Mallets's page

Sorry for so many questions below. Here's the deal. I'm looking to create a Dwarven Mounted Fury Barbarian. I want to stick pure MF if possible. Backstory and RP are more important than being optimal.

So the backstory is that the character is from a tribe of barbarians that have a tradition when a member comes of age, he must venture out into the wilderness and tame a large wild boar as a mount. He may be out there for months or years before he tames the beast and each for this life-long bond. Once he tames the mount, he returns to the tribe as one of it's warriors. If the boar dies, the dwarf retires from the tribe's warband. Well now the tribe has greatly dwindled and this certain breed of boar are becoming extinct, so this adventure has left the tribe to test himself (and his mount).
I'm RPing that if his mount dies, he leaves the party.

I naturally have questions about getting a regular boar or even a dire boar as a mount. I want to stay with the rules if possible. Not that I'm against a GM granting me special privileges. But if I can avoid them, I'd like to.

So now to the questions:

1) For the Mount Fury, it says that I get a "feral" mount? Anything special to the feral mount besides the +2 Str when I'm raging?

2) Is there any legal way (within the rules) to acquire a Dire Boar as a mount? I don't want to have to constant make checks to keep him tame.

I don't think so. I think it's left up to the GM to allow this. But from the Animals & Animal Gear page says the following:

These feral beasts are all but untamable, and are typically only sought out by violent brawlers or cruel lords, either for brutish protection or to pit against equally vicious creatures in violent animal fights. At the GM’s discretion, PCs who acquire dire animals may be required to attempt wild empathy or Handle Animal checks every day to keep their pets from running away or attacking them and their allies. Dire animals are not generally suitable as mounts, though the GM may make exceptions at her discretion.

It mentions "feral" beast and the Mount Fury gets a feral mount! So hopefully most GM's discretion would allow for this!

3) What would be the stats for a Dire Boar Mount? Would you go off the stats located here. This seems a little strong to be honest.

** If dire boar is too hard to acquire, I'll look to stick with a common boar. But this lead me to some questions as well. **

4) I want to acquire a boar as a mount at level 5 (when I receive a mount). But for this to work, I believe I will have to take Boon Companion as my level 5 feat. I will have also had to take Undersized Mount prior to this (say at level 3). With Mounted Combat taken at level 1, then I'd have to wait till level 7 for Ride-by-attack.

All this to say, it sucks to have to use 2 feats just to get a regular boar to ride a level 5. Which is why I'm wanting a dire boar (don't have to waste a feat with Undersized Mount).

[Any way around all this to acquire a regular boar mount at level 5? Remember I'm want to stay pure Mounted Fury if possible.

5) A regular boar will only take up a single 5 ft square like the character himself. This is advantage. But what are the disadvantages? How bad is the encumbrance?

6) Sorry for this last question, since I've already asked a lot. But can someone explain mount starting stats and how mounts level up to me like a big dummy. I've tried reading about it in both forum post and looking at the rules. I'm just confused.

If I got a regular boar at level 5 with Boon Companion, would he start with stats listed here. Or would his stats be improved since the stats here are for a level 4 boar?

How do mounts level up... with your XP? Can they level up? If not, how do you keep them alive at later levels with such low hp. If yes, do you use the Animal Companion leveling system.

Do they acquire feats at preset levels or only at the GMs discretion? Do they acquire ability scores as they level (like animal companions)?

Sorry for so many questions here. i just want to make sure I've got my bases covered.

Curious if other players have found Missile Shield worth it? The benefit seems great. But here's why I'm second guessing it.

From a logical standpoint would an enemy archer shoot at the full-plate armored guy with a shield? Or would he go after the lightly armored guys without a shield? I'd think the latter. Of course every GM will look at it differently. But if a GM is looking to keep things competitive, I could see him easily bypass ranged attacks on the high AC Shielded Fighter with Missile Shield.

I'm also second guessing because you have to take Shield Focus. SF is probably a good feat for a Shielded Fighter to take. But I'm not planning on going the Shield Specialization route. I was looking to be more balanced and take some offensive feats instead.

Nothing's decided. Looking for feedback before I do. Thanks!

The Shielded Fighter's Active Defense feature reads as such:

Active Defense (Ex)

At 3rd level, a shielded fighter gains a +1 dodge bonus to AC when wielding a shield and fighting defensively, using Combat Expertise, or using total defense. This bonus increases by +1 for every four levels beyond 3rd. As a swift action, he may share this bonus with one adjacent ally, or half of the bonus (minimum +0) with all adjacent allies, until the beginning of his next turn.

This ability replaces Armor Training 1, 2, 3, and 4.

If I'm reading it correctly, I have to be using one of the following along with carrying a shield.

• Fighting Defensively
  
• Combat Expertise
  
• Total Defense

Looking at these three options, it makes me feel that I need to take Combat Expertise (which requires 13 Int). I wasn't planning on taking Combat Expertise (nor 13 Int), but that seems the best option.

Fighting Defensively really hurts attack with -4 To-Hit. And you only get +2 AC. Of course CE will eventually give a -4 attack, but you'll also get +4 AC.

Total Defense is nice. But then I can't attack or get AoO. As a frontliner, I need to be doing some damage. So unless the situation applies, I can't regularly use Total Defense.

I would love advice telling me otherwise. But it seems like if I don't want this feature to be a total waste or simply go unused, that I should take CE (and 13 Int).

What do you guys think?

Here's the deal. I want to play a Ranger that hunts big exotic game. The Trophy Hunter seems perfect right? Wrong, because I don't want to use a firearm. I want to use a Heavy Crossbow. And for all my searching, I don't see another Ranger Archetype that offers features that fit as well as the Trophy Hunter. And as for the Hunter class itself... it seems even less fitting (I personally don't want an animal companion).

So I'm looking for rules advice on if you think the changes described below would be fair. I don't want to make this rework over-powered. I'm actually ok with it being a little under-powered.

Let me share my thoughts and please share your feedback on what you think. Whether this is fair or not. And do you think a DM would likely approve said changes... or are they too far-fetched and over-powered. Obviously all DMs are different. But I'd still like a general consensus on what you guys think.

As a reference, here's the features for the Trophy Hunter with my thoughts on how they would be reworked below:

• I would like to keep Improved Tracking since it seems to fit the role of a hunter nicely.

• But when it comes to Firearm Style, well I don't want to use a Firearm. This feature replaces all Ranger Combat Style Feats. So my thought is to drop this feature all together and just allow the character to take Combat Style Feats normally. My character would take Crossbow.

• Hunter's Aim is the hardest to judge (and where I need the most advice on fairness). I could just drop this feature and keep Hunter's Bond, but then why am I even playing Trophy Hunter (just to have Improved Tracking). So my thought is to keep Hunter's Aim but rework it. I think keeping target touch on the first two range increments is over-powered. But maybe reducing it to the first range increment would be fair. So this is what I'm proposing.

Hunter's Aim would read:

At 4th level, a trophy hunter gains a specific understanding of the weaknesses and vulnerabilities of his favored enemies, and his careful study of these enemies reveals the best way to hurt them. When the trophy hunter makes a ranged attack against a favored enemy, he can target touch AC in the first range increment of his ranged weapon. This ability stacks with other effects that increase the range increments to target touch AC, adding one range increment to the effect.

This ability replaces hunter’s bond.

What do you guys think about that? Fair?

If it's too over-powered, could the rule say half of your first range increment? Or maybe it should say if the enemy is within Point Blank range (30 feet). Thoughts please!

Another note, a crossbow ranger can get Pinpoint Targeting at level 10 (which basically does a touch attack). But Pinpoint Targeting is a standard action. Meaning you only get that one attack per round. With this rework of Hunter's Aim you could do a full-attack action. This makes me worry that this rework is over-powered.

Also keep in mind that Hunter's Aim only works with Favored Enemies. So maybe that helps balance it. And Pinpoint may still be useful for attacking non-favored enemies. Also Pinpoint would still work after the first range increment. So maybe it would still be viable sometimes.

Thoughts on this rework please? Whether advice on this rework or on another class that you think fits a Trophy Hunter well. Backstory and the character fitting the class's theme is important to me.

Let me clarify that I'm not looking to use a Khopesh with two hands. I'm looking for a weapon that's bigger than the described Khopesh in the books. A khopesh is described as being 20 to 24 inches long (total length, not just blade). To me that's really short. A sickle could up to 18 inches long. Of course, the khopesh is meant as a one-handed weapon. I'm looking for something a little bigger. Something that would be around 42 inches (3.5 feet) long. Similar to a bastard sword that is described as 4 feet long.

If there a weapon like this that I'm over looking? If not, then I'm looking to create one. But even though I looked over the weapon creation rules... I really have no idea what to do.

To me, the weapon would be exotic. For one, Khopesh is exotic. And two, a bastard sword (being hand & half) is exotic. It could still offer the Trip feature. That's not important to me, but to keep in line with Khopesh.

I guess my main question would be... what would be the base damage of this type of weapon? With it being bigger, thus heavier than a khopesh, I would think it would do more damage than 1d8. So here's what I'm thinking:

1) 2d4 -- Same as a Falchion since they are similarly large, curved slashing weapons.
2) 1d10 -- Same as a Bastard Sword since both are hand & half. Also similar to the Dwarven Waraxe. With the Khopesh's curved blade, probably more similar to the Waraxe.
3) 1d12 -- Same as a Great Axe. The curved blade is more similar to an axe than a sword. Probably not as big and devastating as a Great Axe, but maybe.
4) 2d6 -- Same as a Great Sword, but I think this is too much damage since it's not a dedicated two hand weapon. Nor is it 5 feet long.

I'm actually leaning towards 1d10. With the forward-setting curved blade, the weapon's damage threat is truly more like an axe than a sword. Of course being in the form of a sword give more flexibility with attacks and parries. For me, I'd say 1d10, putting the weapon in line with the Dwraven Waraxe and Bastard Sword.

If it is more like an axe, then it brings up the question of the crit stats. I'm surprised the Khopesh is 19-20 x2 like many swords, and that it's not more like an axe with a crit on 20 x3. Thoughts welcome on crit stats as well.

I've got a few questions about three Picaroon deeds: Gun Feint, Lightning Reload, and Precise Strike. Sorry for all the questions. But if I'm going to take this archetype, I want to make sure I have the mechanics worked out.

First off, let me start by saying that I know Picaroon isn't optimal, because you can't reload a pistol with another weapon in your hand. But I plan to play as a switch hitter. Engage pistol at distance (which I know is a small range) then go to melee. But I have backstory... and it just seems like a fun character to play. I'm thinking combat will be fun even though it's not that strong of a class.

But this leads me to some major questions about deeds and how they would function. I'll try to group the questions under each of the different deeds.

Gun Feint

1) Gun Feint says that a player can "feint instead of attacking with her firearm as part of a full attack". What does "as part of a full attack" mean? What I'm trying to figure out is, do I still get to attack this round? Or is this action (deed) actually a full attack action and I cannot do anything else? Meaning I cannot attack. I'm think it's the latter and this deed replaces any chance for combat. But if it doesn't that's great and advantageous.

2) In the scenario above, if I do get to attack... and I choose to attack with my melee weapon, is it considered a Two Weapon attack? Normally feinting isn't considered an attack action, so I would think not. Because I use the pistol to feint and the melee weapon (likely rapier) to attack, is this Two Weapon fighting and incurring the penalties that go along with it. The reason this is very important is because duel wielding a rapier and pistol incurs -4 to attack if you Two Weapon attack.

3) Can I perform the Gun Feint deed if my pistol is empty? Don't think the rules require the gun to be loaded. But the spirit of the law may omit this. However, if the opponent never saw me fire the pistol, how would he know it's empty? But maybe I'm missing something and there's a clear ruling on this.

Lightning Reload

I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this one. But want to ask just to make sure.

4) With Lightning reload, I can reload as a free action (will have Rapid Reload). If my BAB is at +11, with means I can make attacks at +11/+6/+1, can I make all 3 attacks with a full-attack action? I would think yes, but want to make sure. Being able to do so would at least even out the pistol getting used way less than the rapier. And being able to fire off multiple shots at range seems really fun!

Precise Strike

This is a major one!!!

5) The Precise Strike deed says "To use this deed, a swashbuckler cannot attack with a weapon in her other hand or use a shield other than a buckler". Does this mean that I simply cannot Two Weapon fight and use the Precise Strike deed. Meaning I can't Precise Strike with my rapier and also attack with my pistol. Or is it saying that I cannot have the pistol in my hand at all? That I must only have a single light/one-hand weapon equipped. This is obviously a pretty major question. Because if it's the latter and I can't even have the pistol in my hand... then it gives me the headache of having to sheath the pistol. Precise Strike seems it would be a major tool if you want to cause decent damage as a Swashbuckler.

Quick Clear

6) To use this deed, do I have to have a hand free? I'm not sure if you have to have a hand free to fix a broken firearm. And if you do, would it apply to this deed.

I think that's about it. Sorry for all the questions. I tried to number them to make it easy for you guys to answer. I appreciate any clarifications, feedback, and help! Thanks!

First post and pretty new to Pathfinder. Looking to build a Switch Hitter Swashbuckler. Something similar to a Picaroon (melee and a pistol). Not sure I'm taking this archetype, but very likely. I know there's issues with reloading and all that (not asking about that). I have backstory and I'm looking to play a swashbuckler that will shot enemies at range and then switch to melee when they close in.

So what I'm looking for advice on is... what's the best way to equip (draw & sheath) these weapons? I'm totally fine with wielding each weapon individually. Meaning, pull out my pistol and fire at enemies, then sheath my pistol and draw my melee weapon. But is this the best route/mechanics for this to work smoothly?

I've read somewhere that you can have a weapon in each hand, but it not count as two weapon fighting as long as you're not attacking with both weapons in a round. If I can avoid it, I do not want to two weapon fight, because I don't want to incur the penalties. So with that said, is there a better way than drawing pistol, firing, sheathing pistol, then draw the melee weapon?

Can I fire the pistol and then draw melee weapon with the pistol still in my hand without incurring penalties on melee attacks? Meaning, it will not count as two weapon fighting. More than likely the melee weapon will be a rapier or short sword. If this scenario works... this begs the question, can I fire my pistol with my off-hand (nothing in my main hand yet) without incurring penalties? Or is an off-hand always a penalty even if main hand is free? The reason I ask is... once the pistol is fired, I would draw my melee weapon in my main hand.

Or maybe another option is... after I fire the pistol, could I switch it to my off-hand as a free action, then draw the melee weapon in my main hand. Is this possible?

Sorry for throwing out so many scenarios. I'm just trying to wrap my head around what works best. When combat first starts, I definitely want the pistol wielded by itself. That way if I need to reload, I can. But once enemies close in, I'm going all melee. So I don't care if the pistol is sheathed or unsheathed. But with sheathing costing an move action and giving AoO, if I can avoid it, I would think that's best. Of course, I should be able to step 5 feet away and still sheath the pistol with a single move action to avoid Attack of Opportunity.

But no matter the route I go, I want to make sure it all works together with out occurring attack penalties. If I have to sheath the pistol to avoid penalties, I will.

Thanks in advance for any advice! I'm sure there's better builds than switch hitting pistol/sword. But as I mentioned, there's backstory. I'm not looking for the most optimal swashbuckler. I prefer to play around story and roleplay over optimal build.