Search Posts
If you look at the NPC codex section, there is no link to the iconic character section (which used to be there). However, when I searched iconics, I found this: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/npcCodex/iconic/index.html#iconic-charac ters It's obviously a bit messed up, with both the new navigation system and a broken version of the old one.
One I've done is an Alchemist (vivisectionist) 2 Barbarian X
The battle-plan:
Enjoy your +10 to strength, and your 3d6 base damage per hit. Naturally try to avoid more than two combats per day. You only have 2 enlarge persons and only one mutagen.
Ripe cheese is by far the best cheese.
An alchemist could be specialized to the point that it is not versatile. But it isn't required to specialize to that point in order to be an effective character. This is completely agreeable, but there is a massive advantage to specializing to the point of "no versatility". For example a level 2 alchemist 1 barbarian with 4 arms can dual wield over sized bastard swords and be scary effective. While raging after a strength mutagen: +2 to hit, 2d8+19 damage on dominate hand and 2d8+10 on off hand. And yes, that counts penalties for improperly sized weapons and dual wielding.
(Also, looks like I'm a year+ late to the thread, oh well)
2 levels in alchemist (and an extra discovery feat) to get 2 extra arms, then Raging TWF over-sized bastard swords after a strength mutagen. +4 alchemical bonus to strength, +4 rage bonus to strength. 3/2 strength to dominant hand damage, 3/4 strength to off hand damage, 2d8 damage die. -6 from the improperly sized weapon and TWF is offset with the +8 from strength. In summery, +2 to hit, 2d8+19 damage on dominate hand (strength score of 20) and 2d8+10 on off hand. My god... The damage a level 3 Barbarian alchemist could do... Note: Barbarian Alchemist should be referred to as a Barchemist, because duh.
One of the major reasons Druid keeps coming up over Cleric is the animal companion. Clerics are incredibly viable solo class, so long as they are evil/neutral and able to create undead. Aside from their lack of an animal companion they are just as durable as a druid, if not more so (No armor restriction). While they lack the control abilities of a wizard, they are much more competent in combat, and have access to healing. Clerics are probably the most viable solo class.
The way I see it, the feat's OP-ness is balanced by the potential to spend a full round just lose your spell. Quicken with this though...
So two tower shields would only be useful in that you could use one as cover and still have the shield bonus. Oh well, my dreams of +18 shield bonus will cry in a corner.
Is there any particular reason you cant use more than one shield? If not having 2 tower shields starts to sound worth the feats. (With 4 arms)
The sphere isn't a spell effect, so spell sunder has nothing to do with it.
20th level characters are just as unappealing as 1st level characters. At level one your party is pathetic. Your sorcerer knows 6 spells, two of which are useful, your fighter can wave its sword around, and sometimes hit something. and your bard is a disappointment to the name of music. At level 20 your sorcerer has 80+ spells/day, and is basically god, your fighter is killing the Terrasque and your bard left at level fifteen because he got funded by a wealthy patron and is now Bard Ulrich, drummer for the world renowned Bardtallica.
An all alchemist party would have FAR to much opportunity for ridiculousness. Not only is everyone a blaster, but at level 16 you all get statue, and then the entire party can basically weeping angel their way through every encounter ever. Statue Abuse:
If you took Improved Familiar You could get a Pseudodragon which, according to the bestiary "can communicate telepathically with any intelligent creature" Edit: And even if your barbarian dumped intelligence to 2, you can still use the pseudodragon to listen to him and then use your voice.
Ioun stone, +2 bonus to primary ability score
Yes, I know I'm covered in flying rocks, but... |
