It seems reasonable to me that the cultists who are closer to the demon would be more powerful than the lower ranking cultists.
If there is a need to pump up the difficulty, have the characters chase the demon into the Abyss. Then the world DOES scale up with them!
This. Environments that force them to burn resources just to survive there will help keep things interesting. If you have to go to another plane, planet, or even underwater for longer than a minute, you're out of your element, and therefore vulnerable to anything that might neutralize the magic/items you're using to breathe water, or not melt into magma.
This is the OOC thread for 4 goblins, whose unlikely heroism has brought them to 2nd level. Bucko, Klepy, Tark and Velag have become big heroes, and will now make the world suitable for rule by the mightiest race in all Golarion. None dare stand in their way!
I was looking at Seltiyel last night and although not the ideal optimized character you cant say he sucks or is underpowered. He can be a tough cookie to deal with in battle and if he scores a critical on you you might as well say goodnight with the conditions and damage output inflicted. Its been said like almost a thousand times multi class characters will be behind the single classed characters, but you know what its only logical after all they are trying to learn to do two things. Once the Prc levels star to kick in then you really see a multi class character rise and be on par with a single class character.
Agreed. He's not as "optimized" as some people would make him, and he's not nearly as rich as a PC. He could still give you a run for your money, though. That spell critical is nasty.
Elven Curve Blade specialist Eldrich Knight with critical feats is pretty awesomepants.
I'm inclined to agree, but WITHOUT HAVING ACTUALLY PLAYED ONE FROM 1-20, though, I can't say for sure.
I've played the PrC-happy 3.X, and PF. Straight classes caught up with the endless multiclassing of other concepts, finally. The PrCs, with their revamped skill points and class abilities, don't give the players a world of suck (I'm looking at you, Arcane Archer, Arcane Trickster, Dragon Disciple, and even Duelist).
Let people play what they want. Multiclassing is still a good way to play a different character concept, now more than ever. Straight classing is now worth doing, too. It's a wash.
Multiclassing gives versatility at the cost of focus (to quote the 3.X PHB), and any player wanting to do it would know that. Level dips are now penalty free, so a monk-wizard isn't that stupid of an idea, particularly if he rolled a high Wis.
A cleric-rogue with a PrC based on the Arcane Trickster is doable. A cleric-druid might work, if you want it to.
I think PF fixed much of what was wrong with 3.X, and carries the torch higher for both straight and multiclassed characters better than ever.
Let's give it a few years of real play before we say it doesn't work on paper.
I'm repeating myself, but in the world of dirtbike riders, it's 90% rider, 10% bike. That's VERY true. A skilled rider can do things on a dirtbike that others can't do, regardless.
In PF, it's 90% player, 10% character sheet. Good players know they've traded something for something else.
A rogue 1/cleric 1/fighter 18 has plenty of options, depending on the player and his group. It's not weak. A straight fighter 20 is a better fighter, but not as versatile. I'd play either, and have a good time.
"We'd like to foster a positive, friendly community here at paizo.com, so please be polite in your postings. By policing ourselves we can make sure the signal-to-noise ratio stays high, and we can prevent some sort of overly-moderated catastrophe community."
Peace, man!
This has been an interesting thread, for the most part. You make the bunny cry. Why must you make Cuddles sad?
At 1st level, the "collegiate wizard" feat applies, meaning that even if the universalist is far from any source for spell acquisition, he adds 4, not 2 "free" spells to his spellbook for advancing a level.
Makes sense that a universalist is probably better-trained than the other wizards who have a hard time learning opposed-school spells. He can master any school, and would have a fatter spellbook, as a result. No spell is too rare or obscure for his all-encompassing ease with magic. The universalist knows that a little-used spell can still come in handy in the right situation, and he's more likely to have it ready in short notice. After all, he doesn't struggle to learn any particular spell.
At 8th level, the universalist's arcane bond becomes stronger than that of other wizards. He may take the improved familiar feat for free, or, alternately, gain an extra use of his bonded item to cast any spell he knows once per day.
The benefits of an improved familiar don't need comment. What wizard wouldn't like that? The "lifesaver" spell from his bonded object can be used twice, not once per day. The universalist has more spell knowledge in reserve than a specialist caster, and can make use of it twice as often.
IMHO, these two things reinforce the idea of a universalist being "ready for anything," and compensate nicely for the spell slots he loses to specialists, while giving him some unique, useful features.
It's a general trait you can choose at character creation (most people get 2). They're found in the downloadable player's guides to campaigns.
Here's the text:
6 Magical Knack: You were raised, either wholly or in
part, by a magical creature, either after it found you abandoned
in the woods or because your parents often left you
in the care of a magical minion. This constant exposure
to magic has made its mysteries easy for you to understand,
even when you turn your mind to other devotions
and tasks. Pick a class when you gain this trait—your
caster level in that class gains a +2 trait bonus as long as
this bonus doesn’t increase your caster level higher than
your current Hit Dice.
You can download it free. Pathfinder character traits enhancement.
Yikes I hadn't thought of sneak damage, but a moderately levelled Rogue / Wizard (3/7)
Could do 1d4 + 2d6 negative levels on a sneak attack, and do that twice per day (with reasonable intelligence, and I guess four times if they have a spell focus and are a specialist.)
Compared to a level 10 straight wizard, or level 10 straight rogue, is that balanced (okay I realize balancing around a single attack it crazy talk but I thought I would ask.)
Back of the envelope without a save, and assuming he isn't undead, the BBEG goes down 9 negative level like a rock first round.
Going further our one trick pony is now level 13 rogue / level 7 wizard, he can do 1d4 + 7d6, which is ~26 negative level on average, no save.
I guess death ward is the counter spell to all this, but I think I smell a player smooshing coming up, just for evil gm sakes :)
Actually, the sneak attack damage is negative energy damage, not 2d6 more negative levels. The damage from a sneak attack is the same damage type as the spell, but is tacked on as damage, not as more level drain.
PF PRCs are way better off than they were in 3.X. Skills, prereqs, and extra toys were all changed in ways that make the classes stronger and more fun to play.
Remember the 3.5 Arcane trickster? Look at the PF version. More skills available, due to the redesign of how skills are acquired, more reasonable prereqs, and some goodies for synchronicity. the Invisible Rogue ability and Surprise Spells capstone ability make him a good sneak attacker, with the stealth and magic available to pull it off without getting himself killed for trying it.
The downside? He'll be a rogue3/wizard3 or sorcerer/bard4 at one point of his career. Pretty lame, but I just consider it paying his dues for choosing a more difficult path.
The other PrCs got some love, too. They mop the floor with their 3.X counterparts.
They also give us nice templates for other possible multiclassed PrCs, should a player want to try out an unusual combination. A monk/sorcerer (something like the Fist of Zuoken from Expanded Psionics Handbook) or a bard/druid PrC could be a lot of fun.
The "cleric, fighter, rogue, wizard" standard is still a great way for a party to go, but there are lots of ways to spice it up for particular character concepts. Not a problem for most players. With a little imagination, they'll find ways to stay relevant even at sub-optimum levels.
Who would be a fighter 10/wiz 10 when they can be an EK? Who would play a rogue 10/wiz 10 when they can play an Arcane Trickster, or a Mystic Theurge, etc.?
The EK would use magic to beat a fighter, and fighting to beat a wizard. The AT would out-sneak a wizard and out-magic a rogue.
After all, what self-respecting AT would stoop so low as to engage in a fair fight? Hey, what do I look like, a paladin?
He's going to use his magic and stealth to make sure the odds are in his favor, and he'll get a full round in before anyone knows he's there. The next round, too. With his sneakiness and a good initiative bonus, his foes will be hard-pressed to beat him to the punch.
These multiclassed PrCs have strengths of their own. They pay a real penalty at low levels to learn their tricks, but they're fun to play.
The MT gets a lot of guff around here, but he's the king of pre-encounter buffs. Like any wizard or cleric, he likes to plan ahead, and by the time the battle starts, his party will have a lot of good benefits going on. A higher-level caster can get rid of some of those buffs, but probably not all of them, and it cost him an action just to try it. If the MT is summoning monsters while all this is going on, those poor enemy casters will have a hard time of things.
I ride dirtbikes. Among that crowd, people will say "It's 10% bike, 90% rider." That's demonstrably true, in my experience.
I'd say it's true of PCs, too. It's 10% what's on your character sheet, 90% what you do with it.
I sincerely hope that nobody is taking this thread too seriously,
Not at all! I enjoy reading what people think.
You see, I think that PF fans are a cut above the rest; smart, imaginative, and very heroic, if only in our imaginations. If I ever sound condescending or insulting, please forgive me, as that is never my intent.
I learn a lot here, and visit almost every day. Good stuff!
I could probably be talked into allowing it, since, as you say, it costs a feat slot for a relatively minor benefit. You "draw upon your arcane power" to use it. The magic feats simulate arcane spells only, so you could argue that it's an arcane spell-like ability, and not a divine one.
Spell-like abiiities don't make you a caster, really, but in this case, I might let it slide. A gnome of any class would qualify for it, but it still costs you a feat.
No. The magic feats are spell-like abilities, not actual spells. The rogue is not a true arcane spellcaster, so the arcane strike feat doesn't work for him.
When we look at money in the modern world, with exchange rates between currencies, etc., it gets confusing, quick.
I prefer to keep gp values intentionally abstract. The value of PC treasure is enough to attract hordes of thieves trying to rob them everywhere they go.
That would assume, however, that the thieves know the hero is carrying a +3 bane sword, that his backpack is actually a magical closet, and that his fancy cloak lets him walk through walls of fire and live.
Even if they know what the items are, and their value, fencing stolen magic items requires a wealthy, willing buyer. Not likely in a hamlet.
The PCs are the heroes of tales a commoner may not even believe. I don't like the idea of a "magic shoppe," but players usually have pretty specific ideas of what they want. It's not really fair to deny them things that they need to be effective, or just want for the "cool factor."
In short, their economy is quite divorced from most folks'. They usually know a few "patron" NPCs who have the connections to get them what they want after a week or two. They can barter for what they can afford by the time the wizard has acquired and copied new spells, and the cleric is done making some new item or serving in the temple.
Some people prefer to roleplay it to the hilt; find the master swordmaker and talk to him, etc. My group prefers to get their goodies and move on to the next big adventure.
The PCs are like millionaires. Hey, so is Batman! He's more believeable, though. XD
Good one, Telrathel. A decent combo for a high-level wiz. or sor. is Mage's sword along with one of the Hand spells. It's best against ethereal or incorporal enemies. You can still cast spells while keeping the baddie at bay and doing some damage to it.
I am planning on playing an Eldritch Knight-Fighter 3, Wizard 5, Eldritch Knight 10 for the River Kingdoms AP. I have a few simple questions first.
I am thinking of playing an Elf and having him use an Elven Quick Blade. Then I started thinking about casting and having a hand "free" while using a two handed weapon. Could he hold the Quick Blade in one hand and cast or is it that not workable? If not what weapon would work well?
Second question is about Arcane Strike. Will the caster levels of EK stack with Wizard for this feat?
I have never played 3.5 or pathfinder before but I have looked at the books and ran sample characters. (Old 1E player from the 80's).
The other members of the party will be a Cleric and Ranger(TreantMonk's switch hitter build) with the fourth either a Fighter or Druid.
Yes, he could hold the blade in one hand while casting a spell. Yes, EK stacks with wizard for the feat.
It's pretty useful at low levels for overcoming DR/magic, and the extra damage really helps. Lookin' at you, gricks! :)
My bard is a skirmish guy (longsword or light crossbow) and his arcane strike +2 and inspire courage +2 gave him a nice little combat edge. I've surprised the DM a few times by dropping foes that didn't see me as a threat (kobold with a sword? puh-leese).
Yes, it's nice for a lower-level guy. Any masterwork weapon in your bard's hands is effectively a +1 magic weapon, minimum, and the damage slowly gets better as he levels. Great for dropping mooks and saving your magic for the bigger challenges.
It's clear to me that the feat is just for arcane classes. In the case of the bard/evoker, I'd allow the levels to stack. Tying the feat to either his bard or evoker level seems punitive. Divine caster levels simply wouldn't count. A mystic theurge or eldritch knight would max out at +4, since they'll never hit 20th caster level.
It's not that great a feat in the first place, so why nerf it? +5 weapon damage at 20th level? Hardly overpowered, but ok for flavor. It's good for a "combat bard," since any weapon he uses is considered magical at first level. He can wait a while on the +1 sword.
As someone said before, it's good for gish builds and some bards, or even a crossbow-happy sorcerer, if you're not into optimized builds and just want to play something different.
Hmm, a crossbow sorcerer... How would you make that?
I thought the whole point of a crossbow was that a peasant could get the same range as a skilled archer just by picking it up and knowing where the trigger was.
Why are we trying to "fix" an option that was inferior to begin with? =\
Inclined to agree. As has been mentioned in other bow threads, crossbows are so easy to use, even a wizard can shoot one halfway straight.
Long and shortbows take a lot more training to use effectively, and are thus martial weapons.
All the same, if a player wants a character who's super-bad with a crossbow, it's fine to show him some love.
Like I said earlier, at 8000 apiece, that's mighty expensive for a low-damage weapon. All the same, the idea of a monk who brings the awesome with a set of magical shurikens is just too fun to ignore.
The rules kinda fall apart, here, IMHO. Shuriken, as Ceefood said, aren't particularly fragile at all. I don't see them shattering on impact.
I'd suggest maybe looking at the Robe of Stars for a minute. It generates +5 shuriken (that can only be used once per month). Maybe a similar, less-powerful magic item could do that, but more times per day, so it would be useful to a monk. Just a thought.
Magnetic Bracers
Not only does it cause thrown shuriken to return, it also holds them stylishly at the ready. Anybody remember Jasmine from that old Conan cartoon from the early '90s?
Interesting. I could see that. Thrown weapons don't get much love. Realistically, they're not as good as bows and such, but they're so COOL!
How about this, then? At 7th level, the universalist may either gain an extra spell per day through his bonded item, or, alternately, get the Improved Familiar feat for free.
It gives him a strong something extra through his arcane bond, without any surgery to the class as is.
*sigh* the "racism" comment was a joke. I was hoping "haha!" would indicate that. I apologize for not being specific.
As for the elf, it was a specific example based on the discussion of wizards. Yes, every race is mechanically good at one thing or another. Options encourage players to not be afraid to play a dwarf wizard for instance where they would be trumped mechanically by the elf wizard in potential power because that causes conflicting interests between individuals who want to play something but recognize the power of another combination.
I'll grant you that elves make naturally great wizards. Dwarves have other advantages that help them survive, though, particularly in underground dungeon-type campaigns. They average a +4 con, compared to elves, and darkvision is nice to have always on down in the murky depths.
In a mostly-underground campaign, dwarves aren't ever a bad choice, even for a wizard. They don't have to take toughness. The ones that do can handle a little rough stuff. :-)
I'm confused, too. Do the fighter AND the 9th level druid want to kill the 10th level druid?
Yes. My problem is that I cannot wild shape into anything larger than a dog in exchange for the healing domain. An ability druids usually lack. THe GM thought the party needed a healer and as compensation for my race (gnoll) he decided to limit my wild shape. Anything I wild shape into is only a carrion eating animal of medium or less size.
Well, in that case, get him in his sleep. Use potions or a spellcaster to make you stealthy, invisible, and maybe even silent. Buff up your to hit and damage abilities any way you can, with strength buffs and Greater magic weapon, etc. Have the fighter attempt a coup de gras, then follow up with your own full attack (your companion's, too, if you can bring it) in the same surprise round.
Even if you don't kill him immediately, he's still prone, and even wildshaping into a bird, one of you should be able to finish him off next round. Have a Wind Wall ready to stop or slow him if he tries to fly away.
If I were a druid attacked in my sleep and low on hp, I'd turn into a tiny bat or owl and try to get away. I could shape into something meaner, but I'd be easier to hit.
Getting past the barbarians shouldn't be hard. Fighting your way out shouldn't be, either. They may not even hear his death rattle.
I have no problem with inter-party killing if you're evil, anyway. Comes with the territory.
You do NOT get Improved Evasion when you have evasion and another class grants you evasion similar to how uncanny dodge works?
I've always wanted it to work this way, but am pretty sure it doesn't. Would just like someone else to put me in my place.
That's correct. Evasion's awesome. Improved evasion only comes with high levels in a single core class (though I'm willing to bet there are some splat PrC classes that grant it.)
Your eyes glow blue, and you can see magical auras 120 feet away.
Okay, I imagine that other creatures could easily spot you from a good distance with the spell active.
How about if you're invisible? Or just turned away from whoever's looking your way?
Looks good to me. Very druid-y, ranger-y, and slightly different from the standard elf.
The weapons seemed a little strange, but thinking about it, they're easy to make, and being isolated, the wild elves could have easily developed their own preferred fighiting style. Plant poison immunity is a good swap for sleep inmunity, etc.
I'm unaware of a rule that says it HAS to be that way. Int. has been the wizard's prime stat since 1e.
Cha. as a caster's stat came along in 3e. But, you know that! It's great, AFAIC, but if you wanted to play with it, you'd have a very different sort of flavor.
A suave, charming wizard or a super-genius bard isn't what the iconic idea of the classes suggests, but you could play with it if you wanted to. A high-int bard would have more skill points than even a rogue, though. The party's rogue would be jealous. A high-cha. wizard, rather than hanging back and casting spells, would likely be the party's leader or "face" guy.
Not your "standard" way to play it, but I'm sure that somewhere out there, there's a party where the sorcerer is the smartest one in the group, and the wizard is the persuasive, dashing leader-type.
If the weapon wielder decided he could take the damage and doesn't drop his weapon, it's still red-hot. Could he do the same fire damage to whoever he attacks with it? That could be a balancing factor.
The 12th level fighter might think that's pretty cool, particularly if he's got some fire resistance going on! A low-level character would still have to drop it.
Yes. If you had minor magic as a rogue, then got a rogue talent as a shadowdancer, you could then take major magic.
If you had 10 or more levels of rogue, you could take an advanced talent as a shadowdancer, but the class levels don't stack.
Since fighters don't get rogue talents, a fighter/shadowdancer would only get the talents she could have as a rogue of her shadowdancer level. She could take minor magic, then major magic.
I see no way to do it without a level dip into shadowdancer with RAW.
If you're really dying to be a 20th lvl rogue AND have that awesome ability, you might want to bargain with your DM. It's worth more than a rogue talent. He might let you have it in exchange for giving up something really good, like evasion.
Hide in plain sight still requires the right background; either shadow or a favored environment, so it's not as good as plain old invisibility, in most cases. You could just get a magic item and be as hard to see as a shadowdancer, and you wouldn't need a shadow.
Agreed that bastard swords are cooler than long swords, flavorwise, but arcane strike would be a better feat than EWP for an EK. He doesn't get that many feats, after all, and the extra damage from the feat goes up with his caster levels. IOW, 1d8+1 or more is better than 1d10.
Bastard sword proficiency is a good feat for a sword-n-board fighter. That extra +1 avg. damage per hit over his career as a melee character will help.
