Horselord's page

** Pathfinder Society GM. 251 posts (255 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 14 Organized Play characters. 2 aliases.


1 to 50 of 251 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Scarab Sages

Horselord wrote:
(It is logical and is more consistent, but RAW and all ...)
Nefreet wrote:
Wrong edition. There is no such thing as "RAW" in Pathfinder 2E, thanks to the section on Ambiguous Rules in the Core Rulebook.

The problem with GM fiat is in PFS. You can't leave everything up to GM interpretation that is a grey area regarding character builds. Wild Shape (and Battle Forms in general) has so much grey area (handwraps bonus/non-striking runes), various feat interactions, whether some items work, spells like Avatar that directly contradict general Battle Form rules without specifying an exemption, whether Form Control works on a new form gained that level as the feats add forms without a base level, only a heightened level. The list goes on, and it gets worse with the Druid Dedication + Basic Wilding (Wild Shape) feats.

As wild shape stands, there is so much "GM variation" that it basically vetoes any build that relies on interpretation, which currently is all but a basic druid who doesn't try to make his combat better - just taking the listed bonuses (not his own).

Scarab Sages

Nefreet wrote:
"Natural Attacks" aren't a thing. Claws and Jaws and Fist et all are "Unarmed Attacks".

Of course. I just needed a succinct, unambiguous word to establish context.

Animal Form wrote:
One or more unarmed melee attacks specific to the battle form you choose

Isn't that just the proficiency? Are you saying this wording needs to be interpreted as all attacks in all the battle forms of the spell have the "unarmed" trait?

Food for thought: the same wording exists in Fey Form, yet a Redcap wields a scythe, and a Dryad wields a branch.

Devil Form, Demon Form, Daemon Form, Cosmic Form, Angel Form, Avatar, Nature Incarnate, and possibly others do not have this wording, instead stating: "One or more melee attacks ..."

Of the druid wild shape options, only Insect Form has the wording: "One or more melee attacks ..."

Is the inconsistency between spells for a reason? Is it redundant anyway (just restating it is an unarmed proficiency attack)? Or is it a mistake?

If we assume "One or more unarmed melee attacks ..." means all listed attacks have the "unarmed" trait, of the battle forms that don't have the wording "One or more unarmed melee attacks ...", this raises concerns about body parts being disarmed. The concern swings the other way with Fey Form - are a Dryad and Redcap immune to being disarmed of their weapons?

Still, if "One or more unarmed melee attacks ..." doesn't mean all listed attacks have the "unarmed" trait, are we just assuming body parts cannot be disarmed? (It is logical and is more consistent, but RAW and all ...)

Scarab Sages

Are druid Wild Shape's natural attacks like claws and a bite weapons? Just because they use unarmed attack modifiers doesn't disqualify them from being a weapon as the attacks don't have the unarmed trait like a fist does.

Just pondering if a ranger with a druid dedication would work.

Scarab Sages

It would make sense to count a melee weapon that can be thrown as both a ranged weapon and a melee weapon at all times. Unfortunately, it looks like things need to be complicated for some reason.

Scarab Sages

I can see a benefit to fusion seals over fusions then.

If you can "hot swap" fusion seals it is great for changing your weapon's damage type. Start with a projectile weapon to maximise damage and change the damage type to an energy so you target EAC and use batterys.

Scarab Sages

A simple system for ability tests is roll 2d20 but modify the number of dice rolled by your ability modifier (minimum 1, then drop the die a size instead). Skills should grant extra dice based on ranks.

The DC has two components, difficulty and degree:
- Difficulty is the measure of various factors including general randomness hindering a player from using their ability to its fullest potential.
- Degree is the number of successful rolls required to succeed at the task - this represents how much of an ability must be demonstrated to succeed in a task.

So searching for a needle in a haystack would have a high difficulty but a low degree. In theory anyone can do it, but those with a high perception would roll more dice, thus giving them a significant edge.

Contrarily, bending a bar would have a very low difficulty but a high degree. If you don't have at least a certain strength you cannot succeed, but those with enough strength can reliably succeed within a few tries.

Scarab Sages

10 people marked this as a favorite.

Easy fix for Cleric:

Change "[Cha bonus] channels per day" into "[Wis Bonus] channels per day".

This helps in numerous ways:

(1) It guarantees a modicum of channels per day.
(2) It is more limiting to clerics wanting to max channel energy uses, which is the original intent of removing the "3+" from channels per day.
(3) It gives a reason to use Wisdom, which is now considered almost a dump stat now. A cleric with a paladin dedication can use Charisma to calculate spell points and channel using spell points (if they don't/can't take the Healing domain).
(4) It makes the cleric less MAD. Unless the cleric can take the human ancestry feat "Adapted Spell" to gain an offensive cantrip, they need to be competent with a weapon, which means three stats need to be high (assuming you want spell points and resonance) thus making the cleric a compromise of options, with the Zealot of Gorum channel smite build being all but unworkable.

Scarab Sages

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I really don't like the idea of particular magical items being essential for certain builds, and druid's vestments are looking that way. The problem with these items is they are fundamental enough that characters are assumed to acquire them, thus those types of characters are assumed to possess these items when determining powers/abilities. Magical items should not make up for a class's shortcomings - the class should be fixed.

If Pest Form is not a combat shape (and it isn't) it needs a duration suitable for a utility form - preferably unlimited.

Constitution seems the most thematically appropriate stat to use when determining wild shapes.

Personally, I find dragon form thematically inappropriate for a druid. I could imagine various wild shape "packages" that fit various themes though:

Every wild shape would get pest and animal forms

1. Beast: adds dinosaurs and magical beasts
2. Cave: adds vermin, plants and oozes
3. Forest: adds plants and magical beasts
4. Desert: adds vermin, plants and dinosaurs
5. Planar: adds selected outsider group (elemental, azata, agathion)

Wild shapes should also stay viable throughout a character's career. I think the best way to do this is like in PF1 and modify the character's stats, but if Paizo pushes ahead with generic stat replacement, then these stats should improve as level does.

Scarab Sages

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Wildshape should be about versatility, not power. Heavily restricted durations and no "natural spell" equivalent makes wildshape very limited. Wildshape, like many spells, is just a combat buff now.

From what I have seen, the combat forms of wildshape are respectable, but there is no variance: every druid uses the same stats - you might as well say you're tagging Bob in for the fighting as it doesn't seem to be your character anymore.

Scarab Sages

Releasing your hand from a 2-handed weapon is the same action as dropping an item with that hand.

Wielding 2-handed weapons often requires changing grips to compensate for reach (half-swording) or to attack from a different direction (a zweihander can be held like a spear for quick defensive attacks from a high position, to being held like a broom in a low position for a power stroke). Curious how grip is ignored for simplicity but then forget it happens and justify the action cost for balance: In 3.5 regripping a 2-handed weapon held in one hand was a free action - it became a move action in response to a magus with a 2-handed weapon full-attacking and using a spell-strike.

Scarab Sages

LoreKeeper wrote:

My suggestion, keeping with the DCs as set forth by the playtest, is that the proficiency level should give a scaling benefit based on level:

untrained: flat -2; and +1 per 5 levels
trained: flat +0; and +2 per 5 levels
expert: flat +1; and +3 per 5 levels
master: flat +2; and +4 per 5 levels
legend: flat +3; and +5 per 5 levels

All other things being equal (and assuming 0 other bonuses), at level 20 the disparity would be:
untrained: +2
trained: +8
expert: +13
master: +18
legend: +23

Note that this can have big impact on using skills in combat. At level 20 somebody that is merely an "expert" in Athletics is unlikely to be able to Disarm anybody.

Although I specify +X per 5 levels; the actual skill growth would be smooth by level - not a lump-sum every 5 levels. An appropriate table or something would sort that out.

This has merit. I like this.

Scarab Sages

Is this right? According to the playtest, proficiency bonuses are:

- Untrained: level -2
- Trained: level
- Expert: level +1
- Master: level +2
- Legendary: level +3

This means every level-up all skills effectively gain a rank, all saves improve by one, and everyone has full BAB (in PF1 terms). Does this seem a bit steep?

For comparison, Star Wars Saga Edition had a proficiency bonus of half character level. 5th ed. is much lower than that.

The fallout of a bonus progression that is too steep is level differences become large. By this, I mean the recommended party level range that finds an encounter challenging but not a cake-walk becomes too small. This is due to rapid AC increases making slightly higher level creatures too difficult to hit, or having saves too high, etc.

I wonder if the system would be better at a slower proficiency progression, particularly for Society scenarios. This would permit a broader level range to participate meaningfully.

Scarab Sages

Archetype multiclassing thought of the day ...

Each class is broken down into three archetype streams. E.g., Ranger might have "Combat Style", "Animal Companion", and "Hunter". Each stream is equal weight in terms of character abilities. If a character wants to multiclass they choose an archetype stream from another class and forfeit a stream in their current class.

Debatably, an archetype stream is equal to the bonus feats all characters get (3rd and every 4th level beyond) and could be exchanged for a 4th stream.

Full casting is more than one stream, so probably should be split and/or require additional investment such as feats to balance. In theory a mystic theurge could be created this way but they would probably lose a spell per spell level they can cast each day for each class. Still, they'd have more spells per day than anyone else and unpenalised casting progression in two types of magic ... just not much else for class abilities.

Scarab Sages

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Firebug wrote:
Horselord wrote:

How can you ...

- be a cart horse to help move the party and supplies
- scout as a sparrow or other incognito creature
- explore areas with movement types like burrow
- swim between islands as an aquatic animal
- tolerate the cold in a native form
- track using scent
- stalk someone in plain sight as a cat or other small animal

So what I am hearing is that your 1(!) ability should be able to:

-Make you stronger than the fighter
-Make you a better scout than the rogue
-Make you better at "scrying" than the wizard
-Make you faster at swimming than the boat
-Save you a 1st level spell slot
-Make you a better tracker than a bloodhound
-Make you better at tailing someone than a shadowdancer

That about right?

Sooo ...

- Ant Haul
- Invisibility, levitate
- Summon Monster and Speak with Animals
- Touch of the Sea
- Endure Elements
- Bloodhound spell
- Invisibility

All abilities can be replicated with low-level spells, but the specific spells do it better or wildshape requires significant skill investment. Hardly all-powerful, especially as it doesn't have that many uses.

Scarab Sages

27 people marked this as a favorite.

One of the biggest pet peeves I've had with rules is effect durations. Paizo wants to simplify things yet puts awkward durations on things that really don't need it, such as sorcerer claws in PF1.0.

Wildshape now lasts a minute. Even the wild druid just gets a few more per day. This reduces wildshape down to a combat option, which is very disappointing. And the player's stats don't appear to affect the form, which I think is a move away from ideal. And finally, wildshape now draws from the limited forms listed in the spell.


The duration should be unlimited, or 24 hours at the shortest.

How can you ...
- be a cart horse to help move the party and supplies
- scout as a sparrow or other incognito creature
- explore areas with movement types like burrow
- swim between islands as an aquatic animal
- tolerate the cold in a native form
- track using scent
- stalk someone in plain sight as a cat or other small animal

Also, it hinders the ability of the druid to communicate with native animals (theme-wise).

Storywise, opportunities are missed due to the pitiful duration, such as encountering a druid who has lost himself due to staying wildshaped too long.

I really thought Paizo hit the sweet spot with wildshape in PF1.0 by "wearing a skin", so it was basically the druid modified to be an animal. Minimal statistics about the animal needed to be known and different druids were different as the same animal, yet separate statistics were not required to adopt a form (such as how you need separate animal companion statistics that are underivable from the monster entry). It had faults, but it got more right than wrong.

I do have to mention though, I like that it is now possible for a higher level druid to wildshape into a gargantuan form! That's been a problem that's needed fixing for a while ... so many dinosaurs, and rocs!

Scarab Sages

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Aaaargh!!! Stop giving sorcerers melee bloodline powers!!!!

... or at least cut it down to a minority of bloodlines.

Also, I see they're sticking with the artificially restrictive "one bonus spell per spell level". It is perfectly fine to drop this restriction and just include a fair amount of spells to round out the concept - or even better, a descriptive requirement for bonus spells, such as the demon bloodline gaining all spells with the "pain" descriptor, or all fire spells that have an instantaneous duration.

What are demons known for? What would a half-demon be able to do? These are the questions that need to be asked when determining what [demon] bloodline powers should do. Biting an opponent and gaining temporary HP sounds vampiric to me, and I cannot think of a demon that has a similar ability - maybe a succubus kiss?

PF1 Draconic bloodline was very thematic - in fact the weakest elements in terms of theme were the bonus spells (except Form of the Dragon) and the bloodline arcana (dragons can't do it). The bloodline abilities were clearly of draconic influence. That is what should be aimed for with all bloodlines.

Scarab Sages

The ability reads: You are proficient with (but not specialized in) any
weapons you create with this ability.

There is nothing mentioned about if you are already proficient or specialised in the weapon, therefore the more general rules should apply.

The notable thing is that you are not automatically specialised. This is probably due to only being proficient with the fabricated weapon instead of a weapon type, and/or it doesn't count as a class proficiency.

There is nothing in the ability's description that precludes you from gaining proficiency or specialisation from another source. I.e., it does not say you cannot be specialised, it just says you aren't. The weapon created is an average example and should work as such - so if you are specialised, you get that bonus.

Scarab Sages

Is a computer technology?
If so, the shenanigans are ridonkulous as computers have no tech level, so you could make a tier 10 beast at level 2 and give it an AI, then you can make Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, and Sense Motive checks with a +20 modifier.

Scarab Sages

There are numerous ways to boost an Animal Companion beyond character level:

- Sylvan Sorcerer + Ascendant Recollection + Boon Companion + Robes of Arcane Heritage [CL + 4]

- Ascendant Recollection + Exotic Heritage (Knowledge Nature) + Eldritch Heritage (Sylvan) + Boon Companion + Robes of Arcane Heritage [CL + 4]

- Animal Ally and retraining or selecting a class feature that grants an Animal Companion [CL (or CL-3) + CL-4]

- Oracle favored class bonus for elf or aasimar (+1/2 to oracle level for one revelation) and apply it to Primal Companion (Lunar) or Bonded Mount (Nature). [CL + 1/2 CL]

- Or combine the last 3 by playing an elf lunar oracle with Ascendant Recollection, taking Animal Ally at level 5, take Eldritch Heritage (Sylvan), choosing the Primal Companion revelation, and wearing Robes of Arcane Heritage. When you have all this, your effective Animal Companion level is [3.5*CL - 4], so at 8th level, your Animal Companion is level 24!

Scarab Sages

Mithril is only "treated" as a category lighter for encumbrance. Class abilities that depend on heavy armor should still work (Armor Master - Fighter archetype), and enhancements that can only be placed on heavy armor should still be possible on mithril full plate.

Scarab Sages

The limit is [AC HD limit] = [Character Level + 1]. So a 5th level character can only have a 6HD animal companion (Effective AC level 7), even if they are entitled to a higher level AC.

It is in this post, but not in the ARG FAQ.
John Compton's Post

Scarab Sages

Don't forget to wear Robes of Arcane Heritage! It's like Boon companion without the level cap.

Scarab Sages

I agree with many of the points people have brought up, but the biggest change that should be made is the rewards for beating the following:

- The final Scenario
- The final Adventure
- The Adventure Path

It is bad enough that a character gets the perfect storm of rewards just when they should consider retiring the character, but there are certain rewards that should be avoided due to limited chances to use said reward:

- Loot cards. Seriously, it's like saying "here's cards you'll never use."
- Did I mention Loot cards??? Ok, well add any other type of card that is set aside until earned.

The only reward the Adventure Path card should ever have on it is flavour text that says in some fashion "You completed the objective successfully, well done." Maybe even include an epilogue. The Adventure Path card doesn't need a mechanical reward as the Adventure and Scenario cards give rewards. In fact, for the final Adventure and Scenario cards, the more trivial the reward, the better.

Scarab Sages

I found acrylic deck boxes are ideal for storing the character decks.

I sleeved mine in FFG sleeves, so they didn't fit in the UltraPro acrylic boxes due to the sleeve height, however the DragonShield acrylic boxes DO fit the sleeves.

You can cut down the original packaging to serve as a label.
All character decks are separate so you just grab the ones you need, and as each class deck is released, just fill another deck box.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Seconding the Sorcerer, as too many bloodline options are melee. Sure, have a melee-focussed bloodline such as draconic, but what's an Abyssal summoner doing with claws?

Also, this is not specific to one class, but all the character options that are limited in duration and/or uses per day need a second look to decide if the ability is that powerful that it needs to be limited. The draconic sorcerer's claws are a good example of an ability that should be at will with an unlimited duration. Even wildshape would be more interesting if its duration was unlimited - you could hear stories of druids who stayed wildshaped too long and start believing they are the animal they appear to be ...

Spell taxonomy needs an overhaul - particularly for clerics. Domains with their artificial restriction of one spell per spell level means too many appropriate spells get left out and strange choices are included. If spells were grouped to a tight theme such as Healing, Creature Summoning, Undead, Charm, Polymorph (possibly needs subdivisions), etc., then a given specialty has all the spells for that specialty. Also, clerics shouldn't derive their powers from domains, but from the god they worship. Inner Sea Gods had the right idea, it just needs to be pushed further and developed more: If Urgathoa is the god of undead, make Urgathoan clerics better at undead stuff. Clerics should get full or partial access (they may need to choose) to a list of abilities matching a god's portfolio.

Necromancers should just get channel negative energy in its full capacity without any related feats or other benefits specific to the necromancer specialty. They should also have the ability to "desecrate" like a gravewalker witch instead of an arcane bond.

In general, most specialist wizards don't have much that says "I'm better than other wizards at my specialty." Specialist wizards could benefit from the tighter taxonomy above and have much stronger school powers to complement their narrow focus. A blast mage that could lower resistances and eventually reduce or strip immunity to his element of choice would be flavourful, useful, and keep the class viable at higher levels. A wizard focussing on charm who was able to have lesser effects to his charm spells if opponents made their saves would make charm spells a lot more interesting, such as a failed domination acting as a suggestion or command spell. Other ideas include a Charm specialist able to affect those immune to charms by virtue of their type, or the ability to sustain a charm attack that forces a save every round until the opponent fails.

Scarab Sages

Horselord wrote:

A mystic theurge is a hybrid of two classes. Rather than trying to make it unique, let its uniqueness be its hybridity. Another known fact is being 2 levels behind in 2 full casting classes is about the right balance.

[b]** spoiler omitted **

Why did the system crap itself at the most opportune moment?! It cut most of what I tried to post!!!

Anyway, the key to making the mystic theurge work is reducing its prerequisites down to 2 caster levels in each class - that way cheese is unnecessary and it is fair no matter what the spell progression is in the base class.

The other important thing is a mystic theurge is meant to be a hybrid of 2 classes, yet gets none of the class abilities. The Exalted prestige class in Inner Sea Gods has an ability called "Aligned Class", where a base class is chosen and ALL class abilities are gained at each level after the first (except BAB, saves, and skill points). Give the mystic theurge 2 Aligned Classes which grant all class abilities for every level except 1st and 5th, which grant only +1 spell level in 2 classes. This makes the character 4 levels behind in class abilities, of which many can be made up with a single feat. So the character should still find the class abilities viable, with the potential to make up the lost levels.

A nice touch to mitigate the waning class abilities is a special ability at 5th level which allows the character to add 4 levels to a single class ability, bringing it to the strength of a single-classed character. This could allow a mystic theurge to channel as a pure cleric, thus making a great necromancer; or make a druid's animal companion full strength, or wild shape uncompromised; etc.

Finally, the mystic theurge should have an unbounded progression. If that's too complicated, it should progress to at least 16th level.

Scarab Sages

A mystic theurge is a hybrid of two classes. Rather than trying to make it unique, let its uniqueness be its hybridity. Another known fact is being 2 levels behind in 2 full casting classes is about the right balance.

Mystic Theurge:

Prerequisites: 2nd caster level in both a divine casting class and an arcane casting class, 4 ranks in Knowledge (Arcana), 4 ranks in Knowledge (Religion).

Class features:
At every level except 1st and 5th of Mystic theurge, you gain ALL abilities under the "Class Features" title as listed in the two base classes you have levels in (see the "Aligned Class" feature of the Evangelist [ISG]). This includes everything except BAB, saving throw improvements, and skill points. For example, a wizard would advance his school abilities, arcane bond, gain new spell slots, and scribe 2 spells in his spellbook; a cleric would advance domain abilities and channel, as well as new spell slots; etc.

At 1st and 5th level, only "+1 spellcasting level in 1 arcane and 1 divine class" is gained.

Scarab Sages

A single example of how a high level character calculates his companion abilities would be amazingly helpful. As it reads, I think leadership is easier and better - but I could be wrong as the rules are unclear.

There is a table in the back of every bestiary that has the ECL for selected monsters from that book. If the one you want isn't on that list, you'll have to guesstimate.

Scarab Sages

I cast Animate Thread.

This feat has bugged me too but I came to a different conclusion that is not in consensus.

1. The feat is an item creation feat, so it is obviously banned in PFS.

2. You can buy magical items crafted using banned crafting feats - you just can't do it yourself.

3. Why wouldn't the same rules apply to Craft Reliquary Arms & Armour?

Scarab Sages

It astounds me how some prestige classes make it to print. The Blackfire Adept and Tattooed Mystic are both summoning focussed classes, yet they both lose 3 spell levels over their 10 level progression! Even one level needs strong powers to justify, so these prestige classes will rarely see play and be considered trap options.

Now we have a feat to fix the problem ... or does it? 4 feats are required to restore the lost spell levels, which for a character with no bonus feats, assuming they enter the prestige at level 6 or 7, is half the feats they get when they finish the prestige class at level 15-16. Factor in most prestige classes have feat prerequisites and that doesn't leave much.

So the question is, do the class abilities justify 4 feats, in addition to the opportunity cost of advancing your base class?

Scarab Sages

Apparently I need to look at flight rules again. Thanks for the info.

Scarab Sages

Look in the bestiary at the description for a Roc. It says it commonly carries an elephant. There is no weight listed for an adult elephant, so real-world examples will have to suffice:

Forest elephant: 2,700 - 6,000 lbs
African elephant: 5,000 - 14,000+ lbs
Asian elephant: 5,000 - 11,000 lbs

The Roc has a Strength of 28 and is gargantuan, which gives it a maximum light load of 3,200 lbs. This means a Roc could only carry the smallest of adult elephants, young and forest elephants - and rocs will avoid hunting in forests due to their size. To carry an average elephant, the roc should have a light load in the order of 6,500 lbs, which is at least +5 Strength.

As an aside, let's see how a roc compares to an eagle ...

Applying the young template until a roc is small gives:
Str 12, Dex 31, Con 1, Natural Armor 6.
Compare this to an eagle:
Str 10, Dex 15, Con 12, Natural Armor 1.

This seems to indicate that a roc's Dexterity is incredibly high and its Constitution is abysmally low.

Advancing an eagle up to gargantuan size and 16 HD gives these stats:
Str 38, Dex 13*, Con 26, Natural Armor 10. (* +1 for every 4 HD)

This seems to give a better comparison. The Dexterity is close enough. There is a shift towards making a roc harder to hit in preference to hit points as natural armor is higher but Constitution is very low (9 points lower seems too much). The standout is the strength - a full 10 points lower for the roc! As an eagle only started at 10, this would mean reversing the tables would leave rocs with 0 Strength. Something definitely isn't adding up here.

Scarab Sages

People saying Masterpieces are the domain of just the bard are wrong. Any class that gains bardic performance can access them by spending a feat for each one.

Also, the idea of leaving the interpretation of the mechanics to the GM just doesn't work in PFS - characters either get swapped out with a disagreeable GM, or players look at the option as too subjective to be worth playing. Vague rules don't fly in PFS.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I really think an opportunity was missed here for all pocket editions.

If the book had all art removed, as well as fluff text, and was repaginated in a book 78% the size it would probably be smaller with the same font size as the original.

Scarab Sages

RaizielDragon wrote:
Doesn't it have 1 less ACP?

That is only because it is masterwork.

Scarab Sages

This is a round-a-bout way for a wizard to learn a spell from ANY spellcaster if the spell is on the wizard's spell list:

Have the spell the wizard wants to know be cast in a ring of spell storing. Now the wizard can cast the spell once. This allows him to scribe it into his spellbook.

Scarab Sages

Well as you can only retrain a feat into another feat choice you could select, most classes gain no benefit retraining class proficiencies - only classes that offer a choice can change. So from a feat perspective it seems perfectly reasonable.

Scarab Sages

Lamontius wrote:
regardless, what you are trying to do with stacking archetypes in this way cannot be done while following the rules

I get the impression that to keep the rules clear, muddying the archetype waters with feats becomes problematic (especially beyond 1st level) so they are not mentioned.

Scarab Sages

Lamontius wrote:

You cannot take virtually all of those 'Extra...' feats without the class feature, as they usually have the class feature as a prerequisite for taking them. The idea that you get those class features from those feats is absolutely wrong.

You cannot stack archetypes that alter or remove that same class feature or ability.

There really is not any rules argument or interpretation here, but if you want to do this in your home games and your GM/players are fine with it, go right ahead.

There are long forum debates as to whether a character can take an "Extra ..." feat if he traded the first one out, some stating the class ability of ... is not traded out, just the specific ability chosen. E.g. A witch still has the Hex class feature even if she took an archetype that traded out the 1st level hex - a bit like a Ranger having 0 spells of a given level per day but a high ability score can grant more spells of that level.

You could break out the semantics saying it is an identical class feature but it is not the same - just like twins! So instead of trading the same class feature, two archetypes are trading identical class features.

Scarab Sages

Many class features can be gained through feats, particularly feats titled "Extra ...". My question is, can a feat be used to gain a feature lost to an archetype so a second archetype can stack.

For example, False Priest and Tattooed Sorcerer both trade out Eschew Materials, but if the character used his first level feat to gain Eschew Materials again, he has everything the second archetype needs.

The above may be pushing the line as the feat doesn't specifically grant class abilities, but using feats like Extra Rage Power, Extra Hex, Extra Arcanist Exploit, etc., certainly do.

If a feat isn't gained at the level of the class ability to be lost, retraining may be required.

Scarab Sages

Many prestige classes are a focus. A prestige class should do its thing better than any other option. I.e., the Assassin should assassinate better than any other class choice. The fact it gets no rogue or ninja talents, no hide in plain sight, a death attack no more powerful than a Master Spy or the Rogue's capstone (albeit with earlier access), and no other interesting or unique class abilities makes the Assassin lackluster. 4 + Int skills is just insulting - what were the designers thinking?!

Other prestige classes are flavour or fun ways of mixing class abilities together. We need prestige classes more like the Hellknight Signifer and Evangelist, which improve base class abilities for this concept to work well.

Scarab Sages

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I know how to make the test of the Starstone work in PFS!!!


A group of (possibly mythic) pre-generated characters feel it is their time to take the test of the Starstone. Each character has a series of tests interwoven into the general Starstone test. Players will need to pass all components to survive the test.

To finalise, GMs report on which characters passed the test ,which died, and Paizo then compiles the results and adds the winning character to Galorion's pantheon of gods.

The best part is the characters can be tailor-made to fit as a new god, thereby making the adventure much more targetted and rewarding. They could even use a known NPC, such as Razmir!

The cert for the adventure could have a blessing from the would-be god, or if the character passes the test, anything from a major blessing all the way up to a mythic tier.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

The standard one is, but is it implicit that other, more expensive wayfinders are as well? This would certainly make sense from a theme perspective.

Scarab Sages

3 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

Aaargh! Bestiary 5 has Clockwork Familiar with a Constitution of 10.

So I guess that slipped through editing ... again.

What does having a Constitution score mean for a construct? For a start, that means it is alive, which means cure spells and Raise Dead should work on it. I expect it would also mean it is not treated as an object, so the immunity to effects that require Fortitude saves unless they affect objects would be gone, and probably a few others as well.

But this is all nonsensical! Constructs by definition do not have a Constitution score. (Look at the creature types in any bestiary.)

Scarab Sages

I've been told Blood Money only works with spells that take a full-round or less to cast.

Blood Money:

School transmutation; Level magus 1, sorcerer/wizard 1, witch 1
Casting Time 1 swift action
Components V, S
Range 0 ft.
Effect 1 material component
Duration Instantaneous

You cast blood money just before casting another spell. As part of this spell's casting, you must cut one of your hands, releasing a stream of blood that causes you to take 1d6 points of damage. When you cast another spell in that same round, your blood transforms into one material component of your choice required by that second spell. Even valuable components worth more than 1 gp can be created, but creating such material components requires an additional cost of 1 point of Strength damage, plus a further point of damage for every full 500 gp of the component's value (so a component worth 500–999 gp costs a total of 2 points, 1,000–1,500 costs 3, etc.). You cannot create magic items with blood money.

For example, a sorcerer with the spell stoneskin prepared could cast blood money to create the 250 gp worth of diamond dust required by that spell, taking 1d6 points of damage and 1 point of Strength damage in the process.

Material components created by blood money transform back into blood at the end of the round if they have not been used as a material component. Spellcasters who do not have blood cannot cast blood money, and those who are immune to Strength damage (such as undead spellcasters) cannot use blood money to create valuable material components.

This makes Blood Money really good for Animate Dead, and not much else.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The most frustrating thing about not being able to replay a scenario is the secrecy going in. Players have no idea what they will get out of it, and commonly find if a cert has a unique item or boon on it, the character is inappropriate to benefit from it.

It would be interesting as a standard PFS rule if a character was allowed to "buy" a boon or item from another character's cert (same player of course). Even if it meant crossing it off the original character's cert and the buyer paid PP for the privilege, it would help a lot.

Scarab Sages

A Ring of Spell Storing (Lesser if divine) can bypass the material cost of Animate Dead.

- First you cast the spell into the ring, choosing 0HD as you are not targeting a corpse.

- Next you cast Animate Dead from the ring, ignoring the material cost. As you choose all parameters when you cast the spell, You can choose any number of HD of corpses you are capable of animating, but it functions at minimum caster level. This can be mitigated with Heighten Spell, but it will also require upgrading the ring too.

Another option is a Staff of Dark Flame (47,000gp UE), or if you are not in PFS, craft a staff.

Scarab Sages

KutuluKultist wrote:
3.5 made no distinction between channeling to harm and channeling to heal. The only distinction was positive or negative energy.

D&D 3.5 didn't have Channelling at all. Instead it had Turn/Rebuke Undead.

- It didn't do damage, you either destroyed or turned the undead or they were unharmed. Control was charm (turn) or dominate (destroy).
- Useable [3 + Cha mod] times/day.
- The turning check of 1d20 + Cha mod determined the maximum HD an undead could have and be affected by your turn/rebuke attempt. This was a range of Cleric level +/-4, with a 11 netting Cleric level +1 on a typical cleric.
- The damage roll is 2d6 + Cleric level + Cha mod. This is the number of HD you can turn/rebuke.
- If the Cleric has at least twice the HD of the undead being turned/rebuked, they are Destroyed/Commanded instead.
- The Sun domain's granted power was Greater Turning: once per day you can turn undead, but all undead that would have been turned are destroyed instead.

So Channelling is a LOT better than Turning Undead used to be.

Scarab Sages

Suthainn wrote:
Horselord wrote:

Also, the question of whether a grab attack which succeeds allows the rest of the full attack action still seems murky.
You think that's bad? How about this... a creature with the Grab ability attacks, hits and successfully grapples another creature. That other creature on its turn attacks back with a natural attack that has the Grab ability and allows it to initiate a grapple... worse, it can do so and specifically not get the grappled condition... Grabception?

That's great!

But I would expect the free grapple check of the grab manoeuvre allows them to control the grapple if they succeed, and if they take the -20 penalty they effectively escape the grapple as well, unless it has a specific creature ability to do so without penalty - which makes those creatures much more dangerous.

1 to 50 of 251 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>