Dr_Ugly's page

I think the Oracle has a pretty unique design space that the Sorcerer is unable to fill.

Curses and their affects are interesting enough that they on their own could be worth bringing in Oracles. Imagine that the Blackened Curse still penalizes combat (maybe limiting them to untrained in any weapon proficiency) but they still get a +2 when working with Fire based spells.

Most gods would grant access to the Divine list, but other gods would probably grant access to other lists (Erastil = Primal, Nethys = Arcane, Pharasma = Occult) leading to a different flavor of caster entirely when combined with their curses.

*Edited for clarity

I actually think Curses would fit better as an Archetype (or Archetype like) mechanic. You get a curse that gives a small benefit and a bigger disadvantage, then you can take feats in the future related to the Curse. Not sure why Oracles have to be the only ones who are cursed.

I'm sorry... For *you* if you were me, that would be good enough. I'm not you though and that *isn't* good enough.

I'm telling you... I *feel* like, if the Paladin isn't LG as a setting rule, that the Paladin is lesser. It damages my enjoyment of the class to the point that *I will no longer enjoy the class* because part of it, to me, will feel gone.

You're focused on what you can personally do, and that is all you care about. I'm not I don't draw my enjoyment of the class from what I can personally do with it.

If you can play a CG FULL Paladin of Milani, then it doesn't matter that I can play a LG Paladin of Iomedae because the class isn't the same anymore. Something is different and it doesn't feel like a Paladin anymore. It is just a generic holy warrior at that point and that has little to no draw for me.

I'm really excited to make a CG Paladin of Cayden Cailean in Pathfinder 2. The concept appeals to me and I am going to play it. It may be against the rules, but Cayden Cailean has never been big on the rules anyway. I'm sorry if that will ruin your fun, but I imagine you will find a way to enjoy playing a Paladin anyway.

There is the possibility of reading the sacred claws as similar to the sorcerer claws, but active all of the time. In that case, you will always have the option to use sacred claws over anything else you would be doing with those limbs.

You could, but if you do, what counts as a class feature that depends on form? I guess that is part of why I really have a hard time reading it that way.

I've been doing some reading on the Feral Champion archetype for the Warpriest. They way I am reading it means you cannot use Sacred Weapon while in Wild Shape form. However, some other discussions I have seen seem to indicate other people believe differently. I wanted to bring up the discussion because I am hoping I am wrong (although RAW I don't think I am).

So here is my step by step reasoning:

1. The only Sacred Weapon a Feral Champion can have are their claws. Sacred Claws alters Sacred Weapons and says "Rather than empowering a physical weapon, a feral champion grows claws as primary natural weapons on each hand" This indicates to me that the normal way of making your weapon a Sacred Weapon (getting Weapon Focus) is replaced by this method. This means no Sacred Weapon bite, tentacle, slam, etc.

2. In the same Sacred Claws rule it mentions that "[t]hese claws deal damage as a warpriest’s sacred weapon and can be enhanced as such." Since it says "[t]hese" it does not mean all claws, just the ones you grow from this class feature.

3. Polymorph rules state: "While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision), as well as any natural attacks and movement types possessed by your original form. You also lose any class features that depend upon form, but those that allow you to add features (such as sorcerers that can grow claws) still function." Sacred Claws is a supernatural ability, natural attack, and a class feature. It does add claws, but since it adds them permanently I feel it more appropriately fits into the "class feature that depend upon form" than adding a feature (sorcerers can only grow claws a certain number of times per day).

So if I Wild Shape into a dire tiger, I have lost the claws from my Sacred Claws class feature and now have just plain dire tiger claws. Since Sacred Claws only applies to "these claws" aka the claws granted by the class feature, I gain no benefit from Sacred Weapon in this (or any) form.

I really don't want to be right, because I would love the damage bonus (what would that be for a Warpriest wild shaped to be Huge I wonder?) and special abilities without an amulet of might fists, but I just don't see it. Please let me know if I missed something.