Dimminsy's page

I for one definitely am in the camp of "see the dice, don't know the bonus to it/don't know if it succeeded" is the time in which this ability is valid. A lot of Pathfinder assumes (from wording of abilities that have to deal with die rolls) people play in the open since they assume more PFS which is strict adherence to RAW. I also think the ability is just fine as is with the ability to cause allies to reroll bad dice. It's a once a day benefit per ally and takes an non-free action. It's much better suited as an offensive ability. So is fireball but it can be used to burn a hanging bridge to escape an enemy across a chasm. I'm more of a RAW proponent but enjoy when abilities have multiple uses, such as "Mis"fortune.

Dimminsy wrote:

Ok, an added restriction is I also want there to be a want to convert the crit ranges over to the new system and still have %'s that are close enough to the old values. I want 1's and 20's to happen, but I don't want someone to feel like they were cheated when save or dies occur and they have a 5% of just losing their character or auto-winning a BBEG fight. However, I don't want crit threats to be removed from the game either. I went through the math about crit threat chances in my previous comment if you want clarification about what I mean about crit threats.

Honestly... it seems like you're missing the forest for the trees.

Your reasoning thus far has largely come down to "save-or-dies suck because nobody likes a 5% chance of auto-death". So why not just... remove the 'crit failure' on the 1? If you roll a 1 on your save but your save is still high enough to get over the DC, congrats you shrug off the Baleful Polymorph. Go punch the Wizard's face in for trying that.

Would that solve your core complaint, or do you have deeper issues with the d20 setup?

My issue is not the principle of failing on a 1 or succeeding on a 20. My issue is I do not think 5% of the time is the " correct" or "appropriate" chance of either of those results happening. When a 1 and a 20 are occuring multiple times in the same combat it ceases to be special. If you watch a a match on TV like MMA or boxing, usually the blows take out a "set" amount of energy from the opponent. The high light videos are of underdogs landing a knockout punch against all odds. I know it's not the best analogy and this isn't real life, but it's to give a little reason for the motivation or want for a more average die roll.

@Skeld: Ya, the somewhat normal distribution is what I was going for. My group already knows that static bonuses to weapons and spells already are the best option so they wouldn't change their tactics much. Crit threat ranges could be converted over to keep a similar enough chance to crit threat so any abilities tied to a crit success not just a natual 20 would be relatively unchanged. Thank you for your suggestion. I'll look into it!

@Orfamay: You mind linking that in here? A side goal of this is to change the fewest number of mechanics as possible because I try to play the game as close to the rules as possible unless someone's abusing the latitude they have or the party is just unbalanced too much by a problem character.

@Calth: As I said, I want to change as little as possible about the game and still make this work. However, I do like the idea of max damage threasholds to keep things from getting crazy. Maybe something like "Finger of Death deals either leveld12 damage or 50% of their max health as damage, whichever is smaller." Or an effect of "Immune to death effects when above 40% health." applied to boss-types.

@GreyWolf: The wrap-around methods you described sound like they could hold some promise. Could result in some interesting "Aww that 21 was almost a 20!" but it would make the 20 result more likely than the 1 result thus skewing the average more. I'll think about it a bit more and see if some benefit can be found.

Ok, an added restriction is I also want there to be a want to convert the crit ranges over to the new system and still have %'s that are close enough to the old values. I want 1's and 20's to happen, but I don't want someone to feel like they were cheated when save or dies occur and they have a 5% of just losing their character or auto-winning a BBEG fight. However, I don't want crit threats to be removed from the game either. I went through the math about crit threat chances in my previous comment if you want clarification about what I mean about crit threats.

Looking at the anydice link, I'm really liking the 2d8+1d6-2 model. My goal of this was to not change the power level of characters but to make things a bit more realistic. Characters that "rely" on crit threats such as a Swashbuckler, a Magus, or a crit focused Fighter shouldn't become non-existant or nerfed hard, so a comparable crit chance should be held up. Looking at the 3d6 rule variant Valfen posted but using the model Zhayne posted results in a crit table conversion being:

Normal | Old % | Modified | New %
---------+-------+----------+--------
-- 20 ---|-- 05 -|- 17-20 --|- 5.2
-- 19 ---|-- 10 -|- 16-20 --|- 9.11
-- 18 ---|-- 15 -|- 15-20 --|- 14.58
-- 17 ---|-- 20 -|- 14-20 --|- 21.61
-- 15 ---|-- 30 -|- 13-20 --|- 30.2

I think that's a pretty good conversion rate. What do you guys think?

Also, when looking at the distribution, you have a 56.78% chance of rolling 8-13 (within 3 whole numbers of the average 10.5) which feels much better to me than the 30% chance of rolling those numbers on a d20.

I was mostly looking for a way to curb the "at high level you have a 5% chance every roll when facing a wizard of auto-dying no matter how high your save is and how bad the wizard is" and similar situations.

EDIT: I tried out 1d10+2d6-2 and got another curve that fit the criteria. Editing in a moment again.

EDIT2: Using 1d10+2d6-2 I got this change:
Normal | Old % | Modified | New %
---------+-------+----------+--------
-- 20 ---|-- 05 -|- 17-20 --|- 5.56
-- 19 ---|-- 10 -|- 16-20 --|- 9.73
-- 18 ---|-- 15 -|- 15-20 --|- 15.56
-- 17 ---|-- 20 -|- 14-20 --|- 22.78
-- 15 ---|-- 30 -|- 13-20 --|- 31.11

So it would actually increase the crit threat chance. Mmmmm...

I just thought I should mention that my group will be gaming on roll20.net since we live in different states. This allows us to use things like d5's and d3's if that would help fine tune the distribution.

@Zhayne: When you're rolling an attack a 1 always results in a miss and when rolling a save a 1 always results in failing the save. That's what I mean when I said "crit fail".

@Mr. Pitt: The problem with 3d6 is that you're forcing the minimum roll higher. I still want to range of values to go from 1 to 20 so as to not alter the AC's/Saves of players/creatures but I also want the average to be close to 10.5. I obviously don't want to roll 20d20 and take the average because then there's almost 0 change for a crit success or fail, but I also don't want them to occur 5% of the time.

Exactly Hawktitan. I want crits and crit fails to be something to be unexpected rather than be accounted for 5% of the time.

@Zhayne: Well, that certainly is a quick way to solve the problem. I wonder what the changes of rolling individual numbers would be. I might have to look into it.

@Hawktitan: That would be good but exact values are needed so taking the average usually won't result in a whole number. Floor and ceiling would skew the results as well.

@redward: Look at my OP EDIT2. =)

Hello fellow ROLL-players!

I have been thinking about the concept of "average" in DnD and Pathfinder. There is a wide margin around the average roll (for a d20) that could mean the difference between success and failure. I understand the want for randomness in a game to spice combat and saves up. I also understand that having a set value for whether you're able to hit an enemy or not is bogus.

The goal: Use a pool of dice that when rolled result in a combined average total of 10.5 (or something close to it such as 10-11) with a min of 1 and a max of 20.

Example of a dice average total: 4d6 = 4*((1+6)/2) = 4*3.5 = 14 average. 5d4 = 5*((1+4/2) = 5*2.5 = 12.5 average.

So my question is: How would you go about rolling a set of dice together to get an average die roll for a d20 while still allowing for variation within rolls? I theorycrafted a couple different things such as 3d6 and editing saves and AC down by 1 or 2. I tried 5d4 to get a max of 20 but that meant the lowest roll was a 5. I tried 6d4-4 to get a 20 max again but the lowest roll was a 2. 4d6-4 gave a max of 20 but a minimum of 0. 3d4+2d6-4 gives a min of 1, a max of 20, but an average of 14.5.

How would you solve this problem?

EDIT: Time spent rolling may or may not be an issue because my group will be playing online where the difference in time between a d20 roll and a pool of dice rolled is negligible.

EDIT2: I should probably say another goal is to make it where the "average" is more likely to be the result than the extreme ends of the roll. When you roll a d20 you have the exact same chance of rolling a 1 as rolling a 20. I would like the die results to be the most likely at 10 or 11 and then slowly drop off like a bell curve.

Ravingdork wrote:

Tarantula wrote:

Creatures with a spellcraft skill can make a roll to identify the spell as it is cast.

According to the opinion of a developer with no authority over the rules.

...and the description of the Spellcraft skill.

Core Rule Book, pg 106 wrote:

Action: Identifying a spell as it is being cast requires no action, but you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast, and this incurs the same penalties as a Perception skill check due to distance, poor conditions, and other factors.

If you can see the caster and have Spellcraft skill you can attempt to determine what spell they are casting.

The skill is Int/Trained Only, so it isn't clearly defined exactly what happens if you don't have the skill. On the other hand, the simplest explanation is that you know they are doing something but not exactly what they are doing. Sort of like someone with no training in Disable Device who observed someone picking a lock would know they are doing something with the door but wouldn't know exactly what they are doing.

It would look suspicious.

"...but you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast..." If the spell has no visual (assuming eschew materials as well) or auditory cues, how could one's spell casting be detected beyond "Why's he staring at me?" For a SLA, (which have no visual or auditory cues), how can someone clearly see the spell as it is being cast if it is only detectable after it is cast?

This is different from watching someone use the Disable Device skill for the exact reason of having no detectable stimuli for someone to pick up.

Not trying to be argumentative, just stating my case and trying to understand your side of the fence.

I believe the Gloves of Marking would be good for rogues that are trying to help boost a ranged Bard's damage or be a team player or something else along those lines. It's more of a team support item for TWF fighters that have several martials in the group. The reason I say TWF is because the player has more attacks to succeed, more attacks to benefit from the bonus to-hit and damage, more likely to be Dex based, and could mark multiple enemies for a followup character to clean up. Also, rogues don't benefit nearly as much from crits compared to Strength based martials so that would boost its use even more. Morale bonuses aren't all that common after all.

However, I do agree for my particular build it's not as useful as another item but that's because I'm a Str Barbarian (even though I am TWFing). I'll keep the item in mind the next time I try out a character with sneak attack. Thanks for the info!

Huh, I just noticed. The Deliquescent Gloves use up the hand slot while the Duelist's Vambraces use the wrist slot so they can be combined. I thought they used the same slot so I might just end up using both. Pretty cheap for what they do. Longarm Bracers could also be an option for those times I don't want to provoke as much from an enemy.

I'm not totally convinced the tradeoff of of losing the AnC when combined with lance charging is worth it damage wise (since small characters can more often charge/use a medium mount) but it is certainly a strong option and flavorful.

A Halfling can make full use of Risky Striker a lot in RotRL especially if he uses a Wand of Reduce Person. Also, you can qualify for Arcane Strike if you take the traits Alluring or The Lantern Bearer. I'm currently playing a TWF Halfling Barbarian and he's using Risky Striker and Arcane Strike nearly every fight (level 11 at the beginning of book 4). For reference my starting stats were 14-17-15-7-12-10 after racials, 16-15-15-7-12-8 before.

Good catch, Zword. Life Funnel is a passive ability that works regardless of the weapon (or fist) you're using. So no need for the Ki Focus property if that's all you're after.

Using weapons that are not sized for you have a -2 for each size category of difference. A person cannot wield a weapon that would be equivalent to larger than a 2handed weapon for them.

Example: When a character wields a 1handed Large weapon they can use it as a 2handed weapon at a -2 penalty (assuming they're Medium). They can wield a light Huge weapon at a -4 penalty as a 2handed weapon. A character cannot wield a 1handed Huge weapon because it would require more than 2 hands to wield (1handed Huge -> 2handed Large -> invalid medium).

Jotungrip specifically calls out requiring "...but only if the weapon is appropriately sized for the character." for the ability to work. A Large weapon is not appropriately sized for a Medium creature regardless of whether they can wield the weapon without penalty.

With these interactions, and assuming the DM allowed you to take the variant Tiefling, you can either (as examples) wield a Large Longsword (1handed -> 2handed) at no penalty to attack or dual wield Medium greatswords at TWF penalties (-4/-4 if you took the TWF feat then another -2 for Jotungrip for a total of -6/-6).

Thanks for letting us know, Mangrum!

Sounds like it could be a fun archetype to roleplay. For the future I suggest using ArchivesOfNethys. It cites everything (that I've seen), has many/most of the adventure path items/things, indicates if something is PFS legal or not (double check with Additional Resources just to be sure), and is more likely to be up-to-date. When searching for something use "+" instead of a space between words. So Spirited+Charge as an example. Hope that helps!

Hope you enjoy your mythic adventure. Never have had to chance to play or DM an adventure like that but it sounds like you're getting to really flesh out your character now. =)

The +1-5 add to your sunder attempt in the form of a + to your CMB check and your damage to overcome the hardness of the material. You're still gaining a benefit, but the +'s don't change the material properties. It's similar to how adding +'s to a Mithral armor does not increase the Dex. cap or lower the ACP further.

It's a reasonable houserule, but I think the + already gives enough benefit to the user. It also prevents someone from using a +5 Impervious weapon to nearly auto-sunder almost everything (not that Barbarians basically do that anyway).

shadram, I'm sure Howie's social commentary at least brought some joy to your life!

I don't own that particular book (though I would love to since I'm using an AnC in PFS right now) bookrat, but it's 2 sites vs 1 in favor of Walrus' having Fatal Gore.

EDIT: That's true, but that hasn't exactly stopped them before from using material. Still, either way, I'm happy to conclude they do have Fatal Gore as a special ability. Very interesting choice of an AnC I do have to say, ShroudedInLight.

"Name's Gore. Fatal Gore."

I found this: Link about 3/4 of the way down the page:
"And the walrus's big special ability is Fatal Gore, giving them a base 19-20 threat range on their gore attacks, though the animal companion version doesn't get that ability till after the size increase at 7th class level."

EDIT: I looked up the Walrus

Walrus

Source Bestiary 4 pg. 311 (Amazon), Animal Archive pg. 29 (Amazon)
Monster Entry Link

Starting Statistics: Size Medium; Speed 10 ft., swim 40 ft.; AC +4 natural armor; Attack bite (1d6); Ability Scores Str 12, Dex 13, Con 14, Int 2, Wis 13, Cha 6; Special Qualities hold breath, low-light vision.

7th-Level Advancement: Size Large; AC +4 natural armor; Attack bite (1d8); Ability Scores Str +8, Dex -2, Con +4.

No mention of the Fatal Gore, so take d20 (I assume that's where you got your quote from) with a grain of salt as a precaution.

"...allowing her to use her special ki attacks through the weapon ..."

(quoting Life Funnel) "If the monk has at least 1 ki point in his ki pool and scores a confirmed critical hit against a living enemy or reduces a living enemy to 0 or fewer hit points, he heals a number of hit points equal to his monk level."

I'll go ahead and say I'm not an expert on the Monk. However, I don't think Life Funnel is a "special ki attack" but rather just a passive ability that relies on you having a remaining ki point. I think you actually have to expend a ki point for it to count as a special ki attack.

To my knowledge, Pathfinder "adds" multipliers together. So a character charging with a lance (x3 weapon crit) with Spirited Charge (x3 damage when charging with a lance) would be (smaller multiplier) + (larger multiplier - 1) = (3) + (3-1) = x5 damage on a crit.

Smallest Numbers: If we set "normal" at a generic heavy steel shield, apply Unyielding and the multiplier of the Adamantine, then add +'s after:
HP: 20*[(4/3)+(3-1)] = 20*(10/3)= 66.67 = 66 + (2*10) = 86 HP
HD: 10*2 = 20 + (20 Adamantine - 10 normal HD) + (2*2) = 34 HD

Medium Numbers: If we set "normal" at Adamantine, apply Unyielding then add on the +'s:
HP: 20*(4/3) = 26.67 = 26*3 = 78 + (2*10) = 98 HP
HD: 20*2 = 40 + (2*2) = 44 HD

Largest Numbers: If we set "normal" at Adamantine, then add on the +'s before Unyielding:
HP: 20*(4/3) = 26.67 = 26 + (2*10) = 46*3 = 138 HP
HD: 20 + (2*2) = 24*2 = 48 HD

I personally lean toward the second option since I would say the shield is now "normally" a Heavy Adamantine Shield but normal doesn't have anything to do with the magical +'s put ontop of the shield and only refers to the material the shield is made of.

Ultimately it's up to the DM since I don't think this is spelled out exactly by the rules, but I like it when a player shows me they put some thought into the ramifications of their question instead of "trying to get one past me." Not that you're trying to do that, just saying how I feel when I make a ruling for a home game.

This is probably the most ancient necro I've seen.

I'll already be adding 6-10 damage from Risky Striker vs Large+ enemies or Medium+ if I'm Tiny and I'll be using Arcane Strike with my swift actions to add another 3-5 on each hit. Plus things with acid resist (while not common) would basically negate it since the damage is not multiplied on a crit. I did really consider those gloves though.

What made me decide against those gloves was I'll be attacking with 7-8 attacks myself with haste and then another 4-5 with my An.C. with haste. With that many dice I don't want to add another d6 to each of my attack rolls for the sake of convenience.

jeffh, why could you not charge a person 10' away? Assuming you mean a grid like X--X.

"You must move at least 10 feet (2 squares) and may move up to double your speed directly toward the designated opponent."

Those 2 spaces are 10 feet.

"A staggered creature can still take free, swift, and immediate actions."

"You can move 5 feet in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement."

How I'm reading is you can charge while staggered (at just normal move speed) and/or you can 5 foot step while staggered without using up your move or standard. Is there something I'm missing?

Mmmm, so for a TWF barbarian obviously the item is worth it if it applies to all offhand attacks. I wasn't really going to use the hand slot anyway, so would a +2 to my lowest to hit offhand attack for 8k be worth it? We'll be going to about level 16 or 17 using PFS rules.

So for PFS it would be more likely ruled to only apply to one attack?

If I'm DMing for people I know I often ask minor things about their character such as how they wear their clothes, how they organize their backpack, etc. If the group is more of a roleplaying/die roll suspense kind of group then I would have a 75% chance of drawing out the potion, 25% chance of drawing another consumable. It's not like (most I've come across anyway) people keep track of the actual volume of the backpack.

However, if it would cause trouble with the group then I would just say it's a move action. For PFS I would just stick to a move action since there's enough precedent of not really using sight to get something from your backpack already.

Is anyone of a different opinion? Or the same? I just want to make sure I didn't "get lucky" with two people and everyone else disagrees lol.

I am using a double weapon so my offhand will always be the same weapon. I originally thought it only applied to one offhand attack per round but then I looked at the Cracked Pale Green Prism that gives a +1 to all attacks for half the price. That's a slotless typed bonus while Duelist Vambraces are slotted with a penalty reduction (basically untyped bonus) and only apply to at max half your attacks for double the price but double the benefit on a niche item.

Kind of interesting that the attack bonus on my offhand will/would be greater than my mainhand. If I were to take Double Slice it would be better to make my "offhand" my better enchanted weapon when not hasted.

There are 6 threads mentioning this item on the forum and none of them that I saw cleared up the question.

Source Ultimate Equipment pg. 273

Aura moderate abjuration; CL 8th
Slot wrist; Price 8,000 gp; Weight 2 lbs.
Description
Made from a mix of sturdy steel and boiled leather, these vambraces grant a +1 deflection bonus to AC while the wearer is wielding a double weapon or two weapons (not including natural weapons or unarmed attacks). In addition, once per round, when attacking with an off-handed weapon, the wearer can reduce any penalties on attack rolls made with that weapon by 2.

If one had taken the full TWF feat tree, gaining 3 offhand attacks, would this item negate a -2 from all the offhand attacks or just one of them? "Once per round" and "reduce any penalties on attack rolls" is enough ambiguity to make me wonder. This item is PFS legal and I'm looking to ensure my attacks usually land.

Thanks in advance!

Huh, I always thought ArchivesOfNethys had the most accurate info. Guess they haven't updated Weapon Cords yet. Is the only point of weapon cords now to not be totally disarmed or not provoke an attack picking your weapon back up? Seems rather odd, but it's super cheap even for that still.

Athaleon, ya, crossbows are non-functional in the sense of not contributing anywhere close to a normal bow build. How would playing a Tiefling help?

I apologize if this has already been discussed (my search-fu didn't find what I was looking for using "hand crossbow weapon cord"). This is mostly for PFS.

I'll start by quoting the relevant text.

Crossbow, Hand: You can draw a hand crossbow back by hand. Loading a hand crossbow is a move action that provokes attacks of opportunity.

You can shoot, but not load, a hand crossbow with one hand at no penalty. You can shoot a hand crossbow with each hand, but you take a penalty on attack rolls as if attacking with two light weapons.

Weapon cords are 2-foot-long leather straps that attach your weapon to your wrist. If you drop your weapon or are disarmed, you can recover it as a swift action, and it never moves any farther away from you than an adjacent square. However, you cannot switch to a different weapon without first untying the cord (a full-round action) or cutting it (a move action or an attack, hardness 0, 0 hit points). Unlike with a locked gauntlet, you can still use a hand with a weapon cord, though a dangling weapon may interfere with finer actions.

Benefit: Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with two weapons are reduced. The penalty for your primary hand lessens by 2 and the one for your off hand lessens by 6. See Two-Weapon Fighting in Combat.

Normal: If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. When fighting in this way you suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand. If your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light.

Does this mean that I have to be holding both hand crossbows at the same time to benefit from the TWF feat tree or can I use the weapon cords to always have a hand free for reloading with free actions from Rapid Reload?

Benefit: The time required for you to reload your chosen type of weapon is reduced to a free action (for a hand or light crossbow), a move action (for heavy crossbow or one-handed firearm), or a standard action (two-handed firearm). Reloading a crossbow or firearm still provokes attacks of opportunity.

If you have selected this feat for a hand crossbow or light crossbow, you may fire that weapon as many times in a full-attack action as you could attack if you were using a bow.

Normal: A character without this feat needs a move action to reload a hand or light crossbow, a standard action to reload a one-handed firearm, or a full-round action to load a heavy crossbow or a two-handed firearm.

1) Would the TWF penalties stack with the hand crossbow clause "You can shoot a hand crossbow with each hand, but you take a penalty on attack rolls as if attacking with two light weapons." bringing the total to a -4/-4? Or is that just reiterating the TWF penalties?

2) Assume I start the round with at least one of my hand crossbows in a hand (hand 1). Would this attack sequence be legal?

1) Attack with hand 1 with the TWF penalties applied to hit using hand 2 to reload.
2) Drop the hand 1 crossbow.
3) Use a swift action to recover the hand 2 crossbow.
4) Use all offhand attacks of hand 2 applying TWF penalties using hand 1 to reload.
5) Repeat except hand 1 becomes hand 2 and vice versa.

I know this isn't going to be the best build (you never have a swift action free, reduced damage vs normal bows, etc.), I was just seeing if it was possible to do. Kind of wondering if the build would work with light crossbows (though that would be harder to justify). Thanks in advance!

Only slightly more tricky but along the same lines, he could play a Cavalier or Roughrider fighter with lots of backup mounts. Generic lance and Spirited Charge goodness, he would be dealing large pools of damage on charges. If he went a small character he could ride a medium mount to make moving around even simpler and charges more frequent 'though the damage would be slightly reduced.

(Probably cheesy and I don't know if it's entirely RAW, but lances can be wielded one handed while mounted, so maybe a TWF Cavalier with lances for the times after you've charged an enemy could be an option. If RAW, I don't know if it's optimal either but certainly thematic)

@avr, Huh, that's interesting. I thought I remember somewhere that quadrupeds had to wear two of a foot slot item for it to work, but maybe I'm just going slightly insane.

Well, there's not always a guarantee with PFS with the table rotations, but I think Dragon Style is worth it to be able to charge through allies and ignore difficult terrain which is worth the two feat investment. I might get Winged Boots for my boar then so I don't have to worry so much about flying enemy encounters.

Thank you for the link to the slots. I just need to print it out and all that. I still haven't been able to find a link to the tricks from the AA sadly.

Well last year ranger's AnC died because a rogue was confused, had to attack nearest creature, was a tie between the ranger and their unconscious bird AnC (fireball), rolled randomly and chose the bird (sneak attack on helpless enemies). So it'll definitely come up, and any AoE save effect will also target my AnC.

Ya, it was really odd to me too. Thanks for the Reckless Abandon suggestion. It actually is better than Imp. Crit for my damage, though the -5 to AC is pretty steep, so I don't know if I'll be using it or not.

I haven't really looked at the bloodrage powers because my group is "PFSbutnot" in that since the RotRL was written after we started the adventure path (last year) and rebuilding is so easy, they locked the allowable books to the January version of the Additional Resources. We're not allowed to use the ACG otherwise players that are keeping their characters from last year wouldn't have the same options new players would have when building a character. I'm open to other rage powers though!

@Flutter, Oh, that makes sense. I was misunderstanding your intentions. I guess I should make my AnC as tough as possible since he'll pretty much always have less HP than even Wizards. Are you still suggesting going with a normal AnC instead of the Charger archetype? Devotion's nice, but having an extra 5-6 AC would be nice too without ACPs.

Bumpy.

@Eridan: Ya, I would agree on the activation being standard as long as it says "on command". But the way of activating the ioun stone is only holding it then releasing it (dropping is a free action), so the switching of hands would arguably be the only required action.

@Bob Bob: Huh, I guess I missed that part of the rules. My AnC will have 3 Int by the time I'd want to do this. I really don't know whether the "no effect on animals" part is kind of an AND thing with the < 3 Int requirement or is it like an OR.

I mean, if you pushed your AnC to lift up the ioun stone then "release" it maybe. But like Eridan said, this is a gray area.

@avr:

I thought they would work the same way horseshoes would in that you need 4 of them in order to be effective, aka 2 pairs. Is that not the case for PFS?

I did the DPR calculations and at the level I would be selecting GTWF (I'll have a +3 Furious x2 Two-Bladed Sword), it would increase my DPR by more than Double Slice or Imp. Crit against a CR appropriate enemy and even enemies of higher CR. I originally was going to not even bother with it but after doing the math it works out in my favor since I'll be overcoming all DR except piercing, bludgeoning, and epic.

The DMs indicated that "this year there will be more possibilities of outright dying compared to last" (last year we went from level 1 to 10 and we're picking up again this year) so I assumed that meant don't have awful saves.

@Flutter:

I actually found and read quite a lot of your guide and it gave me some direction (originally had Power Attack at level 1!)

Really the boar was for flavor and to have fun with the build, but the increased movement speed doesn't hurt.

I am absolutely loving the suggestion of Dragon Style. I would have never thought of that. However, the feat progression looks different than what I'm seeing (Paizo link but direct link with same info here). I don't believe Animal Companions gain feats every odd level. To illustrate this, "BAB: This is the animal companion's base attack bonus. An animal companion's base attack bonus is the same as that of a druid of a level equal to the animal's HD. Animal companions do not gain additional attacks using their natural weapons for a high base attack bonus." They have non-standard progression from what I'm seeing. So they gain feats at levels 1, 2, 5, 8, 10, 13, and 16. If it is different for PFS let me know because I'd love 9 AnC feats by 17 instead of 7.

Since I will already be TWF with my barbarian, I was trying to stay away from spending huge amounts of money on Tumbaa. Mithral Kikko armor would be (30 Kikko + 4000 Mithral)*2 usual creature = 8060 gold before enchantments. That's about 1/4 of my level 10 gold compared to (30*2) + 150 (masterwork is not counted twice as per this link "Armor for Unusual Creatures: The cost of armor for non-humanoid creatures, as well as for creatures who are neither Small nor Medium, varies. The cost of the masterwork quality and any magical enhancement remains the same.") = 210 gold, hence the charger archetype. However, if you think it's worth getting the normal abilities of an AnC or another archetype, I could always wait until level 11 to get the armor and just get the normal version of the armor and suffer the penalties to hit for a level.

Yes, with Greater Beast Totem he will have pounce on a charge and with Greater Ferocious Beast he can confer that ability to his AnC. Since Tumbaa will be getting at least 3 primary attacks (1 gore, second gore at -5 if I keep Multiattack, and 2 claw attacks gained when raging from Lesser/Greater Beast Totem) I thought Power Attack would be worthwhile, especially when trying to overcome DR since at max I would be getting him a +1 Furious AoMF. Will probably just stick with a Furious AoMF since it's 4k gold instead of 16k.

Do you have a link to the Animal Archive somewhere? I'd like to look at the tricks, feats, and have proof of valid item slots (we just have to have a valid link and printed text out on us on game day, not the actual book since the DMs aren't "true PFS" DMs and want the hobby to be as accessible to the students as possible).

Thanks for your responses!

Cheech, I explain it under the "Info About Our Game" spoiler. Going to level 17 using PFS rules in a "home game" is basically what's going on.

EDIT: I guess I should go ahead and add in that I was planning on putting Pimon's FCB into skill points since I'll be dumping the two I get into Ride and Handle Animal. Maybe 1 in general class skills then rest into Acrobatics?

Also, I forgot with MW reducing the ACP by 1 and level 9 Charger decreasing it 2 again, he'd have no penalty to hit or on skills.

Assuming the wording is along the lines of, "You may immediately reroll a skill check with the same bonuses as the first, taking the result of the second roll even if the roll is lower." and makes no mention of non-free actions I'd say they can be stacked. If you REALLY want a roll to go well blowing all your rerolls on one check could be useful if a bit sub-optimal.

Say the same effect were to occur with just the ioun stone by itself. What kind of action(s) would it be to change the stone from orbiting around you to the Animal Companion?

Example: Say I am playing a mounted druid and am using a Clear Spindle slotted into a Wayfinder for the protection from possession and mental control. If my Animal Companion gets dominated, what action would it be to give them the Wayfinder/Clear Spindle to protect them?

I've posted recently about a mounted Halfling TWF barbarian build before. Here's the game info and character build if you care.

I need your help building Tumbaa, his boar animal companion. I've never played a druid or anyone mounted but I've got most of the rules down. Right now I'm leaning toward a Charger archetype to keep him alive by wearing better armor (it would be awful if Pimon's Tumbaa died on him).

Here's the feats I'm looking at for him right now (first stat boost into Int for the Common language, second into Dex to qualify for Nimble Moves at 10 instead of 13):
1) Iron Will?
2) Power Attack
5) Great Fortitude?
8) Improved Iron Will?
10) Nimble Moves
13) Acrobatic Steps: ignoring 20ft of difficult terrain is quite wonderful for charging
16) ?

The 1/5/8 feats are to make sure I remain in control of him and to improve the level 15 Charger archetype ability. Is this useful/necessary?

Would it just be better to give Tumbaa two sets of Featherstep Slippers to free up the level 10 and 13 feats? That would require the magic item slot feat, or is that even legal?

I don't want to spend a crazy amount of money on Tumbaa since I'll already be TWFing, so I was thinking of using MW Kikko Armor (what my character will be wearing except Mithral) Barding and only have a -1 ACP to worry about until level 15 when it goes away.

However, I've never built one of these guys before so I don't really know what's best. Any suggestions would be helpful!

Well I personally thought you wanted something workable. If you want "joke" or "silly" builds I got plenty of them too.

Well, altho you do make a point, your OP wasnt clear. We tried to give you useful advice, including my "I wouldn't, except for a TOON! type silly game."

I wasn't saying that I'm upset people were giving actually good mechanical advice. I was just surprised people hadn't given more joke answers. Maybe I just don't believe in the goodness of the internet enough. You guys are 'da real MVPs.

Cast Merciful Cure Light Wounds for extra points.

Can you even apply Merciful? I guess it doesn't really limit what spells you can put it on. "I'd like to cast an Elemental (Acid) Coaxing Cure Serious Wounds." Would that cause "acid bleed heal damage"?

I started this thread because a friend of mine made a character with basically the same stats (two 14s, two 13s, and two 12s) to not let anything suffer. That got me thinking about the opposite end of the spectrum.

Thanks for all your submissions! I was hoping more people would create characters with a wonky theme or purposefully create the worst character possible. I guess mostly min-maxers reside on the Advice forum! /snark

Taking a character to the furthest 20 point buy extremes, what character would you build with the thread title's stat array?

State race, class, the legality of the build (PFS, normal, or third party), and whether you're building more for power or theme.

Mechanically, I'd build something like a Halfling Swashbuckler and put the 18's into Dex and Cha.

Personally, I'd like to try an Elf with 5 Con and act like I was playing on hard mode, maybe an evasion tank type character for the dichotomy.

Traditional and ridiculous builds are welcome!

Thank you Jeff, Bob Bob, and especially Grijm for laying out the explanation well. Also Jeff, the AC can gain an iterative attack if they have fewer than three natural attacks by level 9 (when they get 6 BaB), not just when they have only one attack.

An animal companion gains Multiattack as a bonus feat if it has three or more natural attacks and does not already have that feat. If it does not have the requisite three or more natural attacks, the animal companion instead gains a second attack with its primary natural weapon, albeit at a –5 penalty.

So just to reiterate and organize everything that has been said/quoted:

1) Without Lesser Beast Totem, my barbarian wouldn't be able to make any natural attacks, so since my barbarian is able to gain natural attacks and use them (stacking 2 on top of 0 for a total of 2), the boar should be able to gain the natural attacks and use them (stacking 2 on top of 1 for a total of 3).

2) In the natural attack section it says "You do not receive additional natural attacks for a high base attack bonus" so upon earning 6 BaB my barbarian would not be able to "Longsword/longsword-5/bite/bite-5" since I would have already used my bite attack and the only way to use 2 bite attacks is to have 2 mouths ("so long as a different limb is used for each attack").

3) As per this FAQ a creature with four legs, regardless of the type of foot, are able to use up to 4 claw attacks granted to them by an ability or abilities.

4) As long as you do not use the limb that round for a different weapon attack/holding something you are able to use that limb for an applicable natural attack as per the different limb clause quoted at the end of 2. So Sword (BaB-TWF)/Sword BaB-TWF)/Bite (BaB-5) for secondary natural attack is what would happen at levels 1-5 when TWF with longswords while having a bite ability.

5) The natural attack section states "You can make attacks with natural weapons in combination with attacks made with a melee weapon and unarmed strikes, so long as a different limb is used for each attack. For example, you cannot make a claw attack and also use that hand to make attacks with a longsword. When you make additional attacks in this way, all of your natural attacks are treated as secondary natural attacks, using your base attack bonus minus 5 and adding only 1/2 of your Strength modifier on damage rolls. Feats such as Two-Weapon Fighting and Multiattack can reduce these penalties.". For commentary on the octopus example sent by my DM, I will quote Grijm (editting a bit):

The Octopus can do iterative attacks with the sword, followed by Natural attacks all at -5 at half strength bonus.

Example:
Sword (BaB)/
Sword (BaB-iteratives)/
7 tentacles (BaB-5 at half str)

The Octopus can even TWF with 2 limbs, followed by the rest of the tentacles as secondary attacks.

Sword (BaB-TWF)/
Sword(BaB-TWF-iteratives)/
Sword(offhand BaB iteratives)/
6 tentacles (BaB-5 at half str)"

This is not really going to be used by the boar, but it was just for completeness.

6) The boar would have 2 natural attacks at level 9 without Lesser Beast Totem because of the Multiattack clause quoted near the beginning of this post.

Is this a fair summary of the thread? Was anything left out?

I cannot go to the DM without any evidence to the contrary. All I have right now is the "body parts capable of making the attack" quote which can just responded to with "hooves aren't capable of making claw attacks.

We met last night to game and for clarification I asked if I could use both of my claw attacks for my barbarian. He's allowed to use both of his claw attacks. However, the boar wouldn't "because he only gets one attack" is what one DM said.

I'm still really confused. The DM said that the boar could use the claw attack(s) but only by substituting out one or both of the gore attack(s). So it's not even that the boar can't use the claw attacks, it's just that they believe there's a hard cap on the number of natural attacks a creature can make based on their ability.

I'm just not understanding.