Marthkus's page

I keep hearing of some interesting mechanics, but what I don't hear about is the problems with 2e that are the reason people aren't playing it anymore.

It can't be just because it's a "dead system". Many people still play 3.5.

What were the problems?

Stealth

(Dex; Armor Check Penalty)
You are skilled at avoiding detection, allowing you to slip past foes or strike from an unseen position. This skill covers hiding and moving silently.

Check: Your Stealth check is opposed by the Perception check of anyone who might notice you. Creatures that fail to beat your Stealth check are not aware of you and treat you as if you had concealment. You can move up to half your normal speed and use Stealth at no penalty. When moving at a speed greater than half but less than your normal speed, you take a –5 penalty. It's impossible to use Stealth while attacking, running, or charging.

Creatures gain a bonus or penalty on Stealth checks based on their size: Fine +16, Diminutive +12, Tiny +8, Small +4, Medium +0, Large -4, Huge -8, Gargantuan -12, Colossal -16.

If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth. If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to use Stealth. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Stealth check if you can get to an unobserved place of some kind. This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast.

Breaking Stealth: When you start your turn using Stealth, you can leave cover or concealment and remain unobserved as long as you succeed at a Stealth check and end your turn in cover or concealment. Your Stealth immediately ends after you make and attack roll, whether or not the attack is successful (except when sniping as noted below).

Sniping: If you've already successfully used Stealth at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack and then immediately use Stealth again. You take a –20 penalty on your Stealth check to maintain your obscured location.

Creating a Diversion to Hide: You can use Bluff to allow you to use Stealth. A successful Bluff check can give you the momentary diversion you need to attempt a Stealth check while people are aware of you.

Action: Usually none. Normally, you make a Stealth check as part of movement, so it doesn't take a separate action. However, using Stealth immediately after a ranged attack (see Sniping, above) is a move action.

Special: If you are invisible, you gain a +40 bonus on Stealth checks if you are immobile, or a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if you're moving.

If you have the Stealthy feat, you get a bonus on Stealth checks (see Feats).

Could you be hiding in a box, pick it up and move via "breaking stealth" and re-hide in the cover by putting the box back down?

If so, that would be like mundane invisibility.

I seem to have forgotten why. When I looked over the archetypes for the bard, I was unable to remember.

What should I be looking at again?

I working on a case for the rogue, but to do that properly that requires fully understanding the rogue replacement classes and options. This will take quite some time to formulate, as I want to test my theories in actual game play before trying to present them as novel or true.

What is you consider a 5ft square of air to be a foe? Could you then not great cleave through it?

Like for example let's say you want to cleave 4 people but they are separated by a 5ft square. Could I not just treat that square as a foe and great cleave through it to reach my other targets?

I have a stupid amount of fun playing fighters. Granted the highest level fighter I played was 14 back in 3.5.

My personal experience is that they are a blast to play. I understand how they theoretically have problems, but it just hasn't come up for me personally.

For example, I use to defend rogue to death, but after playing one for awhile in an AP, the problems everyone talked about became more apparent. This has not been the case for me when playing a fighter.

When I admit that the fighter has problems, I'm just giving the forums the benefit of the doubt. Granted other classes basically are fighter+ more *cough barbar*, but unlike the rogue I don't find the fighter dysfunction or lacking either in combat or out of combat.

Maybe I'm just missing something?

I normally abhor the idea of nerfs because I don't think making something else less fun, somehow makes other things more fun.

BUT let's toy with the idea anyways. Let's come up with nerfs for all those nails who would dare stand out!

I'll start.

Simulacrum: Simulacrums made have no SLAs or any form of spellcasting that the original had. Nor do they have use activated supernatural abilities or extraordinary abilities. Keep everything else. Adjust feats, skill points, and ability score from the reduction to HD.

Planar binding: Any service that would yield a monetary reward like wish or stealing valuables, the caster must pay an amount equal to the worth or the opposed charisma check automatically fails.

Barbarians: No longer have superstitious or the beast totem line.

Clerics: now have a paladin like code for their deity/alignment combo

Druids: Can't wear or use anything made of metal. This includes wondrous items. They must also revere nature by never sleeping in inns or enjoying any comforts of society.

Paladin: Lay on hands is now a move action. Auras no longer grant immunties. They only give the paladin their bonus. Smite only last for one attack (this includes summons)

Bards: No longer have versatile performance. All abilities associated with jack of all trades only works on untrained skills. No bard of any archetype can disable magic traps.

Magical traps are now immune to anti magic fields and dispel magic. Only rogues can disable them. Every archetype that is not a rogue that says you can is lying.

Wizards: You can no longer learn or prepare spells from opposed schools. All effects that reduce the oppose school limitation have been removed.

Ninjas: No longer have vanishing trick.

Spellcasters: Concentration is a skill again and scales with con. Casters must always try to cast defensively, less the nerf bat interrupt them via AOO.

Gunslingers: Normal. Guns have been removed.

Alchemist: Fast bombs has been removed. Vivisectionist has been removed. Alchemist must now choose between bombs or mutagens at character generation.

Sorcerer: Must now always cast with cha regardless of archetype.

Cavalier: No longer has Mount class feature.

Rangers: May have as many animal companions as they want via handle animal because hunter's bond has been removed, along with instant enemy. Favored enemy no longer grants a bonus to-hit.

Superstitious gives a +6 to saves human favored class bonus raises that to +12.

Beast totem gives pounce AND ac to make up for a lack of heavy armor, OR you can use reckless abandon to trade out that free AC for MORE to-hit.

With invulnerable Rager you can trade out some relatively useless anti-rogue defenses for crazy amount of DR /-.

I know people like the barbar because of how it actually competes with classes that can cast spells, but surely there is a better way to do that than just adding a +6-12 to all d20 rolls.

Here. I took a stab at rewriting the fighter.

The following is a creative interpretation of the rules that if legal would allow the Rogue to be very broken. Since that contradicts the general rule of "F--- rogues!" the follow is probably not rules legal.

First a Rogue needs to take skill mastery in UMD so that they can take 10 on the check.

The following depends on the Rogue emulating a class feature (check minus 20). At level ten with skill focus and 10 cha, a rogue can take 29 on UMD checks, which translates to emulating 9th level or lower class features.

1. Druid's Vestment This item allows the wearer an additional use of wildshape. A rogue would emulate the class feature wildshape to gain one use of druid wildshape once per day. Allowing the rogue to turn into an air elemental for 9 hours per day at level 10.

2. Sash of the War Champion This item allows the wearer to treat their fighter level as 4 higher for armor training and bravery class features. The rogue emulates 9th level armor training and bravery class features to gain the benefits of 13th level armor training and bravery class features. Which would be a +4 vs fear effects and a -3 reduction on armor check penalty with a +3 increase to maximum dex bonus on armor. Now a rogue can use a chain shirt.

3. Gloves of Dueling This item increases the wearers weapon training bonus by 2. A rogue can emulate having the weapon training class features, but do to the wording of the item, I would say that the rogue only increases their weapon training bonus of +0 by 2. Another interpretation would be increases and granting the emulated bonus which at this level would be a total of +4 to hit and damage.

I think between mythic vital strike and guardian path abilities the advantages of other martials become less relevant.

How does magic jar work against outsiders?

Since they don't have a separate soul, what happens?

I know this is not the most optimal build, what I am looking for is holes and problems in the build and solutions to those problems.

Like, where would this build fall apart in actual play?

Can you answer my questions regarding 4)?

I had an idea of adding martial and skill techniques that are learned through training.

They could be learned by training a number of days equal to the BAB and skill points required to use the technique. Trying to develop the technique yourself would take twice as long. This would have the same cost as training done to retrain class features as outlined in ultimate campaign.

These techniques ARE NOT FEATS and do not have per day limits. Their are no requirements to learn a technique, but you could not perform the technique until you meet the prerequisites.

Some Examples:

If it has not become apparent yet, the game is meant to balanced around the concepts printed in the core rulebook. Certain principles must always true even in the every growing expansion of rule books.

Sometimes these expansions are later ruled not to coincide with the balance in core. The most recent example is the crane wing errata. Here we had a decent and powerful option to negate one melee attack per turn. This appears to be similar to that of deflect arrows except for melee attacks instead of range. Here is why they are not equal in effect. Pathfinder range weapons tend to full-attack opponents and can do so by level 1 via rapid shot. In Core there is no way to negate an attack with 100% effectiveness, even spells like mirror image have some chance of failure. It's not that old crane wing was BETTER than mirror or deflect arrows, it just broke a principle established in Core. There is no-way to with 100% effectiveness negate any melee attack. This is just something that we are going to have to deal with. The game is balanced to Core, even though Core itself is not balanced.

The devs have already stated that they are not going to try and re-balance the system in the 10th+ book.

So the question becomes, how can issues inherit in Core and the system be addressed that doesn't change the balance set forth by Core?

There is a trope that martials can't have nice things. Well that's not entirely true. Martials do have nice things. They are strong durable front-liners and can unleash a lot of damage. They are scary and terrifying opponents on the battle-field that whole strategies have to be built around to handle. It's not that martials don't have nice things. It's that the nice things they have are very limited. Where the caster/martial disparity comes into play is that martials do not have the plethora of options of nice things to choose from.

It seems martials are forced into the role of tanky DPR machines. This is further compounded when we look at a class devoted to the idea that a martial is not this. And that would be the monk. The problem stems from the to-hit gap. Just a +6 difference in to-hit can be devastating. This makes the monk choose between hitting hard (power attack) or hitting with accuracy, while similar martials class have to choose between power-attacking at the same accuracy of the monk or not power-attacking for even more accuracy. The monk appears to be a martial focused on defense and combat maneuvers. Yet do to the her lack in offense she actually is worse than other martials at combat maneuvers and doesn't even have the best saves (both paladins and barbar match her saves). She is eclipsed as a class. The monk was trying to be a different martial and flopped.

How do we expand the nice things martials have access to? Well I can tell you the answer is not feat chains. The balance in Core shows that the further down a feat chain you go, the more specialized you are, but the more those feats have diminishing returns in usefulness. This is one of the reasons crane wing was nerfed. It did not follow the pattern laid down in Core. The answer to the question is also not ONLY scaling feats. If you look through Core, the feats that scale in benefit also scale in trade-offs. This is the only kind of scaling feat we can expect. Feats do not scale like rage powers. Rage powers have their own rules that they follow. That's why they are generally considered "better" than feats.

OK so what is left? (Some of my own thoughts below)

1. Scaling feats like power attack. For example a monk feat that would help them is being able to trade iterative attacks for bonus damage (because no monk can really use power attack and Vital strike already exist for other martials and is a similar idea). Core power attack trades offense for offense, while combat expertise trades offense for defense. If following Core balance, we cannot trade defense for offense outside of a rage power.

2. Feats that add new styles of combat. A bad example of this is Dervish Dance (a non PRD feat). No matter how long the chain we will never be able to make dex combat as hard hitting as strength based combat. But if we like the idea of a monk trading attacks for more damage per attack as a feat, then the same logic can apply to our dex fighters. They are fast right? Shouldn't they be attacking more than strength fighter anyways. Adding means of gaining extra attacks for dex based characters (like TWF which is already in Core) and then trading those attack away for different effects like parry, sneak attack, crits, bleeding, ect..., could be a way to make the dex character viable without stepping on the toes of the strength based character.

3. Magic items. The magical abilities of weapons and armor do not have to be purely for damage and defense (just look at glamered for armor). How this could be changed such that martials benefit more from them is to have the effects dependent on things like skill ranks, feats, BAB, ability scores ect. Most of the special abilities for weapons depend on hitting the target anyways, so it's not like there is not precedent to-hit being needed to trigger an effect. For example you could make a Warhammer that as a standard action be used to strike the ground and trip all but the wielder in a fixed radius. The wielder makes a CMB check and that is what is used to trip creatures in the effect, perhaps this can only be done so many times per day. You could also make a weapon that as a standard action can be swung to create a ripple in the air, allowing the user to make a ranged sunder attempt using their CMB.

Please generate your own ideas to answer the question in the title

I was thinking combining snake, panther, dragon, and shaitan.

Potential Problems: Keeping to-hit high, Keeping AC high enough to trigger snake and panther. Keeping a high dex, strength and wis for damage, to-hit, extra AOOs, and higher DCs.

Potential Boons: Not dependent on full attacks. Combines monk movement speed with offense. AOOs are always at best to-hit. Dragon and shaitan add a fair amount of damage and crowd control affects.

Questions:
Thoughts?
Any archetypes good at addressing the problems?

This suggestion is more of a joke, but...

Gestalt both of the classes together.

From the fighter perspective: How does that class stack up to Barbarians and Paladins?

From the rogue perspective: How does that class stack up to Bards, Alchemist, Inquisitors, and Rangers?

Let's compare Monk to Paladin and Barbarians.

What a simple easy way to bring Monks up to par without requiring massive rule rewrites?

My idea: Take the Monk's AC bonus and turn it into a general combat bonus that increases CMD, CMB, AC, attack rolls and damage rolls (with monk weapons and unarmed strikes).

This turns monk's robes into their version of duelist gloves.

How would that monk compare to Barbarians and Paladins?

I see the that the general consensus is to build an alchemist that either melees or throws bombs.

What about doing both?

I thinking that you could grab extra discovery about 9 times.

Additional questions:
Is it just me or does Alchemical Allocation also works with mutagens since they are elixers? "An alchemist can create three special types of magical items—extracts, bombs, and mutagens. Bombs are explosive splash weapons, and mutagens are transformative elixirs that the alchemist drinks to enhance his physical abilities—both of these are detailed in their own sections below."

The bombs effects that proc on direct hit only work on the target you are throwing at right? They don't effect those in the splash radius who fail their reflex save.

Seriously though, it seems like you could easily run a party of just druids from 1-20.

For what mechanical reason do you choose not to play a druid?

The question is "Can the rogue class be functional without archetypes?".

Goal posts:
1) Do noticeable damage. Monsters shouldn't able to ignore you.
2) Be a decent skill monkey
3) The goal is not to make a rogue that is the best at something. The goal is to make a functional character that is rarely useless in fight.

Restrictions:
1) No strength build rogues
2) You can't assume flanking
3) Must have a viable range attack option
4) 20 point buy

Bonus:
1) Use feats and talents in the PRD
2) Use a race from the CRB

Please post builds, explain why builds won't work, or explain why builds will work.

Link

I need to know if this class would be balanced compared to existing classes. Discussion on the advice forum tends to be more about balance and how to optimized more so than the homebrew forum.

I want to know if this purposed class would be overpowered or underpowered, and what possible changes I could make to it.

Link

My buddies and I took a stab at rewriting the rogue.

Problems with original rogue:
1)No valid ranged option.
2)At low levels sneak attack was a lot of damage, making the set up a valid constraint. At mid-high levels a rogue needs to sneak attack to be useful. My buddies and I do not like the idea of a class being situationally useful. The rogue doesn't need to be the best at combat or damage, but they should always be able to do better than base weapon damage.
3)rogue talents are lack luster.

Solutions:
1)Allow core mechanic to work with ranged weapons
2)Change Sneak Attack so that it is not longer the core mechanic of the class
3)Two minor adjustment to talents, but for the most part leave them as is and add additional abilities of a more combat focused variety.

Design philosophy:
1) no flat addition to to-hit rolls.
reason: Creating to-hit bonuses is a careful balance. We didn't want to create a dex fighter, but we also didn't want the rogues attacks to feel lack luster. We decided to make rogue attacks more punishing when they hit as opposed to making rogues hit more often. We also added ways for a rogue to gain extra attacks to make up for their lower chance of hitting.

2) situationally awesome, always useful
reason: Our goal was not to make the rogue unique or perform a protected niche roll. We simply want the rogue to have various options at their disposal when they wish to contribute to combat. But at the same time we did not wish to make "the dex-fighter class".

3) maintain rogue tropes
We still let the rogue have a difficult time handling enemies immune to precision damage (which there are few of). This stems from the same legacy thinking that had us make sure that flanking was uniquely advantageous for the rogue. This is also why sneak attack is still a mechanic, but no longer THE core mechanic.

4) Dex and Int
We wanted to make sure that the Dex/Int rogue was viable and rewarding to play. The term "skillmonkey" is thrown around a lot when talking about rogues. Since people want to be able to play rogues as a skill monkey we wanted to make sure Int was also important for combat not just for more skill points. The focus on dex has more to do with point 3. We know some people love their strength rogues, but we think that option should be an archetype not the arguable "best way" to build a rogue.

For reasons I would rather not get into, I am making an alchemist with the champion mythic path.

stats are 12str 18dex 12con 16int 12wis 12cha

Mythic powers:
Champion Features: Mythic Power 5/day |5| Surge +1d6
Recuperation(Ex) [GM switched hard to kill for this]
Fleet Charge(Ex)
Longevity
Mythic Weapon Finesse

|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

I'm looking to make a build that focuses on killing monsters (general right?). Any ideas on how to get the most use out of both my class and mythic path?

Binder Class

Anything that could be worded better?
Any interactions and rules unclear?
What do you think of the class balance wise?

Builds will come later, but from what I can figure at high levels monks will have:

Better AC.
Better Saves.
Better immunities.
Better SR.
Better mobility.
More Attack options.
Better CMB for many maneuvers.
Better CMD.
More Skill points.

The only places where the fighter is better is that a fighter will have:

Higher DPR
1 point of health per level more
1 point higher strength
Higher flat footed AC

To keep things simple I am only looking at CRB material for both classes. When you go outside of that, both classes get neat options. Let's assume for a moment that both of them are equally boosted by non-CRB material.

Anyone disagree? Is the extra DPR worth the flaws the Fighter has at high levels?

Quarterstaffs have the monk special quality.

Could a monk then flurry using a quarter staff as a two handed weapon?

Both Summing and polymorph are spells in the CRB.

Let's say a player has only the CRB, but doesn't own a bestiary. Can they use polymorph? Can they summon?

Now summons are technically NPCs. If you tell that player that they can't summon because he doesn't own the bestiary, can he not respond that he owns the CRB with the summon monster spells and since summons are NPCs that you as the GM can run them, since he can't?

So let's say I want to play a summon focused caster in PFS, but do not own a bestiary. Can I play this character sanely, referencing the monster stats using other sources? Or do would I need to make the GM run all the monsters as NPCs, increasing his workload?

Anyone know if PFS will use mythic adventures material?

Fighter Build

He starts out with +8 perception and has both survival and UMD for out-of-combat fun

He grabs the weapon focus tree for damage and Combat reflex related feats for battlefield control.

He grabs some purely anti-caster feats and other fun feats to fill him out.

What do you think of this build? Anything that I can do to make it better? Is it effective both in and out of combat?

Fighter Build

He starts out with +8 perception and has both survival and UMD for out-of-combat fun

He grabs the weapon focus tree for damage and Combat reflex related feats for battlefield control.

He grabs some purely anti-caster feats and other fun feats to fill him out.

What do you think of this build? Anything that I can do to make it better? Is it effective both in and out of combat?

I need my D&D/Pathfinder fix and I don't have the energy to start and GM a new group of people.

EDIT: If this is the wrong place for this, please direct me to a more appropriate spot on the forums.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fbyJd143D7eWxXARwVZyHjS61upvRxhMaPFHnTz HX-Y/edit

What do you think of my fighter build?

I was thinking that for a fighter to shine, a fighter needs to do something only a fighter can do. Dumping feats into one combat style starts having diminishing returns, but what if instead of grabbing one combat style you grabbed several?

Most combat styles take 3-5 feats to be effective. A fighter could grab several and give himself more viable combat options. He trades some effectiveness for being able to pick the most effective style for the situation.

Thoughts?

Not can. Should. Because killing "evil" babies is a GOOD act. Therefore an anti-paladin who eats goblin babies would "fall" from willingly committing a GOOD act.

I would just like to thank everyone on these forums for providing me and my friends hours of entertainment last night with this take on the paladin's code. We ended up creating a new alignment system with 53 different choices, so we could classify the paladin who eats goblin babies.

We dubbed the act CLGE. The inner intent was trying to do good, but the outward act was clearly CE.

This thread stems from a long debate and how it was asserted that paladins can eat goblin babies as a good act.

I'm going to list two fighter builds. I want to know which one you would play and why. Also any tweaks you would make to the build would be good to know.

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Focused Study Human Fighter 18 14 14 10 10 10
Dangerously Curious(+1 UMD),Eyes and Ears of the City(+1 perception)
Skills: Perception,Use-Magic-Device,Survival
1 :Skill Focus(Perception),Combat Reflexes|Weapon Focus(Great Sword)|
2 : |Power Attack |bravery(+1 Will saves)
3 :Cleave | |Armor training(+1)
4 : |Weapon Specialization(Great Sword)|
5 :Great Cleave | |Weapom training(Heavy Blades)
6 : |Step Up |(+2 Will saves)
7 :Stand Still | |Armor training(+2)
8 :Skill Focus(UMD) |Greater Weapon Focus(Great Sword) |
9 :Improved Critical | |Weapon training(Bows)
10: |Disruptive |(+3 Will saves)
11:Spellbreaker | |Armor training(+3)
12: |Greater Weapon Specialization(Great Sword)|
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Human Fighter 18 14 14 10 10 10
Deft Dodger(+1 ref),Indomitable Faith(+1 Will)
Skills: Climb,Ride,Swim
1 :Endurance,Diehard |Weapon Focus(Great Sword) |
2 : |Power Attack |bravery(+1 Will saves)
3 :Toughness | |Armor training(+1)
4 : |Weapon Specialization(Great Sword)|
5 :Great Fortitude | |Weapon training(Heavy Blades)
6 : |Improved Initiative |(+2 Will saves)
7 :Lightning Reflexes | |Armor training(+2)
8 : |Greater Weapon Focus(Great Sword) |
9 :Iron Will | |Weapon training(Bows)
10: |Improved Critical |(+3 Will saves)
11:Quick Draw | |Armor training(+3)
12: |Greater Weapon Specialization(Great Sword)|
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

I know he gets a shiny SLA that allows him to super summon along with actual summoning spells.

But that's it. He's got some buffs and other spells to cast, but has an abysmal number of them. Outside of limited casting and his SLA the only thing the master summoner personally would do in combat is conduct his low CR encounter against the vastly higher CR encounter.

He goes toe to toe with the other full casters because of how good summoning is as a mechanic, but he's not game breaking.

Including summons: his DC's and to hit are low. His only tactic is to crush with numbers, and with all the AOE every class can get a BBEG shouldn't have too much trouble with the summons.

Master summoner has great battle field control and decent damage, but I don't understand how he is, I quote, "The destroyer of worlds".

Why do people think the archetype is game breaking?

NOTE: Let's assume the person playing it is responsible and doesn't lag the game.

Human with expanded arcana for every feet

Spell selection:
1lvl: 0th:Prestidigitation,Detect-Magic,Read-Magic,Ghost-Sound,Daze|1st:Grease,Co lor-Spray,Silent-Image,Protection-from-Evil|

2lvl: 0th:Dancing-Lights,Light|

3lvl: 0th:Mage-Hand|1st:Mage-Armor,Obscuring-Mist|

4lvl: 0th:Message|1st:Charm-Person|2nd:Glitterdust|

5lvl: 1st:Mount,Enlarge-Person,Feather-Fall,Magic-Missle|2nd:Web|

6lvl: 0th:Mending|2nd:Levitate|3rd:SMIII|

7lvl: 1st:Unseen-Servant|2nd:Hideous-Laughter,Resist-Energy,Mirror-Image,Rope-Tri ck|3rd:Sleet-Storm|

8lvl: 0th:Detect-Poison|3rd:Fly|4th:SMIV|

9lvl: 2nd:Pyrotechnics|3rd:Stinking-Cloud,Haste,Slow,Phantom-Steed|4th:Black-Tent acles,Confusion|

10lvl: 0th:Open/Close|4th:Wall-of-Ice|5th:Telekinesis|

11lvl: 2nd:Flaming-Sphere|3rd:Wind-Wall|4th:Enervation,Fear,Stone-Shape,Arcane-Eye |5th:Wall-of-Stone|

12lvl: 5th:Magic-Jar|6th:SMVI|

Arcane bloodline gives: identify,invisibility,dispel-magic,dimension-door,overland-flight

Would you suggest different spells or a different order?

The build concept is to essentially be a spontaneous wizard

I was thinking of playing a rogue with 18 dex and 16 int with 10s in all the other stats as a human. I plan to use my rogue talents for weapon finesse, fast stealth, a combat feat, weapon focus, and skill mastery twice. I'm only planning out to lvl 12.

My normal feats would be ones that added bonuses to skills like stealthy and skill focus.

Can this character function and contribute to the party in an effective way regardless of the campaign situation?

What is "interacting"?

Can the area effect of silent image be moved on your turn when you concentrate on the spell?

If I use silent image to create spheres of blackness around enemies eyes, can they see? Do they get a save?

If I use major image to light enemies on fire(create fire around them), do they get a save? Do they feel the thermal component of the flames? Are they blinded by the flames? Can they hear over the roar of the flames?

Can a major image talk?

Could 'veiled' creatures have missionary sex even if their base forms lacked the correct pluming do to the touch senses added by veil?

Can you walk on structures in a Mirage Arcana?

If levels went that high:
Can a Simulacrum of a Genie grant its master wishes as they are intended?

Can Shades be used for teleportation, planar binding, and plane shift?

NOTE: I tried asking these questions in 'Rules Questions' board, and the only answer I got was that it depends on the GM.

What is "interacting"?

Can the area effect of silent image be moved on your turn when you concentrate on the spell?

If I use silent image to create spheres of blackness around enemies eyes, can they see? Do they get a save?

If I use major image to light enemies on fire(create fire around them), do they get a save? Do they feel the thermal component of the flames? Are they blinded by the flames? Can they hear over the roar of the flames?

Can a major image talk?

Could 'veiled' creatures have missionary sex even if their base forms lacked the correct pluming do to the touch senses added by veil?

Can you walk on structures in a Mirage Arcana?

If levels went that high:
Can a Simulacrum of a Genie grant its master wishes as they are intended?

Can Shades be used for teleportation, planar binding, and plane shift?

Note: What are the pathfinder society rulings for these? And if they differ from normal games please let me know.

I was reading a thread about Summoners and how their Eidolon steps on some toes. My question is whether or not a Master Summoner would work in a balanced party. I really like summoning, but I find that the round action needed tends to be too long for most encounters. Master Summoner seems like a great choice, but I am mildly lactose intolerant when it comes to my characters.

I've seen threads on how every class is either really powerful or really weak. The exception to this rule has been Druids. Is this because they are balance or do not many people play as them?

Any-ways, I think it would be really amusing if the class about maintaining the balance was actually balanced.

Thoughts?