Danish Trumpter's page

I just wanted to thank everyone for their critiques and support in getting me this far. The only thing I can say is that I wanted to try something a little different this round. I didn't realize that combat worthiness was going to be of significant importance in this round so I had fun creating something a bit more fluffy, otherwise I probably would have gone another route. I do think this is a solid critter but i definitely understand the issues with the name and that it may well not be of Superstar quality. Mostly I wanted to wish all those moving on to the next round the best of luck!!

Thank you all for your input!! Thought I might try and explain some of my thinking since voting is over for these and I've seen some important points here that I would like to politely address.

The GM discretion point was mainly supposed to reference use of reflections around corners, say if one were using a puddle/pond/mirror/other reflective surface to catch sight of someone around a corner (i.e. propping the mirror against an opposite wall watching for someone to wander down the corridor).

I also figured it would be possible to sort of shoot around cover/concealment, once again if it would be possible to feasibly do so (imagine someone standing behind a mid-sized tree so you might be able to see the edges of their armor so you can "see" them, then ricocheting the shot off the shield of a companion to hit the guy).

My thought on only heavy and tower shields working would be due to lighter shields just not having the heft to support a ricochet without smacking into the shield's wearer.

And yes I thought rapid shot was the only effect that seemed to me to lend itself the best to a focused, single moment in time effect like a ricochet. The rest (haste, two-weapon fighting, manyshot, etc.) just seemed more frenzied or at least less focused.

Once again I appreciate all the votes and comments!

Danish Trumpter wrote:

I couldn't find this anywhere else, so thought I'd ask here. For the purposes of the Magus class and its one-handed weapon "requirement" for casting, would a lance used while mounted (can be used one-handed) be considered a one-handed weapon allowing its use in spellstrike and spell combat?

No. A lance is a 2 handed weapon. AKA: The magus's class abilities only care about the base classification of the weapon, not weird corner cases.

Makes me a bit of a sad panda but thanks for the response!! Vastly appreciate it.

I couldn't find this anywhere else, so thought I'd ask here. For the purposes of the Magus class and its one-handed weapon "requirement" for casting, would a lance used while mounted (can be used one-handed) be considered a one-handed weapon allowing its use in spellstrike and spell combat?

My wife's Half-Orc Fighter just took Profession: (Bouncer).

Yeah sorry I know, should have cut that part. And I know James jacobs isn't in charge of PFS, just saying that it is a legitimate question that only the people in charge of PFS can really answer since as written it is an all-encompassing phrase.they have to decide how it fits into PFS.

teribithia9 wrote:

As a veteran of several organized play campaigns, I never buy any supplements (unless I want them for home play, etc.) until they're legal. The supplement that I bought is completely legal; was (and still is) listed in the additional resources page with the expanded summons list available and legal for pathfinder society play. I bought it BECAUSE it was listed as a legal resource for PFS. There's also nothing in that additional resources page which indicates that only clerics have access to the expanded summons list.

If the text of the article only referred to the church of Asmodeus than it's a safe bet that it only applied to clerics. Non-clerical worshipers of Asmodeous like Oracles tend to be outside of church hierarchies.

In actuality, the original text of the article states that the priesthood/church of Asmodeus inludes wizards, sorcerers, clerics, etc. So no offense but it is incorrect to say they lie outside the normal church hierarchy. That is not a reason to refuse access to the summoning lists.

And again James Jacobs has said not just divine casters as has been misstated a few times, but all potential priests (wizards, sorcerers, pig farmers, etc.).

I looked at the two of these, like em both, have a conjuror sorc to which I'm thinking of adding fiery shuriken. Thing is I can't really see a huge difference there. scorching ray does more damage, but fiery shuriken doesn't have the "w/in 30 feet" restriction and is conj and you can keep them around a while. But does all that really mean more than the quite a bit more damage ( at 7th level 2x4d6 versus 4d8). Just wondered what people thought about that. (wish fiery shuriken had medium range, easy win for me then!)

I thought a scorpion whip would be a nifty addition to a stalwart defender. Yay for 15 foot reach (with Quickdraw to draw the Longsword or whatever when the baddie hits 5' range). By the time you get to having a +6 belt of Str, you can have something in the nature of 1d4+14 or so (maybe 22 Str, +6 Str enhance, +3 weapon, +4 Str from defensive stance). Not crazy powerful, but fun and effective.

I was just wondering if anything official had been decided yet or if I could just go with what James Jacobs said? ;)

Low-level prepeared casters like wizards and witches can feel kind of slow (1st-4th, even 5th level). It is just that often you seem to be on a rush timeline or there aren't many opportunities to rest. If that doesn't bother you, no worries. I have a witch (4th) that always feels like a two trick pony, with evil eye and misfortune hexes. Oh and I have a few spells that I always seem to run out of by fight 3. I have the feeling it will pick up in a couple of levels, but I think he'll be semi-retired for a while, trying out a crazy Halfling Sorcerer so I can artillerize for a while!

Lol, well I have to admit I liked James Jacobs' answer better, but I can understand the reasoning on both sides. I look forward to seeing what you guys come up with when you get to it, and thank you very much for looking into this. That's a big reason I love Pathfinder so much, y'all seem to actually care about your players and it really shows in the steps you take to listen and respond to us.

So thanks again!!!!

That's great and all, but what is usually covered by the term is sort of countered by the reference they set out earlier in the article claiming the priesthood included sorcerers and wizards. Also just saying it was likely a typo isn't really the answer I'm looking for. I don't want to come off badly or anything, just looking for an official response is all. Either way, if they agree or shoot me down, no worries, just wanting clarification. Granted I would cry for a few minutes for the lost awesomeness of my concept and roleplaying chances, lol, but then I'd just change my character idea.

I don't know if this has already been discussed (pardon me if it has, lol) but I was wondering what the official Paizo ruling was on what qualifies as a "priest" for the purposes of the customized summons lists as allowed in Pathfinder Society play. For example, the Asmodeus priest customized summon monster list on page 67 of AP #29 (which is listed in the table of Additional Resources: Legal for Play).

In the actual entry it says "Asmodeus' priests can use Summon Monster spells . . ." with no reference to cleric, paladin, or sorcerer/wizard only. Earlier in the Asmodeus section (p. 63 last paragraph) it list out what are considered members of the priesthood: "Asmodeus' extremely hierarchical priesthood includes clerics, sorcerers, wizards, [etc.] . . ." Additionally, under New Divine Spells on p. 67, "Infernal Healing" is listed as "cleric 1, socerer/wizard 1 (Asmodeus)" spell, indicating that a sorc/wiz worshiper of Asmodeus would get the spell.

So I was just wondering if that meant sorcerers and wizards would be allowed to access Asmodeus' customized summoning list as "priests." I actually thought it might be cool to allow it with the requirement of some proof of priesthood, like Profession (priest) or an Asmodeus Religion Trait or something like that. Whatever the requirements (or lack thereof) I was looking for an official clarification if it isn't too much of a bother. In a home game, probably not too hard to get a GM to agree to it, but PFS is a bit more stringent in its interpretations. Just wanted to be safe, lol.

I have a Cleric of Desna/Magus from Cheliax. He's the Chaotic Neutral son of a "noble" Chelaxian house. Worships Desna as a god of Travel and (mostly) Luck. Wields a scorpion whip and True Strikes like crazy (that's his "luck"). Kind of an arrogant punk, but fun and effective.

Just looking through the Gunslinger, I really like it. Lost of neat stuff, already have a PFS character in mind, :).

Only a minor issue at first glance . . . what's with the skills?

I know it is a variation of the fighter class (sorta), but really, Handle Animal? Swim and Climb? Ok maybe the last two aren't too bad, but those instead of Perception? I mean Grit is based on Wisdom correct? And a primarily ranged combatant should be able to see/notice the world around them correct. If the gunslinger didn't see the monster coming, how on earth would the be able to gunsling well if it can get to melee range before the GS gets a shot off.

Yes I know this is kind of a dramatic example, but it just seems like Perception makes more sense than some of the skill choices outlined in the playtest.

Two awesome Korean styles:

Hapkido - you attack me and I break you so you can't/don't want to continue (similar to aikido in that you use opponents energy against them - simplistic description I know)

Kook sul won - Korean weapon style (not entirely, but mostly) often using smaller, faster weapons - i.e short style swords, staff, short staff, knives, nunchaku, walking canes, even things like ropes and belts

Nifty cool styles

last bump just to try

I also thought it might be interesting to include greater and lesser "stored spells." The main ones would be the ones equivalent to spells, dealing more damage and greater effects. Those could be set at standard or move actions depending on what the game designers wanted. These would then require a turn to set up before the attack (standard for "spell," standard action for attack on the following turn), or at least make the attack require a full round (move action for "spell," standard action for attack). The lesser abilities might do less damage or lesser effects, but only require a swift action so they can be made with the attack on the same turn. An example might be: standard action to store "exhaustion," or as a swift action store "fatigue."

I completely agree. Thanks for fleshing that out. Forgot to add that stuff in.

ah well *bump*

I do just want to add that overall I really like this class. Yeah there are some issues, but not nearly as many as what I see people complaining about. No the Magus isn't likely to be as deadly in melee as a straight Fighter, but does it really have to be with all the other options for coolness it has? Personally, I don't mind slightly underpowered characters as long as the group is having fun. As far as I am concerned it is all about how you play rather than how much damage you can do. I think the Magus is a great character design with a few rough edges that need to be cleaned up. (And by the way I love the spell list, just needs a little tweaking and a few more touch spells.)

I was just scrolling through the forums and saw a number of wishes for a 3+(whatever) ability for the Magus. Something along the lines of what a cleric's domain or a wizard's school provides. I don't know if this has been suggested yet. If it hasn't, love to hear feedback, and if it has, then I'm just adding my support. ;)

How about a 3+Int/day ability along the lines of the spell-storing weapon ability. Maybe the Magus could choose any spell they know to store in the weapon as a standard action, having it stay there until discharged in a successful melee attack (using the normal penalties from the spellstrike class ability). The spell wouldn't have to be prepared ahead of time (sort of a spontaneous aspect), so the Magus could have a little more variety in their prepared spells and by extension their spellcasting side while keeping the theme of the class. It would also prevent a miss and loss of the spell from being a day ruiner at low levels.

And yes I know there are some wording issues that would have to be cleaned up with the penalties since it wouldn't be a cast/swing, but I think this would clear up at least some of the worries.

Heck maybe it wouldn't have to be spells, but special Magus abilities chosen like alchemist discoveries that the Magus could add on, like choosing one that deals 1d6/howevermanycasterlevels of a chosen energy type; or one that adds less damage and exhaustion or no damage and negative levels. Or healing, or paralyzation, or poison, or abiltiy damage, or whatever.

Anywho, I kind of like the idea so tell me what y'all think.

I agree that it is the same as a small 6 inch buckler, but in D&D parlance, a buckler is the larger version (normally) and doesn't have any damage to its attack. All I am doing is trying to distinguish the one I am describing from what is in Pathfinder. Most people just think of a buckler as a tiny shield.

There are real world shields that could be used easily TWF.

They are called handshields and were often used as a more agressive defense rather than just waiting to block since they are smaller.

They also were used to supplement a punch by a wielder.

Got laughed at when I first brought it out in the fencing club I used to fight in, until I started knocking their weapons wide with it.

The shield is a small dome just big enough for the hand to fit in there gripping a bar across the inside. The dome faces out, instead of to the side (much like the STOMP examples from earlier in the discussion). Finally there is an inch wide lip around the edge of the dome for additional protection.

I have always been a fan of the Need before Greed ideal. Most groups I have been in are pretty darn fair about it, sort of trading a character's share of the loot for a particularly effective item for that character. Haven't worried too much about exact values as long as the character uses it to help out the party. When it comes down to it, that's the fun part of the game anyway.

Some of my favorite characters have been the Wizard making equipment for the party out of my own + party share of the loot, lol, people love to help the magic item crafter survive. Heck one of my best characters was a Water Shugenja with a MW Wakizashi and Scent as my most offensive spell. That character pulled the party out of so many binds (spontaneous ELEMENTAL healer in a DIVINE resources-poor world, the Gods being dead or imprisoned) that even though I didn't always act in combat (as in didn't need to heal) I ALWAYS got first choice of defensive items!

Had a buddy that usually DMed. The first time he PCed while I was around, he built a casting Cleric. I was playing a Dual Shortsword weilding Justicar. We found an awesome shortsword as random treasure (best magic item yet found - something like a +2 icyburst, keen shortsword). Guess who took it. Turns out he was one of those players that have to have that sort of Ultimate God-like Adventurer who can do everything!! With a 13 Str and 12 Dex, took the Shortsword, and decided he was going to start leveling up as a Fighter JUST so he could use the sword . . . wouldn't HEAR of giving the sword to the shortsword specialist. Yeah yeah, lol, slightly bitter, but sometimes these people aren't trying to screw the party over, just trying to create the character they've got in their imagination, even if it is ludicrous.

I used to play with a guy that had phenomenal luck at rolling. Rarely would a d6 roll less than a 5 for him . . . while the rest of us would roll normally on the same dice. I will say that it was painful when he DMed. If he crit then your character was likely dead. Had a 3.0 Whip wielding Forsaker PrC that bit the dust first combat it was in, exploding Rhemorhaz I think it was (or whichever worm/insect-like critter explodes), max damage.

Craziest thing though happened when he was a PC. Wanted to do something crazy, can't even remember what it was, but the DM said he could get away with it if he rolled an 84 on a percentile. He did. Later the same night, he wanted to do something else just as crazy. DM asked for another 84 and he rolled the darned thing.

The DM cried . . .

I have always loved playing strange and random things.

The strangest race was a Half-fiend Petal Assassin . . . that one ended with a DM hate-kill.

My favorite character (I love min-maxing strange combos) was a Halfling Cleric (9th level) with ADHD who was all about mobility. Barely enough Wis to cast spells, almost impossible to hold down though. Massive Dex, and a +15 Initiative at 9th level. Surprisingly, rarely went first, lol, too many 1-5s on the rolls. He also wielded a 5 foot Bastard Sword (Weildskill) in both hands for combat . . . only like a 6 Str though . . .

Well holy crap on a stick . . . my ego searches for an explanation as to why I was wrong but . . . my laziness says to heck with that. Well played sir, lol, well played indeed. For the low level wizard guy, check the casting time section under spell descriptions, tells you exactly what "1 round" equates too.

The summon monster rules do not say that it takes until the next round for the monster to appear. The "full-round action" just means that you cannot do anything more that round beyond swift actions or a five-foot step or the like. The monster appears and acts immediately during the SAME ROUND you are summoning it but after you have spent all your actions to summon the thing. It does not mean the next round or anything like that. After it's one round (the round you cast the spell) at first level it disappears before it gets to act in any subsequent rounds. If it was meant to act in the round after you summoned it, it would say so. It doesn't!

I'm mainly worried that fighters will become too powerful. In my opinion, outside of the technical issues, the casters can move so they can get the heck outta dodge after they cast, keeping them alive. Even with the pathfinder hit die changes, many casters are still a bit weak, so if that fighter can just catch up and make a full attack with no problems, that caster is potential toast. As far as I am concerned, higher armor class and better hit points are the trade off the fighter gets over the caster.