Lo&beholder's page

Bare with me here, if you look at monks master of many styles archetype it says you qualify for styles in the chain of that style so long as you have the first one.

That being said, when you read the fighter unarmed archetype, what i take away from reading that is that you don't even need the first step in the style, just grab crane riposte and sit on it until you get crane style 2nd level then crane wing 5th level.
Ta Da! Defensive Fighting is -1 to attack with a +4 dodge bonus to AC.

All without monk dipping.

Hint: read the last paragraph in acrobatics.
Plus You already have to pick up Dodge for feat so no wasted mojo.

As far as that goes I do recommend taking monk to the 4th level for the "DODGE Concept" because if you read the ki pool section of the monk you can spend 1 ki point as a swift action for either +4 Dodge to AC for the round or 20ft of extra movement in the round. If you stop at level 4 the trade off is one less BAB and alignment restrictions.
Also if you go to 4th level you can tack on the Qingong (drop slow fall for bark skin) /OR/ Monk of the Sacred Mountain (drop evasion for Toughness and +1 nat armor then drop slow fall for being Trip immune).
You could take either archetype and still take MoMS arche to grab all the crane style feats by 2nd level.

Don't be fooled by the Martial Artist though to escape the alignment restriction cause that kills the ki pool.

good luck

Lo&beholder wrote:

Since RAW says you cant autofail on a skill roll it would have to be in orders of magnitude compared to the opposing roll...so....since the general rule is fail/success in increments of 5 from the opposed roll once you hit negative numbers you could house rule for increments of 3 from the opposed roll and make it be that horrible.

Hmmm. Can you point me to the rules you quoted? I'm curious.

On page 180 saving throws it states specifically it states for the auto one way or the other. If you read the skills section, it never states that there is an auto success or failure anything which means you could roll a one and if your bonus still exceeds the DC you still make it. You technically can auto fail or success "using skill" but not "rolling a skill", explaination being you choose to use stealth by walking over a sleeping dragons face, but the gm could choose to say at that point no need to roll the dragon wakes up, oh smaug the stupendous. cheers blackstorm

*edit* also on pg. 178 it states specifically the auto is for attacks which just reinforces that the rules will state it for purpose of "yep, that's a thing".

Since RAW says you cant autofail on a skill roll it would have to be in orders of magnitude compared to the opposing roll...so....since the general rule is fail/success in increments of 5 from the opposed roll once you hit negative numbers you could house rule for increments of 3 from the opposed roll and make it be that horrible. You lied so bad your eyeball fell out of your face or the ghost of Lincoln appears and slaps you then fades away with a stern look.

Yeesh.

Okay Samas. Let me first qualify that this thread is not an attempt to besmirch the name of fighter or wizard and that i am not a proponent or opponent of banning wizard or fighter. this is all hypothetical.

Lo&beholder wrote:

Would say the samurai and cavalier be used far more often?

Yes, but only in the sense that players who want to play "Dude with a sword" wouldn't have any other choice. It doesn't actually improve either class in any way.

The question to stay on topic is not a matter of improvement but one of utility. Can u make a samurai from fighter, if the answer is yes then why not have a fighter archetype called samurai? But if you eliminate the fighter, which can closely mimic a samurai(especially if given the right archetype), the "Samurai" and all the archetypes assigned to a samurai class become more, i wanna say legitimate or prominent, and less redundant flavor.

Quote:

Would a fighter archetype exist for each class?

So you'd be taking out Fighter, than putting him back? Then what the hell was the point of taking him out in the first place?

Well let's see. If you started in 3.0 or 3.5 like i did, then the addition of weapon/armor training was awesome, but for a long time fighter was only a "feat" prostitute. You could hypothetically chop the fighter into two arch benefits packages, extra feats or weapon/armor training. This would facilitate eliminating the fighter and would result in two new archetypes for the more combat focused classes. No need for fighter dipping.

Quote:

Same with the wizard.

There is no 0-20 level necromancer by name because your supposed to be able to build one out a wizard.

...And?

Again, there's no point to your question. "Necromancer" already exists as a part of Wizardry.

Yeesh again. It was a leading observation and segue way into moving on to discussing wizard, but you are right that maybe i should have elaborated more on the wizard instead of assuming that the fighter questions could be translated to wizard.

So I'll elaborate.

3.5 had Heroes of Horror which had a 0-20 lvl. class that slowly transformed one into a lich and the class abilities alone were good, not great for a necromancer, but the class was called Necromancer if memory serves me right. Now if Necromancer were made today would you rejoice, or troll it mercilessly, especially if it carried its own archetypes?
Well let's see. If you started in 3.0 or 3.5 like i did, then the wizard was awesome and for a long time the wizard was the definition of wizardry archtypes over bland sorcerers any day. You can hypothetically chop the wizard into two arch benefits packages, (extra feats and familiars) or schools of magic. This would facilitate eliminating the wizard and would result in two new archetypes for the more magic focused classes. No need for wizard dipping.

Quote:

It's not that they are not fun, should be banned, or are broken.

It's that they are so generalized.

This is why the game has these wonderful things called "Archetypes" that specifically specialize base classes in different ways. I suggest you take a look at the Advanced Players' Guide, Ultimate Combat, Ultimate Magic, and Advanced Race Guide, for examples.

That's just condescending.

Quote:

The ONLY thing that separates them from other classes are class abilities.

So... would other classes shine more without the fighter or wizard classes?
Would it allow for a wider array of more unique and specialized 0-20 level classes?

No. Because Class abilities are the ONLY thing that separates ALL the classes from each other. They are what make the classes the classes. What is a Barbarian without Rage? What is a Sorcerer without Bloodlines (D&D 3.5, but you get the idea)? What is an Alchemist without Bombs and Extracts?

First you say no and you should explain why, but then you go on to agree with my statement and don't answer the next question, but I'll take the alchemist as answer to the last question. kudos!

Quote:

Because without class abilities being the separating factor, the fighter and wizard, make other classes redundant, but not necessarily obsolete.

It seems to me fighter and wizard were created to cut down on the over abundance of 0-20 lvl. classes being born, and maybe that was the case for 3.5, but its hard to find official stamped play tested 0-20 lvl. classes and only

...

This reply got cut off here so I'll just submit this and grab the rest.

**edit** Nevermind i'll leave it at that, it seems reply grouped my responses in the same colors as yours.

It's actually that this thread doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense. It's confusion.

Just a good old pondering of what if you took away fighter.

Would say the samurai and cavalier be used far more often?

Would a fighter archetype exist for each class?

Same with the wizard.
There is no 0-20 level necromancer by name because your supposed to be able to build one out a wizard.

It's not that they are not fun, should be banned, or are broken.
It's that they are so generalized.
The ONLY thing that separates them from other classes are class abilities.
So... would other classes shine more without the fighter or wizard classes?
Would it allow for a wider array of more unique and specialized 0-20 level classes?

Because without class abilities being the separating factor, the fighter and wizard, make other classes redundant, but not necessarily obsolete.

It seems to me fighter and wizard were created to cut down on the over abundance of 0-20 lvl. classes being born, and maybe that was the case for 3.5, but its hard to find official stamped play tested 0-20 lvl. classes and only now, pause for breath, now are we seeing another set of 0-20 lvls. that are being play tested to accomplish not making the other classes redundant or obsolete.

I hope this lifts some of the confusion for you.

Always wanted to try Orc Urban Barb/Orc bloodline Sorcerer that would work right?

*OOWW* and a goblin mystic master qingong monk and gunslinger

GM Elton wrote:

Banning the wizard and fighter will not make any sense.

Perhaps not to you GM Elton, but possibly to others. I'd be fine without either, but the loss of Fighters would rankle.

I've never seen some people get so upset by hypothetical, right. So much for small talk and good conversation.

zergtitan wrote:

Ok, Just for the sake of clarification why can't the Arcainist be a wisdom based caster?

And I would like an answer other then,

1.Just because.
2.There has never been a wisdom based arcane caster and never will.
3.I don't like it.

I would like actual answer like you would have on a college paper (not in length) by supporting your case with evidence.

P.S. On an additional note, why shouldn't a divine caster use Intelligence? Same procedure as above.

Lets not get into demands. Thats not how this works. We like to keep some aspects of our stat uses "silo'd" to maintain a certain level of consistency. This is why there is no Wis based arcane caster and why there is no Int based divine caster. At the moment, this is not something we are looking at changing. Charisma is the ground where the two casting camps meet, which is fine as that stat can take a bit of the load without becoming too unbalanced.

As an aside, I am hoping to get the revision out this week.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

bump

zergtitan wrote:

Ok, Just for the sake of clarification why can't the Arcainist be a wisdom based caster?

And I would like an answer other then,

1.Just because.
2.There has never been a wisdom based arcane caster and never will.
3.I don't like it.

I would like actual answer like you would have on a college paper (not in length) by supporting your case with evidence.

P.S. On an additional note, why shouldn't a divine caster use Intelligence? Same procedure as above.

You know what? I'm going to try and answer this. The obvious answer is in games mechanics terms: it makes more sense to keep one ability for arcane, one for divine, and one for both. This keeps Mystic Theurge builds (as well as most arcane divine builds outside of oracle/sorcerer) in check. So the argument here must be from a fluff stand point.

Arcane magic is a power source that flows throughout the multi-verse in an uncontrolled manner. Those seeking to use this power have to master complex techniques that require a great deal of knowledge and practice to accomplish or a massively powerful ego to wrest control of the supernatural and bend it to your will. Thus Intelligence and Charisma are the stats used to access this power.

Divine magic comes directly from the gods or from a deep understanding of philosophical power. No complex rituals and no actual knowledge is required; just faith and understanding of the principles one believes in. The deity and it's servants deal with the practical details. Charismatic oracles can draw upon this power without comprehension, becoming the tools of the divine without needing that great understanding. Their strong sense of self and their faith in the calling draw the power necessary for divine magic. Thus Wisdom and Charisma are the stats used to access the divine.

So long as magic is divided between arcane and divine,this system works fairly well, IMHO. :)

That always rubbed me the wrong way. It always felt like they should have arcane int, yeah. but divines should work off of charisma and they both share wisdom.

I think you forget about the Empyreal bloodline.
Look, see, wisdom arcane casting.
Not so far fetched.
Heck you got the Sage bloodline Int on Int and no big time munchkinining there.
Munchkinish...Munchkian....Munchkinian...

If you have a class that allows "All Options"

all other options become redundant.

*BOOM*

Mind blown.

Since you've already been taken to task for your spelling and grammar:

Does disqualifying the person who should win the gold metal in a race make the other contestants better?

The problem you're probably trying to address isn't wizards specifically, it is spell casting classes in general, divine and arcane alike. And even that is only actually a problem if it is a problem for the people at your table. If your fighter / rogue / whatever type players are having fun, and the spell casters are having fun, well that's what it is all about, not the imaginary concept of balance.

The spelling and grammar makes people look that's why i never take anyone to task for it cause i get the strategy and i hope no one forgot the spell checker but either way.

I wasn't necessarily concerned for fun at the table, and yes, more concerned for the imaginary concept of balance. pretty straight forward.

Just a good old pondering of what if you took away fighter, which if you're not finding what you want, is malleable enough to mold into something that is comparable to another class.
Would (arbitrarily speaking) say the samurai and cavalier be used far more often?
Would a fighter archetype exist for each class?

Same with the wizard.
There is no 0-20 level necromancer by name because your supposed to be able to build one out a wizard.

It's not that they are not fun, should be banned, or are broken.
It's that they are so generalized.
The ONLY thing that separates them from other classes are class abilities.
So... would other classes shine more without the fighter or wizard classes?
Would it allow for a wider array of more unique and specialized 0-20 level classes?

still though it's not that these classes are broken, it's that they can emulate any class already out there.
and i get that one may simply house rule this feature in, but what if it was an official ruling?
would it make the other classes shine more knowing that they can't be copied so closely?

gen-u-whine LOL.

why does it need to be broken?
It's not broken.
It can emulate almost any class out there that's fighter-ish.
and besides this ain't the place for this, i started a new thread on this.

would it be so bad to put these cure all classes to bed?

Obsolete?

I've said it before, ban wizard and fighter and everything suddenly becomes awesome.

ONE QUESTION

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE ARCANIST GETS AHOLD OF SOMEONE'S BONDED OBJECT OR STICK THAT HAS BEEN SHILLELEIGHED OR FAMILIER OR ANIMAL COMPANION...?

you get the picture.

qualls tokens

Oh that makes sense in my head.

MAKE THE ARCANIST WORK OFF WISDOM.

The arcanist sounds like more than a force of personality and the sum of knowledge as opposed to experience and sheer will.

It doesn't favor wizard or sorcerer dipping.

AND MAKE IT THE FIRST CLASS THAT AGES YOU.

Sure first level bump your character one age category up.

-1 str.dex.con. +1 int.wis.cha.

poo i was hoping you would keep the bloodline pick, make empyreal bloodline work and then turn the arcanist into a wisdom based user mwa haha.

but this could be better than that. cheers

I have always hated flurry and full round attacks for supposedly such a mobile class as monk and when the archtypes came along that allowed me to replace that i rejoiced.
Okay so the brawler isn't so mobile he will get in there and hammer it out.
But...
it seems to me its ranger, fighter, and monk.
two weapon fighting as mandatory?
why not come up with a skirmish ability, ya know, move x feet get such and such bonus
except such and such bonus is a sundering ability.
make it work with acrobatics jump to give it more oomph. which in turns rewards people with acrobatics.
Then the acrobatics would work into awesome blow making it not such a far fetched leap.
remember feats means flavor and infinite direction.
those class features do wrangle in the brawler to a specific direction but at what cost to those who want just a fighter/monk template with no extraneous influence.
i'd rather trade in the two weapon fighting for a little more maneuverability and less rigidity in the class.

going to bed now. was curious what would happen if i left this on the boards.

Again a samsaren

20 point build

1 lvl of monk for ac

the rest is magus kensai archtype

me personally I'm just interested in making a character at lvl 5 cause when i go to game next i want several options to be voted on. i have 5th lvl goblin monk with roll with it feat and crane style(thats just fun in my head).

but this samsaren i was always curious if this build could get tricked out or not especially if put it through the rube goldberg machine that is the advice messageboards.

good night.

well i like the first instinct one

first rnd, (swift)Monkey Style (std act)Barkskin
2nd rnd, (swift)Crane Style (std act)Fight Defensively

At 2nd rnd AC is 27 i attack with only -1 and anyone who attacks after, its deflect, AoO, and if any attack gets thru I can possibly negate all of it cause movement is 40ft and acrobatics 21 and not be there for any follow up attack.

But then again I was looking too see if pumping up my jump could do something else synergy wise. I guess not.

I'm making 5th lvl character with all the time in the world so here goes...

First Instincts
Goblin tree top runner
4 lvls MoMS Monk qingong/ 1 lvl Unarmed Fighter
bonus feats Crane Wing, Crane Riposte, Monkey Style
reg feats Crane Style, Weapon Finesse, Roll With It

Second Doubts
Goblin tree top runner
5 lvls MoMS Monk qingong
bonus feats Monkey Style, Monkey Moves Or Mantis Style
reg feats Weapon Finesse, Pirahna Strike, Run

In Second Doubts the monks high jump turns all jumps into running jumps so the Run feat puts out a +4 bonus to jump...

but then again... what good is jumping, can you use all the time?
didn't 3.5 have a running jump charge?

Should I go with my first instincts?

And if you have any advice to give about refinement let me know
(sigh) be brutal if you need to be, just remember in my mind, roll with it was the inspiration.
Roll With It (Combat, Goblin)
You know how to take a hit, even if your reaction sends you bouncing and flying out of battle while shrieking at the top of your lungs.

Prerequisite: Goblin, Acrobatics 1 rank.

Benefit: If you are struck by a melee weapon you can try to convert some or all of that damage into movement that sends you off in an uncontrolled bouncing roll. To do so, you must make an Acrobatics check (DC = 5 + the damage dealt from the attack) as an immediate action. If you succeed in this check, you take no damage from the actual attack but instead convert that damage into movement with each point equating to 1 foot of movement.

For example, if you would have taken 6 points of damage, you would convert that into 6 feet of movement. You immediately move in a straight line in a direction of your choice this number of feet (rounded up to the nearest 5-foot-square), halting if you reach a distance equal to your actual speed. If this movement would make you strike an object or creature of your size or larger, the movement immediately ends, you take 1d4 points of damage, and fall prone in that square. This involuntary movement provokes attacks of opportunity normally if you move through threatened squares, but does not provoke an attack of opportunity from the creature that struck you in the first place.

You are staggered for 1 round after you attempt to use this feat, whether or not you succeed.

Wholey carp! this could get overpowered quick.

the way i see it i say this without reading anything else on here except first post,

you got an aberration race on your hands.

once they attach, using cmb, thats it, racial tendencies are out the window, no more orc ferocity or halfling luck.

THE ONLY THING to survive would be innate abilities, any thing that can't be erased.

I would say you'd have to treat the host body like an intelligent item with an EGO score and every thing.

Leveling with a new host body should be an unlocking of synergy.

other than that I'm too tired to brainstorm more. good luck

Okay thats what I thought was at work, cast the spell next turn defensive.

So then here's the REAL QUESTION.

With THE SPELL: CHILL TOUCH

Will crane work with it, and if i'm not mistaken, does the spell reserve touch attacks until all charges are used?

Cast Spell, hold charge, next round, go defensive, attack -1 touch attack, enemy attacks, triggers deflect and AoO attack -1 touch attack, rinse repeat until charges are expended or another spell is cast.

and the last question. Does the touch attack of Chill Touch ask for both regular unarmed damage and chill touch damage or just chill touch damage? its late, i know i'm asking something different from above question. do i need to opt out of the touch attack(if there is a touch attack{big if}) in order to use an unarmed attack to deliver the charge,so that both damage die count or will the touch attack assume there is unarmed damage included the chill touch every time?

something like.

*Brain dribbles out nose*
Thanks Peoples

Maybe like holding a charge....? I reread the whole touch attack and holding charges, heck it sounds like just deflecting the attack would set off the charge and complete the spell.

QUOTE
"Holding the CHARGE: If you don't discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the charge indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates..... Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack while holding a charge. If your unarmed attack normally doesn't provoke AoO, neither does this attack. If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack and the spell discharges. If the attack misses, you are still holding the charge."

I would definitely grab crane wing lvl 1 and go sorceror.

But then again thats probably not the case (and I am talking master of many styles here) and you'd have to go 2 lvls Monk for full crane counter-attack.

So looks like this, cast touch spell, sit back defensively, discharge spell on AoO, cast another spell on your turn.

Does this work or is there something similar using the crane or should I just pick up the monkey?

The character is a dedicated sorceror just one or two lvls monk for AC. Of course I'm gonna try to squeeze out as much as possible out of that first lvl

Just like title asks, cause i know i want and like monkey style but i don't want to pass up crane style if i can.

5th lvl character

debating 1 or two levels monk

Empyreal Sorceror for the rest

str 7
dex 18
con 12
int 7
wis 20
cha 7

Thanks Creatives Peoples

Does Mirror Strike Allow You to take a "Scorpion Style feat" punch, and splitting it up into two punches, make the second punch a declared Stunning Fist punch?

I Know you can only have one of each in a single round, (grr duh), but does the spell allow you to get both into a round?

Thanks Creatives Peoples

edit: Mirror strike i think is sor/wiz 1st lvl spell. top of my head

I'm exploring making characters and who doesn't.

So this is an obvious dip that could work so I was wondering if there was a consensus about flavor or legitimate power building involved with the Eldritch Heritage feat or feat tree?

Is it an exploit or a dead end or just tasty? (mmmmm)

@Xorran You're right man, why didn't I see it, it's gotta be the half-orc with sacred tattoos. And man did you go off... in a good way. I like all your selections and it does look like the choice bits from the buffet.

I am trying to go whore save (thanks paladin) while not trying to piss away the lead stat of charisma (f*** you paladin). Its love/hate.

So yes @Umbranus it still is just a concept. But I like where your going as well.

It's looking like Paladin is a tether to this concept and thanks for the advice.

It's probably a lost cause to get stupid saves by level 5 and have something workable past that.

I'm putzen around with a lvl 5 halfling build/ 20 pnt buy / Synthesizers are banned / and I cant find anything this would roll into come lvl 6. At lvl 5 its fine by me but I just see lvl 6 being a useless non themed advance.... bah well here's what I got
Halfling Level 5 2 lvls monk/2 lvls paladin/1 lvl cleric
Str 7
Dex 14
Con 14
Int 7
Wis 14
Cha 20

Monk adds +3/+3/+3 Paladin adds +8/+5/+8 Cleric adds +3/+1/+3
Those include divine grace and domain protection then I added fates favored so halfling adds +4/+4/+4 attributes and luck

So fifth level
Fort 18
Dex 13
Will 18

and thats it.

I would continue cleric but charisma is the wrong stat as this character should clearly be a caster.

And Don't Recommend Dragon Disciple. Thats bad... bad advice giver, Bad!

Thanks Clevers Peoples! :D

Yeah so where to begin.

Okay. Skills should be condensed and clarified since aesthetically they take up way to much room on the character sheet.

SKILLS SHOULD BE SIMILIAR TO CMD & AC. In that you have a base roll defined by different modifiers, just one line on the character sheet.

THEN you can jot down class/racial skills given. SEE, much cleaner.

You don't need to eliminate skills or their description section just don't make my printer work so hard. And besides you guys already force us to do that with class abilities and feats (write cramped descriptions) this will open up more area for writing other things down.

Also Stop trying to SNEAK things in when describing ANYTHING. Don't bold face headings, just use slightly larger print and save the bold print for your run on sentences, or the calculations needed, or for anything that should be bullet points but aren't because of budget constraints.

Either way, and joking aside, please STOP making FLAVOR FEATS. I want to take them but i cant. I don't want to suck ass in combat and I might die if I don't use them for their name sake(making an assumption here), a HEROIC FEAT. I assume Feat is not short for Features cause(and I'm laughing here) that sounds an awful lot like traits.

More to the point why not permanently add traits to the ever sacred character lvl and bonuses table. Strictly for racial growth and flavor outside of class. Just dial back to plus ones. With this simple addition one can make prerequisites (for anything) more meaningful and you can stop stuffing everything into the Feats suitcase.

Last but not least Monte proved to me through Iron Heroes that you can pretty much make any class you want if given enough options on just one class. I KNOW THIS IS RISKY!!! But IF you think about it it gives meaning to everything else. Eliminate Fighter and/or Wizard from the Core 20 lvl classes and make them Prestige classes.

THANK YOU GOODNIGHT!

Bacterial Entities; "Negative Space" Creatures i.e. not doors but the door way and not the box but the space within the box; Astrological Event Creatures (fodder,midbosses,etc.) i.e. Comet Riders, Exploding Star Travelers, Planetary Alignment Sacrifice creatures based on how many planets align; and the incubating planet killing fetus growing from the molten core of the moon(s)/planet/asteroid. Make them. Name them. Go big.