Gray Warden's page

Organized Play Member. 936 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.


1 to 50 of 936 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

Cavall wrote:

Yeah honestly if someone wants to use combat expertise go just stand there, that's basically already full defense that hes paying a feat for. Mazel?

And if they are doing it with the intention of not attacking that's always been an issue with combat expertise so again I'd say not an issue. Announcing you're going to hit an ogre than approaching the ogre should be enough to gain the benefits. Just announce your intentions. It ain't hard. Hell. It's easier.

How is it easier than:

- if attacking, subtract X from the roll and add X to AC
- if not attacking, the feat does not apply

The feat is contingent to the attack action. It applies when attacking (and until the beginning of your next round), not before. Declaration of intentions is not a thing in Pathfinder.

Silver Crusade

Bump + example:

8th level Small Rogue (8 Str, 18 Dex) with Weapon Finesse, wielding a +1 Liberating Dagger, trying to snap himself out of Hold Person. What would the CMB be for the purposes of the Liberating combat maneuver?

a) The combat maneuver is not performed via the weapon: CMB = +6(BAB) -1(Str) -1(Small) = +4

b) The weapon is instrumental to the combat maneuver, which is performed through the weapon: CMB = +6(BAB) +4(Dex) -1(Small) +1(Enhancement) = +10

Silver Crusade

The Liberating (WMH) weapon property allows the wielder to dispel an ongoing spell effect inhibiting movement through a combat maneuver.

The Weapon Finesse vs CMB FAQ states:

FAQ wrote:

Weapon Finesse: If I have this feat, can I apply my Dex bonus to my combat maneuver checks instead of my Strength bonus?

It depends on what combat maneuver you're attempting. Disarm, sunder, and trip are normally the only kinds of combat maneuvers in which you’re actually using a weapon to perform the maneuver, and therefore the weapon’s bonuses apply to the roll. Therefore, if you're attempting a disarm, sunder, or trip maneuver, you can apply your Dex bonus instead of your Str mod on the combat maneuver check (assuming you're using a finessable weapon, of course). For other combat maneuvers, you use the normal rule for determining CMB (Str instead of Dex).

Notice the "normally" highlighted in the text. Would the combat maneuver produced by a Liberating weapon count as an exception to the norm? Being this a weapon property, would it count as a "combat maneuver in which you’re actually using a weapon to perform the maneuver" for the purposes of applying the weapon's bonuses to the roll?

Silver Crusade

Derklord wrote:
Sorry, no delivering the spell during the same turn. Your GM may be fine with giving you a powerful class feature for the cost of a feat, but you shoudl know that it's not RAW.

I do not agree with you and I have explained to you why. Despite not following the Spellstrike template, nothing in the text of the feat contradicts my interpretation, which is further corroborated by the general consensus. Therefore, claiming that this is "not RAW", despite the evidence shown, is an overstatement with a touch of rudeness.

As said, this is not the place to discuss such matter. I invite you to open a relative thread in the rules forum if you are really interested.

baggageboy wrote:
Either way you can't combine a spell and a vital strike attack in the same round. Just something to keep in mind.

I am aware.

Myself, just a few lines above wrote:
However, your point still stands, as I realise now that I would still not be able to use Vital Strike on the round of casting, since I would be using the standard action to cast. This makes the increased size of the war hammer less important, and the problem of wielding it 2-handed superfluous.

Silver Crusade

Derklord wrote:
Gray Warden wrote:
I am currently playing a Dwarf Cleric of Torag (Forgemaster) with the Blessed Hammer feat, thus he often finds himself only doing a single attack per round.

Why? The feat isn't spellstrike, you don't get a free attack - you have to cast one round, and attack the next (barring an AoO), where you could full attack just fine.

Because it does act like Spellstrike, except you also have to spend a swift action to activate it. According to the rules regarding touch spells, upon casting a touch spell, the caster is granted a free touch attack to deliver the charge.

In this case, the charge is held and delivered by the hammer rather than the caster. Particularly:

Blessed Hammer wrote:
When you deliver a touch spell with your warhammer you can do so as part of melee attack made with the warhammer.

Therefore, the usual routine for this character is: standard action to cast the touch spell, move action to the target, free action to deliver the spell via the hammer. The delivery can be done as the usual touch attack, or as part of a melee attack which also adds weapon damage.

This is how I understand the feat works, due to how it is written and the research I have done on these boards, and the GM agrees with me. Since this is not a rules thread, this is how the feat works for the purposes of this thread.

However, your point still stands, as I realise now that I would still not be able to use Vital Strike on the round of casting, since I would be using the standard action to cast. This makes the increased size of the war hammer less important, and the problem of wielding it 2-handed superfluous.

Although any further suggestion on how I could improve the single attack are more than welcome, I consider this particular thread closed for me. Thank you all for your help.

Silver Crusade

Scott Wilhelm wrote:
It has to be a Warhammer, not an Earthbreaker Hammer or Lucerne Hammer?

Blessed Hammer (linked) only works with war hahmmers.

Torag's Divine Fighting Technique (also linked) only works with war hammers.

Thus, yes, it has to be a war hammer.

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Take a dip in Ranger, and you can use a Wand of Lead Blades which gives you a 1 step Virtual Size Increase.

Take a dip in Living Monolith, and you can Enlarge Person as a Swift Action, giving yourself (and your weapon, if you want) a 1 step actual size increase.

I can already use Lead Blades, since it is on the Forgemaster's spell list. Even if I didn't, I wrote I can already use wands of Long Arm, therefore it is obvious that I have enough UMD to be able to do so without the dip. And even if that wasn't true, Feral Hunter would be the dip to go with, given the permanent Animal Focus and the second spell pool I could use to cast Lead Blades, definitely not Ranger.

That being said, this is not a Vital Strike thread, but about how to use a shield with a Large war hammer. I do not need advice on how to boost the war hammer base damage.

Scott Wilhelm wrote:
I always thought it would be funny to 2 Weapon Fight with Warhammer and Sickle. You'd be the Soviet Union! You'd take Tripping Feats: Combat Expertise, Improved and Greater trip, Vicious Stomp, and Fury's Fall. You'd hit with the Hammer, Trip with the Sickle, then take your Attacks of Opportunity with the Hammer. I'd have you take 5 levels in Inquisitor to get Bane, but also to get Bane for your Hammer, but also to get Harder they Fall to bypass the Size limit, Coordinated Maneuvers for that extra +2, and Broken Wing Gambit because why not? Then dip a level in Cavalier and take Paired Opportunist.

Ok, let's look into this, shall we? I asked about advice on how to get a shield bonus while wielding a Large war hammer as a 8th level Cleric (since I said I just hit BAB +6), and that my main concern is that Unhindering Shield would be perfect if it wasn't for the fact that I am feat starved.

Your best piece of advice is:

- dip Ranger.
- dip Living Monolith.
- dip Cavalier.
- 5 levels Inquisitor.
- get Endurance and Iron will to qualify for Living Monolith.
- get two weapon fighting feats.
- get Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Greater Trip, Vicious Stomp and Fury's Fall.
- get Power Attack and Harder They Fall.
- get Coordinated Maneuvers, Broken Wing Gambit and Paired Opportunist.

So, to summarise here we have: 8 levels in random classes that have nothing to do with each other, leaving zero levels left for Cleric despite this being a 8th levels Cleric build; a butchered caster level that has no reason to exist, and an amount of feats all over the place whose number (at least 13) cannot be covered even on a 20 levels build, let alone if we include the feats that I have already clearly stated I have and I am planning to pick.

How in hell, heaven and/or earth can you even think this is in any way a good answer to my thread, or rather a good answer in any thread at all?!

Silver Crusade

Evilserran wrote:
If you were using a polearm or spear type weapon it would be simple with a pair of feats. Shield focus, and shield brace. Your ac goes up +1 with a shield, and you can wield a two handed weapon while still holding your shield! Howveer, you have a warhammer, that makes that much more difficult.

That's literally the same as using a buckler with Unhindered Shield. The problem is the two feat cost on a feat-starved build such as Cleric.

Evilserran wrote:
If it was piercing or slashing you could go with effortless lace, but again, its a warhammer, so its doing bludgeon....

I am using Irongrip Gauntlets, which are identical to Effortless Lace for the purpose of oversized weapons.

Evilserran wrote:
hmm... what about an animated shield? Its only good for 4 rounds... but, your other hand is now free once you activate it..

Indeed it is a good option. I was hoping for something more stable though.

Lelomenia wrote:
Shield spell? It’s in the defense subdomain.

As a Forgepriest, I cannot choose that domain. However I can use UMD on wands. Shield is useful, but it would be my last option if nothing else can be done.

Lelomenia wrote:
Warhammer isn’t a great weapon to try to leverage weapon damage dice tho.

Warhammer is needed for the build I am playing. I am not trying to maximise a Vital Strike build with a warhammer, but rather to improve a warhammer build with Vital Strike.

Silver Crusade

Hi all.

I am currently playing a Dwarf Cleric of Torag (Forgemaster) with the Blessed Hammer feat, thus he often finds himself only doing a single attack per round. Next level, I will be hitting BAB +6, and so I was thinking of picking Vital Strike to add a little bit of additional damage.

Since I am forced to use only warhammers, I was thinking of using a Large one 2-handed, paired with Irongrip Gauntlets to negate the size-penalties, plus Lead Blades/Impact to get to a base damage of 3d6. This however puts me in the uncomfortable situation of having to ditch my shield, which I would like to avoid.

Do you know of any options that would allow me to be able to wield both a Large warhammer and a shield?

Here are a few options I have already explored:
- Buckler
Pro: cheap, can be enhanced to +6 shield bonus. Con: -1 to hit and loses shield bonus when attacking.

- Buckler + Unhindering Shield feat
Pro: cheap, can be enhanced, caps at +7 shield bonus, no penalty to hit and constant shield bonus. Con: requires TWO feats on a feat-starved class.

- Ring of Force Shield
Pro: free actions shenanigans to get AC between attacks at no cost. Con: cannot be enhanced, capping to a puny +2; no AoOs (which is a big thing for me since I do have Torag's Divine Fighting Technique feat and I often use wands of Long Arm)

- Greater Hat of Disguise into Kasatha
Pro: 4 arms. Con: ugly RP-wise, also not sure it works RAW since Multi-Armed is a racial trait.

- Drop weapon, drink potion of Enlarge Person, grab back weapon
Pro: the weapon is now appropriately sized and can be wielded 1-handed. Con: lowers AC by 2, making the shield less useful; defies the point of stacking base damage for the purposes of Vital Strike as I would be losing 1d6 base damage (and so 2d6 in total) due to the size increase.

Thank you for your help!

Silver Crusade

This is in no way related to the thread.

Silver Crusade


Silver Crusade

Korlos wrote:
You can add more crew to reload faster.

Sorry to necro, but I think it's better than creating a new thread. Are there any sources for the quoted part? I cannot find evidence in the rules that enables one to use a crew larger than what defined in the engine's entry.

Silver Crusade

Melkiador wrote:
Are you familiar with the Virtuos Bravo Paladin? You don't have to use it, but it was sort of intended for what you are doing.

Yes, but I do like the Paladin's spellcasting and I would like to keep it.

Silver Crusade

Following on this thread, I have decided to play a Paladin of Shelyn for Wrath of the Righteous inspired to Saint Michael.

The general vibe is that of a once otherworldly beautiful woman, whose face has been however terribly scarred because of a demon's attack. For this reason, she has decided to devote her life to avenge her lost beauty, the most precious gift Shelyn gave her. She radiates an aura of calm rage, which explodes as a blinding halo when cutting through demons with her glaive.

The build until 11th level would be:

Aangelkin Aasimar (Immortal Spark, Halo alternate racial traits)
11 Paladin (Oath of Vengeance)
Stats: 14+2 14 14 8 8 18+2 (middle age + lesser age resistance)
Traits: Fate's Favored, Bully, [Campaign trait]. Drawback: Scarred
1 Combat Reflexes
3 Power Attack
5 Hurtful
7 Cornugon Smash
9 Angelic Blood
11 Angelic Wings (fixed feat)

I particularly like this concept and the roleplay behind it, however I realize there are a couple of problems, namely on the AC department. Since Dex is not a primary stat, Heavy armor will be necessary for this character. Together with the low Dex and no skill ranks put in Fly, this will make winged flight quite hard, and I honestly I can't really see myself playing an angel too heavy and awkward to fly using her own wings.

So I remembered about Mythic Weapon Finesse, which should come around level 6, and decided to go Dex-based with Musetouched Aasimar:

Musetouched Aasimar (no alternate racial traits)
1 Swashbuckler / 10 Paladin (Oath of Vengeance)
Stats: 13 16+2 14 7 7 16+2
Traits: Fate's Favored, [?], [Campaign trait]. Drawback: Scarred
1 Weapon Focus [Glaive]
3 Bladed Brush, Weapon Finesse (Swashbuckler dip here)
5 Combat Reflexes
6 Mythic Weapon Finesse
7 Power Attack
9 Angelic Blood
11 Angelic Wings (fixed feat)

The race synergyzes particularly well with Shelyn. The extra attack from Parry and Repost makes Hurtful, and so Intimidate, less useful, which is why this version of the build lacks the passionate anger of the previous one, focusing more on Diplomacy.

Now, I must say that, while I like the flavor of the first build a little bit more, I find myself asking: why would anyone play a Str-based character whenever Mythic Weapon Finesse is available? I understand that until level 6, the first kicks more, but eventually both builds deal pretty much the same damage. On the other hand, the latter has way better defenses, which are much more important than damage at low levels, is not encumbered by heavy armor (which is also quite costly) and does not need to spend money and/or mythic feats to make their ACP less taxing.

What do you think? Which one of the two builds is more convenient?

Silver Crusade

Rod of Splendor

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Here's a very similar build I made once which might give you more ideas. Imagine a ball of anger and anxiety going around laughing maniacally and making everything it touches go bad.

Tiefling (Asura-Spawn), 1 Unchained Monk / 5 Cleric (Ecclesitheurge) of Groethus.
Of course, CN.

Stats: 7 16+2 14 7-2 16+2 13 or 7 17+2 14 7-2 16+2 10

FCB in skill ranks, max Perception and Intimidate

Domain: Madness, Darkness

1 Weapon Finesse, Dodge [Bonus]
3 Domain Strike
5 Enforcer

So, the idea is to stack as many debuffs as possible in a single round. By level 6, with a Conductive/Cruel Amulet of Mighty Fists (which you can enhance yourself at half the price by virtue of being your bonded object), your routine will be:

1) First flurry attack with unarmed strike.
2) Swift action: apply Madness domain power via Domain Strike, -2 to hit and saves (+2 to skill checks).
3) Free action: apply Darkness domain power via Conductive AoMF, 20% miss chance.
4) Free action: Intimidate via Enforcer, -2 to hit, saves and skill checks.
5) Second flurry attack with unarmed strike.
6) Free action: Sicken via Cruel, -2 to hit, saves, skill checks and damage.

So, overall, a potential -6 to hit & 20% miss chance, -2 to damage, -6 to saves, -2 to skill checks.

Later on you can respec your bonded object in a Cruel/Spell Storing AoMF and buy a [monk] +1 Cruel weapon. This would allow you to also discharge a spell with your first attack (namely Bestow Curse) for even more debuffs.

A different route would be to go Str/Wis, and deal also damage while debuffing. You would simply need to go Tiefling (Qlippoth-Spawn) with stats 16+2 12 12 7-2 16+2 10. Instead of Weapon Finesse you can anticipate the other feats and eventually pick Power Attack.

Yet another option for a Str/Wis based build would be to dip one level into Sage Counselor Unchained Monk (rather than vanilla Unchained Monk), invest three skill ranks into Bluff, and pick Moonlight Stalker. At this point, you may even go Small-sized Tiefling, max Bluff rather than Intimidate, and pick Taunt to avoid size penalties.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vice (2018), adapted wrote:

"We believe the Alignment Convention is open to...interpretation."

"What exactly does that mean?"

"Stress positions, waterboarding, confined spaces, dogs. We’re calling it enhanced interrogation."

"We’re sure none of this fits under the definition of torture?"

"The Good doesn’t torture. Therefore, if the Good does it, by definition, it can’t be torture."

This is how ridiculous some of you who are using moral relativism to make torture non-evil sound right now.

Silver Crusade

Melkiador wrote:
Tengu have good stats and can get the wakizashi proficiency with a racial.

Replace "Tengu" with "Half-elf" and the sentence still stands. Plus, extra feats.

Silver Crusade

As I have already replied on the other thread, Warpriest wins in this case for several reasons:

- TWF requires feats. Warprists have lots of them, Inquisitors do not.
- TWF doesn't let you cast spells without fumbling with your weapons. Warpriests can buff themselves mid-combat without incurring in somatic components, Inquisitors cannot (without the Quick Draw feat)
- Inquisitors' main feature is Bane, which by default applies only to a single weapon (unless you want to get yet another feat)

For the race, Half-elf wins compared to Tengu. You can pick the Human FCB to get even more feats, and you can get proficiency in wakizashis via Ancestral Arms.

Silver Crusade

Definitely Warpriest.

TWF requires lots of feats: Inquisitors do not have nearly enough as Warpriests. Additionally, Inquisitor's Bane applies only to one weapon (by default).

I suggest Half-elf with the Human FCB to get an extra feat every 6 levels and the Arsenal Champlain archetype to get Weapon Training. As per wakizashi proficiency, get Ancestral Arms as alternate racial trait or a cracked opalescent white ioun stone.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Derklord wrote:
And now I'm thinking, if a rust monster prefers reactive i.e. easy to oxidize metals, do alkali metals count as a sort of doggie treats for them?

Give em a lithium battery if their feeling down, or a nice chunk of metallic sodium if they prefer a more spicy treat.

Silver Crusade

Get a monkey familiar.
Give the monkey a pair of lesser Archery Gloves.
Go with a standard archery build. Your familiar gets the feats too.
Make it mauler to increase monkey's damage.

You now have two competent archers at the cost of one. I call this build Double Trouble.

Silver Crusade

Yeah, cool.

Except the whole challenge of the build is going Kobold, a 5 RP race.

Not Aasimar, a 15 RP race.

Of course you'll get a cheesy build if you start with a race literally 300% as strong as what the OP asked.

Silver Crusade

Temperans wrote:
Question, why not just use a katana and a wakizashi? I mean sure you get less Weapon Focus benefits, but no weird rules, and you can still use a katana.

Because the OP asked for a dual-katana build. When possible, I always try to stick to the explicit request before exploring other options.

Silver Crusade

Come on man, don't be so literal. The lace makes a 1h weapon count as light for pretty much every intent and purpose.

Fine, the way light weapons are treated differently is not stated in the TWF feat but in the TWF combat paragraph, but quite everybody considers the combat section to be integral part of the feat (no-one has ever used TWF rules without the feat). Do you really think the developers were explicitly thinking of excluding TWF benefits when writing down the lace? Considering a 1h weapon as light is instead a much more elegant and simple interpretation.

I mean, you were right at pointing that out, but the intent of the item here is quite clear to me, and I wouldn't expect people to enforce such a literal interpretation.

Silver Crusade

The katana is a one-handed weapon regardless of your proficiency. Same as bastard swords.

The fact that you can use it as a 2-handed martial weapon is irrelevant and a bonus feature of the weapon. It only means that, if you do not have EWP but you are proficient with all martial weapons, you can either use the katana 1-hand with -4 penalty due to non proficiency, or 2-hand with no penalty.

Of course this is even less important in this specific case as Tengus are proficient with katanas (which are Exotic weapons, not martial, hence Tengus count as having EWP with them)

And there is no reason why the Effortless Lave would not work with TWF.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Serum wrote:
Gray Warden wrote:

Unpopular opinion: the players who can't catch up with the updated difficulty should step up their game rather than blaming those who can.

In other words, if the Inquisitor can get to those levels without particular efforts, why can't the other characters too?

This comment seems out of place in this discussion. The players are already successfully optimizing to keep up with the GM's moving goalposts. They are unhappy that they have to do so, and the GM is unhappy that they continue to find optimizations that beats him.

This isn't a player vs player problem.

The OP said that the problem is the disparity between the characters, with the Inquisitor being able to keep up with the increased game difficulty, while the others are left behind.

I have been in this situation many times, last of which I was playing a standard Warpriest archer, and two other characters being a Dwarf Bard and a Half-elf Fighter. The Bard was built with 18 Cha in creation, which went down to 16 due to the racial penalty (effectively having PB 13 stats), and went around smacking people with its warhammer for a puny 1d8+2 damage. The Fighter was going board&sword, had feats that literally never used just because they sounded cool (Step Up, Antagonize), a couple "background" feats to cover the role of the "tank-protector" (Bodyguard) that were occasionally used, and no Power Attack.

It didn't take long before they started complaining with the GM about my character being "OP". The GM increased the game difficulty, which however made things even worse for them.

Long story short, we rebuilt their characters together while keeping the core concepts intact: the Bard's player redistributed the stats a bit and retrained to Skald, which apparently was what they wanted in the first place, but they didn't know the Skald existed; the Fighter instead specialized in reach-fighting, once they realised we were constantly facing Giants, and switched out those unused feats for something else to build on the "tank-protector" concept(we kept Bodyguard and added Shield Brace).

We are now at 11th level, and since then they haven't complained anymore. But silly me, probably I should have done fun things such as picking Skill Focus [Appraise] and tossing rocks rather than arrows, instead of helping my friends at being better players.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So on one hand we have an hypothetical 5th level martial character built with standard feats and traits to make it good at fighting (Power Attack, Weapon Focus, Combat Reflexes, reach weapon and so on), on the other a hypothetical 5th level martial character with Wildling, Pass for Human and Skill Focus[Survival], using a club to fight because it's, obviously, so cool.

Turns out, the latter is pretty much useless in combat (despite being so cool) because this is how the game works, and complains with the GM about the former, which in turn is "OP". Why should the first player "tone down" their character, filling it with feats they do not like, just to accommodate the second player's complaints?

People may not like it, but this is how the game works: it uses maths to overcome challenges, you cannot (usually) roleplay yourself out of a fight. So if you choose "flavour" options over efficiency because muh background, you can't complain then if your character is not efficient at fighting.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
InvisiblePink wrote:
What do you find compelling enough about a game where everyone has higher numbers to think that the former is a brighter idea than the latter?

It's not about the game, it's about the attitude. The dichotomy here is rather:

- either ask the players who have demonstrated less system mastery to learn and grow as players, getting better at something they are supposed to enjoy, with the help of the GM and the more game-savvy players,

- or ask the players who have demonstrated more system mastery to willingly be worse at something they have spent time to be good at, just because the others are not willing to make constructive changes to their characters.

So yeah, since "forward" is always the preferred direction to me, the former is indeed a brighter option than the latter.

And, on this regard, I'm sure that it wouldn't be difficult to come up with just a few tweaks to improve the other players' characters without altering their concept. So I invite the OP and the GM to share them so that we can fix those, rather than nerfing the Inquisitor.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Grandlounge wrote:
Because some classes are stronger out of the box than others thus require fewer books and less expertise to optimize. A fighter without Ultimate Equipment and weapon masters handbook is at a staggering disadvantage. Where an investigator can have 1/2 level to attack and damage and be an invisible four armed gargoyle with basics class features. Similar things can be said with other companions.

And yet Pathfinder is a huge game, with enough options to optimize quite literally every character. True, it might take more or less efforts depending on the character, but it's possible. If the players who can't keep up do so because of a lack of game mastery, they can always ask the more expert ones, and come up with an upgrade all together. This is what cooperative game means.

InvisiblePink wrote:

Pathfinder is a game in which not all character concepts are equally viable. Not all concepts are suitable to high-op play. If you declare from chargen that this is a high-op game, that's fine; experienced players will know not to bring their devilish and lovable rogue to a hardball full-caster party.

But if you start an arms race after the campaign has begun, and you expect PCs to catch up, you might be implicitly demanding that they change or abandon their concepts. How is the sword-and-board fighter going to keep up with the RAGELANCEPOUNCE barbarian? He likes his shield. His grandpa gave it to him. It's in his backstory.

This is quite a common opinion, and yet I have never seen it applicable to a real game. I understand and agree on the fact that, when theorycrafting, some options are inherently better than others in terms of damage or skill bonuses. When put in the context of actual APs, however, these differences become much smaller, as every character will find their own niche of expertise.

Using your own example, a sword&board Fighter will never be as efficient as a pouncing Barbarian in terms of damage, and yet the Fighter's player has no right to complain and demand the Barbarian to get nerfed: they decided to sacrifice some damage potential in exchange of defense, they can't get both. Still, this doesn't mean the Fighter is useless because, as said before, Pathfinder is big enough to accommodate that build too, see any reach-build with Combat Reflexes and Shield Brace for example.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Unpopular opinion: the players who can't catch up with the updated difficulty should step up their game rather than blaming those who can.

In other words, if the Inquisitor can get to those levels without particular efforts, why can't the other characters too?

Silver Crusade

Sticking to your requests, here's my take:

Tengu Slayer

Stats: 18 12+2 14-2 8 12+2 7

Traits: Reactionary, Ancestral Weapon [Cold Iron, unless the AP is filled with werewolves]

1 Possessed Hand
2 Ranger Combat Style > TWF
3 Power Attack
4 Weapon Training (Weapon Focus [Katana])
5 Shield Focus
6 Ranger Combat Style > iTWF
7 Unhindering Shield
8 Combat Trick > Improved Critical
9 Critical Focus
10 Ranger Combat Style > gTWF

- You start with a cold iron mwk katana for free, and you have +1 to hit with all cold iron weapons.
- Get a cold iron wakizashi until you can afford an Effortless Lace: this will make your off-hand cold iron katana light (main hand: -1 to hit, off-hand : -1 to hit).
- Use your main weapon in your Possessed Hand (main hand: no penalty to hit / +1 damage, off-hand: -1 to hit).
- Since you're getting almost no penalty from TWF, Power Attack is worth, especially since Weapon Focus is applied to both weapons.
- Shield Focus + Unhindering Shield give you +2 shield bonus to AC, which can be enhanced during gameplay.

Silver Crusade

Meirril wrote:

I've got two thoughts on this. Other than a dirty trick, I can also see urinating on an opponent being used as intimidation.

The other thought is...can the goblin finish in 6 seconds? Lets assume out goblin just walks around without pants. If he starts urinating, can you really expect him to just stop in a standard action? This sounds suspiciously like it should be a multi-round action.

You can finish in a standard action by converting the single-target ranged touch attack in a 15ft cone scatter attack.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's equivalent to casting Create Water, so you don't provoke only if you piss defensively.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wicky1976 wrote:
Is that bad advice because mechanically it doesn't work or because it its not interesting to do so ? @ Gray Warden

Because the feat is clearly intended for you to use the warhammer to do the AoOs.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wicky1976 wrote:

You just need to wield the hammer to use Torag patient strikes...

choose chivalry inquisition to be mounted invest to get another proficiency (if you are human military tradition to get another cool weapon prof) and wield a lance one handed mounted and use the other hand for the hammer...

LOL come on dude, be real.

Silver Crusade

Dragonborn3 wrote:
A minor tweak to the wording that makes the feat worthwhile for every divine class that qualifies to take it.

So pretty much every divine class:

- Clerics can spontaneously convert prepared spells into Cure/Inflict spells
- Warpriests can spontaneously convert prepared spells into Cure/Inflict spells
- Druids can spontaneously convert prepared spells into Summon Natural Ally spells

The only divine spellcasting classes which still do not qualify despite this very lax interpretation are Paladin and Ranger, which do not even deserve to be called spellcasters. Honestly, I am quite sure this is not the intended use of the feat.

Silver Crusade

Dragonborn3 wrote:
Yes, as written, a cleric can qualify but not gain extra spells per day. That is a minor tweak however.

What do you mean with "minor tweak"?

If you are referring to the spellcasting, it's not only that they don't get extra spells per day, they completely stop progressing in spellcasting. Therefore, a 5 Cleric / 10 DD character would still cast spells as a CL 5 Cleric. Not minor at all.

Silver Crusade

Scott Wilhelm wrote:
He's saying that with Broken Wing Gambit, your allies get the AoO, but you don't. But the truth is, you count as your own ally.

Oh boy! Is it that time of the year already?

Silver Crusade

Dragonborn3 wrote:
Gray Warden wrote:
Cleric is not a suitable choice, since the feat talks about spontaneous spellcasting.

Except for one little important thing.

Cleric Class Features wrote:

Spontaneous Casting

A good cleric (or a neutral cleric of a good deity) can channel stored spell energy into healing spells that she did not prepare ahead of time. The cleric can “lose” any prepared spell that is not an orison or domain spell in order to cast any cure spell of the same spell level or lower (a cure spell is any spell with “cure” in its name).

And to back it up, the magic section has this.

Spontaneous Casting of Cure and Inflict Spells wrote:

A good cleric (or a cleric of a good deity) can spontaneously cast a cure spell in place of a prepared spell of the same level or higher, but not in place of a bonus domain spell.

Irrelevant. Cleric levels still do not count as divine spontaneous levels for the purposes of the feat:

Scaled Disciple wrote:
Benefit(s): You gain a +1 bonus to your caster level when casting spells included in the dragon domain* or subdomains. Your spontaneous divine spellcasting qualifies in place of arcane casting for the dragon disciple prestige class, and you may increase spellcasting in your spontaneous divine class as you progress in dragon disciple levels. Add the bonus spells gained from the blood of dragons ability to those you can cast as divine spells.


Dragonborn3 wrote:
Without feats the animal companion won't advance with a Hunter, so the Feral Hunter archetype is nice.

Feral Hunter still suffers from the lack of progression in the Animal Focus and Wild Shape class features, which will stop to a +2 enhancement bonus to a single stat and medium-sized animals respectively, which I don't think are worth the much slower spell progression.

Silver Crusade

Cleric is not a suitable choice, since the feat talks about spontaneous spellcasting. The first sentence just refers to spells included in the dragon domain (reported in the Editor's Note), but in no way gives you domain powers and/or bonus spell slots.

As it is, you only have three options to choose from:
- Oracle
- Inquisitor
- Hunter

which get all staggered as soon as you start getting levels into DD.

Inquisitor's best trait is Bane, it comes online just in time, but it doesn't work on a multi-weapon build. Both Inquisitor (Divine Huntsmaster) and Hunter give you a nice buddy to help you not to die and automatic bonuses to your terrible stats via Animal Focus, but both will stop at level 5, becoming soon obsolete. Therefore, you don't want to choose a class based or level-dependent class features.

On the other hand, spellcasting is the only thing that progresses (sort-of), and since you want to get Kobold Confidence, meaning you'll need to have at least 13 Cha, I suggest you go all in with a Cha-based Dual Cursed Oracle build with the Lore/Nature/Lunar mystery. They will all give you Cha to AC and CMD/Ref, allowing you to be less MAD. Together with Misfortune and Fortune from the Dual Cursed archetype, you get three nice non level-dependent revelations that will stay strong throughout all the game.

Feat-wise, you have a choice to make: if you want to focus on combat, you qualify for the Eldritch Heritage[Orc] feat chain which will help your sub-par Str; if you want to focus on spellcasting, try to get Favourite Prestige Class and Prestigious Spellcaster to keep up your CL everytime DD doesn't improve it.

An example for a combat-focused build would be:
Stats: 15-4 12+2 14-2 10 7 16
Traits: Divine Favor (> Divine Favor), Irrepressible, [Community Minded (> Orc 1st level power), Drawback]
1 O - Kobold Confidence, M: Cha-to-AC
2 O -
3 O - Tail Terror, M: Misfortune
4 O - +1 Str
5 O - Scaled Disciple, M: Fortune
6 DD -
7 DD - Skill Focus [Survival], B: Power Attack
8 DD - +1 Str
9 DD - Eldritch Heritage [Orc]
10 DD - B: Toughness
11 DD - Improved Eldritch Heritage [Orc]
12 DD - +1 Str
13 DD - Favored Prestige Class [+hp], B: Quicken Spell (> Divine Favor)

Silver Crusade

I'm GMing a modified version of Rappan Athuk, where the players are trapped inside the dungeon. An NPC is the only bridge between the inside and the outside, "sponsoring" the PCs by giving them WBL according to their level (duh?!): equipment can enter the dungeon from the outside, but it cannot leave it. As a result, PCs have equipment worth their WBL plus whatever they find in the dungeon which, usually, is rubbish to them.

I don't want to modify the loot found in the dungeon to make it suitable for the PCs, since they already have automatic WBL, and I don't want to give them too much wealth, but at the same time I want to make it worth the fights. Any idea on how to make it a bit more interesting?

Something I though of is the following. Like them, many other adventurers have been trapped in the depths of the dungeon during the years, and I was planning to introduce a micro-society of once virtuous heroes who, now tired and somehow gone insane, have accepted their fate and, rather than keep pushing towards the depths of the dungeon, have decided to settle and spend the rest of their days challenging each other in a fight-club, trying to forget their misery.

The PCs could join these non-deadly fights once in a while (for example, when they don't feel like exploring the dungeon, or one of the players is absent), also giving me the opportunity to play some decent NPC from time to time, using the loot they found in the dungeon as an entry token: the higher the value of the items they invest, the harder the fight, the better the prize. The prize will of course be worth as much as the entry token, but hopefully more useful to the PCs.

In this case my question would be: how to choose the prize? Should I make it entirely random or should I somehow make it dependent on the entry tokens from the two parties? If so, how to justify in game terms the "merge" of the items?

This was just an example, but I'm open to all suggestions. Feel free to share your experience on this matter if you have had any. Thank you all for your help.

Silver Crusade

Slim Jim wrote:
Even though the sentences are the same, the paragraphs are not grammatically identical because paragraphs are about establishing context and dependance (i.e., in the same manner as software coding produces different output if lines are reordered); the "alternate paragraph" above clearly establishes its context in its first sentence to clearly state that full ranged attacks are always available while mounted. It is indeed the way the paragraph should have been written...if that is actually what the writers originally intended. But in the existing, Paizoese version, a cart-blanche ability to ranged full-attack while mounted can only be inferred by cherry-picking a desirable tertiary sentence out of the rear-end of the paragraph and mounting it on a pedestal for solitary worship impervious to any grammatically implied IF>THEN dependency context.

The paragraphs are grammatically identical. The absence of any conjunction referring to the previous sentences makes the phrase "You can make a full attack with a ranged weapon while your mount is moving" grammatically independent from the previous ones. Therefore, you can rearrange its position within the paragraph without altering the overall meaning.

"I can read while jogging, but it's difficult. I can read while running, but it's very difficult. I can read while walking."
is grammatically and semantically the same as
"I can read while walking. I can read while jogging, but it's difficult. I can read while running, but it's very difficult"
and neither of the two suggest that reading while walking is a difficult task for the speaker.

Speaking of context:

Slim Jim wrote:
The context, established by the first sentence of the paragraph

this is just plain wrong. The context of a text should never be inferred only from the first sentence, but from the entirety of the text. And the context here is "actions you can do at range when your mount is moving", not "double-moving and/or running", since clearly not the whole text refers to that.

Please accept the fact that this time you're wrong, that your ability to understand written language may not be as impeccable as you think it is, despite your unnecessarily verbose examples.

Also, let's stop misrepresenting consensus:

Meirril wrote:
So if the mount takes a single move...ranged attacks aren't defined. Some people argue for no penalty.

If the mount takes a single move, you can full-attack at range at no penalty. This is not what "some people argue": this is the general consensus, the way RAW is applied in the majority of home and organized games. At the moment the only person who thinks otherwise is Slim Jim, with Meirril giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Silver Crusade

You can find them here. They're all pretty standard traits.

Defensive* Strategist[Religion: Torag] > Inner Sea Gods (*I made a typo in my previous reply)
Fate's Favored[Faith] > Ultimate Campaign
Clever Wordplay[Social] > PFS Primer
Dangerously Curious[Magic] > Ultimate Campaign

other traits you can use to get Int to UMD + UMD as class skill are
Arcane Archivist[Faction: Dark Archive] > PFS Guide to Organized Play
Pragmatic Activator[Magic] > Ultimate Campaign

PS. Thanks @Magda :)

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The problem with the Defense domain power is that it doesn't stack with Ring of Deflection or Protection from Evil (which you can cast en mass with the communal or circle versions), meaning it becomes quickly obsolete as the game progresses. Luckily for you, you can swap it out for Torag's Divine Fighting Technique: Torag's Patient Strikes.

Here's a PFS build you might like or use for inspiration for your Inquisitor of Torag which makes great use of that feat, warhammer and AoOs.

Stats: 16+2 12-2 14 12+2 14 7
Traits: Divine Strategist [Religion, Torag], Fate's Favored [Faith]

1 Additional Traits: Dangerously Curious [Magic], Clever Wordplay > UMD [Social], Torag's Patient Strike [BONUS]
3 Power Attack, Teamwork feat
5 Pushing Assault
7 Blessed Hammer
9 Lunge, Teamwork feat
11 Divine Interference

Here's how it works:
- Torag's Patients Strike counts as Combat Reflexes using Wis instead of Dex to calculate how many AoOs you can do each round, but only when using a warhammer. The problem with it is that it has no reach, so it's not easy to do AoOs. With this build, we will try to increase your reach with warhammers in order to exploit this nice feat.
- Levels 1-2 [Fame < 12]: use a regular warhammer 2H, or 1H + heavy shield when needed. Put ranks in UMD: you should have a +8 bonus at level 2, +10 if you manage to buy a cracked Magenta prism ioun stone (only 800gp). Spend 2PP to buy a wand of Long Arm. If you have time to buff before combat, try your chances to activate it with UMD: remember, DC is fixed to 20, you can retry all the times you need without wasting charges, and the wand gets stuck for a day only if you roll a 1. If you manage to activate it, you have a nice reach warhammer you can use to do up to 3 AoOs per round. If not, it's fine, you still have high Str and Divine Favor!
- Levels 3-5 [13 < Fame < 30]: buy a Wand Key Ring to activate your wand 100% of the times. If you still invest ranks into UMD as level passes, you can retrain Additional Trait to something more useful.
Do not enhance your warhammer.
- Levels 6+ [Fame > 31]: at this point your to-hit bonus should be +12 (4[BAB] + 4[Str] + 3[Divine Favor] + 1[mwk weapon]), and can easily go up to +14 with Judgment and Bane (more if we count also possible buffs from the party). Therefore, you can afford to sustain a -2 penalty to hit while using a Large sized warhammer. This not only gives you +2.5 damage, but mainly entitles you to make it Lashing Shadowcraft, getting an extra 5ft reach when needed (for example when facing enemies also with reach).
- As an extra, you can deliver touch spells as part of your warhammer attack. Remember you can cast them beforehand (hence spending the swift action required to activate the feat before the combat begins), hold the charge and discharge it as soon as you hit.

The main challenge of this build is the amount of swift actions it needs. Of course, when fighting the BBEG, you can build-up your buffs round after round, but in general you'll have to decide how to spend them depending on the specific encounter.

Silver Crusade

Just cast Ant Haul on you to get the +1 AC

Silver Crusade

Dave Justus wrote:
Since he already has a 3rd level slayer, it is likely that his DEX is already as good as his CHR, so taking CHR replacing DEX abilities won't likely help.

The OP said they are "creating a 3rd level" character. I assumed it was because the campaign started at 3rd level.

If this is not the case, and your Dex is on par with Cha, I still suggest the Cleric/Inquisitor/Warpriest dip + Desna's Shooting Star. Decent Dex will still be useful for AC, Initiative, skills, Ref and feats prerequisites, but from that point on you will have to focus only on one stat for literally almost everything else.

Silver Crusade

Pump up your Cha to 20.

Dip a single level into Cleric, Warpriest or Inquisitor of Desna, and pick Desna's Shooting Star for free (instead of a Domain or Minor Blessing). They also give you access to Divine Favour (that you can cast yourself or from a wand, it makes no difference), which couples very well with the Faith trait Fate's Favoured. Otherwise, pick Irrepressible (also a Faith trait), which lets you use Cha on many Will saves. If going Cleric, consider Variant Channeling.

Use Slayer bonus feats to pick TWF feats and/or ranged feats without having the Dexterity necessary to qualify for them.

Eventually pick also Noble Scion (War) to use Cha to Initiative instead of Dexterity.

This is already enough to build a very strong starknife-based martial, but if you happen to go on a multiclassing-spree, consider two more dips:
- Oracle (Nature, Lore or Lunar) to get Cha to AC and CMD/Reflex saves
- Swashbuckler + Artful Dodge feat to use Cha instead of both Dex and Int to qualify for feats.

Silver Crusade

MrCharisma wrote:
doomman47 wrote:
blahpers wrote:
MrCharisma wrote:

I have a memory of a monk archetype or something who gets more standard actions ...


They still wouldn't be right, as that has nothing to do with "as you gain more BaB's".
Well actually that is true in a round about way, getting more bab means you have more levels getting more levels brings you closer to the 12th level ability that grants more standard actions but that is the only instance of more bab(higher level) giving more standard actions.
Yes but the BAB isn't what gives you the extra standard actions. This is like saying that when a Sorcerer gets +4 BAB they get 4th level spells, so BAB gives you spells.

There is no bijective correlation between class levels and BAB. In fact, you can get higher BAB without getting a higher class level, i.e. multiclassing.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bloodrealm wrote:
If I was running a game and someone tried to cheese with Wayang Spellhunter, I'd ask them how being raised in Wayang society factored into the character's backstory and personality.

Regional Traits only require you to have lived in the specified region 1 year or more. In other words, they hardly require you to spin your background around them, apart from a single line on your CV about your study abroad experience maybe.

Apart from that, I'm also part of this school of thought. I have played a blaster before, and theorycrafted a couple more, and I have never stacked the two traits. I believe Wayang Spellhunter exists to give players the opportunity to spend their Magic Trait elsewhere and still get a (restricted) metamagic cost reduction. Traits should be used to personalize your character, and it's so sad to read in literally every blaster's resume the same line:

4713 - 4714: Master's Degree in Magical Sciences, University of Minata

Silver Crusade

blahpers wrote:
Given the blatant contradiction

I agree with what you said, I just wanted to point out that, in my opinion, the contradiction is only apparent, and it disappears the moment we realise that the whole scope, or area of effect, of Mounted Skirmisher is already melee mounted combat alone. Hence, there is no need to specify "melee" in the feat, as it is implied by the scope of the feat.

Myself wrote:
From this we conclude that you can already full-attack at range when the mount is moving. Therefore, the Mounted Skirmisher feat does not apply to ranged combat, and only applies to the melee case. Hence, both the Benefit and the Normal sections only apply to the melee case (which is why "melee" was not explicitly mentioned, although it should have been for clarity's sake).

1 to 50 of 936 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>