How would you build a 40K-style techpriest, servant of the Omnissah?
Technomancer? Which spells?
Mechanic? Exocortex has a good bit of 'the flesh is weak' flavor, but drone would let you have a servitor.
Search Posts
Based on discussion here, I've whipped together some acid-energy ray guns. The stats are a bit paint-by-numbers, but hey, the system is young.
Disruptor Pistol (Atomic, baryonic, molecular, nuclear)
Disruptor Rifle (Atomic, baryonic, molecular, nuclear)
Matter Disruption Excavator (Heavy, Light, Portable)
Disintegration Cutter (Industrial, Precision, Weaponized)
Advanced Melee Weapons
Disintegration Cutter, Industrial
Disintegration Cutter, Weaponized
Small Arms
Disruptor Pistol, Atomic
Disruptor Pistol, Nuclear
Disruptor Pistol, Baryonic
Longarms
Disruptor Rifle, Atomic
Disruptor Rifle, Nuclear
Disruptor Rifle, Baryonic
Matter Disruption Excavator, Portable
Heavy Weapons
Matter Disruption Excavator, Heavy
How does one get proficiency with the special weapons? I feel like I'm missing something obvious.
Who is supposed to use Longarms? Soldiers get Longarms, but they also get heavy weapons, which are better unless you really like shifting your grip to drink serums and apply medpatches. Anyone can take Longarm Proficiency (and some of the build guides in the core book suggest this), but they won't get their 3rd level free Specialization, which is at least slightly discouraging. Are they just for Exocortex Mechanics? Are they really enough better than Small Arms that they're worth a feat, even without Specialization? Am I missing something stupidly obvious?
In Pathfinder, Aroden's failed return broke prophecy. In Starfinder, the Gap broke history. It occurs to me that those are opposites. Does the ending of the Gap mean prophecies might work again, in a great spacial-temporal version of turning it off and back on again?
Kasatha are described as tradition bound, but we're only given two examples. The first shows up in all their art - Kasatha keep their mouths covered. This is easy to explain - mouths are bodily orifices, and Kasatha wear masks for the same reason humans wear pants: they don't want to show off either end of their digestive tract. Humans and other species are then all being a little gross, but they're another species, so it's a bit more like seeing Donald Duck never wear pants than being outright rude. The second is the preference for melee over ranged combat. This has a few roots that I can see. Most obviously, Kasatha have a racial Strength bonus, so on average they're better at melee compared to other races. But they also come from an old culture that plateaued some time ago. Wars fought with swords (even Laser Swords) have way less collateral death and destruction than those fought with guns and bombs. And duels are more manageable than wars. And duels using melee weapons are a lot easier to make non-lethal than duels using guns (fencing foils and bokken vs. laser tag and MILES gear.) What other Kasatha traditions (and explanations thereof) are there?
My first, and only SFS character received the number 702, instead of the 701 that would have enabled the 'Welcome to Starfinder' boon. Can it be renumbered?
I recently received the 'Goblin Golem of Obsidian' card in my Paizo shipment, and I'd like to have access to it on both iOS and Android. Is there a way to mark my Google Play Games and GameCenter logins as being equivalent?
This was a great book. My only real complaint is that The Specialist seems a rather lot like Alaeron with the serial numbers filed off, to the point of me wishing he was just Alaeron.
Archetypes can be tricky to balance, especially for new designers, because of the automatic assumption that you should get something for what you give up. But the truth is that sometimes giving something up doesn't mean anything, and sometimes there is no room to improve. I'm going to talk about the latter reason first, because it is simpler and it breaks the game faster.
The inspiration was this thread was the desire for a 'caster cleric', so I'll talk about that. Clerics are a 9-level caster with a huge spell list. They don't get free metamagic feats or quite as many flashy spells as Wizards do, but they don't need to keep a spellbook and get more spells every time a new rulebook comes out. This means that to a certain extent they don't need metamagic, because they can simply find a higher-level spell that does more damage, or lasts longer, or whatever instead of applying metamagic to a lower-level spell. There isn't a lot of room between 'cleric' and 'wizard' to make a cleric's spellcasting better. Some classes are already the best at what they do - making them better at that thing just reduces their versatility (because you traded something else off) or breaks the game (because you gave them 10th level spells or a BAB of 2 x level)
Sean K Reynolds touched on this when giving advice for designing archetypes:
(Similar points here and here.) This most obviously applies to things like taking away bonus feat to give a specific feat that such a character was going to take anyway (Forgepriest Warpriests were going to take Craft Magic Arms and Armor at 3rd level anyway.) Or restricting a domain choice to the ones that thematically match the rest of the class. These decisions aren't bad design on their own - they are bad design when used to justify a power increase elsewhere. Suppose I made a 'ranged cleric' archetype that gets to apply Reach Spell to all their Touch range spells for free. Taking away medium armor for that archetype isn't as much of a drawback as it looks like, because such a character has an easier time keeping their distance from the bad guys (unlike a stock cleric, which has to get nearer the action). In fact, such a character might have been happy switching to light armor anyway, because the extra 10 feet of movement keeps more space between them and threats. This is particularly true when designing an archetype for yourself. 'Must worship Desna' isn't a drawback if your character was going to do that anyway. 'Must be X alignment' isn't a drawback if you were going to be that anyway. Being harmed by positive energy isn't a drawback if you were already making a dhampir. Removing spells from your class list isn't a drawback if you as a player were never going to prepare those spells, and so on.
The arcane casters are hardest: generally its easier to make a new school or bloodline than swap pieces of a wizard or sorcerer - they can't even really trade off bits of their chassis - already having minimum BAB, skill points, and HD. This means that most cleric archetypes have a very small list of things to trade off - one or both domains, BAB, HD, maybe Channel Energy. One can't get upset with a downgrade to 1/2 BAB to get some other shinies - there just isn't much else to trade.
When I came back from vacation, I found my copy of PF #100 waiting for me. However, a nice big bite was taken out of page 100 (apropos, I know). The pages on either side were fine, and the crinkles at the edge of the tear were perfectly flat, so I'm assuming this happened somewhere in the print/bind part of production, rather than in shipping. Any chance I could have a pristine copy put in my package next month? Do you want/need photos of the damage?
Please cancel my Pathfinder Campaign Setting and Pathfinder Player Companion subscriptions.
I don't seem to have the PDF for the Giantslayer Map Folio on my account.
Magic circle against X is a 10 foot-radius circle. It can be focused inwards, pretty much always to support a planar binding, but could probably be used as a jail for an outsider in a pinch. If you try to put a creature that is bigger than the circle in it, this happens If a creature too large to fit into the spell's area is the subject of the spell, the spell acts as a normal protection from evil spell for that creature only. I have no idea what that means. Is the creature mobile? Are other creatures warded against it, or it against them? I also have no idea when it would apply - the circle is a 10-foot radius from the affected creature - how can it be bigger than itself? Is it possible to have made the diagram too small?
Are there any psychopomps concerned with shepherding souls to the material plane for birth?
Nominally speaking, the Pathfinder timeline advances in real time (it was 4707 when it started publishing, it is 4715 now). But Paizo has stated that they don't want to canonize exactly when or in what order adventures happen, especially for ones that could significantly change the campaign setting. For instance, the Guide to the Worldwound notes the fall of the Tower of Yath, which occurred in The Worldwound Gambit. But that tidbit doesn't change any adventures - it's just an easter egg to notice if you've read the book. Likewise, Stalking the Beast and Reign of Stars make reference to other Pathfinder Tales stories. But it doesn't affect their plots - they aren't sequels. Well, both of those actually are sequels. What I mean is they aren't sequels to the other works they reference. And progressing the timeline via fiction is less damaging than via adventures. It's still an extra book to read, but at least a story has exactly one outcome. An adventure, or adventure path, can have wildly varying outcomes. Which brings me to my point. I've been reading Lord of Runes. I haven't finished it yet, so this might not be a complete set of examples. It occurs in Korvosa, mentioning the Blood Veil plague and Gray Maidens. It has references to Thassilonian lore that imply the the Shattered Star AP and/or Rise of the Runelords AP have been completed. (More likely the former than latter, since the looting of Xin Shalast isn't mentioned.) And I've just reached the part when Eando Kline shows up, which I think implies the Serpent's Skull AP occurred. But the big one, because it actually changes the world, is it refers to the Mendevian Crusades as being over, which I have to assume relates to the conclusion of the Wrath of the Righteous AP. (I suppose this had to be addressed somewhat, since Kings of Chaos ties in to the destruction of Kenabres at the beginning of that AP.) Is this just a consequence of being the fifth book in the Radovan and the Count books, where their own self-contained history needs to be able to move forward? Do the Radovan and the Count stories get broader license to do this kind of thing as the 'flagship' of the Tales line? Or just Lord of Runes, as the first of the Tor books going to a wider audience? Is this a change in approach to the fiction in general?
In the Pathfinder Tales thread, Chris said the intent was to provide links from the product pages of the novels to the digital versions on sites like the iBookstore or Kindle store. It seems like linking to Comixology for the Pathfinder Comics would have a similar purpose.
Please cancel my Pathfinder Tales subscription. I still support the line, but at this point eBooks serve me best.
Throw Anything and Catch off guard are weird feats. They are basically Weapon Proficiency (Improvised). Clearly, they are not meant to replace individual weapon proficiency feats - that would make them too good. So we have to say, 'no, a longsword is real weapon - you can't use Catch Off-guard with it.' But that leads to the weird situation where an Alchemist (since they all get Throw Anything to go with their bombs) is better at throwing a beer stein or a rock than a throwing axe, which is meant to be thrown. (Your GM might decide the rock only does 1d4 damage, but 1d4 that hits is better than 1d6 that doesn't.)
What's the best way to get some use out of the Explosive Disarm ability? It seems neat to blast open a door or ruin a trap with a bomb, but the AC is the same as the trap DC...which is going to be higher than a typical touch attack. Why should I roll an attack roll with 3/4 BAB instead of a Disable Device check with full ranks, plus half level in bonuses from Trap Finding, when the difficulty is the same?
As tablets become more prevalent, would Paizo consider allowing the option to download single-file PDFs unzipped?
*Ahem*
Fuse grenades (and their shrapnel-filled children pellet grenades) take 1d3 rounds to go off. However, they can also be thrown as splash weapons. Does this mean A) That you can throw them for immediate ignition similar to alchemist's fire, with a ranged touch attach and the whole nine yards? B) Or is this just saying to use the Splash Weapon rules to figure out which square one lands in when you throw it, then you have to wait for it to go off? I have the feeling the answer is B, because a direct hit seems unnecessary when these items have a blast radius. Which leads to my secondary question: When you activate a grenade, do you know if it has 1, 2, or 3 rounds before detonating? I.e. can you (safely) hold it for a couple rounds before throwing, so your foe doesn't have a chance to move away? Does it go off at the beginning or end of your turn? Let's say I've rolled a '1' on my fuse (or I rolled a 2 and held it for a round, or a 3 and held it for two rounds). Do I have to throw it this turn or risk having my fingers blown off? Can I throw it next turn before it explodes, but without letting anyone else react? What if I ready an action (or delay), so that I act before the time my next turn would have started?
The 'My Subscriptions' page still has this test:
Is it perhaps time for that to come down?
I have a PbP infernal sorcerer. Is there any relatively straightforward way to get glibness on his spell list?
These mythic powers say"As a swift action, you can expend one use of mythic power to cast any one arcane spell without expending a prepared spell or spell slot." Does that mean that you actually cast the spells as part of the swift action (Essentially Quickening them), or merely that, like many other Mythic powers, you spend your Swift action to use the power, but you still have to obey the normal casting time of the spell? I suspect the latter, but I'm not finding any rules to back me up. If the former, those are much more powerful than I would have thought.
Spell resistance is a lame mechanic - essentially AC for spells. But not on all monsters. Just some monsters. It's an extra hurdle - Saves are already like AC for spells. It's often attached to creatures that have elemental resistances, making damage spells even worse options. It has odd mechanical implications regarding what is real and what is magical (i.e. spell resistance doesn't protect against a magically conjured boulder falling on you, but does against magically created fire exploding around you), largely giving Conjuration spells a pass. Related, it is often overlooked when developing new spells. Sometimes Spell Resistance is thought of as a balancing spell feature, sometimes it gets a 'No' because that leads to physical impossibilities*, and sometimes because the spell author just wrote something based on the school and it was never revisited. It has no flavorful hooks, making to give responses to knowledge checks other than 'is resistant to magic!', which ceases to be an interesting tidbit after the 80th time. It isn't immunity, so monsters cannot really say 'I am above your mortal magic'. It applies to spells uniformly, making it less a puzzle (the way elemental resistances are), and more an exercise in finding which spells say 'Spell Resistance: No'. Proposals to fix it: Get rid of numeric spell resistance. It effectively only comes in 3 'strengths': 5 + CR, 10 + CR, and 15 + CR. Why not have something more like a 50% miss chance instead of 10 + CR, which works out about the same? Whenever possible, change spell resistance to something more interesting. Imagine if, instead of having SR X, a Succubus was instead immune to Enchantment spells. That's fitting (Can't b$*+*$*@ a b*+*@#%!ter), is something interesting to reveal via knowledge check, and is something that the spellcaster can work around, instead of doubling down and hoping for a high roll or looking for SR: No spells. Abilities that are more interesting than SR:
*: e.g. what would it mean if Spell Resistance made you immune to having a wall of iron toppled over on you.
The weird things: 1)Monsters often have dramatically high Natural Armor scores, which frequently begin to feel gamist to keep pace with their CRs. 2)Every single PC gains at least +1/2 BAB per level, leading to the odd situation where a high level wizard gets progressively better at attack rolls, despite the fact he hasn't used his dagger since 2nd level and the Touch ACs he does roll attacks against are mostly static. 3) Characters have no innate AC gain, relying on protective magic gear for scaling. (A fully-equipped PC gains ~1 AC per level, though it can come in clumps if there is a crafter in the group.*) The proposed change:
The result:
Monsters above CR are slightly easier to hit. Monsters below CR are slightly harder to hit. Fighter attack bonuses scale at the same rate as caster saves. *: AC magic items require CL of 3 times the bonus, and there are three major AC items: amulet of natural armor, ring of protection, and either magical armor or bracers of armor. So with a crafter on board AC jumps by 3 every 3 levels, instead of moving more smoothly.
This month's subscription order is only three softcover books, which I would expect in the white cardboard mailer envelope. But my confirmation email shows it shipping Priority at a cost of $13.97. That seems high. I saw in the November Shipment thread that there was an issue with removing sidecarted books (like the strategy guide) from subscription orders. Was my shipping calculated based on the Strategy Guide, which is heavier and would require a box?
Channeling Cheapy and Sean, I wanted to remind people what makes for good playtest feedback. I've updated Cheapy's ACG post for Occult Adventures. I’m not the end-all-be-all for what Paizo wants from this, but here are my thoughts on the topic.
I thought I had put my Strategy Guide into my sidecart, but it is currently listed as 'pending'. If this is not in my sidecart, please put it in my sidecart.
Is it worthwhile to invest in the Leadership feat and/or the Loyalty power of the Marshal mythic path? Is there a way for your cohort to gain Mythic ranks? My concern is that nothing changes the 'Cohort at your level -2' thing. Even with Loyalty allowing stacking your mythic tier, that is likely only to net more followers, rather than a stronger cohort. A (for instance) level 8 cohort, hanging around with 4 level 10 characters is doing okay. But when those level 10 characters have 5 mythic ranks and can fight a CR 15 monster causually, that cohort is looking a little less like an asset and a little more like a liability. (Getting even more attacks with Marshal's order is nice and all, but only if those attacks can expect to actually matter.)
Clockwork mage? *looks closer* Robot clockwork mage!?
The bastard sword (or the Dwarven waraxe) is the iconic hand-and-a-half weapon. But no one ever uses it as one: anyone interested in wading in two-handed would rather just use a greatsword (and save a feat), and most shield-and-sword builds would rather use a feat for something other than one-bigger die size and less-frequent loot drops. Add to that the fact that the entire 'one-handed' weapon category are hand-and-a-half weapons in that you can switch to a two handed grip for more damage (assuming a Str > 14.) Historically, longswords/broadswords were likely to be hand-and-a-half hilted. It might be interesting to re-evaluate the weapon categories from light/one-handed/two-handed to something like light (daggers, shortswords)/one-handed (sabers, rapiers, scimitars)/half-and-a-half (longsword, battleaxe, mace)/two-handed (greataxe, greatsword), perhaps with simple Str pre-reqs to proficiency instead of requiring a secondary feat.
Maybe my eyes are playing tricks on me, but has the font in quotes and the left-side navigation three been changed?
Gearless characters are one of those things many people want. 'Vow of poverty' monks or ascetic clerics. A 'low-magic' style feel of not being festooned in system-required numerical bonuses. A desire for a character's accomplishments to be their own doing, not just their magic belt. And so on. But the system fights this, and hard. There is a basic assumption in the CR tables that you've spent a certain amount of wealth on AC and save bonuses, or on improving your attack roll and damage (if you use attack rolls and weapon damage.) A GM wishing to run a 'low magic' campaign can simply lower Wealth-per-level and use less powerful monsters, or perhaps just adjust AC, attack, and save DCs somewhat. But that isn't quite fair across the party: spellcasters and martial classes are affected by access to wealth differently. Spellcasters use magic items to save juice - Reducing their wealth simply shortens the adventuring day as more spell slots are spent on basic buffs and healing. Martial characters, in contrast, use magic items to gain new abilities: reducing their wealth increases the chances that a martial character is unable to affect the outcome of an encounter. There have also been attempts to fit a gearless character into a party of more ordinary characters. These tend to have secondary problems. For instance the 'Vow of poverty' style solution where a character refuses to use gear in exchance for static bonuses. This approach requires the GM to adjust the wealth in their campaign, to avoid the other party members getting a larger share. Additionally, static numerical bonuses (like these approaches usually give) are only half the battle. They don't address the other things magic items can do, like flight or the use of other magical effects. In a way, they also cheapen the idea of a Vow of Poverty: if going without gets you the same result, then there is no sacrifice. (Set had an excellent commentary on Good getting all the toys here.) Other solutions involve 'buying' magical bonuses by sacrificing/tithing/donating wealth. These solutions manage to avoid upsetting expected WBL, but are mechanically a bit hollow. It feels like a hack, because it is, and also kind of feels like just buying invisible magic items. (Incidentally, it also somewhat cheapens crafting feats.) Sometimes this approach involves magical tattoos or the like, which really do just become magic items under another name. Gearless characters are also immune or more resistant to sundering, disarming, and dispelling effects, which is usually not the intent of these abilities, but should be considered when balancing them. I don't have a solution. This thread is for discussion so we can find one.
This is spun off of some of the discussion of Pathfinder Unchained. As written, planar binding has issues.
At the same time, it's easy to see why errata hasn't been issued - I have hard time imagining errata that would fit on the page, and address things like the wish loophole in a way that doesn't either arbitrarily limit some SLAs that are ok, or become an itemized list 'per monster'. And you'd still have the problem of a future book possibly breaking the spell. In comparison, the summon monster (and summon nature's ally) spells use a curated list of monsters, checked for general power level and early access to spell-like abilities. The list doesn't get bigger with later monster books: instead new, different spells like eagle aerie, summon minor monster, or summon elder worm are necessary. Likewise, Polymorph effects had similar problems in the 3.0 era. They were streamlined somewhat in 3.5, but was a monumentally flexible spell that got better and more flexible with every Monster Manual. Pathfinder solved the problems with the polymorph spell by breaking it up like Ma Bell. It became a series of spells that granted access to specific forms, with clearly delineated powers. Beast shape i made simpler transformations like turning into a wolf possible at lower than 7th level, but eventually obsolesces like most spells (compared to 3.5 polymorph, which scaled smoothly up to 15th level). New monster books no longer inflated the powers of these spells unless specifically added and evaluated as a new spell. Individual powers could be evaluated on a better basis than 'how many HD does the critter have'. It was a much better paradigm for everyone but sorcerers, who now had to invest in more spells if they wanted to turn into many different shapes. I think that's fine: 'anyspells' should be limited for exactly that kind of reason, and it makes the 'shapeshifter sorcerer' invest in parallel spells in the same way that a 'fire sorcerer' or 'beguiler sorcerer' does. It promotes the ability to actually know what your spells do, instead of bringing the game to a halt to flip through 5 monster books in case there is one with <12 HD that would happen to solve the problems none of your other available spells can. So, my proposal is this: break planar binding (and possibly planar ally) into a series of spells. Bind genie i could be lower-level and bind a janni, while bind genie iv (or whatever) could get an efreeti, and require 17th caster level to actually get a wish. Bind devil i could be limited to imps and lemures. You can mirror fantasy tropes and make it easier to bind demons/devils than angels, reducing the team red/team blue thing some alignment-based spells have now. 
I will reserve final judgement until I see the finished class, but the hit to Sacred Weapon hurts a lot. I can only hope that we will get some way to replenish our fervor like the other limited pool classes.
The more I think about it, the more I think that PCs aren't meant ot reach 20th level. I mean, Pathfinder created capstones, which implies someone is supposed to get there, but spell progressions are weird about it. 9-level casters get a new spell level every other level. But there are no 10th level spells at level 19 (or level 20 for spontaneous casters) 6-level casters get a new spell level every third level. But there are no 7th level spells at 19th level. 4-level casters get a new spell level every fourth level. But there are no 5th level spells at 17th level. To me, this really says that PCs are meant to peter out around 17th level: 20th level exists so you can have an NPC BBEG who challenges the whole party, but doesn't have a 'next tier' of spells in his spellbook the wizard will never get to play with.
When I ordered my copy of the Emerald Spire, I put it in my sidecart. But today I got my shipping notice for June subs and it wasn't included, so I came and checked on it, only to find it 'pending' as a separate order. Not sure how that happened, but I did change my address a day or two ago. Maybe that popped it back out of the sidecart? Anyway, can I get these orders combined to save on shipping?
Inner Sea Gods had a nice little chart of deities and which creatures serve them (if not necessarily exclusively), but I was sort of elaborating on that by thinking about which deities are essentially members of a given outsider race. That is, Erastil and Torag get along with archons, and have archon servants, but they aren't archons themselves. Asmodeus is the ruler of Hell, and devils all work for him. Even if he isn't a proper Devil himself, being instead a fallen angel or a primordial deity that created the devils, there are several Archdevils that started as non-devils and now have devilish traits. Asmodeus almost certainly has the devil subtype, even if he wasn't 'born' with it. Gozreh might be an aeon. (S)he is a primal force, and encompasses dualities: Male/female, Sea/Sky, and so on. But this is a stretch. Lamashtu is a demon. There is no argument on this. Nethys has to have become an Aeon: the duality thing is perfect, right down to deities being a paradox of immense power and the inability to use it directly. I suspect that Nethys's moment of ascension, when he achieved arcane omnipotence, tapped into the multiverse itself, which the aeons serve directly. Pharasma can't possibly be anything other than the biggest and greatest of the psychopomp Ushers. Rovagug is a qlippoth. This went from fan conspiracy theory to canonized. This may have been the truth all along, but James Jacobs has admitted that sometimes when your players come up with an evil plan better that what you have, it's often better to go with their theory as if it was right all along. Sarenrae has to be an angel. I've debated with people if she's an ascended angel, or the first angel, or creator of the angels. But one way or another, she is an angel. Zon-Kuthon is a kyton. Maybe Dou-Bral was corrupted by the same force that created the kytons. Maybe Zon-Kuthon created them, or adopted them based on a similar outlook. But like Asmodeus and devils, we can safely assume Zon-Kuthon has the kyton subtype.
It looks like this is my May subscriptions shipment. I also preordered the Deluxe Harrow deck, which was to be combined with my subscription shipments. Is it also expected this month, and if so, why isn't it attached to this order?
Iomedae has been a deity for 800 years or so. But she wasn't one of the 'Core 20' for the Inner Sea until the disappearance of Aroden a century ago.
In the century since, Iomedae has become the paladin deity of Golarion. It makes me wonder how much of her ascension from patron saint/demigod to Core 20 deity has been a result of drawing paladins to the Worldwound, instead of merely filling the gap left by Aroden.
Psychic Paper
|
