Faskill's page

I'm not sure I really understand the question. When you cast the spell you can target 2 enemies at range (touch range). With the hand you can target one enemy at touch range and one enemy at hand range.

That’s actually still helpful I did not think about that. Since I can get reach for 1 minute with Long Limbs I will be able to move within reach of 1 enemy and target another one far away thanks to the hand.

Still, if you really want to benefit from Imaginary Weapon double attack, I think the best thing to do is to use Reach Spell.

The problem is that you can’t use both an Amp and metamagic on the same spell so that wouldn’t work.

The question for me is if you need to actually touch 2 ennemies, or does touching one ennemy triggers the spell and then lets you do 2 strikes within range.

I'm wondering about the interaction of Spectral Hand with Imaginary Weapon, specifically if it would allow you to make both Strikes on 2 adjacent targets or 2 targets separated by 5 feet (XOX).

Spectral Hand :

You create a semi corporeal hand out of your essence that delivers touch spells for you. Whenever you Cast a Spell with a range of touch, you can have the hand crawl to a target within range along the ground, touch it, and then crawl back to you. When making a melee spell attack with the hand, you use your normal bonuses. The hand can move as far as it needs to within range.

Imaginary Weapon :

Cast somatic, verbal
Range touch; Targets 1 creature

You create a simple weapon of force. Make a melee spell attack roll against your target's AC. If you hit, you deal your choice of bludgeoning or slashing damage equal to 1d8 plus your spellcasting ability modifier. On a critical success, you deal double damage and can choose to detonate your weapon to push the target 10 feet away from you.

Heightened (+1) The damage increases by 1d8.

Amp You form multiple force weapons to lash out at multiple foes. You make two imaginary weapon Strikes, each against a different target. Your multiple attack penalty doesn't increase until you've made both Strikes.
Amp Heightened (+1) The damage increases by 2d8 instead of 1d8.

Spectral Hand says that the hand can touch a single target, but so does Imaginary Weapon.

My question is : if the hand can get into position to target 2 ennemies, can you do both strikes from the Amped Imaginary Weapon?

Bonus question : Do you control the movement of the hand (possibly avoiding AoOs) or does it just automatically take the shortest path to the target?

Thanks a lot in advance for your input !

Faskill wrote:

Telekinetic weapon deals less damage because of the splash and imaginary weapon is only available at level 6 at which point I will retrain my conscious mind :)

Telekinetic projectile does more damage when amped and choice of physical damage is superior to fire. If you are only worried about damage, you should just use gouging claw.

It does not, TKP does 1d6 (+2d6/level) + spell mod while amped whereas produce flame deals (1d10 + 1 splash)/level + spell mod. So even with the ranged damage die it is clearly superior in damage to TKP. Produce flame also deals 1d4 persistent damage / level on a crit.

In theory, you’re also only supposed to use TKP when there are objects that you can target. I don’t know if it could come to that but it is not totally outside the realm of possibility that a GM could choose to say that there are no such items in certain situations.

I agree changing damage types is very useful though, so is the push back, so I can’t argue that Produce Flame is strictly better.

But I would argue that the spell is within unarmed reach thanks to the arrow which delivers it.

There is not two versions of Produce Flame, what the spell says is

Produce Flame wrote:

This is normally a ranged attack, but you can also make a melee attack against a creature in your unarmed reach.

The Psychic modifier is:

The Oscillating Wave wrote:

When using produce flame as a melee attack, increase the damage dice of the initial damage (but not the persistent damage) from d4s to d6s.

It's clear you can only use Produce Flame as a melee spell attack when the target is within your unarmed reach, so no you can not use the "melee version" when using a ranged Spellstrike.

I disagree with this interpretation, Starlit Span specifically allows you to use touch spells at a ranged distance. For me, the part about not being in unarmed reach is thus irrelevant. The Starlit Span class feature specifically allows you to deliver spells as if you were in melee range.

With magic, the sky's the limit, and you can't be bound by the confines of physical proximity. Your power reaches as far as your senses can perceive, transcending the space between you and your target even with spells that normally require direct physical contact.

When you use Spellstrike, you can make a ranged weapon or ranged unarmed Strike, as long as the target is within the first range increment of your ranged weapon or ranged unarmed attack. You can deliver the spell even if its range is shorter than the range increment of your ranged attack.

Telekinetic weapon deals less damage because of the splash and imaginary weapon is only available at level 6 at which point I will retrain my conscious mind :)

I’m asking this because there is a different damage die when using a melee Produce Flame when using it through the Oscillating Wave Psychic Dedication (https://2e.aonprd.com/ConsciousMinds.aspx?ID=3), so I’m wondering if I can apply this with a ranged Spellstrike.

My thinking is that this could work since the arrows essentially delivers the spell in melee but I’m checking how that would fly RAW since this is for PFS so "check with your DM" wouldn’t really be a good answer.

Thanks a lot in advance for your insights!

I don't know, I don't think the bullet can be considered as a weapon after all its just ammo, so the which wouldn't need to manipulate the weapon per se one of her other hands could open the chamber.

First and foremost, I'm just gonna go ahead and profusely thank anyone that's been contributing to this thread !

I'll make a post writing in an orderly fashion the questions I'm still asking myself for clarity's sake.

1) Can I trigger the grab / WHW grapple check on a trip attack?

2) When i'm grappling with the WHW, I'm not grappled, does that mean I can make Aoos? If not, why?

3) When grappling and being not grappled, what happens if my foe tries to reverse the grapple?
Since I'm not grappled does it just break it or can I become grappled myself? In the last case could I use my Intelligence instead of my Strength when determining my CMD against an attempt to reverse the grapple?

4) Does Final Embrace allow me to constrict as a free action? Is the wording of the feat enough to uphold a size limit to what I can constrict?

Thank you in advance !

The white haired witch has been errataed so that all the actions are now swift actions instead of free actions... I don't know what the developers had against this archetype that was already very weak to begin with.
That's why final embrace could be useful.

You're right on the grab thing though about getting the grappled condition (I will use the prehensile hair hex so strength for CMB isn't a problem). Maybe I can use it on my first attack and then release and make it so that I use my regular witch grapple on the second attack.

It still looks like Final Embrace is useful though if it can allow me to constrict as free action, but the size requirement still puzzles me.. I mean if I were to use the feat wouldn't I be hampered by the size restriction that is written in the feat, even though it's clearly a mistake?

Please keep in mind that this is supposed to be a PFS character so the rules around the character are supposed to be airtight...

When you say yes you mean that this is a mistake in the feat?
I don't much care about grab to be honest because the white haired witch already has a build in free grapple check. My question was more turned towards the size limit of constrict.

Another question that's popped into my mind is what happens if I'm grappling a target in the end of my round, and another target comes into AOO range? (I have 10 foot reach) Would I be able to stop grappling my first target and make the Aoo on the second one or would I be stuck with grappling my primary target because apparently releasing a grapple is a free action?

I have looked at the question you asked the designer Bruno and it seems to clear things up, thanks a lot !

Here is my interpretation :

- Without final embrace I can make a grapple check as a free action and constrict as a swift on creatures of ANY size.

- With final embrace I can still do that if I choose not to use the feat. However I can also use the grab ability on a creature my size or smaller (giving me a +4 to grapple check) and constrict creatures as a free action (do those creatures have to be my size or smaller? this still stays unclear).

Thanks a lot for your help I hope I will be able to clear things up before my game ! Playing GM credit characters for the first time is such a hassle ! :)

Edit : One another question : If I were to make a trip attack could I trigger Grab / the witch grapple check on it?

The only blocking point for the WHW is constrict but since it has no size limit apparently it should work out. The WHW doesn't have grab per se so I don't think a GM could enforce a size limit on her free grapple check.

The thing that disturbs me a bit is that the final embrace feat says you can only constrict creatures your size or smaller (without the feat), is that a mistake in the feat description?

I will bump that since I have still not received an answer and am currently creating a PFS character, who could potentially be useless if there is a size limit.

I have looked at the hexcrafter's guide but it's far from being a reference especially since the defiler build is very shady in my opinion.

I have seen some people suggesting to take Final Embrace but there'a nothing in the WHW description that would point to it being size restrictive.

By the way Korthis I like the monk dip better, it gives me flurry of blows, 1d6 dmg with my hair if I take Feral Combat Training as well as WIS to AC and combat reflexes for free.

The thing is I have no idea how many levels in witch / monk I should take or for example if I should try to go Eldritch Knight or something.

Thanks for your answers anyways ;)

Hello,

I'm currently trying to come up with a viable White Haired Witch build.
I'm just stuck with one question, in the WHW description size is pretty much ignored, but normally creatures can only constrict creatures smaller than themselves. Would this apply to the WHW, pretty much making her useless?

I would also gladly take any advice concerning a WHW build (aimed towards PFS), I was thinking of going monk with feral combat training and perhaps eldritch knight and I don't know how many levels of WHW to take (assuming I won't go higher than level 12 or so)

Thanks in advance for your help,

Octave

Shinemesen, keep in mind that a 3rd level spell equals CL 5, so your spell stored Sg will only deal 5d6 dmg be it intensified or not (not accounting for empower spell)

Constrict is a swift action, so you can only Constrict once per turn.

I honestly don't see why arcane accuracy can solve this problem. First of all at low levels you will have limited arcane points so it is totally out of the question to use arcane accuracy on each attack.

More importantly arcane accuracy uses a swift action, which will prevent you from using constrict on your target on the same turn, thus severely reducing action economy.

I was not thinking of using wands for level dependant spells.
But things like a wand of true strike, shield or bladed dash can become very useful.
It's become close to overpowered in my hair witch build where I use true strike to get a guaranteed trip even on quadrupeds with entangled and fatigued. Accurate strike then allows me to make a cmb + 6 grapple check vs target's diminished cmd.

You could pick the wand wielder arcana so you can cast spells from wands which will let you keep your frostbite charges

As to the white haired witch / prehensile hair combo, you will only use one type of attack so whether it is primary or secondary doesn't change anything since you will get full BAB and 1.5 int modifier on it.
I still think natural combat is required to make this build fully legit, I have seen Reynolds' answer but he does not 100% seem like he knows what he's talking about

Thank you for your very complete answer.
In the case of a manticore, it is normal for me not to know what option to choose I guess ^^

What I don't understand is that, to me, fast zombies are more combat efficient than bloody skeletons even at early levels

Thank you ;)
I've already read this guide but the reasoning lacks explanation in my opinion. It advices to create only bloody skeletons with creatures with less than 20 HD but I can't figure out why

Hello everyone,

I've recently started playing a 8th level necromancer in a mythic campaign and I am looking for advice as to what is better when considering animating fast zombies or bloody skeletons.
I'm playing a wizard so bloody skeletons are nice because I can't channel energy so they can heal themselves after combat. Also they cannot die which is a very good thing, needless to say.
On the other hand if I read it correctly fast zombies gain increased movespeed, they keep their ability to fly (albeit at reduced maneuvrability) and they get two additional slam attacks in their attack routine.

So what's your take on this? For example I want to animate a manticore but I don't know which variant to use.

I don't see why not

You can also cast remove paralysis during creation, so it seems logical to me that a fast zombie could be hasted.

Remember that before you get prehensile hair, you will apply your strength to your to hit when using the hair attack and only the intelligence modifier to its bonus damage.

He should look up into Inquisitor, it really meshes well with the Gunslinger, if you search Gunslinger Inquisitor on those messageboard I'm sur you'd find something that'd fit him

Andreww, frostbite doesn't require a save. Please at least read the spells you're referring to before trying to break someone's argument

Hi, I was reading this thread when I realized I have a question to ask about PFO.

What's the real difference between it and another MMO?
I have been a fervent MMO player ever since the beta of WoW, but I have stopped playing online games about 3 years ago.

I have nonetheless picked up D&D and PFRPG and have been loving it during the last year.

People seem to hold the view that PFO will be different than other MMOs, can you please help me understand why?
I must say I haven't been very immersed in trying to see how PFO works but from what I've seen it seems a bit like (excuse my being harsh) a remake from every MMO that's ever been made, with no awesome graphics to back it up or very innovative combat system.

So please enlighten me, what would make PFO different from the other games?

You should consider buying first level pearls of power.
For 1000g, you will be able to cast one more first level spell, and you can buy as many as you want, 2-3 seems like a good number to me.

Well let's end this useless argument about Undead Master, at worst one can take it at level 3 which isn't so much of a big deal.

I've got a question for your ShakaUVM there are 4 traits mentionned in your guide, which is probably because you took Additional traits instead of Preferred spell. What traits would you go with in priority?

Thanks in advance

I don't think I'm gonna have access to 3rd party material sadly...

I was more leaning towards the wizard anyway, especially since my GM is allowing me to trade Scribe Scroll for Spell Focus like in PFS. What I'd really like to know now is whether or not to take the Undead master feat and also what mythic path and abilities to take that would synchronize best with a necromancer.

No love for an aspiring necromancer? :(

Why not go magus instead of druid?

Hello everybody,

I'm planning to build a Necromancer for a homebrew Mythic campaign taking place in the Ravenloft setting.

I've read those two guides :

Brewers Guide to Undeath And Necromancers
ShakaUVM's guide to the PFS Necromancer

and I find it hard to choose between going the cleric or the wizard way.

It seems like cleric get animate dead sooner so maybe that would be one of the positive points of clerics, especially since the game is gonna start at level 6, where cleric will have animate dead but not wizards.

The thing that is most confusing to me is the discrepancy between those two guides.
Specifically, the first one says that the Command Undead feat is a waste, whereas the second one seems to find it very good. It's the same for the Undead Master feat.

I find that the access to the Command Undead (Mythic) feat would perhaps turn a bit the tables, as it would prevent intelligent undeads from having a second save when I use Command undead.

Another blocking point is the real use of the "Undead Master feat", if I understand it correctly, the wording is such that it would only increase the maximum HD of the undead I can raise using animate dead, but not the actual max HD of the pool of undead I can control, which would make it a bit lackluster.

Last but not least, I have never played a cleric in an actual long duration game, and I wonder if a channeling build (maybe with the dazing variant) would be better than "god wizard" spells when coupled with my necromantic abilities.

I guess what I'm really asking is both "what's more optimized" and "what do you think would be more entertaining to play".

Thanks in advance for your help,

Faskill

PS : Just to get it out of the way, I read the Undead Lord cleric archetype and I agree with the first guide's author in the opinion that it is not very good, especially in a game that will begin at level 6 / mythic tier 1, and will be more aimed towards the higher levels.

Sounds to me like a copy pasting error.

I would wait for an errata on the new bestiary before using those "new" definitions.

What about the duration on the rest of the buffs, mainly the size buff, to me it seems like it would be unlimited, which seems a bit hefty for a 36k item.

Also, what's the duration on that?

I've got another question, how does the melee transmogrift work early game exactly?
I have difficulties seeing why half elf is a good option for this build (I assume half orc is for the bite attack? )
How could a half elf get 3 attacks at level 4?

My bad Serum/Sammy, I didn't actually know that.

The website he and I was referring to, the one with the links to the spells, is this one :
http://www.d20pfsrd.com , which is far from being official

Honestly, I have difficulty seeing how the font of the text is relevant.

Sure, spells are generally italicized, but is that really a general rule? Is it actually written somewhere that spells will be throughout the book italicized? Also, the PRD is hardly an official source and should not be mentioned when discussing RAW.

Couldn't the writer of the feat just have been too lazy to write both the command undead spell and feat, assuming that both would be able to make one qualify for Undead Master?

I'm just hypothesizing here but it does seem like the whole argument is that the text is in italics, and I don't think you can really make a ruling based on that.

Also, I don't think the examples are relevant. The thing I'm arguing here is that the feat would not have a feat AND a spell requirement but a feat OR a spell requirement, which would maybe be a bit of an exception I guess.

I like hard mode but I think there should be an incentive, however small, for players who play it.
It doesn't seem right for me to put the life of my character on a very thin line if there isn't anything to be earned from it.

Well, depends on how you read it I guess :

The ability to (cast animate dead) or to command undead.

The command undead feat enables you to command undead, so it should be legal. It's really some heavy rule nitpicking you're doing here, as it's pretty clear the feat should enable you to qualify.

Have you actually read the Undead Master feat?

It clearly mentions the Command Undead feat

Thanks for the quick update ;)

I really appreciate your taking the time to answer my questions !

One last request though, could you put a sample 20 point stat buy in the stats section ?

Thanks in advance :)

Faskill

Hi,

I really like this guide.
However I think it needs a build example with detailed level by level feats and maybe also spell choices.
Also, do you have any strategies in the lower levels? It seems like this build is more designed for higher level play

Keep up with the good work and thank you for the guide;)

Faskill

Very well is the answer you're looking for sir.