So I'm playing a Giant Instinct Barbarian, due to the difficulty of finding large weapons I'm looking to craft my new weapon upgrades now that my party has some significant downtime and coin to burn. But the Crafting rules are vague at best.
For Example, I know I could make a normal Greatsword with just the formulas in a formula book. Do I need a separate formula to make a large greatsword? what about a large mithril or adamantine greatsword? If special materials do require their own formulas and I were making weapons for other party members with the same materials too would that require even more specific formulas? IE would I need specific formulas for every weapon, or would I just need an adamantine formula for example that can be combined with any weapon formula to make that weapon in that material?
I am wondering when characters have swim/climb speeds in addition to their normal speeds can those speeds be used together as a single action?
Can a Raging Athlete barbarian with a 30 speed: swim 10' to a 10' cliff, climb it, then run 10' in a single action, or would that be 3 actions?
If each is a different action, couldn't a character "Climb" on level ground? Most people would clearly choose not to do so as it would slow them down tremendously, but if it didn't slow you down or if you didn't mind that it did, why couldn't it be done?
So, I'm neither the caster or the target of this little escapade, just a scaley fighter along for the ride. However this exchange has resulted in some discussion between our GM and the party that I think has been a little sloppy with word choice on specific points.
I 100% agree that anyone who does not meet the requirements of "Identifying Spells" CRB pg 305 does not know that Charm was cast. (Unless the target gets a critical success on their save, which invokes the spell specific entry that they know there was an attempt to charm them.) "Critical Success The target is unaffected and aware you tried to charm it."
However what has been presented to the party are statements that they do not know that "the spell" was cast, and statements that they do not know that "a spell" was cast. The former falls under my previous paragraph, since noone was able to identify the spell as it was cast, the only person that knows charm was cast is the wizard that cast it.
The later is where I have issue/concern. As far as I can tell, there is nothing in Charm that indicates there is anyone in sight of the caster that would be unaware that a spell is being cast at all.
To me this seems extremely clear this is not the case, because if you are unaware a spell is cast, you would have no opportunity to identify the spell, which is something that is specifically pointed out that you can do in the successful save line.
"Success The target is unaffected but thinks your spell was something harmless instead of charm, unless it identifies the spell (see Identifying Magic)."
Further, that would be such a huge deviation from the general rules on spell casting that it would require specific entries calling it out. (Kind of like the critical success line that clearly calls out under those circumstances you know someone tried to charm you) Which I don't know of any other spell that lets you automatically identify it on a critical success on the save. Similarly I don't know of any other spell that noone is aware of a spell being cast.
The only direct textual backing offered for not knowing a spell is cast, is the spell description of what happens if you fail your save and are actually charmed. "To the target, your words are honey and your visage seems bathed in a dreamy haze."
That line is being presented as the description of what the target sees actually happening during the casting (which is altering their perceptions before the spell is even completed casting or they've even had a chance to make a save), rather than as flavor/description for how the target that failed the save views what is happening during the spell duration.
To those brave (or bored) enough to read through all that, Thank you. And any support would be appreciated. Alteratively if I'm wrong here, any assistance in helping me understand what I'm missing would also be appreciated.
Edited: I don't think I clearly detailed that the current GM ruling is that only the target is unaware of "a spell" being cast.
On the other hand, even if the Oracle doesn't have Bless as one of their spells known they can still use a wand of Bless without rolling anything. How does that factor in?
I'm mostly curious because I can cast anything from the Cleric spell list, be it a scroll or wand.
Does this mean that even with bought scrolls I'm supposed to use Read Magic? From the rules
To have any chance of activating a scroll spell, the scroll user must meet the following requirements.
The spell must be of the correct type (arcane or divine). Arcane spellcasters (wizards, sorcerers, and bards) can only use scrolls containing arcane spells, and divine spellcasters (clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers) can only use scrolls containing divine spells. (The type of scroll a character creates is also determined by his class.)
The user must have the spell on her class list.
The user must have the requisite ability score.
If that is the case, it means that Read Magic is a must for every single spellcaster.
Look at what wands (spell trigger section) says:
The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it.
How does a Paladin do that? They don't have Read Magic, they don't have Spellcraft.
Does that mean that the name of the spell is enough, then it also should be when talking about spells, either in Combat or outside.
So the only section that seems to require read magic is:
Decipher the Writing:
The writing on a scroll must be deciphered before a character can use it or know exactly what spell it contains. This requires a read magic spell or a successful Spellcraft check (DC 20 + spell level). Deciphering a scroll is a full-round action.
Deciphering a scroll to determine its contents does not activate its magic unless it is a specially prepared cursed scroll. A character can decipher the writing on a scroll in advance so that she can proceed directly to the next step when the time comes to use the scroll.
First Read magic is only the more common option for deciphering, spellcraft can be used instead. If we say assume a Paladin never bothered to put any points in spellcraft then they would not be able to decipher a scroll, and rules as written they would never be able to cast from a scroll.
However I don't think I've ever played at a table where a GM was that strict. As an unwritten rule, as long as someone can decipher the scroll they can then decipher the scroll with someone else so that person can use it. This is likely exclusively the method when buying a scroll, the seller would decipher it for the person if required. I've NEVER had a GM request a decipher scroll check or make someone cast read magic on a scroll they have purchased.
If more party members do it more healing gets done every 10 minutes.
Don't forget the 'Continual' part of Continual recovery. Treat Wounds has a 1 hour immunity normally, this immunity starts at the start of the treatment, not the end, so you can attempt to treat wounds every hour, not every 70 minutes.
Then When you take Continual Recovery, the Immunity period reduces from 1 hour to 10 minutes. So now as soon as you complete the first treatment they are ready to be treated again. Having more people with this ability means you can heal more people at once, but it wouldn't do anything to increase the rate at which you can heal one person.
The entry for giant instinct under barbarian seems to say a small PC can use a large weapon but then state they only gain access to a weapon one size larger than their category. Does this imply that a pc cannot purchase a large weapon at character creation if they are small even though they can technically use it?
as far as I've read, Med/Small are both the same size for EVERYTHING other than the actual Creature.
To add to this question, the only place I see anything about increased sizes is the section on Effects that increase size. (pg 279)
Increasing Die Size:
When an effect calls on you to increase the size of your weapon damage dice, instead of using its normal weapon damage dice, use the next larger die, as listed below (so if you were using a d4, you’d use a d6, and so on). If you are already using a d12, the size is already at its maximum. You can’t increase your weapon damage die size more than once.
1d4 ➞ 1d6 ➞ 1d8 ➞ 1d10 ➞ 1d12
IF that is what is applied for increasing the damage for weapons as they actually increase in size it would acknowledge that a weapons dmg should increase as size increases, but only ever do so once, and should never exceed a 1d12.
Thus a Medium Dagger is 1d4, a Large dagger is 1d6, a Colossal Dagger is still 1d6, and a Great Axe (assuming it's at least medium) is never anything other than 1d12.
We also have no answer for weapons of reduced size...
These Look fun. One Flying Character Vs Army. Flyer has a bag of holding full of bags of caltrops. Flies 1500 ft above army, and starts dumping the bags of caltrops out on top of the troops below. Safely out of bow/spell range hundreds of spiked objects fall to the ground making troops have to perform dozens of reflex saves to avoid 187 dmg on a success, 375 dmg on a fail, and 750 dmg on a crit fail. on the off chance that someone should actually survive, they are now also surrounded by a field of caltrops to cross!
What's up with Touch attack spells? Most spells are pretty straight forward, you cast the spell and that guy over there needs to make a save, or there's a ranged attack roll right away.
However there is no clarification on how touch or touch attack spells work.
-Do touch/touch attack spells have to be cast adjacent to the target and delivered as part of the spell casting?
-If you fail the attack roll do you keep the charge or is the spell lost?
-Can you cast the spell then use stride/step to move adjacent then deliver the spell attack automatically?
-Can you cast the spell then use stride/step to move adjacent but have to use a strike to deliver the spell attack?
Then there's the Archetype Rules that list 'occasionally' Archetype Feats that act like skill Feats. And they should have the Skill Trait. Unless I missed it there are no Skill Trait Archetype Feats listed among the archetypes. Are they listed Elsewhere, or does "occasionally" mean there are none yet, but you think some will be coming?
2a : extortion or coercion by threats especially of public exposure or criminal prosecution
Definition of coerce:
transitive verb
1 : to compel to an act or choice
was coerced into agreeing
abusers who coerce their victims into silence
2 : to achieve by force or threat
Definition of intimidate:
transitive verb
: to make timid or fearful : FRIGHTEN
especially : to compel or deter by or as if by threats
So, Blackmail is to coerce by threat. Coerce is to compel by threat. Intimidate is to compel by threat.
Therefore Intimidate is just as evil of an act as blackmail!
Definition of contract:
1a : a binding agreement between two or more persons or parties
especially : one legally enforceable
If he breaks the contract, he'll be sued.
Even a contract is in and of itself a form of coercion/blackmail. "If he breaks the contract, he'll be sued." It is a threat that something will happen if you do not abide to what was agreed.
So draw up a NDA type contract that stipulates the terms that you would blackmail for. If the party agrees and signs, you simply have a legal NDA. if the other party does not agree to it, then there is no NDA and you can do whatever you were going to threaten blackmailing them with.
HOWEVER this avoids actually threatening them with Blackmail!
"Good: Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others."
Therefore the "Good" Paladin is making the personal sacrifice of doing something questionable, in order to help others.
To say
Blackmail > Coercion > Oppression > Evil
is akin to saying
Killing Evil Creature > Killing > Evil
Blackmail, in theory, would be a Chaotic act, or an act that is against the law. But that would only be assuming you're in an area where Blackmail is actually an illegal act.
With a 2 lvl dip in alchemist (or alternate options like lvl 7 mutation warrior) you could gain a Vestigial Arm, or Tentacle Discovery that would be able to perform your reloads.
Edit: side question. Say I took stunning fist (1 use per day per monk level). Would you say that the monk 1/brawler 2 gets 2 or 3 daily uses? It's the same clause in the ability, but it feels different, for some reason.
This probably feels different because it is. (At list different than from my post above) Stunning fist is NOT a Class ability, rather it is a feat that acts differently based on your levels of a specific class. Since Brawler Acts as monk for the purpose of Feats then in this case you do add the levels together. So for the purpose of stunning fist, a 1monk/2brawler qualifies as a lvl3 monk.
Stunning Fist:
You know just where to strike to temporarily stun a foe.
Prerequisites: Dex 13, Wis 13, Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +8.
Benefit: You must declare that you are using this feat before you make your attack roll (thus, a failed attack roll ruins the attempt). Stunning Fist forces a foe damaged by your unarmed attack to make a Fortitude saving throw (DC 10 + 1/2 your character level + your Wis modifier), in addition to dealing damage normally. A defender who fails this saving throw is stunned for 1 round (until just before your next turn). A stunned character drops everything held, can’t take actions, loses any Dexterity bonus to AC, and takes a –2 penalty to AC. You may attempt a stunning attack once per day for every four levels you have attained (but see Special), and no more than once per round. Constructs, oozes, plants, undead, incorporeal creatures, and creatures immune to critical hits cannot be stunned.
Special: A monk receives Stunning Fist as a bonus feat at 1st level, even if he does not meet the prerequisites. A monk may attempt a stunning attack a number of times per day equal to his monk level, plus one more time per day for every four levels he has in classes other than monk.
The distinction is in how the two work. Monks Robes, add +5 to the monk level for the purpose of determining AC bonus and unarmed attack damage, but those two class abilities still don't stack with each other, so you have Monk lvl+5 OR Brawler level+5.
Stunning Fist on the other hand is 1/day for monk levels, and 1/4/day for non monk levels. Since Brawler levels count as monk levels for this, the Stunning fist feat itself is how they stack. Because the rules for Class abilities not stacking unless otherwise specified does not apply to Feats (Feats are not class abilities), the result is you add both monk and brawler levels as 1/day.
At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk’s attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may make unarmed strikes with his hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply his full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all his unarmed strikes.
Usually a monk’s unarmed strikes deal lethal damage, but he can choose to deal nonlethal damage instead with no penalty on his attack roll. He has the same choice to deal lethal or nonlethal damage while grappling.
A monk’s unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.
A monk also deals more damage with his unarmed strikes than a normal person would, as shown above on Table: Monk. The unarmed damage values listed on Table: Monk are for Medium monks. A Small monk deals less damage than the amount given there with his unarmed attacks, while a Large monk deals more damage; see Table: Small or Large Monk Unarmed Damage.
Brawler Unarmed Strike:
At 1st level, a brawler gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A brawler may attack with fists, elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a brawler may make unarmed strikes with her hands full. A brawler applies her full Strength modifier (not half ) on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.
Usually, a brawler’s unarmed strikes deal lethal damage, but she can choose to deal nonlethal damage instead with no penalty on her attack roll. She has the same choice to deal lethal or nonlethal damage while grappling.
A brawler’s unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that modify either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.
A brawler also deals more damage with her unarmed strikes than others, as shown on Table: Brawler. The unarmed damage values listed on that table are for Medium brawlers. A Small brawler deals less damage than the amount given there with her unarmed attacks, while a Large brawler deals more damage; see the following table.
Hybrid Class Rules / Parent Classes:
Each one of the following classes lists two classes that it draws upon to form the basis of its theme. While a character can multiclass with these parent classes, this usually results in redundant abilities. Such abilities don’t stack unless specified. If a class feature allows the character to make a one-time choice (such as a bloodline), that choice must match similar choices made by the parent classes and vice-versa (such as selecting the same bloodline). The new classes presented here are all hybrids of two existing core or base classes.
Results:
So, unfortunately due to the Hybrid class rules, and that neither class ability says that it works with the other, the two would not stack. Therefore as a lvl 1monk/2brawler, your unarmed damage with the robe would be either 6 monk, or 7 brawler.
The same logic applies for the AC bonus, you get the AC Bonus of either a lvl 6 monk, OR a lvl 7 brawler.
Edit: All this said, you have a home game, you may be able to present this information to your GM, and see if he is willing to waive that rule in this case. Since this is not really a case of what you're trying to do causing game breaking mechanics.
Still seems like a flurry of pin pricks compared to unarmed strike damage out of a flurry of bow attacks like a Zen Archer gets...
I'm not saying it can't have up side if deployed properly, but I just don't see it as some ground breaking build that is going to overpower all other options.
Minimal: ...you're proficient at both melee and ranged combat.
Moderate: ...in addition, you're capable of securing battlefield-control AoOs.
Optimized: ...in addition, you're built to weather abuse and make your saves.
Implied (any degree): your output is more than negligible in multiple roles. I.e., the BAB6 melee guy who drops his opponent after one hit and then quick-tosses an axe for d6+4 against a distant opponent isn't much of a switch-hitter. (He's more firmly in the territory if TWF/Rapid, or a more damaging attack.) The "classic" 3rd-edition switch-hitter was a Ranger with both Rapid Shot and Two Weapon Fighting by 2nd level.
Also implied: you're a martial built to rotate weaponry as appropriate to the situation. --A high level caster who can do anything anywhere anytime may be an off-the-scale Green Lantern superhero coexistent in your fantasy RPG, but they're not really a switch-hitter even if they do sometimes slum around as a giant monster with opposable thumbs.
Examples:
* The archer who charges into melee Power Attacking with a greatword and offering his untouched pile of hitpoints as a meatwall to prevent squishy death has minimal switch-hitter capacity.
* The enlarged barbarian with a 20' reach polearm, Combat Reflexes and Quick Draw, has a moderate degree of switch-hittery.
* A paladin who is normally mounted with a lance, and also possessing both heavy and light blades and an Adaptive longbow, is an optimal switch-hitter. He's highly mobile and capable of both supernova offense in melee or at range, and can take more abuse than probably anyone else in their party.
* A Zen Archer who moves faster than the mount, hits nearly as hard more times per round, has a longer range with their primary weapon, higher AC/Saves and only moderately fewer HP. Level depending, can completely ignore total concealment, shoot around corners, teleport anywhere on the battlefield and very rarely has to do anything other than keep putting arrows in the air as part of a full attack.
So, Personal curiosity, does anyone know, or any chance a Dev is willing to step forward and explain why the Waveblade from Adventurer's Armory 2 is not PFS Legal?
I've been wanting to assemble a Halfling Swashbuckler(Mouser) Monk for some time, and a waveblade is the perfect option since it's going to have crappy Cha, the ability to have a high chance of regaining spent Panache points is critical! (pun only slightly intended)
One more point that wasn't covered by the x3 posts above. If you weren't sure, as an Untyped Bonus, it applies to all forms of AC, (Standard, Flatfooted, Touch, CMD*)
Specifically AoMF works with any attack you make with your body, feet, knees, elbows, hands, headbutt, bite, claw, gore....
I definitely do see a high number of monks start saving some $$$ and maybe getting a basic Ghost Touch AOMF or something like that, then running handwraps for all their normal stuff.
Which would bring up another question. If you wear an AoMF with a specific bonus added, Ghost Touch/Holy/Flaming... Lets got with Flaming in this specific example, and wore Handwraps that were say straight +2 would your fist attacks be +2 Flaming or just +2? Certainly all other natural/unarmed attacks beyond fists would be Flaming only.
This has the potential to make unarmed fighters very powerfull very quickly!
My personal assumption would be they do not Stack, Fist/Hands would be the Handwraps only, All other attacks would be Flaming (Whatever is on the AoMF) only!
So Yes RAW the the penalty only applies when one of the creatures engaged in melee is one of your allies. In the event when it is to people/creatures that you do not know. I rule that if you shoot at one, and don't take the -4 you are also engaging in combat against it as well, and will take appropriate penalties for hostile creatures and such should you decide to diplomacy with it rather than fight it.
In a PFS scenario, there is no option to wave the -4 penalty.
As a house rule, nothing is stopping you from doing so. If I were GM'ing and that request made of me, I might decide to allow avoiding the -4, but consequently rule that a Nat 1 still misses everything entirely, but a 2-5 actually hit your ally rather than the opponent. This increases the players chance to hit the enemy, but also puts in an equal chance to hit your ally as you are taking in penalty to avoid hitting your ally. I would further rule that if your ally does not willingly accept this risk, then you lose the ability to opt out of the -4 penalty.
If you do roll 2-5, possibly a second attack roll to see if you hit him squarely enough to injure. Targeting the ally's Flatfooted AC with no shield bonus, as they are likely not prepared to be shot in the back by their friend.
Also there's nothing to say that you can't put a bandolier/quiver/whatever on a construct and have it understand how to access ammunition from that source.
I believe this is a common misconception.
If you look at the Table: Actions in Combat You'll see that Climbing is not listed as something that provokes an attack of opportunity. What you WILL find is "Use skill that takes 1 action" Usually provokes an attack of opportunity. This covers something like a Heal Check which is a standard action.
However if we look at Climb we find that it also does not mention that the act of climbing provokes an AoO, additionally climbing is not a skill that "takes 1 action" it is done as part of a move action. What climbing WILL do, is cause you to lose your dexterity bonus to AC unless you have something that allows to you keep it.
So unless someone can show where Climbing specifically provokes, then you would only provoke once for moving OUT of a threatened square. Now when it comes to climbing onto a table you have to carefully consider when the person is actually climbing, and when they threaten. If the opponent threatens the table, but does not threaten the square the player is in when he starts to climb onto the table, the the act of climbing onto the table does not provoke. If the player then chooses to continue and CLIMB down off the table, that would provoke, and the player would not have his dexterity bonus to AC. However if once on the table, the player decided to jump down off the table, that too would provoke since the player is still leaving a threatened square, but the player would retain his dexterity bonus as he is no longer climbing.
Now if the opponent threatens the space the player is in before climbing onto the table, then the act of climbing onto the table would provoke, and would provoke while the player has no dexterity bonus to AC (since to move onto the table they are in the act of climbing) This is true whether the opponent also threatens the square the table is in or not.
1) Yes, if you exclude those cases you mention, any other ranged weapon would need ammo.
2) No, I see nothing in what you've posted here that details any reload times would change, so all reloads would be baseline unless the constructs have feats to change them, or the player has feats to change them and he is able to share feats with his construct
3) Yes. The construct would follow all the rules to clear the misfire if the firearm was not destroyed by it. Additionally, The rule you provided doesn't actually say integrated weapons cannot be damaged. It says they can be be sundered or disarmed. So they are not susceptible to targeted attacks by enemies, that is completely separate from damage that would happen to the weapon by other means.
Disclaimer: Again, I have not put any effort into further research on the topics at hand, and are making these determinations only with the information you provided.
Crane style centers around one fighting defensively which if you have the feats take another -2 to hit meaning that every attack you have with flurry takes a -4,which makes it horrendously unreliable and even more so considering that the monk is a 3/4th bab class.
And no, you can't take combat style master because crane style is one of those styles where you can't swap out on the fly cause then it will be even more inaccurate since fighting defensively lasts until the start of your next turn.
So with this in mind would a crane style user just ignore flurry entirely?
First don't forget that while Monk is 3/4 bab, a monk changes to full bab during the flurry due to Flurry using Monk Level as BAB.
Flurry BAB:
For the purpose of these attacks, the monk’s base attack bonus from his monk class levels is equal to his monk level. For all other purposes, such as qualifying for a feat or a prestige class, the monk uses his normal base attack bonus.
So a little examples, lets set some baseline. As this looks like a more defensive build, lets roll with a relatively low ability mod for your attack at a +2.
As a result, your single attack at level 1 is:
1d20+2(ability)-2(crane)+0(BAB) or a total of 1d20+0
By comparison, your Flurry attack at level 1 is 2 attacks at:
1d20+2(ability)-2(crane)+1(BAB)-2(Flurry) or a total of 1d20-1
So, if you are trying to hit AC 16 you either have 1 attack with a 25% chance to hit, or 2 attacks with 20% each to hit.
I don't know about you. but I'll take the 20% chance on 2 hits.
The biggest argument for NOT doing Flurry would be if you're trying to hit AC 19. Because then you have a single 10% chance or 2 5% chances. So there you might as well flip a coin. For all other values, you're mathematically better off using Flurry.
Additionally, as others have mentioned. As you level and your BAB falls behind your monk level, and as your Flurry Modifier reduces, you will have a higher chance to hit when you flurry compared to normal attacks.
From my perspective as a player and occasional GM for about 2.5 years in the Raleigh/Durham Area, Michael IS the Face of Paizo in this area. And short of hiring Scarlett Johansson to take his place, I don't believe you could find anyone better to take his place in that role.
Michael puts in hours of prep time each week not only for the games he GM's but to help new/less experienced GM's be fully prepared for any games they are running. He gets to know every player that not only plays at his games, but even comes with questions and a passing interested in what Pathfinder and PFS are about. He puts in countless hours working to help players in this area with little or no recognition or incentive for himself as he already has every measurable bonus Paizo has to offer.
Yet I have no true understand of exactly what he did that warrants his removal as VC. Thus it seems odd that the act of removing him as VC is hurting the Paizo and PFS Brand in this area significantly more so than whatever actions he took that sparked this issue.
you are correct you get 30' reach and can attack any square within that 30' area.
The main drawback I see is that you don't threaten any squares when using it as a reach weapon. So you can not take any AoO, and you do not provide flanks for any allies.
and actually the inner 10' is fine because the feat calls out that you can attack anywhere within the 15' reach, normal reach weapons do not have that verbiage so you are unable to attack inside the actual reach value.
Good point, not exactly looking to to change dmg type on every spell i cast every day, just in those oh crap moments when my only good spells are high resist/immune by my target.
May be time to just hit up Old Faithful, Improved Init to help blow things up before my melee charge in the way.
Thanks for the information everyone, Especially thank link to zenith games, I'm going to have to read through a LOT of those, not just the Sorcerer ones.
I do think there's an argument for all those blood-line mutations to work off Wisdom rather than Charisma, given the verbiage used for the Empyreal archetype. But for my build I find the bloodline powers i have, while they are weaker, fit very well with the theme of the build and the campaign.
I do think I may rock Metamagic: Elemental Spell for my Feat next level, given my spells atm are cold/fire I'll probably pick Acid, and then snag a lightning dmg spell soon.
So here's the Scenario.
I'm normally a very melee/skill centric player, I've never really ran a character with a lot of spell/caster focus. The closest I've done until now is a Bloodrager, and that like most ragers was merely to supplement my combat abilities.
Currently I'm in a Horror Rules based campaign where I found myself trying to flesh out a group that already had all the major roles covered (2 Melee (1 Tanky, 1 Striker), Ranged (Striker), Psychic, Oracle (Both Controllers), Cleric (Healer). I decided there were 2 things noticeably missing, a Trapper and a Blaster/pure Arcane. Combined with a little meta gaming of not wanting to roll through a horror campaign with a low Will save character I was able to throw together a character to fill the void I felt we had in the party. End result, someone who normally focuses on Martial builds is running a Sorcerer: Celestial Bloodline(Wildblooded: Empyreal), Seeker Archetype
For Traits I took Seeker (to support the trapper role), and Focused Mind.
Currently I'm at Level 6 with the following Feats:
Eschew Materials
Combat Casting
Spell Focus: Evocation.
I have the following spells (* indicates Bloodline Spell):
0: Detect Magic, Disrupt Undead, Message, Prestidigition, Ray of Frost, Read Magic, Spark
1: Bless* Feather Fall, Mage Armor, Magic Missle, Shield(considering swapping this out, I don't use it often)
2: Resist Energy*, Flurry of Snowballs, See Invisibility
3: Fireball (Will gain Magic Circle against Evil* Next Level)
Noteable items possessed*/desired
Metamagic Rods - Lesser: Extend*, Empower, Maximize
Goggles of Minute Seeing*, Eyes of the Eagle.
Cloak of Resistance*
Headband of Inspired Wisdom
Mnemonic Vestment
Hopefully that covers some of the scenario I'm in and where my build is so far. Currently I feel like the character needs some more single Target or at least more localized Area spells as my melee striker is an overrun build, so he's often in the middle of my area spells. Also I'm trying to avoid having to go point blank/precise, so have been leaning away from spells that require ranged Touch attacks.
Anyway Before this gets too long winded I'm looking for any tips on Gear/spell selection/Feats as I move forward.
Yeah... the quests issue. I could use some proper brainstorming on that.
At first it was a tag on scenarios 'this is a quest', but then people really wanted to be able to filter on them more properly. Also some quests don't have a number, some do.
So I introduced the quest as a type of content: Scenario, quest, module, AP. Yet this makes people confused as to where the numbered quests are, like 8-16.
And I totally see everyone's point, I just don't quite see a solution to this issue. Thinking on it though.
Started making small quality of life changes to the pfstracker again btw, so that's good. Will be suggesting to people during registering and in the profile to keep the same name as on warhorn, for organisers to find it more easily.
Also going to put the country-choose option on the register page, instead of only on the profile (though it will not be a required field).
And I am looking into sorting scenarios better on mainly the reporting pages.
@Tineke: Yeah! It is one of those things. I don't have free time, but I have enough money to buy companions. :) It used to be I don't have money, but a lot of free time. Life is weird.
@Hilary: I have a few ideas on how to achieve this, starting with a extra tag for content that basically says 'pfs' or 'sfs'. Then possibly a switch or some such or a tag... or I dunno yet.
Is it possible to set multiple types for a single scenario, you could then filter off the type and the scenario could be found anywhere it is applicable So you could report a season 8 quest on the season 8 section or the quest section.
Simon, Looks like reporting for "8-16: House of Harmonious Wisdom" is either missing or possibly just has some syntax issues, but it doesn't appear to be showing up.
Heck, even intelligent undead are usually biologically incapable of coexisting with living creatures, mostly because Vampires and the like HAVE to prey upon living things to survive
Most people don't consider that evil... considering that's true of all non-autotrophic life.
Most people consider that extremely evil when the living things preyed upon are sapient as vampire victims tend to be, so your point only stands if you're willing to be highly pedantic about it. Vampires being able to nonlethally feed on animals is usually only a thing if the setting specifically allows it to be. Most of the time it's dragging someone into a dark place and then cracking them open like a red bull, which is kind of different from you and the orc family down the street both enjoying bacon for breakfast.
You mean because the Vampire feeds in the dark, and the pig is killed in the light? The living and the Dead are neither good nor evil, yet the Un-Living/Un-Dead are inherently Evil?
If fighting evil means that you qualify as good, then if you have an entire region inhabited solely by evil creatures. Then you introduced undead into that region, since the entire argument on undead being evil is the things they do to living creatures. Would that mean since the undead are now doing those things solely to evil creatures they become an anti-evil evil, and thus could be considered good?
Seeking is on the Ranged Weapons, and says it's only for Ranged Weapons. A bow should make the Arrows Seeking, this FAQ should not change that. This ability does not say anything about DR.
The recent FAQ does not change that, all that is being said is even before the FAQ the Seeking quality does not have the superscript 2 indicating that it is applied to the ammunition of projectile ranged weapons. Which would mean it only works on thrown weapons.
However also as pointed out, there is a forum post by John Compton that states that was an error/oversight. And that it does in fact work with projectile weapons.
The brawler is substantially better than the (chained) monk at unarmed combat, largely due to Martial Flexibility and full BAB. Actually, the (chained) monk isn't very good at unarmed combat at all -- that's why the umonk was invented in the first place. The original monk didn't do very well at its design goals.
Just because you can't make a good monk doesn't mean it can't be done, and certainly doesn't mean the brawler is better at it.
The Unchained monk really isn't all that great, it just allows you to pick and choose what abilities you want to gain and gives you full bab when you're not doing a full attack, but a good monk is nearly always doing a full attack anyway, so that doesn't matter.
IMHO due to the high number of attacks, and the increasing base damage, a straight Monk (even Core Monk) is easily the most potent unarmed combatant in the game. You simple have to avoid falling into the dex/wis traps. Those stats are nice to have but you need to build your monk the same way you would build any other high damage melee class, Primary stat Str, Secondary stat Con, after that Wis/Dex. Having 3-4 good stats after your rolls would make a very strong character, but even if you only get 1-2 good stats and don't bomb the other 4 you can still make a high damage monk that will be very potent with just Strength and Con.
First Max Strength, and keep putting stat increases into STR as you level Next plan your feats so you get Pummeling Style and Pummeling Charge as soon as possible (lvl 9). Once you have Pummeling Charge just try to make sure your party members understand you are likely to be charging all around the battlefield so try to stay out of your way. If you have a support member that can help keep you enlarged, or maybe a spell like strong jaw on you during combat you'll be a 1 man wrecking crew. Also your first bonus feat should be improved Grapple, at all levels Grapple should be your go-to option any time you do have to move, and are not able to full attack. If you can't full attack a successful grapple on a powerful caster or two handed weapon opponent can effectively shut them down for that round, then you put them down with a full attack on your next turn.
As for Archetypes unless you get a good enough roll to have a high wisdom score I'd recommend going Monk of the Four Winds, since that trades off your stunning fist (which will have a low DC) for straight elemental dmg that scales as you level. Also Qiggong to swap out any abilities you're not fond of for alternate options. Trading for Barkskin (to increase AC), and gaining Ki Stand (so you can stand and still full attack/pummeling charge) are two of my preferred options.
(Not counting exceptional scenarios) # of Languages = Common + Int Modifier + Ranks in Linguistics.
I think the first real question in all this is does a headband of intelligence come with pre-assigned Languages, or are they chosen by the person upon equipping the item? Just like an int headband identifies what skill is being used, and the FAQ adds "Intelligence: If my Intelligence modifier increases, can I select another bonus language?
Yes. For example, if your Int is 13 and you reach level 4 and apply your ability score increase to Int, this increases your Int bonus from +1 to +2, which grants you another bonus language.
Technically, Int-enhancing items such as a headband of vast intelligence should grant a specific language (in the same way they do for skill ranks)" then the specific languages provided by the ranks in linguistics gained should also be in specific preassigned languages.
The second question then becomes How are these specific languages assigned? I would say on creation, the person making the item could specifically create it to include any languages that person knows. Any language not known and specifically included would be randomly selected (again at creation, and with no duplicate languages, including no duplicating with the language from the +2 Int).
Third Question. In what sequence are the languages learned? here's where I would offer some freedom to the player. Whatever language is associated to the increased int is hard set, player gains these languages (or misses out if already known). After that, I would say the player is capable of selecting any of the available languages to assign to the specific ranks being added. I don't think there is any need to hardcode a specific language to every specific rank, forcing a character to wait till level 20 before they can use the language they most hoped to gain.
Finally does any of that previous junk really matter? NOPE! even the FAQ says "Technically, Int-enhancing items such as a headband of vast intelligence should grant a specific language" which is not the same as saying the DO work that way.
So here's what REALLY happens by RAW, when you gain INT bonus pick a new language, When you gain a skill rank, pick a new language. If you already have 3 ranks in linguistics and get a +2 headband at level 5, you are only gaining 2 ranks so you learn 2 new languages from ranks in linguistics and 1 from higher Int Bonus, total 3.
You aren't targeting undead when you damage the living. That's all there is too it. Negative Energy Affinty just tells you what happens when you are targeted by negative or positive energy,
Actually the OP is claiming that the cleric can choose to include themselves as a target on any channel. Which is correct (See Below). The problem is that you don't just channel for specific target types (undead or living) but you also declare if it is to heal or harm. So a cleric that channels negative must declare they are channeling to harm the living or to heal undead. Thus even though a Dhampir cleric is including themselves in a channel to harm the living, they are specifically channeling to harm. therfore they can not be healed by that channel, even though they can also target themselves with the same channel.
Cleric's Channel Energy wrote:
"Channel Energy (Su): Regardless of alignment, any cleric can release a wave of energy by channeling the power of her faith through her holy (or unholy) symbol. This energy can be used to cause or heal damage, depending on the type of energy channeled and the creatures targeted.
A good cleric (or one who worships a good deity) channels positive energy and can choose to deal damage to undead creatures or to heal living creatures. An evil cleric (or one who worships an evil deity) channels negative energy and can choose to deal damage to living creatures or to heal undead creatures. A neutral cleric who worships a neutral deity (or one who is not devoted to a particular deity) must choose whether she channels positive or negative energy. Once this choice is made, it cannot be reversed. This decision also determines whether the cleric casts spontaneous cure or inflict spells (see spontaneous casting).
Channeling energy causes a burst that affects all creatures of one type (either undead or living) in a 30-foot radius centered on the cleric. The amount of damage dealt or healed is equal to 1d6 points of damage plus 1d6 points of damage for every two cleric levels beyond 1st (2d6 at 3rd, 3d6 at 5th, and so on). Creatures that take damage from channeled energy receive a Will save to halve the damage. The DC of this save is equal to 10 + 1/2 the cleric's level + the cleric's Charisma modifier. Creatures healed by channeled energy cannot exceed their maximum hit point total—all excess healing is lost. A cleric may channel energy a number of times per day equal to 3 + her Charisma modifier. This is a standard action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity. A cleric can choose whether or not to include herself in this effect. A cleric must be able to present her holy symbol to use this ability."
When you deal damage to it with negative energy, it is healed.
Not too sure about this. It seems like you're extrapolating a bit too much. By the way I read it, it's just not harmed by the negative energy and not healed (the same way living creatures are not healed or harmed when a cleric channels positive energy to harm undead).
This is a good example. By your(The OP, and those agreeing with him) method a normal human (or other living creature) cleric, that chooses to channel positive energy to harm undead would be able to heal themselves at the same time. But even though they can include themselves as targets for that channel, they are still channeling to harm, and since they are not harmed by positive energy, it has no effect.
Same circumstances, you invert them, a dhampir cleric channeling negative to harm living. They can choose to include themselves as targets, but they are channeling to harm, negative energy does not harm dhampirs (since they are treated as if they were undead, even though they are living creatures) since they are not harmed, it has no effect.
Because most of the game's themes are based on fantasy tropes, and in most media undead are evil if they are intelligent and/or the result of evil/dark/forbidden magic so they are evil in the game. Outside of Casper, and Slimer(from Ghostbusters) you won't find too many(a high percentage of) undead good guys.
That is the same reason why summoning evil outsider is evil even if you use them for a good purpose. Generally when someone calls an outsider the outsidr(demon/devil) outwits the human and makes things a lot works. That is how the "deal with devil" in media is transferred to the game by having devils be the masters of "fine print" contracts.
Because mankind has always vilified what it doesn't understand. But a few more examples, Ghost Dad (Bill Cosby), Ghost (Patrick Swayze), Frankenstein (Frankenstein's Monster), Twilight (The whole clan of Vampires the story centers around), Ghost Rider, A Christmas Carol (Marley, or multiple examples if you accept the "spirits" as actual ghosts)... I'm sure the list continues.
But as Frankenstein portrays, if you make something out to be a monster, it is very likely to become monstrous.
I won't get into the whole outsider/demon, as those are not undead...
How is it different? It allows you to deal negative energy damage to living creatures, including yourself. Negative energy affinity converts this damage to healing, does it not?
No it does not, you are treated as undead for the purposes of determining if you are healed or harmed by positive/negative energy.
Because channeling specifically calls out that you have to select both the target creature type (living or undead) AND if you want to heal or harm them. You only do healing, or harming, to the appropriate type.
Since The cleric in this question is targeting living to harm. even if they select themselves to be included, they are still casting to harm, so even though negative energy heals undead they are only channeling to harm creatures, therefore they do not receive any healing.
"An evil cleric (or a neutral cleric who worships an evil deity) channels negative energy and can choose to deal damage to living creatures or to heal undead creatures."
I believe in 3.5 it did both at the same time. At the time of channel you need to choose to damage living or heal undead. That's btw out of the cleric chapter.
Including/excluding self comes after you select to damage living or heal undead.
Lets Look at the relevant Pieces.
An evil cleric (or one who worships an evil deity) channels negative energy and can choose to deal damage to living creatures or to heal undead creatures.
A cleric can choose whether or not to include herself in this effect.
Regardless of sequence of events it does not work. It boils down to the requirement to either target living creatures to deal damage, or target undead to heal. Since you have to make a choice to heal undead or damage living then even if you include yourself when you chose to damage living then you do not receive healing because you are undead, and you're not choosing to heal undead.
I had the same thoughts when trying to pick a class to play my PFS Dhampir boon. It all falls through because you're not just targeting living, or targeting undead, but you're target them to perform a specific action (heal or harm)
Have you considered making it fully adjustable? Call them Weapons of +x Catching
Allow it to 'catch' any spell of level = enchantment Bonus used.
This would let a +1 Catching version catch up to a Level 1 spell, a +3 Catching one could catch up to a lvl 3 spell.
Or possibly Spell level = Echantment bonus used -1.
So +2 Catching catches lvl 1 spell, a +4 Catching would be need to catch up to lvl 3 spells.
Either option can allow the player to select just how strong they want their enchantment to be. Also I would say the weapon can be used any time it is within the effect of the spell. But maybe have the player wielding it make an opposed 'level' check vs caster level check of the spell. The Caster level check for the caster would be d20+Caster Level+Spell Level, the wielder of the weapon catching the spell could be BAB based so full BAB Classes are more skilled Could be D20+BAB+Catching Bonus
Maybe add base weapon bonus too (D20+BAB+Catching Bonus+Enchantment Bonus), this would let a +3 weapon with the +1 Catching be just as good (+4 Total) at catching a level 1 spell as a +1 weapon with +3 Catching is (+4 Total) at catching a level 1 spell.
These methods would still leave chance involved with being able to cast, and put full casters on more or less even footing as full bab classes, partial casters on level footing with partial bab.
I agree it should catch+store the spell, and not be able to catch any more for a period of time until the stored spell has been released. I would say the spell can be willingly released upon a confirmed critical hit into the target (area spells still impact the area as if the attacker had cast the spell on that target). Or can be released safely via a 1min/spell level ritual.
If released safely via the ritual the weapon can Catch a new spell immediately, if released via combat the weapon can not catch a new spell for Some period of time (Maybe 1d4 Rounds/Spell level)
You are correct in that if the adjustment does not include the Superscript 2 it does not apply to the ammo fired from the enchanted weapon.
As for Ghost Touch, that is a melee enchantment, so it never worked on a Bow to be able to shoot ghosts. That is why you need Ghost Touch or Ghost Salt'd Arrows.
Without Charts I would imagine the enchantments would probably default to melee only unless they say they are for ranged weapons, and then you would need to determine if the intent of the enchantment was to be conferred to ammo or not.
