Daryl MacLeod's page

Daryl MacLeod wrote:

PS: My comment was made in jest.

I know that, I don't think the person who responded to you did. I may be wrong about that.

Just re-read this thread and realized that was where you were coming from. Not sure how I gapped out and missed it the first time through.

If you were new to Pathfinder/D&D 3.5, which way would YOU choose for the game to work? I'm confident that tha devs chose 'our' way of reading it as part of their writing process.

That's hilarious! Scroll back a few pages and you will find quotes (with links to the original posts) from just about every person on the development team who frequents these boards unilaterally diasgreeing with your camps point of view.

Unless, of course, you 'decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks.'

That right there ^ is where you slide off the rails. You are not being asked to decide between iterative attacks or a move action - you are being asked to decide between a Standard Action or a Full-Attack.

-A Full-Attack is a full round action that prohibits movement (other then a 5' step).

-A Standard Action is not a full round action and allows you enough time left over to take a Move action.

Generally speaking a character does not have to decide between an Attack (standard action) or a Full-Attack (full round action) until after he or she has made their first attack.

There are of course Feats and Abilities that preclude being able to make this choice.

Be careful about multiclassing though. PF has been changed to somewhat discourage multiclassing.

With 3.5 it could be extremely advantagous to multi-class - I find that in PF it more often pays better rewards to focus on a single class.

JohnF wrote:

wraithstrike wrote:

Axl wrote:

Hrothgar Rannúlfr wrote:

Unless we conclude that the Paizo staff does not know how to properly interpret their own rules...

Flurry of blows...

He meant the rules team. :)

Which does clearly demonstrate that the Paizo rules team do, occasionally, write the rules in such a way that it's easy to interpret them in a way contrary to what the rules writers think they say.

I agree. :)

This is not an example of that. The rules are crystal clear in this case. You must make a full-attack in order to gain the benefit from Manyshot. Making a full-attack precludes movement beyond a 5' step.

Now switch Rogue to Ninja and gain a Ki Pool to go with your nice CHA score.

I haven't verified it but I've seen it mentioned that the Scout arcetype would be legal for a Ninja to use.

Vanishing Trick FTW!

Malachi: you post long posts! I basically stop reading them so I apologize. I did read to the part where you go off the rails: making an attack and cashing in your iterative attacks for a move action IS NOT a full attack.

It's the "Attack" referred to in "Deciding between an Attack and a Full Attack".

Regrettably until this sinks in we'll just keep chasing our tails.

Barbarians go well with Rogue. Play a Shoanti and use an Earthbreaker + Sap Master!

Personally, regardless of which build you go with I'd consider taking Furious Focus sooner if possible. It synergizes soooo well with Power Attack - especially at low levels and even more so for a 3/4 BAB class. The last thing a 3/4 bab class needs is penalties to attack rolls.

If you do decide to dip Fighter or Barbarian take that class first - more HP and +1 Bab gives more options for feats @ first level. Heck, take Weapon Focus, Power Attack & Furious Focus at level 1 if you go Fighter.

PS: My comment was made in jest.

Probably because it's small & you'll get great mileage with it.

Power Attack + Furious Focus for the win!

Dabbler wrote:

Tels wrote:

Marius Castille wrote:

I haven't played a monk in ages but one idea I had was burning a feat on Martial Weapon Proficiency and using a glaive (for the reach). That would seem to dovetail well with combat reflexes, especially at lower levels.

The problem with this is then you don't get the full BAB because you can't flurry with a Glaive (not a Monk weapon).

Sohei?

That's one way, but not until 6th level IIRC.

1level of Cleric + Crusaders Flurry. If Sheylin is your deity you now fluffy w/glaive and get 3:1 with Power Attack on account of 2 handed weapon.

Or how about a Hungry Ghost Monk of Sarenrae with a keen scimitar?

Can't you also get a bite attack with Ranger? Two good saves, lots of skills and favored enemy are always nice!

Props for using gallivanting in a sentence. That's a word I'd like to see more of.

That's the reason I take it. Don't recall ever making a caster level check with my rangers... But it is great for self buffs etc.

In my home game we use the templates from d20pfsrd, what's the ruling for Society play? I have PFS character that uses a Horse Chopper - this diagonal craziness hasn't come up but I guess if it does I'll just shut-up and deal with it...

If he didn't include full stops he would have inserted the quote. There should be a button at the bottom of your screen (under the box you post in) that says "how to format your text". If you click that it will show you how to use bold and italics etc.

I like some of the Halfling stuff from the ARG. So much so that they are probably my second choice to human for many classes. Half-Orcs got a boost as well. And until they errata some of the alternate racial traits I'll let my players dump dark vision for skill points and then drop ferocity for even better dark vision (at least I think those are the traits that are replaced - don't have my book in front of me).

How does this feat interact with Power Attack? It seems clear your Klar is supposed to be an offhand/light weapon, but is the Earthbreaker treated as a one handed weapon even though it's a two handed weapon?

This speaks to the importance of making an effort to undetstand the spirit of the rule. It's clear that the intent is to provide a maximum bonus of up to +2, so long as you don't exceed you current HD.

As for the Wizard 5/Fighter 1 - allowing a caster level of 6 passes the sniff test: it doesn't reek of cheese.

It's not just for multi-classing though. Magical Knack is almost a must have for my Ranger characters.

Shame to waste a feat on it. Might want to consider a dip into a class that grants medium armour proficiency.

Or choose a different fighter archetype if Lore Warden isnt vital to your build.

It blows my mind that we're still going round and round 750 posts later. The RAW could not be any more clear.

Gauss wrote:

Thod:

I suggest you read this post of mine that explains the different points.

- Gauss

Yes - I did read this earlier.

It might even have spawned the idea for my post. Because if specific isn't trumping general than what I wrote becomes possible - or you would have different rulings for high and low levels.

To be honest when I read your previous post Thod, I couldn't really ascertain what question you were asking or which position you were supporting - if you don't mind re-phrasing it may elicit a more detailed response.

Also, bear in mind one of the prerequisites for Manyshot is BAB +6, which insures you're getting at least 1 iterative attack. Then again if you feel option 1 in the original post is a valid interpretation of the RAW & RAI you're obvioulsy ignoring prerequisites (and common sense) so your questions become valid in that context...

Then again I'm admittedly uncertain what you're asking...

The Guided property is not 3rd party as someone alluded to above. And it is usable on ranged weapons - at least it was used on a ranged weapon in the Paizo published Curse of the Crimsom Throne adventure path.

I don't have the book in front of me at the moment but I will check and see how & if it modified attack rolls...

I will admit I have not seen it any Paizo material that wasn't written as basically 3.5 stuff from back in the day - so maybe they banned it?

I can tell you that the sourcebook it appears in is not listed as acceptable material for PFS play.

Adamantine Dragon:

Do you still assert that the section on 'Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack' is deciding between two forms of Full attack?

- Gauss

That is what he is asserting. I don't think he'll answer you though - so maybe he'll correct me for answering for him if I'm wrong.

Edit: Ninja'd by the man himself!

But you're still wrong - full attacks do not allow you to move anything more then a 5' step. If you make an Attack and then follow it up with a move action you are not making a Full Attack.

Daryl MacLeod wrote:

Skylancer4 wrote:

Which would be using a ranged weapon as an improvised "melee" weapon? Maybe it is a reading comprehension "thing."

For the sake of argument can you quote the rule that says an improvised weapon cannot be used to make a Trip attempt?

While I'm not convinced that a Zen Archer should be wasting his time trying to trip foes while using his bow as an improvised weapon, I don't think it's the 'Trip' rules that prohibit it... There may be rules specific to the Zen Archer (like Axl referenced) that prohibit such a thing however...

Either read the spoiler above where they copied/pasted Trip or read Trip. The TRIP ability states melee attack. If you are using your bow to make ranged attacks you are failing to make a melee attack and so are unable replace the attack to trip. You can use any weapon you want to attempt a trip as per the FAQ, if the weapon is making a ranged attack you are unable to use the Trip attack as per the CM write up. Unless you are using the bow as an improvised weapon to make a melee attack, trip is off-limits.

You're jumping to incorrect conclusions. Nobody is asserting that the Zen Archer is making ranged attacks. We're talking about using a bow as an improvised weapon to make melee attacks. So I guess it is a reading comprehension "thing".

Again please cite the rule that says you cannot make a melee attack with an improvised weapon to make a trip attempt.

To be clear I'm not arguing that this allowable - I just don't think it's prohibited by the rule you think it is.

Which would be using a ranged weapon as an improvised "melee" weapon? Maybe it is a reading comprehension "thing."

For the sake of argument can you quote the rule that says an improvised weapon cannot be used to make a Trip attempt?

While I'm not convinced that a Zen Archer should be wasting his time trying to trip foes while using his bow as an improvised weapon, I don't think it's the 'Trip' rules that prohibit it... There may be rules specific to the Zen Archer (like Axl referenced) that prohibit such a thing however...

I'm playing a Ranger Guide and to be honest I'm lamenting the fact I can't use Instant Enemy spell and I don't have an Animal Companion.

Also, Kukri's would save you a feat.

Thanks for posting that stuff from JJ.

Now that we can put the nonsensensical debate regarding "Deciding between an Attack and a Full-Attack" behind us we can now debate Manyshot.

Oh, wait. No debate is needed as the rules are crystal clear on what kind of action is required with Manyshot...

Gauss - you mentioned above that the rules for deciding between an Attack and a Full-Attack had to be somewhere - I think they were placed where they are for a reason...

For the first 5 levels of the game (assuming full BAB progression) there is very little differenc between a Standard Action & a Full-Attack (barring specific feats and abilities that are governed with specific rules pertaining to their use). When you only get 1 attack action with either a Standard or Full round action the general rules don't come into effect much.

Once you hit BAB 6/1 and have iterative attacks without relying on special abilities or feats it makes sense that the clarification pertaining to Attack actions and Full Attack actions be presented under the Full Attack heading - afterall, the Standard action has remained the same throughout.

Not sure if that makes sense as I am neither articulate or eloquent...

Instead of arguing I wish people would actually do some research.

Here are some usefull links

PRD I copy and past from here when I want to post Official rules.

Rules of the Game Here is where I go when I want to understand a difficult rule.

Pathfinder SRD When the PRD just won't do.

JAMES JACOBS James Jacobs knows his stuff. Ask him questions. Don't tell him I sent you. ;)

These forums 90% of the time the answer to your question is going to be answered promptly/correctly.

Dictionary don't assume you know what a word means.

Revised (v.3.5)SRD flip over your CRB you see "3.5 * OGL compatible" this is that.

Pathfinder Frequently Asked Questions We love to argue don't we. Here is where our arguments end. :(

Thank you for that. I followed the link to rules of the game and read the entry on Actions (part one).

In that article Skip Williams clearly explains the following (under using actions);

In most cases, you have the following three options available to you during your turn (choose one):

-One standard action plus one move action.
-Two move actions.
-One full-round action.

Why is this significant? Because it should put to rest the insane assertion that you can use one standard action plus one move action and call it a "Full-Attack" and then attempt to game the system by applying the benefits of Manyshot (which requires a Full Attack) to this standard action.

Martial artist is a good archetype, but poorly written in places. He still has abundant step, but no ki to use it, for example.

MA

Or dip 2 levels Rogue/Ninja to get a Ki Pool and voila! Abundant Step. Throw in the Dimensional Agility feat chain and you have a Nightcrawler to call your own.

Remember the Rogue's Sneak Attack does not multiply on a critical hit.

So really if she wants to hit a lot she should play a ful BAB class.

Fighters, Paladins and Rangers all have proficiency in Kukri's so you get to save a feat.

Each of them has additional static damage that they can add to the hits and it gets multiplied on critical hits.

I did the numbers a while back comparing Ranger to Fighter and I believe the Ranger's "Favoured Enemy" bonus out paces the Fighters "Weapon Training & Specialization" until at least level 11 or so.

A Ranger also has the option of selecting the TWF style and he or she does not have to meet the DEX pre-reqs for the feat chain - meaning they can pump their STR or CON or any other stat higher then a comparable fighter would.

A Ranger also gets 6 skill point per level and can take arcetypes that will give them Trap Finding.

If she wants to maximize her damage output look at Ranger/Fighter/Paladin. The bonus feat from being Human is always a nice bonus too!

If she wants to be a Rogue I think the Scout arcetype also stacks with Knifemaster and should present her more opportunities to sneak attack.

There is also a trait called "River Rat" that gives +1 bonus to damage with daggers - she could ask her GM to rule it applues to Kukri's instead... If she did all her chores without complaint for 1 week I'd probably allow it.

Cheers!

D

I can't believe it is this hard for some people to understand.

When you decide between an Attack and a Full Attack, you actually have to decide between making an Attack and a Full Attack.

If you decide to Attack (note the capital "A") you can make a move action after your first attack.

or you can choose to Full Attack by continuing with your remaining or iterative attacks and restrict yourself to a 5' step.

That's all the rule is saying.

Decide
between
an Attack
or
a Full Attack.

Nothing more. Nothing less.

There are not two-types of Full-Attack - the "Full Attack" where you get to make a move action after making your first attack is actually just an Attack.

I am going to ask this can anyone name me any full attack action other than manyshot that locks you into a full attack from the get go?

Why? What would that accomplish? An absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

There are several feats i can think of that only work on a full-attack. And has always been the case the only move you can make with a full-attack is a 5' step.

Thanks for moving the thread and thanks for the responses thus far.

I didn't necessarily create a zombie horde, but I made a few appearances of plague zombies in the chapter, and tied them to Rolth. So instead of run-of-the-mill zombies, I made exploding, plague-infested ones. Too bad only 2 of my PCs were susceptible....

This is pretty much what I'm thinking I will do.

Any combatant has the option to opt out of a full attack (and move, instead) after the results of the first attack are determined.

This is very true. What people are failing to understand is that if you "opt out" after the first attack and move instead you are taking a standard action followed by a move action.

Standard Action + Move Action does not equal "Full Attack"

Therefore you have not met the requirements of Manyshot and are not entitled to receive the benefit.

Trying to game the system by using Manyshot (as an enhanced standard action) and then employing a move action is neither RAW or RAI.

Are you trying to say the wording could be better or do you really think the "intent" was to allow someone to benefit from a feat that says it needs a full round action to be used with only a standard action.

Concerro; No and No.

I think I am trying to say what you are trying to say - that is;

Manyshot cannot be used to enhance a standard attack by giving the user the benefit of firing 2 arrows and being able to take a move action.

It's very clear that by Manshot's definition that it can only be used as part of a full-attack action.

AD and others appear to be trying to game the system (inadvertantly or otherwise) by invoking the general rule of "deciding between an attack or a full-attack" when the specific rule of Manyshot clearly states you can't use it with a standard action.

I think the designers have done a very good job in this instance of making that as clear as possible - if players were intended to be able to combine Many shot with a standard action & a move action it would say so in the description. It doesn't. That's also why I don't think a FAQ is even needed in this instance...

I apologize if I am neither as eloquent or as articulate as Gauss - but the way he explained it is spot on in my opinion.

The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks.

^That's from the rule for "Full Attack"

Nice try though.

Hi Jason,

Regarding the bonus feats listed; what prerequisites are you legally allowed to ignore then? If not BAB, what is a 'normal' class or level based prerequisit?

What was your intention for the Archetype if not a miltant cleric more skilled at arms then the vanilla version?

No FAQ required on this one...

I have to admit I've given the Paizo authors grief in the past for ambiguity or unclear wording in rules before - but this is certainly not one of those instances.

I don't see how the rules could be made anymore clear; you may use Many shot as part of a full-attack action.

End of story.

If you want to bail on your iterative attacks that's your choice - but the only move you can legally make after applying the benefit of Many shot to your first arrow is a 5' step.

Any other interpretation is wrong. Those of you suggesting option #1 are willfully ignoring the Rules as Written.

I'd rule that BAB is both class and level related and therefore allow a Crusader of Sarenrae take Weapon Focus (Scimitar) at level 1...

I think that's the intent of the Archetype afterall - Sacrifice a Domain and suffer diminished Spell casting for superior (for a Cleric) Martial abbility with your Dieties favoured weapon...

The real question here is; Is it worth it?.

General:

CRB p187 wrote:

Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you’ve already taken a 5-foot step, you can’t use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.

Specific:

CRB p130 Manyshot wrote:

Benefit: When making a full-attack action with a bow, your first attack fires two arrows. If the attack hits, both arrows hit. Apply precision-based damage (such as sneak attack) and critical hit damage only once for this attack. Damage bonuses from using a composite bow with a high Strength bonus apply to each arrow, as do other damage bonuses, such as a ranger’s favored enemy bonus. Damage reduction and resistances apply separately to each arrow.

So there are two possibilities:

1) The Specific trumps the General. Specific in this case states it is a Full-attack action in order to use the ability. Thus, the decision is already made.

2) The Specific does not trump the general. This is based on an interpretation that regardless of the specific wording it is still a single attack and thus single attack rules apply.

Personally I think this is a situation of specific trumping General. However enough leeway exists that if someone made a FAQ on this I would hit the FAQ button if only to remove people's confusion.

Adamantine Dragon: Now I have cited the rules but come up with a different interpretation.

- Gauss

^This.

And I have to say that was very well laid out Gauss. Specific trumps general is what the rules are saying and trying to say (RAW & RAI)

As a GM I have my players "declare" what feats they are applying ahead of time. When they say "I'm using Many Shot" they have decided to make a Full attack rather then an Attack (with the option to take a move action).

That player has the option to stop firing after his first shot (which consists of two arrows), but he cannot take a move or move equivalent action.

Just build an Archer Ranger, human of course. If you're playing in Golarion I think it's the Kelish that are "horse lords".

As others have mentioned you can skip mounted feats entirely - use your horse to make a single move with your full attack and your golden.

Tweak Lastoth's build so you take boon companion early as possible If you'd like a bad ass mount.

You could also choose the "skirmisher" archetype if you want some "tricks" that synergize well with mounts/companions. You give up a lot though - tough call.

I'd recommend watching Dirty Rotten Scoundrels for inspiration. It features two very distinct conmen that should give you some inspiration for how such a character could work.

^That's the first thing that came to my mind as well. There is also a Dicaprio movie that was based on a real life conman who got away with some amazing capers - so much so that I think the FBI or CIA eventually employed him. I think it was "Catch me if you can".

Have high wisdom character take "wisdom in the flesh" trait and then use it with disable device. No rogue necessary.

Also, I'm not sure you can give up Darkvision with Forest Walker, then get Darkvision back with Acute Darkvision. It seems to me that Acute is meant to be an addition to darkvision, not a replacement.

If that was the case Paizo should have wrote: "... Gain an additional 30 feet range to a maximum darkvision range of 90'..." or something like that.

As it stands, by RAW you can in fact give up dark vision and gain it back (but better) in this manner.

I expect this will be FAQ'd soon enough though - I am on the same page as Sean H with what I think they (the authors) were trying to accomplish with that racial trait.

I forgot to add that Risky Striker is only against enemies Large or bigger. So be sure to stack it with Big Game Hunter!

Some good stuff for halflings in the ARG that will help boost their DPR. Improved Low Blow and Risky Striker I think they're called. Risky Striker in particular. Stacks with both Power Attack & Piranha Strike and boosts damage at the same rate but instead if a penalty to hit you take penalty to AC.

Archers do very well in combat. With the material available in the APG & UC you can be an archer that mixes it up in the thick of melee with your ranged attack.

Being that Perception is WIS based, the natural fit for a perceptive archer is the Zen Archer. Not only do you get Perception as a class skill you get to base your ranged attacks off WIS by level 2 or 3 (can't recall at the moment).

A magic headband is going to serve double duty for this character - pumping his perception and combat ability.

Your WIS can become so obscene you may want to consider the trait "wisdom in the flesh" (I think that's the name of it) that lets you use your WIS mod on any DEX/CON/STR based skill. Stealth, acrobatics, and disable device would all be good choices and all of a sudden you are way better at more things out of combat.

The Zen Archer is so blessed with feats and class features that replace or replicate feats you can actually be a non-human race and not suffer for it. Dark vision anyone?

Instead of trying to negate the gunslinger why not take him out of his element? A simple invisibility spell on a Tetori Monk to facilitate a grapple should do it. Make him have to fight with a light weapon instead of his gun. The grappler can be a mook - he just has to delay the GS long enough for the rest of the party to deal with the BBEG.

I've found that as Pahtfinder grows I just can't keep all the pertinent rules in my head anymore.

So I pose this question to the community:
What commonly used rules are frequently forgotten or overlooked?

I'm talking about some of the more common rules that are easy to forget or often get overlooked, not obscure situations or powers.

For example- I always forget that the GM should make the rolls for a player when they search for traps. (prevents meta gaming for when you roll that inevitable 1)

Also- You can't sneak attack in dim lighting due to 20% concealment (actually my group is pretty bad at keeping track of lighting sources during combat, as it can be a chore.)

I thought it would be handy if we had a sticky thread with this info for those like myself that just can't remember everything. If I haven't had to use certain rules in a while I just don't retain them.

So let me hear it. What rules do you find are most commonly forgotten?

After doing a little digging into Domain powers I am confused as to what action some of the granted powers are. For many powers it simply doesn't say.
I believe the general rule is that if something doesn't say what type of action it is, then the default is a Standard Action.

Let's look at an example-
Good Domain
Touch of Good (Sp): You can touch a creature as a standard action, granting a sacred bonus on attack rolls, skill checks, ability checks, and saving throws equal to half your cleric level (minimum 1) for 1 round. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier.

Holy Lance (Su): At 8th level, you can give a weapon you touch the holy special weapon quality for a number of rounds equal to 1/2 your cleric level. You can use this ability once per day at 8th level, and an additional time per day for every four levels beyond 8th.

Now touch of Good clearly states an action, but why not Holy Lance? It's further complicated by the fact that in the Beta it was specified as a Standard Action for Holy Lance. Why the Change? Is it still a standard action?

And if it is a standard action doesn't that really nerf it if you're using it on your own weapon? It means you just spent a turn activating it and ate up one of your rounds/per day allotment before you even get to use it.

I have no problem it it's a Standard action. It would be a little powerful if it was a swift or something. I just wish they would make it clearer, as many domain powers don't specify.

Completely random question. If a NPC has no magic items on him and then drinks a potion(lets say Bull's Strength for example) would that NPC have a glow when viewed through the Detect Magic Spell? Maybe a faint aura?

Does the monk add an extra attack for each extra arm to the number of attacks they get with the flurry?

Can you Rapid Shot Eldritch Blasts?(3.5 warlock)
The 3.5 Warlocks Eldritch blasts are based of the characters BAB for number of blasts.
Eldritch Blast qualifies for Point Blank and Precise Shot and Rapid Shot is worded much the same as these two feats. They specifically say 'weapon' in the text, but it has already been clarified that rays and spells that requires a ranged atk qualify as a 'weapon' in these cases.

Rapid Shot- When making a full-attack action with a ranged
weapon, you can fire one additional time this round. All of
your attack rolls take a –2 penalty when using
Rapid Shot.

You can indeed atk with Eldritch Blast as a full-attack action and it counts as a 'weapon' so I see no reason for this not to work.

Thoughts? Arguments? Objections?

Upon reviewing a the core rulebook I have yet to find anything addressing whether or not multiple powers can be channeled through an attack at once.

Any thoughts?

Here is a list of feats I converted for my game. Thought I would post them for the heck of it. Suggestions welcomed. Names have been changed from the original so I could post em here. Enjoy.

Extra spellbook- Wizard
Get 3 spells per lvl instead of 2 for wizards

Lost in the Fight- Pre Req. Small size
You gain +2 to AC when adjacent to at least 2 creatures larger than you.

Human Perserverance - Human
+1 racial bonus to all saves

Wall Fighter
Whenever adjacent to a wall you gain +1 to melee Atk, melee Dmg and AC.

Blood ThirstY
+2 to Atk + Dmg against bloodied foes

Battle Anticipation- PreReq. Improved Init, Dex 14
+1 feat bonus to AC and saves

Quick to Act
Roll initiative twice, take higher of the two

Crushing Critical- PreReq. BAB +8
Deal extra 1d10 with critical hit.

Evasion- PreReq. BAB +10, Dex 16
You gain Evasion.

Shield Expert- PreReq. BAB +3
+1 Shield bonus to shield you are proficient with

Steady ShoT
+3 to dmg with bow/crossbow if you haven’t moved since the end of your last turn.

Irresistible Flame/Cold/Sonic/Lightning/Acid (Choose 1)
Your opponents resistance is treated as half of that listed (round down) for your Atks

Selective Spell- PreReq. Wizard/Sorcerer, Ability to cast 4th lvl arcane spells
You may choose to have an area spell you cast not affect a number of creatures equal to or less than your Int(Wiz)/Cha(Sor)

2 Weapon Opportunist- PreReq. Dex 18, Two Weapon Fighting
If you make a successful Attack of opportunity with a melee weapon you can make a second attack with your offhand weapon at a -5

My group has been playing Paizo for several months now. We have a Monk in our party and we have been noting how the new rules affect him. Here is an actual e-mail he sent to me by that player in regards to the jump checks the Monk has.

"I am just staggered at the potential for jumping ridiculousness.

Right now, I have 12 ranks(Level 12) in acrobatics and a Dex bonus of +3. Acrobatics is a class skill so there’s another +3, making my acrobatics check an +18. My movement is now up to 70’, giving me a total jump bonus of +16 (+4/10’ over 30’ base) for a jump bonus of +34. I also get to add my monk class level to jump checks, so another +12 gives me a base of +46 to jump. I can roll a 2 and jump 12 feet vertical from a standstill.

But it gets better. Looking at the Ki abilities, I noticed two things: they don’t define spending a Ki point as any kind of action whatsoever, and there are two point uses that help jump. You can spend a ki point to give yourself and extra +20’ movement for a round. You can also spend a point to add +20 to one jump check. If these two are allowed to stack, that’s another +28 to a single jump check for two ki points (assuming you can’t spend more than one point for the flat +20 bonus, which they don’t explicitly restrict), bringing my total bonus for a single jump to +74. I can roll a 6 and jump 20 feet vertically from a stand-still."

It should also be noted that a +74 allows for a 74 foot Horizontal jump that needs no running start if you are a monk.

I also feel that there is just no way any skill should have a +74 bonus.
I think Paizo needs to adjust the Jumping abilities of the Monk and more importantly ASSIGN ACTION TYPE SPECIFICS TO KI POOL USES AND CLARIFY WHAT CAN AND CAN NOT STACK.

My group has been playtesting since Alpha 1 was released. Here are the latest two observations based on months of playing.

CMB DIFFICULTIES ARE TOO HIGH EVEN WITH 'IMPROVED -' FEATS.
My players don't want to take the CMB feats because they are too much of a gamble and don't work most of the time. They would rather spend a feat on a 'sure thing' despite the fact all of them like the flavor maneuvers add to combat. Only classes with a full BAB stand to succeed an average of 50% of the time. That is viewed as too risky to waste an entire round on.
I am considering making CMB DC's 12 + CMB

TOO MANY SPELL-LIKE ABILITIES
I never realized how powerful spell-like abilities could be. The fact that there are no components, materials, or invocations of any kind gets through a LOT of loopholes in game mechanics and GREATLY increases PC power level beyond what I think Paizo intended. Enemies no longer have a chance to react to many of the powers that PC's have. Wizards can cast very powerful Spell-like abilities with no chance for opponent counterspells. Nor can readied actions from opponents be used since the effect 'just happens' there is little warning and few counters in the game mechanics for this many varied Spell-like abilities that are being thrown around. I welcome discussion on this second point.

Anyone have any thoughts on houserules to 'Paizofy' the Warlock? A few things I noticed right away....

1. Casters now have at will cantrips and spell-like abilities which lessens the uniqueness and impact of the Warlocks low level at-will Invocations and Eldritch Blast.

2. Warlocks have no 'high level punch' that the new core classes have to encourage players to stick with a core class longer.

3. The Warlock Damage Reduction seems underpowered.

I think these are a few things that need to be addressed when converting.
The class as a whole isn't that underpowered compared to Paizo classes and doesn't need a whole retool, just some tweaks.

I think a start is to give them a few more Invocations, especially at lower levels. Not sure what to do with their damage reduction just yet.

Input...?

I'm looking for a Warlock Feat that appeared in Dragon some time back.

The feat was similar to the Practiced Spellcaster Feat that allows multiclass casters to treat their caster level as if it were 4 lvls higher or up to their Max HD if less than 4.

I'm playing a Rogue/Warlock and the feat would be perfect if it is indeed out there.

So if anyone knows the issue or name of the feat that would be very helpful.

Thanks

I'm really looking for some feedback on this idea as I may implement it as a houserule.

Scaleable Feats!
These would be Feats with bonuses that would increase at various levels with the character. For example Improved trip would state that at 8th and 15th level the bonus to trip increases to +4 and +6 respectively.

Why create Scaleable Feats?
1. Currently I feel there are too many feats with bonuses that don't add much impact to the game at higher levels. This is especially a problem when feats are the Fighters bread and butter. I feel Fighters lack the punch at higher levels that Wizards and other classes do. Having fighters with Scaling Feats would give them "class abilities" that grow the same as the other classes.

2. Skill based feats are overlooked. My players rarely take skill feats over combat feats. I would like to see these skill feats hold their own against combat feats. An idea I've been tinkering with is giving the skill based feats an additional +1 every four levels starting at the level they take the feat. Example- Persuasive feat taken at third level would give the initial +2 to Diplomacy and Intimidate. At 7th lvl both skills would receive a +1 and agskill feats at lower lvls.
(This may work better every 5 lvls, not sure)

I plan on combing over the copious amount of feats and seeing which ones would be good to scale, especially for a fighter.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Monetary Handouts?

If this has all ready been discussed under New Rules or something let me know.

I've noted that Jason has made several comments on different threads about including alternate ideas for certain rules in the final version of Pathfinder RPG.

This is a great idea and has led me to the belief that including a small chapter about "House" or "Alternative" rules would be a great asset.

For example the Unnatural Beauty ability could be included for those that want to play a world with Tolkienesque elves.

Jason mentions skills here-
"Hey there all,
I can certainly understand the desire to give more skill points. I think this will be an optional rule in the final system. I would prefer to keep the base numbers close for backwards compatibility reasons.
Jason Bulmahn"

This is an excellent option to keep. So why not a small chapter detailing "house rules" and a brief indication of what kind of campaigns or circumstances they would be good to use them in?

Thoughts?

Question- does the dwarven stonecunning racial ability allow them to spot traps or doors with a DC above 20 or that are magical?

It states they automatically get a roll within 10 ft.

Under a Rogue's trapfinding ability it states that only rogues can find traps with a DC over 20 or that are magical.