That's your opinion. But you can see an obvious change in writing styles pre- and post- organized play. Not just when organized play started, but when it popularized.
Search Posts
The CRB was more conversational, as was the document it was based on the 3.5 SRD. It wasn’t intended to be “technical”. That way of thinking didn’t really come around until PFS became more of a thing. Originally, you solved issues amongst friends like adults. PFS changed the venue to arguments amongst pedantic strangers.
A barbarian gains the benefits of rage powers only while raging. Reminder text is pretty normal, especially in the CRB. In the later books they started leaving reminder text out.
False dichotomy. It’s both a creature and an object.
The rules treat dead creatures as creatures though, or else Raise Dead would target a corpse and not a "dead creature". Dead is also a condition that affects creatures/characters, not objects:
You also benefit from haste, if that happens to come up. Though all attacks should suffer from that -2 you're taking from using spell combat.
Touch Spells in Combat: Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll. This seems to be the rules source the OP was looking for. Unconscious creatures are automatically considered willing, but a character who is conscious but immobile or helpless (such as one who is bound, cowering, grappling, paralyzed, pinned, or stunned) is not automatically willing. The thing about a corpse is that it is both an object and a dead creature(as specified in the target for Raise Dead). And since it's also unconscious, you could teleport with it as if it were a creature instead of as luggage.
We could go on and on about useful spells. I just wanted to make sure they had the common strategies.
Spell Combat and Spellstrike take a bit to get used to. Magus is a higher complexity class because of them. Here's another part that may come up
Touch Spells in Combat: Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll. This is where that "free" attack is coming from. But also this is where we get that we can cast a spell, then move, then deliver that free attack with Spellstrike. This is a very common thing to do on a magus, both for positioning and to cast outside of a threatened area and then deliver inside. It's good knowledge for a healer too, as you can cast the heal from the back row and then move up to deliver it to the ally as a free action.
S1: Yes, you can take a 5 foot step during a full attack action, like spell combat. S2: This all sounds correct. S3: You can use Spell Combat and Spellstrike together. You could spell combat as a full round action to:
On the second round assuming the first two hit, you'd still have one charge of 3rd caster level chill touch. You could go with a standard attack for no spell combat penalty. But you could instead gamble and spell combat this round too. You just have to make sure you hit with your attack first and then followup with some other spell. *In case it wasn't clear, a held spell like chill touch stays active until you use up all of your touches or until you cast another spell.
It's not quite there yet. It's a lot better than it was a year ago, but like you said, AI has trouble keeping multiple personalities seperate. All AI characters know everything that every other AI character knows. It will keep getting better every year.
I think your GM is wrong and your build is honestly far from optimal. But I also don’t think it’s worth a fight. What is synthesist even getting you? Why not just go pure Oracle?
I believe your math is mathing. Although when I input the familiar into Pathbuilder, it's receiving 60 skill points at level 12 and I'm not sure how it got that answer. We'd have to see almost all of the numbers, because when you share skill points with your familiar, the sets of ranks don't stack. If your familiar has 1 rank in stealth and the master has 2 ranks in stealth, then it doesn't have 3 combined ranks in stealth, it just takes the better value of 2.
Skills: For each skill in which either the master or the familiar has ranks, use either the normal skill ranks for an animal of that type or the master's skill ranks, whichever is better. In either case, the familiar uses its own ability modifiers. Regardless of a familiar's total skill modifiers, some skills may remain beyond the familiar's ability to use. Familiars treat Acrobatics, Climb, Fly, Perception, Stealth, and Swim as class skills. For regular familiar skills, the Hit Dice familiar rule doesn't matter anyway, because you have the more specific rule to use the "normal" number of skill ranks for the base animal, instead of some adjusted value.
There are going to be multiple issues with that working, so get ready for people to list all of the ways it won't work. Have you considered using onsize greatswords instead? Jotungrip (Ex): At 2nd level, a titan mauler may choose to wield a two-handed melee weapon in one hand with a –2 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. The weapon must be appropriately sized for her, and it is treated as one-handed when determining the effect of Power Attack, Strength bonus to damage, and the like. This ability replaces uncanny dodge. Since you are dual wielding, you'll probably want to go for the Hand's Autonomy feat to reduce those penalties by 2. Normally, I'd suggest the Fighter's Effortless Dual Wielding, but that's going to require a questionable reading from your GM about if it works in this combo.
Have you considered the haramaki as an armor that isn't quite armor? It would still leave you bare chested, but with your belly covered. The shifter can get half wisdom to AC while using light armor and a shield. The weretouched archetype could look pretty cool, being a beastguy Spartan. The biggest problem would be no free sword proficiency, but a dip could fix that. The lack of metal armor is annoying but can be worked around.
I would also avoid prepared casters, because that vancian style casting feels really different than the pop fantasy assumption of mana based casting. Spontaneous casters feel more like what people expect to do in their game. It's pointless to talk about what is the most educational to the newbie. It's not like we are training them for a job. What's most important is for them to be excited to keep coming back for more.
It sounds like everyone is misunderstanding what you are asking for. Maybe you should try starting over fresh and more concise.
Sure - they are humans about 18-35 with some experience from DnD3.5, DnD5, PF2. [/ooc]I would not classify anyone who's played 3.5 to be a newbie at Pf1.... Yeah, I'd kind of agree. The ones who have played 3.5 will just be tacking on a handful of extra abilities when playing PF1. They might be more interested in things that didn't really exist there, like Gunslinger, Inquisitor, Magus and Summoner. I assume a lot of us came from a 3.5 background and remember how easy it was to pick up PF1. Wanted party composition will depend on the kind of adventures you are running. If it's a pre-existing module, you'll really want someone on condition removal, so something like a cleric or oracle is heavily encouraged. For an adventure you are creating yourself, you just tailor to whatever the group actually has
To be fair, the request for PFS legal was kind of buried down in the request. And it’s not like these threads can’t be googled up based more on title than content. So giving non-PFS options isn’t unexpected. I do agree that Kasatha and Multi-attack shouldn’t be a default assumption though. It’s one of those things you have to ask the GM about, like playing a summoner.
If I were going to replace the unchained rogue, I’d choose an unchained barbarian. He can handle traps face first and doesn’t have to worry about the constitution fiddling. You will hurt on skills just a little, but the fighter will eventually have a lot with advanced trainings. But also it’s going to be rare to have a party of nothing but Newbies. There will usually be at least one player with experience.
With Newbies, I’d focus on characters that are easier to play, but without caring about how hard they are to build. You could always help someone with the building. Plan out those hard choices for them like feat paths and spells known. My picks:
Aroden worship decreased after his death, but never went away entirely.
I also find it interesting that this is going in the opposite direction of the D&D3.5 to Pathfinder conversion.
I'm not sure if you had that in mind from the beginning, but just going back to 3.5 skills sounds a lot safer for game balance than letting checks stack even higher than they do now. Keep in mind that 3.5 was also different in how you gained skill points.
The Pathfinder system was a simplification of this system that achieved similar high and lows to the old D&D 3.5 system.
I'm a fan of the alchemist class for its versatility and the "mad scientist" RP factor. One example is Dr. Ratbotnik, a ratfolk vivisectionist/preservationist who throws summons instead of bombs, uses scurrying swarmer to get those sneak attacks in, and builds an army of anthropomorphic and awakened animals.I adore the Alchemist pet archetype: Promethean Alchemist. The loss of bombs and mutagen is annoying but you can still figure something out. I love the idea of that archetype, but when trying to build one out it felt like there were barely any compatible discoveries, since most of them modify abilities you traded out.
I have a few concerns: 1) Is this too powerful when combined with skill unlocks?
You have to think of those bonuses being on top of what you usually get with your usual rogue build. The "costs" of being tiny are pretty insignificant compared to the bonuses, with mouser taking away most of the bad parts. You don't need an odd race? The original didn't require a specific race at all. The kitsune is hardly an odd race, even being common in society play.
Even if you increments the spell to become a lvl 9 it's only to increase the DC not the spell lvl so you need to change for a creature of summon monster lvl 1 not 9 All effects dependent on spell level (such as saving throw DCs and ability to penetrate a lesser globe of invulnerability) are calculated according to the heightened level. So, a mount spell cast as a 9th level spell, could be altered to a creature from the list of summoned monsters from Summoner Monster 9, as that is "an option from a spell of the same level or lower as the spell that summoned the target".
Dice damage doesn't scale much, so is usually not that important. Consider unarmed attacks dealing 1 instead of 1d3. That's only an average difference of 1 more damage per hit. Tiny beast shape gives +4 to dexterity. So, that's a total +4 to Attack. +5 to AC with the natural armor from beast shape 2. Eventual +2 to damage, which I'd personally use an agile amulet of might fists to achieve. You can two weapon fight your unarmed strikes, using your bite as a secondary attack. 0 reach isn't that bad, especially with a dip of the mouser archetype, which gives you an easier time flanking than just about anyone else for a near constant +2 to attacks. Obviously this build will be taking every possible option to maximize their dexterity. Maybe you will just have to see it in action.
There is one thing I love above all others in any game... Pet classes and summoning classes. I love having a companion or summoning minions and such, This has lead to the Unchained Summoner becoming one of my very favorite classes in Pathfinder. I dont play this kind of character too often as I dont want to annoy my group with it too much (Even if they do constantly tell me to stop worrying and just play what I find enjoyable... They are an amazing group.) I really like these because your "character" is really a relationship of characters. Your eidolon can have their own goals that influences their summoner's goals. I think some people play it purely mechanically, but there is so much inspiration in having your character also be a relationship. I can somewhat do this with familiar builds, but because of the power level disparity, the familiar always feels like more of a servant. A middle ground is the Summon Guardian Spirit feat. That gives you a summon that you can have a relationship with, though they aren't really around often enough most of the time, and they are still fairly weak compared to your PC. PS: By "relationship", I'm not talking about a romantic relationship, though that could still be a possiblity with an eidolon if you want to go with that. In general, I go for the battle partner relationship like in Pokemon or the Fate series.
I guess I'm not seeing it, please explain? Songbird of Doom was the main origin/popularization of it, though it's possibly more common to do it with a Kitsune with Fox Shape. There are really a lot of possible variations, but it leaves you with a melee that is incredibly hard to hit because of size and dexterity and deals a fairly large amount of damage.
Double life spirit guide oracle is the cheesiest thing I’ve done in actual play. The party just couldn’t die to damage against anything close to their challenge rating. It got boring super quick so I just started using a different spirit to add back some danger. The tiny dex to damage multi-class builds are the worst thing I’ve seen someone else do in actual play. The craziest thing I’ve considered but would only do in a silly one shot is the Ratatouille eldritch guardian. Take the mounted feats and then have the familiar ride you while you ride your own mount. Your monkey can use mounted combat to negate attacks against you.
I unfortunately have never run the Forever Undead, because it is ridiculously unfair to deal with, especially if your players aren't the type to do in game research and just keep trying to brute force the problem. Maybe a topic for some other thread, but I also have builds that I won't play in a real campaign, because they are just too cheesy.
can arcane weapon exploit can be applied to mage sword spell? Maybe not every spell, but instant weapon “acts in all ways as a masterwork weapon typical of its type”, so there is no reason it shouldn’t work.
I usually think of Arcane Tricksters as utility. Were you doing most of the damage with your weapons or were you somehow combining them with magic attacks?
Assuming we're talking about PF1, I've been a GM pretty much since it came out and I've played a grand total of four characters, all different races and classes. I guess we could consider GM to be the class you keep coming back to. Do you enjoy the role of GM?
I always come back to Druid and/or Ranger with a bit of cleric mixed in. The PF1 Hunter has now completely occupied that niche for me as well. That’s interesting. So do you usually go with animal companions? I’ve played a couple druids but haven’t done much with the companion options.
I was reminded of how a lot of us who have played the game for a long time have settled into our favorite classes and playstyles. If you stick with a game for this long, you have probably found what works best for you and prefer doing it over most things. So, what class or build do you just keep coming back to? And what experience have you gained with it that may not be common knowledge? Personally, I love summoning monsters, and I've done summoning builds using a large variety of classes and archetypes. My experience is that you can really struggle against damage reductions, since most summons do lower single damage attacks. And you can struggle on swarms as there are few summoning options that deal area damage with most not being available till later levels. Secondly, I've played a lot of healers. I have really enjoyed pushing channel to its limits, but I've found I can go almost too far with this to the point where regular damage just isn't dangerous to your party.
I have played witches a lot. So much one of my GMs asked me to play other classes. And Northern Spotted Owl gave you exactly exactly the same advice I would. This should tell you something. Well, as to effectiveness. I really enjoy hearing about experiences with our big focuses. I bet there are some lesser known quirks to being a witch that you have come across.
Synthesist isn’t that powerful. It’s generally weaker than the base summoner. The problem with it is that it can abuse the point buy system. You can take the minimum on all of your physical scores and then use those points to maximize your mental scores. Another reason to ban it is because of how oddly it interacts with the rest of the game and how many special questions it brings up. Summoner is bad about this in general with how complex the evolution system is but synthesist just makes it worse.
The point is that the dexterity character gets their dexterity scaling on top of everything else a non-dexterity gets. And they get to do this without taking the hardships of heavier armor.
In general there should be somewhat obvious trades for the abilities you are getting. This gives up next to nothing for fairly big abilities. Other archetypes would be trading out spells per level and reduced arcane pool for all of these goodies.
Sorry, I was looking at a different elemental conversion source
It looks like elemental conversion only changes the damage and not the descriptor. So a water fireball still has the the fire descriptor and that’s what Elemental Bond cares about. Personally I find that a bit silly and possibly an oversight so expect some variation from table to table.
“ full attack with a light or one-handed weapon against any creature within your reach, including the creature that is grappling you.” That could be interpreted to mean that you can attack the grappler regardless of the previous criteria. And indeed if it doesn’t mean that, then that whole bolded section doesn’t need to be there otherwise
Increase by level is only 1/3 of it. You also have dexterity by belts and dexterity by wishes. There are even further ways to gain dexterity but those are not the general case.
a Magus doesn't get Heavy Armor Proficiency until 13h level... hardly low level.... Is that really a meaningful case for this more general point? As a "general rule", armor heaviness doesn't scale with level. Finding some niche case where it kind-of-almost does scale with level doesn't seem productive to the discussion. Compare that to the baked in ability progression in the game system. Dexterity scales constantly through the entire game for every dexterity build.
Misfortune is good, because it works on everything and can be used in almost every fight.Fortune works the same way, if you can keep it up with Chant. For a single combat you can keep it running, but it stretches believability and intent to chant nonstop through an entire dungeon. And great to hear from you again Melkiador. Thanks! It was a good break.
Evil eye being mind-effecting makes me avoid it. A surprising amount of enemies are immune. I like the rest of its mechanics. It's very versatile, has a nice duration and even does something when saved against. Fortune being once per day isn't available enough, unless you are being silly with cackle spam. Misfortune is good, because it works on everything and can be used in almost every fight.
|