Kando's page

Kando wrote:

When i as a mage use/can use mindcontrol on one villian to kill the others the people maybe will not like me for it but at least they will not instantly kill me or am i forced to be "evil".

When i as a necromancer make the corpse of a dead villian move just long enough to finish the fight. I am an ultimate evil person. And need to be killed on sight.
There are more neutral variants of this but i am choosing this example to show you where there is the big problem with flat out saying undead/moving corpses=evil.

There's a difference between "Is an evil act" and "Makes you the ultimate evil person who needs to be killed on sight."

Yes, it's evil to do so. No, doing so once doesn't make an otherwise good person evil. Yes, circumstances and intent matter, but if you're going to rely heavily on evil means, you'll eventually be evil. But still probably not "kill on sight". Even paladins don't have to kill every thing evil on sight.

And mindcontroling a person is not an "evil act"? Or throwing a fireball in someones face? Seriously....

No amount of handwaved explanations will change that for me. Not in a world where there is magic and mages can create there own dimensions or stop time itself.

I dont know what groups you play in or what types of paladins you adventure with, but mostly because of this evil discriptore, even when the gm has/would houserule this away, even when i am totaly a nice guy, i will burn at the stake as soon as i even make a finger move.

And move objects comes way to late to play a necromancer type.

One of my first groups broke up because of this, now i am not even trying anymore. I just have to deal with that.
As Stupid and illogical as i think it is.

1. As incorperal he needs to stay within your eyesight.

2. And as corporal he will leave behind ectoplasm on the walls. And cant stay "halfway" in walls.

3. If you are so found of that scout ability, i am afraid i will blow your mind, but....
Gloves of Reconnaissance
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/e-g/glove s-of-reconnaissance

These cheap gloves will always be 100% better then your phantom.
I can only say you paid a very high price for a much weaker but, "at will" version of a 2000g item.
Gratulations

If we say something like "This feat has a prerequisite of +7 base attack bonus," but then if we errata that later to "This feat has a prerequisite of +5 base attack bonus" folks seem to be able to understand that the +7 version was an error and that it was never intended to be and that the +5 version is the correct one, despite the fact that we did indeed print the (incorrect) +7 version first.

If we say "There are paladins of Asmodeus" and then we errata it later to "There are no paladins of Asmodeus," how is that any different than fixing an error in rules? Why do some people not give flavor error fixes the same respect they give rules error fixes?

It baffles and depresses and frustrates me.

Paizo's policy for not issuing errata unless we reprint a product combined with almost only reprinting rules-heavy products doesn't help, of course.

Changing numbers will never be the same as changing/adding lore. And most importenly in your example it would be a buff try the same with a nerf and we will see how many will care^^.

Lore is a very diffrent kind of beast. I can only try to explain it from my own perspective, i am normaly a real sucker for lore.

As soon as new lore comes out the world you create becomes bigger and more "fleshed out" it was always there but we only dident kind of now about it. But as soon as as it comes out, its there and it will never realy vanish in our/my mind.

Simply taking that away is like taking away salt from a meal it REALY loses flavor.
Except when nobody or at least a huge amount of people dident liked the "flavor" to begin with.

And this is pushed to the max with such a controversal thing like the undead always evil argument.

About that undead always evil argument.

Personaly in a world where raising undead is very real and not just a horror story to scare children, the world would change with it.

As example it was a the end of shawn of the dead as the people survived they made "use" of the undead, i personaly would not take it that far but it is one of at worst "neutral" possibilitys.
Yes it was a comedy but i thing if zombies would become real and we would survive "as easy" this is one more or less realistic outcome of the modern world with it.
But dont forget its at its early stages, i personaly thing the zombie that pushes the cards indefinitly for the rest of his undead live would take it to far, as one example.

I am not saying that undead would or should become common place or that necromancer will be liked much. But at least in most of the world they would or should not be kill on sight because of it. As with every other mage type he would be capable of very good but also very evil things.

I could come up with more then enough uses of the undead that would at its worst be neutral.
Or to you realy thing that what aragorn did in the lord of the rings with his undead army was evil?
And just because i am a necromancer i am not like a kid in a candy store and have to raise every persons dead belovid just to make it dance, thats just stupid.

That in this world nobody can come up with a spell that makes a corpse move that isnt inherintly absolut evil is ludicrous.
And that there is no order of at least neutral necromancers like in diablo 2 or other fantasy settings is just ludicrous ether.

To be fair it would be a tough thought experiment to thing what would become good or evil in many situation, or sometimes even neutral regarding undead, but taking the easy way out and just saying undead=evil isnt right ether in my opinion.

Fast healer can work with fast healing.

1. There is no seperate entry for "rest healing" and "natural healing" because there are by rule one and the same. There is no other form of natural healing, except for fast healing and that is ruled to be just like natural healing.

As it is right now by (admittetly hidden) but basic rules, it would be just the same if the feat would say.

fast healer
When you regain hit points by natural healing or through magical healing, you recover additional hit points equal to half your Constitution modifier (minimum +1).

So in short

resting=natural healing

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/combat.html#healing
Or
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/basics-ability-scores/glossary under "rest" and
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/conditions#35TOC-Disabled

And fast healing is considert natural healing except when otherwise stated. Or short

fast healing=natural healing
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/rules-for-monsters/universal-monster-rules #TOC-Fast-Healing-Ex-

that means:
fast healing=resting

Sure its it is still debateble if this is intentional or not, but to 100% rule out fast healing. You would need to say that you need actual 8hours of rest or rule out fast healing. Or symply house rule to only work with real resting.

At the moment the eldritch scion is just a band aid for a class many (or at least me) wished for. I realy hope that paizo updates the class/archetype/Book in a timely fashion.
But i am almost certain they added the archetype at the last minute.

My biggest offenders with the archetype are.

-1 Arcane pool point for 2 rounds, all things considered, is silly for a class that can have/use so many swift actions. And most costs points too. So, depending on your bloodline, you will use most if not all your points just to activate your bloodline powers and avoid arcana/feats that costs swift action/points. Or you kind of "avoid" your Bloodline. But then except for seriously waked roleplay reasons there is no point in picking this archtype.

I would like to see a base mystic fokus pool of charisma mod + half class level (or maybe every fourth class lvl) and the option as a swift action to spend a number of arcane pool points(more then one at a time) to get extra rounds, every points spend adds 2 rounds to the pool. Considering you get no other benefits from rage then the activation of your bloodline abilitys and this could includes even the normaly for the bloodrager constant ones, i seriously doubt this is even close to overpowered.

This way MAYBE they could have consider the other way around (rage for arcane) as a high lvl archetype/class feature, but to be fair, it sounds and is overpowered at least if they not nerf the ratio hard.

Yes this COULD double your pool but half of it would only be used for your bloodline and this way you are not out of "ammo" so ridiculous fast.
Just as a reminder the bloodrager gets 4 + con mod + 2 per lvl after 1lvl.

As it playes now, it feels like they replaced arcana with a gutted and bandaided rage. Except for the bloodlines.
As it is now, i would take a weaker version of real bloodrage in place of arcana i dont have the pool to support anyway.

-At the very least consider making this a free action and/or up the rounds. Yes as a free action you will plow through your resources even faster but at least you can/wlll play some kind of a shotgun character...in close range.... with one shot.

-The archetype/book is plaqued with errors.
as examples the posts above mine or these ones:

Bonus Spells
At 7th level, an eldritch scion gains the bonus spell from his bloodrager bloodline that is normally gained at 10th level. He gains the next three bonus spells from his bloodline at 9th, 11th, and 13th levels, respectively

ok understandable but just as example here the bonus spells from draconic bloodline.

Bonus Spells:
Shield (7th), resist energy (10th), fly (13th), fear (16th)

know let the confusion begin!......

.... yea i am not stupid, mostly likely the intend was that you get the later spells sooner, but if you play it like it is written where do you get your 7lvl spell? after the 10lvl spell or is it now the last in line? Or nothing, because there is no 5 spell in any bloodline.

And an other one, are the bloodline abilitys that are constant for the bloodrager also constant for the Eldritch Scion?

And what personaly grinds my gears.

-The magus skillpoints per lvl (2+int mod) is mostly likely balanced around the fact that he is a int caster class to begin with, with this archetype he doesnt need int that much so his skill points should go up to 4 +int mod. I bet, with all the other errors etc. with the book, this was an oversight.
I seriously dont believe they expect me to put points into int, too. The archetype/class is mad enough as it is.

-Carrying on with the Bloodline theme paizo should have strongly considered giving it "eschew materials" as a bonus feat.

-that i need the Spontaneous Metafocus feat to metamagic a spell with spellcombat now.

And no, i dont consider bandaiding serious flaws in the archetype with heavy investment in feats and/or maybe even arcana, good practice.

And yes i hate it and i will play it anyway just because there is no other option then 3rd party for this type of class.

I seriously dont want to sound ungrateful and i apologies if it sounds that way, but i wished for the class/archetype and now that is here it walks on crutches.

On a side note i hate that there is no "good" necromancer possible, i like the white necromancer but its 3rd party.