Party just fought a clay golem.
Is Cursed wound meant to be a throwback to 1st edition D&D when you had to be a 17th level caster to heal wounds after being cursed by a clay golem?
Our party was forced to leave due to Cursed Wound. We had no way to get rid of it at lvl 8. It's a DC 29 counteract check with a level of 10. Normally a creature level 10 would only be a lvl 5 counteract effect, but the text says it's a level 10 effect.
That would require a lvl 15 caster getting a critical success or a level 17 caster getting a success with a heal.
Is there any errata on this?
Clay golems were never this tough in Pathfinder 1st edition. Not that I don't like a much more dangerous golem, but boy it sure drove us out of the adventure. It's going to takes probably a month to get this cleared up of downtime.
I'm reading this fighter feat Power Attack. I don't understand why you would ever use it. It takes two actions. It calculates as a second attack, so a -5 penalty to use same as a second attack. It does one extra weapon die of damage without the ability modifier bonus.
Why would you ever use this?
Is there some other feat combination this is useful with?
It seems like a very badly designed fighter feat.
How do you determine statistics and CR of a troop? The troop template lists characteristics, but not statistics.
Are there any additional rules for designing troops to determine damage and CR? Or is it more approximation?
Any info on building troops would be much appreciated.
I'm trying to build tiefling troops for the PCs to fight.
Choose a school of magic you already have Spell Focus in. The bonus to save DCs provided by Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus for that school increases by 1. You can expend one use of mythic power as part of casting a spell from your chosen school to force any of the spell's targets to roll their saving throws twice, taking the lower result.
It isn't written the same as Greater Spell Focus, which indicates add +1 and it stacks with Spell Focus.
This says add 1 to each and they stack for a total of +4? Is that how it is being run? Or is it intended that it increase the benefits of Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus by +1?
After much grousing and malingering, I've decided to give Mythic Adventures a shot. Not sure how much I'll like it given the insane difficulty of challenging the players, but I'm taking the Mythic Adventures challenge. I'm going to keep an ongoing journal filled with my methods for challenging insanely powerful PCs.
After initially thinking I would have to reign in my PCs by using very restrictive character building, wealth by level, and the like, I've decided to go in the opposite direction by giving them so much that those factors won't much matter once I modify encounters.
Mythic Adventures is built for playing demigods and legendary heroes. The kind of characters you read about in the various ancient myths that split mountains, cut down armies alone, and cause realms of giants to quiver in fear when said hero enters their territory as they try to kill him (or her) without the hero noticing.
I'm going to embrace the idea. I've read stories of that kind. I feel it is my job as DM to create that type of story for the mythic heroes. I want them to be legends at the end of this feared by demon lords in the deepest layers of The Abyss.
This is the combination that I have to deal with that Paizo has allowed into their game.
Barbarian level 12
Guardian Path available in Mythic Tier 1 powers:
1. Ever Ready (Ex): Whenever you make an attack of opportunity, you gain a bonus on the attack and damage rolls equal to your mythic tier. You can make attacks of opportunity while flat-footed, even if you don't have the Combat Reflexes feat. At 3rd, 6th, and 9th tier, the number of attacks of opportunity you can make each round increases by one.
2. Retributive Reach (Ex): Treat your reach as 5 feet greater than normal for the purpose of determining whether or not you can make an attack of opportunity. If a creature provokes an attack of opportunity within this area of increased reach, you can expend one use of mythic power to gain a bonus equal to your tier on the attack roll and damage roll of the attack of opportunity.
This makes it impossible for anything to fight the barbarian in melee without receiving an AoO counter-attack. If they attempt to move farther than 10 feet away, he will pounce on them for full attacks closing the distance.
This combination not only screws the DM, but screws the player as well. I will have absolutely no choice but to employ very dirty tactics to hammer the barbarian character. Paizo has created a rule combination that hurts the DM by making it impossible to challenge the barbarian with this combination in melee combat where he shines, but at the same time hurts the player because the DM will have to counter this complete and utter ridiculous combination Paizo's rule team didn't foresee by not ever allowing a serious enemy to get into melee combat with him.
How can Paizo's rule team take such pain staking effort to change Crane Style single block, while at the same time allowing this insanely overpowered combination that no other character but the barbarian can do to exist? Have any of you had this in your epic game yet? It's coming my way. I want to know how you dealt with it. I feel my only option is going to be to completely avoid the barbarian in melee and do mean stuff to him like constant disarms, no save spells, and ranged attacks. Paizo not limiting this combination has screwed this player. I'm not going to waste my time arguing with him to tone this down when Paizo should have never even allowed it in the game.
Since Paizo has decided to put in the game Mythic Combat Reflexes along with Come and Get Me with all the other options for extending a barbarian's reach with size boosts and reach boosts, how are DMs dealing with this utterly insane combination?
The only thing I can think of is ranged and invisible attackers (which the cleric will purge).
Since they decided to put in Greater Elemental Blood, even flying is a useless ability against a Greater Beast Totem barbarian. Invisibility and Concealment aren't much of a defense if the Barbarian spends two feats and gets Mythic Blind-fight as well.
So how do DMs stop this beast at high level? Is there a way or did Paizo just put in a martial character that is literally unstoppable against 95% of what he fights? (The 5% I'm thinking will be well-prepared casters with help using no save spells like euphoric tranquility that will slow the barb down until it gets cleaned off him by the cleric or mage).
I think this is the worst thing I've ever seen Paizo put in the game.
I'm going to let the players have their crazy abilities. The mythic monsters they fight are going to have equally crazy abilities whether it is equivalent PCs built like characters or mythic monsters of legend that can shrug off even the attacks of mythic enemies. How else did they survive to become creatures of legend if they couldn't?
Mythic Rank: A creature with the mythic subtype gains 1 to 10 mythic ranks, representing its overall mythic power. Its rank is generally equal to 1/2 its original CR.
Armor Class Bonus: Add the creature's mythic rank to all of its armor classes including touch and flat-footed. A mythic creature is harder to strike.
Bonus Hit Points: Add 100 hit points times the creatures mythic rank. Multiply this amount x 2 for four PCs, x3 for 5 PCs, x 4 for 6 PCs. If you feel the creature needs more hit points, add more until you have a creature capable of surviving long enough to make for an interesting and challenging battle. For pure brute creatures, doubling the above numbers might be necessary.
Damage Reduction: A creature with 5 to 10 Hit Dice gains DR 5/-. A creature with 11 or more Hit Dice gains DR 10/- base. Add the creature’s mythic rank to its damage reduction. If the creature already has damage reduction, it adds epic to the qualities needed to bypass that reduction. If the damage reduction granted from this subtype has a larger numerical value than the creature's original damage reduction, increase the creature's original damage reduction to the amount of the epic DR. For example, a monster with DR 5/bludgeoning that gains DR 10/epic from the mythic subtype gains DR 10/bludgeoning and epic. There are enough ways to bypass damage reduction in the game, give mythic creatures damage reduction that works.
Spell Resistance: If the creature has spell resistance, add its mythic rank to its spell resistance.
Mythic Power: The creature gains the mythic power and surge universal monster abilities. Creatures gain a number of mythic surges equal to twice their mythic rank. The monster's surge die depends on its rank, as summarized in Table: Mythic Subtype Abilities. Multiply a mythic creatures mythic surges by 2 for 4 PCs, by 3 for 5 PCs, by 4 for 6 PCs (and continue the progression as needed).
Ability Bonus: At 2nd rank and every 2 ranks thereafter, the monster gains a permanent +2 bonus to an ability score. If it has multiple bonuses, it can apply them to the same ability score or to different ability scores.
Mythic Feats: At 1st rank and every 2 ranks thereafter, the monster gains a mythic feat. It must meet all of the prerequisites for this feat.
Mythic Attack: Add the creature’s mythic rank to its attack and damage rolls and any special attack DCs the creature has.
Mythic Defenses: Add the creature’s mythic rank to all of its non-attack powers whether auras, special defenses, or anything else to do with the creature.
Mythic Durability: A mythic creature can spend a mythic surge to heal 25% of its hit points as a free action.
Mythic Resilience: A mythic creature can cancel any powerful effect used against by using a mythic surge as a free action shrugging off the attack. A critical, a spell that lands, or any effect used against. It can cancel the effects of a mythic feat like Vital Strike or Power Attack by spending a mythic surge.
Mythic Saving Throws: Add the creature’s mythic rank to all its saving throws. If a mythic creature makes its saving throw, any effect used against has no effect. Mythic creatures shrug off attacks. If a mythic creature fails its save, it takes only half damage or half the effect (duration, ability damage, etc.) from the attack.
Mythic Regeneration: A mythic creature’s regeneration should be multiplied by its mythic rank for creatures with an established rate of fast healing or regeneration. If a creature does not have a starting regeneration, 5 or 10 times its mythic rank is a good starting point. Multiple by 2 for 5 PCs, x 3 for 6 PCs. A mythic creature’s regeneration cannot be halted until the creature is rendered unconscious.
Mythic Initiative: Add a mythic creature’s rank to its initiative. A mythic creature gets to take an extra standard action ten lower its regular initiative.
Mythic Power Renewal: A mythic creature can renew one its powers by spending a mythic surge. For example, a mythic dragon can use its break weapon the following round by spending a mythic surge rather than waiting 1d4 rounds.
Additional Mythic Abilities: The monster gains a number of mythic abilities equal to its MR + 1. Such abilities can be drawn from the mythic path abilities or the mythic abilities listed with the monsters, or it can be a new ability you create by taking inspiration from those abilities. These abilities should be thematically appropriate for the creature.
Some new monster abilities are especially powerful; at the GM's discretion, they can count as two abilities toward this total. For example, the mythic fire giant's fire vortex ability could count as two mythic abilities.
In place of a mythic ability, the monster may gain a universal monster ability, such as rend or pounce.
CR: When you're finished adding abilities to the monster, add 1/2 the monster's mythic rank to its CR to determine its new CR. Evaluate the monster at its new CR using Table: Monster Statistics by CR to make sure it falls within the expected values for its new CR.
XP: Change the creature's XP award to match its new CR. Don’t worry about xp too much. The main reward for defeating mythic creatures is completing a mythic challenge.
I'm getting ready to run Wrath of the Righteous using Mythic Adventures. I'm finding that enemies are not viable in a mythic campaign, even mythic enemies. They do not have sufficient hit points and offensive/defensive capabilities to stand up to a party for even a round or two.
Was the expectation for Mythic Adventures really one and two round combats even for Demon Lords? Was it intended that the DM waste his time statting out Mythic enemies only to have them destroyed in 1 or 2 rounds? That was the design goal? Have the game designers stated that mythic enemies are there to be loot pinatas that mythic characters destroy within seconds of meeting them?
1. Fleet Charge and Mythic Initiative: The barbarian is bad enough given the whole Beast Totem pounce. Now we have Fleet Charge and Amazing Initiative. Two uses of Mythic Power and all characters gets two extra attacks on top of being able to charge. So with haste past 10th level, we're talking an average of 5 to 7 attacks using Power Attack and other such abilities.
To counter this ability, they give mythic creatures DR 5 or 10/epic and about 5 more hit points per mythic tier? How does that math even work? The stat bonuses don't matter because they are offset by the PC stat bonuses.
2. Damage Reduction: Paizo has turned damage reduction into a useless ability. Something written on the sheet that never need be accounted for at high level. There are so many ways to bypass DR in regular Pathfinder they felt the need to add more ways to bypass DR in Mythic, including epic DR.
I don't understand that design choice. Though DR is so impotent even when it functions at higher levels that it does next to nothing in Pathfinder. It is equally useless in Mythic Adventures save against non-mythic creatures.
3. Spell DCs are so high as to be impossible to make for mythic creatures. So battles consist of casters getting off some form of Dazing Spell or something like color spray and the physical damage PCs launching a bunch of attacks on the monster ending it in a round or two.
In regular Pathfinder this is still a problem for most brute monsters, now it is a problem for every type of monster and enemy. Then again in Mythic saves barely matter because the physical damage dealers are going to launch multiple boosted attacks to destroy any single mythic creature that wanders out.
I guess I'm wondering why make a book about mythic characters and not supply enemies capable of withstanding them? Mythic PCs far outclass mythic monsters, even demon lords.
It seems that quite a bit of thought was put into designing mythic PCs, but not much thought was put into how to challenge them? Or was it assumed that DMs wishing to make Mythic adventures would tailor everything?
Side note, why does the Champion, Archmage, and Trickster vastly outclass the Guardian and Hierophant? Why did they waste time building on a weak ability like channeling? Channeling is very weak past the first few levels. A Heirophant ability that doubled channeling damage should have been number one on the list if they wanted to make channeling viable at all at high level. When Archmages are receiving Channeled Power at tier 6 and Hierophant's best ability is immunity to crits (but not sneak attack or crit effects), there's a serious design discrepancy.
I feel after reading Mythic Adventures that it is a very disappointing book. It doesn't seem very viable if you follow the Pathfinder rules. It seems like running it would be nothing but a chore as you watch the players tear everything apart in a round or two, you wonder why you even bothered to write anything up at all. I know normal Pathfinder can become like this as well, but mythic seems to have not even tried to challenge the PCs.
I've been weighing the pros and cons of both classes for a Mythic campaign. I know full casters are powerful. At the same time casting up to 6th level spells while doing amazing physical damage is a powerful combination as well.
Which class do you think would do better against a majority of creatures?
1. Demon Lords: I've been looking at demon lords. They are immune to a lot. They have an incredibly high SR. It seems like a caster would have major problems against a demon lord for a variety of reasons, especially a mythic demon lord.
2. Casters can wipe out large numbers of enemies far quicker than physical damage dealers. There's not much better than AoE damage or save or suck spells for eliminating large numbers of enemies. Some of the mythic powers allow for a crazy area on save or done spells. Not sure that is clerics or oracles.
3. Casters have more versatile defensive options. Do 7th to 9th level spells have a greater advantage for defensive options than 1st to 6th on the cleric spell list? I'm not so sure.
Would have far superior combat ability as a warpriest trump having 7th to 9th level spells as a cleric oracle in a mythic campaign? What do you think?
This class needed some limits on its capabilities. Not sure why they weren't installed from the beginning, but I'm going to put some limits in. Too much battlefield flooding with unlimited summon monster spells active. The eidolon isn't so much better than the Master Summoner being able to cast limitless Summon Monster balances out the weaker eidolon.
Even a regular summoner can only have one active summon monster spell without an active eidolon. Not sure why the Master Summoner would be so much more effective than a regular summoner at summoning. Makes no sense given the Eidolon is effectively weaker even at lvl 20 than summon monster 9 or gate.
Summoning Mastery (Sp): Starting at 1st level, a master summoner can cast summon monster I as a spell-like ability a number of times per day equal to 5 + his Charisma modifier. The summoner can use this ability when his eidolon is summoned. Only one summon monster spell may be in effect while the eidolon is summoned. If the summoner’s eidolon is not summoned, the summoner can have two summon monster spells active. The master summoner may have an additional summon monster spell active for every 6 levels past first. He can have three active at 7th, four active at 13th, to a maximum of five active at 19th. This ability otherwise functions as the summoner’s normal summon monster I ability.
This ability replaces the summoner’s normal summon monster I ability and shield ally.
This is the first time someone has run a Master Summoner. We're finding it is an annoying class. Not so much because of the summoning ability, but because of the exploitative nature of the summons.
1. Lantern Archons: There name should be "Bane of Any Creature with Low Touch AC."
At lvl 10 the EVIL (I emphasize this because of the absurdity) Master Summoner summons in Lantern Archons to kill paladins (any martial with heavy armor and a low dex) and dragons (specifically a good-aligned silver dragon).
Even with a +3 attack, the sheer number of Lantern Archons with flight bolstered by his bard henchmen does immense damage.
The Master Summoner with Superior Summoning summons three of these creatures in a round on average at lvl 10. He brings in a battery of Lantern Archons and fires laser beams that bypass all DR or energy resistance with the possibility of critting.
How long does this creature remain useful? I can see it remaining useful to lvl 20 given touch ACs of many dragons and powerful martial opponents in heavy armor rarely get much past 15 to 18.
Does it seem lame to anyone else that a celestial creature can damage even other good creatures like paladins and good dragons?
2. Lightning Elementals: "Master of Disarm".
What's up with the +10 disarm when charging?
These creatures are summoned a short distance away from a weapon using martial. They charge the creature disarming it. They fly, so they can come in at any angle and charge. Even an augmented Medium Lightning Elemental gets a +18 disarm when charging.
The chances of any martial standing up to 2 to 4 or more such disarm attempts is pretty poor unless they are specifically prepared to counter disarm. With the disarm ruling allowing a creature to take the weapon into its hands once disarmed, a lightning elemental disarms, takes the weapon, and flies off. There is nothing that says an elemental can't pick something up, so it does.
These tactics are rinse and repeat over and over and over again because of their effectiveness for the past 10 levels. They could seriously use some toning down. Lantern Archon energy beams should be given an energy type or at least not affect good creatures. They may seem like a moderate ability for a creature at low level, but when used in bunches by summoners this ability is nuts.
The +10 for Spark Leap should be halved. Way too much of a bonus when controlled by a player that can repeat this tactic with multiple lightning elementals any battle against armed martial opponents. Renders them near useless nearly every battle very early.
I now see why Pathfinder Society banned them. Too much cheese with summoned creatures. We've now banned them in our games. We don't mind powerful, but powerful and overly cheesy due to specific abilities of creatures is nothing we like.
A Master Summoner wanders around the battlefield with a regular invisibility spell active summoning a ton of creatures that do very specialized things that destroy enemies because these specialized attacks render them unable to effectively retaliate. Incredibly annoying class. The above two creatures are a major reason why.
This is my first time playing a Synthesist. The first time our group has seen one in action. I want to know if the following is common:
1. I've reached 9th level without taking a real point of damage. I've only taken temporary hit point damage. I've never had a character reach this level taking no real hit point damage.
2. My AC is high. I already have AC 30 at 9th lvl with minimal magic items with only the mage armor buff.
3. My strength is already 26 at lvl 9.
Is the Synthesist really this strong?
It's our second time with a Master Summoner. Though they are no where near as durable as a Synthesist, their versatility through creatures is pretty amazing. Air Elementals and Lantern Archons are nasty little creatures in groups.
As a DM I think Paizo's change to Crane Wing is clumsy and ruins the Crane Style chain of feats. Whoever made the decision to change Crane Wing didn't do so in a fashion that maintained Crane Riposte as a highly useful and attractive feat as the last in the chain. The penultimate feat in a chain of feats should be useful and attractive to a player.
There is very little incentive to invest in Crane Riposte as one deflection while using Total Defense will not be competitive in a fight against enemies using full attack actions. And reducing Fighting Defensive from -2 to -1 is negligible given all the attack increases provided by spells and magic items at higher levels. Thus it ruins the best designed martial arts feat chain conceptually and mechanically.
I don't like that as a DM. I think it is unfair to players who have invested in this chain of feats and unfair to martials who already experience the "watching through the window" factor when casters unleash spells that render enemies trivial. This definitely hurts monks the worst, especially monks that chose to use a weapon.
That being said I believe this change to Crane Wing was warranted for one reason: the level you can obtain it at. It was far too easy to obtain at too low a level rendering many combats against low level martial creatures trivial. If this feat were obtained at level 10 plus like say Greater Beast Totem or Come and Get Me, it would be fine as is.
Thus I'm going to incorporate the following change to maintain the usefulness of Crane Riposte:
Add the following line to Crane Riposte:
If the attack you designate your dodge bonus to AC from Crane Wing against while fighting defensively misses, you can make an AoO against the attacker.
I'm tempted to add the following to Crane Wing:
Add your level or half your level as a Dodge bonus to AC against a single attack per round in place of deflection while fighting defensively. I'll see how useful the +4 dodge bonus to AC is before I add this modification. I think scaling might be better given the scaling of attack rolls.
If the Paizo game designers had thought more about how Crane Riposte was affected by Crane Wing, I would have had no problem with the change.
The AoO gained while dodging the attack is more integral to the imagery and concept of the style than the deflection. Dodge an attack and attack back like so many martial arts teach. And not while using the Total Defense action, which makes it appear as though you are doing nothing offensively during a fight.
This is what I'm doing to keep the integrity of the Crane Martial Style while incorporating the Crane Wing change. I like the style. I don't like seeing it made as unattractive as the change has made it.
Help me understand how the hit points work.
Summoner: 14 Con
1. With the above baseline, the following is true?
Summoner has 10 hit points when not fused.
When fused the Summoner has 9 hit points and the Eidolon has 6 hit points for a total of 15 hit points combined.
My summoner personal pool of hit points drop when fused?
2. If I add a +2 enhancement bonus to my Con from a magic item, the following is true?
Summoner has 10 hit points (8 from HD, +1 from 13 Eidolon Con, +1 from enhancement bonus) and the eidolon has 7 (5 from HD, +1 from Con, +1 from enhancement bonus from Con). 17 total hit points.
3. Synthesist gains large size from evolution surge spell gaining +4 size bonus to Con.
Summoner has 11 hit points (8 from HD, +1 eidolon con, +2 from size bonus to Con) and the eidolon has 8 (5 from HD, +1 con, +2 size bonus to Con). Total of 19 hit points.
The following is true:
The summoner's hit points drop when fused if Con is higher than the eidolon's Con?
Summoner hit points and eidolon temporary hit points increase when the eidolon's Con increases from enhancement or size bonuses?
Is this how it works? You have to track all this depending on the circumstances?
Fey Form I
School transmutation (polymorph); Level alchemist 3, magus 3, sorcerer/wizard 3
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (a piece of the creature whose form you plan to assume)
Duration 1 minute/level (D)
When you cast this spell, you can assume the form of any Small or Medium creature of the fey type. If the form you assume has any of the following abilities, you gain the listed ability: climb 30 feet, fly 30 feet (average maneuverability), swim 30 feet, darkvision 60 feet, low-light vision, and scent. If the form you assume has the aquatic subtype, you gain the aquatic and amphibious subtypes.
Small fey: If the form you take is that of a Small fey, you gain a +2 size bonus to your Dexterity. If the form you take has natural armor, you gain a +1 natural armor bonus.
Medium monstrous fey: If the form you take is that of a Medium fey, you gain a +2 size bonus to your Dexterity. If the form you take has a natural armor bonus, you gain a +2 natural armor bonus.
Fey Form II
Tiny fey: If the form you take is that of a Tiny fey, you gain a +4 size bonus to your Dexterity and a –2 penalty to your Strength. If you take a form that has natural armor, you gain a +1 natural armor bonus.
Large fey: If the form you take is that of a Large fey, you gain a +2 size bonus to Strength and a +2 size bonus to your Dexterity. If the form you take has natural armor, you gain a +4 natural armor bonus.
Fey Form III
Diminutive fey: If the form you take is that of a Diminutive fey, you gain a +6 size bonus to your Dexterity and a –4 penalty to your Strength. If the form you take has natural armor, you gain a +1 natural armor bonus.
Huge fey: If the form you take is that of a Huge fey, you gain a +4 size bonus to your Strength and a –2 penalty to your Dexterity. If the form provides natural armor, you gain a +6 natural armor bonus.
Fey Form IV
I'm basing the spell on Monstrous Physique. Fey Form is a more beneficial form for dexterity-based fighters. It seems most of the polymorph forms are focused solely on strength-based characters. I wanted to create a spell to create a character with more of a dex focus. I figure turning into Fey is a good way to accomplish this.
You can't get their spell-like abilities or the majority of their supernatural abilities. Do think monstrous physique is a good analogue for a fey form of spells? Or is it too low level?
Physically the fey aren't very powerful. They have a ton of magical abilities. I figure if you can turn into elementals and dragons, I don't see why you couldn't turn into a fey.
Any assistance in spell design or example of a fey form spell would be helpful. [I]Monstrous physique/I] isn't very helpful to a dex-based fighter. I think it would be pretty cool to turn into a little faerie and attack someone like a stinging bee as a Magus.
Do I have this straight?
I want to make an Eidolon that can craft items.
1. As long as I take Basic Magic and his caster level is appropriate, then he meets the prereqs for Item Crafting Feats? So an Eidolon with 3 HD (and thus caster level 3) would qualify for the Craft Wondrous Item Feat?
2. The Eidolon can Craft an item without the meeting the prereqs by adding +5 to the DC? So he could craft a Belt of Incredible Dexterity+4 choosing to make it CL 3 for a DC 8+5 (not having spell) for a total of DC 13?
3. If the Eidolon has neither the caster level to cast the appropriate spell nor the spell on his spell list, can he still make a Wondrous Item that requires that spell?
Let's say he wants to make a Pearl of Power for lvl 5 spells.
He sets the caster level at 1 to make it easy not carrying about dispels and the like.
So does that work like this:
Base DC 6 (CL 1 + Base 5) +5 (Unable to cast lvl 5 spells) = Total DC 11
Is that how Item Crafting works? So you don't need spell prereqs with SLAs or the actual spell or caster level on your list?
This ability as written has all kinds of problems.
The first part is fine. I get to fire an arrow with a single-target ranged touch attack spell.
How does the second part work? It needs some errata badly. That single sentence bolded makes this ability utterly useless. If all the effects of the spell are lost in the round it is cast, then there is no way you can ever fire more than once since you cannot use Ranged Spellstrike with Spell Combat to get multiple attacks.
This thing is basically not useable with Scorching Ray unless I can Quicken the Spell. So is Ranged Spellstrike only supposed to be useable with a Quickened Scorching Ray or Quickened Magus Arcana?
In essence you're giving up Spell Recall and Improved Spell Recall to be able to fire a ranged scorching ray with Quicken Spell? Is that how it is intended to work?
How does this class do at high level? I'm thinking the 12 to 20 range once enemies gain access to greater dispel magic and word spells that can get rid of tons of summoned creatures with one casting.
How do the summoned creatures do at high level in combat against creatures with higher ACs and hit points?
I'm thinking of playing a summoner of some kind. Our campaign should get to level 15 or so. How do the various summoners perform at high level?
During one of the endless caster-martial discussions, the dragon in the antimagic shell was brought up. How do you beat a Great Wyrm dragon in an antimagic shell if the dragon is played tactically well?
antimagic field is a lvl 6 spell that can only be taken off by the lvl 9 mage's disjunction and even if you use that spell, only a 20% chance at lvl 20.
That means the Great Wyrm Red dragon can snatch and grapple with ease with very little chance of anyone able to break out because none of their magic is active while they're doing so.
The only things I can think of without allowing the whole environmental set up like crumbling a cave roof on them is an archer of some kind, ranger set up for dragon hunting, or some barbarian build. Maybe a caster calling up his own powerful creature might do it as well. I believed a called creature cannot be gotten rid of with antimagic shell. But there doesn't seem to be a whole lot capable of challenging a dragon in an antimagic shell.
Have any of you DMs used this on your players? How did they deal with it?
Undead and contructs are immune to any attack requiring a fort save that doesn't affect objects. But both suffer the effects of critical hits and can be staggered.
I've always played animated objects as immune to critical hits. Thus they would be immune to Staggering Critical due to being immune to critical hits. They are not immune to being staggered if by some means other than a critical such as a spell.
I'm leaning towards immune to Staggering Critical. They are already immune to most of the critical feats being immune to stunning, exhaustion, and the like. Dazing Assault and Staggering Critical have always been one of those gray areas. You can daze and stagger creatures immune to stun. That's why I see a lot of fighters choose Dazing Assault over Stunning Assault.
I'd like to hear how others run it.
I have a magus player looking to boost the damage on his Spellstrike shocking grasp by taking a level of sorcerer to gain Bloodline Arcana that boost damage per die like Draconic/Elemental (Primal).
He has an 8 charisma. He doesn't care about being able to cast sorcerer spells.
Before I let this pass, is there any rule saying you must meet the prereq stat for a class to gain a level in it? I don't meant RAI. Is there any actual rule stopping him from doing this? We like to play as close to the rules as possible to make it everything consistent.
How do other DMs adjudicate AoOs and Come and Get Me? Do you look at an attack of opportunity like a normal attack? And give the barbarian the AoO?
The ability says the barbarian gives vicious counter-attacks when attacked. Is an AoO considered an "attack" or is an "attack of opportunity" something specific and different?
Some examples of when this comes up:
2. Two Come and Get Me barbarians are going toe to toe. Do they provoke from every AoO and whose AoOs go first? How do you sort out the absurdity of a Come and Get Me exchange?
3. The barbarian purposely goes running through others to provoke AoOs and counter-attacks each AoO as he does. This I could see him counter-attacking.
How do some GMs handle this? I'm leaning towards being extremely specific with the language and saying an AoO is not an attack for Come and Get Me activation to elminate some of the absurdity.
And specify an attack as an active attack on the opposition's round that is either a full attack or some type of active melee or ranged attack rather than an AoO.
I know by RAW it is any attack most likely including an AoO. I'm not sure wht RAI might be. I know as a DM, I would like to see how some other DMs deal with these types of situations.
First, do you plan on running another campaign after you finish Jade Regent?
If so, how do I get in? Do you recruit in the recruitment forum?
I've been reading your game threads. You seem to run a fun game with tons of roleplaying. I love roleplaying. If you ever do another campaign, I'll be on the lookout. Keep me in mind. I want to get in a roleplay heavy PbP game.
We all know there are going to be quests in this game. Use the already great material created by Pathfinder in its adventure paths to make quest lines.
So if I make a lvl 1 human fighter starting in Sandpoint, I can level up following the Rise of the Runelords modules in a quest line moving from place to place. That would blow anything I've ever done in WoW or Everquest away.
I want to see all the creative adventures brought to life. I want to wander in ancient Thassilonian dungeons. I want to face horrors from Carrion Crown in a dark gothic area like Ustalav. I want to wander Caliphas interacting with their undead underworld. I want to sale out to islands and crash land on an island and search for Ancient Azlanti ruins.
I want to do all this in a giant virtual world where everything is brought to life visually. That would be an experience that would make me want to play an MMORPG again. So many of these worlds are carbon copies of each other. I want a world that is fresh with adventure paths that start at lvl 1 and go all the way to max level like I'm doing an adventure and I can get a sense of accomplishment and completion rather than doing the same old thing over and over again with raid bosses and the like.
Give me an adventure experience in a Pathfinder MMORPG unlike any other game has done to date. Give me quest lines with plots I can finish throughout the entire life of my character. Give me side adventures to kill time. Give me the Galaditorial pits of Tymon. Give me active raids on cities by orcs hordes and dragons that happen while I'm wandering around a city buying my gear. Give me an adventure experience that can make everything fresh again.
I don't want to walk in. Play for a little while doing redundant quests and PvP until the game seems like nothing more than a WoW clone. Give everything a creative theme like you've done in so much of Patnfinder. Immerse me in a world rather than simply giving me a game to play. Make everything seem like I'm doing it for a reason.
Like when I fight in the galadiator pits of Tymon, don't just give me gear. Let me wager my own cash or win a prize or gain rank rather than PvP points.
Give me an experience like I get out of Pathfinder rather than a standard MMORGP experience that I've already had a 10 or more times. Make it unique and standout. And most of all don't forget to use the material from the game world and adventure paths that we already enjoy. Don't make something up for the MMORPG when you already have much better material already created to mine for the game.
I'm running an evoker. For some reason I overlooked Dazing Spell until now.
I was looking through the bestiary monster types. It looks like almost nothing is immune to daze. In fact, I didn't find a creature immune to daze. A bunch of creature are immune to mind-effecting spells and stunning. But nothing seems to be immune to daze. Perhaps there are some monsters immune, but I didn't see any.
So if I take Dazing Spell I get to daze multiple targets for multiple rounds while doing damage to them all if they fail their Reflex save? Is this the case?
And if so, what are some DMs experience with this metamagic feat. It seems like the type of metamagic feat that makes encounters trivial. Is that the case? Or is there some balancing factor to it? Is it not as bad as looks on paper? If I get it, I'm really leaning towards taking it, will my DM cry? I don't know if taking a feat that will make a DM want to rip his hair out is such a good idea.
I just want to know if Dazing Spell is useable and doesn't make the game trivial.
As a lover of old kung fu and martial arts flicks, I'm really impressed with Pathfinder martial arts. I was doubtful a company could produce a martial arts system for D&D that was both mechanically viable and conceptually intersting. Pathfinder pulled it off.
I was looking up old martial arts clips on Youtube while reading over the various Combat Style feats. Many of them really fit the flavor of the martial art mechancially and conceptually.
Monkey style is about perfect with the ability to move around while on the ground and climbing and the ability to move into an opponent's space and beat on them, like a monkey climbing all over a person.
Crane style evokes the smooth, fluid defensive movements of that martial arts style. Defend and counter attack, while maintaining extraordinary balance.
Dragon style evokes the power of the dragon. This is a style unique to Pathfinder, but they did a great job making it. You can picture the dragon leaping up over his allies or over difficult terrain and coming down with power on an opponent. And your powerful attacks simulate the claws and bite of a dragon.
Snake style emulates the fangs of a snake launching out at the opponent and puncturing their flesh. And the quick defensive movements of the bobbing and weaving snake head.
Tiger Style emulates the powerful claws of a tiger ripping flesh and pouncing on opponents if they try to get away.
Almost every style has something interesting. I can't wait to see more.
I really want to if the game designers can make a cool Scorpion, Toad, Centipede, and Iron Skin style of martial arts. I still remember watching an old movie called The Five Deadly Venoms. The new Combat Styles give you the feel of the five poisonous creature martial arts of that movie and so many other movies out of Hong Kong in my youth.
Now that Pathfinder has built a really intersting martial arts system, I could see them leveraging into the modern market. Now you could make a cool modern adventure game with martial arts incorporated into the system.
I have to give the designers big props. You guys pulled off a damn cool martial arts systems within the framework of D&D. Which is not easy to do. Most of the best martial arts systems use looeser frameworks such as those found in GURPS and Hero System. Though those two martial art systems are still amongst the best in gaming, the Pathfinder Combat Styles still did a great job of integrating a staple of the fantasy combat into a game that no one had done well before. Very attractive and mechancially interesting and balanced martial arts system.
You even upgraded grappling in a very cool manner. The Tetori Monk along with all the new grappling feats like Choke Hold and Necksnapper finally give us martial arts lovers what we have been waiting for in a grappling system.
Big kudos from a happy Pathfinder customer. I just specced out a lvl 8 monk (master of many styles)/lvl 12 fighter (weaponmaster) with Dragon, Snake, and Crane Combat Styles and he's going to be awesome. I'm even coming up with new names for his maneuvers like Dragon Fang (for Snake Fang) and Dragon Wing (for Crane Wing). I'm imagining the style switches with a dubbed voiceover where my character is fighting saying things like "So, you've defended against my Crane Style, now let's see if you can defend against my Dragon Wing".
Though I did have to house rule monks being able to buy style feats with their bonus feats. I didn't get that one. They are the martial artists of Pathfinder. They gotta be able to buy style feats with their bonus feats. That's their schtick.
I'm looking for a fairly detailed description of Pitax including buildings and armies. If you statted up some of the noble houses, that would be helpful as well.
My players eventually want to annex Pitax, and I haven't fully statted the place out. Someone else's info on it would be greatly appreciated.
I want them to have to fight a bit of a rebellion in Pitax with the various noble, criminal, and merchant factions attempting to play the political game with them.
The powerful folk in Pitax don't want to go from Irovetti the tyrant to another tyrant even if the PCs are benevolent (which they are). So I want the PCs to have to work to take Pitax. Perhaps even build up some Diplomacy points. I'll probably build this subsystem.
If someone else has put some work into this, that would be a great help.
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell while under the influence of magic or extraordinary effects that usually impede movement, actions, or attacks, such as paralysis, poison, auras, natural spider webs, solid fog, slow, web, compulsion spells with a paralysis-type effect, or any effect that generates a similar effect. This does not have an effect on difficult terrain or natural phenomenon (such as being buried in a cave in generated by any means magical or mundane. This does not affect the prone condition or prevent trips. This spell does not affect indirect impediments on movement such as those from charm or compulsion spells that control the mind, daze, stun, sicken, or nauseate the target or have some effect other than a direct effect stated clearly in the spell effect that slows or halts movement (versus an indirect affect on movement such as that caused by daze or stun).
I want to make freedom of movement an easier to adjudicate spell. I feel as though the spell as written is confusing and allows for interpretations that overreach the intent of the spell given the sheer number of effects that can alter your ability to "move and act normally".
I threw in the grapple part because I don't like how this spell turns grappling and improved grab into a trivial ability. High level Large or larger creatures do have rather insane grappling CMBs and CMDs. But this is a major attack ability and tactic of high level dragons, creatures like the Shoggoth, and animals, yet once you obtain freedom of movement you are completely immune. A ring of freedom movement is on all my players list of "must have gear" for this reason. So I wanted to come up with alternative means of freedom of movement providing a bonus against grappling and improved grab without making the ability trivial. Do you think this version would make accomplish this?
Question for DMs: What spells from APG and Ultimate Magic are now must haves for your optimized casters?
For the most part the Core Rulebook spells are well-balanced. There's a few that can ruin your encounters, but overall there are ways to counter or deal with every spell in the core rulebook.
Now with the release of the APG and UM, we have new spells. Some of them are really making my life tough as a DM. And they are so much better than Core Rulebook spells, it's a no brainer to take them.
Here's my list that are proving to be a pain so far:
1. Calcific Touch: This spell by itself isn't such a big deal. a caster having to get in melee reach to use it makes the spell as is balanced. Even with spectral hand, a smart creature can kill the hand and slow the spell's progress.
This spell with the Reach metamagic feat (and Empower or Maximize and Reach at higher level) is a nightmare. It's an "I win" button against most big melee creatures with low touch AC. It eats there dexterity far to quickly and has no resistance to it save abiltiy immunity or spell immunity spell.
Question for designer: Did the designer bother to think about how this spell interacts with metamagic?
2. Prediction of Failure: The only defense is immunity to mind-effecting magic or immunity to fear or the sickened conditions. Otherwise this spell guarantees a -4 to attack rolls and saves and a -2 to damage. Even if you make the saving throw, the effect lasts the length of most combats. It's a range spell.
So it's basically like adding +4 to the DC of any spell with no saving throw.
Combine this spell with Battlemind Link with two casters and it's -6 on all saves against spells from the two casters.
Question to designers: Did you really think this was a well-thought out spell? Do game designers bother to check how a spell synergizes with other spells and abilities?
What are some of the spells causing DMs headaches from the UM and APG?
Does Fickle Winds create an open or closed cylinder? Do you think the top and bottom are open like a wind wall or is it completely closed so that nothing can get in from any side that it protects against.
This spell pretty much makes archers utterly useless unless it is dispeled.
A few of the lines form the spell are missing, which I assume means it didn't get a good audit like quite a few powerful spells from Ultimate Magic.
I'm not sure what the designer intended. If the cylinder is closed, it basically means any caster with this spell can pretty much beat an archer with a lvl 5 spell no matter how good that archer is. The archer is effectively useless.
Nice class design. The Samurai class captures a lot of what I like about the samurai.
Mounted combat: check.
One on one battle capability: check.
Mounted archery: check.
By flavor I mean abilities like resolve. I like that the samurai can focus on enduring a fight to the death. That gives the feel like The 47 Ronin who were determined to avenge their fallen master.
The mounted capability is much like the historical samurai with the necessary Pathfinder balancing to make a mount survive.
The swordsmanship of most samurai movies.
And the leadership of say The Seven Samurai. The banner on the roof and the leadership of Kanbe Shimada and his right-hand man.
I posted my thoughts on the EN world forum. I will post a version on here since it is the official playtest forum.
I will say with absolutely certainty that a well-designed ninja and samurai are classes I would use. And an Asian-flavored Adventure Path I would play. I'm a target customer.
But I still recall the previous 3rd edition attempts at a Ninja and Samurai, both lacking the most important elements associated with the archetype. The ninja was a watered down class with some loosely "ninja-like" abilities that no one ever played because it lacked the one defining aspect of a ninja that ever person that loves ninja wants as part of the class: martial arts.
I'm hoping Paizo boils down the classes into the key elements that ninja and samurai lovers enjoy from history and fiction:
1. Swordsmanship for the samurai
2. Hand-to-hand fighting for the ninja
Any version of the samurai and ninja lacking these two key elements will find no use in my campaign and I will not run an Asian-flavored adventure path with a watery soup type ninja and samurai.
Bottom line message to Paizo as one of the target customers for the samurai and ninja class and an Asian-themed adventure path: Do it right or don't do it at all!
Making a ninja without martial arts or a samurai with strong swordsmanship ability and expecting us to see it as legitimate rendering of the archetype is like making a wizard without magic and expecting us to call it a wizard. The whole attraction of Asian-themed characters and campaigns is the unique fighting systems developed in Asia. Without the unique fighting styles, Asian-themed classes seem like fighters or rogues with slightly different abilities that didn't much need their own stand alone 20 level class. Mine as well have been an alternate class path.
So do it right Paizo. Give the ninja marital arts.
You do such a nice job designing the core classes and the classes in the APG, I didn't figure Paizo would suddenly have a total breakdown of the imagination and design two legendary archetypes like the samurai and ninja without the core combat capabilities associated with each class. That would be the same type of poor game design I've seen from WotC for years and I know Paizo is better than that.
So don't screw up the ninja and samurai for the umpteenth time by a D&D product. Do them both right. Watch all the samurai and ninja movies. Read all the literature. Make sure a samurai is a bad to the bone, quick drawing, katana slashing bad dude and the ninja can go hand to hand nearly as well as a monk.
Then you'll be hitting the nail on the head.
This is coming from someone that would very much enjoy a well done ninja and samurai. And will very much despise another watery soup samurai and ninja from a d20 company that will never get any use.