Draznar's page

Will the hero cartographer @artjuice return? <3

Looking for advice to help a friend. We are looking to put together an adventure were combat has a much more Visceral & Grueling feel to it. His main inspirations are the game, Dark Souls & the anime, Attack on Titan, where in both you always feel that death is a very real possibility.

To be clear, the goal is **not** to just unfairly kill the PCs. But we want their to be the threat of death in nearly all the combat events. If the PCs round the corner and see a goblin with a rusty knife, they still need to use caution.

Any ideas or thoughts?

Will those sheets of cardstock character minis ever be available for purchase separately?

A PC of mine recently emailed me with a question / request. He is playing as a Changeling Barbarian tho disguised as a human to others. He plans to have the character kick-box of sorts, combining changeling claws(natural) and kick attacks(unarmed). I'm unsure if I'm understanding his issue correctly and wanted to ask if anyone can tell me if my PC is correct about the problems of mixing unarmed & natural attacks or would this work entirely different.

He is also asking me to house-rule a feat (which I don't think I have an issue with) but I wanted to make sure the problem he describes actually exists in the first place.

As you may recall, unarmed strikes are messed up. As are natural weapons. And God have mercy on your soul should you attempt to mix the two! Naturally, I'm here to work on that last one, ja? As you know, my plan is to focus on kick-boxing most of the time, then add in all those fun natural bits during those dramatic times that warrant lovable 'ol Sophitia raging. Perhaps in the future I'll use claws outside of a rage once the others are aware of them, but never where there are humanoid witnesses around (potential exclusions for dramatic rage moments of course). The trick is that mixing natural weapons and "manufactured" ones like my feet imposes all manner of ugly things: all natural attacks are treated as secondary (base attack + str - 5 and damage die + str * 0.5) and all "manufactured" weapons treat as if two-weapon fighting (base attack + str -2 (assuming having the two-weapon-fighting feat and a light off-hand weapon), weapon die + str for main hand, weapon die + str * 0.5 for off hand), considering natural weapons as light off-hand weapons. A handy feat, Double Slice lets you enjoy your full strength bonus on off hand weapons. Sadly this does not affect natural weapons, though it would work for unarmed attacks. Multiattack is another potentially useful feat to consider as it lessens the attack penalty for swinging with secondary natural weapons to -2 from -5. Feral Combat Training comes close, allowing you to pick a natural weapon and use it with feats requiring Improved Unarmed Strike (style feats, Stunning Fist, etc) and even work in a monk's flurry.

So now that there's some background here, I'll get to my proposal: a new feat that would function as Double Slice for otherwise primary natural weapons when mixed with unarmed strikes (natural weapons that are normally considered secondary gain no benefit). The goal is to tear down the ugly wall between natural weapons and unarmed strikes, focusing on simply using your body as a weapon, pointy and not-so-pointy bits alike. By specifying that this only works with a combination of unarmed strikes and natural weapons, we avoid exploiting things by getting swords and other truly manufactured weapons in the mix and also dodge simply making an enhanced version of Double Slice as this will confer no bonuses when say wielding two axes or chakrams as I may well do at some point. The end wording I was thinking of would go something like this:

Snazzy Feat Name!
Prerequisites: Dex 15, Improved Unarmed Strike, Two-Weapon-Fighting, at least one primary natural weapon

Benefit: When attacking using only unarmed strikes or a mix of unarmed strikes and natural weapons, add your full strength modifier to damage rolls for all unarmed strikes and natural weapons that are normally considered primary.

Normal: When attacking with unarmed strikes and natural weapons, add only half of your strength modifier to damage rolls for off-hand unarmed strikes and all natural weapons.

Thoughts?

Fozbek wrote:

Stéphane Le Roux wrote:

Anyway, without a weapon in hand, you don't threaten, and thus you don't get any AoO. The ability doesn't work.

This. Because you do not threaten any squares when you are unarmed, and the ability doesn't change that rule, it does not work at all unless you have Improved Unarmed Strike or natural weapons. If you're a typical PC race straight-class Kensai, the ability simply doesn't work as intended.

I agree. The way I wrote it doesn't actually map to what was in my head. While my input is wholly unofficial at this stage, if I were to suggest a better way that I could have worded the ability in the turnover, I would say something like:

Iajutsu (Ex): At 7th level, a kensai applies his Intelligence modifier as well as his Dexterity modifier on initiative rolls (minimum 0). As long as his favored weapon is on his person, a kensai threatens as if armed and may make attacks of opportunity when flat-footed, and may draw his favored weapon as a free action as part of making an attack of opportunity. This ability replaces the medium armor ability.

The schtick is intended to be that the kensai is sitting there with his sword on his hip, and even if you get the drop on him and roll up on him he can still bust out the weapon and bring the pain in one graceful motion, all in the space of an eyeblink. Basically, a reactive Quick Draw on the off chance he actually loses initiative despite his bonuses.

If you are running a home game, that was my RAI and you can take it for whatever it's worth. If you are running PFS or some similar RAW situation, you must wait for an official erratum or clarification from Sean, Stephen, Jason B., etc.

Thanks for that clarification of intent Jason! Tho that's how I was interpreting it anyways, Its good to know that was your intent as well!

Now if only I can find more uses for the ability to come up... Any other ideas Jason?

Best Thread Ever for this type of setting! I look forward to using this, thank you so much!

Toadkiller Dog wrote:

Will you do one of these for every chapter? Can't wait to see what's in store for Broken Moon. :)

Yes, I plan on having lists for each installment. I'm a bit behind at the moment as I've been out of town, but I should have playlists for BM and WotW up within the next few weeks. I've come across a few very good pieces that I've been saving for WotW, and I'm really looking forward to putting that one together.

We are just going to be starting this soon! I look forward to the rest of your playlists!

Lots of thing provoke AoO. Unarmed attacks, most combat maneuvers, casting spells. moving in a threatened square. It also means you do not have to have a weapon drawn to threaten the target.

I realize those things provoke AoO but they rarely happen in my experience. By a wide margin, the main way AoO happen in my groups experience is fighting larger things whose reach exceeds yours, so you have to move through their threatened squares to melee them.

In the other cases you mentioned I feel like the only people who make unarmed strikes, are those who have Improved Unarmed Strikes, and the only people who make X Combat Maneuver instead of just attacking something, are those who have Improved X Maneuver.

I get how the rule works but I wanted to find more ways to utilize the ability.

What if an enemy provokes an AoO during the surprise round and you don't have a weapon drawn?

But without a reach weapon I can't see enemies provoking attacks of opportunity? Perhaps there are more things that provoke AoO than I know of, AoO rarely come up whenever my group plays.

The only case I can think of is if I have a reach weapon and an enemy charges in to right next to me. But if I had a scimitar no AoO would occur.

What other things might happen to trigger an AoO in the surprise round.

I'm not sure I understand how to use this ability effectively. Adding intelligence to initiative is a no brainer but the second part is what gets me.

Other than wielding a reach weapon, which doesn't seem like what a kensai Magus would use, how can a Kensai make use of being able to take attacks of opportunity while flat footed and drawing a weapon a weapon as part of that for free.

I get the fluff, but without a reach weapon how does a Kensai take advantage of Iajutsu?

In a similar vein as the thread

http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/general/andTheCrappiestFeatAwardGoesTo

but reversed and more positive. What are some of your favorite feats? Stuff that's almost always useful / fun ^_^b

I really enjoy the Dazzling Display line, especially for Bards.

Can a Magus, who can only prepare up to 6th level spells, with spell perfection feat (choosing Vampiric Touch, a 3rd level spell), prepare a Perfected Quickened Vampiric Touch?

This would effectively make the spell a 7th level spell slot, (which Magus can't do), but could Spell Perfection work around that?

Crazy PC is at me again XD

Is it possible to get x2 Swift actions a turn if you are willing to downgrade a Standard or a Move action into a Swift? I think his goal is to do Swift, Swift, Standard.

I don't think its possible, but a PC of mine is convinced its legal. I thought the only real conversions was downgrading a Standard -> Move.

Is this something Pathfinder changed from 3.5? I always thought you could only ever get one Swift action a turn as a hard rule.

Sounds like a sonic version of magic missile with a tweak. I would treat it as such. No attack roll, no save, no range increment. You just see the target, fire away, and it hits. That doesn't sound game breaking at all, and it's not an option I'd take over the force-multiplying songs.

What do you mean by "the force-multiplying songs"?

I have a PC who wants to hold charges when he uses his Spell Combat, and deliver them next turn. Does this work?

In Round 1 use Spell Combat to Attack with Sword and cast Shocking Grasp but holding the charge.

In Round 2 use Spell Combat to make a Touch Attack with Shocking Grasp spell held last turn. Then cast a Vampiric Touch, and with Spellstrike, attack with sword to deliver the Vampiric Touch.

I'm not sure why he wants this, but does anyone have any thoughts? Thanks for the input.

If we do a Rival Guide 2... chances are good it'll be VERY similar in level spread to the first Rival Guide, since the fundamental theory behind it is that high-level NPCs are harder to make than low-level ones, and are thus more useful to a paying customer.

+1 Here's hoping for Rival Guide 2.0!

I am wondering about Words of Power and creating Ray spells.

The Word in question is for Target Word "Selected" and how it works in conjunction with certain effect words. Selected says if a wordspell does energy damage you can make it create a ray. For things like Corrosive Bolt Effect word (which gives no saving throw) it flows smoothly.

But what happens if I try to use the "Frost Fingers" or "Lightning Blast" words, both of which offer a saving throws for Reflex Half?

Would my Rays require a ranged touch attack, only to then allow my foe a saving throw?

Anyone have any insight to this?

I don't know why, but I'm having trouble wrapping my head around how this all works out. So if someone could break it down for me step by step I would appreciate that.

Here's what I got. So lets say we have a Level 5 Magus, who has a total of +6 to hit in Melee. He wants to use spellcombat & spellstrike using corrosive touch.

If we wanted to just use Spell Combat, I would make an attack roll @ +4, hit and deal damage, then I would make my concentration check to cast defensively, followed by my melee touch attack to hit my foe with corrosive touch deal damage of the spell, then I'm done. Assuming it all goes well, doing sword damage, and spell damage.

Taking the above scenario, and adding spell strike, it would be the same, except I would make another melee attack (still at -2?) instead of a melee touch attack to deleiver the spell? Essentially doing Sword Attack, Sword Damage, Spellstrike Attack, Sword Damage + Spell Damage?

Do I have this right? Also, I don't see the disadvantage to using spellstrike with spell combat, is there ever a case that you wouldn't want to spellstrike with spell combat?

Thanks for the help!

Understood. The issue is that the sword isn't making the attack. The user is. The sword thus doesn't benefit from the spell. But, if the flavor and concept appeal, go for it.

Appeal to me? No way, I thought it was a bit overpowered. But I wanted to find a real rules reason for why that doesn't work. Thank you much.

Anyone else confirm this?

Draznar wrote:

How does an Intelligent Item casting spells work in regard to components? Is that just bypassed in general?

The specific case in question is a PC wanted to get an intelligent item that can cast True Strike, but it got me thinking about components needed to cast a spell & intelligent items in general.

Thoughts?

Either treat it as a spell-like ability, which requires no components, or limit to spells that it can cast with the necessary components. If doing the latter for true strike, then the weapon needs to speak, while the focus could be embedded into the item (set in the pommel, etc.). Spells with somatic components are kinda tough if going this way. It's ok for some things to be impossible or for others to be difficult.

On the other hand, true strike is personal. Cast by the weapon, it would apply to attacks made by the weapon, not attacks made by the user of the weapon. Adjust for flavor if you prefer.

His scheme is to have the weapon cast True Strike on itself, then swing the sword and essentially auto hit anytime we come across a BBEG.

How does an Intelligent Item casting spells work in regard to components? Is that just bypassed in general?

The specific case in question is a PC wanted to get an intelligent item that can cast True Strike, but it got me thinking about components needed to cast a spell & intelligent items in general.

Thoughts?

There really isn't a Magus archetype for not wearing heavy armor?

Staff Magus

Draznar wrote:

James, a PC of mine wanted to know if the weapon limitations of a Bladebound Magus were for fluff or game balance? (Context : He wanted to have a greatsword as his Black Blade)

Any insider thoughts / info on the subject? Thank you!

That's a Jason question... but overall, magi do not use two-handed weapons. They need to keep a hand free for spellcasting—they're not "fighter/wizards" as much as they are two weapon fighters who just happen to use spells as their off-hand weapon. So two-handed weapons are nonsensical in most cases—the staff magus is the only one I know of that breaks that rule.

Thanks a bunch for the input James! Any recommendations / advice on how I could best get an answer from Jason / Another Developer? There is this thread for you but I dunno how to best ask a Developer an offbeat question.

About the Bladebound archetype:

1) How reduced is his Arcane Pool ability?

2) What does the Black Blade gain and/or grant as the Bladebound magus levels up?

1) 1/3 + Int Bonus. Not sure if I'm allowed to give an exact number, if so please edit / delete this.

2) The Blade is like an intelligent item / familiar. It does have its own Arcane Pool that it can use for various effects, like changing its element or increasing its damage.

I love this book, and want to give a thank you to all who were involved!

I would love more of these types of books and I hope we can have a Rival Guide 2.0 in the future!

James, a PC of mine wanted to know if the weapon limitations of a Bladebound Magus were for fluff or game balance? (Context : He wanted to have a greatsword as his Black Blade)

Any insider thoughts / info on the subject? Thank you!

The Blade of a Bladebound Magus is limited to One Handed Slashing Weapons, Rapiers, or a Sword Cane, does anyone know why they limit it to that? Is it fluff? is it balance? Anyone have any ideas / thoughts?

If a Magus has the arcana "Close Range", what happens if you spellstrike a spell with a multiple rays? Like Scorching Ray type spell? Do all the rays fire off anyway, the three rays can have one target?. Is it one hit then all three rays go off on the target of do I roll them separately, or does only one ray even happen and the rest or ether wasted or stored?

When creating an Intelligent Item, who can cast spells, how is the caster level determined? I looked in the intelligent item section but I can't seem to find it. Can anyone tell me how this is determined / point me to where this is stated in the core rules book?

I don’t know, I feel like part of this type of casters fluff is in the fact that he has to go out and collect the spells. I mean does magus just learn the new spells permanently? If not what happened to the spell? If so where did he get it from. I think that this is fine mechanically but hurts wizard and the fluff for the learned spell caster.

No one at the Samurai and Ninja Design meeting can say anything as of this moment. They are all under NDA. This was an early design seminar for these classes, hence we are keeping them under wraps for now. You will get more info on them in the coming months.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

But is it fair to say we will likely see a Ninja / Samurai class Pathfinder stlye someday? Presumably in Tian Xia? If so this is first I have heard of it ^_^b

In all seriousness, if Thesing had anything to do with naming the brat, you know it'd be named after him. So Thesing Umburto Blah Blah Blah Whatever, the 2nd.

Yea I thought the exact same thing, but I was also going along the line of thought that the son wouldn't want to be Thesing Jr or Thesing the 2nd. So I wanted to come up with a [Son's First Name] Umbreo Ulvalno.

KaeYoss wrote:

If post-mortem, I suggest Edward.

How is it possible for a thread to reach its all-time low three posts in?

I suppose you could have suggested Angelus...

On a related note, I did a search for 'venetian names' and got lots of hits.

Its more of an Epilouge deal.

I shall pass on nameing anything in relation to Twilight.

It has become possible this might be relevant, so I am looking for advice...

If Thesing had a son.... what would a good name for him be?

Just asking for a rules clarification on Spellstrike.

Spellstrike (Su): Whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of touch from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack.If successful, this attack deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell. This ability does not grant the magus a free melee attack—such attacks must be made normally. Alternatively, a magus can make a free touch attack with his free hand instead of delivering the spell through his weapon, as normal.

Can Spellstrike be applied to Ranged Touch Attack spells? IE, could I Spellstrike by imbuing Disintegrate into my Sword then having it go off when I hit someone with it in melee?

Draznar wrote:

I’d like to see dimension door on the spell list.

It is.

Whoops, my mistake.

I like the idea of giving him mage armor one the spell list. It would also be pretty cool to see the class be able to have a better casting of it as a magus arcana, maybe add half int bonus then full int bonus at a later level?

Ranged touch spells and the ability to go into the weapon to attack people with.

And for a random add, I'd like to see dimension door on the spell list.

+1 to the idea that eventually, ranged touch spells would be able to go into the weapon to attack people with.

+1 to the idea of giving them mage armor one the spell list.

It would also be pretty cool to see the class be able to have a better casting of it as a magus arcana, maybe add half int modifier then full int modifier at a higher level.

I’d like to see dimension door on the spell list.

+1 to the idea of the armor proficiency abilities becoming an magus arcana, removing them from the standard class abilities.

I quoted "A cohort is generally an NPC with class levels" to my PC but he counters with....

"I think what there referring to is the person playing the character, (None Player Character) which is why they say generally because (like in this case) a player will be playing the character. (Making it in definition a Player Character)" -- PC

I argue that "The Cohort is an npc, its never considered a PC. Even if you control her primarily, that doesn't make her a full fledged player character."

Am I crazy or is my thought process reasonable?

If hes an npc, should I be "controlling" the cohort, or the PC?

A PC of mine wants to take Leadership, after looking at the feat it was unclear to me if the stats for the Cohort should be rolled up, or just use a NPC (possibly Heroic Stats) from the Core book?

Or is there another method entirely? Thank you.

I was listening to a Chronicles Podcast from one of the Pathfinder Seminar at (GenCon?) and there was a question about "Things Paizo can't do due to open gaming license legal issues" and I was curious if that would be expanded.

Some specific monsters were referenced that Wizards owns that Pathfinder can't do due to Open Gaming license reasons, such as the Beholder & Mindflayer. What are all the other monsters that Paizo can't do? Is there somewhere I could find a list? Thank you!

I am confused who the adjacent person is this Redirect Attack talent. If Player A attacks Rouge B, can Rouge B use Redirect Attack to have Player A hit themself?

Draznar - I only wrote up the quests that specifically said they were wanted posters and charters and such. The others I'm doing in-game as roleplaying.

Updated Handouts: Kingmaker Player Handouts

Ah that makes sense. Much obliged!

It will be a while. I beleive around June 2011. Tho there has been no official announcement. So for now, the Kingmaker AP is probably best bet.

These are really well done and I look forward to using them! Quick question tho, for Stolen Lands Quest pdf 1 & 2, why only have some of the quests and not others? Or did I miss something?

PP folks have a distaste for the d20 system so i doubt there will be any synergy between Pathfinder and Iron Kingdoms.

As a GM I like them for the purpose of adding more cinematic flair for my PCs. Using them for power-gamer or meta-gaming type purposes is no good for us.

Also, I will often give my named significant NPCs / BBEGs a "Anti-Hero Point", to increase the tension / add more dramatic situations. Its no fun if PCs always just steamroll stuff. Sometimes its cool, but not for encounters that should be climactic! In the end tho, as long as everyone has a good time, that's my goal.