MassivePauldrons's page

I think investigator is probably the best jack of all trade Inquisitors are strong as well, but I just think studied strike is a little overtuned.

1. Studied combat caps out at +10 to hit +10 to damage and isn't limited to a particular weapon type, studied strike is ok, combat inspiration and access to mutagens are awesome.

2. Good variety of spells from the alchemist list (not really a lot direct combat options, but lots of strong buffs, heals and defensive options).

3. Alchemist spell casting isn't subject to spell failure from armor, so with feats or by taking one or 2 levels of fighter.

4. d8 hit dice good progression on will/ref, can use inspiration on must pass saves, not super MAD so you can afford to start with a 14 con usually, access to solid defensive spells like shield, mirror image, and stoneskin.

5. 6+ int & int based spellcasting, inspiration for free on int based skills, lots of free skill points for social skills.

It's a Fantasy RPG that has a very large player base and an absurd amount of viable source material.

Just your average clone is banned for not aspiring to better himse...

Uncle Teddy's Bear is banned for beating me to the punch!?!

MassivePauldrons wrote:

nennafir wrote:

To BigNorseWolf and Drahliana Moonrunner: Don't worry, I never pvp at a table. It is a big drag and only causes trouble. Also, it takes freedom away from the players, and I am never for that. This is only about killing lawful NPCs.

Killing a Lawful NPC(or any non hostile NPC) that hasn't provoked combat is an evil act, enough evil acts and you'll have to retire your PFS character. Good luck with being an eye-roll inducing edgelord though.

Luckily I didn't do it...my sword did...I am very peaceful and would never do that...Praise Iomedae!

How many times would this actually occur without you being in control, the blackblade's ego progression is pretty slow presumably you'll make the vast majority of you saves.

Are you going to be informing the DM at every table that your swords purpose to slay lawful creatures and to let you know when a personality conflict my occur. Or are you as the player going to determine when personality conflicts occur.

What happens when you fail an ego check next to lawful venture captain. What happens at the start of the society mission when you're assigned a group with a paladin and a monk you fail your ego check and you sword forces you to remove associates it finds, "distasteful". Can the mission even be completed at that point?

To many problems that don't have clear answer, if I was DMing I'd make the call that for the sake of keeping the session on track your blade has no obvious purpose and move on.

the black blade’s mission is usually up to the GM and the needs of the campaign or the adventure, or a GM can determine the weapon’s purpose randomly using Table: Intelligent Item Purpose

To BigNorseWolf and Drahliana Moonrunner: Don't worry, I never pvp at a table. It is a big drag and only causes trouble. Also, it takes freedom away from the players, and I am never for that. This is only about killing lawful NPCs.

Killing a Lawful NPC(or any non hostile NPC) that hasn't provoked combat is an evil act, enough evil acts and you'll have to retire your PFS character. Good luck with being an eye-roll inducing edgelord though.

As a player I have little to no problem with overpowered characters, usually the characters I make are optimized to one degree or another, sometimes to the point that they are completely unfair vs typical CR appropriate challenges.

As a DM I have little to no problem with overpowered characters, the entire system is your playground and you aren't governed by any sort of character creation rules. Crushing an entire party of optimized player characters under you thumb as if they were nothing more than bugs is easily accomplished. Doing so in fashion that feels fair is a little more of an acquired skill.

That said if you're one player in a group of 2-5 others and DM(Who just FYI has to put a lot more effort and prep into the game than you do) and enough of them have a problem with what your doing with your character.
Then it's your job as an individual to come to some sort of reasonable solution with the group. It's not their collective responsibility to tip toe around your victim complex.

The PCs that started above level 1 (back-up characters) didn't even start with PC wealth. And, point of order, even WITH PC wealth, there's no way a monk is getting a +4 armor bonus. +3 is the best you're pulling, and that leaves you with 1,500 gold. You ain't affording anything else directly combat related with that, not even a basic +1 amulet. Maybe a +1 cloak of resistance.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/character-advancement

Bolded items are the consumables that have been used prior to combat. I pretty much always use a few consumables or buff spells on NPCs. If you look through strategy blurbs of the NPC codex, you'll see, that seems to be Paizo's philosophy as well. Sorry I should've been more clear on what the bolding meant.

Potions of mage armor cost 50gp and last 1 hour, never made a monk who hasn't used one at least once.

I used the correct wealth. They're just examples of what I would make as a DM, can't speak for what your guy would do.

Yeah I dunno man,

Even an generic(no real focus) elite array monk would probably whoop yah, if the guy has 20 point buy and PC wealth it's a even bigger problem. If you DM is using the pregen lvl 5 monk form the GMG it's probably winnable.

Maybe try to taunt one of the Monk's lower level minions to battle in his master's place?

MassivePauldrons wrote:

Lem has some +1 impervious adamantine balls facing down those grey maidens with just his trusty flute.

Going by Ileosa's dress, that Lem is a 14th level Scarwall-wizened badass facing a troop of 5th level fighters. He'll be fine.

They're 8th level fighters, and going by the original print they each have more hit points than Lem. So I think my point is still somewhat valid... but I guess one song of discord later and the problem would solve itself. To be honest I just saw a chance to use, "adamantine balls" in a sentence, and leapt boldly through the breach damn the consequences.

Lem has some +1 impervious adamantine balls facing down those grey maidens with just his trusty flute.

Have them each run two characters, personally as a player I get bored running a single character anyways. Typically one fighter type and one utility character is pretty easy to run as a player. Since it will likely be one of the two characters that specializes in any given social skill, you shouldn't run into too many problems of your players talking to themselves.

thejeff wrote:

Ooooo... Weapon shrinkage

More seriously, with small characters it's lower base die damage on top of Str penalty.

A 1st level halfling with a 14 STR and a greatsword does 1d10+3 (avg 8.5).
A 1st level human with the same point cost in str has an 18 and her greatsword does 2d6+6 (avg 13).

That's an extreme case - two handing makes it worse, but then two handing is generally the best reliable damage option.

Doesn't mean you can't play a small melee character. I've done so. Even Str based one, but the challenges are real.

Well, sure at 1st level, as a Str character. Even assuming Str, by 4th, the Halfling has Risky Striker and this looks more like this:

Halfling: 14 Str, Power Attack, Risky Striker: 1d10+13 (18.5)
Human: 18 Str, Power Attack, 2 other Feats that can't add to damage too much: 2d6+12 (19)

Risky striker only works on large+ size categories? Based on the games I've played more than 50% of enemies are medium or smaller.

Can we stop having these threads now, the classes you all want to play are in the Path of War 3rd party book, fighters aren't ever going to be anything other than bland full attackers or a dip class for other builds.

Weapon Mastery & Armor Mastery Handbooks already fixed the fighter, they get stuff like +5 to ac for free, unrestricted bane starting at 5th level, options for gaining more skills points, increased DR, will save bonus = to their fort save. The only issue is that those books made pretty much every fighter archetype garbage compared to the base fighter because nothing is worth giving up weapon and armor training progression now.

Also very obvious to anyone, but gloves of dueling and mind buttressing armor are 2 required item purchases for fighters

Only problem with some of the things I listed is that armor specialization and mind buttressing armor are not society legal.

I would still agree that any class with even paladin spellcasting progression is going to have innately more utility than a fighter. But for doing sheer volumes of non specific damage fighters are stronger than ever. Even better lots of their prexisting defensive weaknesses are easier to mitigate than ever. Also put full skill point progression into UMD to add more utility. If you don't cast spells you should have maxed UMD pretty much as rule.

Archers are the most well rounded strongest martial in the game and their biggest problem is they have so many good feats. It's really worth noting Fighter archers come online faster than any other class even Rangers. Which is pretty big deal when you consider 90% of game-play revolves around 4-15 levels.

Hey sorry for the bit of a necro, but I just though it would be funny to post this quick build I made up using armor masters handbook feats and options. 63 Ac raging using a 2 hander w/ no buffing spells, no defending weapons. Probably sub optimal to keep taking + AC feats at a point but w/e.

Give him 1 level of Infiltrator Inquisitor or a ring of mind shielding.

Undectectable alignment lasts 24 hours if the npc has access to it.

Yeah, we'd have seen so many less if they had just banned the alternate heritages instead.

How do you sell players companions doing something like that?

Is there a point to this? I suppose I can at least commend you for choosing the correct sub forum.

"I'm pretty sure I'm a girl; I wish people would stop treating my the wrong way and my body didn't feel so disgusting and smelly."

What's so smelly and disgusting about the male body? I'm a little dubious on how any talk of trans representation seems to skew quite heavily towards trans women at the near total expense of trans men.

I guess I just don't understand how to write from the cis perspective.

That's a really lame out. If you want to change someones mind you should try to avoid indicating how much disdain you carry for them.

I actually really like Shardra as a character though, so you can still consider this a positive review.

I like Dwarves

They aren't big time Mary Sues and Gary Stus like aasimars and tieflings.

They aren't overwhelmingly the product of rape like half-orcs.

They aren't anthropomorphized animal people.

They aren't insane like gnomes.

They aren't child sized and larcenous like halflings.

They are more family orientated and loyal than your average human.

Sure they are kind of jerks, but Elves are even bigger more patronizing jerks.

Eidolon's are too strong for a companion even when the player gets all the rules right. They're about as strong as a beast totem barb which is already the best melee outside of an actively smiting paladin. The difference being they always have a guaranteed buffer/healer/support(effectively filling the role of two classes). SLA's are poorly balanced and allow for overpowered bestiary feats unintended for players.

I don't particularly like the chassis of the summoner itself D8 hit dice 3/4th's bab simple weapon and light armor proficiency, pseudo ninth level casting at least for conjuration spells which is one of the most powerful schools. You can make a competent(not good) power attack flank buddy or archer with the summoner which only further enhances their action economy dominance.

I'm personally willing allow the class, on the condition that everyone else is well optimized, but it's still very rare for a mechanically sound summoner build to get out-shined. I'm willing to acknowledge that druids and animal bloodline sorcs could theoretically exhibit similar problems. In my experience though I've always had less trouble with them. Mostly due to the fact that if a summoner runs into any mechanical problems there is usually a evolution that will solve the issue, also haste at 4th level...

Whelp lemme tell you, the first thing to do is ask your girlfriend if she's ok with inter-character conflict. The second thing to do is discuss with her how that might play out in game and whether either of you are comfortable with the idea of a character being retired... The third thing for you to do is to stop asking the Paizo forums for relationship advice.

The problem with the synergy was that in the RAW, it applied to all checks, and they were so many of them it became ridiculous.

More ridiculous than 80% of skills rolls falling under the banner of perception, and the only reason for ever not maxing it being a flavor at the expense of mechanics type decision.

I keep noticing this irritating trend of bringing personal grievances to bear and wrapping them up within the messaging of more important overarching topics. It serves nothing save to muddle otherwise cogent points and cause tangential conflict to drag over into discussions where it has no place. It constantly amazes me that while generally speaking mainstream liberal points of view are the ones with which I can find the most common ground. Many of the people proselytizing for these same ideals come across as some of the most obnoxious individuals I have ever had the displeasure of listening to. You can't pick your allies I guess, but god damn...

Not all cats and foxes are smarter than most humans, but many are.

This statement is of such objective falsehood that it taints any other suggestion you might make with its abject idiocy.

Yes, but most stuff doesn't send that at you right off the bat so you'll be a god of smashing things for at least three levels. But--as soon as something targets Will you are screwed.

Also, you completely misread the statistics, the stuff in [brackets] is the point buy, while the stuff in (parenthesis) is the attribute breakdown, and the stuff on its own is the final attribute.

You should actually read things and learn their meaning before arbitrarily assigning meaning.

The will would be at a -2, not a...

No it would be a -3, but thanks for the personal attack. I understood your point buy numbers. Your arrogance is amusing though. No will saves early huh, yep sleep and color spray sure are bad spells that never get used at early levels sounds about right.

FrankManic wrote:

I just use 4d6 drop low with one complete re-roll if your first roll is awful. Not for any particular reason. It's just what I'm used to. And point buy... I dunno, It just seems less interesting. You're always going to get an average character and never have anyone out of the ordinary. Sure, sometimes rolling leaves you with a totally crap character, but sometimes you've got an 18 to give to int so you put a 17 in str, a 17 in con, a 15 in dex, put a 12 in wis and make cha your dump stat at 11... and have Mike the Murderous Melee Magician, The Wizard with a Maul.

You have obviously never met the completely min-maxed attributes of the Orcish Barbarian that has

15 point buy
STR 20_(16+4)[+10]
Dex 15_(15)[7]
Con 16_(16)[+10]
Int 5__(7-2)[-4]
Wis 5__(7-2)[-4]
Cha 5__(7-2)[-4]

20 point buy
STR 22_(18+4)[+17]
Dex 14_(14)[5]
Con 16_(16)[+10]
Int 5__(7-2)[-4]
Wis 5__(7-2)[-4]
Cha 5__(7-2)[-4]

25 point buy
STR 22_(18+4)[+17]
Dex 13_(13)[3]
Con 18_(18)[+17]
Int 5__(7-2)[-4]
Wis 5__(7-2)[-4]
Cha 5__(7-2)[-4]

Also, one's statistics are not the things that define if the character is boring or interesting, it is the RP that is taking place by the Player.

Having a -4 to your will save isn't optimized it's idiotic, even if you're using the superstition rage power. In addition anything that inflicts mental attribute damage to your character has effectively become save or die =/.

Probably about 28-32(I just whipped up a couple builds to test this and it holds true though the range is a bit more like 25-33) depending on the wealth of your campaign is good for a dps fighter. Two handed fighters will probably be at the lower end of the range with archers and two weapon fighters a little higher due to better dex. Depends on the magic level, but that seems fair to me.

You could probably just make Paladin and kill him in one attack round since he's playing an evil undead, but a better solution is to leave the group now and don't be nice about it either. If you're afraid of confrontation just send an email to to just the gm, or hell just stop showing up. Duck em honestly doesn't sound like they've earned anything from you.

I'll just leave this here...

Archery is categorically better than melee fighting in Pathfinder, some builds can compete, but most don't do it well unless you can pounce.
Anyways I really like the following home-brew nerfs.

Replace Manyshot with Improved Rapidshot(<-I made this up not from a sourcebook): No to-hit penalty when using Rapidshot.

Change the benefit of Improved Precise Shot(I hate this feat lol!) from ignoring all cover other than full cover and all concealment other than full concealment - to - ignoring the cover other than full cover created by friendly creatures and the concealment created by low light conditions.

Remove Improved and Greater Snap Shot.

Pathfinder is certainly playable as is, but the only melee that are going to consistently compete if you're npcs use logical tactics are pounce barbarians(with some way to fly) and eidolons.

Another idea is to give everybody deflect arrows it's a surprisingly easy feat to qualify for and can really level the playing field with dpr. It'll be pretty obvious that you're specifically picking on the one character though, so it's probably better to just talk with them about it.

Of course you can start using a lot of archery npcs, but if you start going archery on archery Pathfinder starts to feel like an artillery combat simulator hah.

It's compatible with most other non race specific witch archtypes, and it happens to be a very regional and race specific prestige class. Just house rule it if you don't like it, but it's designed to be taken within the context of Golarion as a campaign setting. Jadwiga probably wouldn't teach witches who follow a particularly orcish tradition of how to be winter witches. It makes sense to me they're supposed to be racially intolerant.

Take Exotic Weapon Proficiency and use the Fauchard, it's far and away the best polearm: (reach, trip, and 18-20/x2). If you really don't want to spend a feat glaive-guisarme and bardiche are both pretty good. The ogre hook too but it's kinda verisimilitude breaking for a Hellknight.

I fail to see how wizards are so broken, when by core every other class can have a legal level 17 wizard companion.

Now of course the easy counter to my theory is, "Well what if your dm doesn't allow leadership"? First off I would like to note that such a counterpoint is highly ironic when it is presented by a demographic that consistently downplays and dismisses the contribution of GM fiat to the balance process.

However regardless of that amusing anecdote I would posit that said response is without value in the context of this discussion. For the purposes of the situation presented there are only two meaningful distinctions of GM that exists. The kind that would allow the game breaking, illegal(Con bonuses to hitpoints scale with hitdice) creation presented in the OP's example(Type A) and the type that would not allow it(Type B).

Type A is fine with unbalanced nonsense; which in and of itself is perfectly reasonable. They might have their own funky ideas to contribute and likely the rest of the group has similar tastes. Pretty much the furthest thing from my personal cup of tea, but the world wasn't built to be my oasis. I find it unlikely to the point of impossibility that a Type A GM would disallow leadership, while allowing the "Standard Level 20 Wizard".

A Type B GM(Please excuse me for my presumption, but I consider this represent the vast majority.) for balance purposes, setting consistency, consideration for other party members, simplicity of adjudication, or really just any reason doesn't allow, or at the very least presents some sort of rational obstacle to the unbridled accumulation of power that is a, "Standard Level 20 Wizard". A Type B GM may or may not allow Leadership, but such a consideration is inconsequential to my overall point.

It's either A no meaningful outside influence exists, so everyone gets to be crazy and it all works itself out. Nobody needs balance when the league isn't regulated. Or B there is some amount of external pressure outside the player's control that will reign in their ability to completely break the system.

There might be a meaningful argument towards class imbalance, but so severely over-exaggerating your position only weakens it.

Just my 2 coppers.

MassivePauldrons wrote:

Just FYI I read your OP in Sean Bean's Boromir voice. Also aren't Alchemist who two weapon fight with Force Bombs almost as big of a problem in terms of subverting AC?

They can nova the boss that way, but they can't dominate every fight that way. Bombs run out, ammo/gold doesn't.

Suggested encounters for a day is 3-4. Pathfinder society follows this model, I've never seen an scenario where any party I've been with has been meaningfully pushed to the limits of ability usage.

Regardless I apologize for being off topic I just wanted to make a Sean Bean reference.

Just FYI I read your OP in Sean Bean's Boromir voice. Also aren't Alchemist who two weapon fight with Force Bombs almost as big of a problem in terms of subverting AC?

Always looked like a typo with the 0 to me, the kit shouldn't be heavier than a whole lab setup 50lbs vs 40lbs.

Not official obviously, but just use your best judgement till the next round of reprints. I feel like having the item cite the APG entry as a source and implying that the only change was the name is enough evidence to support your assumption as being the most logical one.

Blood money is garbage both in concept and execution, people who use it are unapologetic exploiters and it's existence is stain on the Paizo editing staff's track record(Not a huge stain it's hard to account for the machinations of misanthropic jackanapes).

Just my 2 coppers :).

If you really miss more options try looking into some third party products. I get that they have a stigma, but dream-scarred press and some others have put out some real winners. I personally think Ultimate Psionics is a better thought out book than a good deal of what Paizo puts out and I don't like Psionics at all.

Also adding multiples of a monster to an encounter doesn't scale the CR on a 1 to 1 scale for example 4 Ogres is equal cr to the base creature +4 or CR7 which would constitute a "deadly" encounter for your players.

All this information can be found in the Gamemastery section of the Core Rule under *Designing Encounters* pages 397 to 400.

The appendix of Bestiary 1 also has some CR guidelines for making your own creatures.

Equal CR is supposed to represent a challenge to a party that will consume roughly 20-25% of the parties resources for the day though YMMV . In general CR is a good guideline but you're going to have to vet most monsters/npcs against what your party can do. I find that for the most part an encounter with a CR 1-2 above a parties APL which in this case would be a CR4 or a CR5 is relatively appropriate to challenge a well built group, but not create high odds of player death.

So, the class is well designed because it CAN be broken but people can choose not to.

I suppose you're unfamiliar with the term "First Order Optimal Strategy"?

Every game has them. People will use them.

Ignoring them because you think people won't use them means you need to retake Game Design 101.

You can be as condescending and patronizing as you like you're not winning me over at all. If you're so masterful at game design give me an example of your work.

Wizards work in the vacuum of a competent dm and a group a friendly players, which constitutes the vast majority of Pazio's customer base.

Pathfinder isn't a strategy game it's a "role-playing" game your character isn't supposed to be immediately aware of your metagame, "FOOS" if you want to be competitive with your dm play him in a game of chess, starcraft or badminton.

Reading every page of the Pathfinder SRD doesn't make you incredibly good at playing Pathfinder. Creating a fun interesting character that doesn't immediately have access to all of your metagame system knowledge and is enjoyable for your dm/party members to play with is. That's not a gentleman's agreement that's playing the game as intended.

Why I should let any player abuse blood money when it's from the appendix of a book that the majority of the time players aren't going to have a legal copy of? Whos content relates to a sequence of events that have no bearing on the vast majority of people's campaigns. That's called proper dming not being a house-ruling Nazi.

If as a dm I'm supposed to allow every single option without consequence, then every class has easy access to 9th level wizard spells through leadership. I don't understand how theory crafting in this discussion even matters.

Wizards aren't a problem because most people have some semblance of social grace when in a room with one another. Since the entire game is reliant on that concept being reality I'd say that the class is working as intended.

Just wanted to state that it's not, "House Ruling" to limit the amount of non core supplements you allow into your campaign. Pathfinder is built with the assumption that the GM can limit the use of certain materials if they become problematic.

Wayang spellhunter/magical lineage hijinks is pretty easy to prevent considering Traits are an optional rule set. Hell it's harder to prevent just flat core paladins winning initiative and 1 shotting your CR appropriate big bad.

Healing hitpoints is pretty trivial, it's the cleric's ability to remove/prevent debilitating status effects that truly make it and encounter destroying badass. Craft Wand/Scroll are two pretty solid feats. Though make sure your party is actually contributing to the scrolls of restoration/deathward/w/e that you are casting on them as well.

Also because most of your support spells aren't really dc based you can still afford to be whatever kind of cleric you want usually, though channeling generally suffers a bit if you want to be a combat cleric.

If your party is already good on damage it's surprisingly fun and gratifying to play a well built support cleric. My personal favorite is restoration/heroism, but there are so many amazing combos like luck/travel etc...

I wouldn't feel obligated by any means there's usually just the alternative of buying consumables at market price/finding them as loot. Which works out perfectly fine unless it's a low magic setting. Though healing being rather hard to come by fits the theme of said settings quite nice.

Ascular Vruul is described in the faction missions as a traitor to the pathfinders and moreover being responsible for the deaths of numerous pathfinder agents(see silver crusade/shadow lodge). Presumably if an Andoran agent who's feeling unmotivated asks around they'll be able to learn a bit about Vruul's actions which would likely make their assignment more palatable.

If your lucky one of the members of a less scrupulous factions will just kill him for you so you don't have to get your freedom fingers dirty.

Anyways it's just another mission that highlights what us Grand Lodgerers already knew, which is don't involve your personal beliefs and agendas with the business of the pathfinder society(I'm mostly kidding do whatever is fun =P).

I'm pretty excited to run this for our groups 8-9s next Saturday, that said...

I fail to understand how anyone could think that Shadow Orchid could effectively death-attack the pcs. Her tactics section uses some of the clearest language I have ever seen in a PFS module. Intent is more important than a slight loophole that doesn't even work, because it's not part of her tactics.

unless she's a worshipper of asmodeous and owns AP 29 :-p

It get the feeling you're just joking around, but to be clear to anyone who misunderstands, it states in the module very plainly that she is a worshiper of Abadar(She has a key to the city heavy shield in her picture lol). This is why you should ignore the alternative summons list on pfsrd when designing encounters heh.

It's super clear RAW Jiggy, if the developers wanted these to work with Alignment channel then they could've put an addendum within the feat that said something like, "All abilities that apply to channel energy for the purpose of harming living or undead creatures also apply to Alignment Channel for the purpose of harming outsiders".

Homebrew it if you want, but damn this game has so many things that are unclear in their intent, don't go imagining new ones for us.

Right. put your 5th level fighter with a 15 PB against my Blink Dog Fighter 1 with +1 Mithral Breastplate barding... not saying the blink dog will win, but he's got 29 AC, and a bite with P/B/S, constant blink and dimension door at will, and he's level 5...

Round 1, fight.

Seems like you've got a misunderstanding of the creature advancement rules.

You don't get to rebuild you apply the following modifiers to stats and that's it(+4,+4,+2,+2,+0,-2).

A first level Blink Dog Fighter with +1 Mithril breastplate barding (5400gp) would have the following statistics.

Sir Blinky the Hairy
1st Level Blink Dog Fighter

Str 16 (12+4)
Dex 19 (15+4)
Con 16 (14+2)
Int 10 (10+0)
Wis 15 (13+2)
Cha 9 (11-2)

AC = 23/14/19 (10 base + 7 armor + 2 natural + 4 dex)

Feats = (Combat Reflexes <- built in, Iron Will <- built in, Dodge)

He has one fighter feat to toss around so spend that on dodge and you've got ac 24.

His attack is a +7 bite that does 1d6+4 and he has 31 hp.

A plain jane 15 point buy great-sword fighter with just boring normal feats and +1 Fullplate +1 Greatsword (5000gp) would look something like this.

Sir Mooky the Porter
5th Level Human Fighter

Str 20 (17+1+2)
Dex 13 (13+0)
Con 14 (14+0)
Int 7 (7+0)
Wis 12 (12+0)
Cha 7 (7+0)

Feats= Weapon Focus/Weapon Specialization/Blind Fight/Toughness/Power Attack/Improved Initiative/Dodge

AC = 22/12/20 (10 base + 10 armor + 1 dex + 1 dodge)

His attacks are +13 2d6+11 or PA +11 2d6+17 and he has 54 hp.

Unless I want my cohort to be really good at surviving and not much else I don't really see how a Blink dog is all that useful.

Certainly not enough for you to put a brag post in here about how it'll mess up everyone's humanoid cohorts.

They then proceeded to pull both encounters and lost party members to a celestial tyrannosaurus, again.

Naroth is Evil he would summon a fiendish tyrannosaurus not a celestial one.

Also Summon Monster VII is in his spell book, but not on his prepared spell list for the day. I might be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure that you're supposed to play the module as written so the spells he has prepared are what he would bring into combat.

Someone feel free to correct me on that actually being a society requirement though.

Maybe they return to find her only moments away from completing a ritual releasing Malfeshnekor (At his point her chance for revenge against the marauding adventurers). More likely would be that she'd flee to Magnimar,and meet up with the Skin Saw cultists but I think the former explanation is acceptable enough if a bit cliched. More importantly it preserves the climax of the first module.

That said though, the idea that after decimating her defenders the ultimate goal of their raid might flee; is a thought that probably should have occurred to the pcs. You might want to suggest as subtly or as bluntly as you like that this might be a possibility. You could even use Orik to suggest it in character.