Would it be possible to enchant a Magus' black blade with transformative?
Search Posts
It says each time you cast a summon spell that summons more than one creature, you can add an additional creature. So does this mean if you use a summoning spell that can summon 1d3 of a creature the possible outcomes are 1,3,4, or 2,3,4? I'm assuming the first one, but there is a little voice in the back of my head that keeps saying it doesn't feel right.
Given that Staff-like Wand requires that you both have 11 levels of wizard and you have Craft Staff, which itself requires Caster Level 11th, is there anyway to actually get Staff-like Wand at 11th level? I feel like I'm missing something, because it seems weird to have a minimum requirement no one can actually meet at the stated minimum.
I'm not sure I'm understanding somethings about item creation correctly. Let's say we have a 1st level gnome alchemist who rolled well and has a total of of 18 int. He takes skill focus: Craft (Alchemy), and Obsessive: Craft (Alchemy). So he has a Craft (Alchemy) skill of 1+3+1+4+3+2=14, so he can take 10 for an automatic result of 24. For the sake of my question he has unlimited funds. Ok, he wants to make a 1st level Cure light Wounds potion. Easy peasy he has the formulae and meets all the prereqs, it's a DC 6 skill check to create. Next, he wants to create a 1st level Magic Fang potion. This isn't he knows, in fact it's not even on his formulae list. Potions however are neither spell trigger or spell completion so he should be able to carry on without the missing prereq. The DC to create the potion is now 5 higher for the missing prereq making it DC 11 to create. Still well within his automatic result of 24. So he can do this with no problem? Finally, he decides he needs a powerful potion. The party fighter has been irritating him and our alchemist decides there needs to be a "mislabeling accident". Time to make a potion of Inflict Serious Wounds, this is a spell he can't possibly know as a formulae and isn't high enough level to use even if he could. It would have a minimum CL of 5, +5 for crafting, +5 for not knowing the spell, +5 for not meeting the Caster Level, for a grand total of DC20 to create, which he still beats by taking 10. So assuming he has the 375gp necessary for his nefarious scheme, does this actually work?
I'm starting a game this coming weekend and as it stands it's three players. The other two players are playing an archery based ranger and a transmuter and I'm not expecting anything optimized or ridiculous from them since they're both completely new to Pathfinder and related games. So that leaves me feeling like I need to cover healing and probably melee in some fashion or another. We're starting at first level. My base rolls were 9,10,12,15,15,18. My first thought was to just make a melee based cleric and be done with it, but I'm feeling kind of ambivalent about it. So any suggestions on what might be a good (and interesting to play) third man?
Is there a worse second level for a class than Sorcerer? +1 casting per day of a 1st level spell and +1 known 0th level spell and that's pretty much it. I think every other class gains some kind of class ability. Maybe the bloodline spell should be brought down from 3rd to 2nd. And on an unrelated note, Adding in an extra class skill with the bloodlines to a class that only gets 2+int skill points per level isn't helping much. I'd suggest either granting additional skill points or giving free ranks in the bloodline skill rather than just allowing it be a class skill to be bought.
Simple question. Is idea of backwards compatability holding Pathfinder back from its potential.
I have some thoughts and suggestions on the druid class. When I downloaded the pathfinder rules I was initially very earger to see what had been done with the druid since I had always thought them to be mechanically interesting but had never got around to playing one. To be perfectly frank I was kind of disappointed with what I found. I find myself to be underwhelmed with that most defining of druid abilities the new wildshape, I can't help but think, why bother. I don't think you should look at any major spell or ability for a class and the first thought that pops into you head is why bother. Really it's just a bit boring. That said I recognize that the previous incarnation could be horribly unbalanced as it had carte blanc to cherry pick the best of stats from an every growing list animals. And not only that, but cast spells while doing it. I have to be honest, from a flavor standpoint I never have liked the natural spell feat, but I can understand why it was originally conceived. A druid only has a limited number of shifts per day and with his parties demands for spellcasting it would often be wasted to shift out to cast a much need spell. My suggestion, I believe remedies some of these problems. I propose a) The elimination of the wildshape feat, to me it is somewhat silly, the cause of some balance problems, and as a must have feat a glaring example of bad design. Spellcasting could only be done in the druids natural form without the use of the silent and still spell metamagic feats. b) Wildshape would become an at will ability, elimating one of the reasons for the natural spell feat in the first place. Allowing more use of the classes defining feature. c) Wildshape no longer would function as the beastshape spells. Instead at certain level intervals the druid would be able to select once creature from a preapproved list. For instance at level 4 a druid would pick one creature from the level 4 list. From now on they would be able to shift back and forth at will to that one creature, say at level 7 they could add a second creature from the level 4 list or the level 7 list and then they would be able to shift at will to either of the two creatures known to them. This has the advantages of making druids more unique from casters who could do basically the same thing as them with a spell. Allowing more stastically unique choices to druids allowing them to build toward different ends, and making individual druids more unique from one another. Eliminates the problem with of carte blanc selection since the choices are made before hand and limited to balanced choices at each level. Hopefully my initial thoughts aren't too jumbled here, what do you think?
I like the way in general that Pathfinder has changed the skill system in regards to class/crossclass skills, it seems more elegant. My question is how this skill system interacts with a familiar. Does the familiar benefit from the +3 bonus for the skills that are class skills of their master, or do they lose out in comparison to the 3.5e counterparts in regards to skill bonuses. My thought is that skills that are considered class skill for the master should be considered class skills for the familiar. My suggestion is this. One thing I immediately noticed on making my first Pathfinder character is that the new skill system was a little faster when making a first level character, but due to not having the extra bundle of skill points I felt that I didn't have the chance to represent a more well rounded character background that I could with 3.5e if I felt like it. My suggestion would be to add more skill points to starting charcters, but not at leveling. I.e. A first level sorcerer might have 4+int skill points but at each level would only gain 2+int skill points. I think this might better represent a lifetime of learning up to that point, and then allow them to focus on the skills the find most useful as they level. |