Faenor's page

Season 5 scenarios for PFS 2E are not loaded. I don't know if Season 4 is fully loaded yet. It'd be great if they could be added.
Happy to help with this if it's a public repo btw.

Faenor wrote:

roquepo wrote:

Allows you to wield 2 weapons, 2 implements at the same time with your weapon out or free 1 hand for consumables.

You don't benefit from Implement's Empowerment while wielding two weapons so there's not much (any?) benefit.

I don't know why you think that's the case.

Relevant text: You don't gain the benefit of implement's empowerment if you are holding anything in either hand other than a single one-handed weapon, other implements, or esoterica, and you must be holding at least one implement to gain the benefit.

If you are wielding a weapon implement in one hand and a one handed weapon in the other you are fullfiling the requiremente for both. Implement hand is holding a single one handed weapon and nothing more and you are holding an implement. Hand B is holding a single one handed weapon and nothing more and you are holding an implement. Neither hand is wielding anything that messes with the requirements for Implement's empowerment to work.

It is not that strong of a niche (best use I see for this is making use of Paired Shots with Repeating Hand Crossbows and that one can only trigger weaknesses once), but it definitively works and it is worth considering.

That's incorrect, read the text you just quoted: "if you are holding anything in either hand other than a single one-handed weapon". You cannot hold more than a single one-handed weapon. Otherwise you could do two-weapon fighting, double slice, etc. which is against the design of the class to only be able to use a one single one-handed weapon and would be insane DPS with double slice + implement's empowerment + triggering weakness and you'd see everyone rocking these builds. It doesn't matter if your implement is a weapon or an amulet, you can only wield one weapon.

Relevant text: "...to use an action from the implement you're switching to. To do so, you can Interact as a free action immediately before executing the implement's action." Attacking with a weapon seems like a viable action. Where is their language that suggests this isn't viable? I acknowledge your restriction, however. I still think this is an example of breaking mechanics. Implements and 1 handed weapons aren't actually a drawback if you can use those hands for desired tasks anyway, and this doesn't even require feats like skirmish strike or quick draw.

I see how you can interpret it like this RAW but I'm not sure that's the intent. It seems pretty clear that "...to use an action from the implement you're switching to" refers to specific implement actions like the wand's Fling Magic etc. not striking with your weapon, though I'd love to be wrong on that one.

Allows you to wield 2 weapons, 2 implements at the same time with your weapon out or free 1 hand for consumables.

You don't benefit from Implement's Empowerment while wielding two weapons so there's not much (any?) benefit.

Also AoN reliability and performance track record is pretty spotty, although it has improved slightly lately. Feels very amateur-ish.

Hello, March of the Dead is missing in PFS2 modules:https://downloads.paizo.com/OP-Sanctioning/March+of+the+Dead+(BotD) .pdf

The Thaumaturge Archetype Dedication lacks the "Special You can't select another dedication feat" clause right now.

Ghost is missing that clause too.

Damn I've lost around 10 achievement points by clicking "Refresh points" :(

Pixel Popper wrote:

BloodandDust wrote:

You could also just add a Trip Augmentation to your shield for 8sp.

That will let you switch hit between a double-slice (shield boss and sword), trip + strike, or trip + double-slice any time you like.

Sadly, RAW, you cannot add a Trip Augmentation and have a Shield Boss...

Shield Augmenation wrote:

There are numerous methods to modify shields—snarling rods to catch weapons, bladed edges, padding for nonlethal strikes, and so on—but all share basic functionality. A shield augmentation can be etched with weapon runes, much like a shield boss or shield spikes, but doesn't otherwise alter your shield's statistics. A shield bearing an augmentation can't be combined with an attached weapon, like shield spikes . . .

(Emphasis added.)

But the good news is, shield augmentations can have weapon runes etched on them, so you can still effectively use the Shield's Shield Bash attack in conjunction with Double-Slice tactics. You're losing out on 1d6 damage VS SB's 1d4, but it's still plenty viable.

I don't think that's correct, a shield bash is explicitly not a weapon and double slice requires a weapon in each hand:

A shield bash is not actually a weapon, but a maneuver in which you thrust or swing your shield to hit your foe with an impromptu attack.

Requirements You are wielding two melee weapons, each in a different hand.

The interesting thing is that I've noticed, after a numebr of re-reads, you can have a sword weapon implement, and a sword regalia implementa t the same time, but if you do you can't dual wield them and still use implement empowerment.

The ones that get real interesting, though, are the wacky edge cases - like having your Tengu Fan be a piece of regalia, for the "throwing cantrips with my Class DC" trick while maintaining efficiency.

Or even the more cheeseball things like trying to claim that your sword is both your weapon implement and your regalia implement. I'm pretty sure that... basically all of this stuff needs to be DM adjudication, one way or another.

Oh! It's worse than that! I think that by a hard reading of the rules, you can get Implement's Empowerment with a two-handed weapon, as long as that weapon is an implement. Weapon impleent are only permitted to be one-handed, but there's nothign technically stopping you from declaring that some other implement is a two-handed weapon. Still, there are RAW limits. Let's see...

- Amulet: pretty straightforward. Not a two-handed weapon.

- Bell: "any type of portable musical instrument that is played with one hand". This is not a two-handed weapon either.

- Chalice: must be a vessel that fills with liquid. Arguably must be from the exhaustive list of "cup, goblet, small amphora, polished gourd, or hollowed-out skull". Stretching this to fit a two-handed weapon is not particularly viable.

- Lantern: "You might use a common glass lantern, torch, paper lantern, or other similar light source." Technically not an exhaustive list ("you might") but practically speaking it's going to be a hard sell to push past it... and a two-handed weapon is not going to count as sufficiently similar to the above listed without _really_ stretching things. No two-handed weapons.

- Mirror: "thaumaturges always choose small, portable, handheld mirrors as implements". "portable handheld" says no on the...

I've been thinking that you could make an Improvised Weapon build, using the Regalia (sceptre) as an Improvised Weapon. You should be able to benefit from Implement's Empowerment as it says you can hold an implement in one of the hands and a weapon in the other. So you could potentially dual wield or even Double Slice with your Weapon implement and your Regalia, and get runes to power your Regalia via a Doubling Ring (improvised weapons are considered Simple Weapons). It synergises well with weaknesses and the status damage that you get from the Thaumaturge but you obviously wouldn't want to use some of the feats of the weapon improviser that breaks your improvised weapon on a crit.

Not sure this is completely RAW, pretty sure it's not RAI.

As a slayer you can uniquely qualify for Killing Flourish and Gruesome Slaughter (demoralise + sickened 30 ft. radius). You will also meet prerequisites for Dastardly Finish and Merciless Butchery which allows to Coup de Grace as a Standard action cowering creatures (which you'll inflict with Signature Skill).

I'd go with something like that for the remaining levels:

L7 Violent Display or Killing Flourish
L8 Combat Trick Cornugon Smash (intimidate as a free action when you use Power Attack)
L9 Accomplished Sneak Attacker (you need 5d6 sneak attack to qualify for Dastardly Finish)
L10 Improved Critical
L11 Gruesome Slaughter (if you picked Killing Flourish at 7th) or Disheartening Display
L12 Ninja Trick (Feat) Dastardly Finish
L13 Merciless Butchery

Cornugon Smash seems like a must as it looks like your build lacks demoralising as a free action which is a must for Intimidate builds.

avr wrote:

In my party, as a player? I'd probably prefer someone who does extra damage to one who has the means to take all of the spotlight when skills are involved.

BTW, what are the extract combos you see as being good with combine extracts?

Heroism+Channel Vigor comes to mind.

Heroism is 10 minutes per level so it isn't a good candidate for combine extracts imho which is something to use for short duration extracts for the action economy benefits. I use it on things like Shield+Monstrous Physique or Channel Vigor+Mirror Image, etc.

Does anyone have a Ganzi boon to trade by any chance? I have a Suli and Ratfolk boon to trade in exchange.

Indeed, compare with Pummeling charge:

Prerequisites: Improved Unarmed Strike, Pummeling Style; base attack bonus +12, brawler level 8th, or monk level 8th.

There is a semicolon after Improved Unarmed Strike and Pummeling Style which means you need both these feats and one of base attack bonus +12, brawler level 8th, or monk level 8th.

If the summoned creatures are present you are using the Summon Monster (SP) ability. If it was an SLA your idea would work as the summons would work exactly as the spell, only with a longer duration, but it is an SP ability, and the ability is in use for the whole duration.

Summon Monster is actually an SLA, (Sp) stands for spell-like ability. So I guess you are saying it works.

Note the text a few rows under the point you cited:

Quote:

A summoner cannot have more than one summon monster or gate spell active in this way at one time. If this ability is used again, any existing summon monster or gate immediately ends.

So we have two pieces of text: "Drawing upon this ability uses up the same power as the summoner uses to call his eidolon. " and "If this ability is used again, any existing summon monster or gate immediately ends."

I would say that the consequence is: "Using this ability is the same as summoning an eidolon. If this ability is used again, any existing summon monster or gate immediately ends.".

The second part is why I was asking the question indeed. I can definitely see where you're coming from but summoning his eidolon is a ritual, not a summon monster or gate as Agénor pointed out, so I guess using RAW it's legal.

Not sure it is intended though but it takes one minute to summon the eidolon (unless reduced via the elf FCB) so I guess it isn't game breaking if the summoner wastes one minute of his SM spell to summon his eidolon or spends 9 levels of FCB to reduce that to one full round instead of spending the FCB on something else e.g. 2 evolution points (half-elf), hit points, etc.

No.

You can make an argument that you can summon your eidolon, but only by playing linguistic games about what is and isn’t “a rule.” Let me bold a different part of your quote:

Summon Monster I (Sp) wrote:

Drawing upon this ability uses up the same power as the summoner uses to call his eidolon. As a result, he can only use this ability when his eidolon is not summoned. He can cast this spell as a standard action and the creatures remain for 1 minute per level (instead of 1 round per level).

It isn't about playing a linguistic game, it's about the order in which the operations happen.

My point is about using the SLA when the eidolon is not summoned which fits with the part that you've highlighted.

The Summon Monster (sp) ability of the Summoner says they can't use it when their eidolon is already summoned.

Drawing upon this ability uses up the same power as the summoner uses to call his eidolon. As a result, he can only use this ability when his eidolon is not summoned. He can cast this spell as a standard action and the creatures remain for 1 minute per level (instead of 1 round per level).

However can they use the Summon Monster SLA then summon their eidolon? I know they can do it using the Summon Eidolon spell, I'm asking if they can do it via their normal ritual that takes one minute.

The ability only says they can't use it when the eidolon is summoned, but once it is used the creatures remain for 1 minute per level so what I'm thinking is that the summoner can use SM (standard action) then start the ritual (one minute) to summon their eidolon and once summoned, for the remaining duration of the SM, the summoned monsters and eidolon will overlap. Is that correct?

I find skavens a great inspiration for ratfolks characters ;)

In addition to all the great advises for the build e.g. grenadier, etc. I would add that I would get the cognatogen discovery asap as this will really boost your damage, DC of your bpombs, your number of spells and you don't need dex so much given you hit touch AC.

Great, thanks a lot! Yeah I wasn't sure where to look, it's a little bit all over the place indeed.

The relevant skills are Arcana for arcane, Nature for primal, Occultism for occult, Religion for divine, or any of the four for an item that has the magical trait and not a tradition trait. The GM determines the DC based on the item’s level (possibly adjusted depending on the item or situation).

Sorry if that's obvious but what's the DC to cast a spell from a scroll or from a wand?

Awesome, thanks a lot for a great answer!

As a Tiefling with the prehensile tail trait, when I use Alter Self to take the form of a humanoid e.g. Troglodyte, can I decide to keep my prehensile tail feature?

Otherwise, if I assume a form with a prehensile tail e.g. Vanara, can I get the usage of the tail given I already possess the "prehensile tail" ability myself?

I'm playing a beastmorph alchemist in PFS (vivisectionist is not PFS legal) and I'm having a lot of fun. Natural Attacks build with Feral Mutagen, buy a helm of mammoth lord for a 4th natural attack (at your max bab), get pounce at level 10. Thinking of taking Master Chymist prestige class from 11th.

Vessa wrote:

I'm so excited! Kingmaker was awesome so this one will be even better!!

I do wonder though why not port it over to 2e?

Owlcat has been working on Wrath for over a year now and PF2 wasn't available for them to use. Since they already had the engine built for PF1, it made some sense to use that for Wrath.

-Lisa

Glad to hear that it will be PF1!

Has 2E Finally Made “Low Magic” Viable?

PF2 IS low magic, nothing to change :D

It's kind of crazy that the majority of the community agreed that Mutagenist alchemists were clearly underpowered and when Paizo had one chance to at least fix it a bit with the errata, they added such an underwhelming and situational ability as Mutagenic Flashback. Looking at the reactions on the forum, it's already one of the most discussed and disliked changes. So disappointing.

A Fighter would do more damage than a Druid in a target dummy situation starting from day one, and that never really changed.

The difference was stuff like flight. It does not matter how much damage your falchion fighter does if he can't reach the enemy.

Celestial armor, potion of fly, winged boots are all pretty much mandatory options for mid level martials in PF1. With UMD and wands that work more than once per day it is also pretty easy to be versatile, obviously not as much as a full caster.

I'm almost sure the 400 dpr thing was a bit of an exaggeration (sounds like something from the dpr Olympics thread).

Not at all, most of my characters except wizard, sorcerer, etc. do at least 150-200 DPR by level 11 and a few martial do 250+/300/400. And I play mostly PFS so I'm not even taking about vivisectionist shenanigans.

Quain Martial Artist is a trait that gives +1 damage to unarmed attacks.
Martial Focus (natural) feat gives +1 damage to natural and unarmed attacks.
Bone Fists gives 1 Natural Armor and adds 2 damage to natural attacks, and treated as having armor spikes.
Vine Strike gives 1d6 additional damage with natural and unarmed attacks.
Strong Jaw increases the natural attack damage by 2 steps.
Bloody Claws gives bleed damage with your claws.

Note that Improved Natural Attack feats are monster feats that are not normally allowed for players. Only a few options give this e.g. Ranger Natural Combat Style. Obviously if you are the GM, it's your call.

You can start with this thread where prototype00 analysed and compared the different stances.

So this is sort of off topic, but I poked my nose in the 1e forum about a week or two ago and they are still having the "why won't Paizo let martials have nice things" conversation and I didn't have the heart to tell them.

With all the material, martials can be really OP in PF1 now though. Like easy 300-400 DPR at level 11 kind of OP. Makes PF2 fighters and rogues feel like amateurs ;)

After my question on interaction between Morph and Polymorph effects, similar question now but between Dragon Claws and Monk Stances.

Dragon Claws is a morph effect that gives claws dealing 1d4 damage plus 1d6 energy damage (that scales up to 3d6 at 9th). Monk stances e.g. Tiger stance allows you to make claws attack that deal 1d8 slashing damage; are in the brawling group; and have the agile, finesse, nonlethal, and unarmed traits.

Let's imagine you used you focus spell to cast dragon claws, then with your next action you enter the Tiger stance, then strike.

How much damage do you do?

1. 1d8 slashing (dragon claws has no effect)
2. 1d4 slashing + 1d6 energy (stance has no effect)
3. 1d8 slashing + 1d6 energy (stance overwrites the damage of the claws but you keep the energy damage)

The last one seems reasonable to me and I don't see anything in the rules that says one way or the other.

Thoughts?

I would be willing to bet when they come out wit the Dragon Disciple archetype they will get a feat very similar to flurry of blows that applies to their claw attacks. I wouldn't be surprised to see other feats that will make the claws a focus of combat for them either. Dragon Disciple always felt like an iconic prestige class, and one of the few early ones that worked well.

That would be pretty cool, I really hope you're right!

Yes, at the moment claws are not going to be a primary attack form for the Sorcerer. It seems to me they are more likely intended to be something the sorcerer can do as a third action then as the focus of the character's attacks. And with not getting expert in Unarmed until 11th, that seems intentional.

All the problems I listed for "natural attacks" are not specific to the sorcerer. Sure I understand they are not meant to be a primary attack form for the Sorcerer, but the issue is that they are sub-par choices on pretty much every front because of the limitation that feats and other abilities only apply to weapons you are wielding. So it's the same problem for Druids with Wild Morph, Alchemists with Bestial Mutagen, Barbarians with Animal instinct, etc. The only ability that works with unarmed attacks is the Monk's Flurry which you can only take for non-monks as a dedication at 10th level which is really late.

For Draconic sorcerers, it's even worst because their initial focus spell doesn't even synergise with their feats and spells i.e. Bespell Weapon, Magic Weapon making Draconic a pretty poor bloodline choice.

And more: Double Slice, Lunge, Twin Party, Disarming Stance, etc.

Basically all the two-weapon fighting feats do not work with unarmed attacks except monk flurry preventing from getting more attacks, or any feature that adds to weapon damage except runes with the handwraps.

Sure, I know runes work, all the other effects that I cited don't.

(...) Bespell Weapon, Magic Weapon, use poison or Poison Weapon, Energy Mutagen, Twin Takedown, etc. They all apply only to weapons you are wielding (...)

Thanks, that's what I feared. The issue is that Natural Attacks cannot receive any boost like normal weapons can. For example you cannot use Bespell Weapon, Magic Weapon, use poison or Poison Weapon, Energy Mutagen, Twin Takedown, etc. They all apply only to weapons you are wielding making unarmed attacks a trap option in general.

Even more so for a Draconic bloodline Sorcerer who can never enhance his Dragon Claws afaict (Bespell Weapon doesn't work and Magic Fang is on the Primal spells list).

I think they should rush to release an Unchained book to fix the Alchemist and maybe even rush to release a 3rd edition which would be the 5e of Pathfinder (PF2 being its 4e so far) /s

After reading the archetypes from Last Omens on the AON site, my only request is that the next archetypes are less situational, none of them seem even remotely passable.

Dragon Claws have the Morph trait and gives you finesse claws that deal 1d4 damage plus 1d6 energy that scales.

Bestial Mutagen has the Polymorph trait gives you a jaw and claws attacks, an item bonus, and scaling damage dice.

Effects that slightly alter a creature’s form have the morph trait. Any Strikes specifically granted by a morph effect are magical. You can be affected by multiple morph spells at once, but if you morph the same body part more than once, the second morph effect attempts to counteract the first (in the same manner as two polymorph effects, described in that trait).

Your morph effects might also end if you are polymorphed and the polymorph effect invalidates or overrides your morph effect. The GM determines which morph effects can be used together and which can’t.

You can both be affected by Dragon Claws and Bestial Mutagen, but what happens to the claws?

What do you get?
1. Only the effect of the last feature you used
2. A mix of effects depending on what you last used e.g. mutagen + Dragon claws you get 1d4 damage claws + energy damage + item bonus
3. Mutagen damages dice and item bonus + additional energy damage dice.

Potent Poisoner: Poisons deal minimum damage even on a successful saving throw (still deal 0 on a critical success)

What does minimum damage mean exactly?

Other than that, I mostly like it. Seems really needed to make the Alchemists class viable at all.

So the OP is saying that the Barbarian Instinct that's built for making unarmed attacks is only really useful for characters that focus on making unarmed attacks?

Huh. Who knew?

/s

Nope, that if you take the barbarian dedication and the animal instinct you get nothing. But sure if you're saying that spending a feat to get nothing is good game design and not worth pointing out, I'm sure you will love the mutagenists' first ability and PF2 is obviously the perfect game for you /s

shroudb wrote:

Not sure what went wrong with Alchemist development really that made them so terrible as they are atm.

"What went wrong" is the scrapping of the resonance mechanic, basically. The playtest Alchemist was so heavily tied to that mechanic that it would have required a complete ground up rework to make the Alchemist work without it... which I guess they didn't have time for.

That'd be a pretty lame excuse tbh, maybe more not enough review and testing.

Almost as good as the mutagenist alchemist xD
Such great game design.

I'm having a hard time myself finding reasons not to play a gnome for any class. I love their ancestry feats which can give pretty much any class the little push it needs to make it awesome or special. And their ability score boosts fall out well for most classes.

Ah? I found halfling and gnome strength flaw makes them really subpar for all martial classes but rogue. Even alchemist is hard due to bulk.

Well as published so far, it's pretty bad. If you need to buy another book to make it viable, that doesn't make it better game design.

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Going straight Barbarian, multiclassing into Fighter, then grabbing Double Slice makes for one of the highest DPR builds in the game (specifically, I believe to get as high as possible you go Giant Totem and dual wield oversized, non-agile, weapons).

If you go giant instinct, you should talk to your GM beforehand so that they can decide how you get a second weapon, as the class feature only grants one weapon initially.

Yeah not going to be legal in PFS. Makes no sense, you get access to only one oversized weapon, feels like a pretty lame way to limit the build...

So I'm not sure how often you would Quick Alchemy a low level poison (with powerful alchemy) as opposed to crafting double in the morning. In general, not many cases where I want powerful alchemy. I think I'd rather snag sticky bombs for a quick alchemy boost. Really would only be poisons, tangelfoot bag, or thunderstones no? (more in the future I'm sure)

Unless I'm misunderstanding something at 3am which is highly possible what being 3am haha.

The problem with this is that the DC doesn't really scale up. With the Potent Poisoner feat, you add +4 to the poison DC. The best injury poison you can create is the Purple Worm Venom (item 13):

Saving Throw DC 32 Fortitude; Maximum Duration 6 rounds; Stage 1 5d6 poison damage and enfeebled 2 (1 round); Stage 2 6d6 poison damage and enfeebled 2 (1 round); Stage 3 8d6 poison and enfeebled 2 (1 round)

So the DC with Potent Poisoner is 36. An Adult Bronze Dragon (CR 13) Fortitude save is +24 so saves on a 12+ (40%) which is ok but not great. An Ancient Brass Dragon Fort save is +30 so saves on a 6+ (70%) which is pretty crappy. An Ancient Gold Dragon Fort save is +37 so is only poisoned on a 1 (95%). With Powerful Alchemy, it would use your alchemy DC so at level 20, the DC would be 10 + 20 (level) + 6 (Int) + 6 (Master) + 4 (Potent Poisoner) = 46 instead of 36 but it took you one more action to do it. The Ancient Gold Dragon would save on a 9+ (55%). Given the poison damage doesn't scale either, it's probably not worth spending 2 actions to use poison.

So basically, if you build a character to use poison, you will fall behind at higher levels as you will have spent several feats and take dedications for suboptimal results i.e. it's a trap, and poor game design.

It's not even like Favored Enemy or Favored Terrain were OP before...

After posting this question I immediately found the answer. It's all to do with contact poisons:

CRB Pg.550 wrote:

Contact: A contact poison is activated by applying it to

an item or directly onto a living creature’s skin. The first
creature to touch the affected item must attempt a saving
throw against the poison; if the poison is applied directly,
the creature must attempt a saving throw immediately
when the poison touches its skin. Contact poisons are
infeasible to apply to a creature via a weapon attack due to
the logistics of delivering them without poisoning yourself.
Typically, the onset time of a contact poison is 1 minute.

Poison Weapon wrote:

it applies the effects of the poison, provided that poison can be delivered by contact or injury.

Keeping this question up here on the forums so others who might be confused can see.

Most of the contact poisons (all?) have a pretty long onset time (1-10 minutes) so that's pretty useless.

I'm pretty sure the point is to allow you to apply poison for one action rather than three.

If you aren't an alchemist, poison is pretty expensive and DCs don't scale with level. Even if you are an alchemist, powerful alchemy only works with quick alchemy which costs another action in addition to the action to poison the weapon if you multiclass rogue to take this feat. So 2 actions to have a DC that has any chance to succeed 50% of the time and does nothing if the opponent saves. Pretty underwhelming.

If you only take the rogue feat, one action to add 1d4 damage is extremely weak.