection bonus (ring of protection, protection from [alignment]) are the least-expensive. Dodge and Combat Expertise are the other methods, along with fighting defensively (dodge bonuses) and of course Dex. A few other RAW sources exist: ioun stone has one or maybe two methods, perhaps a luck stone. The rest are party-dependant: haste (dodge bonus), prayer (penalty to foes' attack rolls) and higher-level spells.

Hi Turin,

Ioun stones are a great idea, every little +1 helps!

All of this is moot against a foe with Quickened True Strike backing up their rays (+20 insight bonus on top of their normal ranged attack bonus that ignores concealment miss chance).

True, but that's a lot of spell mojo so I can't get mad when it works.

On the up side, as previously mentioned, bad guys spending actions on just you means that they're not nuking the entire group.

Hah so true!! Thats why I have to tell myself almost every session - my party contribution is to soak the hits so it's ok that I can't kill anything.

Thanks for your response

Paladin mercies are nice, too, especially if you're the Paladin. Death Ward, as has been mentioned previously, is a great defense, and the other suggested defenses are excellent as well. I see, though, that you are a a level 2 Paladin. It may fit with your planned progression, I don't know, but taking more levels of Paladin and getting the mercies will allow you to cure yourself as a swift action. One more level of Paladin lets you take the fatigued mercy, which will let you remove the effects of a Ray of Exhaustion as a swift action lay on hands(assuming you save successfully, which still means you're fatigued, should be an easy fort save as a Fighter/Paladin). With a Death Ward to beat Enervation, you're looking at the Ray of Enfeeblement now. You'll probably save against that, for half. Short of Spell Immunity, you will have to deal with that somehow. Many fine suggestions have been made already.

Indeed, there have been a lot of good ideas put forth (including yours).

I guess I had kind of pre-supposed that I was going to take a fighter level but I haven't yet decided whether I want to pursue paladin-hood further... maybe the mercy would be more valuable than the feat...

Something to think about anyway - thanks for your response!

Cos1983 wrote:

Somehow getting spell immunity (the spell), through items or allies.

A wand of lesser restoration might be helpful too.

You want potions of lesser restoration rather than wands as the wands (like a scroll) will take 3 rounds to cast while the potion is a standard action to quaff.

You can talk with your DM about quickdraw applying to potions (and alchemicals) as he might allow that.

-James

Thanks for the suggestion,

I agree that it's important to keep curative items around since no matter how good your defense you eventually get tagged.

However the main focus of my question was options for improving my defensive chances vs. rays.

Actually, my question now is this: why are those the first spells you get hit with? They're good, but a) that's 3 spells, which requires some Quicken Spell goodness to get off in less than 3 rounds, and b) why not other spells like grease, charm person, color spray, etc.? There are many ways to disable a fighter without repeatedly targeting him with effects that reduce his strength and/or levels.

Well, we have a real lack of magical utility in our group which means it is often difficult to get on top of well defended spellcasters so it's not uncommon for them to get a few spells off before we can close in.

Re: non-ray spells. In our early levels I was coming up against a similar problem whereby I was constantly being taken out of battle by save-or-sucks and consequently I focused on improving my saves in the mid levels - nothing insane but against a spellcaster of equal level it is more likely than not that I will simply make the save against fort & will spells in particular.

Enfeeblement and exhaustion will stack together. The only reason enfeeblement doesn't stack with itself is that it specifical states that in the spell description.

Yeah that's what I thought too.

In his GM's defense, it was the first spell I put on my cohort caster, and she rays the biggest nastiest sword wielding brute pretty much first thing in a round.

Oh poop I've been discovered!

Also - as far as I can tell no-one is blaming the GM; I think it makes perfect sense for enemies to target known / apparent weaknesses - PC's would do the exact same thing.

I was just curious about options for protecting against it.

There is feat that allows your shield bonus to AC to apply to touch attacks. Ray's don't stack. Make sure the DM knows this. Try to get items that get you a miss chance.

I don't know what books are allowed, but getting items that allow you to teleport next to the casters will take care of them.

Hi Wraithstrike,

Thanks for your suggestion, this is great - I looked up the feat and it is called "Shield Ward" and from PHB2 (which is a source my DM generally allows).

As for ray's not stacking, I know rays of the same type don't stack (ie. 2 Rays of Enfeeblement), but do different rays that target the same stats also not stack: example - Ray of Enfeeblement & Ray of Exhaustion?

It's a ray, so try to boost your Touch AC. Higher Dex (Maybe), Deflection, Dodge?

Hi David,

I already have dodge, and my dex bonus is decent (+3) but constrained by my armour. Although I guess some mithril full plate and a better dex item are a decent option.

Thanks for your input

Unfortunately, there aren't a lot of ways to resist necromancy via feats. You can get Great Fortitude and Iron Will, as well as greater versions of these. There's a feat in the Campaign Setting that might help, IIRC it's called Necromantic Resistance. It's a regional feat that will help. But what you might really need is a way to avoid being hit at all aka a good touch AC via high Dexterity, Dodge, and bonuses to your touch AC via deflection, insight, etc. I note you have Leadership. Is your cohort a spellcaster? Having a cleric handy to dispel these things as they occur won't hurt either.

It also doesn't hurt to ask the other PCs for their assistance. Finally, talk to your GM. If you're always getting hit with the same spells, then one asks the question of how the bad guys all know to use those spells. And only those spells. This may start moving from an in-game situation to an out-of-game situation where the GM-player bond is at stake.

Hi Lathira,

Thanks for your suggestions. I have already spoken with my GM and as much as I loathe to admit it does make sense (in many cases) that our opponents would be familiar with my character. He is a crusader type and public figure, all through his own making (RP stuff).

As for leadership, the resources from this feat have allocated towards the effective management of a lawful good military initiative being waged by my character (part of the reason villains know who he is). So when my cohort is around he is of great help but he is often elsewhere advancing my character's interests.

Depending on item availability, a ring of counterspells filled with ray of enfeeblement might be an inexpensive solution.

It only works once until you get someone to refill it, but that might go a long way.

Hi Dire,

Thanks for your response, that is definitely something to consider but the lethal cocktail that I seem to get consistently is Ray of Enfeeblement + Ray of exhaustion + (sometimes) Enervation - basically been dropping my +hit by 5-8 depending on the foe...

I guess a follow up question would be, is there a way to get specific resistances vs. necromancy?