Angvar Thestlecrit

LordKailas's page

Organized Play Member. 1,410 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Organized Play characters.


1 to 50 of 1,410 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

I had an idea for a redeemed villain character when I was still playing 3.0. I didn't get to play him until I'd been playing pathfinder for awhile. Pathfinder mechanics mean that it wouldn't quite work the same way but my DM let me keep the backstory since he liked the concept.

Anyway, the original idea for the character was that he was a Rogue/Executioner/Anti-paladin. He had a horrible encounter with something that level drained him back to level 1 before he escaped. The experience was so horrible that he sought atonement, destroyed/donated most of his gear except for his now non-magical sword. Which he kept as a reminder of what he once was. He would then start leveling as a paladin. I think I had some way to re-qualify as executioner again but I don't really remember the details now. I also had the idea that his sword would slowly regain it's powers in an attempt to tempt him into using it and falling back into his old ways.

The pathfinder version of this character was a Rogue 1/Paladin(X). His patron deity was Korada. So, I took the feat improved unarmed strike and the trait heirloom weapon - Rhoka.

When fights broke out he would try to deal with things just using unarmed strikes, but he had the option to pull his old sword (the Rhoka), when things got bad. He had a high enough str that at low levels he was able to get away with it. But more and more fights he was having to pull the sword. It also meant that he approached even obviously evil enemies at least initially as being possibly redeemable. After all, he himself was pretty terrible and was able to be redeemed.

At one point We encountered a demon in the middle of a wrecked village. My character really wanted to attack the demon, but was forced to ask questions first. It turned out the demon wasn't responsible and never said anything that gave my character an excuse to attack him. In the end I had to let him teleport away since he wasn't "doing anything wrong" at the moment.

The game was supposed to be more roleplay centric then what our DM typically ran and was started in response to a player that had joined the group and essentially complained that things weren't "realistic" enough. He quit the group and so the DM went back to his normal sandbox game. Meaning I only got to play the character for a handful of sessions.

He was fun and was played very sub-optimally for roleplaying reasons.

Since you're true neutral and your god is as well. You should have access to (and can cast) all the alignment spells, since neutral isn't opposed by the other alignments.

Cleric: Spellcasting wrote:
Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells A cleric can’t cast spells of an alignment opposed to her own or her deity’s (if she has one). Spells associated with particular alignments are indicated by the chaotic, evil, good, and lawful descriptors in their spell descriptions.

Just be careful what you cast. Holy Word for example, doesn't make the caster immune to its effects and so you risk deafening yourself every time you cast it.

ErichAD wrote:

As written it's looks like a lower level version of black tentacles. A non-specific existence summoned to act on the world in a way similar to a physical thing without really being there.

Even assuming it's intended to ignore DR, it's still pretty weak as a 3rd level spell. It would be nice if the spell were written in such a way that it either reinforced or moved away from game defined words like "swarm", but it's been years and the spell has remained unchanged.

Cloud of fangs doesn't have the same ring to it anyway, fang flock? Biter Bevy? Snarl of Fangs?

gnashing cloud?

I agree about it being kind of weak for a 3rd level spell. Not every spell can be fireball but still.

It really depend on what you're trying to "cover" by being a mystic theurge. Hunters get low level divine spells meaning they could cover healing if they're willing to give up the combat utility.

Alternatively, you could be an arcane class that gets some divine magic (eg. Witch) or a divine caster that gets arcane magic (eg. ancient lorekeeper oracle ). Mystic theurge gets lots of versatility but at the expense of higher level spells. If you can figure out what divine and arcane spells specifically you want you can probably afford to give up some of the versatility without problems.

I would recommend making a "dream list" of every spell you want. If you find that only a handful of spells are outside of what's offered by a single class, you could take the Pathfinder Savant prestige class to grab those extra spells. I personally have had quite a bit of success mixing cleric with pathfinder savant. Wizard with pathfinder savant has been... a less useful mix, partly because someone else was already handling healing.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Project Image might work, so long as the BBEG has some way to conceal the fact that they are actually close by. It has the added bonus that the BBEG can even cast spells and have said spells originate from the false image.

The way it's worded it seems like that is possible. divine paragon gives you deific obedience but then completely re-writes it to make it effectively non-functional. You have the feat but instead of actually benefiting from it, the archetype replaces all of the domain powers of your non-devoted domain.

Divine Paragon wrote:

Instead, she must choose from the evangelist, exalted, or sentinel boons granted by her deity. At 5th level, she gains access to the first boon granted by her deity.

At 11th level, she gains access to the second boon. At 14th level, she gains access to the third boon.

So long as the thing you worship has evangelist, exalted or sentinel boons to pick from you should be good. The only time it wouldn't work is if it only has demonic boons or didn't list any boons at all (eg. Elion). In those cases you just wouldn't gain any boons. In the case of Socothbenoth specifically it should be fine so long as they are a valid choice for a cleric. Cleric also says "deity" throughout all of it's descriptions.

Interestingly, I think the least tragic backstory I've had for a character was for my LE necromancer. My design approach for him was to treat him the same way I would a BBEG for a campaign. His life goal was to create a new race of creatures that were negative energy based. All of his undead and constructs were nothing more than experiments in an attempt to achieve his end goal.

He and his older sister had parents that were adventurers. His father was a rogue, his mother was a druid and his sister was a separatist cleric of Cayden Cailean (a reach cleric I made that predated this character). She went off adventuring because it was expected of her. He ended up becoming a separatist cleric of Zon-Kuthon not because he enjoyed giving or receiving pain, but because it was a means to an end. He started off LN, but over time his alignment shifted to LE as he became more and more willing to delve into dark magics and use questionable means to achieve his goals.

He probably caused many tragic backstories, but he didn't really have one himself.

I was in a 2nd edition game where drinking water from a particular magic pond granted you a permanent bonus to wisdom and charisma and also shifted your alignment to Lawful Good. This ended up being a problem for my druid.

Another thought is to do a twist on the comic "the killing joke", the driving idea is that it only takes 1 bad day to make you become evil. Maybe this is true, and maybe 1 perfect day could make you become good.

for example:

They go to make trouble at a bar, but it's a holiday where everyone is super friendly, the drinks are practically free, and things just generally go their way.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Usually this is because I'm doing theorycrafting but, I'm constantly having to look up how weapon damage scales with size beyond 1d8 and 1d10. There's a handy chart that shows you and it's easy to use, but I have to look at it every time.

There are items and feats that allow you to make diplomacy checks during combat to do very specific things (eg. Antagonize, Authoritative Vestments, etc.). For the most part I think the line is there just to remind players/dms to use common sense when it comes to diplomacy checks.

Imagine a bar brawl with one guy standing on a table trying to get everyone to calm down and stop fighting. Depending on who the guy on the table is and what kind of patrons are brawling this might work or it may be completely ineffective. Though, you might argue that in the cases where it's effective, the guy on the table isn't using diplomacy but rather intimidation instead.

You can add evolutions via evolved familiar x2. Just pick the gills and swim evolutions. While this doesn't give your familiar the aquatic subtype it does give it a swim speed and allows it to breathe underwater.

avr wrote:

Besides those on LordKailas' list, any character with the spell Aram Zey's Focus can disable traps like a character with trapfinding. It's on the alchemist/investigator, bard/skald and sorc/wiz/arcanist lists. Find traps duplicates the trap spotter rogue talent. I usually figure that you can't afford utility spells except fly/teleport types until they're a level lower than your highest spells, so these are 5th-6th class level tricks at best for a full or 6-level spellcaster. Similarly Sense Vitals can give sneak attack.

It's not relevant to Merellin's concerns because it's with blowpipes (ranged weapons) only but for your list Lord Kailas poison darter rangers get sneak attack too.

A disposable familiar (figment archetype, or the kineticist's elemental whispers) can be the best scout ahead you can get.

Any character with the dirty fighting feat and an improved maneuver feat can get a big advantage from flanking.

Thanks! I'd missed that one, probably because the ability isn't called sneak attack.

In the same vein as the spell Aram Zey's Focus. There is the trait Trap Finder, however its a campaign trait meaning that unless you're playing the associated campaign it will require DM approval.

There are also prestige classes that grant trapfinding or sneak attack. Which could be relevant if you decide you want one of the options listed above that don't give you the relevant ability. I've listed the prestige class and what level you gain the relevant ability.

Sneak Attack
Assassin (1st)[+1d6 every odd level]
Crimson Assassin, Deep Sea Pirate, Sleepless Detective (1st)[+1d6 every 3 levels]
Arcane Trickster, Halfling Opportunist, Rose Warden (2nd)[+1d6 every even level]
Evangelist (2nd)[as per original class]

Trap Finding
Brother of the seal(2nd)
Consortium Agent(1st)
Dark Delver(1st)
Pathfinder Field Agent(3rd)

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've looked at this before and this is what I came up with ignoring prestige classes.

Sneak Attack
Vanilla Rogue
Vanilla Ninja
Vanilla Slayer
Alchemist - Vivisectionist or Chemist
Magus - Greensting Slayer
Monk - Monk of the mantis
Bard - Sandman
Cavalier - Order of the blossom
inquisitor - Sanctified slayer and/or Crocodile domain
WarPriest - Cult leader or Mantis Zealot
Druid - nature fang and/or Crocodile domain
Vigilante - Serial Killer
Fighter - Venom Blade
Cleric - Crocodile domain

Trap Finding
Alchemist - Alchemical Trapper, Crypt Breaker, Trap Breaker or Vault Breaker
Bard - Sandman, Detective, Archivist, or Archaeologist
Druid - Nature Fang (Slayer Talent)
Slayer - Slayer Talent
Hunter - Patient Ambusher
Vanilla Investigator
Ranger - Trapper or Urban Ranger
Sorcerer - Seeker
Oracle - Seeker
Its worth noting that when it comes to skills, if there is a skill you want your character to have and its not normally a class skill there is a talent that at the very least will make it a class skill. Many of them also give you a small bonus as well as making it a class skill.

Glancing at the list there's some obvious overlaps, such as Sandman(Bard), Nature's Fang (Druid) and Slayer. While others may or may not work (one of the alchemist archetypes under trapfinding probably works with vivisectionist but I don't know for sure). Also, while everything under sneak attack does get sneak attack, very few get a progression that mirrors what a rogue gets. So, while you would have sneak attack it wouldn't be at a level that's going to majorly contribute to your damage.

Since the rules don't explicitly state that you can or can't. It would fall fully within the purview of the DM.

IMO it seems reasonable that you could, but that's about as much as I can say.

Andrew the Warwitch wrote:

So, is there a limit on how many companions a BM has? I understand that at 4th level a ranger finally gets a companion, but would it be only one companion at that point? For instance, I want to build up my BM so he has a tiger as his primary, then an eagle and 2 ferrets for minor stuff. How would that work?

Well, the most straight forward method is to take the boon companion feat at 5th level and apply it to your tiger. Then every time you level instead of adding a level to your tiger you add an additional animal companion. The progression would look like this

4th level - tiger(lvl 1)
5th level - tiger(lvl 5), eagle(lvl 1)
6th level - tiger(lvl 5), eagle(lvl 1), ferret(lvl 1)
7th level - tiger(lvl 5), eagle(lvl 1), ferret(lvl 1), ferret(lvl 1)
8th level - tiger(lvl 5), eagle(lvl 2), ferret(lvl 1), ferret(lvl 1)

there is no limit on adding companions but unless you do something like take the feat boon companion they don't advance as you normally only get 1 level to distribute each level. So for example if you didn't do anything else and just poured all of your levels into your tiger at level 15 you would have

15th level - tiger(lvl 12), eagle(lvl 2), ferret(lvl 1), ferret(lvl 1)

well, from summon monster

Summon Monster wrote:
It appears where you designate and acts immediately, on your turn. It attacks your opponents to the best of its ability. If you can communicate with the creature, you can direct it not to attack, to attack particular enemies, or to perform other actions.

Note that the first part happens even if you can't speak its language. So, you should be able to designate who your enemies are as soon as it appears and it will attack whichever of them is most convenient to attack.

While I would assume that celestial creatures can speak celestial I can see why a DM would rule that animals don't gain the power of speech and/or understanding just because they are angelic.

edit: when I started to post there hadn't been any other answers and my delay has caused me to basically say what's already been said. I apologize for the repeated information.

Anguish wrote:
LordKailas wrote:

Which spell and/or ability?

Ones that I use all the time? ones that are my strongest? or My most efficient offensive ability?

It depends. Sorry. I know. Cop-out.

We don't play such that confusion is mind-obliterating. It's already taken away some player-agency, so we leave freedom to apply some tactical sense. As in, we boil it down to "you got confused about WHY you're doing what you're doing, but not WHAT you're doing." So, you can still recognize an undead target as being a good candidate for positive energy, and you can still recognize that a heavily armored opponent isn't a good candidate for hitting with a stick. A target who is standing beside a cliff might be tempting to push off it, and a target who is standing in a flammable place is tempting to light on fire. An ally who is known to be vulnerable to fear would suggest using those spells on them.

You're out to defeat your target. Attack them in some way that serves that goal. That's what I meant by "honesty" in an earlier post.

I mean, so long as it's being applied consistently that's fine. If a monster gets hit with confusion (and gets that attack result) I would expect it make a single attack against the nearest target, even if it it normally gets 10 attacks per round. On the other hand if you expect it to get all 10 attacks against a nearby mook while expending once per day abilities, then I agree there's no reason the fighter getting hit with it shouldn't be expected to do the same.

IMO getting the "attack nearest creature" result should still be a detriment even if the nearest creature happens to be an actual enemy.

Anguish wrote:
I would expect you to take a 5 foot step and annihilate the creature (likely with a spell), regardless of if it was previously an ally. If an open space wasn't available, I'd expect you to cast defensively.

Which spell and/or ability?

Ones that I use all the time? ones that are my strongest? or My most efficient offensive ability?

IIRC in that moment I had all of the following available to me and had used all of them recently (i'm excluding spells I'd cast that wouldn't break invisibility as they clearly are not "attack" spells).

Fire Jet (school ability)
Produce Flame (racial ability)
Snap Dragon Fireworks
Intensified Fireball
Flame Strike
Intensified Flame Strike
Fire Snake
Terrible Remorse
Dispel Magic
Arcane Surge (mythic ability to cast any wizard spell)

Recently my go to spells with the character have been Intensified Flame Strike, Fire Jet and Destruction. Based purely on if we are facing multiple targets, how quickly I think the arcane archer in our group will drop things and how much of a threat it is to the party. For longer combats I'll cast snap dragon fireworks since I can fire them off in addition to casting spells.

Derklord wrote:
Confusion means the target thinks the nearest creature to was an enemy, and it makes no sense that a Wizard would use a sword against an enemy when spells as discribed above are aviable.

Interesting. I always assumed that it meant you had to take the attack action against the nearest creature. In this way it means it also negatively impacts martial characters who are near creatures that are actual enemies, as it would prevent them from taking the full attack action.

I guess it depends on the DMs interpretation of "attack" and how much control the character has over how much effort they put into said attack.

Are you expected to burn limited resources on the attack?

If I'm a magus using a spell storing weapon should I use spell combat with my highest level spell and expend the spell out of my weapon?

confusion doesn't state that you believe that your target is your enemy just that you have to attack the nearest creature. Which I always imagined as having a literal irresistible urge to attack.

MrCharisma wrote:

The order people are having trouble with is:

(Harm + Sneak Attack) >=1hp


(Harm >=1hp) + Sneak Attack

Looking at the abilities there is another sequence that also makes sense to me.

(Weapon + Sneak Attack) then (Harm <= 1 hp)

This is based on the wording from Touch spells in combat which seems to imply the spell discharges after the weapon damage has been resolved. Which would make it work the same way a spell storing weapon works.

Do you know what their intentions with this character are?

Generally the trade off you get with MT is more spells per day and more spell variety in exchange for overall spell level and caster level. This sort of trade is usually considered a bad deal since typically as a caster you want your caster level to be as high as possible and you want access to higher level spells asap. The exact two things that are being traded away. Also, it's a half BAB class meaning it doesn't play well with martial builds that throw some magic into the mix.

Do they need access to all divine and arcane magic or is there just some mixture that they are looking for? If they just want to be caster type X with access to certain spells from caster type Y there are archetypes, prestige classes and feats that can do this without hurting your casting progression quite so much.

feyspeaker + seducer sounds like they're looking at casting lots of enchantment/charm type spells. Oddly enough, feyspeaker is one of those aforementioned archetypes as they can pilfer spells from the wizard list.

I'm trying not to just say "don't do it". So, any additional insight you have on the concept behind the build will make it easier to give advice.

I'll also point out that while traits like bifurcated magic are nice they don't tend to play well with other caster level boosting feats/items, since usually the goal is to raise your caster level above your character level and this is precisely when traits that boost caster level stop working.

Anguish wrote:
LordKailas wrote:

I had a wizard fail against a confusion effect. She then proceeded to swipe at allies with her sword. So, it was a good thing in that she was trying to attack using her sword instead of spells.

Wow. That was allowed at your table?

For us, that'd pretty strongly violate the intention of the spell. I mean, it doesn't say "attack nearest, unless you don't want to, in which case go ahead and find a way to 'attack' them that stands no chance of actually doing anything significant to them".

Well, confusion states

Confusion wrote:
Attacks nearest creature (for this purpose, a familiar counts as part of the subject’s self)

There is a creature adjacent to my gnome fire wizard. I have a bastard sword in hand (its my arcane bond) which my character crafted themselves (meaning they are proficient with it thanks to my gnome racial trait master tinker).

If I'm being forced to attack the nearest creature I'm not sure that it makes sense to do anything but attack with my sword.

As the DM what would you have the character do instead in that scenario?

To get back on topic, I did find another item.

Infernal Cord

Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:

No, that wouldn't apply, as passively being a worshipper is not a word, thought, or action:

UMD wrote:
Activate Blindly: Some magic items are activated by special words, thoughts, or actions. You can activate such an item as if you were using the activation word, thought, or action, even when you're not and even if you don't know it. You do have to perform some equivalent activity in order to make the check. That is, you must speak, wave the item around, or otherwise attempt to get it to activate. [...]
Outside PFS I think it'd often be allowed as if it were "emulate alignment," but that'd be a houserule, so baggageboy should be careful with it in the guide.

Well, I was looking at how the extra ability gets triggered.

Pendant of Knowledge wrote:
If you are a worshiper of the associated god, the pendant also counts as a holy symbol. In addition, once per day as a free action, you may add a +10 insight bonus on a single skill check you are about to roll.

In this case it does require an action to activate the extra function. I agree its a bit of an edge case and while I might assume the other items are similar I can't say so for sure. It may be questionable in PFS games and none of the effects are particularly amazing (IIRC the zon-kuthon item lets you cast a 2d6 magic missile), to make it worthwhile.

Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
LordKailas, which UMD function would you use to pretend to be a deity's worshipper? I can't find an appropriate one. I suppose as a GM I might let someone do it anyway.

I would assume they fall under the "activate blindly" option. Outside of that I agree that I don't see an option would explicitly allow you to do this.

It's tough since there aren't many cheap magic items that are limited in a way that you would need UMD to trigger them.

Prayer Beads are the 1st thing that come to mind. However, the only one that falls in your price range would be a lesser stand that's missing the healing bead. Unfortunately, the healing bead is the more useful of the two beads that come on a lesser strand.

Other items I've used UMD with to good effect.
-Robe of the Archmagi
-Horn of Goodness/Evil

But, both of those are also outside of your price range (though just barely on the horn). There are the deity specific items like

Pendant of Knowledge

that might be useful but you wouldn't need UMD if you just worship the appropriate deity, so unless there's a useful combo that involves different deities you probably won't need UMD for these.

I found a bunch just scanning down the deity list on archives of nethys that make sense for a bard

Baalzebul - Arrogance, lies
Belial - deception, desire
Maeha - abduction, propoganda
Onamahli - Beauty, double standards
Zaigasnar - destructive vanity
Lao Shu Po - night, rats, thieves
Areshkagal - greed, riddles
Socothbenoth - perversion, pride, taboos
Pirias - Denial, drugs, wonder
Ruzel - Blasphemy, humor
Xhasnaphar - masks
Calcabrina - dreams, insanity, mystery

In almost every case you can find multiple evil deities that are related to the traits above. So, there are a lot of options. As others have said you just need to determine "why" the bard is evil. What evil things are they using their talents to perpetrate? Even if its just for personal glory much of what I listed above could work.

I've found that it's become less popular as time as gone on. You have to have a reason to conceal "what you really are". When every intelligent group of monsters guns for the wizard first then the wizard will want to stop "looking like a wizard" even if it means putting on faux armor that provides zero mechanical benefit.

In 3.0 my druid disguised herself as a noble woman. Took a bath, wore nice cloths, put on perfume, and threw a silver chain leash on her wolf companion. We were infiltrating a city where we figured the guard was on the lookout for our group.

Besides, in pathfinder you're just one hat of disguise away from looking like whatever you want to look like making the "muscle wizard" a novelty concept at best, fun until its not.

What you're describing seems more appropriate as an adventure than a single monster.

2nd edition D&D did have gargantuan mimics called house hunters but they aren't actual structures they are more like snails with extremely ornate shells that look like buildings.

For an adventure you would probably just take a normal setting or structure and populate it with a bunch of things like you describe all under the control and/or extensions of the living structure.

If you want to simply upsize a mimic then I would use the house hunter I linked above as a guide.

To answer your rules questions.

1) Yes, the bonuses stack. If a creature goes from medium to large it gets +8 to str, -2 to dex, +4 to con, and +2 natural armor. If you then bump it up from large to huge it would get an additional +8 to str, -2 to dex, +4 to con, and +3 natural armor as per the chart.

2) A creature gets a bonus/penalty to AC, Attack, CMB/CMD, fly, and stealth based on its size. Once you've determined the final size of the creature it will receive bonuses and penalties based on that final size only.

3) As the DM you can adjust things as needed to represent the actual danger the threat represents. While an encounter may involve a creature that is a CR 25, in the context of the adventure perhaps it only represents a CR 7 challenge. This could be because circumstances prevent it from using the full force of its abilities and/or it isn't motivated to kill the PCs. It may prefer some other course of action (such as simply leaving) after a certain amount of resistance. Meaning that the PCs can effectively "defeat" the creature without killing it. Once this "win condition" is met the PCs should get full exp as per the challenge they overcame. Which again may have only been a CR 7 encounter even though you were using a CR 25 monster.

Well, I'm not even suggesting that the caster is aware of the questionable wording. It would be more along the lines of

PC: I cast suggestion and suggest to the enemy "To cure your affliction, visit the temple priest."

DM: so.... are you trying to get the enemy to disengage combat now to go do that or do you mean its something they should do after the combat?

Based the the answer given by the PC the suggestion would then either take effect or immediately fail. As the DM has clarified the caster's intent. Certainly if the DM wants to be a stickler on the wording they can be but all that does is turn the PC into a lawyer every time they want to cast suggestion, which likely won't add to the enjoyment of the game.

Merellin wrote:
baggageboy wrote:
Shimmerwing dragonfly familiar with the mauler archetype.
How does a cavalier get a familiar, And why wouldent you use your actual mount...?

There are many feats that would allow any character that wishes to have a familiar to gain one. The most common combination would be grabbing eldritch heritage with the arcane bloodline.

As for why you're not using your normal mount I don't think any of the normal mount options can fly. The dragonfly familiar both can fly and can shrink to a size smaller than the character allowing you to have a flying mount option with you at all times.

It really depends on the limitations of the campaign. My most recent cavalier/hunter for example is in a campaign where large monstrous mounts aren't an issue so the mother's fang giant snake is fine. I plan on growing it further at higher levels with the mammoth rider prestige class.

One of the things that's nice about the snake is that it has both a climb speed and a swim speed so it doesn't slow the party down at all.

I had a wizard fail against a confusion effect. She then proceeded to swipe at allies with her sword. So, it was a good thing in that she was trying to attack using her sword instead of spells.

I think it depends on the intent of the caster. If the caster intends for the creature to do it immediately it should fail if doing it immediately is unreasonable. If they meant "at your earliest convenience" then it's fine and that's what will happen.

Its the difference between

"you NEED to see a cleric about that rash"
"you should see a cleric about that rash"

The first one will get brushed off as there are more immediate concerns vs the second one which, sets it as a priority just not necessarily something that has to happen right this second. The first one might work if there is a cleric that could be reasonably reached in a round. The result would be the character rushing over to said cleric asking for help. Status removal during combat isn't unreasonable. It's really the same as a character using a wish or miracle. The exact wording doesn't matter so much as the character's intent if the wish or miracle is coming from themselves.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

38) The blight druid kidnaps and kills some of the mill workers animating them as host corpse zombies(termites) that are told to "go back to work and wait". Rinse and Repeat as needed to put a stop to the operations. From the operator's perspective workers are showing up to work and just standing around not doing anything. When someone tries to convince them to start working or to leave they turn violent. The first death is thematically horrifying.

39) The mill mysteriously burns to the ground. Magic seems to be involved but none of the surrounding plant life is even so much as scorched (see firestorm).

40) Domesticated animals have gone mad. Animals used to power and/or guard the mill have begun attacking their handlers (see atavism).

blahpers wrote:
Ha! I don't see why a buddy couldn't simply render themselves helpless to your attack, dropping their Dexterity to zero and granting a +4 bonus to the sunder attempt. Strange that the caster level doesn't seem to enter into the mix.

Barbarian: Whoa! hold on there friend you have something on you.

Ally: wha? what is it?

Barbarian: Something quite vile, hold still while I get it off, <raises great axe>

Ally: eep!

Well, the racial trait that gives you a claw attack does so in exchange for the sword training talent so it's one or the other. The first thing that comes to mind is to play a tengu magus. Though I don't know if magus gets access to the tengu only spells or if they even make sense if you can.

The nice thing is that the tengu claw trait counts as improved unarmed combat for purposes of taking feats meaning its easier for them to pick up feral combat training.

You could run it like Leadership or even vile leadership. The PC gets a leadership score which gets compared to the chart. But they don't get a cohort and followers. Instead you just add up the numbers and divide by 3 (rounding down) to determine how many HD worth of shadows they can control.

so, at a leadership score of:
10 they can control 4 shadows (8+5x1)
15 they can control 12 shadows (10+20x1+2x2+1x3)

It might be a bit excessive at higher levels but at 10th level (the 15 score), how useful are 12 3HD shadows really?

You could rule that any that get created beyond the limit aren't under their control or perhaps they simply can't create more than their limit allows. In any case the shadows the PC creates should probably not be able to create spawn themselves or if they can those spawn count against the PC's limit, otherwise this can get out of hand really quick.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've got a few builds for a blaster type wizard. While these do go out to level 20, these builds are effective right out of the gate.

Fire Starter (Arcanist/Cleric/Wizard)


Key concepts: High fire damage output for level
Race: Gnome
Racial Traits: Pyromaniac
Traits: Magical Lineage (Fireball) or Wayang Spellhunter[Fireball]
Class: Sorcerer(1), Arcanist/Cleric/Wizard(X)
Sorcerer(1), Arcanist(6),Wizard(1), Arcanist(X)
Archetype(s): Crossblooded (Sorcerer), Elemental Master(Arcanist), Theologian (Cleric)
Bloodlines: Orc and Draconic (Fire) or Primal (Fire) or Solar (Fire)
Exploits: Bloodline Development(6th), School Understanding(9th), Quick Study, Fiendish Proboscis
Variant Channel: Fire (harm, now causes creatures that fail their save to catch fire)
Domain: Fire
School: Fire
Feats: Spell Focus [Evocation](1st), Spell Specialization(3rd), Varisian tattoo(5th), Intensified Spell [Metamagic](7th), Greater Spell Specilization(9th), Selective Spell [Metamagic](11th), Piercing Spell [Metamagic](13th), Spell Perfection(15th)
Suggested Feats: Magic Trick(Fireball), Flumefire Rage, Intensified Spell-Like Ability, Burning Spell (Metamagic), Elemental Spell (Metamagic), Quicken Spell (Metamagic), Selective Channel, Bloatmage Initiate
Magic Items: Blazing Robe, Blazing Eyes, Cord of Stubborn Resolve,
Key Features: This build pack tremendous power at low levels, likely becomes less useful at higher levels.
• At first level your Fire Bolt deals 1d6+2,
• More importantly you can memorize all of your domain spells (burning hands, produce flame, fireball) using non-domain slots
• As a bonus at 9th level you will have Fire Resistance 20.
• At 5th level if you specialize in Burning Hands and pick intensified Spell as your Domain Secret, you will have a 1st level spell that deals 9d4 fire dmg.
• The primary advantage wizard offers is the dancing flame ability at 8th level. This ability will allow you to fireball your own party and only harm the enemy.

Storm Kindler (Arcanist/Bard/Cleric/Druid)


Key concepts: High electrical damage output for level
Diety: Hei Feng
Traits: Acolyte of Apocrypha and Magical Lineage (Lightning Bolt) or Wayang Spellhunter[Lightning Bolt]
Race: Sylph
Racial Traits: Like the Wind, Mostly Human
Class: Sorcerer(1), Arcanist/Bard/Cleric/Druid(5), Storm Kindler (10), Arcanist/Bard/Cleric/Druid(4)
Sorcerer(1), Arcanist/Bard/Cleric/Druid(9), Storm Kindler (10)
Archetype(s): Crossblooded (Sorcerer), Elemental Master(Arcanist), Theologian(Cleric), Thundercaller(Bard), Storm Druid(Druid) or Tempest Druid(Druid)
Bloodlines: Orc and Draconic (Electricity) or Primal (Air)
Variant Channel: Weather (harm, now causes lightning or Sonic Damage)
Domain: Lightning and Weather(Strom Druid only)
Feats: Spell Focus[Evocation](1st), Varisian tattoo(3rd), Spell Specialization(5th), Storm Lashed(7th), Greater Spell Specialization/Intensified Spell(9th), Empowered Spell(11th), Piercing Spell(13th), Spell Perfection(15th)
Suggested Feats: Intensified Spell-Like Ability, Burning Spell (Metamagic), Elemental Spell (Metamagic), Quicken Spell (Metamagic), Selective Channel, Bloatmage Initiate
Key Features: • At 3rd level Shocking grasp does 4d6+8 damage
• A cleric/Warpriest/anti-paladin of Hei Feng may prepare lightning bolt as a 3rd lvl spell.
• Lightning Bolt is your primary spell and will get the following bonuses
o Metamagic -1 from total increase
o +1 Caster Level (Sylph)
o +1 dmg per die (Primal or Draconic)
o +1 dmg per die (Orc)
o Intensified spell (Theologian or Druid)
o +1 Caster Level (Varisian tattoo)
o +2 Caster Level (Spell Specialization)
o Can Spontaneously cast it (Greater Spell Specialization)
o At 6th level it will do 9d6+18 damage (48 avg dmg vs nrml 21avg/36max)
o At 11th level it will do 12d6+24 damage or it can be cast empowered as a 4th level spell doing effectively 18d6+36 (99 avg dmg)

Full Caster Arcane Trickster (Rogue/Magus)


Key concepts: Arcane Trickster at earliest lowest possible level
Optional Trait: Two-world Magic[Brand]
Class: Rogue/Magus(4), Arcane Trickster(10),
Archetype(s): Eldritch Scoundrel(Rogue), Greensting Slayer(Magus)
Feats: Spell Focus[Evocation](1st), Accomplished Sneak Attacker(3rd), Varisian tattoo(5th), Intensified Spell(7th), Fiendish Obedience[Andirifkhu](9th), Damned Disciple(11th)
Suggested Feats: Intensified Spell-Like Ability, Burning Spell (Metamagic), Elemental Spell (Metamagic), Quicken Spell (Metamagic), Bloatmage Initiate, Greater Spell Specialization, Empowered Spell, Piercing Spell, Spell Perfection, Spell Specialization
Suggested Gear: Headband of Ninjitsu, Vest of the Cockroach, Sniper Goggles
Key Features: • Casting is never interrupted for the class in question
• Gets full sneak attack progression at all levels.

These are pulled from my Character Concepts Document.

you are responding to a post that is 4 years old

1 person marked this as a favorite.
blahpers wrote:
You know that thing about out-of-game problems and in-game solutions?

always a great idea?

1. Correct

2. If you're looking at a blaster type wizard generally you'll want the Evocation-Admixture subschool. Unless you have a specific reason for taking something different.

The admixture subschool gives you a reliable method of getting around energy resistance which is one of the major obstacles blasters face as you get into higher levels.

"oh, it's immune to fire, but weak against acid? then I guess my fireball is now an acid ball."

Joshua029 wrote:
Regarding the accusation of this use of Mount being game breaking, I present the following counter-example, showing that it's not out of line with what else is in the game.

So.... you're example to show that it's not broken is that a 4th level wizard using a 1st level spell and a 2nd level spell gets a 8 hour summon monster while a 12th level wizard using a 2nd level spell and a 6th level spell gets a 4 hour summon monster?

I think I would counter your example with your own example that it is OP. But lets compare things equally.

as a 12th level wizard and assuming 1 potential encounter per hour for 16 hrs.

Option A: Combine 6th level mount with Alter Summoned monster to get a 24 hr summon monster VI that can fight in 16 of 16 potential encounters.

Option B: Combine 6th level flight of eagles with Alter Summoned monster to get a 4 hr summon monster VI that can fight in 4 of 16 potential encounters.

Option C: Combine 6th level Eagle Aerie with Alter Summoned monster to get a 4 hr summon monster VI that can fight fight in 1 of 16 potential encounters.

Option D: Combine 6th level (Conjure Black Pudding or Summon Erodaemon or greater genie or meladaemon or summon monster VI or summon nature's ally VI or summon stampede or summon vanth) with Alter Summoned monster to get a 1 rd/lvl summon monster VI that can fight in 1 immediate encounter.

Seems to me that Option A is better then Option B in every way and that even Option B is substantially better than anything else, with anything else being literally every other level 6 spell that alter summoned monster could be applied to.

Tallyn wrote:

So out of curiosity, which GMs that are in this thread would allow this? It's basically a 2nd level spell modifying the appropriately heightened mount spell to become a 2 hour/level Summon Monster.

It effectively makes the base level Summon Monster/Nature's Ally obsolete in most ways.

I would allow it with one alteration. I would make it so that the alter summoned monster spell changes the duration to be 1/rd per level or whatever duration is remaining, whichever is less. In this way it doesn't compromise the utility of the spell while preventing much of the abuse of it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Loved: The customization options available at all levels. Two characters of the same class could be radically different via feats and archetypes. Without being stuck on a set progression path. At the same time the original base classes (from 3.0) got serious upgrades making it so that you weren't wasting your time taking more then 1 or 2 levels and/or not grabbing a prestige class ASAP.

Wanted: Better support for necromancer builds and/or a class based on building constructs (that is having a bunch instead of just 1). For awhile I was using a bunch of 3.5 necromancer feats because pathfinder didn't offer anything (even now there's more 3.5 necromancer specific feats than what's in pathfinder). Additionally, the Summon Monster and Summon Nature's Ally tables need a major overhaul. At some levels you barely get any options and at other levels more then half your choices are actually terrible when you run the stats.

Hated: Lack of prestige class support for certain class abilities. For example if you want to have character based on wildshape very few prestige classes actually advance this ability normally. This means that some builds get locked into their base classes because you can't multi-class and you have little to no prestige class options. One of the two prestige classes that gives flexibility in this area, Dawnflower Anchorite, I feel is an amazing model of how most prestige classes should work. However, its locked behind a deity I hate. Meaning its only an option for me if I can get DM approval to ignore the deity requirement.

Will Miss: It really depends on how different 2nd edition is. From what I've seen minion type builds got majorly nerfed by having minions consume your action economy, making it difficult at best to have very many. I like playing characters that have minions and I would rather see a system that streamlines and balances such character concepts instead of penalizing them to the point that only very specific styles of minion builds are even possible.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Joshua029 wrote:
It appears that there's a lot of not paying attention going on here.

Is there?

The general consensuses is

"yes you can do it, but its an OP combination that your DM is likely to balk at"

The rest of the thread seems to purely be an argument on if it is actually OP or not. It doesn't matter if you use a certain combination in a non-abusive way. There are a couple of things to keep in mind.

1. Over time you may end up leaning more heavily on it and abusing it more, in response to the DM turning up the difficulty of encounters to balance this tactic. This sort of escalation ends up not being fun for everyone at the table.

2. Another play might see what you're doing and also start doing it in a way that is more abusive. This could lead to number 1.

3. Munchkin players never consider themselves to be munchkin players. I'm not saying you are or aren't. Just that if someone is crying munchkin you should be receptive to their compliant and consider why the combo is game breaking. If you can't see how it is, ask. If self restraint is the only thing keeping you from breaking the game with it, it doesn't change the fact that it's game breaking. A player should not be in a position to break the game on a whim.

4. Would you consider another option that is less powerful but would fulfill the same role for a similar amount of investment? If the answer is no then that's an indication that roleplaying is not the main driver of your desire to use this combination. That doesn't mean that you're wrong in wanting to use it. Just that it's disingenuous to claim you want it for "roleplaying reasons".

5. Many players are going to be hostile toward anything that looks game breaking. Probably because they've experienced number 1 first hand. Maybe you can use it in your own home game and your DM will be cool with it and no problems will arise. That's awesome, just don't expect others to feel the same way.

Personally, I like recognizing what combinations are OP. In this way I can recognize if another combination is actually OP or not and I know what combinations to avoid and/or may need to be house ruled in order to keep the game enjoyable for everyone.

Socothbenoth does not appear to be a valid choice for deific obedience.

I don't see anything in the RAW that would prevent you from taking Demonic Obedience and Fiendish Obedience, along with the Damned Soldier and Damned Disciple feats. Though, these would only allow you to pick alternate choices for Fiendish. The Demonic Obedience feat locks you into to the specific list and you wouldn't be able to swap anything from that list.

It will be easier to help if we can narrow your focus a bit (as you've pointed out there's a lot of material that can be used).

What would you like your plant minions to be able to do?
How do you envision fighting with them? (having 1 big plant, having a bunch of little plants, summoning plants, etc.)
Do you want to be a plant yourself?
What do you want your main character to be doing during combat? (eg. front line combat, mounted combat, caster, something else?)

the feat curious companion will allow you to take a plant as a choice for an animal companion. There are crafting rules for making leshys. They even added leshies and Gathlains as a playable plant based races. There are archetypes like treesinger that allow you to take a plant companion without needing the feat. There's even several summoner archetypes that might work.

IMO there's enough out there that you could probably make any kind of character you want and give them a "plants as pets" theme.

Smitty.The.Smith wrote:
Delay poison seems to be the best way to handle Cloudkill short of poison immunity.


Extended Delay Poison + Daily Heroes’ Feast = poison immunity for all practical purposes.

avr wrote:
Agree with DeathlessOne, but a potential workaround might be to kill the skeleton, raise it from the dead, kill it again, then reanimate it. It'd have to be a very special skeleton to be worth all that of course.

It would have to be a very special undead indeed since you'd have to use a Resurrection or True Resurrection spell.

Other spells that might work (but would require DM approval) would be polymorph any object and clone. Using either spell it might be possible to create a fresh corpse that's a duplicate of the original corpse you animated.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
willuwontu wrote:
Using them separately means that they are applied separately. The FAQ does not say you cannot use them at the same time, just that they must be used separately.

The FAQ states that they must be used separately, which means they can't be combined. If you combine them then you're not using them separately.

willuwontu wrote:
How would you run the quoted question?

So, again, do the attack and damage bonus of swashbuckler weapon training and weapon training (light blades) from fighter both apply on attacks with a rapier?

Note that they do not say they stack.

Its not relevant to the discussion. I'm only discussing what happens if two abilities stack vs what happens if they don't stack.

As I already stated very early on, IMO sneak attack from various classes is intended to stack. At a glance I would assume that the two abilities you're asking about would stack (meaning you get to add both bonuses to an attack that is applicable to both abilities) since they have different names. IMO having different names is enough to treat them as different abilities. Now, if its called out somewhere that a specific ability stacks or doesn't stack with another specific ability that would over-ride my general assumption. If for example an FAQ identifies that these two abilities do not stack. Then I would assume that you have to pick one or the other for an applicable attack. That because they do not stack you have to pick which one applies.

1 to 50 of 1,410 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>