Joana's page

Thanks.

Rogue 10/Monk 2 walks up to wizard, stuns him with Stunning Fist. Next round, wizard is killed with Dastardly Finish (APG feat), because he's still stunned until the rogue/monk finishes his first attack. Is that correct?

The fact that the spending limit will change the way how "good" the classes are in relation to one another is hardly limited to animal companions!

With a low limit, classes like monks and bards are in trouble - they need lots of attributes in order to pull off everything their class gives them, meaning they either need to spread their limited resources thin or ignore some of the class's aspects. A fighter, on the other hand, can still work reasonably well, as he only really needs two, maybe three, attributes, and arcanists are the same.

But if you move to a more generous method of assigning attribute values, some classes have an easier time unfolding their wings.

Good point, there are other things that don't work out so well. The monk in a low point buy campaign struggles more than other classes. That doesn't invalidate my point though. As it's not possible to discuss and fix everything at once, can we focus on one thing at a time? Thanks.

But by that same logic, ALL character class abilities should scale with point buy.

Most of them do because the bonuses from the character's ability scores stack with them and so improve them. Spells are harder to save against, melee combatants hit more often, do more damage, or have longer lasting power (AC and hit points), etc...

Natural bond is a specific druid class power. Weapon Training would be a specific Fighter class power. Should the Weapon Training abilities increase in a high point buy campaign? No

Weapon Training abilities already increase in effectiveness because the ability score improvements all stack with it and make it more powerful and stay effective longer.

Higher starting points for stats are their OWN reward and are, in and of themselves, scaling up the character. There should be 0 reason they alter class abilites, wether druid, cleric, wizard, ranger or any other.

It would be unfair if the druids and rangers got free class ability boost along with their better stats and no one else does.

And remember, unilateral inflation DOES NOT EQUAL GAME BALANCE.

Most character class abilities benefit and stack with ability bonuses except for the animal companion, which doesn't benefit if any of my stats increase. Extra spell buffs? Just the idea that I have to spend them on the animal companion, whereas the cleric, sorcerer and wizard don't have to, is proof that the animal companion doesn't scale.

Edit: I am playing a druid, in CoT, and the animal companion is not suffering at all.

If the animal companion is appropriately powerful for a 25 point build campaign, then it's too powerful for a 10 point buy one and will dominate the party, I would think. It follows that animal companions should have weaker stats in a 10 or 15 point buy campaign. I see the animal companion more as a part of the druid character itself that has been separated, leaving the druid alone weaker. Think Adam, rib and Eve, metaphorically speaking. It would make sense to me that the stats of the companion should scale with the point buy in the campaign, because he's part of the druid (or ranger).

There are no epic pathfinder rules, and 3.5 animal companions don't work like pathfinder ones.

But there are "Epic Fantasy" Pathfinder campaigns with 25 points to buy stats, and that's what I'm talking about in comparison to low, standard and high (respectively 10, 15 and 20 points). My question has nothing to do with 3.5, sorry about the ambiguous use of "epic".

How come animal companions don't have better stats in an epic campaign than in a standard point buy campaign? Shouldn't animal companion stats vary depending on the point buy value?

...

However, the beard devil would NOT lose the following abilities, as they are NOT dependant on his form, (except for Darvision and See in Darkness if his new form would not have any eyes) and thus could still be used while employing, say, Giant Form:

Darkvision (Ex)

See in Darkness (Su)

Resistance (Ex)

Damage Reduction (Ex or Su)
...

Thanks, but I'd trust your answer more if you didn't just directly contradict the rules about darkvision. Either that or the rules are remarkably ambiguous. The way it's written, I read them to mean that darkvision and scent depend on your form so you automatically lose them when wild shaping. Although I guess they could be read as you say. Gahh. The Pathfinder rulebook is driving me nuts.

Does anyone else think that animal companions are less attractive in epic campaigns than others with fewer build points, and therefore the classes that have them don't scale up? I'm obviously thinking of the animal companion as a "shard" of the character. The power relationship between characters and animal companions gets skewed.

Would Bless affect a combat maneuver that takes the place of an attack?

The spell Bless reads: pg249 PFRPG

"Bless fills your allies with courage. Each ally gains a +1 morale bonus on attack rolls and on saving throws against fear effects."

When making a combat maneuver that takes the place of an attack would Bless affect that roll?
The first sentence of Trip reads: pg:201 PFRPG

"You can attempt to trip your opponent in place of a melee attack."

Our group pondered it for a few minutes but never came to a definite conclusion. What do you guys think?

It applies (PF core rulebook):

"While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision), as well as any natural attacks and movement types possessed by your original form. You also lose any class features that depend upon form, but those that allow you to add features (such as sorcerers that can grow claws) still function. While most of these should be obvious, the GM is the final arbiter of what abilities depend on form and are lost when a new form is assumed. Your new form might restore a number of these abilities if they are possessed by the new form."

I'm starting to feel really dense. I don't get it.

1. It states under polymorph in the spell section that all racial bonuses are lost while polymorphed.

2. Yes.

I'm sorry, I can't find the text you're talking about for #1. I also did a word search for "racial" in the pdf. The section for polymorph on p. 212-213 (Chapter 9, magic) only mentions the loss of armor bonuses in the context of items, which aren't the same as natural armor anyway.

"Each polymorph spell allows you to assume the form of
a creature of a specific type, granting you a number of
bonuses to your ability scores and a bonus to your natural
armor. " -- says bonus only.

I can't find anything about losing racial natural armor, would you be so kind as to quote it or explain your statement?
Thanks.

My character has racial natural armor (not a bonus from a magic item).

1. Is that lost when using wild shape? I'd think so, but the mechanics as described for the spell and the polymorph section suggest that it's kept.

2. If I have the feat improved natural armor, does it apply to my new form? I'm confused on that one, I'd like to think it does; it would be fair anyway.