Derklord's page

"Succeeding on a Saving Throw: A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack." CRB pg. 216

It says spell but that part of the rules applies to all effects.

Spymaster's Handbook contains optional rules on using knowledge to identify class features, look here under "Recall Intrigues".

On hexes in regards to sylvan trickster, I would be interested in your material since I am presently playing one.

Here you go:

Sadly, neither the Hexcrafter or Sylvan Trickster has the "hex class feature" that Hex Strike requires. I believe only the witch herself has that.

Going beyond what the others said, we actually have something official on the topic: This FAQ sets a clear precedence that a class feature with a different name still counts for a feat if the mechanics match/reference what's asked for. A necromancy school wizard's respective ability is called "Power over Undead", and yet the FAQ explicitly says you can apply the effects of Extra Channel which has prereqs of "channel energy class feature" to it.

I have a full list of ratings and comments for hexes in regards to a Sylvan Trickster, if you like.

Enlarge Person is transmutation school, but is not under polymorph subschool

The last sentence of the rule quote is the one that actually applies here, "In addition, other spells that change your size have no effect on you while you are under the effects of a polymorph spell." You simply cannot enlarge a polymorphed target.

True that. But do you really think this is the only rule they're wrong on?

'No you don't get more attacks as you level. Oh the number behind your BAB at lv 6? Yeah that just means you can choose to make your attack at BAB +1 or BAB +6. Like if you want to deal less damage with power attack'

This is actually closer to the truth than you may think. It is the case that nothing says the numbers after the slashes in the BAB entries are for iterative attacks. Which is actually problematic because because iterative attacks from BAB are in the rules... but the penalty isn't. At all!

It just makes no logical sense to me.

Your GM is either an idiot, or a cowardly jerk.

What does your GM say the line "which for most spellcasting characters is equal to her class level in the class she’s using to cast the spell" means, if not what it says?

Before anything, you probably should decide on whether you want to use a weapon or not. UnMonk is proficient with every weapon with the monk special property, so there're plenty of choices. Upsides of weapons compared to unarmed are cheaper enchantment cost (although see Handwraps below), the ability to use them two-handed for both 1.5xStr (that was changed from cMonk) and 3:1 Power Attack ration, the ability to have reach (only beneficial during early levels), and the ability to have different damage types. The downsides are that you can't use the bonus attack from spending ki, or style strikes, with weapons (unless you have the Ascetic Form feat, see below for more on that). That doesn't mean armed builds can't use them, though - they can use an unarmed strike (usually the bonus attack from ki pool) to make the style strike and attack with the weapon the other attacks, which is something especially worthwhile for Flying Kick.

Archetypes:
Unlike cMonk, UnMonk is a fully functional class without archetypes, but there are some that are worth looking at:
Invested Regent replaces just the first bonus feat and lets you grab additional spell-like abilities in place of feats (bonus or regular); your pool won't be overly large but some of these SLAs are rather nice. Air Walk (at 10th level) alone makes this archetype very potent, as lack of flight is one of the unMonk’s biggest weaknesses. Don’t let the pool keying off charisma fool you, if you just use the pool for Air Walk and maybe some conditional stuff, even a 7 Cha would still be fine. Stacks with all other archetypes below except for Scaled Fist.
Windstep Master replaces the 4th level ki power with the ability to walk on air. Already pretty nice, especially when you don't plan on taking Empty Body early on, it gets outstanding if your GM allows you to make Flying Kicks while in the air (RAW is very unclear, but they are called "flying" kicks after all!).
Soul Sheperd replaces Stunning Fist and Evasion with DR and resistances, and at 12th level gains Blindsight for living and undead creatures, which is extremely good. Archetype is from an AP, so clear it up with your GM.
Perfect Scolar replaces Still Mind and the 4th level ki power with a bonus to knowledges (and gets all of them as class skills).
Scaled Fist is an often mentioned archetype that changes your key ability score to charisma. Can be nice for a race with charisma bonus and wisdom penalty, but is otherwise a downgrade. You need to invest in improving the will save, and Monk doesn’t have the skill ranks to make much use of charisma based skills.

Feats: Apart from the archetype, your most important choice is probably going to be which style chain/VMC you use.
The "normal" paths would be Ascetic Style, Dragon Style, Jabbing Style, Pummeling Style, VMC Barbarian, VMC Magus, or using none of the above. Apart from Dragon Style, they all also work with Weapon Finesse, although VMC Barbarian only if you take unchained Barbarian as a base. There is no single best play-style for unMonk throughout all levels, if you're interested in damage comparisons, check my unMonk DPR calculator for exact numbers throughout levels 1-16.
The easiest method is style-less, i.e. not using any style feat chain at all and instead grabbing assorted feats like Power Attack and Possessed Hand - it's not much weaker (at some early levels even stronger) than other styles and allows greater flexibility. Also has the advantage of not needing a swift action to enter a style, which can be relevant in surprise fights. Armed or unarmed.
Ascetic Style (up to Ascetic Form) is something like the default style for armed - it's not exactly necessary, but it is much smoother (and more flavorful) than weapon based style-less, and it's also pretty much top dog for damage. You basically get all the goodies of both armed and unarmed (including ki pool's DR penetration ability, and even the scaling damage), for the cost of a few feats. Armed only.
Dragon Style (up to Dragon Ferocity) is something like the default style for unarmed - low investment (only two feats) and comes online very early (3rd level). Unarmed only.
Pummeling Style (up to Pummeling Charge) is a possibility if you want more maneuverability, especially on open battlefields. You'd use your early feats on singular feats like Power Attack, and the build in DR penetration is nice, but your style only really comes online at 9th level. It does, however, free up style strikes even if you have to move. Unarmed only.
Jabbing Style (up to Jabbing Master) depends a bit on the enemies - the higher the AC, the weaker it is, while target switches aren't helpful either. Also needs four feats and only becomes good at 9th, but can do a lot of damage and has some added mobility. Note that against tougher enemies, you don't want to use Power Attack. Unarmed only.
VMC Barbarian takes even more feats (every other feat, plus you probably want Extra Rage) and lowers your AC, but it comes online early (3rd level), and has some nice additional benefits (well, it's Rage), including a Rage Power at 11th level. Like style-less it has the advantage of not needing a swift action at the start of combat to get ready. Armed or unarmed.
VMC Magus takes at least as many feats (you definitely want Extra Arcana, as the Magus Arcana you get at 7th level will be Ki Arcana), comes partially online at 3rd level, but becomes pretty crazy at 10th level, when you can basically make every attack against touch AC by (ab)using Accurate Strike and the Ki Leech ki power. Touch attacks sadly can't profit from Power Attack, and the swift action is already used and thus isn't available for the bonus ki attack, but the damage is still very high, and you could add Flamboyant Arcana for a defense boost via OP&R. Armed or unarmed.

Jabbing Style and Pummeling Style don't actually require you to be in their stance to work, meaning you don't need a swift action to activate them and you can use them alongside other style feats. You wouldn't get to use the follow-up feats (those always require an active stance), both these two can be tacked onto basically everything.
Other good general feats are Weapon Focus, Power Attack, Extra Ki, and as usual improvements to saves (Iron Will, Steel Soul etc.).
Humans and half-humans have the option to pick up a fly speed by taking Planar Heritage, Airy Step, & ]Wings of Air. Not cheap, but very strong.

Bonus Feats: The stand-out ones are Dodge, Deflect Arrows, and Medusa's Wrath, plus depending on campaign, build, and allies, Mobility and Combat Expertise. Improved Critical is the only one to directly increase your damage; it's fairly good for weapons with an increases thread range, but very weak for unarmed. Improved Grapple and Improved Trip are also nice as fall-back options.

Style Strikes: Your first or second style strike will be Flying Kick, period (the only exception would be Pummeling Charge builds, and even than Flying Kick can be useful). It takes a while to be really good, especially when adventuring in open spaces, which is why selecting it at 9th level can be okay, but this is the main reason unMonk is so much better than cMonk.
Defensive Spin boosts AC, Elbow Smash boosts damage (it's usually the best style strike for that).
Foot Stomp prevents escape; including 5-feet-steps.

Ki Powers: There are too many ki powers to list all the good ones, and a lot of it depends on your build. Notable standouts: Note: Options tagged with "Qinggong" are selected via Qinggong Power.
Empty Body (4th) grants amazing versatility, especially outfight, to a class very much lacking just that. Rather ki hungry early on, but flight, invisibility, and intangibility is awesome. Yes, it's really available at 4th level!
Barkskin (4th, Qinggong) grants some very welcomed AC boost, and is all but mandatory when using an AoMF (which prevents you from using an Amulet of Natural Armor).
Ki Metabolism (4th) allows you to hold your breath for >10 hours, which can be very helpful for underwater exploration/fighting.
Placebo Effect (6th, Qinggong) can surpress most conditions from yourself or allies.
Restoration (8th) removes all ability damage or drain and even negative levels. Self-only, but you get to ignore the material component cost.
Freedom of Movement (8th) is a swift action to use, and it's a supernatural ability, meaning you can have it active exactly when you need it to.
Insightful Wisdom (8th) doesn't help yourself, but can easily save party members.
Ki Leech (10th, Qinggong) costs no ki to activate, meaning it can be sustained indefinitely, and should remove all ki problems.
Dust Form (12th, Qinggong) is amazing for defense, as it makes you immune against non-magical damage, only take half magical damage, and be affected only half the time by non-damage spells.
Diamond Soul (12th) is better than the cMonk's permanent version, as you can activate it after getting buffed by your party.
Cold Ice Strike (14th, Qinggong) is a swift action AoE damage spell doing around 50 average damage.
Unshakable Zeal (16th, Qinggong) lasts all day long and can grant free attack roll and maybe even other bonuses.
Ki Volley (16th) requires Diamond Soul, but can bounce back hostile spells.
Akashic Form (20th, Qinggong) is crazy powerful, outright negating death even multiple times per day.
Action Before Thought (6th) starts weak, but becomes very interesting in combination with Ki Leech.
The Thought Shield line (I at 4th, II at 8th, III at 10th, IV at 12th don't take this one!, V at 14th; Qinggong) can do a lot to shore up the will save, although you might want to ask the GM about retraining ki powers.

Equipment: At early levels, you'll probably want to use one of the three monk reach weapons, Double-chained Kama, Kusarigama, and Kyoketsu Shoge. All are weird, but Kusarigama and Kyoketsu Shoge also have two different damage types. Since Flying Kick requires you to end adjacent to the enemy, you'll want to use a non-reach weapon later on, Sansetsukon or Seven-branched Sword have the highest base damage (Sansetsukon is slightly superior because 19-20/x2 is better than 20/x3). If you prefer, you can just want to start with one of them, dealing more damage early on for losing the usual benefits of reach (AoOs and higher chance of full attacking). It's possible to flurry with any melee weapon by using the Versatile Design weapon modification and Ascetic Form, but you need to spend a feat or two on proficiency, and mechanically, it's usually not worth it. For unarmed, there's two ways to "enchant" unarmed strikes, both with weaknesses. Handwraps come at regular cost, but you won't be getting the bonus on some style strikes, while Amulet of Mighty Fists affect all unarmed strikes but cost twice as much (and also blocks your neck slot, so you'll really want the Barkskin ki power). Mathematically, using Handwraps is better for most levels even during turns in which you use flying kick, but you have to deal with different attack and damage rolls, and while flying kick is about the movement, Foot Stomp and Leg Sweep mainly care about hitting, making an AoMF better if you chose to use those.
Weapon Finesse based builds can go either unarmed, or use weapons, the best ones are Sanpkhang and Cestus. If not using Ascetic Style, the best weapon is Waveblade.
Something of a 'must have' item is a Wand of Mage Armor, handed to an arcane caster of your choice. You can be generous with the charges, as your caster buddy should have 1st level spell slots to spare by the time you've used them all. Unarmed builds should also buy a Scizore, which is a weapon that grants a +1 shield bonus to AC when worn (you don't need to care about proficiency since you never attack with it). Not an actual shield so it can't be enchanted, but it doesn't hamper your Monk abilities like a shield would.
If your GM lets you use an item from a PFS module, the Braid of a Hundred Masters (yes, this is a legit PF item, it's just not on AoN of d20pfsrd; it’s from a PFS scenario) increases the effective level of the fast movement, which basically means +10ft Flying Kick range.

Multiclassing: Multiclassing is, of course, possible. UnMonk does gain quite a lot from staying in class, though - bonus attack at 11th level, ki powers that can be very strong (like Ki Leech at 10th level), and style strikes/improved Flying Kick range. A dip into Bloodrager would be okay, but I wouldn't recommend lowering your accuracy by dipping into a non-full-BAB class.

It will depend on whether the GM accepts "for all purposes" as fulfilling the PrC requirement for mystic theurge ("Able to cast 2nd-level divine spells and 2nd-level arcane spells").

No, it depends on the GM letting "for all purposes" count for fulfilling the prereqs but not for what spell slot it takes to prepare or cast the spell. Basically, it requires select enforcement, and doesn't work with any consistent ruling: Either the effect only applies while casting, in which case the spell is cast as 1st level but doesn't let you qualify for anything while not casting, or it does apply outside of casting, in which case you need a 2nd level spell slot to prepare or cast the spell.

Most of the early entry shenanigans have been stopped. You had better check with your GM before using Faith Magic to qualify. This seems to be even more questionable than some of the other early entry options. Many GMs are going to veto this hard.

More questionable? This is one of just two ways that I know of that actually work RAW. Still dubious, though, because it depends on interpreting "Able to cast 2nd-level divine spells" literal, and not as "possess 2nd level spell slots from an arcane casting class". The latter is usualy assumed and enforced with the argument of "when you've spend all 2nd level spell slots in a day, the strict interpretations means you are no longer "Able to cast 2nd-level divine spells" for the day, and thus stop qualifying."

The other (mostly*) RAW legal method is Spirit Whisperer Wizard grabbing the Lore spirit's Arcane Enlightenment hex, which lets you get spells and explicitly says "When she casts these spells, they are treated as divine rather than arcane."

*) Requires the unwritten rule of "whenever a class feature grants access to class features from another class, unless otherwise specified, all instances of the class name are relaced by the name of the class that granted you the option to begin with, or "the character", as appropriate.", withoiut which significant parts of the game stop working.

On the HeroLab-specific front (just talking about programming, NOT legality for your game):

1) Under the Background tab, chose a faction from the Guilds section of ISM. (Kintargo Opera House, etc.)
2) Each time you gain fame with your guild, go to the Journal tab and put the earned Fame in Earn Box of the Prestige Award Journals section. Be sure to select your Guild in the dropdown box. Add a new journal entry each time.
3) When you reach 5 total earned Fame, an "Eclectic Training" option...

To copy paste: It's not easy to do, though. Your character needs to be at (and occasionally return to) one of a couple certain spots on Golarion, pay a fee, pass a skill check to enter (fairly easy with take 10 though), and then you need to do some checks and tasks, which have a limit to how often you can attempt them.

Basically, you need in-game years at low levels to make use of this option.

"Early entry" was based on a FAQ that said that having a spell-like ability that duplicated a spell counted as being able to cast the spell for purposes of meeting a prerequisite. Which resulted in several iterations of characters that could be (for example) Oracle 1 and Sorcerer 1 but had at least one (Sp) that counted as 2nd-level in each class and could therefore take MT as their third character level. Being down only one level down in each class instead of three or four.

When the designers saw how much this altered the power level, they narrowed the FAQ and said that a spell-like only counts as that specific spell. So, for example, having mirror image as a (Sp) meets a prerequisite of "able to cast mirror image" but not a prerequisite of "able to cast 2nd-level spells."

To be precise, it was the combination of two FAQs released independently at around the same time. One that answered "Does a creature with a spell-like ability count as being able to cast that spell for the purpose of prerequisites or requirements?" with "Yes.", and one that designated all SLAs as arcane or divine.

This was not written for PdB, but most stuff still applies.

● Use Combat Manager (discussion thread here). I'm using that program and I honestly don't know how I would be able to GM without it. A library of not only monsters (with templates addable), including probably all the ones from your AP, but also feats, spells, and rules. I've made characters for my PCs so I can roll stuff like perception without my players noticing. I also use the initiative roller, because while "roll initiative" at the start of combat can be cool, it a) wastes a lot of time, b) distrupts the flow of the game and c) prevents the GM from using initiative for situations that may or may not result in actual fighting (because when they have rolled initiative, the players will presume a combat is absolutely going to happen).

● Use some method to track initiative for the players. I'm using little folded pieces of cardboard with the PCs names (and numbers for monsters that the party knows about) on both sides that I put on the top of my laptop and move around so that the one farthest to my right (the players' left) is the the current character and the players can see who's next and so on.

● Don't roll ability scores or hit dice! Both might feel like important RPG staples, but in reality, it's asking for trouble. A melee character that has less HP than the party Wizard is fun for absolutely no one. I'm using "average rounded up" for HD, and point buy for ability scores. I'd also suggest not using too low a point buy (nothing below 20), because a) it increases the inherent disparity, and b) usually leads to less rounded out characters. Higher point buy does not actually mean more powerful characters, because players react to the point buy.

● Always expect the unexpected, and learn to roll with it. Using an AP there are some limits, and it's really more an art than a science, but expect the players to always do something else than what you've thought they'd do. When in doubt, invent some NPC or use some quickly selected monsters (Combat Manager helps here) when the PCs really want to invest that run down house that the AP description doesn't expect to be visited. Don't feel bad when you need to call for a short time out when the players catch you flat footed because they did something weird.

● Read ahead, and familiarize yourself with both the plot, and with the monsters the party will face, especially their special abilities (a monster/NPC uses some ability that fascinates? Read up on it!). Expect NPCs to be interrogated (friend and foe).

● Make the PCs create cheat sheets for their characters, where they have all the important statistics, including attack rolls and damage rolls udner different sircumstances - calculating the currently valid attack roll(s) every round is probably the biggest time waste during combat. Here are some examples with varying amounts of information. For newer or more casual players I recommend the version with all relevant/active abilities spelled out. Likewise, have the players use Spell Cards, and printouts for complex on-the-fly choices like Summoned Monsters (the above link to the cheat sheets also contains a sample printout for SM 3-5).

● Check everything your players selects (to see if it's actually legal, and to prevent imbalances, i.e. characters that are too weak or too strong in comparison to the other PCs). Try to familiarize yourself with every ability your PCs have. Asking for the spell/ability card in question can't hurt, you'd be surprised how ofter people overlook something semi-hidden in the description.

● Remember that very few creatures fight to the death. If a combat is too lethal, but the monster/NPC side has also suffered losses, having them retreat/cut their losses or use diplomacy even if they'd likely won the fight is a good and realistic alternative to fudging dice.

● Be honest and forthcoming with descriptions - the players only know what you tell them. Focus on information that is or may be actually important.

● Be willing to always listen to your players, but enforce rulings and decisions when necessary.

● Keeping the game going is more important than getting every rule minutiae 100% right. When looking something up would take too much time, just make a decision, flipping a coin if necessary.

● Don't needlessly limit things, especially not with the goal of lowering the power level, or of making the game easier to GM. The opposite usually the result, as the balancing between classes gets better with more books allowed. That doesn't mean you can't ban things you don't want in the game, e.g. firearms, just be aware that the most propblematic and game-breaking things in the game are CRB (and to a lesser degree APG) classes using CRB spells.

● The same as above is pretty much true for "low equipment"/"low magic items" games. If you want somehtign like that, use Automatic Bonus Progression. Even for other games, I highly recommend it!

So, as an arcane caster, your job is to either provide utility/buffs for the party, or deal damage to the bad guys.

An arcane caster's job is what the player wants it to be, and there are more ways to meaningfully contribute to the party.

Infernal healing is ok if you have no healer in the party.

With Infernal Healing, you are the healer. And while the usefulness quickly dwindles onces wands become aviable, it's an amazing spell to have at 1st level.

Grease is a poor spell, as most will pass the save.

At low level, objectively false. Please stop spreading misinformation.

disguise Self and Silent image are VERY situational and not useful in most encounters.

Maybe your games are different, bust most games have stuff outside of combat. An Arcanist has enough 1st level spells 'known' to be able to spend some on non-combat-related stuff. Plus, a creative player will find combat relevant uses for them, especially Silent Image.

Look for Treantmonks God-mage build for a discussion on spell selection. it will help you a bunch.

The guide should not be considered the be-all-end-all to arcane caster play, it's actually quite flawed. It's main use is for somewhat experienced players who purposefully want to tone down direct attack spells in order to not break the game or overshadow the party.

yeah, against soldiers (NPCS level 1-2) grease isn't bad, once the bad guys hit parity with their CR, then they will pass the saves more often that not.

Do you see anyone suggestion to keep using the spell until 10th level?

A 1st level spell doesn't have to be useful at higher level, an Arcanist gets more than enough 1st level spell. I don't know if you actually understand how the Arcanist works, but they can simply stop preparing it later on. Or only use it on low ref enemies - I remember a certain Flesh Golem, that's CR 7, in Carrion Crown book 2, that gave our party some trouble until my Summoner used Grease. That was 6th or 7th level, by the way.

Also, you mentioned Color Spray being good, literally every single thing you wrote about Grease also applies to Color Spray. That makes you comments highly hypocritical.

The God mage build relies on a "don't let the dice, or your enemies stats" decide the outcome. So buffs, spells that don't give saves, attacks that go against touch etc. are at it's core.

Did the OP say they want to strictly follow Treantmonk's guide? No? Then this is irrelevant.

It's not the only playstyle, stop acting as if not following the guide was 'doing it wrong'.

As for spells like Shield and Mage Armor, I'd rather cast Haste and then just stay out of the way

Did you seriously just compare a 3rd level combat spell with a 1st level buff spell lasting multiple hours? Either you just maliciously compared two fundamentally different things, or you don't even understand how spellcasters work.

and from my experience, you'll have decent enough AC from magic items quick enough.

It takes a long time until Mage Armor ceases to be useful. If your experience is different, you're either not looking at the spell obejctively enough, or your experience is simply significantly different from the norm.

But I'm wondering if anyone has any tips for playing a Arcanist from level 1?

Three main suggestions:

1) Don't get fixated. You're playing a full caster with the biggest spell list in the game, the biggest strength you have is being able to cherry pick the best spells in the game. Not every spell you learn needs to be fundamentally new, but keep an open mind. This isn't a martial where you have to pre-plan your feat tree, you can simply decide "I could try buffing the party", and grab Haste at levelup. Related, if you decided Fly isn't a spell you enjoy, this does not bar you from taking Overland Flight later on!
Mainly, just remember that not ever spell you learn/cast has to be Conjuration or Illusion.

2) The best spells are usually not highly specific silver bullets, but rather spells that are good in many situations. As an Arcanist, you can change your prepared spells on a daily basis, if you find yourself never using certain spells, simply stop preparign them, and maybe don't learn spells like that in the future.

3) Learn as you go. See what works and what you enjoy, and when you next need to decide on something, do it based on that, not on some rigid pre-planned build.

I think that Hilt Hammer's damage can crit, under the principle of "text that does nothing isn't rule text". The combat rules says "Precision damage (such as from a rogue’s sneak attack class feature) and additional damage dice from special weapon qualities (such as flaming) are not multiplied when you score a critical hit." (CRB pg. 184), which makes the "and isn't multiplied on a critical hit" part of Precise Strike's description not change how the ability works. Therefore, that part is reminder text and not rule relevant, we can treat it as not present. When Hammer Hilt changes the abiliy to not deal precision damage, no rule text prevents it from being able to crit.

BTW, idiotingly strictly RAW, it can't be activated: "can activate this deed before rolling the attack roll when making an attack that would benefit from precise strike". An attack against a target immune from precision damage doesn't benefit from precise strike.

I don't think this is "strictly RAW", because it relies on a questionable interpretation of what "benefit" means. You have to chose to use the deed before the attack roll is made, but it's possible to only know whether the target actually can take damage from (regular) Precise Strike after the damage is rolled. For an extreme example, a 3rd elvel Metamorph Alchemist has 25% chance to ignore precision dmaage, if that triggers, the attack did not benefit from Precise Strike. So what, do we roll that ability when beign attacked by a Swashbuckler with Hilt Hammer, to see if the SB was allowed to activate the deed? But that decision has already been made and considered valid, so we basically have to go back in time...

I am sorry for the vague idea, I dont really have anything big or specific in mind, I just want a sneaky character with skills, Some sneak attack and combat ability with daggers, And true arcane magic!

Does it have to have Sneak Attack? Because I don't see anything in "A sneaky thief/rogue type with magic" that leans itself to Sneak Attack, unless you exclusively mean Rogue as in the class name and not as an ordinary English word.

Unless you're ultra locked-in on Sneak Attack, Questioner Investigator deserves recommendation. Probably the best class/archetype in the entire games when it comes to skills, int-based arcane casting from the Bard list, and a backstab-style combat mechanic that is actually good.

My problem is that a lot of rule options require GM and/or players operating in good faith. Simple Weapon Proficiency says you make attacks with such weapons "without penalty", but we know it means "without non-proficiency penalty". On the topic, no proficiency feat actually grants proficiency RAW, and the armor proficiency feats RAW have zero effect; here, too, we know that's not what they're meant to do. Another example is how the polymorph rules (and some other rules in the magic section) only talk about spells, and yet we know they should be used for a wildshaping Druid.

I don't want my players (or as a player my GM or my fellow players) to start looking for loopholes. This one may not make the game imbalanced, but the next one might. I mean, simple weapons are underused and weak, right..?

I think the hostility was more directed to the claim that the interaction was “Rule as intended” by the author.

I didn't post anything, but I do agree here. Boomerang Nebula, do you really think the author deliberately wrote the ability to benefit highly specific class combinations in a way that no other ability in the game does, all without pointing out this oddity in any way?

2+2 should never equal 5, unless your game is set in 1984.

The trait seems to be written rather specifically for stuff in Horror Adventures. Fleshcrafting requires surgery that dels ability score damage, and curing the Promethean corruption requires removing the cyborg parts. I can't think of anything else...

Spell Sage Wizard can cast Cleric (and Druid) spells, and for resurrection spells, the limits to the respective ability aren't a problem.

In theory, the requirement to have a piece of the creature is even more stringent than the requirement of being familiar with it.

There is no "in theory", the material components were written under the knowledge that having a SCP (or Esschew Materials) takes care of them. They were never designed as a limitation, rather only for flavor.

"The advantage of spells that don’t require material components is they don’t require a spell component pouch (and in the rare circumstance in which if you’re grappled, you needn’t already have your material components in hand to cast the spell). Most material components are part of a spell for flavor rather than to satisfy rules. The guano and sulfur material components of fireball are there because early gunpowder (black powder) was made from guano and sulfur. The fur and glass rod material components of lightning bolt come from the ability to create a buildup of static electricity by rubbing fur against a glass rod. The game could present those spells without material components at all, and it would have a negligible effect on how the game plays (as proven by the “it has whatever I need” spell component pouch, and the sorcerer class getting Eschew Materials as a bonus feat)—they’re just in the spell for fun." UM pg. 133

For some reason, this topic always comes up in regards to polymorph spells. By all logic, guano should be costly in areas where no bats live, and yet, I've never seen someone mentioning making Fireball's material component costly. Hipocrisy at it's best.

I am not a fan of the "there is not a listed price for XX, so it cost nothing" argument.

It's not an argument, it's simply what the rules say. "Unless a cost is given for a material component, the cost is negligible." CRB pg.213
It explicitly says what is and what isn't a "negligible cost", there is no room for interpretation. And yes, there are a few spells where application of the rules have an undesired effect, like Transformation with its "potion of bull's strength" material component. But that doesn't make the rules wrong, but rather the spells a case of "someone didn't think this through".

If you stop and think about it how anyone is supposed to change into something they have never heard of before?

How does any magic work? How does a caster know how to cast spells they learn upon levelup? I get what you mean, but there's a huge part of the game that isn't explained, including how you get better at profession (sailing) after spending the entire levle in a desert tomb, or how you can take Weapon Focus with a weapon you've never touched.

An alchemist feral mutagen is active for 200 minutes at most, not constantly, but it is cited as a valid source for proficiency with natural weapons.

The problem is that the FAQ isn't about prerequisites, it's about whether or not you get a -4 on attacks. Whether the Alchemist has proficiency only during those 200 minutes of Mutagen, or at all times, is simply not addressed.

The reason the FAQ exists is because the CRB says "All characters are proficient with unarmed strikes and any natural weapons possessed by their race.", which does not cover natural weapons gained from anything else. Druids have explicit rules ("Druids are proficient with [...] all natural attacks [...] of any form they assume with wild shape"), and the polymorph rules grant proficiency ("In addition to these benefits, you gain any of the natural attacks of the base creature, including proficiency in those attacks."), but nothing in the rules grants proficiency for e.g. a Bloodrager's bloodline powers, hence the FAQ.

All right maybe I'll choose Style Shifter for that.

That's pretty much why I was asking about your goals. If you're after e.g. Dragon Style+Dragon Ferocity, a dip makes sense anyway, which can take care of the issue with the limited duration claws. Shame the Menhir Guardian Monk loses both IUS and Stunning Fist...

I had forgotten about raging vitality, but the research I've been doing in the last few days did mention it several times, so I think you're onto something there.

You don't actually need the feat... as long as you remember that the HP boost from rage doesn't make you more sturdy. The reason the Sudden barbarian Death Syndrome exists is because people think that when rage adds 20 HP, they can also take 20 more damage, and thus their start worrying about their HP 20 points later. Just don't do that and you're fine. Check damage against your pre-Rage HP, and act as if the bonus wasn't there at all.
Let's assume a 8th level Bloodrager with 15 Con using PFS's HD rule. A non-raging BR dies after taking 84 damage (unconscious after 70 damage). A raging BR dies after taking 86 damage.

That's not to say Raging Vitality wasn't useful - it makes the sample character die after taking a whopping 114 damage, while also increasing your Fort save by +1 - just saying if you're short on feats, don't fear that without Raging Vitality your character is doomed to die with nothing to do about that.

On a different note, if you do decide to go Bloodrider, a dip into Sohei Monk lets you pick up Mounted Skirmisher as a prereq-free bonus feat, effectively giving you pounce. At 7th+ Level, that's a ton of value.

Melkiador wrote:

My guess is no, since humans have 10 fingers and 10 toes, but can only wear 2 rings.

patently untrue. as this is the Rules forum

Humans and other critters can wear 20 or 30+ rings, as many as will fit on their little fingers and toes and various other areas...

"It’s possible for a creature with a humanoid-shaped body to wear as many as 15 magic items at the same time.
[...]
Ring (up to two)" CRB pg. 459

Either you blatantly ignored that Melkiador very clearly was talking about magic rings, which would make your post deliberately misleading and smartass in a most obnoxious way, or it is your post that's "patently untrue". The game explicitly says "as many as 15 magic items", that makes your claim of "can wear 20 or 30+ rings" objectvely false when talking about magic rings.

"Of course, a character may carry or possess as many items of the same type as he wishes. However, additional items beyond those in the slots listed above have no effect." ibid. See the wording used? It says "carry or possess", and does not use the word "wear" that is used for having magic items that 'count'.

Since this is, as you pointed out, the rules forum, and "wear" is a game term, the related rules make Melkiador's post using that game term to be correct, and yours wrong.

You might want to read the next line after your bolding to the end of the paragraph in the CRB and think about it some more, ... additional items .. in the slots listed... hmmmm... what could that mean?...

What it means is wearing e.g. two amulets, i.e. multiple items in the same slot. It does not mention having more of the same slots with only some of them being active.

Practically, if we start going beyond what is explicitly replaced or modified in an archetype, we’re opening a can of worms.

I think the opposite is true, the can of worms is letting archetypes that clearly alter/replace the same thing stack because they don't use the specific language. Also note that the first couple of books (APG, UM, and UC, most notably) did not yet have the "this alters X" language, if you go strictly by that text's present, you're allowing some very clearly unintended stacking for those, or you have to apply a double standard.

This FAQ explicitly supports this, as it cleary says that even minor additions count as altering a class feature.

I'm puzzled here. Rogue is a dex-based pure martial, and you want a cha-based caster. How are those two things connected?

I think it would help if you described what you're looking for without using a class that's completely different as an example. Hell, you should never use class names to describe the character you want, because they just don't tell enough. Do you want Sneak Attack? Do you want to have a backstab mechanic? (That's not the same thing!) Do you want many skill ranks per level? Do you want to be good at skills? (That's not the same thing!) Do you want to disable magical traps with Disable Device? Do you want light armor only? Any, all, or none of those could be what you mean with "Rogue".

There is no such thing as "give up the "Light" category". It happens automatically, there is no choice involved, and the penalty for improper size is independent.

Are you sure you're reading the right rules? I don't see where you get the idea from that the handedness change is voluntary. Here are the correct rules, just in case.

It looks like willuwontu derived the mean and median by figuring out the DC for all the monsters in the Bestiaries. Which means mostly non-humanoids, which means a +4 or +8 to the DC depending on intelligence. That's going to skew the numbers.

The thing for non-humanoids and animal intelligence isn't a bonus to the DC, but rather a penalty on the roll. It's not included in the table (apart from the percentile given in the second column), which means that the actual chance to successfully faint is even lower than what the table suggests.

I don't know where those numbers come from exactly, but my spreadsheet with the data from these links has slightly higher numbers not only for the monsters (median of 32 for CR 8), but also for the NPC sheets, which has 60% humanoids (median of 30 for CR 8).
Even filtering for for humanoid foes only doesn't change much, with the DCs for CR 8 being 30 (monsters) and 29 (NPCs).

Now that you mention it, I really am surprised I don't see that more.

Maybe because the basic concept is too overdone already? Plus, when you go for the "only good member of the evil race" cliche, you should really go all the way and play a drow dual wielding scimitars...

I have yet to see an evil Tiefling in any game I've played - PC or NPC

And that is the issue with this concept. Every PC you see of a "traditionally evil race" is non-evil, because you virtually never have evil PCs. And you can't interact much with evil NPCs beyond fighting them, especially not with ones not being able to blend in, so all the named NPCs you see are non-evil, too.

Of course, whith every PC or NPC you see being non-evil, the 'gap moe' of your character 'breaking the mold' simply doesn't exist. Like the joke that the entire Drow race "consists of nothing but Chaotic Good revels, yearning to throw off the reputation of their evil kin", because everyone and the kitchen sink plays a Drizzt clone.

Ultimately, there is no "traditionally evil race" when it comes to PCs. The game actually outright tells you as much: "When playing drow, kobolds, orcs, or other such races, it is often best for party dynamics to take on the roles of characters who rebel against the norms of their races and societies—creatures who do not agree with their often brutal cultures, and instead wish to carve out a better existence for themselves among other races." ARG pg. 82

As we discuss this, the problem may be that so few races are really portrayed as evil.

For good reason. First, it's really boring - a character that's evil because their race is always evil basically has no motivation. And second, a true "always evil" race cannot have free will, and that means it's literally impossible to play oen as a PC. So the best you can do is an evil society, but for the members of that society that are fine with it being evil it doesn't really make sense to be away from said society. Which means that unless you actually visit the society in a campaign, you only have contact with the non-evil outsiders (in the non-game meaning of the term)... which basically brings us back to square one.

The easiest way is to do nothing particular. It's a -2 to attack rolls, that's it - just compensate it with attack roll bonuses. We take attack rol penalites for benefits all the time (think Power Attack or Rapid Shot), this isn't any different.

You said what you said

And what I said was in conditional mood. Do you know what that is? Do you know what that's used for? I didn't call the OP's concept an utter joke, I said that a character with that concept without mechanical support would be an utter joke. For anyone with proper understanding of the English language, the phrase "would be" made it perfectly clear that I wasn't talking about something eisting by default. It's called a form of irrealis moods for a reason, irrealis literally meaning "not real".

And yes, I stand by what I said. With no mechanical reason to stop using their weapon, the character would be an utter joke, literally dropping perfectly fine weapons for no reason. Of course, all it takes for the character to not be an utter joke is a mechanical reason to stop using the same weapon throughout the fight.

and then tried to double down on it by calling his concept “stupid nonsensical garbage” and a “lame-ass gimmick.”

I doubled down on calling the hypothetical character that I'm very sure the OP doesn't want to build that drops perfectly fine weapon "stupid nonsensical garbage" and "lame-ass gimmick". Not the OP's concept itself. The reason you believe me to be rude is because you don't make the distinction between the OP's concept and a character with that concept without mechanical support.

And yes, I stand by what I said in that post, too. A character who drops a perfectly fine weapon they're holding to grab a worse one is 'doing some stupid nonsensical garbage', and has a 'lame-ass gimmick'. But again this is conditional, I was only talking about a character who does that dropping of their weapon for no reason. If there is a reason, like the mentioned Impaling Critical feat or the Anchoring weapon enchantment, what they're doing is not 'some stupid nonsensical garbage', and they are not using a 'lame-ass gimmick'. If you stop your self-righteous would-be holy crusade and look at the other posts in this thread, you see that the OP seems to currently be aiming for a throwing build. That, too, has a reason to let go of their weapon, and all that I've said does not apply to such a character.

I'm not replying specifically to your post otherwise I would have quoted it. I'm replying to the OP and generally other posts.

Considering that Joesi was the only one in a year to post here, you really should have made it clear who you were addressing. Not that who you're addressing changes anything about your arguments being faulty...

I did not address the Glove specifically.

But the gloves are what's creating the corner case that the entire thread is about. The entire topic is about what happens if you have this specific enchantment on this specific magic item, you can't contribute to the topic if you talk about one part without the other.

GMs can generally make sensible decisions and do what they think is best at their table.

That's statement shows that you have absolutely no interest in rules discussions. That's a statement that does nothing except stifle discussion, no one interrested in discussion would ever make such an utterly worthless statement.

What are you trying to do here? Are you trying to impress us with how smart you are? Considering how flimsy some of your arguments are, I don't think that's working. Case in point:

spell Refine Improvised Weapon:T1 and note that regular weapons are not a valid target.

This is pure circular logic. 'Improvised weapon aren't weapons, as evident by the spell not being able to target manufactured weapons, which we know it does because it says "improvised weapon".'

DL, I apologize for the words I chose and the implications of selfishness. I can try to justify it or explain it away but I won't. I hurt your feelings, made you feel insulted and I apologize.

It's all good, no hurt feelings. I didn't take it as a personal insult. My post wasn't meant for my own sake, but rather for everyone who bans/limits crafting (or something else) in a genuine attempt at making the game more enjoyable for the players.

I'll send you a PM, too, but rest assured that I don't harbor any ill feelings towards you!

If all I need to do is to make sure there is a katana or two that the character can acquire that is not taking the game hostage.

If you chose to play a samuria in a viking setting, and insist on usign a katana, and demand to find katanas as loot knowing that it's absolutely not setting appropriate... yes, that's exactly "taking the game hostage". It's your duty as a player to build a character that functions in the group and in the campaign.

Maybe you play with people who don't give a f~#+ about immersion and flavorfulness. No judgement, but it doesn't apply to everyone. The people I play with would ask "where does it come from" if I drop a katana in a viking themed game's loot.

Does that mean I need to ban paladins in a Viking setting?

Possibly yes. I am actually currently GMing a campaign where the PCs are vikings in medieval Scotland, and I deliberately asked for neutral (on the good-evil axis) characters. Good-Evil-alignment in Pathfinder is absolute, not relative, which means you can't be a paragon of Good if your goal is to go to another country and plunder it with force of arms.

What about wizards or alchemists needing access to spells and wanting downtime to write scrolls or create potions? I guess that means no alchemists or wizards.

If you can't manage to play a Wizard without scrolls, or an Alchemist without potions, that's your problem. I'm a GM, not a kindergartener.

Here's what I'm getting: the only reason to ban/restrict crafting is to benefit the GM.

I strongly disagree. The players benefit from a challenging and flavorful campaign. The players benefit from me being able to quickely add PCs if they did something I didn't (or couldn't have) prepared for, without having to carefully read through a bunch of stat blocks for monsters with a CR significantly higher than the party, to see if they have one-shot abilities. The other players benefit when they can progress with the campaign at a logically pace without having to wait for the PC of the guy who loves his crafting.

Quite frankly, I find the implications of some posters here that banning crafting is some selfish thing for the GM to do outright insulting. I truly believe that I can make the campaign I'm GMing more enjoyable for the players by banning crafting, how the f!#! is that "to benefit the GM"?

1 item can take, like, 16 days of Downtime. I handwave most of the narration but the PCs still have to deal with the any consequence of hanging around the city for 16 days. If they go off adventuring, the item is still being crafted in 2 hour increments but that's just delaying things further.

My issue is that feats the players select are supposed to have a benefit. If I offset crafting with less loot, or make the game so fast-paced that they can only craft an item every five levels, I'm basically robbing my players of a benefit they paid for.

Thing is, I don't think item crafting is what enables it or acts as the impetus. Players willing to negatively disrupt gameplay with these behaviors are going to do them whether or not they are making magic items.

I'm GMing for players comperatively new to P&P RPG, but with 20ish years of experience in games like D2 and WoW. My players don't optimize their characters to "win the game", break the campaign, or show off, but rather because it's simply natural to them.

I myself have pretty much broken a campaign with my character purely by accident. My Summoner had Craft Wondrous Items, and I outright stopped using the feat because our party was already too strong. Sure, the GM could have done more adjusting the AP, but playing is supposed to be fun for the GM, too, and who am I to demand from him to put in that extra work after he gets home form his job?

­

Personally, I like crafting because it allows me to make stuff that normally will not be found in the game.

One of the first items I made in Carrion crown was a pair of fingerless gloves for a character that was a Changeling and had a strong complex about her non-human features. Based on Alter Self they had a limited polymorph effect that allowed her to change her claws to normal fingernails and slightly alter her features. The net effect was giving her a +10 to disguise herself as a human while losing the claw attack. There was no bonus to disguising as a different person.

This is interesting, because I have the exact same motivation.. for banning crafting feats. As a GM, I like giving my players exactly the kind of stuff you describe, and I don't want them be able to craft something that's mechanically better but less flavorful. I prefer if m players don't have to chose between flavorful magic items and mechanical benefit.

Simply changing armor and weapon types or substituting magic items of equal market price more suited for your particular group, instead of providing "generic treasure" or falling back on "the AP says" (you have no agency as a GM when running an AP/published adventure outside of PFS? Really?), is basic GM-ing.

Considering that people generally run published adventures so that they dodn't have to put in the work, you're being rather condescending here.

Meanwhile, your "this is basic GM-ing" solution requires every single enemy with magic gear encountered to wear one of the same 2-3 types of armor, use one of the same 2-3 types of weapons, exclusively use big 6 wondrous items/magic jewelery, and be of the same size as the PCs. How is this supposed to work in somethign like Giantslayer, exactly? You could also only encounter very few enemies using such stuff, as everything but one armor, weapon, belt, etc. per PC inevitably gets sold, in which case your entire argument goes up in smoke.
If that's your idea of good GM-ing, I'm damn glad I don't have to play at your table, because I would puke.

If you're running a PFS game or just don't want to deal with Item Creation feats so you ban it in your game, fine. That's not what I'm getting at here. If you didn't tell your players at character creation that Item Creation feats are banned, or that there likely won't be downtime portions in this campaign where expensive mundane or magic items can be made, then later you impose such restrictions on them, why?

I don't think anyone was talking about stealth nerfing players. Your opening post makes no mention of this discussion being about after-the-fact prohibitions, and I don't imagine anyone arguing in favor of doing that.

Downtime is boring? Ok, handwave it.

Handwave what, the time required, to make those feats even stronger? Or do you mean handwave the time spend? That's impossible in my campaign, becasue I don't GM a video game-esque campaign where the mosnter sit around doing nothing until the PCs get into aggro range, and the only objective is killing monsters for gold and experience.

Crafting breaks WBL? Give the PCs less wealth

Do you also increase all enemies' AC by 1 when the PCs take Weapon Focus? Because this is basically the same thing, de facto removing what the feat grants. The player paid for a feat that, due to the GM negatively compensating for it, has no benefit (or at least not its main benefit).

Crafting feats are like Leadership - it's not that I can't balance the game around it, it's that they give the PCs something I don't want PCs to have.

Like I said, there are ways to do it, if you're willing to use them.

What's the gain, though? Why do I need item creation? What good does it do? You're describing the GM doign a lot of changes, up to outright breaking the willing suspension of disbelieve in an obvious "it's here because it's a game" plot device, just so... what? The min-maxer can have the exact perfect item that is supposed to be only found in a small area on the other side of the planet? To make the greedy player believe they've found a way to circumvent limitations and get more powerful than intended?

If someone picks up a magic item creation feat because of the cost reduction, so that they can get more magic items than normal, I don't want to enable that. If someone picks up a magic item creation feat because they they don't get that this isn't Diablo/WoW/PoE, and want to wear "best in slot" in every magic item slot, I don't want to enable that.

And if someone only want to pick up a magic item creation feat because they worry about their Witch not being able to find any hexing rods, I can get them what they want without allowing crafting feats.

I don't see how this is complicated - Detect Poison pings on everything that is designated as "poison", by use of that game term. If the word "poison" doesn't appear in the description (or the description of anything referenced), it's not poison.

So what reasons or justifications are we GM's using to prevent PCs from using these skills and abilities? More than that, why don't we WANT them making their own gear?

Multiple reasons.

• I want to GM an adventure. Hanging around for days or weeks after every other encounter to craft something for the entire party is the exact opposite of that. This is Pathfinder, not Medieval Blacksmith Simulator 2000™.
• Having one PC whose downtime is worth significantly more is an open invitaiton for players to feel left out.
• Magic item creation totally breaks WBL. Unless you want to reduce loot, which isn't fun.
• Magic item creation puts more power into the hands of the already strongest classes, and most importantly the classes that already do the most out-of-combat.
• With magic item creation, I can't control what items the players have. In my current campaign, I took some steps to make magic items special, not the usual "buy it on magic amazon", and magic item creation would completely destroy that.

I have banned magic item creation (handing out bonus feats like PFS does in exachange for e.g. an Alchemist's Brew Potion). No ban on mundane creation, but if the party would dare to sit on their asses for weeks at a time, I'd have hostile forces congregate at the PC's location. Hell, I did that when the party sat around for a couple days without crafting!

-at level five I regain the armor prof without losing the Shadow Weapon, as it does not state any ability will be lost taking this feat or even wearing Heavy armor when not prof with it...correct?

Well, you don't really regain anything, because you never had heavy armor prof. That aside, what an archytype replaces has no bearing on how it functions. I don't think any ability gets shut down by the existence of proficiency with something, and unless an ability explicitly says it doesn't work while wearing a certain type of armor (or armor in general), it works even in armor the class/archetype does not grant proficiency in.

Indeed, loss of armor proficiency is often used in archetypes to deliberately weaken it, basically making you pay a feat (or a dip) if you want to go strength-based, or suffer lower AC.

You also get evasion, which is only useful if you have a decent reflex save.

It's even worse than that, as Shadowdancer's evasion, like most of them, only works in light or no armor.

Of course, there are ways to make a low dex Shadowdancer work, and not everyone cares about all class features.

My goal with that character is to have combat be about Bluffing for feints and mixing my attacks between throwing weapons and melee attacks, eventually being able to chuck a weapon at someone at the start of combat and in my same turn run after that weapon and melee attack, weaving in my Owl companion into the mix as needed.

That is a hard task, because the game really doesn't support that. Basically, it can't be done in one turn for most classes, and it doesn't make sense to do it, either. To be honest, I don't get what you're trying to do - the whole point of throwing a weapon is to not need to get into melee, unless the throw kills the target (which doesn't work in Pathfinder, or pretty much any game with a HP system that doesn't lean towards one-hit-kills), why would anyone chase after it into melee?

In addition, feinting requires spending an action, and is feat intense, and you're looking into combining that with something that you already don't have enough actions to do in a turn, and that is feat hungry on its own.

However, getting an animal companion as a Slayer forced me to lose out on two Class Features later and to get my Studied Feature at 2nd lvl and miss out on my first Slayer Talent.

Considering that the class features are both almost useless, and that a Slayer gets more talents than there are good selections, this is a very lopsided trade not really something to lament. It shows that this is a 3rd party archetype...

the few reddit comments told me about some sort of Starknife deity and a whole chain of thrown weapon Fighter feats

Divine Fighting Technique (Desna's Shooting Star) is what they were talking about, but that's strictly worse than Mythic Weapon Finesse. With "thrown weapon Fighter feats" you mean the Startoss Style suggestion? That's not actually Fighter related, but it doesn't fit what you want at all.

They are better balanced, not necessarily stronger.

unSummoner provides a much needed nerf to the class, especially fixing the "full caster with reduced spells per day" casting. It's still strogner than any other 6/9 caster due to the Summon Monster SLA, but no longer by as wide a margin, and it doesn't outclass even fairly well buil martials with a mere class feature. It should be used exclusively, baring a decidedly very high powered campaign.

unBarb is a much better made class than cBarb, with a higher floor (i.e. better at low optimization levels) and lower ceiling (worse at high optimization levels). It removed the cheezy abuse or Ragecycling, has more rounded defenses, and makes the class play more organic. It's not without flaws (e.g. it no longer has in-class flight), but I would definitely use it and make my players use it, unless they have a really good reason why they want the core version.

unRogue is a much needed upgrade to what can only be described as an NPC class in the chlothes of a PC class. The few things cRogue has tha unRogue misses are negligible. It's still not a good class, nor a well designed class, with plenty of issues that makes it ill suited for beginner players or anyone without high system mastery, unless the game is low powered (in which case it's fine). The cRogue should not be allowed to be used.

unMonk is the one class that should co-exist with the core class. For a typical Monk build, i.e. melee damage focussed (be it armed or unarmed), unMonk is miles ahead of anything cMonk has to offer, providing highly needed fixes to a pretty much broken class. Anyone interested in such a character should definitely use the unchained class. However, tere are some cMonk archetypes that drastically alter the playstyle that retain their value as playable choices (Tetori, Zen Archer, Far Strike Monk, Sohei, Sensei), if a player wants to play such particular builds that the archetypes are made for (in order grappling, archery, thrown weapons, mounted combat, support focus), cMonk with those archetypes should remain aviable.

Does anyone have a point by point eval comparison of Paladin's vs War Priests?

No, because comparing classes is seriously really complicated. As I often say, what's best depends on what you actually want, and what the party and campaign look like.

What you did here is more of a lineup than a comparison. An actual comparison would need to look at specific things to do (e.g. condition removal), and check what each class's toolbox in that regard looks like.

The hardest point of comparison is how randomly good and bad the blessings are.

What are you talking about? We all know that in reality, all Warpriests get the War blessing and none other!

The only caveat I would offer to that, Java, is that (IMHO, of course) archer builds tend to shine against non-pouncing melee builds in most situations precisely because of the need to get close to enemies.

People are still building non-pounce melee builds? In this economy?

Hammer The Gap's a decent feat when you have 6+ attacks, right?

No, because even if it works perfectly, it's a win more. Meaning it's only helpful when your character is already at their best (i.e. you can full-attack the target and all/most of your attacks hit), which is exactly the time you least need your feats to help you.

Good feats to increase damage would be Power Attack, Spirit Oni Master, Mutated Shape, and Demonic Style, although I would advise against getting all of those, and recomment rounding out your character instead.

Of course, what feats to take heavily depends on what class you want to go into. Or classes, even.

but technically firearms are a separate category of weapons… and are only “ranged” in the most literal sense, right?

I don't think so. The first line of the firearm rules is "Firearms work differently from other ranged projectile weapons" (UC pg. 135) - see the word "other"? This sentence only works if firearms are ranged weapons.

Firearms are generally only good for Gunslingers: They are generally treated as Exotic weapons, are slow to reload, their damage tends to be unimpressive, and they tend to misfire when you roll badly.

All of that can be fairly easily fixed without needing to be a Gunslinger. You need a class or archetype that grants a firearm if you want to start with one at 1st (or other low) level, but not only do such ioptions for other classes exist, after a few levels, there's a multitude of ways to make firearms work without direct support from a class.

And all that's only true for early firearms, although I can't fault you for assuming those to be the topic. Advanced firearms most certainly do not require a class or archetype made for them.

Oh, absolutely, I’m just musing about a marriage of the Eldritch Archer with the Gunslinger themes from the Stephen King novels, to include the use of a revolver. With that in mind, I’m fairly certain the Spell Cartridges feat, will take care of reloading

You wouldn't even need that feat, Rapid Reload allows reloading any advanced firearm as a free action.

What you call a "traditional party" is like the tradition of marriages being arranged by the parents, with the bride and groom only meeting on the wedding day. It is a primitive, outdated custom that has absolutely no place in the 21st century.

On what I think (or at least hope) you're actually interested about, a well-functioning party solely consistent of charisma-based classes is absolutely possible.
• Paladin/Antipaladin, Bloodrager, Swashbuckler, Medium, Summoner, Feyspeaker Druid, and Fractured Mind Spiritualist can easily provide a melee presence.
• Sorcerer, Oracle, Psychic, Seducer Witch, Elder Mythos Cultist Cleric, and Feyspeaker Druid can provide full casting, if that's desired. cSummoner also de facto has full casting.
• Bard, Skald, Mesmerist, Magical Child Vigilante, Sworn of the Eldest Inquisitor, Fractured Mind Spiritualist and (again) Summoner come with plenty of skills.
• Oracle (especially Pei Zin Practitioner), Skald, Paladin, Elder Mythos Cultist Cleric, Seducer Witch, Razmiran Priest Sorcerer, and Feyspeaker Druid provide condition removal (and remember that UMD is charisma based).

As evident by the first FAQ I'd posted, when the game talks about abilities not stacking, it means that the respective levels don't stack. A Life Oracle5/Cleric5 multiclass with 14 charisma doesn't get to heal 5d6 when channeling energy. But the FAQ also says "you have to use them separately", which means you can do so - thus, they get eight uses of channel energy (for 3d6 each), and the total HP healed in a day does stack (for 24d6 in total).

In this case, a Rogue5/Slayer6 would not qualify for Dastardly Finish, just like the Oralce/Claric doesn't qualify for Channeled Revival. But when attacking a falnked target, the two seperate non-stacked abilities still both activate seperately, meaning the damage is stacked, just like the Oracle/Claric's total healing is stacked despite the abilities explicitly not stacking.

In the ACG playtest, hybrid classes were straight-out forbidden to multiclass with a parent class. That was removed for the final version, but most such multiclasses result in redundant abilites. This is intended, and is something the ACG explicitly warns about.

Sneak Attack in specific does stack, but it's a bit complicated:

There is an FAQ about stacking class features, but the way it's written it only applies to active abilities.
The stacking rules talk about bonuses, which per the common terms section are "numerical values that are added to checks and statistical scores". Bonus dice are not numerical values - but there is an FAQ that says that the stacking principle applies to other cases, and the game generally takes a "things should be the same, or they should be different." approach.
However, the vast majority of Sneak Attack granting abilities (28 out of 41) say they do stack with other sources of SA, so if we do apply the above mentioned principle, all sources of SA should behave the same (for stacking purposes), and thus Sneak Attack from Rogue and Slayer do stack. And if we don't apply the principle, nothing RAW makes bonus dice not stack.

Sneak Attack is a rather weak mechanic, and a Slayer/Rogue multiclass is not exactly a powerhouse. Regardless, you should check in with your GM.

The best suited spell would be a Symbol of Sleep. Triggering it should be easy, and since it doesn't have to be cast right then, you can justify a high DC without requiring a high level NPC present. And whether be it a letter from a mysterious person that the barmaid hands the PCs, or a rune curiously inscribed on a coaster, it shouldn't be hard to make it a proper plot hook.

The problem with any spell that can be (fully) saved agaisnt is no matter how high you put the DC, there's still the chance for PCs to roll a natural 20 on the save. With 8 PCs, there's a 34% chance at least one of them does so. The Persisten Spell metamagic can significantly reduce the probability for that, down to 2% for 8 PCs.

It is the penalty for two-handed combat, made into a class ability.

I hope what you mean is that the -2 penalty is meant to imitate the TWF penalty (with a light off-hand). Mechanically, Spell Combat has zero relation to TWF.

Ran into another problem my Witch needs have light armor proficiency to wear the silken ceremonial armor

No you don't. You never need proficiency to wear armor or use a shield or weapon - you're just suffering from certain penalties if you don't. In the case of armor and shields, you get the Armor Check Penalty to attack rolls (which means if you don't make attack rolls, you might not care about it). In this case, the Silken Ceremonial Armor has an ACP of 0, so no penalty to anything. The same applies to the mithral buckler.

Sunsilk special material, just scroll down to it.

Direct link to it.

I think Neriathale’s recommendation to use the spell Phase Step and don’t put yourself into the firing line is the right answer for this specific question.

This, a hundred times this. The problem isn't too low AC, the problem is being in a place a Witch has no business being in.

IMO latter material published that modifies a prior rule overrides the prior rule that it modified.

Not only is this not how the rules work, Component Freedom doesn't modify anything relevant for spell combat.

This is what you fail to accept. There can be something that overrules the line in Spell Combat, but it has to use the same (general) language, and neither Still Spell nor Component Freedom, an not even that thrid party stuff, does so. If you want to use Spell Combat without a free hand, you need something that explicitly makes your hand count as free. Component Freedom doesn't contain the words "hand" or "free", and thus can't possibly do that, dito for Still Spell and 'Mythic Spell Combat'.

You assume a correlation between Spell Combat's free hand requirement and somatic component's free hand requirement That assumption is wrong.

Per this FAQ, any maneuver that uses your weapon also works with Weapon Finesse. For which maneuvers do use a weapon, consult this blog post.

They might, or they might all hit.

That's kinda like saying "why should I try to get a job, I might win the lottery". Sure, it could happen, but it's just not a realistic expectation.

Do you keep your secret identity secret from the party as well?

I view that as akin to stealing from your party, or PvP. It is a player's responsibility to create a PC that functions as a member of the party.

The tricky bit to always staying in vigilante identity is most of the social talents only work in social identity, and you get them every odd level.

Easy solution: Just stay in the social identity 24/7. Vigilante Talents explicitly work regardless of identity, and there are literally just four talents that don't fully work if you don't switch identities, the Renown line and Case the Joint, which are all hard to actually set up in a normal campaign anyway. And the only thing from the base class features is the scry protection that stops doing anything when the scryer targets a party member.

Also, two thirds of all social talents work in vigilante identity, or about seven eights if you discount the Renown line and related talents. Ultimately, only Social Grace and Well-Known Expert will actually be missed.