Master_Crafter's page

Note: It's long, but I am posting this for constructive criticism: please let me know if you feel any part of this can be improved.

The thing I dislike about most level-based systems is the eventual number bloat and how that affects late game. While I love the feeling of powerful characters and rarely see an issue with the unique effects of late game spells/feats/abilities (especially as presented in PF2E), the number bloat annoys me to no end, particularly when a 20th lvl character can sit back and laugh at the negligible dmg which can be dealt by a hoard of 1st lvl NPC's until they finally decide to exterminate them all with one AOE action. What makes this even worse is the fact that many of those same lvl-1 NPC's can literally trip themselves to death by rolling max dmg twice on a d6, which is not that hard to do.

That stated, PF2E seems to do a wonderful job of keeping the static bonuses granted to characters of similar level pretty much even across the board through a system of proficiency and stat bonuses. As such, I'd like to design a variant for an E10 setting which narrows this gap by taking advantage of some of those features without limiting the unique effects available by completely subtracting higher level feats and spells.

This system comes in two parts, one to make the "common" NPC a bit sturdier, and the second to cap the number bloat.

.
~~~~ Part One: Sturdier commoners ~~~~

Essentially, this is a level chart for common NPCs. While (for the most part) this should be a meta-game consideration that the players are simply familiar with, it serves to make the common NPC a bit sturdier, more useful, and more of a threat if you happen to piss them off by giving them either hit-point/hit-die or class levels based upon their relative age and/or experience. the basics are as follows:

Infant -> HP = 1 + Con
Child -> HP = 1d6 + Con
Teenager -> 1st lvl NPC
Young adult/adolescent -> 2nd lvl NPC
Full-grown adult -> 3rd lvl NPC

Infants can have a specific heritage, but cannot select a background until they have become children, and must wait until they are a teenager before they may take any Ancestry Feats. Once a character becomes a teenager, they replace the 1d6 + Con hit points with their class hit points instead, gaining all the benefits of a 1st lvl character of their selected class. (This represents their exploration into the class they wish to pursue into adulthood, but could theoretically be retrained.) Young and full-grown adults are simply more experienced and/or hardier individuals.

Ideally, we would have a couple basic NPC classes to choose from in addition to the classic character classes to further highlight the differences between NPCs and PCs, but even without that this creates a usable medium-fantasy setting for your characters to start exploring. It also reduces accidental fatalities and gives both monsters and PCs a reason not to piss off a mob, even if they could still take on a few villagers by themselves without too much trouble.

.
~~~~ Part Two: Capping Number Bloat ~~~~

While most E6/E8/etc systems seem to completely cap all character progression after the denoted level, I specifically want to target number bloat while leaving character progression in place. Therefore, I need a system which will accomplish this while still permitting characters to gain spells, feats, ability boosts, etc.

To this end, I propose the following modifications:

1 - At 10th lvl characters stop gaining additional HP or resistances based upon numeric character lvl. This does not prohibit them from gaining or improving these benefits based upon feats or class abilities.

2 - Characters continue to gain class abilities (including spell slots and spells known), feats, skill increases, and ability boosts past 10th lvl, per normal advancement.

3 - Spells up to 6th lvl function normally, as do lower-level spells heightened up to 6th level. (I selected 6th as opposed to 5th lvl spells as one extra die does not seem to make too much difference at this point, but there seem to be more Heightened effects at even-numbered levels than there are at odd-numbered levels.)

5 - Spells of 7th lvl or higher which have scaling numeric effects (particularly healing/damaging effects and resistances) are reduced to match those of 6th lvl spells. (This can be accomplished by reversing the effects of heightening such a spell for most 7th and 8th lvl spells, or reducing such effects by 1/3 or 30% for most 9th and 10th lvl spells.) Effects which are non-numeric or which fall into the category of special conditions (such as Stunned, Sickened, Clumsy, etc) are not affected.

6 - Creatures with more than 10 class levels experience the same modifications to those levels as stated above. Alternately, the GM may elect to grant additional levels (class or monster) to creatures with a CR of 3 or less to make them appropriately threatening to a common NPC.

7 - Monsters with a CR above 10 should have their lvl-based proficiency bonuses reduced accordingly. However, their resistances should not be reduced by more than 5 points and their HP should not be reduced at all. It is up to the GM if spell-like effects innate to the creature are reduced or not.

Point #7 serves a dual purpose: it reduces the amount of work required by the GM to set up an encounter; it reinforces the powerful nature of truly monstrous creatures. This helps preserve the GM's high-level toolbox while granting PCs a heightened level of immersion as they will need to employ more advanced strategies when dealing with such powerful entities. After all, while they might still be able to take on such a creature head on, the risk would be much greater, incentivising them to take a more cautious approach, whether that should mean opting for parley or calling in the reinforcements!

.
Further Thoughts

In reference to the relatively static scaling bonuses past lvl 10 (particularly the Ability Boost and Skill Increase proficiency bonuses), I do not believe these to be too powerful, but I do think that they (along with other special effects granted by spells, class features, and feats) help highlight the differences between 10th and 20th lvl characters. As these bonuses are relatively narrow in range (+0 to +8 for Proficiency bonuses and -1 to +6 in Ability bonuses), and as the majority of these bonuses are assigned in in the earlier levels of character development, I do not think that they would adversely affect game play across the spectrum when factored into the system described above.

Ultimately, the difference these bonuses might make on the outcome of a fight between a small group of commoners and a character of 10th lvl or higher seems negligible (10th-lvl PC vs ~10 commoners being an even match or a 20th-lvl PC vs ~12 commoners). However, when considering a confrontation between 10th and 20th lvl characters, a not-unreasonable +4 to +6 bonus difference can drastically affect the outcome. I feel that this (alongside the special affects granted by higher level class features, unique spell effects, and feats) would help PC's at those higher levels feel more powerful without necessarily making the outcome a foregone conclusion, especially if the higher-level characters were slightly outnumbered.

Of course, you could just suggest that someone cast Read Aura next. True, this spell takes longer to cast at one minute, but once heightened it can distinguish individual auras on multiple items each time it is cast, which makes it more useful than Detect Magic at higher levels (which can only give you a general sense of where they exist and what the strongest individual school is).

Furthermore, if you take Read Aura as a cantrip, and are trained in Arcana, you can get innate (essentially permanent) Detect Magic via the feat Arcane Sense without taking up another cantrip, if you happen to need that extra cantrip more than the general or skill feat.

That should greatly reduce the time needed to figure out what items your loot goblins should be focusing on grabbing each encounter.

Mortuum, I am actually attempting to write my own game system primarily for personal use and was wondering if I could use this alignment system in it. Probably won't use the whole thing, but I think you've done a wonderful job.

I doubt that it will ever be published, but would love to give you some credit for this idea in my own work. I myself am not particularly fond of alignment systems in general, but know that there are many people even among my friends who use these concepts to add to the game by setting guidelines for their character's actions in morally dubious situations.

Don't know if or when you might see this, but hoping that it's OK.

Combine this spell with Spectral hand and affect any stone within 100ft +10ft/lvl. Then you can create those spiked walls, cover over arrow slits and murder holes, etc at range.

I would probably limit structures you could create to fairly large shapes (no smaller than a 3-4 inches in thickness/diameter, meaning only one spike per 5 or 10 cubic feet, depending on length), personally, per the "crude shapes" argument, but I see no reason you couldn't make terrain that was the equivalent of an immovable area of caltrops (5 ft square per 10 cubic feet) or trap an opponent with a cage of arm-thick columns (though I would allow them a reflex save to escape as the cage was forming).

A large spike I would allow to deal dmg as a spear that had been braced against a charge if you took the readied action to cast the spell, but it would still require an attack to hit them. However, you could reasonably make a stone ceiling or stalactite cave in with this method as well, dealing falling dmg (1/2 or none on a successful reflex, depending on size) and potentially burying them in the process.

Probably more useful if you were eon a battle field, though, would be if you could use this to make a trebuchet (essentially a counter-weighted lever system) in an instant and start hurling small boulders or scatter shot at your opponents on a battlefield. You can take out any siege engines they might have brought before they can ready them while attacking their squadrons at the same time. Form it in two parts, the base and the arm, so that one just sits on top of the other and the whole mechanism is so simple that most DMs would probably reduce, if not waive, the failure chance for moving parts. And who cares if they destroy one or two of these when it only takes a single spell to recreate them from scratch.

And note that some smaller historical trebuches actually functioned mechanically more like catapults, so why not ask your DM if you can switch between those two rule sets? Gives you a better range of attack options for mid and long range, and the worst thing your DM might say is "No".

P.S. Don't forget to summon small earth (or titanium) elementals for ammunition. Just remind them to earth glide into the ground when they hit so they can keep attacking from below. ;P

I might consider turning this character into a Cross-blooded Elemental (Air) / Storm-blooded Sorcerer. You could transform all attacks into electirc attacks and gain a +1 to the DC to resist them for doing so. Then I'd take the following bloodline powers:

1st - Elemental Ray (nice ranges touch attack)
3rd - Stormchild (2 resistances and mitigates the effects of weather)
9th - Elemental Blast (mess around with critters normally immune to electricity)
15th - Either ability (unlimited flight or limited 10x speed modifier that can be used offensively as well, but only for a limited duration)
20th - Elemental Body (immunity electricity, Crits, and sneak attacks)

For bonus spells:

3rd - Burning Hands (electricity)
5th - Scorching Ray (electricity)
7th - Protection from Energy
9th - Elemental Body (more for the movement than dmg/tanking, and note that you can take the form of any elemetal, not just air)
11th - Shout
13th - Chain Lightning
15th - Control Weather (thematic and potentially devastating fi used correctly)
17th - Summon Monster VIII (elementals only, but not just Air elementals)
19th - Elemental Swarm

As for 2nd lvl spells to keep in mind:

Blur (20% miss chance is always nice)
Fiery Shuriken (ranged touch attack)
Fog Cloud (concealment that you can partially ignore with Stormchild)
Scorching Ray (yes, you can get it later with your bonus spells, but why wait!)
Shatter (kill your enemies potions or other equipment and make caltrops at the same time!)

---

Also consider for a storm-based character using a Cross-blooded Elemental (Water) / Boreal Sorcerer. This essentially gains similar effects to the one described above, but specializes in cold dmg, gets better weather immunity, and my favorite SLA, Control Winds, as his 15th lvl ability.

I specifically call out Control Winds because the ability to create a full-blown tornado that can stop all ranged attacks, obscures vision for all combatants except you, can mightily toss enemies around for 6d6 dmg/rd for 1d10 rounds on top of falling dmg on a failed save (which they have to make every round), and can deal dmg as a swarm if seeded with enough daggers in an area with a radius of 40 ft/lvl, all under your complete control for 10 mins per lvl with additional cold effects (extreme cold and sleet that hampers movement) that you are immune to is insanely powerful.

I think there are a lot of good arguments here. Unfortunately, all arguments for any side are going to be due to extrapolation in this case, given the lack of more detailed references than what has already been posted. However, I will put in my 2 cents and see where it falls.

---

Here are the points I feel are most important:

DV sees through <i>normal<i/> shadows, not illusions or supernatural shadow, as listed in the descriptions of both DV and Deeper Darkness (Darkness only subtracts from normal lighting and does not actually create "magic" shadows, from what I can glean, thus allowing DV to function normally).

Several versions of SB do, in fact, function in normal and even bright light. Furthermore, as a SU ability SB is most definitely a magical effect, and is easily categorized IMO as a Shadow Illusion effect. Therefore SB is not <i>negated</i> by DV (anything capable of using SB in full light gets all benefits vs a creature with DV, after all).

However, the "normal" SB ability (Fetchling version) only works in dim light and serves only to <i>increase the miss chance</i> (presumably by magically cloaking the character in the extant shadows or some similar fluff).

---

So here's my view on things:

While the Fetchling (used for simplicity) might not get the normal miss chance for being in dim light vs a character with DV, they should still get the <i>increase</i> in miss chance provided by SB, as the Fetchling is <i>magically</i> altering the shadows to conceal themselves to a greater extent than normal.

I would rule that DV vs Fetchling SB would reduce the effect, but still allow it to function. Straight math would result in a 30% miss chance with no concealment, but as this would not be a standard value in PF I would reduce it to 20% miss chance and throw in concealment allowing the Fetchling to continue sneaking about.

If conceptualized properly I see no reason tech could not be user-specific. In a fantasy realm where nearly all but the most basic tech is magically enhanced to function at all, anything "advanced" could require special "battery packs" that only an artificer can create. Without these packs the tech simply doesn't function. And anyone who has worked with old-time batteries (salt and acid cells) knows that they require constant maintenance just to prevent the cathode and anode from corroding away, on top of not being very efficient.

The main bar to an official artificer of whatever style (steampunk, clockpunk, magitech, biotech, etc) is the PFS bar on crafting. As I see it, this bar is primarily in place due to a short list of factors:

1 - The current item creation guidelines are just that, guidelines, and a crafty player can use them to validate a number of custom items which fly in the face of game balance (Ring of True Strike, anyone?). Attempts to overhaul this would require extensive lists of abilities and restrictions on those abilities which, if not properly handled, may become more limiting than viable for these concepts which increases the difficulty of this task accordingly.

2 - The current crafting and selling rules, while initially balanced (craft for 1/2 cost, sell for 1/2 cost, net gain 0), have sufficient leeway with various discoveries feats and other mechanics (especially the downtime rules) that this could easily break the game economy unless the DM makes prodigious use of the "wealth by level fairies". However, in this case the players of these characters start to become miffed (indirect, but still not good for PFS).

All that said, I think this can be accomplished, though it may take multiple classes, archetypes, and tricks/discoveries to do so. Magic item crafting, as it currently stands, would probably be the least part of any such class, as for PFS play it would have to be limited to existing items and possibly enhanced/combined versions of these items. However, the Artificer may gain the ability to craft certain specific "upgrades" into his constructions, such as flight, energy effects, or static bonuses, but limited in # or applicable slot. And I believe that there are likely enough different ideas already out there for this to be more an issue of collecting and consolidating those ideas into something balanced and PFS friendly than creating a whole new concept. Of course, the existing writers would have to agree to this unless they have listed it as open source, but most of them have already done the latter and would likely be flattered should their ideas be used in an official concept, I would think.

The hard parts would be making the class feel unique from what already exists while allowing it to still permit those concepts, and making it balanced in terms of game economy so that the WBL fairies need not rear their ugly faces.

Here is the pathfinder spell compendium.

Here is the pathfinder feat compendium.

Pretty much. The primary benefit of the app I mentioned is that it is a copy you can download on your phone/tablet and reference without going online. And out only cost me $5 or $10.

I also have purchased all these books in pdf, but when I just need to reference something and don't have internet I'll generally reference it on this app instead. More concise and easier to use than managing multiple pdfs on my phone, IMO.

I would love to see an artificer. Granted, I don't generally play PFS, so crafting is not an issue in the games I play, but keeping in mind that it IS an issue in PFS, there are still dozens of potential paths for an artificer-like class.

Instead of making custom magic items, he might be able to temporarily "combine" items, enhance the bonuses of current items, or create improved versions of similar tech. While not truly magical in nature (unless he actually takes the feats to create magic items) he could have a number of chemical/mechanical analogues to them, similar to an alchemist's infusions.

His inventions might only function because they feed off his otherwise untapped magical potential, and as such begin to break down and stop functioning if he is not there to maintain them, limiting the number of items or combinations he can have active at any given time.

Possible tropes include not just magic item creation or utilization, but also Dungeon Engineers with great skill crafting an disarming various dungeon hazards (including, possibly, those pesky slimes), Biochemists who specialize in mutating creatures to meet their needs (ankeg siege engine, anyone?), and even Construct Specialists who, while not necessarily making true golems, can stretch the limits of effects such as Animate Objects.

Personally, I would make this an archetype of the Alchemist, adding discoveries to mimic these abilities and possibly changing the list of infusions they have access to, but I can see many different possibilities. And so long as the available discoveries/talents are well written to list exactly what can be accomplished (instead of leaving it in ambiguous the realm of item creation) I see no reason this could not be included in PFS.

It's not quite complete, and definitely not a PDF, but the PF Reference Document app for android and iOS is a pretty good collection. The author, Luigi Papino even updates it fairly regularly (though updating on the android could be easier; be sure to read the description carefully).

Currently, it includes the following texts up to date (so far as I can tell): CRB, APG, ARG, UComb, UM, UE, UCamp, MA, GMG, NPC Codex, Bestiaries I-III, and indexes for feats, magic items, spells, and spell lists that can have various sources toggled for ease of consumption.

It also includes a built-in search function if you know what you are searching for. The one thing that it really seems to lack, IMO, is an index for the bestiaries you can sort through by CR, type, etc, and the best place to go for a full feat tree or list of all archetypes for a given class is still going to be d20pfsrd.com. Not that you can't find them on this app, but you have to know where to look.

It seems to me that possessed capital and earned capital could both be considered <i>your</i> capital in a sense. The difference between these, I think, would be the difference in who possesses the "title" to that resource, and thus has the right to redistribute them if they choose.

In the case of possessed capital, the title is yours, while in the case of earned capital the title actually lies with someone else and you have arranged a kind of layaway plan with them. In either case, capital represents resources that you cannot generally take with you, such as warehouses of goods, groups of laborers, political allies, and the goodwill of various spellcasters.

Regardless of who has the title, without constant maintenance goods can spoil, laborers can find other employment, political allies can be persuaded to other causes, and goodwill can be eroded, thus all of these forms of capital can suffer from attrition.

Consider the prospect of the dragon hoard with the dragon still atop it, as presented in a previous post: It represents earned yet not possessed capital, as you have cleared the rest of the dungeon, laying claim to all treasures within (thus "your" treasure). However, until you slay the dragon you do not possess it. If, however, you leave the dragon sitting there to "guard" it for you the dungeon may eventually repopulate or another adventurer may come in, slay the dragon, and take the hoard for themselves. AKA: you just lost your claim to that capital.

On a more modern note, consider layaway contracts. This is like another form of earned capital as you have already put forth the down payment (literally money in this case as opposed to your character's time, but earned either way). The item is contracted to you, and thus "yours". However, if you do not finish paying before the contact expires you loose your investment and get no product. Another version of "earned" capital attrition.

I created a Sundering character for similar reasons in our groups current campaign. An inquisitor with high intimidate who regularly uses the frostbite spell to deal nonlethal dmg, he cleaves through most equipment effortlessly with an adamantine maul, dealing excess dmg to the welders (great sunder), depriving them of their equipment bonuses, and sending them running in terror after a few hits (enforcer). He can also send his foes flying if he chooses, or on a critical hit, and they take AoOs if he does so (greater bull rush and bull rush strike).

Not quite the same status infliction that you seem to be heading this towards, but an absolute blast play. Ends up with most off the agro, tho. Apparently people don't like it when you break their stuff. :)

I actually played a campaign where my character was an exclusive crafter for the party. Ended up crafting constructs for municipalities to serve as messengers and guards. The messengers paid for themselves, so I even have a discount on the guard constructs.

We actually ended up affecting the timeline when my character crafted the Golden Army for the Lich villan before he even became the bad guy. They were all Brass Golems with the regeneration ability (unlimited mending), implanted intelligence (brain bioconstruct), and crafting feats. Long as there were a couple left they could salvage brains from fallen enemies and craft more of themselves.

Probably want the best idea. We never did fix that timeline.

Just search "master of many forms" in the message boards. I placed it the homebrew section mistakenly. But I am glad that you are taking my comments as intended. Thank you.

I really like this conversion. I had actualy worked with Cartmanbeck on a witch archetype for the Warlock which was posted on d20pfsrd, but I really like this one as well. Makes it a class in it's own right, keeps some of the unlimited use ability (though this might outshine some other classes a little such as the alchemist with his bombs), and adds versatility in the shape of limited spellcasting (which greatly reduces the abuse of abilities like invisibility, black tentacles, etc).

I wonder if you couldn't post this on the d20pfsrd for easier access in case this post gets buried in the future? Of course, I'm not sure what it might take to get something posted on that site.

Um... you do realize that in 3.5 I believe they removed both undead and constructs from the lists of available forms, right? It was considered un-thematic and overpowered (though they effectively replaced those with Elemental Body {see below} and Undead Anatomy as far as the spell lists were concerned in PF). And in PF they specifically removed the "gain all extraordinary/supernatural abilities" clause from all polymorph abilities because of game balance, replacing it with specific lists of abilities you could assume.

That said, if you were wanting a Fey, just modify the Alter Self and Monstrous Physique effects granting them the DR/cold iron and other type-specific abilities as an option. If you want Constructs, modify the Elemental Body line of spells to include a list of "construct" abilities. Most of the rest is redundant. For Aberrations, simply allow them to select one or two abilities not normally granted by the base form they have selected, possibly even allowing one of these to be from a different spell effect than the one they chose to assume that form. (Aberrations are generally magically-mutated creatures, after all, just more extremely so than magical beasts.) And if you want outsiders, modify the various abilities to permit those shapes. This is far less complicated and far more translatable. If you want to add an alignment factor to it, just grant them a feat similar to Sun-/Moon-/Starlight Summons, but specific to their use of Wild Shape and granting an alignment aspect.

Note that some abilities are simply not granted by any of the polymorph abilites, such as gaze attacks and a number of the specific auras (other than frightening) as they have also been considered too OP for game balance in the hands of PCs with so may other options at their disposal. Statue as an at-will ability generally falls into this category as well (there's a reason it's a 7th level spell). And with your capstone ability for this class, Shapechange seems kind of redundant, as it is effectively a lesser version of your ability to change forms anyway.

And while you did resolve the issue with spellcasters taking this class too early (with a 4th lvl spell they won't be able to take it before lvl 7, gaining all these abilities at lvl 16), Druids will still be able to take this class after 4 lvls granting them all of these abilities by lvl 13.

This might be a good conversion for the ADnD MoMF, when game balance was entirely a DM-controlled concept, but in PF this is no longer the case as the game has been re-designed to provide it's own game balance considerations (not that it can't be broken, regardless, but it takes more to do so).

I apologize if I seem like a nay-sayer here, but I believe these are real balance and concept issues you will need to address for this to be a good PF version of the MoMF prestige class.

While I doubt that my MoMF Archetype is quite what you are looking for, I still suggest you take a look to see how I addressed some of these game balance issues, especially in determining when the class gained access to new forms. I hope it will give you some ideas for your concept (more of a Poly-Shaper than a Wild Shaper, IMO).

I think there has been a lot of attempts to resurrect this class. I have even attempted to do so, though I did so as an archetype of the Druid class. (Feel free to check it out here if you's like.)

Personally, I never much cared for this to be a prestige class, but that aside, here are my notes:

As a general rule, in order to maximize the adoption of any new class or archetype it is a good idea to minimize the inclusion of sources that are not relatively common (ie not on d20pfsrd or a similar site dedicated to the system you are modifying).

Furthermore, I read the Agathion spells and they seem more appropriate to a strongly aligned class such as a paladin or cleric, as opposed to a supposedly neutral class such as a druid, which this would be an extension of. Not that Druids can't be strongly aligned, nor that this class is restricted to Druids (as per the general shape-shifting requirement), but they are the most likely to pursue this class. I might also make a similar argument concerning the Devilish Demeanor and Undead Anatomy line of abilities you have granted this class.

As for the requirements, realize that the easily acquired feat requirements and the generally stated ability to "assume another form, via class or race abilities or spells" means that a Human Wizard could begin this prestige class after only 3 levels, granting him Shapechange at level 12, which is very powerful, especially when you consider that this ability is not available until level 17 otherwise. And the same goes for many of the other forms this class could assume after only a few levels.

I do not mean this to be rude or insulting, but rather a critical, and hopefully helpful, assessment of what you have proposed and hope you accept this as such.

It might not be a bad addition later, after the Wild Shape tables have been completed, to add the magical beasts and other WS restricted shapes to the list displayed optionally just under the spell descriptions to make this even more versatile. But at the same time WS Druids will get the most out of this and I understand that it should be made complete for them first.

And beej67 is fairly accurate for the most part. The main draw to these forms would be for additional abilities, not combat power which is really what most WS Druid builds are going for.

Consider that, excluding the lvl 20 capstone, this character can double-tap Channel energy for 16d6 with Quick Channeling for an average of 56hp.

Is this the most effective action? Not necessarily, but that can easily make up for the last hit on each and every ally that is in your channel radius. So unless your enemies are actually being smart and ganging up on one PC before moving to the next, it's usually enough to keep everyone in the fight.

If you need to target-heal a specific ally just LOH. If you took the Greater Mercy feat, one Quick Channel and one LOH for an ally that doesn't need a mercy heals 19d6 for an average of 70hp to that ally while still healing all other allies for 28hp. Given that, aside from most BBEGs, most enemies are not optimized for dmg this is usually more than enough to keep going even under substantial pressure.

That said, pick your best ones, probably sticking to Selective and Quick Channel (possibly getting Extra Channel if you are running out a lot). I would also take the same tact with the LoH feats, but listed all of them for your perusal. My preferences here would be Greater and Ultimate Mercy. If you happen to be constantly fighting the full gamut of afflictions or running out of LoH often, I would consider Extra Mercy and Extra LoH, but the remainder would not be among my preferences (different players, different play styles, though I think a lot of people on these forums min-max).

Divine Interference is also good, as it can turn that potential Crit into a miss, but it does require spells and is a quick way to run out of them. Not such a bad thing if you find you have more spells than you need or just don;t want to mess with them, but something to note before taking. (And it would not work with the WotHL archetype, as they loose spells altogether, so decide accordingly.)

I would argue, however, that Sacred Summons is largely wasted on any class that doesn't get at least 6th lvl spells, as the alignment subtype that the critters get doesn't make up for the fact that if you are limited to Summon Monster IV the HP, Atk, and Dmg is so outclassed by lvl 20 (and at allother levels proportionately by available Summon Monster X) that it might as well be watching on the sidelines as it will survive, at most, 1 or 2 hits (if you are lucky).

IE: trade standard action to summon creature that absorbs standard action from enemy. Net benefit: zero, as all other enemies can still attack you (assuming the enemy your summon targeted doesn't just ignore it and attack you anyway). If you were getting at least Summon Monster VI or better by lv 20, I'd say go for it, but otherwise not worth it IMO.

I would personally go with the Storm Druid archetype and select the Cloud domain (subdomain of Air). Control Winds may look like a weak spell, but look at the wind effects that you can create (and resist). You can create a full-blown tornado by 15th level, I think.

Furthermore, the Cloud subdomain not only grants you the Lightning Arc ranged touch attack, but also gives you the Thundercloud ability which not only hinders your opponents visually (yay miss chances!) but also damages them. And you can still see through it for yet another way to stick it to your enemies.

You will, of course loose your normal Summon Nature's Ally spontaneous casting in lieu of spontaneously casting your domain spells, but the only real downsides that I see are the loss of Woodland Stride and Trackless Step. Some people may also be perturbed by the loss of Venom Immunity and Thousand Faces, but few creatures effectively use poison, and unless you are running a high-level intrigue campaign thousand faces is not terribly useful, IMO.

This combination effective grants you the ability to control the battlefield while leaving your Wild Shape ability fully intact. And you won't be stepping on too many toes, but can still fill in where needed either summoning, casting, or wading into melee.

Ah, and I just noticed that the maximized healing actually comes as the Pally capstone at lvl20. It's a long way to go, but if you get there that would make this build the best healer in the game, from what we calculated. (The DM was actually running an inverse of this build for the Boss. We survived mostly because he forgot to maximize his channel negative.)

Have you considered combining the Warrior of the Holy Light with the Hospitalier? Both are completely compatible, and WotHL adds some buffing and healing options to the paladin's repetior of LoH abilities, for when the HP are less of an issue than the effects. You also get more LOH/day. The trade here is that you lose spells (which are often a mute point for Pally's IMO) in favor of the near-constant buffs and enhanced LOH this class provides.

Regardless, you should definitely keep feats such as Extra Channel and Selective Channel, Versatile Channel (which may not be accessible unless you palladin "falls" for a couple levels then gets an attonement), Quick Channel and possibly Improved Channel on your list if you plan on going this route, as this will be your primary source of healing.

And if you do add in the WotHL archetype, also keep in mind Extra LOH, Extra Mercy, Greater Mercy, and Ultimate Mercy. This will grant you even more healing and allow you to buff the party to boot, not to mention the nifty ability to bring a dead ally back to life. Word of Healing, Reward of Life and Reward of Grace as well as Radiant charge can also provide a bit of a boost.

The nice thing about this combo is you are now the party healer and buffer. If you were willing to hamstring yourself for a few levels you can also do some decent damage (versatile Channeler). You can remove any condition, double-blast channel energy to bring the party to nearly full HP in one or two rounds, and revive your fallen in an emergency (even if you have to rest a day or two to regain enough LoH to do so).

I'm pretty sure there was even a feat or item which allowed you to maximize/empower your Channel Energy, though it may not be PFS legal.

We actually had campaign in which one of the characters was a pally of Pharasma (super anti-undead). He wore black skull-embossed armor and wielded a scythe, but we never lacked for healing (which was good, given that the Boss nearly KO'd the party 3 times, and we still lost 3 out of the 5 party members). He actually forwent some of the above-mentioned feats in order to take some more combat-oriented ones.

All said, he was effective at both dealing damage (though this was his minor role) and healing it, and was a great party buff alongside my bard (who was the only other character to survive).

Thank you for your comments Galnorag. I assume by "misc items" you refer to the caveat items that I had mentioned in my last post, and personally I would agree with you here completely. However, I could also see two people cooperating to make a hybrid item, one crafting the permanent abilities and the other imbuing it with the limited use effects, or some similar method.

As for the feat progression, as it stands you may take Craft Disposable Item or Craft Wonderous Equipment without any prerequisites other than CL (CL1 or CL3, respectively), but you must have at least one of these two before you can take Master Artifice. I'm not sure if you had noticed this or not, but this was intended as a limited progression for that reason. If, however, the DM were to rule that you must acquire all of them in order that would also be understandable, though that is not something that I would enforce at my table.

I also noted that you had mentioned the possibility of basing the accelerated crafting upon the highest level spell as opposed to the CL. While this could very well be a personal preference I would not. Consider that while a bard (as per your example) may not master spellcasting as fully as a wizard, he has may other talents that he has developed which might aid him in his endeavor. He may even know more about the preparation of the material components to resonate with the tones of the spells he is attempting to imbue them with, for instance. Furthermore, as his spell list is more limited he is more likely to have to make additional UMD checks just to pull off crafting an item which also increases his likelihood of failure for any given crafting check, which would also increase the time he would have to spend.

Finally, to address your comments concerning repairing/recharging objects. You are correct that Make Whole can repair a magical item, even up to restoring it's magical qualities, but only if your CL is at least double the CL of the original item. These rules grant a similar, if slower, option to low level characters who may not have a high enough CL to do so, or when they want to restore an item that already has a very high CL. As for recharging, the rules I propose really only mean that the cost when recycling the material components is reduced by the cost of the wand (or whatever, generally 50gp or less) plus 10% of the remaining cost. The characters recharging this item must still pay the other 90% per charge. And that is only while the object still retains at least one charge and for one additional day per CL of the original item once the last charge is expended. After that the discount no longer applies, save for the cost of the material component (again, usually 50gp or less).

It might well be OK to reduce the cost further, however, you must also consider that the table I included only placed things in terms of a small AO with boosted CP. As you could also apply these to Medium and Large AOs at relatively low levels, this can quickly become more powerful with a reduced cost, which Is the only reason I haven't decreased the cost further, though this might warrant investigation.

Consider the following:

As you may notice, both of these advancement tables show that the larger the object is you are animating, the more likely it is that you would actually be buying up to animate an object one size smaller than your maximum due to the increased # of abilities you could stack onto that AO.

While my proposal only makes this a minor trade up, forcing you to decide between a better stat block and potentially better defensive/offensive traits, the advancement you propose actually nearly doubles the # of CP you get for an AO at 8th level by reducing the size (and inherent stat block) weighing this clearly in favor of the trade, IMO. And this trend only worsens as the CL increases.

I also created a chart for an advancement that splits this difference.

While at lower levels it mimics my own, at higher levels it starts to run into the same issue as yours. Ultimately, as I would not want to unbalance the intended power of the AOs this spell is meant to create based upon the official stat blocks, even at extreme levels, I would have to lean towards my proposed advancement in favor of either your own or the hybrid. Especially considering that most AO traits only cost 1 or 2 CP, with only a few exceptions, and there are only so many of them and there are even flaws which can be applied which allow you to gain additional CP as well (though I doubt that most people would use them in normal play).

Of course, this is all house rule territory anyway, so judge this as you will.

OK, I think that was it. These rules might require a little more book keeping (especially in the case of crafting multiple items at once). However, they grant a number of benefits IMO. Among those are:

1- Making a dedicated crafter no longer takes all (or nearly all) of your available feats, as one feat now grants the ability to craft multiple items based upon their functional similarity.

2- Crafting a mundane sphere of gold no longer takes longer than making one of steel if the gold is actually present, as the material cost is no longer a factor in this project. In fact, the gold sphere would take less time as it is an easier material to work with. (Note, also, that if the gold is not present, the cost would still factor as the crafter would have to make other items to pay for it's acquisition.)

3- A more powerful (and supposedly more skilled) magic item crafter takes less time to craft items than a weaker (and supposedly less skilled) crafter.

4- Magic items can now be recharged and salvaged where previously they could not. This is great for the character who really wanted to use that wand the enemy just had, but discovers it only has 4 charges left, or when the fighter sunders that awesome staff they were planning on snagging.

The notable caveat lies in the dual classification of the Craft Wonderous Item feat, which falls both under the Craft Disposable Item and Craft Wonderous Equipment feats I proposed. In general, however, most wonderous items are either limited use functionality or infinite use functionality, with relatively few having aspects of both. Those which do I would grant to DM fiat, depending upon the remaining utility after the expendable charges had been used.

The following is my update to the actual crafting rules. As this is rather lengthy, I am going to attempt to subdivide this into sections based on what is being accomplished in an effort to reduce information overload with one giant post.

The following item creation feats are simply a streamlined combination of the existing item creation feats arranged by their function. Note that all of these reference the feats they emulate/grant and the levels at which those benefits become available.

I arranged them as such as I felt that, aside from the mundane fabrication of the items being imbued (which would most likely be purchased outright anyway by someone with enough money to be crafting anything magical), the principals behind the actual imbuing process for these items would be essentially the same. Note that I do not include Craft Construct, as this is sufficiently unique IMO, to remain a separate feat.

I have often been aggravated with the inflexibility and unrealistic nature of item creation in DND and continuing onto PF. I am a crafter in real life and find some of the crafting times, as well as the sheer number of feats, unnecessarily burdensome.

As such, I present here for your perusal my updated and hopefully streamlined version of magic (and mundane) item creation. This will be posted in multiple parts with spoiler tabs for ease of reading.

The elemental thing is really more of a flavor text. The character is actually selectively animating aspects of his environment that represent (to him at least) the 5 elements (earth, wood, metal, fire, and water). As such, Animate Objects seems more appropriate to me for this purpose.

But beyond that, I always felt it was a little silly that it was effectively impossible (outside DM fiat) to animate a small metal object (a 2CP trait) but it was OK to animate a huge mithral (4CP) or colossal adamantine (6CP) object. After all, how often are you gonna have that much of a material? And if it's so difficult to animate, why would animating such a large amount be easier than animating a smaller amount of the same?

This also allows smaller AOs to have more "swiss army" functionality, without letting them overtake the sheer power of larger AOs, and keeps AOs in general relevant for a longer time, something which I have long thought was missing from this spell and class of creature, IMO. Granted, you can craft them with the Create Construct feat outside of the standard limits if you are willing to pay for the upgrades, but that goes well beyond the temporary effect I'm looking for and requires far more investment.

As for the Summon line of spells, I thought those were a bit over-hyped, especially if they were going to be restricted to elementals as in this case. Don't get me wrong, the ability to summon certain creatures tactically is wonderful, but seeing as their CR is at best 2/3 of your own and they will likely be taken out in a couple hits anyway makes keeping up with all of the different stat blocks seem like overstretching. Especially when you can have a single stat block per size and a list of abilities to choose from for the cost of one 6th level spell slot instead of having to keep up with multiple 1st through 9th level spells and how many of what they might* summon for you.

In other words, more consistent and easily tracked utility without necessarily more power.

Of course, as I review what I have posted above, I note that my proposed CP costs would make a Small animated object (with unchanged HP, atk, dmg, etc) with 5 CP require CL11, as opposed to a Huge AO (also 5 CP, but massively increased HP, etc) which can be created with CL8.

So, might the following progression be more appropriate?:

The matchup for an improved small AO (by CP) with CL relative to other standard AOs by size would then look more like this:

I am wanting to make a character that can create "elemental" creatures by animating objects. However, even if you consider the signature abilities of the various elementals to be 1CP traits, this means that I can never animate a small or medium object with all of these traits (all elementals have at least 2 signature traits, some up to 4).

As such, I'm wanting advice on a possible house rule that might allow the use of extra caster levels to increase the available CP for these animated creatures. I charted things out, and it appears to me that the bonuses these creatures get from size (Atk/Dmg/HD/etc.) account for about 3/4 of their overall power, if not possibly more once you enter the area of constructs of Huge size and larger, but I realize that the adaptability of the CP traits can also be quite potent.

(please forgive the table format)

Given this breakdown, would you consider it reasonable to permit a CP point buy-esque system in which a character may buy a single extra CP for 1 effective CL, with each additional CP costing one more than the previous? This extra CL cost would not increase the size, HD or other related properties of the animated object, but would allow an animated object of any size to potentially exceed the current posted limit of CP if the caster has the CLs to spare. Or would this be too weak/powerful?

Ultimately, I want this to represent the potency of these extra abilities, especially relative to the cost of animating smaller objects, but I don't want it so expensive that it can never be practically used. Any insight would be appreciated.

Combine Monk of the Four Winds with Drunken Hero and it can actually be decent if you give them just a few things: feat Deep Drinker, Drinking Horn of Bottomless Valor (24k), Hand of Glory (8k), and three Rings of Ki Mastery (10k each, one on each hand and one on the hand of glory). This is expensive, at a total market cost of 62k, but can be afforded by 10th level if the character focuses exclusively on this build (probably not a good idea, IMO, unless your DM favors the +3 standard action option, below). The monk must prepare by storing 2 Ki in each ring, but after this using Slow Time only requires 3 points of Ki (instead of 6).

First cycle (after using slow time to gain 3 standard actions): Drink (a standard action) twice to regain 4 Ki and use a move action to execute the swift action required to use slow time again for 3 Ki. Net gain 1 Ki and 2 or 3 more standard actions (depending on how you read the Slow Time ability, not actually sure here).

Second cycle: Drink to regain 2 more Ki, then (assuming only net gain of 2 standard actions**) any standard action you want for a net gain of 3 Ki, or 5 Ki if you chose to drink again.

**If you assume net gain of 3 standard actions, insert another use of Slow Time, rinse and repeat. This is the broken option, but it could be interpreted this way as the wording "gain three standard actions during his turn instead of just one" is not the same as "lose one standard action then gain three", though I could see arguments for both. Regardless, this would be handled in our group as a one-of.

Nevertheless, regaining 3 to 5 Ki in a round can be pretty useful for a monk, especially if they have also mixed in the Qiggong archetype, seeing as they would have been restricted to only regaining 2 Ki and being stuck with a move action if they only had the Drunken Master archetype (the only archetype that can efficiently "restock" their Ki points throughout the day).

Note that while Slow Time is a supernatural ability it's use is not restricted by it's own wording (as it is a swift action which can be executed as a move action under that clause, and Supernatural abilities are not otherwise mentioned within the restrictions of this ability)

Well, the cart would require that the character wheel the whole thing around like a wheelbarrow, with the one back leg possibly being stood upon when firing.

If you look at the historical weapon, it had a hook and two pins on the barrel. The pins were for bracket mouting on a device such as the one described, whereas the hook was to brace on the crenelations of a battlement.

All that said, 2d12, even multiplied by 4 for a full attack (8d12) doesn't even keep pace with many wizard spells that can easily pull out 25-40 d6, many of which go against touch AC or saves (also generally lower than AC, but often still dealing dmg on a successful save).

Granted, weapon special abilities can tip this scale, but it's still not quite OP IMHO, especially when you consider the investment involved. & if you don't like the cart you could always makethem vventure through passageways too narrow for it (but don't be surprised when they pick up an immovable rod as Froze_man suggested, above).

I would definitely agree with that house rule, & is indeed how we run things in our group with one small modification: difficult materials to work with increase the craft DC, which thus increases the risk of failure.

We also do not factor the cost of expensive mundane components into the time it takes to craft magical equipment, assuming those components (such as a masterwork weapon) it readily available. & if it is not, that component must be purchased or crafted separately.

I would agree that Hidden master is primarily a sight-based ability and that abilities such as scent might pierce it, as there is no real way of covering this up in PF save for a massive stench that would have to affect an area.

As for blind sight, I think that since this ability primarily detects upon sound it would also have a chance to pierce this ability. However, since a ninja likely does practice moving silently as well, I would still require a perception Vs stealth in this case, probably allowing the ninja to utilize the +20 stealth modifier, but also giving the creature with blind sight a +20 to their perception to offset.

Of course, all of this is technically house rules given the subsequent wording you've pointed out. But it at least seems to be a reasonable interpretation and is how I would probably run it at my table.

So, I noticed that you neglected to mention what level you were or what kind of budget you have to work with.

That said, you seem to be pretty focused on AC, and as far as that goes upgrading all of your AC items to +1 then +2, and so forth is usually the most economical way to go. As far as getting rid of the shield, if you have enough you can always go for a wand of shield, shield of faith, or a ring of force shield if you have the cash.

Alternatively, if you have a caster in the party you can chum up to, a minor ring of spell storing is not a bad idea. Just have them cast any extra shield spells into it at the end of the day. You can also use this tactic to effectively get a ring of true strike. ;)

The wonky part is when you start making items out of different, often expensive materials.

Take for instance making two spheres, one of iron, a notoriously hard metal to work with by many standards, and one of gold, a metal which can simply be melted down and cast into a mold.

The iron sphere costs, say, 10sp, while the gold one costs closer to 1000gp (10,000sp).

Although both have the same craft DC, it will take you at least 1000x longer to make the gold sphere you could melt down and cast into a mold over a cookfire than it would to make the iron one you would have to hammer into shape over an anvil.

Also compare that to the time it would take to make an ornate jewelry box (maybe 50gp) with complex inlays and a hinge. The box should have a higher craft DC by aproximately 5 points, but can still be made faster then the gold sphere for some reason.

@Boz, I think you need to reread the thread carefully. You are mistakenly combining two completely different lines of thought.

No one has suggested that cold iron armor should make you immune to weapon enchantments. However, you did say that cold iron should be impossible to enchant.

The logic followed that if anything that is cold iron is impossible to enchant, then neither cold iron weapons nor cold iron armor could be enchanted.

I then proposed an alternative whereby these could be enchanted, but at a higher cost and craft DC to create.

The only other crossover between weapons and armor which has occurred in this thread was another post by me proposing how a cold iron weapon might pierce through magical defenses without actually negating them altogether (lowering them incrementaly based on the weapon's enchantment).

No where, other than your last two posts, has there been any mention of cold iron armor making the wearer immune to weapon enchantments. Only that cold iron equipment itself, whether a weapon or armor, would be difficult if not impossible to imbue, depending upon your preference.

Edit: I apologize for any confusion. My previous response was based upon an assumption that there was a typo in the comment of yours to which I was responding.

I had interpreted it as "Who has ever mentioned cold iron eliminating weapon special effects?"

Note the lack of the word "armor" after "cold iron", and you might see my confusion, given the context of this thread.

I notice that people keep calling TWF a "trap", but for a class that gets the majority of their dmg from an ability completely separate from their weapon's base attack output, I'm not so sure I'd call it that.

While I have never, personally, elected to go much farther than the basic TWF feat (occasionaly splurging on TW Defense or Double Strike), I am quite fond of this on sneak attack builds.

Granted, a properly built fighter will easily match a fully stated rogue's SA on any single hit in a full attack, and probably beat it hands down using feats like the vital strike tree, but that is what they are designed to do.

However, having a realistic chance to get off your SA dmg more than once in a round, when it is likely over 60% of your dmg output is too good to pass up IMO.

That said, given the rogue & ninja's avg BAB, the -2 atk penalty is already a hit, making taking the Imp and Greater versions of TWF rather ineffective given the slim chance of landing one of these attacks with the cumulative -5 penalties for iterative.

Who has ever mentioned cold iron armor eliminating weapon special effects? You're not making any sense.

Um, you did in your first post.

I'd be all for this if there was another caveat: Cold Iron can NEVER, EVER be enchanted, either temporarily or permanently.

Also, it'd be neat if cold iron weapons had the ability to ignore spells such as Shield, Mage Armor, etc. Sadly, the game would need to have a good definition on what is an enchantment, what is an "improvement", and it's not in right now...

(Emphasis mine)

And ever since you have been arguing what counts as a magical enchantment.

This is the also the original post in which weapons were mentioned in this thread as well, tho the OP was originally about armor.

It's the third from the top. See for yourself.

For lower levels, flankign and vanishing trick will be your best friends. However, if you are not adverse to some feat intensive builds, there are other options.

Option 1 - intimidation.

Take weapon focus, dazzling display, and shatter defenses. You won't be able to get all of these till lvl 8, but intimidation is easy to pull off, especially if you go the extra mile and take the skill focus and persuasive skills for an extra +5 (+10 if you have at least 10 ranks).

If you are small you can always add in the taunt feat and focus in the bluff skill instead, or if you are big and muscley the intimidating prowess feat might be more your style.

Option 2 - improvised weaponry

Take catch off guard and improvised weapon mastery. You can easily keep a 1d4 base dmg (or better) improvised weapon with you data all times. The die type will increase by one step (d4-d6-d8-etc) and you will still benefit from a 19-20/x2 crit range, which can (so far as I'm aware) be increased to 17-20/x2 with improved critical (improvised weapon) as the imp weap mastery feat overrides the normal properties of your weapons instead of "doubling their crit range", though the effect is still the same. (Note; I could be wrong, but I do believe these actually do stack in this case.)

Of course, you will only be able to treat unarmed opponents as flat footed while wielding an improvised weapon, so you should specialize in either sunder or disarm maneuvers as well to use this to best effect. Sunder is generally more effective tho, especially if you are using an adamantine shovel to crack their weapon and deal the extra dmg straight to your opponent using greater sunder.

Option 3 - capitalize on one of the above

If you aren't adverse to dealing nonlethal damage you will love this one. Take the feats bludgeoner (at least if you are planning on using an improvised weapon), sap adept, and sap master. You will be able to deal nonlethal dmg with any bludgeoning weapon (most improvised weapons falling into this category), will get to roll sneak attack dmg twice, and get an additional 2 points of dmg per sneak attack die rolled. At lvl 20 that equates to 20d6 + 40 SA dmg (avg 110 dmg) before adding in weapon dmg or other bonuses such as from a high Str score.

The downside: all this damage is nonlethal, so creatures and characters with regeneration will heal it double time, in addition to any lethal dmg they would normally heal. Same goes for healing spells cast on any of your targets, which could bring them back in the fight pretty quickly. But then again, clerics capable of casting such spells should be your first targets anyway.

I never mentioned cold iron armor in any of my posts.

But that is exactly what this post is about: adding innately antimagical qualities to cold iron. So it doesn't really matter if you mentioned it or not if you are in this thread.

That said, the OP wasn't saying that cold iron would make magic impossible, or even cancel it out completely, just make it more difficult to use in certain scenarios (most specifically for casters jailed in a cold iron cell and for casters who were attempting to target opponents wearing cold iron armor).

Most of the following posts were simply elaborating upon the ramifications of such an alteration to the properties of cold iron, especially with respect to the added difficulty of even enchanting such items and what additional benefit cold iron weapons might provide.

If you were not ready to discuss these topics, that is understandable, but this is not the thread for you.

I would assume that if a single point of fire/cold dmg would remove it so would a minimum damage roll.

That said, I'd lean towards one point of damage per level of the spell (4 in this case) at least for melee attacks. 1 point should still suffice for fire/cold as the alone is specifically noted as being weak to these elementsts.

As for the whole "use your claw to scrape it off" I'd have to say this might be possible, but them you'd have to scrape it off your claw as well, likely by scraping your calw against a rough corner or surface. If the creature has 2+ attack/round they could even do so before taking a second round of con dmg, but they would deal at least 8 points of dmg to themselves (4 to scape it off with the claw & 4 to scrape it off the claw onto another surface).

That said, with a troll's regeneration, the prospects of doing this would hardly phase them, butany other creature is probably taking at least a -1 atk penalty for any attacks which require the use of that claw/limb. Still a +1 for the necro, just not quite as big of one.

Alcohol is a natural antiseptic, which would prevent bacterial decomposition. However, it would also soften tissues making them easier to tear if disturbed. Baring access to a scroll, however, this might be your best option. Not that I'm entirely sure where you will get a barrel of booze from in the middle of the wilderness.

Well, if we are to use strict "raw" as you propose it, we might as well say that the dispell effect only takes effect on those creatures who were present for the casting of the original unhallow spell but suppresses any affected items for a full year, as for it to affect any creatures or items which enter the area at a later point it would have to be recast.

This interpretation simply means that the spells hallow and unhallow are essentially useless given the 10 min casting times. Furthermore, unless all intended targets were present to begin with not even the inherent protection from good/evil effects are of any use as they cannot be "recast" on potential new targets as they enter the area of the unhallow. And if one of those targets should ever leave the area they are excluded permanently (as those effects cannot affect them once they exit, meaning that it must be "recast" on them when they reenter).

I'll at least agree with this, the spells hallow and unhallow need major clarification.

Yes, but compare the costs of a +5 cold iron weapon and other magical weapons.

Using the 25% markup this comes to 64.5k, or 77k using the 50% markup.

Compared to other weapons, that would be 50k for a +5 or 72k for a +6 (total enhancement including special qualities).

Even if the weapon could bypass mage armor, shield, and shield of faith (armor, shield, and deflection bonuses respectively), only the most dedicated witch hunters would bother with such an item, as very few creatures will have access to even 2 of these three effects, much less be reliant upon them when they could have access to dancing shields, rings of force shield, bracers of armor, etc.

Though, I wouldn't necessarily allow a cold iron weapon to function in such an all-or-nothing manner. I would rather suggest that a cold iron weapon pierces DR magic as though it were magic, regardless of enhancement, and reduces any magical AC bonus (from spells or enhancement bonuses, other than Dex based incidentals) by 1 point per point of enhancement.

That said, I'd have to revise my preference to the 50% markup, as it is a slight scaling benefit.

The anti magic qualities could simply make enchanting cold iron more expensive and labor intensive. It already costs an extra 2k to enchant, but if you really want to make it harder just increase the cost of enchanting it by 25-50% and increase any craft DCs by 5.

That would make a +5 cold iron armor cost an extra 6.25-12.5k, on top of the extra 2k just to enchant it, and increase the DC to make one from 20 to 25. The cost for a weapon would be an extra 12.5-25k. (I personally lean towards the 25% cost increase.)

The only abilities which might not be affected by this cost increase would be anti-magic qualities such as SR, spell turning, and dispelling.

Normally, yes a person and their equipment do count as one target, but you state yourself that dispel is an exception to this, as it can target equipment separately.

That said, I would not propose a single check against all items. Chances are that at least a few would continue to work, especially the higher level ones, and after 1d4 rounds a new dispel check would have to be made against the ones which are re-activating in order to keep them down.

Perhaps, for simplicity's sake (as it may end up being a lot of rolling) only one check every 1d4 rounds vs each effect. This would capture the "intermittent functioning" effect that I would presume an unhallow/hallow-dispel is meant to simulate. Weaker items probably wouldn't work most of the time, while stronger items would function most of the time. Still not as powerful as an anti magic field, but potent in it's own right. (Unhallow = spell level 5; Anti magic field = spell level 6)

Actually, I kina like this concept. As is everyone either wants mitral or adamantine equipment, but no one bothers with cold iron unless they are going to be up against a bunch of fey.

That said, I'd adjust what you've proposed to the following:

Cold iron prison DC and to cast = 25 + spell level. (They might get off that can trip, but not a polymorph). This can possibly be increased by increasing the sheer amount of cold iron used in, say, the foundation to siphon off any magical energies.

Cold iron armor has no decrease in AC, but gains an SR equal to it's AC bonus + 10 and doubles its arcane spell failure chance and gains a divine spell failure chance equal to it's normal arcane spell failure.

This means that cold iron full plate will be boss against lvl 1 casters (SR 19 vs 1d20 + CL1, only a 15% chance of success), but even with a +5 enhancement will be of limited use against higher level casters (SR 24 vs 1d20 + CL20, only a 15% chance of failure).

Enchanting cold iron already costs an additional 2k, which means that it is rather undesirable at early levels since it already costs double, but this gives it more desirability and flavor over all.

Of course, if you wanted to add in the Spell Resistance armor qualities, that could be slightly problematic. I'd have to rule that the SR provided by those qualities is simply increased by the armor's AC bonus.

The spell affects the entire area. I read this as "is cast upon everything in that area" which translates to "cast upon all possible targets in said area".

And look at that possible range of CLs dispelled again. The dispell check is 1d20 + CL9 (for the darkskull) vs a DC 11 + CL (for the spell effect) this means that to dispell a CL 1 spell you would have to roll at least a 3, and even with a nat 20 you can only ever dispell a CL 18. On a 1 or 2 you get nothing (10% chance of absolute failure).

And then you still have the effect of "wait for it" and your equipment at least is back up to full with no chance of being affected again unless you are forced to exit and re-enter.

Now, I could see that items might only work intermittently in the area of an unhallow-dispell, but to function without hindrance after only 6-24 seconds? It's really not that hard to stall for 30 seconds.

On the other hand, anyone with a bag of holding could theoretically strap the skull to their hand and "full attack" the pocket dimension. Spell effects don't cross planar boundaries, so each attack would subject all targets in the area to a new dispell magic for each attack. Give these to a monk and see how long your spells last.