Yeah, that all looks legit. The double musket text suggests that it's a separate roll for each of the two shots it takes.
Personally, I tend to recommend against allowing double-barreled guns. They're just a little too crazy. Gunslingers don't have any problems providing solid damage with single-shot guns.
I think I saw a Guardian power that was similarly out of place. In the playtest document, the powers were arranged in alphabetical order and notated like Speedy Summons to indicate what the required tier is.
My guess is, somewhere along the way the editors decided to cut the requirement out of the description and arrange them into tier categories instead. But when doing that, a couple of them happened to get missed.
Epic Meepo wrote:
If brawling could be added to bracers of armor, you could wear brawling bracers of armor and +1 brawling armor to get a +4 bonus on attack and damage rolls with unarmed strikes.
Doesn't work like that. Check the text for Bracers of Armor. If you wear them with actual armor, the one with the lower armor bonus just stops working altogether.
That's pretty much exactly how it works. Multiple sources of DR don't stack in magnitude, you just take the highest DR. But if you've got different types, they each get an attempt to reduce damage, just so long as you use only one of them.
So if you've got DR 3/Cold Iron and DR 5/Bludgeoning, you use your DR 5 for anything that it applies to and your DR 3 for anything else. If you end up getting hit by a cold iron rod, you take the whole thing.
I think it's worth pointing out that the rule says, "If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest."
That indicates to me that bonus attacks you get from sources other than BAB aren't necessarily subject to the highest-to-lowest requirement.
I've got a maneuver monk/unarmed fighter that's been kind of silly the last few sessions. On any mundane grounded mook, he'll blast across a 100-foot charge and:
So with a single charge, you've got your chump pinned, prone, and four attacks deep. Not too shabby.
I disagree. For the maneuvers delivered with a weapon that take the place of an attack (sunder, trip, and disarm), there's no reason you can't replace the bonus attacks granted by a style feat.
Of course, this carries the caveat that if you're restricted to an unarmed strike for these bonus attacks, you must use an unarmed strike to perform the maneuver.
It's not that you have to be able to make attacks outside of your turn, it's that you threaten even when it is not your turn.
But just to play Devil's Advocate, let's presume Darksol is right.
If you take an Attack of Opportunity under normal circumstances, would you then stop threatening for the rest of the round. Without Combat Reflexes, you can't take more than one AoO. Once the first one is used up, you can't make anymore attacks outside of your turn, so you stop threatening, right?
Alternately, why don't readied attacks qualify? The grappled condition doesn't say you're unable to ready an attack. If you can use a readied action to make an attack outside of your turn, shouldn't that count?
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
No; the grappled condition states you cannot make attacks of opportunity when so grappled, which means you do not threaten any squares, a requisite to provide flanking.
Being able to make attacks of opportunity is a function of threatening, not the other way around. You can make attacks while grappled, so you can threaten while grappled.
Consider this: Presuming your GM allows it, a +2 bonus from Aid Another on a strength check is actually a bigger bonus than it usually ought to be.
Look at the Carrying Capacity tables. The amount of weight you can carry/lift/drag doubles for every five points of strength. So if you've got two guys of equal strength pushing on something with all of their might, they presumably generate double the force of one person alone and can account for about an extra 2.5 points of DC. As the difference in strength increases, the extra person should matter less and less.
So with a 12 strength rogue helping out an 18 strength bruiser, a +2 is actually a bargain.
This was discussed a bit in the SLA casting thread, but I think it deserves its own separate mention.
Pathfinder Design Team wrote:
This seems kind of huge to me. Basically any race or class that gives a SLA grants access to crafting feats. This opens up the trade to a lot more characters.
Well, sure. Once you get to sub-sentient levels of INT, all bets are off.
Ximen Bao wrote:
So what happens if your int score goes down? Can a curse hit a Barbarians's 10 int and make him lose common? That would be hilarious.
Stat penalties work differently from gains. Unless it's ability drain, a loss of Intelligence just means a penalty to skill checks and spell DCs.
Drain works as if you really do have a lower score. So if it is Intelligence drain, you would presumably lose bonus languages. Fortunately for our barbarian, base languages are not a function of Intelligence, only bonus languages, so you can't forget how to speak altogether by taking Intelligence drain.
I'm interested to know, did the glabrezu manage to make its concentration check to get that off? A 13th level big cat AC should have a grapple CMB of at least 20, so that's a minimum DC37 concentration check as I figure it. The glabrezu would have to roll 18 or better to make it.
Not impossible, certainly, but I get the impression that it was never actually rolled.
Bard with the Archeologist archetype is one of the better "do anything" class choices. Druid it also rather versatile and you can get an animal companion that helps share the burden.
Summoner with the Master Summoner archetype is probably the best option for a solo adventurer. You can basically just summon a solution to every problem and you cast from charisma, so you've got that going for you. You probably won't melee much directly, but most of the monsters you summon will.
Where are you getting your numbers? It's ten gold for a dose of black powder. So you're looking at 11g per shot. Still high, yes. But as a gunslinger you get Gunsmithing for free, which allows you to make your own ammo at 10% cost. So each of those shots would be 1.1g, instead.
Do note that alchemical cartridges (including paper cartridges) are only half price with Gunsmithing. So once you start using those to get full attacks, you'll be looking at 6g per shot, but it's more manageable by then.
I'd argue that pounce is at its most appropriate when used as a standard action. Surprise rounds are where you see the most standard action charges and ambush predator creatures (big cats and the like) are the ones you most often see with pounce. So I'd say a pounce from a standard action charge is legit.
You'd need a +6 enhancement bonus on the weapon. So, for the most part, you're not going to do it with a standard magic weapon. A +4 bane weapon of the appropriate type would be the most likely candidate for the job. Smite evil also should work. For most other characters it's effectively DR/plot device.
1. They're described as attacks, so you have to roll to hit for each of them.
2. This isn't super clear. I suspect the intention is that you're supposed to get them as part of maintaining a grapple. In that case, they should apply each time you maintain. The way it's written, however, it seems like you can just take two free rake attacks any time during the round, so long as you take them against a grappled opponent. In this fashion, you could even start the round grappling, rake, then release if you wanted to.
3. Rake is described as a claw attack. The monster stat blocks will have the damage already figured, but anything that modifies an attack should also modify rake as appropriate.
Sounds like a monk to me. You get loads of bonus movement and flurry. You can take some SLAs with the Qinggong archetype and eventually Quicken Spell Like Ability as a feat. Once you start getting into the higher levels, the Dimensional Agility chain can have you blipping all over the place through Abundant Step.
Alternately, a synthesist summoner could get a load of natural attacks and a bunch of movement bonuses through evolutions and they get a similar Dimension Door ability. Quicken metamagic via feat or rod will get you the swift spells.
I can see where you're coming from. I read it as the standard rules as only explicitly defining a lower bound and the FAQ as clarifying that there is no upper bound. But I can see how you'd read it as defining the permissions rather than the restrictions.
The rules around crafting are kind of foggy enough that pretty much everyone is going to need to find their own balance in it. I hear tell Ultimate Campaign is supposed to clear things up a bit on the crafting front. Maybe this will be one of those things.
For example, a 3rd-level wizard with Craft Wondrous Item can create a 1st-level pearl, with a minimum caster level of 1. He can set the caster level to whatever he wants (assuming he can meet the crafting DC), though the pearl's caster level has no effect on its powers (other than its ability to resist dispel magic). If he wants to make a 2nd-level pearl, the caster level has to be at least 3, as wizards can't cast 2nd-level spells until they reach character level 3. He can even try to make a 3rd-level pearl, though the minimum caster level is 5, and he adds +5 to the DC because he doesn't meet the "able to cast 3rd-level spells" requirement.
Perhaps it's not the intent, but the bolded text seems to suggest that the only limitation is the craft DC.
The only legit way I can think of is the one Grell mentioned earlier: A big witch coven.
It'd take one level fifteen-to-eighteen witch to cast the resurrection spell or life giver hex along with seventy or eighty additional witches, depending on how high the first witch could juice her own caster level. The crowd of helper witches can be any level as long as they all have the coven hex.
Kind of a big deal, but also kind of appropriate for a deed this epic. Convene a gigantic gathering of witches and they all pool their power in a huge ritual to return a soul from ancient history.
Could be a good story hook.
You can make melee attacks when grappling, even if you can't make attacks of opportunity. So, while you might not be able to take advantage of one of the most common uses for threatening, you still threaten.
Based on the context, I read the provisions against allowing Strangling Hair to move an enemy as a restriction on taking the move option when maintaining a grapple. I wouldn't see it as unreasonable to to interpret it as a restriction on the initial movement as well, but that's not how I read it.
If your hair successfully grapples an opponent, you will likely threaten that opponent. But that's because the first step after successfully initiating grapple against a distant opponent is that you move that opponent to an adjacent square. So if you threaten adjacent squares, you will threaten the grappled opponent for the purpose of flanking.
Combat reflexes limits you to a single AoO for movement during a round.
No, it limits movement to a single opportunity per round. It's a subtle difference, but a significant one.
Now, you could argue that the entire movement is part of the same opportunity and you're merely deciding when to act on it. I'm not aware of any other drawn out opportunities like this, but movement is already a special case, so it may be possible.
I could see having a lot of fun with a character who can see all of these tropes and this foreshadowing for what they really are and declares it loudly for everyone anyone hear.
Only nobody actually believes him. People put up with him because he's a pretty good bard or whatever, but they all think he's a little touched and more or less just ignore his ranting.
You'd need the other players to back you up on it, but it could be pretty fun.
It's not RAW, but I've always been kind of a fan of allowing players to take whatever feats they want, but they just don't work unless they qualify for them. I think the advantage of being able to take early feats is offset by having dead feat slots for one or more levels.
Either that, or the Sean Reynolds way where you can take a feat if you're able to meet its prerequisites in any way (like with potions, or wild shape, or raging) but they're only "on" while you actually qualify for them. Again, not RAW, but I like it.
Ah, I stand corrected. Though with enemies that you need a crit to hit at all, the larger crit range would still provide more utility. Most DR can be overcome with the correct materials or magical enhancements. I still think the game leans towards swords being a better choice for front-line fighters.
A critical threat does not mean an automatic hit. If you miss on a 19 with a battleaxe, you miss on a 19 with a longsword. Automatic hits only score on a 20.
EDIT: Ninja'd like crazy. That's what I get for letting this thread sit in an open tab for 20 minutes without refreshing.
It's not at all unreasonable to come to the conclusion that each iterative attack has its own separate BAB, especially in the light of many rules entries which refer to "your highest base attack bonus."
However, even if that is not the case, general bonuses and penalties to attacks also apply to combat maneuver attempts. So the penalties for iterative attacks would apply to combat maneuvers taken in their place.
Tommy Vaceck wrote:
I'm assuming we're just working on bringing the monster down to 0 HP. Of course it'll eventually regenerate. The Tarrasque is a plot device. You're not supposed to be able to actually kill it.
As for showing work, Rapid Reload with alchemical cartridges allow reloading a one-handed firearm as a free action. Clustered Shots lets you group all attacks in a round against DR.
I agree, I'm not super crazy about double-barreled guns, but it seems like that's the way they're supposed to work. If you use single-barreled pistols and two-weapon fighting instead, you could do the same if you can squeeze out another ten damage per shot. I'm sure the optimization gurus around here could make that happen.