Mikemad's page

40 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


Ever since I picked one up for the first time almost a decade ago, I have played exclusively cleric.

Wonderstell wrote:
Mikemad wrote:
Coven/Army Across Time infinite caster level builds were banned fairly swiftly for me after trippling the radius of the world with a control water spell, killing everyone.

Even if you manage to convince your GM to go with the most lenient definition of "statistics", how would you get infinite caster levels?

I'm not gonna go into all the math, it's discussed in great depth in other threads, but heres the basic idea. First, get a ring of tactical precision to make coven give +2 (or +3 if your gm rules that the buff given by the copies who also have the ring counts as a separate source and thus stacks with the buff you receive; this is discussed elsewhere). Each casting of army across time buffs your caster level, causing the next casting to create more duplicates, and thus more caster levels. Theres a series involved, your first goal (by filling your entire spellbook with AAT and metamagics of it) is to get a high enough caster level that you can ring of sustenance rest for 2 hours, prepare spells, and then still have the last casting going and continue with fresh spells. Then you get a high enough CL that an extended version lasts over 24 hours. Then you can just keep resting and casting ad infinitum. There may or may not be pearls of power involved. There also might be more aid buffs involved. I don't really know. I wasn't the one to make the build. Its also limited by space.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Coven/Army Across Time infinite caster level builds were banned fairly swiftly for me after trippling the radius of the world with a control water spell, killing everyone.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I doubt you want to be an evil scythe wielder, but if you could find a way to make that work, the divine fighting technique "Way of Hunger" is really good for that.

Pretty much title. When a medium humanoid is hit with an enlarge person spell, they take up a 2x2 square. When the spell ends, how do you decide which of the four squares they shrink into? This mattered in one of our games as it decided whether or not one of the players was in reach of an enemy afterwards.

Im not saying you keep growth. Im saying use growth as a crutch till you get a better late level domain.

Hi guys,

A little while ago, user LordKailas made a post regarding this magic item:

Icon of Aspects:
Aura moderate evocation; CL 7th; Slot none; Price 5,500 gp; Weight 1 lb.
When a cleric with an icon of aspects prepares spells, she may replace the granted powers of one of her domains with those of a different domain she doesn’t have but that is associated with her deity. This lasts until the next time she prepares spells. The cleric must meet the level requirements for both abilities. For example, a 6th-level cleric with the Good domain who swaps for the Healing domain can’t use healer’s blessing even though she meets the level requirement, because the holy lance power of the Good domain requires her to be 8th level. The icon affects only granted powers, not domain spells, bonus feats, or other benefits. The icon can affect only one person at a time.

This got me thinking about a possible way to make the transition from low level to mid-high level cleric much smoother.

It all revolves around the growth subdomain of plant domain, which gives toggleable swift action enlarge person from level 1, and the separatist archetype, which lets you have a domain your deity doesn't normally get, but at a penalty. Here are a couple of things to note:

1) Growth domain is extremely good at low levels, arguably the best domain at level 1.
2) It is almost completely unaffected by the penalty from separatist archetype, you just get one less use per day of the first domain power (the second power essentially doesn't matter).
3) You get the second domain power at level 6 rather than 8, which means separatist puts it exactly at 8, thus allowing you to use the icon of aspects effectively to get other domain powers.

Ya know all those domains which are super good starting at level 8ish but suck at low levels (Madness, Heroism, ect)? This gives us a nice way to get into those domains without suffering in the early game. Here's how it goes:

At low levels, with literally any deity, use separatist archetype to take growth domain. Have overpowered 20 ft reach longspear which you can turn on and off on a turn-by-turn basis (avoiding the usual 20 ft reach blindspot issue), as well as barkskin and enlarge person.

At level 8, you gain the second growth domain power (which is relatively bad). Ditch 5k gp on an icon of aspects, and from this point forward use it to swap out growth domain's powers for the desired late-game domain's powers. For your troubles, you also get to have enlarge person and barkskin for the rest of your life. Neet.

As an example, build an Iomedae reach cleric starting with Growth/Tactics and transitioning into Heroism/Tactics at level 8 when heroism comes online.

Hi guys,

I know that things like stat-boosting items let you qualify for feats provided you wear them for at least 24 hours, but does this apply to other items?

Specifically, does the bane baldric let you qualify for extended bane feat if worn for 24 hours?

MrCharisma wrote:
I think you are correct, it doesn't stack with weapon enhancements. However it does scale approximately twice as fast as weapon enhancements, and from level 12 onward it's giving you bonuses you wouldn't normally get.

Fair enough. However, I'm not sure it's worth spending a domain in that case. I could just as easily separatist into growth domain (you don't lose much from it) and have toggleable 20 ft reach and a comparable damage buff (1d8 -> 2d6 and 16 -> 18 str) starting from level 1 for the same AC loss. Also means I wouldn't have to be evil.

Ignoring DR is interesting though. Not sure how to compare that to other things.

Hi guys,

Just a couple of questions about the following cleric domain powers:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------
Madness domain 1st level:

Vision of Madness (Sp): You can give a creature a vision of madness as a melee touch attack. Choose one of the following: attack rolls, saving throws, or skill checks. The target receives a bonus to the chosen rolls equal to ½ your cleric level (minimum +1) and a penalty to the other two types of rolls equal to ½ your cleric level (minimum –1). This effect fades after 3 rounds. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier.

This doesn't have any explicit descriptors like mind-affecting, but I suspect it isn't supposed to work on things normally immune to mind-affecting spells (undead, constructs, ect)?

Also, is it possible to use Dweomer's essence to buff the this ability, even though it isn't a spell? (can it use spell components?)

People always talk about this ability like it's incredible at high levels, but it seems like it fails miserably against anything reasonably threatening (immunities, high SR, basically everything you would want to hit with this).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------
Demon domain 1st level:

Fury of the Abyss (Su): As a swift action, you can give yourself an enhancement bonus equal to 1/2 your cleric level (minimum +1) on melee attacks, melee damage rolls, and combat maneuver checks. This bonus lasts for 1 round. During this round, you take a –2 penalty to AC. You can use this ability for a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier.

Am I correct to assume this doesn't stack with weapon enhancements? If it doesn't then does it have any effect on your ability to ignore DR? It would be a bit strange for it to act like a weapon enhancement in terms of not stacking with weapon enhancements but then also not act like a weapon enhancement in that it can't beat DR. Basically, is there any point to taking this ability?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------

I'm trying to make a variation of a reach cleric which focuses on madness domain debuffing (using a conductive longspear) rather than the usual summoning/buffing. Not sure if I can make it work out effectively since trying to debuff requires me to invest heavily in wisdom (detracting from strength) and beating SR. I'm also quite concerned about becoming useless any time something immune to mind-affectings shows up since I won't have any investment in summoning and my melee ability will be worse than most reach clerics.

Dave Justus wrote:

Actually, in most fights I have been part of, going from 2 rounds to 4 is the difference between life and death. Going from 4 rounds to 40 is a waste, since the fight probably ended by the 4 anyway, particularly if I didn't spend my turn gaining 36 useless rounds of life and instead did something to bring down the bad guy faster.

Whether increasing your AC is good or bad in a circumstance and worth it depends on a ton of factors, but saying low AC to mid AC is always a waste and mid AC to high AC is always great is simply wrong.

Anyway, I have derailed this thread more than enough and I apologize for that.

The example was extreme just to show the math. I understand going from 4 to 40 isn't usually the biggest deal. All I'm really trying to say is that gaining AC has differing levels of benefit depending on where you start. Your original point was that there is no difference between going from 30-33 AC and going from 33-36 AC (assuming we don't end up in edge cases). That's what I'm arguing against. I make no judgements regarding whether going from 30-36 is the best plan.

Also, the plan was never to cast these in combat. See my previous responses. The whole idea of the combo was to cast it between consecutive fights when you still have a few rounds of free extend spells from blessing of fervor.

Dave Justus wrote:
Mikemad wrote:
If you want to measure "tankiness" by the average damage you take per swing of the opponent, then you are correct; there is no difference.

Well, the amount of damage I take per round of the opponent combined with the amount of damage I can take and still stay up is indeed how I measure 'tankiness.' I am not sure how else you would. And the math works out the same here, absent the below 2 and above 19 cases whether it is one swing for 100 or 5 swings for 20 although the real life 5 swing version would make each individual round closer to the prediction.

I'm not sure what your 'twice extra turns means' but I think you are doing the math wrong on that. Reducing the amount of damage you can expect will extend how long you can stay active. How much that is, depends on a) how much damage the opponent can deal out and b) how much you can take, not something you can measure in 'extra turns' without knowing those factors. Reducing the expected damage by 90% doesn't really help you if that last 10% still takes you down after all, no extra turns at all there.

As far as the 'wizards don't want AC' argument, sometimes they are just wrong. People don't always act in a logical manner after all, but often they are up against the outside the bounds problem. If you increase your AC by 3 and they still need a 2 to hit, you indeed haven't helped yourself. There is also the question of how to spend resources, AC isn't the only defense in the world and there are other ways to achieve it.

This is what I mean, and I'll make the example as extreme as possible just for clarity. Suppose I have 200 HP, the boss deals 100 damage per hit and attacks once per round. He hits me on a 2 (exactly), so I only last about 2 rounds against him. I now cast a spell that raises my AC by 10. He now needs a 12 to hit me, so I last about 4 rounds against him. By adding 10 to my AC, I have doubled the amount of time I stay standing against him.

Now suppose he originally needed an 11 to hit me. He kills me in roughly 4 rounds. I now cast a spell that adds 10 to my AC. He now needs a 20 to hit me, so he takes 40 rounds to kill me now. I have gained 36 extra rounds against him, and multiplied the time he takes to kill me by 10.

The AC buff on a low AC PC made him mildly more annoying to kill. The AC buff on a mid AC PC made him completely unkillable. That's what I'm talking about.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dave Justus wrote:

Those percentages are accurate, but misleading, as the subsequent reductions are a higher percentage of a smaller amount.

Using your example, and saying that a hit would do 100 points, and only one attack a round (just to make the math easy) with no spells active you would expect to take an average of 50 points each round (of course it would actually be 100 or 0, but that doesn't matter for the explanation). We'll also continue to avoid any critical rolls.

After casting your first spell, you would now expect to take an average of 35 points each round, which is indeed 70% of 50, so 30% less. It is also 15 points less.

After the second spell, you would expect to take 20 points of damage each round. This is 57% of the previous 35 points, so your 43% less is also accurate. What is important though is that it is also 15 points less damage.

The first spell reduced your expected damage by 15 points. The second spell reduced it by 15 points. Together they reduced it by 30 points, not syngergizing at all.

This is because the d20 roll is a flat roll. Moving the target up by 1 will have the same mathematical reduction of damage regardless of whether you are changing the required target from a 5 to 6 or from a 15 to a 16.

If you want to measure "tankiness" by the average damage you take per swing of the opponent, then you are correct; there is no difference.

I think that's a weird way of looking at it though. Ultimately, what I care about is how many times the BBEG can swing his fist at me and I stay standing. In this regard, casting both spells lets me stay standing for more than twice the extra turns either individual spell would give me. If the boss hits you on a 2, adding 1 AC basically changes nothing even though, yeah, it reduces the average expected damage per hit by X amount. However, if the boss needs a 19 to hit me, adding an extra AC literally doubles the time he takes to kill me even though it still technically reduced the amount of damage I take on average per hit by the same X amount.

This is why every wizard player I talk to thinks AC is bad. They don't have enough base armor for buffing their AC to really matter. Everything is going to hit them regardless.

Gonna be honest though, a huge part of why I made this thread was because I thought it'd be fun for us to give sick names to combinations of spells people commonly cast together anyway.

I mean, what's cooler: "I cast (insert 3 spell names)", or "I CAST (INSERT SWEET AF ANIME ATTACK NAME SPELL COMBO TITLE)"?

It just feels thematically appropriate lol.

Dave Justus wrote:

I don't know that I would consider just stacking bonuses or using two effects that don't particularly interact to be a 'combo.' These are just good spells, and more good spells is obviously better than less good spells, if you can get them (spending several rounds to get ready, just in time for the fight to be over isn't a great plan.)

To me, a combo is when the spells together are greater than the sum of there parts, avr fear condition spells being a good example.

Fair enough, although it's just an issue of semantics to a certain extent. I would argue that in many cases, stacking effects are better than the sum of their parts, however.

For example, suppose you have 2 spells that add 3 to your AC and they stack. Suppose an opponent currently hits you on an 11, so they hit 50% of the time. You cast one of the 2 spells, he now needs a 14 to hit you. He now has a 35% hit chance against you, you have reduced his damage output by 30%. Now you cast the second one, he now needs a 17 to hit you. He now has a 20% hit chance against you. This one cut his damage by 43%. I.E., the more AC you get, the better individual points of AC are (until the opponent only hits you on a 20).

I would imagine this is part of why the game doesn't like effects stacking. Imagine if I could just cast shield of faith on my barbarian 7 times and they all stacked. He would be completely immune to melee damage. That's WAY better than basically anything else I could do with my first level spells slots, but nobody is complaining that shield of faith by itself is a broken spell.

One thing I should mention regarding the combos of low level min/level buffs (Protective Ward/Blessing of Vitality and such). These become much more practical if you sync them with your usual in-combat casting of blessing of fervor.

Here's a situation that comes up often in my games:

I'm level 7-8ish. We are raiding a dungeon/evil lair/castle or something with repeated combat encounters. We run into our first combat encounter. Round 1 I cast blessing of fervor. The fight lasts 3-4 rounds-ish. I still have 3-4 rounds of blessing of fervor. I can use those remaining rounds to cast any level 1 or 2 spells extended, and I know there is going to be more encounters ahead. I cast protective ward under free extend spells (maybe a bless or something as well). For the next 2 or 3 fights, I am significantly harder to kill.

Everything here stacks, dont worry. With regards to stacking with items, shield of faith/ironskin usually give a substantially higher bonus than the items you can afford at a given level. Even if you have a ring of protection and amulet of natural armor, its often an extra 4-5 AC.

With regards to the practicality of casting 6 spells. Yeah not often. However, the blessing of immortality is entirely level 1-2 spells, one is hr/level and the rest are mins/level. It isnt that hard to pull off at mid levels if you have some prep time and dont particularly care about you lower spell slots (a duel, for example).

Now, for real impracticality, see the comical anti-undead combo. Its 7 high level spells, some of which have only round/level durations lol. The only time I would use something like that is if I happened upon a dormant demilich, rested directly in front of it, cast 7 spells directly in front of it, then tapped it on the skull like "uh... hi!".

Magda Luckbender wrote:
This topic may be suitable for its own guide. Opinions?

We could try to put something together depending on what we get here. I have a list somewhere I made a few years back where I went through all the "useful" cleric spells and categorized them with some annotations. If that would be a useful reference, let me know.

Hi guys,

The cleric has a massive list of spells and access to the whole list at all times. I feel like there should be a whole bunch of spells that pair particularly well. I thought we might try to compile a master list of all the cool combos we can come up with.

Here are a few examples I threw down off the top of my head:

Protective Ward (Shield of Faith/Ironskin/Defending bone): Uses entirely level 1/2 spells, gives a substantial stack of AC buffs and some DR.

Blessing of Vitality (Aid/Bears Endurance/Blessing of Courage and Life): Stacking effective HP buffs. Grants an effective 2d8+4*CL extra HP. Also gives some minor attack and saves buffs.

Blessing of Immortality (Protective Ward/Blessing of Vitality): Self explanatory.

Summon Banhammer (Ancestral Gift/Greater Magic Weapon/Rags To Riches): Creates a +3 (or higher) bane weapon of your choice for 10 mins/level.

Anti-Undead Shell (Death Ward/Undeath Ward): For when you don't like undead.

Anti-Undead Gigabuff Mk. Ultimate (Anti-Undead Shell/Summon Undead Banhammer/Smite Abomination/Disrupting Weapon): For when you REALLY don't like undead.

Bubble of Non-Interaction (Antilife Shell/Undeath Ward/Spell Resistance/Fickle Winds): Living and undead creatures cannot come within 10 ft of you, immune to ranged attacks, resistant to magic. Becomes phenomenally more powerful with CL buffs.

Blue Flare (Flamestrike/Cold Ice Strike): Give em the ol' 1-2.

Vengeance (Shield of Dawn/Blood Rage/Caustic Blood): Anything that hits you takes a billion damage and buffs you (rather impractical to set up due to the durations).

Gimme your sweet combos (preferably with a sweet name) and I'll add them to the list.

Actually, yeah. It probably is just a y/n check. Nvm then, not worth much.

The caster level boost is not a competence bonus. It's untyped like you then bolded in the quote. The "bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source" is questioned in this case because it's so similar to aid another, and aid another stacks with itself. By the same logic a witch's coven would only grant +1 CL.

Admittedly, it isn't obvious to me whether the feat is a y/n check vs a "boost for each nearby" check.

willuwontu wrote:
It caps out at +3, because it only cares if there's at least one adjacent ally with the feat, having more than one doesn't give more.

Interesting. I've seen people state that the feat stacks with itself on other threads. I wonder what everyone else thinks.

Hi guys,

What exactly is the interaction between all three of these things?

Army Across Time:

This spell functions as ally across time as noted above with two exceptions.
First, you can summon one duplicate per caster level before the spell ends.
Second, you can have up to one duplicate in existence at a time for every 3 caster levels you have.

Ally Across Time:

You create one or more 5-foot cubes of temporal possibility where your timeline overlaps with those of your parallel existences. As a free action, you can summon a duplicate of yourself (not including any animal companions, familiars, intelligent items, or other creatures) from an alternate timeline in one of the cubes you can see, which lasts until the end of your turn. This duplicate has your statistics (though its hit points equal your caster level), threatens all squares adjacent to it, and HAS ANY TEAMWORK FEATS YOU HAVE. Although the duplicate APPEARS WITH ALL EQUIPMENT YOU CURRENTLY CARRY, it CANNOT USE any of its equipment and all its equipment disappears when the duplicate does. This duplicate cannot voluntarily move from the space in which it’s summoned. During its brief existence, a duplicate can use the aid another action once to assist you, but it cannot take any other type of action. Once a duplicate disappears, the cube of temporal possibility it occupied dissipates.
You can summon only one duplicate before the spell ends. For every 4 caster levels you have beyond 3rd, you can summon an additional duplicate before the spell ends, though you cannot have more than one duplicate in existence at once.

Allied Spellcaster:

Benefit: Whenever you are adjacent to an ally who also has this feat, you receive a +2 competence bonus on level checks made to overcome spell resistance. If your ally has the same spell prepared (or known with a slot available if they are spontaneous spellcasters), this bonus increases to +4 and you receive a +1 bonus to the caster level for all level-dependent variables, such as duration, range, and effect.

Ring of Tactical Precision:

"anytime the wearer gives or receives a numeric bonus from a teamwork feat or the aid another action, that bonus increases by +1"

The duplicates all have the ring (since the ring doesn't have to be used to function, they should in theory give an additional +1), and you have the ring (you should recieve an additional +1). Do you actually get +3 from each duplicate or am I missing something?

zza ni wrote:

pounce need a charge - straight line mostly. your best option is to make it a fight around corners - stone shape or walls etc. also if you can summon as standard action (which there are a at least 3 feats for and more options otherwise) summon monsters into the charge lane after you take your aoo.

as for fighting a synth. try going for the eidolon with spells that send it back, or rendering the summoner unconscious. there are also cheese ways to stack fear effects that have no save to force him to run away if he gets too close. (for example a skald with the rage power that make adjusted enemies shaken. giving it to party members \summon monsters with rage song)

Flight makes wall of stone and stone shape less useful (you can charge while flying).

My aura has terrible summons (unfortunately, it's really hard to get great sacred summons on a cleric with travel domain), so no sacred summons. Summon good monster doesn't grant standard action summoning like summon evil monster does. Clerics also cannot take academae graduate. I can't think of any other ways to get standard action summoning.

Since you cannot target a synthesist and their eidolon separately, attempts to banish the eidolon interact with the synthesist's will save (which is phenomenal). I don't understand why people think synth is weak to banishment spells; you likely have less than a 25% chance of actually landing them. The same goes for most sleep spells I can think of.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Magda Luckbender wrote:

That's a tough fight! Pounce is very strong. The odds are against you. As you've likely deduced, your best option is to trip or otherwise prevent the Pounce from landing. Even with a good CMB and Tandem Trip feat the pounce will eventually get through. Pounce defeats reach tactics in much the same way that reach tactics defeat non-pouncing multi-attackers.

They have 4 legs and can fly. I don't think tripping is going to be a viable option. My hope is to use the tactics discussed in this thread to force a situation where they can't charge at all. If they try they just get hit with an AoO and then lose their action.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Holy sht, this blew up. Thanks for all the responses. If anyone is curious, the reason I asked about this is for countering pounce. Specifically synthesist pounce.

Im trying to find ways to avoid getting 1-rounded by multi attack pounce, which means I need a way to stop them from just charging every round. This gives me a viable option to play a sort of poke-game with a pouncer. Forcing them to trade hit-for-hit instead of 5+ hits vs my s*~+ty iteratives. I could never beat a well-built synth in a slugfest.

Hi guys.

Just a quick question regarding readied actions and reach. Suppose I have 15 ft reach and the travel cleric domain (teleport as move action without provoking). Suppose I ready an action to use the teleport as an enemy moves within 10 ft of me. Do they still provoke an AoO for approaching me or does the readied action trigger first? Alternatively, if I teleported behind them during their move (heh, nothin personal kid) would they provoke as their move continued? This seems cheesy af, but im curious nonetheless.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Evangelist by itself doesn't use much, true. Evangelist with Banner of the Ancient kings requires 15 Charisma, a feat, and an 18k gold investment. It also notably eats your spontaneous cures and limits your channeling ability.

Summoning doesn't use any attributes, true. However, doing it effectively as a cleric eats 4 feats (You cant take herald caller as an evangelist). This sort of infernal summoning also restricts you to Asmodeus, so my domain options are extremely limited.

You need at least 13-14 in wisdom in order to be able to eventually cast 9th level spells. I also hate running characters under 14 constitution.

All told, this build eats 5 feats, a domain, 18k cash, restricts my second domain, requires 14 wisdom, 15 charisma, 14 constitution, everything else goes to strength. It also means most of my higher level spells go to summoning, and im stuck in light armor or mithral breastplate.

You have the following resources to spend when making a build:

Spell Slots

I don't have very much wiggle room, unfortunately. That said, I'm still playing with it.

Magda Luckbender wrote:

Here's one legitimate objection [Youtube: Angel Summoner and BMX Bandit] to this build. It's a very strong and effective build that can render lower-tier builds irrelevant whilst also magnifying them. If you do play a powerful summoner-cleric be sure to give the person playing the ranged rogue [or even rouge] a chance to shine. Other PCs always love your buffs, but be careful not to over-use the infernal summoning thing.

The video was perfect LOL.

Yeah, I understand. Fortunately, the rest of my group builds quite efficiently. There shouldn't be too much issue with people being left behind, especially when everyone is at +5/+5.

It depends heavily on what level range we're playing at. This build is best at 5-10ish; it kinda struggles early on.

Magda Luckbender wrote:

This is a very powerful build, for sure. It seems PFS legal. There are other highly optimized cleric builds, but the one you provide is certainly near the top.

I've played with, and GMd for, players using that +5 +5 bardsong/flagbearer/banner of ancient kings combo. It's basically a 'we win' button for your party. Use it well.

Besides summoning powerful creatures and buffing like a pro, what else can your PC do?

Also, do note that your PC will have a detectable Evil aura, even if the PC is Lawful Neutral. This is a minor inconvenience at worst in PFS play, so don't sweat it.

It's got standard trickery domain shenanigans (invisibility and move action mirror image). This is particularly useful on an evangelist summoner. Summoning and buffing don't break invisibility. You can sneak into the room, have your uber summons basically solo the encounter, and walk away laughing. (although now that I think about it, singing probably doesn't help your stealth much and the summons wouldn't see the banner). The mirror image does a huge number for your defenses.

You don't have the feats to get combat reflexes/power attack, but the fact that you've provided yourself with +5/+5 and have decent strength and a longspear mean you aren't a half bad reach cleric. Hell, if you run out of summons, fate's favored divine favor/power puts your net bonus at +9/+9 (it literally doesn't matter that you don't power attack).

I haven't worked out the exact details of the build yet. I wanted to make sure it's legal before I spend a lot of time on it.

I'm actually not a huge fan of the build you provided. It feels extremely win-more. Yes, in a standard combat encounter it wrecks them six different ways, turns them inside out and replaces their veins with orange juice. The issue is, I usually design my builds around like, the worst possible situation. I don't play PFS, my GMs have zero problems throwing CR+6 encounters at us in 5 ft hallways with level-draining ghosts attacking us from the walls. The CR 15 zombieconstructoutsiderswarm doesn't give a fk about your move action daze. The axe beak is never going to trip it, and it's damage is comparatively insignificant even with CoDzilla buffs. It feels like the sort of build designed to wreck PFS encounters (this kind of stuff never happens there from what I hear). It's not bad, don't get me wrong. I just wouldn't call it an atomic bomb.

Hi guys,

I've been playing around with a variety of cleric builds and I built one that feels exceptional. I was wondering if I'm interpreting the various pieces properly.

It's a 9th level evangelist (Cleric archetype, not PrC) of Asmodeus.

The build revolves around using Banner of the Ancient Kings and Sacred Summons for the alternate summoning options unique to Asmodeus.

If you weren't aware, certain gods give a couple of extra summoning options. In particular, Asmodeus gives the option to summon hellhounds with summon creature 2, and cerberi with summon creature 4. These have significantly better stats than other summons of the same level, and are compatible with sacred summons.

Banner of the Ancient Kings/Flagbearer, as far as I can tell, should work with Sermonic Performances granted by evangelist since it is "similar in all respects to bardic performance used by a bard of the same level". I've seen this debated before, however. If it works, the combination with evangelist would provide +5/+5 to all allies, using only a move action.

Combining these with basic summoning feats, the cleric could summon 1d3+1 (3 avg) cerberi as a standard action with summon monster V, and then immediately buff them and the entire party with +5/+5 on top of the bonuses from augmented summons.

The 3 buffed cerberi could then attack 9-12 times per round (depending on rends) at +18 to hit with massive damage bonuses, potentially dealing hundreds of damage and providing a large meat wall.

Does all this function like I think it does or am I missing something? This seems blatently unfair. You're basically summoning a CR 13 encounter as a standard action. It feels like any other cleric build I could make would pale in comparison. All of my other builds have to be compared to this one as it stands and its oppressive af. I almost wish there's something wrong with it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Meirril wrote:

And that is what Contingency is for, even if all it did was teleport away his corpse.

And lets not mention what other buffs this guy should of had up. A serious BBG should never be presented to the PCs in a weakened, unbuffed state unless the players WORKED to get that. A wind wall and a cloak of displacement would of guaranteed the party couldn't do enough to really challenge this guy. And it would of provided enough information about the BBG to face him later if you would of gotten that nasty surprise now.

You're level 9. Every BBG should have a challenging AC that stacks multiple defensive spells including Mirror Image. You're entire party should be sick of seeing Mirror Image and at level 9 most of the party should lack a method of overcoming it. Everything I'm saying here just puts the BBG at an APs standard level. This isn't even talking about making a boss tough enough to stand up to a heavily optimized group.

He had 32 AC, stoneskin and a cloak of displacement (which feels like a bad item to me, the version that gives blur seems better) when we fought him. The cloak takes a standard action to activate and only lasts 15 rounds per day, so he never got it up. Wind wall also only lasts rounds/level (although fickle winds might have worked). The bloodrager's greatsword is adamantine, the archer had clustered shots, so stoneskin did little. 32 AC wasn't particularly hard to hit.

I don't know why he didn't have mirror images or contingency. I understand no mirror images to a certain extent because it only lasts minutes/level and you cant expect to have it up all day. Dunno about the contingency.

It felt more like a mistake on his part than a "he doesn't care" sort of thing.

That said, this is all beside the point. I'm just wondering about spells. Whether the GM set things up properly is it's own debate. This was just me and some friends; none of us are particularly amazing GMs and there aren't any regulations or anything.

Edit: Actually, I think I might know what happened. We fought the wizard at the bottom of a tomb designed specifically to stop things from teleporting out (various horrible monsters imprisoned). Its possible he had a contingency teleport, and it fizzled upon activation due to the dungeon's properties.

Meirril wrote:
Honestly doesn't sound like your GM really cares at this point. If he did, he wouldn't of made all that much wealth available even if you were fighting encounters at CR+4.

I should mention the wizard kill wasn't supposed to happen. He was supposed to be a reoccurring villain character. He had every ability to escape and had a horde of minions between him and our party (presumably was going to subdue and capture us then leave). We beat him in initiative. I teleported myself and the bloodrager to him with travel domain. Bloodrager/archer 1-rounded him with full attacks before he ever got an action. We were already buffed.

Otherwise we wouldn't be EXTREMELY overgeared. Just slightly better than we should.

Hi guys,

I'm currently playing a campaign with some close friends of mine (no PFS or anything). We're currently level 9 (started at 4) and everyone playing is relatively seasoned at pathfinder. The party looks something like this:

Archer Bard: Opens every combat by activating inspire courage/casting good hope.

Bloodrager: Pretty standard 2h front liner. Extremely highrolled stat line (Several 16+).

Kineticist: Lightning/grapple focused. He's relatively new to the party so im not 100% sure how he works just yet.

Reach Cleric (Me): Cayden Cailean Travel/Ferocity domains. Open every combat by drinking an enlarge person potion (move action accelerated drinker trait (walks around with a tankard of enlarge person potion for flavor reasons)), casting quickened divine favor (3rd level spell with extra traits reducing metamagic level cost by 2, bonuses buffed by fate's favored) and casting SOME other spell.

The party has always had an incredible damage output, bringing down most encounters in 1-3 rounds. Over time, this has caused our DM to to slowly increase the difficulty of the encounters we face (everything is a slaughter otherwise). This caused us to accumulate wealth much faster than a normal campaign (we killed a level 16 wizard we weren't supposed to, dropped 300k+ gp in items). This combined with liberal use of item crafting feats means we are overgeared as well (perpetuating the high dpr issue). Nowadays, we commonly face cr+4ish encounters.

I've been having issues getting value out of my spells in combat. Most things we fight have some combination of very high SR or unbeatable saves that make offensive spellcasting impossible. Summoned creatures, even with bard aoe buffs, are so underleveled compared to our enemies that they cant consistently do anything (often missing opponents on 19's). Enemies tend to just ignore them. Wall of stone gets flown over/teleported over/walked through by ghosts. Everybody already has boots of haste, making blessing of fervor unimpressive. Other AoE buffs largely covered by the bard (I guess I could cast prayer (meh)).

I honestly have no idea what I should be casting anymore. These days most of my spellbook has been going to out-of-combat utility and prebuffing. It feels like the only thing that works consistently is high-accuracy physical damage. Any ideas of what I should be casting in combat?

((((By the way, sorry for all the parentheses))))(()()(()()()()))))))))))))))))))))

Hi guys,

I've been thinking about a lightning domain theologian cleric. The build would take a single level dip into crossblooded sorcerer, use traits to get empower spell for free on lightning bolt, and then use incenses of meditation/bead of karma at opportune times. My wonder is whether the domain power from lightning domain stacks with regular empower spell, allowing the end result lightning bolt to deal upwards of 250 damage to the primary target (absorbing the recoil damage with protection from energy).

The domain power granted by lightning domain reads as follows:

Lightning Rod (Su)
As a swift action when you cast a spell with the electricity descriptor, you can designate one creature within line of sight. The spell’s damage against that creature increases by 50%, as if affected by the Empower Spell feat. This additional damage results from divine power that is not subject to being reduced by electricity resistance, and you take an equal amount of electricity damage immediately after you cast the spell.
The spell can deal this additional damage only once, even if it could affect the target multiple times.
You can use this ability once per day at 8th level and one additional time per day for every 4 cleric levels you have beyond 8th.

What do you think?

So I was playing a battle cleric in a level 4 campaign with a few friends of mine. We were about to raid a hobgoblin camp and we had a bit of time beforehand so I decided to pre-buff myself into a mockery of clericzilla (basically dumped my whole spellbook) just to see how ridiculous it would get. Turn 1 of combat I charge straight into one of the hobgoblins....




...and roll a natural 1, threaten critical on myself, confirm critical on myself, deal 64 damage to myself, die instantly (LOL).

Serves me right I guess.

I suppose if worst comes to worst you always have the level 2 grace spell to avoid attacks of opportunity entirely. Feather domain also wouldn't be too bad to separatist since boon companion boosts your "druid" level one higher than it needs to for the purpose of animal companions anyway. Would madness/feather separatist work (also, how the hell would you roleplay it?)? You wouldn't have access to enlarge person, but at higher levels being able to righteous might both yourself and your animal companion via improved share spell would make up for that anyway. Your melee ability with a buffed animal companion would be absolutely off the charts as well. Also, why specifically an axe beak?

@Dave Justus: In that case, I suppose trickery isn't so bad since it at least provides some out of combat utility as well as a non-standard action (although move action is tricky to use without a mount as you pointed out).

Something that came to mind is that I could take separatist for the growth domain. Growth domain is nice for separatists since the main ability isn't affected by your cleric level. This would give me access to a swift action enlarge person at level one, which would be amazing for this build.

As nice as evangelist is, I couldn't really see myself getting a decent mount short of going for feather domain (which obviously could not be paired with madness on an evangelist). I'm curious how reach cleric would work with mounted combat since a huge part of this build involves making acrobatics checks to move while avoiding attacks of opportunity. How do you manage to ride a mount and not get shredded by AoOs? I'm also curious how much the loss in AC due to light armour hurts evangelist (never actually played one).

Thanks for the replies,

@doc roc: I actually did not know any of that, thanks. Hmm, that might make the whole idea significantly less viable.

@hogeyhead: As you pointed out, it would be a huge pain to get guided hand on a reach build. Furthermore, I don't think it would be worth the investment anyway. I can get nearly the same bonus to hit and deal significantly more damage by putting an 18 into strength BEFORE BUFFS. If you consider things like bulls strength, righteous might, eaglesoul buffing your strength well past 20 (even if you started with 14), using your wisdom for attack rolls at the cost of 2 feats starts to look a lot less useful. I notice that you didn't mind using madness/trickery for a reach build. Do you think it's alright to do a melee-focused cleric with no melee-focused domains?

@avr: As you probably noticed, the vast majority of those deities are either evil or extremely obscure (would cause roleplaying issues, would be very obvious to the gm that I took it exclusively for the domains and might as well have just worshiped an ideal). There was one in there that I didn't notice though, and that's Groetus. Groetus is chaotic neutral, isn't too obscure, and has madness/destruction domains. Do you think destruction would be a better domain for this character than trickery? (I've never been a huge fan of destruction: Notice that the first ability is strictly worse than ferocious strike as it requires a standard action).

Hi guys,

So I will be making a combat-focused cleric for an upcoming campaign with some friends of mine (starting at level 4) and I happened to be blessed with the best set of attribute rolls I have ever gotten. Before any bonuses from leveling up or the human racial, my attributes look something like this:


Now, my original plan was to build a standard reach/summoning cleric as detailed in Brewer's guide:


However, since I will likely have a much higher wisdom stat than a typical reach cleric (18+), I am considering focusing the casting side of my character on debuffing rather than summoning. I would like to try out the madness domain (the domain powers seem absolutely insane) and perhaps get a conductive weapon longspear down the road in order to deliver vision of madness with reach.

As far as I can tell, the best way to go about this mechanically would be to make a cleric of Lamashtu for the madness and ferocity domains (enlarge person as well as a nice damage boost). However, this has the obvious limitation of trying to roleplay a follower of the mother of monsters in a non-evil campaign.

The option I can see for getting the madness domain on this character without having roleplaying issues is to build a cleric of Sivanah. In this case I would take madness and trickery. The issue here is a general lack of domains which aid in melee combat. I would feel like a decent debuff cleric, but also as if I had sacrificed my melee ability entirely (trickery is a useful domain, but not real helpful in the general focus of the build).

Does any of this seem like a good idea at all? Would it be worth trying over a typical summoning setup? If not, is there a better way of properly utilizing a high wisdom score with a reach cleric? It just seems like a waste for me to cast literally no spells which use wisdom.