KnightUrsaBorealis's page

The 11th level ability, it would be cool if it also reduced Arcane Armor feats to an imediate action? That way some orders that use swift actions do not prevent arcane casting as well.

I like this. Not only does it bring in the cavalier to games that may normally exclude knights, but it does so in a way that really fits the theme. Its also great to see an archetype that trades abilities from the base class in a way that even though I'm missing out on certain cavalier abilities, I'm getting something equally awesome.
I do worry that in games where leadership is banned, this archetype may lose some umph. What would you suggest is done instead? I also prefer Pirate's Savvy to scale, but I'm not up to snuff on all the orders so I'm not sure how it compares. Another thing is that sneak attack as 5th level rogue all of the sudden at level eight seems strange. I might swap sneak attack (and have it function as rogue -2 minimum 1) and Pirate's Savvy so as to give Pirate's Savvy more bang and sneak attack feel more natural.
nice job.

Your mythic. If you can't deal with an army of non mythics or at least escape from one...well your fault really at that point.

Have you read the mythic book? it does not turn you into a god. It turns you into the closest way d20 can turn you into Heracles. major difference.

On topic: that seems a bit harsh unless the GM has other plans. In a game I was in once we had to die in order to get to this one castle in the sky in order to furthur plot points. But witjout that it seems like a heavy abuse of the rules. Wish, for both PCs and NPCs, should very risky business. Wish for an army? here is an army of not very loyal demons, should have been more specific. Want infinite power? Heres a device that never runs out of 12 watts of power. Using it to crush a party is very unsportsmanlike.

As the switch hitting ranger in this party, I approve of this advice. Ill also offer some even though Ill give it personally later, I3thlongshot. Elf is even better than it looks, because between that monk, some monsters, and the shear size of my dwarven beard, that -2 con you take shouldnt really be a problem. Alternativly you can always look at the tengu, they have an alternate trait that lets them pick a fee weapons they are always profficient in (super handy because if I remember right its based on int). They dont have adjustments in all the right places, but their racial abilities are nice and will grant you a decent will save with that +2 wisdom. Also, we dont do point buy, and we rolled heroic, so Id focus on Int, dex, con, then maybe wisdom. Str and cha are sadly not for you.

On last thing, your level nine, alchemists have immunity to poison in one level; and you currently have a +6 to resist poison. Youre good on poison.

Elegantly put Phasics. +1

And you are being a different kind of 'that guy;' the one who is being rude about their own opinion. I personally agree, being munchkin-y or full of cheese isn't cool. However, I'd hardly lable this as cheese. Please stop repeating the same thing over and over, the OP did not ask for broken records.

back on topic:

Honestly probably not. Its a great curse to go with a kitsune fluff wise though, but I suspect that the wolf snout would be in all forms. I bet that you could make a good case the spell failure to be negated in your 'natural' form, but that's purely up to the GM (smores are good, offer to take a feat for it ;D) and not RAW. Cool idea though.

Straw man.....you keep using that word....and I do not think it means what you think it means.

so for some clarification:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

When someone points out that your argument is invalid, and uses relevant material, such as pointing out that there are no mechanical rules for appearance, they are not using a straw man. They are providing a specific example as to how you are incorrect, because your argument included being upset about the lack of mechanical benefits in an area where d20 does not give mechanical benefits. This is a straw man:

Your argument about spellcasters is invalid because on the sorcerer's spell section it says they may cast spells from other spell lists if they have the knowledge.

This statement clearly is not what you are arguing about and uses a specific example not related to your argument. Disguise checks and sense motive are d20's way of calling Jack Sparrow's bluff. In this way, they are related to your argument about the appearance of your character and how others perceive them.
If this upsets you, Scion and World of Darkness are excellent at providing mechanical appearance rules, even having a stat called 'appearance.' But as pathfinder is d20 not d10, this does not apply.

Now that this mix-up is out of the way, I (like everyone else who has posted here) think that the rule could use some clarification. However, this rule seems pretty clear. You can change form, and without special magic or circumstances, most people will not connect the innocent LG elf with the murdering orc. UNLESS, they witnessed the transformation, have True Seeing, use detect thoughts and 'witness' the CE orc remembering the transformation, ect. These are very clear mechanical benefits.

This class is to make Mr. Hyde, and it is effective at that. No where in the source material is Mr. Hyde immune to witnesses of Jekyll's transformation, nor would he have been immune to scrying attempts to discover his true nature. If humans of the setting had been able to read minds, they would have discovered quite quickly that Dr. Jekyll is to blame, because Hyde thought about it.

No, I'm inclined to agree with Lynx on this. Only possibly take it a step further. A while back I introduced true sorcery to my players and after we fixed the errors in the book so that it was more balanced, they won't go back. Spells per day is so rigid and inflexible; it's rather annoying. You can't make creepy winds that raise the dead or earthquakes that spit tiny water elementals out with spell slots. I was hoping words of power might be something like that, but so far I have never been disappointed with things in the pathfinder series, and they do seem to give some flexibility to the caster.

One of the things I noticed, and it seemed a bit off to me, was that the words of power still require somatic and material components. This may be for balance purposes and I totally understand on the one hand, but on the other, they are words, and they way they are described made me think more of a, "I say the word and it happens" (or not)and less of the show that a wizard would normally make when he casts. Not saying it should be verbal component only, more curious as to why not? any thoughts?