Dedlin's page

But is there any suggestions for the wizard, or is the build already good enough, LOL.

I am also playing an arcane trickster and have lots of fun with it and the use of partial cover from a tower shield in front of you to stealth. A spell sneaker would be awesome in this pairing.

So me and my wife are going to be playing in a friends game soon and I had the thought of playing a husband and wife duo, fighter and wizard. We are still talking about it but I wanted to see what others thought about this idea.

I was thinking that the fighter would specialize in more defense combat and act like a shield for the wizard, while still being competent in combat of course. They would use a warhammer and large steel shield and would have a tower shield strapped to their back so that they can pull it out to provide cover for themselves and the wizard when needed.

Look at the Phalanx fighter archetype from APG, one handed polearm use defensively is great for this idea.

IIRC VoP is very situational in terms of it's effect on a game. For a class that can self-buff like crazy like the Druid VoP can be quite powerful. For other classes the benefits associated with VoP simply aren't worth the trade offs.

+1

In two situations I have played vow of poverty, one was a monk, the other a druid. Both characters were more powerful than geared characters in my group because of it.

Dedlin wrote:

Well are group is trying not to be hehe...

PF purists at heart I guess

Since the words are most just copied and pasted the meanings are still the same so whether you wish to look at 3.5 or not the answers are normally there.

Sneak attack does apply to every roll though for scorching ray. That is a PF ruling if it matters.

thx wraithstrike

Well are group is trying not to be hehe...
PF purists at heart I guess

Glutton wrote:

It is detailed in the 3.5 book Rules Compendium pg 42. The short answer is No. The Long answer is No, single actions that give multiple attacks cannot trigger sneak attack, many shot, and scorching ray are specifically mentioned. There is also an longer reply given in a sage advice/faq/internet flotation device I cannot recall at this time. Hope this helps.

Technically, a full attack action IS a single action. Can archer rogues not get sneak attack on multiple arrow attacks in 3.5? ;P

OK....so dumb question but I post here for help, why am i talking about PFRPG yet getting 3.5 errata quoted at me. Our group is not looking backward at anything 3.5

If my statement was irrefutable and I had rules support, I would not have used the words "I believe" in my post. What's more, I would have provided the rules support upfront.

I appreciate your efforts, we have run into a few issues in my group with rule disputes and we want to be PF true and get away from the 3.5 rules we remember, and my DM feels the same way about he thinks you can't but none of us can find anything that refutes my definition and he is not excited about 27d6 on one target if all touch attacks hit. So I am trying to see if anyone can provide the proof in opposition or evidence that my interpretation is right.

Sneak attack would only apply to the first ray, I believe. Unless you hit multiple targets, then they would each be susceptible to sneak attack.

please show a rule on this. My argument is a greater invis'd archer could make 3 bow shots within 30 feet and they all would be sneaks, why you say, because each requires a separate attack roll. The only example where this is said not to be the case is vital strike and many shot, but only one attack roll is made here. this is the difference, each ray same target would all need a separate attack roll.

It is not that I don't believe you RD, I just need proof so I am prepared to discuss it with my DM.

any way I can get precision damage from scorching ray on all rays on same target? I am arcane trickster, and have 3 rays, and wonder if through greater invis or even flanking can each ray gain precision damage or always just the first?

Sorry to say seen this unfold under my DM, it is his choice, let him sit. He wants to waste to hours of his life sitting their not involved I say let him.

I am currently playing an arcane trickster in a campaign right now, we are 12 currently but tricksters are the stuff. spells scouting, tons of skill points if built intelligence heavy. Anyway rogue/wizard is how I like it, also been toying around with rogue witch, to throw a little healing in.

You rule!

Sorry I meant denied dex.. I was on my phone

First: Excellent f$$+ing product! It deserves the explicit. Great job.

Second: how bout a tab that has the skills, and the rules governing each skill use. You know like DC's and modifiers for perception/stealth diplomacy. Your product is so great this seems like a natural progression to me. Because things like stealthing and bluffing are combat related so I think they also fit in with the theme of the program.

There are two things: Invisibility, and the Invisible Condition. One is magical, the other not necessarily so. Both however grant the same numerical bonuses.

If you are hidden due to concealment, a high stealth check, and someone else's failed perception check, do you enjoy the same numerical benefits as a creature enjoying the Invisible Condition? Meaning: you get +2 on ranged attacks and treat targets as flat footed

Yes

Now in your case, the requirement of cover/concealment has been failed so you become observed by the potential observers that you have failed on this requirement just as you would become observed by them for failing the opposed roll.

-James

That is what I am trying to figure out James, is once I leave my cover after I have stealthed and they opposed are they immediately allowed another check, or do I have to do something "Ie. cast a spell" to draw their attention, which will also make me unstealthed anyway?

The specific words are a "firm voice" and "strong" nothing about loud. I believe it is hinting at mumbling doesnt count.
I am well aware of greater invis. and the penalties to snipe. and the vanish spell, and the fact that they will be able to hear me. But as long as I am stealthed by any means hey are denied their dex thus I ca spell snipe, and I have the ability to do it from more than 30 ft so i can max my close range. I just need help figureing out ways I can get a stealth check, such as fog and dakness because they grant cover and concealment which gives a check. I am assuming interposing hand (bixby's) which grants +4 cover, is full cover thus I can't sneak attack them even with shadowstrike. I just need clever ways to get myself stealth besides invis. because my GM will quickly find ways to negate my invis. but other was will keep him thinking.

per the PFRPG

"If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth. If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to use Stealth. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Stealth check if you can get to an unobserved place of some kind. This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast."

"Creating a Diversion to Hide: You can use Bluff to allow you to use Stealth. A successful Bluff check can give you the momentary diversion you need to attempt a Stealth check while people are aware of you."

"Action: Usually none. Normally, you make a Stealth check as part of movement, so it doesn't take a separate action. However, using Stealth immediately after a ranged attack (see Sniping, above) is a move action.

Special: If you are invisible, you gain a +40 bonus on Stealth checks if you are immobile, or a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if you're moving."

Thank you again for the discussion and help.

Ok, I have read the stealth ruling, so a few questions. besides darkness and fog, what else can I use to make stealth checks so I can spell snipe. Most importantly I am looking for other means of stealthing other than invis and G invis. secondly if I leave the (thing) that offered me concealment, do I automatically lose stealth?

OK, Zen archer is out, our group has a couple of irregulars and one is a zen archer. don't want to step on toes but it is a damn good archer. As a gm I constantly gave shit to the guy who was a shadow dancer and how he was playing the shadow with a rogue as its pet basically. little to soon too open that wound or hypocrisy on my part.

Next problem is my DM is saying he has seen no where in the pfrpg books(core, apg) that says you can sneak attack with rays or spells in general. I am beginning my search now but if anyone can quote this for me I would appreciate it.

As far as what is in the group, a witch, 2 bards a fighter and a dragon disciple monk. monk more than sorc. Cohorts are a waste of a feat.and probably no to the last one, also we are core mostly, very little outside the Pfrpg main books.

Dedlin wrote:

Ok, suggestions/tips needed to make an arcane trickster, rogue/wizard build that is also a trapsmith. (I am not interested in bombs from Alchy) I just need some thoughts or suggestions on how to make this work. Level 12 or 13 is the character level.

What do you really want him to be able to do?

People have different views on arcane tricksters, and many of those views the PrC simply doesn't deliver.

Also what sources do you have available?

As to the first, do you just want a build that finds traps, is stealthy and casts spells? Or is it about the gobs of sneak attack dice?

-James

In the case of the party I am in it is about contributing. I do not need to be the star and don't want to. So support, spell selection and some damage is always good.

Rockhopper, thank you great advce. I didn't even think about ray of frost. wow. I was also lookin at arcane blast to do with sneak as well.

Thank you for this great guide.

As far as good choices go, I can offer a few suggestions. If your only opinion on "Trapsmith" is being able to disable traps with reasonable success, rogue 4 may not be necessary.

I mean physically using traps in combat also. Per craft trap ability.

You'll need to pursue the evocation patron to get any blasts of worth, but it's hardly a sacrifice.

What do you mean here? I took evocation but it is worthless going to arcane trickster. Did you mean take fire specialization?

and JTOkay and Sean, thx, that is the way I am leaning. I am jus trying to decide feats other than craft wonderous item. And also any suggestions on weapons or should I forgo it, dont seem I may be all that effective.

Without being a min/maxer Elf seems out, storyline doesnt fit. thinking gnome for flavor or human for versatility. half-orc has some interesting racial swap, scavenger and +1 all saves, but not sure it fits the build. Also thinking halfling, with a kender flare to it. Mischievous, which works for gnome too.

Thoughts please I appreciate your input

Ok, suggestions/tips needed to make an arcane trickster, rogue/wizard build that is also a trapsmith. (I am not interested in bombs from Alchy) I just need some thoughts or suggestions on how to make this work. Level 12 or 13 is the character level.

bump

Dedlin wrote:

Nerfherder wrote:

I'm sorry but doing 2D6 with your Off hand whilst still retaining shield bonus seems untterly broken and I told him he could'nt do it, even thou now I see it is a legal build. IMO this has effectively eliminated TWF as a viable min/max and has relegated it to a colour build. I would hazard to say that Sword and Board far out weighs Two Handed fighting as a min/max build for ANY fighter.

Just a quick note, to get 2d6 as a medium creature he is using Heavy shield/bashing/and shield spikes. This is giving him a -4 to his main hand and offhand attacks. A heavy shield even mithral is still a one handed weapon, so make sure he is taking that -4 even with TWF feats. If he goes to a light shield the damage drops to 1d8 (w/bashing and spikes) and the normal TWF penalties apply.

I believe Shield Mastery eliminate all penelties however the fighter needs to be level 11 to take it.

It only eliminates the penalties for the shield. the weapon would still be at -4.

I'm sorry but doing 2D6 with your Off hand whilst still retaining shield bonus seems untterly broken and I told him he could'nt do it, even thou now I see it is a legal build. IMO this has effectively eliminated TWF as a viable min/max and has relegated it to a colour build. I would hazard to say that Sword and Board far out weighs Two Handed fighting as a min/max build for ANY fighter.

Just a quick note, to get 2d6 as a medium creature he is using Heavy shield/bashing/and shield spikes. This is giving him a -4 to his main hand and offhand attacks. A heavy shield even mithral is still a one handed weapon, so make sure he is taking that -4 even with TWF feats. If he goes to a light shield the damage drops to 1d8 (w/bashing and spikes) and the normal TWF penalties apply.

From the 13 to put it simply.

But my suggestion was before knowing there was a dedicated archer. Maybe a twohanded melee inquisitor build? Not certain why I keep throwing Inq at ya :P

You like what you like :)

Dedlin wrote:

I totally see what you are saying Kotroni, and was looking at doing a trickery domain cleric possibly. Honestly I a not a hug fan of Arcane casters, well playing them anyway. But was debating on it. I wold have to find a build I really liked and concept to go with it.

My question is this, other than dipping rogue for one level, any way as a cleric I can get Trapfinding so i can disable magical traps without wasting a dispel magic.

Kotroni: if you have a fun build for a trickster I am happy to hear it.

How about starting out as a 1st level rogue, and then have your character having a vision or calling of a deity with the luck or trickery domains and becoming a cleric-rogue.

I did fail to mention that one of the bards is an archer builds and cranks out dps.

Ximmrik - I am messing around with a cleric rogue build but as mentioned we have lots of healers.

Greg - I am unfamiliar with feather domain and will look into.

Thanks for all the suggestions I am still undecided at this moment

Oracle of Battle all the way. You pwn in melee and you're close enough to heal the others. Clouded vision has been a gift in role-play situations, so funny. Human is my choice. I can probably post a build later on tonight if you're interested.

Dark, I would love to see your build. I may have the opportunity in a different game to play one of those if My death seeking dwarf slayer (barbarian) dies.

But as mentioned above the group has 2 bards and possibly a witch so bringing in a battle cleric is redundant to the party. I was looking at another build I like divine caster but figured with a cleric I will have the channel ability that none of the others have plus I could domain other abilities. But I may be pushed towards a trickster build, which I have never played one of those.

I am just trying to find something that will fit in with the above classes without stepping on many toes and still being fun to play.

hmmm, what material are you allowed to use? I have actually been looking at doing a halfling rogue who uses the halfling opportunist prestige class from 'halflings of golarion'

I do not have that book, we tend to use the core books but are doing one group that uses the legacy of fire material and I could probably get permission for anything else by paizo that is current.

I totally see what you are saying Kotroni, and was looking at doing a trickery domain cleric possibly. Honestly I a not a hug fan of Arcane casters, well playing them anyway. But was debating on it. I wold have to find a build I really liked and concept to go with it.

My question is this, other than dipping rogue for one level, any way as a cleric I can get Trapfinding so i can disable magical traps without wasting a dispel magic.

Kotroni: if you have a fun build for a trickster I am happy to hear it.

Dedlin wrote:

On page 307 of the Bestiary 2,

Incorporeal Subtype: An incorporeal creature has
no physical body. An incorporeal creature is immune
to critical hits and precision-based damage (such as
sneak attack damage) unless the attacks are made using
a weapon with the ghost touch special weapon quality. In
addition, creatures with the incorporeal subtype gain the
incorporeal special quality (see page 298).

Hope this helps

There it is right in prints thanks Dedlin

YW, and my group found that about three weeks ago and the rogues were super happy.

I am in a group that has 2 bards (One Arcane Duelist and one standard) a 2WF Sword and Board build, a Dragon disciple (monk sorc build), and possibly a witch. I am trying to decided what role to fill, would think that either an oracle or cleric would fit the bill. However I want to have utility other than just heal, and lean to cleric for having the channel ability, without being a dedicated healer. Any suggestions to build, it is preferred to have a theme to go with it. Not as worried if it is melee capable as long as it has damage dealing ability.

LvL 12
25 point build.

Thx for input

On page 307 of the Bestiary 2,

Incorporeal Subtype: An incorporeal creature has
no physical body. An incorporeal creature is immune
to critical hits and precision-based damage (such as
sneak attack damage) unless the attacks are made using
a weapon with the ghost touch special weapon quality. In
addition, creatures with the incorporeal subtype gain the
incorporeal special quality (see page 298).

Hope this helps

Don't forget if you have a ghost touch weapon or spell in play you can precision damage and crit incorpreals.

I live in Washington state so time frame is not an Issue, I am a returned to college because of job market student, so I keep crazy hours. Mostly paying you the compliment, you have a flare for words.

Other than saying monk in the feat description You may want to specify unarmed attacks or something otherwise clerics and may be rangers will be highly upset by these feats in your campaign. Unless you willing to share.

I appreciate the advice and suggestions and feel that my offering the olive branch of changing feats is probably the most realistic action.

P.S. Inner Heru, I want to play in one of your games. But the whole teleport was a group effort. Because the Bard had become unimportant he was ignored by the party as well and means of travel that did include him were not sought.

Correct, I must have been thinking about something else at the time :)

How about using the Intimidate skill to demoralize, when there are no other combat options available? Intimidate is a class skill for a bard, so even if you have only one rank in it, you can have a +7 (1 for rank +3 for the ranked class skill bonus + 3 for CHA). Could be a +9 if you put 3 ranks into it, and could be as high as +11 at next level assuming you raise your CHA at 4th.

Not as effective as a trip, but no need to spend feats on improving your CMB or range attacks.

Would be fun to roleplay a street performer gnome demoralizing an enemy, too :-).

In general, bards seem to have a lot more options at 4th level, when they can at least get 2nd level spells, so no need to do anything drastic at 3rd.

I agree, it is such an easy thing to do to demoralize and give the enemy -1 while at the same time giving party plus ones to some things and the check is quite easy. 1d20 + intim skill vs. 10 + HD of mob.

thank you Heru, and I did not make it clear in my initial post, but you saw it the same way we did when my Gm and I sat down before I took the feet and talked about it. Why would this guy follow you? How did you meet.....all the stuff to create a roleplaying background for someone who is compatible with my paladin...it was like signing up for a dating service. We also discussed my DM controlling him, being his voice, running him as a npc and it never happened.
He was made, and has been a bump in the story at best. In the 2 levels I have had him (more specifically the 5 months of bi-weekly gaming) Levels 10-12 he has cast maybe 6 spells, and been little more than an after thought. I realize that is only about 10-12 sessions that last about 5-6 hours but I have mentioned to the GM about the lack of use he gets and a meh was my answer. I am looking for ideas on how to better utilize a cohort without him becoming over powered for just the expense of a feat, but also not feeling like my feat was wasted.

ok, out of curiosity as a player who feels he has wasted a feat on leadership address this issue with my DM. Everything seems to be designed to exclude my Cohort. It is the consensus that my cohort, I am a Paladin, he is a bard makes my character to broken, and thus my cohort does not seem to be included in much solutions. IE...we have to use windwalk and he gets left behind, or teleport doesnt have enough room for him. Things like that.
How do you as a GM handle leadership, or as a player how does your GM handle it. Looking for a little help here.

BlindProphet00 wrote:

Dedlin wrote:

the only thing I would say is taking power attack and combat expertise to start gives you a feat that you will probably use one or other at one time, not together. I could be wrong. you may invest in selective channel to start along with one of the previous two, depending if you feel you will need the ac more or less with the heavy armor.

Just a thought.

Good point. I mainly just took it so by level 8 War domain power so i can have more options open. I guess it could be taken later. I had trouble finding good low level feats. The main reason i didn't think selective channeling would be worth it was because doing 2d6 healing with no other bonus's in combat wouldn't be worth it, and i i needed to heal i would be better off with a cure light or cure mod. I am also inexperienced with clerics though so my assumptions could be wrong.

You are aware that it is an AoE? That's 2d6 on _all_ your allies, which on average is as good as casting cure light on all of them. We also use it to stabilize and save people all the time. It is really good.

Yup Kamelguru summed it up AoE heal 30' radius 2d6 to everything, selective helps you not heal the bad guys. Channel is by far the best thing to happen to clerics since losing heavy armor :)

the only thing I would say is taking power attack and combat expertise to start gives you a feat that you will probably use one or other at one time, not together. I could be wrong. you may invest in selective channel to start along with one of the previous two, depending if you feel you will need the ac more or less with the heavy armor.

Just a thought.

the only thing I would say is taking power attack and combat expertise to start gives you a feat that you will probably use one or other at one time, not together. I could be wrong. you may invest in selective channel to start along with one of the previous two, depending if you feel you will need the ac more or less with the heavy armor.

Just a thought.

Err I think you're missing my point. Allow me to give an example.

Assume a 3rd level half orc ranger with 18 str.
feats: improved unarmed strike, aspect of the beast (claws), multiattack, endurance

Attack routine: unarmed strike +7 (1d3+4), bite +5 (1d4+2), 2 claws +5 (1d4+2)
average damage= 6+4.5+9=19.5 assuming all attacks hit

Assume another 3rd level half orc ranger with 18 str.
feats: power attack, aspect of the beast (claws), weapon focus (claw), endurance

Attack routine: bite +6 (1d4+6), 2 claws +7 (1d4+6) - including power attack
average damage=8.5+17=25.5 - additionally he will hit more often

Note how by avoiding wasting extra feats on unarmed strike and multiattack (as well well as avoiding making the natural attacks secondary half str bonus!) you can make the build much more efficient.

I see your point, I don't care for either way. I think natural attacks for PC's as primary attacks should be a bit better but whatever.

The other post you are in summed it up...if you like romans hehe...I play with a group where we are more storyline centric on our character builds than minmax so stylized shield fighter at some losses by specializing is how we play.