Search Posts
I was searching through the discussions for this as I am building an inquisitor. Do people love this spell? I want the effect but it seems like a low will save for a tank-ey dude and not affected by judgments. I haven't seen it used much, but to me the answer is going to depend on 3 things. #1 How squishy are the other people standing in melee (to me the word Threaten in the spell description is a rule. You do not threaten with any ranged attacks and spells other than touch). A fighter probably has similar AC to the inquisitor and more hit points. Rogues and wizards/clerics specializing in touch spells often need the help. It's great for the sword and board inquisitor that flanks with a rogue, terrible for the bow inquisitor that has an enlarged barbarian in the party. #2 How long are you going to be stuck with it? For a PFS or other character with about a 10 level career it will probably be good for the majority. If you go much past 8 though creatures are going to have gained at least a +4 against the save compared to level 1 also immunity to mind-affects gets more common and you'll want to trade it out. #3 Is related to #2. If your campaign is going to have a lot of Vermin, Undead or other things that are immune to mind-affects its going to be terrible.
Flame Strike might do "Divine Damage" or it could be untyped damage, the text is unclear about the type, but clear that it cannot be resisted. Spoiler: Half the damage is fire damage, but the other half results directly from divine power and is therefore not subject to being reduced by resistance to fire-based attacks.
There is a feat which gives a 5 foot step as an immediate, but it wouldn't work for your idea. Step Up Spoiler:
Step Up (Combat) You can close the distance when a foe tries to move away. Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +1. Benefit: Whenever an adjacent foe attempts to take a 5-foot step away from you, you may also make a 5-foot step as an immediate action so long as you end up adjacent to the foe that triggered this ability. If you take this step, you cannot take a 5-foot step during your next turn. If you take an action to move during your next turn, subtract 5 feet from your total movement.
Honestly I think that mobility as part of the requirements for Spring Attack was intended like this. You both provoke (at least if you've got a reach weapon), but because of your dodge bonus he's less likely to hit you. I think there are other ways to boost your AC against AoOs (and to hit with AoOs), at the very least some kind of trait bonus. On further reflection if you are fast enough, and use Pushing Assault when they provoke against you Spoiler:
Pushing Assault (Combat)
A strike made with a two-handed weapon can push a similar sized opponent backward. Prerequisites: Str 15, Power Attack, base attack bonus +1. Benefit: When you hit a creature your size or smaller with a two-handed weapon attack modified by the Power Attack feat, you can choose to push the target 5 feet directly away from you instead of dealing the extra damage from Power Attack. If you score a critical hit, you can instead push the target 10 feet directly away from you. This movement does not provoke attacks of opportunities, and the target must end this move in a safe space it can stand in. You choose which effect to apply after the attack roll has been made, but before the damage is rolled. you may be able to play keep away similarly to how you'd like to play.
I'm no expert on retraining rules but wouldn't it be better to go Rogue X->Holder X-1, Rogue 1->Holder X-1, Unchained Rogue 1->Unchained Rogue X More complicated but instead of twice your levels in retraining it would be twice your levels minus one, and would not require you to multiclass rogue+unchained rogue at the same time.
I have always assumed that firearms (and thus the tech firearms from the tech guide) were meant to break that rule. Wielding a pistol is different from a light crossbow and wielding a rifle is very different from wielding a longbow. I think the tech guide may have benefited from reprinting some of the firearm rules which I assume apply but see no direct proof.
Am I the only one in this thread who thinks that gold as a separate XP track is a good thingProbably not but you won't count me among them. Gold = Power complicates the balance of the game, it's FAR easier to create a functionally balanced game when Gear isn't Power unless it's an actual part of the Character's abilities rather than something they found or bought. I'm very curious how you see the balance of the game being negatively affected by gold. To me gold giving access to magic items levels the playing field between classes quite a bit and also allows for challenges where you need the ability to cast certain spells, so I see it as a positive for balance. WBL is admittedly one more thing to track, but can be eyeballed pretty easy. I do have to acknowledge on the negative side that spending your gold wisely is, from what I've seen, one of the later stages of learning how to play, but any game complicated enough to be fun has a learning curve. Leveling up in most classes means a couple choices a level, sometimes pretty obvious choices too. Choosing whether to upgrade your cloak or your weapon or get some fancy wondrous item is way more interesting than leveling.Fault of the system. Were it better designed leveling up would be far more flexible rather than following a predetermined path set by a single class. At that point are you still playing D&D though? Wealth in a different game should follow a different system, we're in complete agreement there.
Am I the only one in this thread who thinks that gold as a separate XP track is a good thing and players shouldn't be penalized for accumulating and spending it? Leveling up in most classes means a couple choices a level, sometimes pretty obvious choices too. Choosing whether to upgrade your cloak or your weapon or get some fancy wondrous item is way more interesting than leveling. The unchained rules for scaling bonuses are even better because they free up the big 6 slots for interesting choices. (I've been using limited custom crafting for a similar effect.) The economy, weights and conversion of coinage and prices of items are terribly unrealistic, but they were only ever meant to restrict player access to items of excessive power. Baseline the game allows players to convert their wealth into lightweight trade goods of enormous cost (an example is wish diamonds) and back again with no loss. We've always played it that as long as you have a few pounds of encumbrance or extra-dimensional space you're covered for carrying your savings because bookkeeping that gets tedious fast. Hauling out a dragons horde can be interesting though.
I don't personally think there is anything in the paladin code that would prevent the killing of evil outsiders. A particular paladin may wish to redeem or capture them, but that would be more personal choice. The last paladin I played had a run-in with demons as part of his backstory and thus viewed the destruction of evil outsiders as both a good act and his primary mission as a paladin (also it was personal, but there's nothing evil about enjoying your job). Good-aligned evil outsiders are interesting concepts but also something I mistrust as a kind of trap. The creation of an evil outsider is the refinement and purification of evil souls and conversion of such a creature would be very antithesis to it's nature (probably a process with a high likelihood of self-destruction). Devils, demons and the like may be intelligent but unlike the PC races they don't get a choice of alignment and this is intended. It is their very nature to be and to do evil and to not do so would be like a human living without a heartbeat. How often do you look at someone who is demonstrably alive and wonder "Is their heart beating?" That is how strange it would be for a PC to wonder about the alignment of an evil outsider. As you may have caught on I actually view evil outsiders to be more clear cut evil than most evil creatures. Tornadoes can cause great destruction, ending the lives of many innocents, but the tornado is not evil, so why is a zombie? The person who made the zombie and let it loose is evil, but the zombie itself is as mindless and destructive as a natural disaster. For these reasons good evil outsiders should be used sparingly if at all. Also remember that if your Good Evil Outsider sees a paladin talking is a free action which can be preformed not on their turn. A Good Evil Outsider should try to surrender (and the paladin gets a sense motive).
Has anyone noticed how many of the encumbrance boosting options aren't legal in Core? No masterwork backpacks, ant haul, muleback cords... Makes me wish handy haversacks were always available (or fame->price was more fine-grained) I have a core Ranger with 14 strength. 58 lbs for light disappears after armor, a couple weapons and a small number of handy items (I have no room for silk rope). The good news is that I have several cheap items I can dump if I ever need to carry anything beyond my kit. I track encumbrance for myself very carefully because I consider movement speed to be one of the most important combat abilities for all characters. Being in the right/wrong square can make a huge difference. Unfortunately this conflicts with my desire to carry some potentially useful/roleplay items on many of my characters at least until I can afford that haversack.
If I knew ahead of time that the Wizard was coming I would roll his initiative even though he doesn't know he's teleporting into combat. Initiative is an artificial thing designed to make a turn based game possible. If something else happened that triggered the wizard to teleport back at a specific initiative count (maybe someone rang his magic doorbell?) I would rule that the Wizard was delaying until that initiative count. In either case I would allow the wizard to move after his teleport, who says "I'm going to teleport home now, but first I will move 30' that way"? This also prevent him from being flat-footed.
By RAW I don't think a creature in manacles even incurs an arcane spell failure chance. Personally manacles would make it impossible to preform some tasks (eg wield two weapons) but otherwise don't hamper a creature much. If you want to hinder a creature you need to secure the manacles to something, like a wall. This would prevent movement, and could incur spell failure or make all somatic spells fail (depending on how exactly they are bound) Fetters aren't manacles at all, they go on your ankles and as a result slow your movement.
I think the simplest and most consistent ruling is that a +2 Defending weapon with +3 from GMW acts in all ways as a +3 Defending weapon except those excluded by the spell description (does not overcome DR other than magic). This is in the territory of would need to be explicit that it can work otherwise it does not.
I guess I don't consider cheese to be be fighting words just a view point that sometimes people like to read in the most favorable way for their concept without checking their own confirmation bias first. IE if a player wants something to be true they can very easily read a rule differently than if they came into it from a more neutral stance. I'm referring less to the OP (who asked a legitimate question about size categories of weapons), than some later posts that talk about weapon familiarity when the OP did not. Upon further review those may have been tongue-in-cheek, my apologies. As a GM if you wanted a racial heritage weapon which matches Aldori-Dueling, Estoc, or Sawback Saber but didn't qualify for racial heritage I wouldn't have a problem with it. At that point its a sword with a story not a mechanical advantage.
I homebrewed my own Small (light) and Medium (one-handed) versions for an archetype of mine. Elven High Guard. And it has "Elven" in the name for the strict pupose of elves. The Elven War Knife is like unto Legolas's white knives, and the elven war blade is just a one-handed version of the elven curved blade. I really don't know why they never had these versions in the first place, sinceit allows some Dex combatant versatility with elves, which is what elves prefer, vs Strength.You must not have seen the degrees of consternation that the idea of effective Dexterity based melee raises around here. Depends on your definition of effective. A lot of Dex to Damage-ers are attempting to do as much (or more) damage using TWF as a 2h weapon with faster movement, higher AC and reflex saves, better skills all while adding Strength as an additional dump stat. Cheese. Swashbuckler with its in-baked limitations is a Dex to Damage option that I'm very glad they added because it allows me to point to a balanced option for that type of fighter. That said, do elves, half-elves (and I think there is a way to get racial weapon proficiencies as a human) need the boost or should they consider taking the martial weapon that does what you want and you can reskin it however you like? Mostly this thread seems like a cheesy way to get an exotic weapon (read mechanically awesome not RP awesome) on a class with limited weapon proficiencies. If you just want RP awesome I don't think any GM will stop you.
Came to thread very excited by the potential of the title and was disappointed. On topic I'd very much like to see such a software, given that we can't accurately predict today's weather predicting climate and geology seems a bit of a stretch. There are guidelines of course, for climate setup prevailing winds based on Coriolis Effect, if the wind comes off an ocean/body of water the area is wet, if wind hits mountains it dumps all rain (mountains often have deserts in their shadow). Temperatures relate to latitude. For continents, mountains and volcanoes you could build your own idea of tectonic plates but I not sure if science understands how those came into being very well and I certainly don't.
GM Fiat. I would rule that if you spent the actions tying someone up (pinning is not tying up, pinning is a prerequisite) with the intent to render them helpless, then they are helpless. Just succeeded at a pin check, not helpless. I know of no rule that prevents a medium creature from "pinning" a gargantuan dragon other than low percentage. Exactly how do I, a human, render a multi-ton dragon helpless via grappling? The loss of Coup de Grace attempts in this game does not make me sad.
Its far worse than that the NPC in question has Weapon Specialization and is doing too little damage no matter how you calculate it. Bits of relevant stat block follow
Spoiler:
Strength 12 BAB +15 Melee: +1 shock chainsaw +16/+11/+6 (3d6+5/18–20 plus 1d6 electricity), +1 chainsaw +16/+11 (3d6+4/18–20) Special Attacks: Weapon Training (heavy blades +3) Feats: Greater Weapon Focus (chainsaw), Improved Two-Weapon Fighting,
Which the attack bonus calculates out correctly with penalties at -4/-4 but also seems to have lost 2 damage for MH and OH weapons. As the GM I would rule that RAI is 1.5x Str per iterative (so 1.5 when two handing or 1 mainhand and .5 offhand) boosted to 2x Str with Double Slice and some archetypes. I know this isn't what the OP wants and with the -4 penalties is strictly inferior but some options are strictly inferior.
You may not like these better than your current options but I'll chip in my 2cp. Ruled creatures obey the wielder as if she were their absolute sovereign. Still, if the wielder gives a command that is contrary to the nature of the creatures commanded, the magic is broken. A good many creatures are secretive and greedy so interrogation and taking their stuff is contrary to their nature and ends the effect. Additionally I would argue that not all societies are organized in such a way that obedience would mean much. Pack and herd animals might obey a sovereign but vermin and solitary predators would not. If that's not enough of a nerf in my home game I think we'd rule based on the underlying spell of Mass Charm Monster. It is a Mind-Affecting Charm that only works on living creatures. There are a lot of monsters immune to that. Undead, constructs, vermin and anything under a Protection from X all have immunity I think. Further the FAQ for charm spells makes it clear that stealing their stuff would be against the nature of almost any creature.
Like many have said it depends somewhat on your role in the party and also on what your saves look like. SR on an Sorc/Wiz/Witch who only has a good will save and no wisdom to back it up can be quite useful. SR is mostly detrimental to monks in my opinion. Also useful in parties for the only spellcaster (yes they do exist) or that split up and solo adventure sometimes (maybe these exist?). I think low SR (5+lvl type) is often at least neutral and sometimes a boon. There are plenty of high CR creatures that have fewer caster levels than hit die (dragons and monsters + class levels come to mind), and your party members can often pierce that pretty easy. Doesn't often work for the BBEG but can be useful against his minions.
As long as we're thread necro-ing... We've been playing with a Warpriest in the WotR AP (not mine). I'm not sure its a terribly well built Warpriest, but it did make me look over some potential Warpriest builds. I like the bonus feats, those alone make it distinct from a Cleric and give you a lot of options for playstyle (Warpriest is the only way I would ever sword and board and one of the few ways I would TWF, never ever going to play a Fighter). I like the not being alignment restricted and better spellcasting compared to a Paladin. I admit that they're a little too close to inquisitors but spontaneous vs prepared is enough of a distinction that I feel the Warpriest is a useful addition to the designspace. I think a Warpriest is a solid Tier 3 and makes an excellent addition to any campaign that excludes Tier 1 classes, and can play well inside a campaign with Tier 1s (unlike many martials who often feel superfluous at those tables). So Warpriest doesn't need fixing in my opinion, even if Inquisitor might be a little better in combat prepared casting and bonus combat feats makes the Warpriest tempting. What would I tweak? Have blessings add spells to the spell list, give 1 spell for every level of casting but you have to choose only 1 spell from your 2 blessings. It would make blessings feel more fun and also allow them a chance to even out the power of various blessings. |
