Ivarrwolfsong's page

The easy fix for Power Attack is to keep all its drawbacks but let it do 2x your damage dice + 1x your static bonus which turns it into vital strike.

This way it is one big hit at the cost of a second action and a bigger MAP if you attack again.

Let’s look at how it functions now for a 9th level fighter in the play test (18 str, +2 greatsword).

- it has the “open” tag so it needs to be your first attack for the round.
- the attack cost is 2 actions at -0 MAP
- you get an extra d12 damage, for 4d12+4 averaging 30 dmg
- if you attack again, it is at -10 MAP

If you simply attacked twice, you could do
- attack 1 (-0 MAP) 3d12+4 average 23.5
- attack 2 (-5 MAP) 3d12+4 average 23.5
- if both hit, average damage is 47 damage.

Even if you tally the damage as only hitting 2x every other round you STILL do more damage ... we will use 4 rounds as an example:

-4 rounds of Power Attack: 30+30+30+30=*120*

-4 rounds of attacking twice, missing 1x/2rounds: 47+23.5+47+23.5=*141*

So currently, you spend a feat to do less damage.

IF INSTEAD, we take the current Power Attack, warts and all, and simply double the damage dice we end up with one attack doing 6d12+4, averaging 43.

This is still less than 2 successful attacks, which is fitting since 2 attacks would have a -5 MAP on the 2nd swing. However, it’s significantly better than the current “anti-feat” that exists. After all, you are restricted by the “open” tag, the lesser flexibility of using 2 actions as 1 action, and you have to spend a feat on it. It should give SOME benefit, right?

level 1 fighter - 60%
Level 9 fighter 60%
level 19 fighter - 60%

Looking forward to that :)

It's one of the problems I have seen with the new system: At 1st or at 20th, you shall always be "Mediocre +1"

Rangers are really bad in PF2. They don't have access to any of the decent archery or combat feats, and the action economy of HT and ACs is a nightmare.

A better classic "Ranger" can be created thru a nomad background Archery spec fighter with a dip in the Rogue archetype. Survival, stealth, longbow arrow spam, etc... welcome to the new ranger.

The PF2 Ranger is really, really, really bad. Until they re-do it from scratch, it will remain group poison. It is sad, but its the truth.

For the 9th level Play Test, I made myself a more archetypical "ranger" by making a Nomad background fighter spec'd for archery. I took the Rogue Archetype at 2nd (Rogue Focus) and 8th (Skill Mastery- Stealth).

This gives me a stealthy (Assurance - Stealth, Swift Stealth, Terrain Stalker) archer who treats everyone behind me in initiative as flat footed on round 1, who has good Survival (Nomad gives you Assurance - Survival and Lore <terrain>). I rounded it out with Half Elf, Fleet, Cat Fall and Kip Up.

I'll let you know how it turns out... Hopefully it's more fun than my two weapon fighter. That was a yawn-fest.

I currently play a Level 14 Cavalier in Hell's Vengeance who uses a Flail. I started with a heavy Flail. Later on, I used the "design your own weapon" option from Weapons Masters Handbook to create a "Bladed Flail" that does b/s damage with a 19-20 x2 crit. There have been some pretty epic disarms in the campaign (disarming a Gunslinger who was surrounded by our Necromancers zombie horde and leave him to be helplessly gobbled up was a personal favorite).

For your Paladin friend:

I agree with the above poster in regards to the character being s defense based toon. The player doesn't seem to concerned with damage based on his feats and archetype. Trip and disarm in conjunction with high defense will work nicely in the "Defender" role.

Regarding his choice of Flail, he already has a really nice boost from your house rule. If you want to give them a slight bump, the easy fix is to simply allow it to be a 19-20 x2 weapon. Or they can pick up WMHB and design something like my Bladed Flail :).

I currently play a Level 14 Cavalier in Hell's Vengeance who uses a Flail. I started with a heavy Flail and then used the "design your own weapon" option from Weapons Masters Handbook to create a "Bladed Flail" that does b/s damage with a 19-20 x2 crit. There have been some pretty epic disarms in the campaign (disarming a Gunslinger who was surrounded by our Necromancers zombie horde and leave him to be helplessly gobbled up was a personal favorite).

For your Paladin friend:

I agree with the above poster in regards to the character being s defense based toon. The player doesn't seem to concerned with damage based on his feats and archetype. Trip and disarm in conjunction with high defense will work nicely in the "Defender" role.

Regarding his choice of Flail, he already has a really nice boost from your house rule. If you want to give them a slight bump, the easy fix is to simply allow it to be a 19-20 x2 weapon. Or they can pick up WMHB and design something like my Bladed Flail :).

So I'm making a weapon / shield build ranger. The fluff is he is an Ulfen warrior and wanderer, moving from conflict to conflict, battle to battle in search of meaning. He worships Gorum and has spent much of his early life among the minor skirmishs between other humans in service of minor lords among the Linnorm Kings. I'm going with a more forlorn, "ubi sunt" type of feel.

Level 5 - Ranger (Divine Tracker / Infiltrator) 4; Medium 1
Str 18 (17+1 at 4th)
Dex 14
Con 14
Int 8
Wis 13 (+1 at 8)
Cha 12

Traits - magic Knack (ranger): other trait ... Shield Bearer?
Feats-
1- imp Shield bash
1 human - Spiked Destroyer
2 Ranger - Shield Slam
3 (Medium) - Spirit Focus- Champion
5 - power Attack
(Might swap 3 and 5)

I'm taking War and Destruction as my blessings from Divine Tracker and Human and Evil Outsider as my pref enemies, respectively.

I'd two-hand my large shield, getting a free bullrush from Shield Slam which allows a swift action attack with armor spikes from Spiked Destroyer. At range I'll throw weapons at penemies I suppose, but with access to the untyped +10 speed boost from the War Domain and access to Longstrider or Expeditious Retreat, I can close quickly.

Two hand Shield Bash damage (+1 enhancement)
+6 str
+6 power attack
+2 spirit bonus (medium)
+2 seance bonus (medium)
+1 trait
+1 enhancement
+2 Destruction Blessing

+20 damage (+24 vs Humans; +22 vs Evil Outsiders)
Free Bullrush (and knocked prone if hit a wall) with swift action armor spikes attack.

Armor Spikes (always count as 1 handed) +1 enhancement.
+4 str
+4 power attack
+2 spirit
+2 seance
+1 enhance
+2 Destruction Blessing

+15 damage

At Ranger 6, I'm leaning toward Shield Master, but may take Two Weapon Fighting and give up 2 handing my shield for an extra attack. Alternatively, I could forgo a Str belt, get a dex belt and take TWD as a normal feat.

Any suggestions?

EDIT - for PFS

Can we sell back our rings of deflection if we'd like to keep the jingasa?

Edit: oh wait. never mind. thats once ever. Sell em back...

Jingasa of the Unfortune Buyer

Also fun for Shaman, a full progression caster. Fire shaman can cast Shared Sacrafive without worrying about alignment restrictions, then cast fireballs on his enemy porposely catching himself in the blast and choosing to fail the Dex save ;). You can choose Life as you wandering spirit and hex and have life link also.

Ivarrwolfsong wrote:

Milo v3 wrote:

Quote:

The damage is ELECTRICAL

No, the damage is synapses overloading.

Quote:

The damage is electrical damage. It's in the spell description.

I apologize if I'm coming off adversarial, that's not my intention.

the damage is electrical because pathfinder doesn't have a Psychic damage type, so electrical is the next best thing unless you think paizo should introduce more damage types; which is a separate issue.

Mind Thrust, which actually does what people seem to be saying Synapse Overload does, has untyped damage...

Quote:

The damage is ELECTRICAL

No, the damage is synapses overloading.

Quote:

cause damage via psychic shock from being shown some unknowable truth or vision of the unspeakable.

Why does it "have to be from something that's unknowble" rather than being "every scrap of info inside your head at once"? Why is "every scrap of info inside your head at once" less justified?

I'm saying kind of the same thing. The difference is that I'm saying that forcing the target to send signals from his own mind to his own body is not divination. If it made him discover something new or unleashed some hidden know knowledge or the like, it would fit divination. If it filled his head with our knowledge, or we probed his mind to find a weakness, that would fit divination. It doesn't do any of those things.

The damage is electrical damage. It's in the spell description.

I apologize if I'm coming off adversarial, that's not my intention.

Part of the shtick of the Psychic is blasting with divination spells. Mind thrust is also divination.

Mind thrust absolutely makes sense as a divination spell :)

MIND THRUST: You divine the most vulnerable portions of your opponent's mind and overload it with a glut of psychic information.

This attack deals 1d6 points of damage per caster level (maximum 5d6). The target receives a Will save for half damage. This attack has no effect on creatures without an Intelligence score.

Except no information is being sent from outside... It's the CASTER forcing the target's MIND to do something, in this case, to flood the body with the mind's information. You force their mind to do something... Seems like mind control, no?

Nothing says YOU send them information, nothing says YOU are unlocking some horrible vision in their future to shatter their mind with unspeakable information.

You are forcing their mind to do something. You are forcing it to unleash a torrent of information through the BODY. The damage is ELECTRICAL, not some sort of mental trauma. The mind is sending signals through the body causing "all synapses to violently trigger". It's not the mind sending the ankle the square root of area of Cthulhu's backside to the ankle.

I'd love some divination spells that cause damage via psychic shock from being shown some unknowable truth or vision of the unspeakable. This spell doesn't do that though.

I'm fine with it being divination for balance, or for a classes schtick. I'm just saying by flavor and the definitions we are giving, it does not fit in divination.

Milo, That's not divination.

By the way you are reading "information" nearly all mind affecting enchantment spells would be divination as the targets brain is sending "information" throughout his body to follow your commands or suggestions. Heck, all pain spells would be divination as the body sends the pain "information" to the brain.

Like I said, if it uncovered hidden information or flooded his mind with some unspeakable future occurrence or the like, I suppose divination would make sense. Nowhere does it say or even insinuate that you flood his brain with info from YOUR mind or another source. This spell causes the target to overload his synapses with information from his own mind. . That's mind control, not learning forgotten secrets, piercing deceptive magic, finding hidden stuff, etc.

There is no information being delivered.

Synapse Overload: You cause the target's mind to unleash a vast overflowing torrent of information throughout the target's body, causing the target's synapses to violently trigger. The target takes 1d6 points of electrical damage per caster level (maximum 15d6) and is staggered for 1 minute. A successful Fortitude saving throw doesn't reduce the damage, but it negates the staggered effect.

If it said something about forcing "secrets which men should not know", "the combine lore of 10000 scholars", etc, etc, into someone's head causing his brain to melt, I'd be onboard for divination. This spell is basically just "direct damage weaponized" mind control. You are forcing his mind to do something in which the end result is damage.

I feel even more strongly that it should be enchantment the more I look into it.

Btw- All other Synaptic spells that mess with the target's synapses (ex: Synaptic Scramble, Synaptic Pulse) are enchantment spells.

It may just be that they have a "no dd blasts in enchantment" rule.

Not in this case. Would you consider Suggestion, Dominate Person, Command or Visions of Hell to be divination?

Synaptic Overload even says "You cause *the target's mind* to unleash a vast overflowing torrent of information throughout the target's body, causing the target's synapses to violently trigger."

That doesn't really fit "enables you to learn secrets long forgotten, predict the future, find hidden things, and foil deceptive spells." You aren't divining anything, you are just manipulating the target's mind.

I suppose it should be an enchantment spell.

Because it is giving someone information. Way, way too much information.

Hehe. That would only be divination if it was a personal spell

Synapse Overload, a mind affecting direct damage spell, is listed as a Divination spell. Is this an error?

Am I missing something (totally possible) or does this seem like an error?

"Divination

Divination spells enable you to learn secrets long forgotten, predict the future, find hidden things, and foil deceptive spells.

Many divination spells have cone-shaped areas. These move with you and extend in the direction you choose. The cone defines the area that you can sweep each round. If you study the same area for multiple rounds, you can often gain additional information, as noted in the descriptive text for the spell."

alright, thanks all!

In general when items are being made you are supposed to use full casters first as a guidelines to price their creation cost.

Which means if a spell appears on the wizard/sorcerer, cleric/oracle, or druid spell list you should base it off of that.

However, it appears that lead blades only in only normally on the ranger spell list which should mean wands of it would be 1st level, just like the spell for rangers.

If it does appear on the normal spell list (not adjusted by domains or anything) for a full progression casting class you should probably use that instead though.

Its listed as a spell for Gorum worshippers only as a lvl 3 spell (Inner Sea Gods). The above sounds correct to me.

I've had people say yes because they are both Divine, but I have also had people say no because wands are supposed to be created by wiz/cleric/druid by default. This means it would be a level 3 wand.

However, that would mean Rangers wouldn't be able to buy it as a 1st level wand either =P...

Lead Blades is lovely, but I would NEVER spend a 3rd level slot on it.

As a warpriest of Gorum, I add *Lead Blades* to my spell list as a 3rd level spell.

As Lead Blades is a divine spell level 1 for a Ranger, could I buy a divine level 1 Lead Blades wand and use it w/o UMD?

Vine Strike works better on AnCs with multiple attacks.

With lead blades, vine strike and precise strike, even a mediocre pet is hitting pretty decently

Bear 4
1d10+2d6+5
1d8+2d6+5
1d8+2d6+5

That's not even counting Focus, Feats or other Buffs. On a large cat 7 it's wacky

For 2nd level spells, take a look at VINE STRIKE from the Melee Tactics Toolbox.

+1d6 on all natural attacks with a chance to entangle. Mins/round.

It seems perfect for raptors and cats

Some of the feats in the Weapon Master's Handbook are *crazy* good for a reach fighter.

For example:

This: Difficult Swings.

or

This: Spear Dancing Style.

The follow up Spear Dancing feats even allow you to use it as a double weapon at 10 feet :o

I strongly suggest going INSPIRED BLADE swashbuckler at 1. You get Weapon Finesse (rapier) and Weapon Focus (rapier) for free and your Panache will Int bonus + Cha bonus (min 1). Use your last feat for Fencing Grace and you have to hit and damage based off Dex. If your human, take Piranha Strike.

Take Mutagen, Swift action study thingie, and whatever as talents.

9th 20 int / 18 dex...
Cats Grace + Mutagen + Kirin Strike + studied strike + piranha strike + weapon bonus (let's say +1 keen) = +27 damage (none of which is precision) crit'ing on 15-20 for 2d6+54. There are even more tricks to dump in there but this is only requires one short term buff.

With Longarm you threaten out to 10 so Combat Reflexes is really worth it, especially with parry/riposte.

I took traits that switch social skills from Cha to Int. I now have a skill monkey, knowledge monkey and dex based melee character all in one. He's like Batman + Van Helsing + Zorro :).

EDIT- no Piranha Strike and 4 damage actually is precision so: +23 damage (+42 on a crit)

Ivarrwolfsong wrote:

You are correct! I missed that as almost every swashbuckler I've run into has it. There will be a lot of folks headed to Frown Town lol.

Thanks!

Still better than pound town.

/agree

You are correct! I missed that as almost every swashbuckler I've run into has it. There will be a lot of folks headed to Frown Town lol.

Thanks!

I strongly suggest going INSPIRED BLADE swashbuckler at 1. You get Weapon Finesse (rapier) and Weapon Focus (rapier) for free and your Panache will Int bonus + Cha bonus (min 1). Use your last feat for Fencing Grace and you have to hit and damage based off Dex. If your human, take Piranha Strike.

Take Mutagen, Swift action study thingie, and whatever as talents.

9th 20 int / 18 dex...
Cats Grace + Mutagen + Kirin Strike + studied strike + piranha strike + weapon bonus (let's say +1 keen) = +27 damage (none of which is precision) crit'ing on 15-20 for 2d6+54. There are even more tricks to dump in there but this is only requires one short term buff.

With Longarm you threaten out to 10 so Combat Reflexes is really worth it, especially with parry/riposte.

I took traits that switch social skills from Cha to Int. I now have a skill monkey, knowledge monkey and dex based melee character all in one. He's like Batman + Van Helsing + Zorro :).

One could argue that only the special attack granted by Spellstrike suffers the -2 penalty for Spell Combat; the rest are made at full accuracy despite Spell Combat's wording because, so long as they have a charge of a spell in them, they are Spellstrikes and only the 'free' Spellstrike is impeded by Spell Combat. This argument uses the exact same logic as the crit one-- "This" implies to the free attack and not the entire ability"-- and is totally wrong.

I disagree. The description of Spell Combat explains how the other attacks are modified. The description of spellstrike adds a new attack to spell combat and says this new attack is also modified as per spell combat.

The reality is that the bolded "This" statements refer to the melee attack referenced in the original line.

There is nothing written in the spellstrike description that backs this "reality". One has to assume the "this attack" refers to the last attack written about before being referred to as "this attack".

Thanks for the response, and I see where you're coming from. I just don't see the backing in the description.

I'm playing a magus in PFS and don't really have the luxury of RAI vs RAW.

To be honest, I was actually hoping someone would find something I'm missing :)

Thanks for the feedback all who have responded so far.

I do agree that additional touches can be delivered through spell strike. That is clear from the first sentence of the spell strike description as you are still delivering the spell in its entirety over several rounds. That is also addressed by the FAQ.

However, later in then description, it indicates that you can deliver the free touch attack through your weapon as what amounts to a free weapon attack. It then specifically lists several effects that affect *this attack* not just " attacks" or "all attacks" or "these attacks" or "spellstrike attacks", but "this attack".... One of those modifications that affects "this attack" is the spell using the the weapon's crit modifier.

It is actually pretty specific in referring back to the free touch attack's replacement.

Per the description of Spellstrike, it appears that a multi-use/multi-touch spell delivered through the weapon would only benefit from the weapon’s crit range for the one attack that is substituted for the free touch attack granted when casting a touch spell.

Spellstrike (Su): At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack . Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell . If successful, this melee attack deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell. If the magus makes this attack in concert with spell combat, this melee attack takes all the penalties accrued by spell combat melee attacks. This attack uses the weapon's critical range (20, 19–20, or 18–20 and modified by the keen weapon property or similar effects), but the spell effect only deals ×2 damage on a successful critical hit, while the weapon damage uses its own critical modifier.

Basically, Spellstrike does 2 things:
1) Whenever the magus casts a touch spell, he can deliver it through his weapon. A spell such as chill touch or frostbite has multiple touches. As the description of Spellstrike indicates that you can deliver the spell through your weapon, and the spell is a multi-touch affair, it makes sense that you are still delivering the spell on subsequent touches.
2) It allows you to use your weapon to deliver the free touch attack granted when casting a touch spell as a normal melee attack. If you do so this , the spell benefits from the weapon’s crit range, but not multiplier.

So here is an example of an 8th level magus with haste attacking with a +3 rapier:
Using spell combat, Max casts frostbite from 10 feet away from Mr X and Five Foot Steps in.
Attack 1 – Max designates this as his free attack (replacing the normal free touch attack from casting a touch spell) from Spellstrike. He rolls an 18 and then confirms the crit. He does 2d6+6 with his +3 rapier (crit) AND 2d6+16 from frostbite (crit).
Attack 2 – This is Max’s primary attack. He rolls a 19 and crits with his weapon. Since frostbite allows one touch per level, he can also deliver another blast of spell damage. However, because this isn’t the free attack gained from Spellstrike (the “this attack” referred to in the description above), the spell does not benefit from the rapier’s 18-20 crit range. The spell still has a 20 crit range. Max does 2d6+6 with his +3 rapier (crit) AND 1d6+8 from frostbite (not a crit).
Attack 3 – The hasted attack. If Max hits, he will still do weapon+spell damage since he has 6 touches left for frostbite. He rolls a 4 and misses.
Attack 4 – the iterative attack. Max rolls a 20! Both the rapier (crit range: 18-20) and the spell (crit range: 20) crit! He does 2d6+6 with his +3 rapier (crit) AND 2d6+16 from frostbite (crit).

Is this correct or incorrect? Please explain your answer.

Remember...

In order to take Amplified Rage you must have the Rage Class Feature so, as a skald, you need a dip in Bloodrager or Barbarian.

pauljathome wrote:

Numeria is definitely an area that I have NO interest in.

+1. I'll play it, but honestly, robots and the like have no appeal to me at all in this type of genre. This will be a season of holding my nose while I play.

Now, if the whole robot/construct thing isn't overplayed, then cool - I mean, I'm willing to give it a chance. But, at this point, I'm not overly excited about Season 6.

I agree 100%.

Page 18 of the Guide to Organized Play shows me all I need to know.

Not sure if I missed something...

So Slashing Grace allows Dex to Damage for slashing weapons. Is there no way to get Dex to damage on piercing weapons (other than agile enchantment)??

It seems like rapiers would be the weapon where Dex is most relevant:/

Any combatant worth their salt will wear you out with low attacks on your targe side. They can also repeatedly pummel your targe unrelentingly without you being able to retaliate due to range. If it's a center grip, your wrist will give out.

Even in close combat, your at a disadvantage. You're jabbing and swinging with a shield edge in close formation where you can't really wind up.

There is a reason no armies or dueling schools ever recommended this!

However, this is a game with wizards and dragons. I'd disallow it for flavor reasons but it seems well within the realm of Pathfinder "normality"

I've heard people say you can't attack the target before you iajutsu. The way I've seen it played is that you can't attack him once he's been challenged.

A sword saint can perform a lightning quick iaijutsu strike against the target of his challenge to inflict devastating wounds while drawing his sword. After the sword saint has challenged a foe but before he has attacked the target of his challenge , he may choose to use his iaijutsu strike as a full-round action, making an attack roll with his weapon as normal. In order to use this ability, the sword saint’s weapon must be sheathed at the start of his turn.

The reasoning being: the enemy is not the target of your challenge until you challenge him.

Some will say that's BS, others will say it's the exact reading of the rules. Hash it out with your GM.

Even in PFS, I could see it ruled either way.

If he rules in favor of the reasoning above, start with a reach weapon and let them step to you. Once they step in, free action drop the reach weapon, swift challenge and iajutsu him

The Admiral Jose Monkamuck wrote:

Kaiyanwang wrote:

The Admiral Jose Monkamuck wrote:

Of course this leads to the classic power gamer comment "Hey since shields are weapons and I can weild two weapons why don't I just wear 2 shields and get double the AC bonus. Mwahahah." Have a nice big stick ready if someone tries that.

Shield bonus does not stack.

I am aware, but some people will try ANYTHING.

It's quick and easy to shoot down the stacking shield bonuses.

However, what remains is that a TWF fighter can weild two weapons, and if both are the same weapon, then he only has to take weapon focus, weapon specialization, weapon training, etc., once and apply these things to both weapons at the same time. If he uses two different weapons, then he needs to spend more resources getting these feats and class abilities on each of his different weapons.

So, if he wants a shield for the AC, then he might as well use a shield for his weapon too since there is no "off-hand" in Pathfinder (per official ruling) and this way he can save on feats (etc.). That makes perfect sense and is the most economic solution in the rules to allow a TWF fighter to get maximum benefit from the fewest feats and class abilities.

Yep, it's silly. Yep, it annoys the bejeezzes out of me that dual-wielding two heavy shields is the most cost-effective means to achieving TWF superioirity while maintaining the highest AC possible.
But when the guy who will try "ANYTHING" wants to do this, it's pretty much impossible to point at the rules and say "You can't" or even "You shouldn't".

Home Games: simply don't allow it. PFS: You can't force him to change a legal character, but you can not allow him at your table if he plays that character.

Just a reminder...

You can't use Ranger Style Feats in Heavy Armor.

Sorry for the thread necromancy... At least the topic is appropriate :)

Has there been any official word on this?

I tend to disagree with Asthyril on the point that channelling is targeted. If it is, would you be able to hit an invisible creature in your channel burst if you didn't know he was there? What about creatures in darkness?

I think that folks take every use of a word and attach the "official game meaning" to it, even if it doesn't make sense.

Rocky,

I agree about using Kiss with Embrace. However, you can use Kiss on your ally so the power doesn't become redundant