MultiClassClown's page

It's been a long time since I've been active on the forums, and my Internet and access to new gaming resources is still limited (old PF book and HeroLab with only the basic module), but I'm building a new character to replace an existing character, and I'd appreciate some help on the build. As usual for me, I'm willing to sacrifice mechanical optimization to fit the character concept. The character is a halfling duelist, sort of a cross between a musketeer and an antebellum southern gentleman, but in a no-gunpowder setting. He's being inserted at L10, here's what I have so far:
STR 13
DEX 22
CON 15
INT 18
WISH 11
CHA 18

Alternate racial traits: Low Blow; Underfoot
House Rule:My GM is allowing me to replace shield proficiency with Combat Expertise because it fits concept better.
Feats (including fighter bonus feats): improved critical (rapier); Mobility; Weapon Finesse; Weapon Focus (Rapier); Critical Focus; Dodge; Fencing Grace; Springs Attack; Underfoot.

Thoughts?

Even the simplest of us can have moments of brilliance. Take me for example. I just a day or two ago had one of the better ideas I've ever had in all my years of gaming, but I need advice in the execution. Here's the skinny:

My best friend/GM is starting a new PBEM/PBC campaign in a quasi-czarist Russian setting (it's a third party published setting, one I don't know, so if you recognize it, please, no spoilers or metagaming). Due to the small size of our group, we're each playing two characters. I immediately hit on the idea of playing a Cossack (sorry, quasi-cossack). I didn't want a paladin or cavalier, for flavor reasons, so, being a long-time fan of rangers, I went with Horse Lord/Skirmisher. I was having a hard time coming up with a second character concept, when I ran across the Rough Rider fighter variant. I began wondering if it wouldn't make a better "Cossack" than the Horse Lord. That's when I had my Epiphany: that's my second character. I worked it out with my GM, and here are the particulars: twin brothers, one set of randomly rolled stats, arrayed any way for each. Level 1, Human only. Must be played with distinctive personalities and approach to combat. Canon only. I have access to a 2009 printing CR and the net via my phone, so please be patient. I would like to get advice on tweaking each PC, then moving this discussion to a different part of the boards to report on how the two flesh out as played side-by-side. Here's what I came up with:

Stat rolls: 18, 17, 16, 13, 11, 9

The brothers Rodenkov

Sergei
Human Horse Lord/Skirmisher Ranger
Favored Class: Ranger
STR 17
DEX 18
CON 16
INT 11
WIS 13
CHA (9+2) 11
Traits: Savanna Child (Handle Animal); ?
Level 1 Class: Ranger (+1 Hit Point)
Feats: Mounted Combat; Skill Focus: Ride
Skills:
Handle Animal
Knowledge Geography
Knowledge Nature
Perception
Ride
Stealth
Survival

(I'm considering making his INT 9 and his CHA 11+2=13. I know he can take Mounted Combat as a ranger fighting style bonus at L4, but given the concept I thought he should already have it. I plan to make him a slightly better horseman and his brother a better fighter, though neither will be a slouch at the other's forte.)

Nikolai
Human Rough Rider Fighter
Favored Class: Fighter
STR 18
DEX 17
CON 16
INT (9+2) 11
WIS 11
CHA 13
Traits: Veteran of battle; ?
Level 1: Fighter (+1 Hit Point)
Feats: Mounted Combat; Power Attack; Skill Focus: Ride
Skills:
Ride
Handle Animal
Intimidate

So, thoughts?

Before I get to the meat of my post, a preface: I've been gone from the forums here for a while due to financal/internet access issues, and my access is still limited. So if any of this has been covered or rendered moot in the last 6 months, my apologies. Also, while there is some PF application to this question, it does stem from a d20m campaign, so I won't be devastated if it gets moved.

I'm currently putting together a campaign with a buddy using a heavily modified version of d20 Modern. One of the biggest changes has been adopting the PF skills mechanics (1 point/rank, +3 for ranked class skills) and several PF skill conventions (Stealth, Perception, Linguistics ). It was, in fact, my frustration with certain limitations of the original d20m language mechanics that caused us to institute the PF mechanics. We've made it a class skill only if you take the academic, investigative, or religious starting occupations, or if you take the (highly modified) linguist smart talent. This obviously affects other uses of the skill but not languages spoken.

And now the part that is universal, a new application of the Linguistics skill, and a request for input: the application is the ability to recognize and mimic accents and dialects of a language you speak, and the input regards difficulty andmodifiers for things like the obscurity of the dialect. I was also thinking that in specific situations a GM could require a roll for this application of the skill and use the margin of success/failure as a modifier to a subsequent disguise skill roll.

Thoughts?

I'm thinking of creating an Arcane Archer build -- as a thought exercize for now, perhaps to play somewhere down the road. It's a PC that has always fascinated, but never fit any of thecharacter concepts I've played. So I got to fiddling around in HeroLab, and came up with the following build, which allows for AA at level 9. I know there are a couple of ways to get there by level 8, but they all involve fewer caster levels and more levels in fighter, and this build is designed with a specific casting level in mind:

Half-Elf
Level 1: Fighter, Archer build. Trick shot:Feint Bonus Feat:Point Blank Shot
Levels 2-8:
1 more level fighter Bonus Feat: Rapid Shot
6 levels sorceror, Arcane bloodline, Bonded Item: Longbow
Spells known: I don't often play arcane casters, so I'm not real good at choosing these, but for an Arcane Archer, these seemed obvious: Gravity Bow; Cat's Grace; Haste. Spells that seemed a good idea but not so obvious were: Expeditious retreat; invisibility; mage armor;protection from arrows
Feats: Manyshot; Deadly Aim; Precise Shot; Weapon Focus: Longbow.
Level 9: Arcane Archer
Feat: Quicken Spell

I went with more arcane levels than fighter levels to get to the Haste spell as... hastily (rim shot)... as possible. I picked Quicken Spell because it seems that not picking up at least one metamagic feat is underutilizing the bloodline features.

Am I doing it right? Any suggestions for minor tweaks? Other spells/future spells? Different metamagic feat?

Thanks in advance for input.

Tomahawk

The tomahawk is a small hand axe favored by rangers, woodsmen, and settlers in wilderness areas. The tomahawk is balanced for throwing, has a razor-sharp blade, and the back of the blade doubles as a hammer. The hammer head is primarily designed for tool use -- if used as a weapon, it only does d4 damage, is not treated as a double weapon, and cannot be used when the tomahawk is thrown.

(Data after slash mark is for the hammer head)

Cost 10 gp
Dmg(S) 1d4/1d3
Dmg(M) 1d6/1d4
Critical x3/x2
Range 20 ft./--
Weight 3lbs.
Type S/B

1) Hold At Bay
Prerequisite: Outflank feat
Benefit: Whenever you and an ally who also has this feat are flanking the same creature, your flanking bonus applies to your armor class as well as your attack rolls.

2) Opportunistic Flanker
Prerequisites: Hold at Bay feat and Paired Opportunist feat
Benefit: Benefit: Whenever you and an ally who also has this feat are flanking the same creature, if that creature makes an attack on one of you, it incurs an attack of opportunity from the other.

Disclaimer: I have not yet play-tested the gunslinger class; my GM is adamantly anti-firearms. However, I've been following the discussion of the class with some interest here on the forums, and have a suggestion for a Grit feat. I was not thinking of the game when the idea first struck me, it started when I was discussing old Western TV shows with a coworker, and realized that one particular show's title would lend itself well to a gunsliinger/grit feat.

Hence, the feat "Will Travel". I would suggest it have No Name as a prerequisite feat. It's a limited version of the Teleport spell: It can only be used a limited number of times (1/month per level, maybe less, 1/year per level?), cannot be used while in combat, applies only to the gunslinger and her mount, and the target location has to be the outskirts of a settlement, city, castle, or other built-up area of civilization.

I was having a conversation with my best friend/GM the other night, and he expressed his frustration with what he perceives to be the weakness of unarmed combatants other than monks. I suggested one simple change to an existing feat that I think would go a long way towards making unarmed combat a lot more useful for non-monks. Here is the original feat, with my proposed change in bold:

Improved Unarmed Strike

You are skilled at fighting while unarmed.

Benefit: You are considered to be armed even when unarmed—you do not provoke attacks of opportunity when you attack foes while unarmed. Your unarmed strikes can deal lethal or nonlethal damage, at your choice. Your unarmed strikes count as melee weapons for the purpose of applying melee weapon combat feats and other melee weapon-related abilities.

Normal: Without this feat, you are considered unarmed when attacking with an unarmed strike, and you can deal only nonlethal damage with such an attack.

If that seems a bit too much, you could also take the addition and make it a tree feat under unarmed strike, calling it Greater Unarmed Strike.

Thoughts?

As I mentioned in this thread, I'm playing a half-elven spelless ranger in a game where despite the quasi-medieval fantasy nature of the setting, the campaign is definitely taking on aa western, frontiersy, almost shall I say a Firefly-esque feel to it. My ranger, for instance, is armed and dressed like Natty Bumpo, talks like Mal Reynolds, and enforces justice like Rooster Cogburn.

I got to thinking, and wondering. I was thinking about all those old westerns and frontier movies, where the Natives use birdcalls etc. to secretly communicate vocally at a distance. I wasthinking this would be an ideal ability for a character like mine to have, and was wondering if anyone had suggestions on how to play it out? I was thinking of making it a Ranger-specific variation of Secret Message, but using Survival instead of Bluff, allowing it only in a Favored Terrain, limiting the complexitity of message sent (like a fixed code) and using Knowledge: Nature to intercept instead of Sense Motive.

Thoughts?

I'm currently working on a character for a campaign in my best friend's homebrew world, and I'm looing for advice on ways to build him. A couple of things to bear in mind as you consider what advice to offer me: Aesthetics are important to me, even if it means sub-optimizing the character mechanically and in combat. However, aesthetics are NOT so important that I'll completely NERF him. The advice I'm seeking is not "Don't do that, you won't do as much damage as you woulf if you did THIS" when it comes to choices I've already made, it's more along the lines of "Well, if you're going to take THAT tack, you should consider THIS" that I seek. Secondly, if at all possible, I'd like to keep him straight-class.

A little background before describing the character within it:

While my friend's world is your typical pseudo-medieval fantasy world, he's not abouve micing a bit of flavor from other eras and genres. However, firearms are right out. In this particular campaign, things are taking on a slightly Old West/American Frontier setting. It wasn't intentional, it just evolved as the background stories of the campaign and the characters were set forth. Whick brings me to my character:

Orrin is a Level 2 half-elf ranger, specifically using the Spell-less Ranger class from KQ11. Part of the western flavor: For this setting the class is called Marshal. Orrin already has a horse that at L4 will become his animal companion, to add to the Old West theme, its name is Destry. Orrin makes his living off of the generosity of those he protects and the bounties he collects on wanted men. He was introduced to the game as he brought a brigand in after he caught the man raping a farmer's daughter. He was none to gentle on him before turning him over to authorities. He's CG, and a bit more interested in justice than the law. He's reminiscent of Rooster Cogburn or Dirty Harry. Here's where the Old West/Colonial Frontier flavor intrudes on game mechanics, and yes, where I'll admit he's sub-optimized, but oh so flavorful. His highest ability is Dex, and he carries a longbow, but he took the Two-Weapon Combat Style. Along with his bow he carries two tomahawks, using the stats for the throwing axe, and two Bowie knives, using the stats for daggers. So you see how he's starting to look less like THIS and more like THIS (albeit with a bow, not a long rifle).

His L1 feat was Weapon Finesse, since all of his melee weapons are light -- I know he could do more damage, but again, not without seriously denting the style I'm going for. Future feats planned include Quick Draw and a Weapon Focus or two. His skill focus is Stealth, he's maxed out on all theo utdoorsy skills like Survival, knowledge Nature, Know: Geography, handle animal, ride, perception... At level 4 I'm thinking of taking Favored Enemy Critical as his Marshal... er... spell-less ranger "Ranger Talent".

Any other thoughts? Again, within the parameters of, "Well, if you're going to stick with flavor as such a high priority, the best I can suggest is..."

I'm sure this question has been addressed at some point, but I can't find it for the life of me.

I've been playing PFRPG fpr almost a year now, mostly Play-By-Chat campaigns, and I'm about to play a cleric for the first time. Specifically, I'm rebuilding an old 3.5 Cleric. Can't convert him, the character sheet has been lost, I'm remaking him from memory. He WAS a 12th level Cleric/Radiant Servant of Pelor, with the switch to PF we've switched to the PF pantheon despite it being my friend/GM's homebrew setting. So I'm looking over the rules on clerics and channeling positive energy, and the quesiton I have is: Why bother with the Turn Undead feat when all it does is make the undead flee, whereas channeling does them pretty nasty damage -- and both uses of positive energy have the same range, both affect all undead in range, and whereas the turn is all or nothing against each undead, the channeled energy is going to do at least some damage each time it's used. Help me out here, am I missing something?

Before my suggestion, a little history: A while back -- oh, heck, months, maybe even a year, I bumped into a thread that started when someone asked about different ways a character could or couldn't coerce a Druid into revealing their secret language, and what sort of pitfalls and ramifications there would be (short version: Bad Idea, in caps). Along the way someone made the suggestion, why not just take a level of Druid to gain the language? Of course that would work, and I don't honestly recall where that train of thought went.

Now I don't know why this idea popped into my head this weekend, months later, that's just the way my brain works. I got to thinking, well, what if that's not what the GM wants? I know, technically, it's perfectly within the rules. But it may not be appropriate for the campaign, and it does smack of... well, you know... *whispers* munchkinism. I mean, it's like taking your kid to the Shriners Circus and that's enough to be allowed into the highest levels of the Masons, and made a Templar and told where the Ark of the Covenant is an... I kid. Really. Please don't send the Illuminati after me.

But my point is, if you want to really take the whole exclusive/secretive/hierarchical nature of the Druid class,then taking a level of the class just to gain the language is muy quesorifico. If you disagree, or want to argue the validity of doing so, fine. The rest of my post will bore you. But if you want to limit that sort of thing, without resorting to the time-honored "No! BAD player! BAD!" method, you might want to try the following house rule.

The rule is based on the description of druidic society, along with my own experience with language and parenting (what are we doing for his b-i-r-t-h-d-a-y?).

Here's the idea: The Druidic language is incredibly complex, with many layers of hidden meanings, multiple terms for the same concepts and objects, subtle nuances, secret words, etc., and a Druid spend her whole life learning it. For that reason, treat the Druid language as a regular skill, not a language skill. The skill is a Wisdom-based skill, and is considered a class skill. A character's ranks in the skill do not cost any skill points and are equal to her levels in the Druid class, they cannot be increased by any other method. The Druid uses the Druidic Language skill in the following ways:

1) Druids can speak to each other in the Druidic Language, as per the standard rules for a language.

2) When Druids meet each other, they use the Druidic Language skill instead of Diplomacy to determine reaction to each other.

3) Druids can use the complexity of their language to exclude lower ranking Druids from the conversation. When speaking among other Druids, the Druidic Language skill is used in place of the Bluff and Sense Motive skills for the purpose of sending, receiving, and intercepting secret messages.

The other night I was thinking about creating a variant-cleric style class that has no access to spells whatsoever, in exchange for an increased ability to channel energy. My first thought was simply to take the stats for cleric, remove all spells, and increase the energy advancemend (to +2d6 every 3 levels). But without testing it, I get the feeling it would be broken without some other tweaks. A few ideas, to consider individually and/or collectively:

I can easily see it being abused by multi-classing, so it would probably have the same "Once you leave you can't go back" restriction as monks and paladins.

I was also considering, along those lines, stipulating that you have to START OUT at first level as one to play one. The two requirements could be melded into one rule: No character with any levels in any other class may add levels in this class beyond those he already has.

another means of preventing abuse would be to stipulate that the Channel Energy dice from this class do not stack with dice from other channeling classes.

Any other suggested tweaks, or thoughts on the tweaks I've already suggested?

Question: Is there ANY reason anyone but a Finesse fighter would chose the Spiked Chain over a Great Flail? Both are two-handed, both have Trip and disarm. The Great Flail does more damage on average, more maximum damage, has a higher % chance to do 8 or more points of damage, and has a greater critical threat range. Plus, it's a Martial Weapon, not Exotic. So it would appear that there are only two reasons to spend the feat on the Spiked Chain: 1) It looks "Wikked" and you want it for character style, or 2) You want to trip or disarm using Finesse.

Unless I'm missing something.

The Core Rulebook says a character must have 2 ranks of perform to become a duelist. Does anything say it has to be 2 ranks in one Perform, or could it be 1 rank each in two different performance skills?

OK, so I've been working on a Duelist build, and I am discovering something: using the Core Rulebook alone, the class really is designed in such a way that to get the most out of the class features, you pretty much HAVE to use a Rapier, or settle for really sucky damage. Here's why:

The class requires the feat Weapon Finesse. If you're going to take that feat, odds are you're going to build a character with a high dex, to make use of the feat. Otherwise, why TAKE the feat in the first place? OK, so the feat allows you to use DEX instead of STR for all light weapons, the whip, the rapier, and the spiked chain. That's a pretty etensive list, but the big three are the Rapier, the Whip, and the spiked chain -- and hell, if it wasn't for that nasty crit range, the rapier wouldn't even outshine the short sword. So ok, add the Short Sword and Kukri to the list of best weapons for finesse.

Here's where it gets tricky.

Most of the Duelist class features, with the exception of Canny Defense (Precise Strike, Parry, Riposte, Deflect Arrows, Crippling Critical)require a light or one handed piercing weapon to use. So let's look at the aforementioned "Best Finesse Weapons": Whip? Nope, sorry, slashing. Spiked Chain? Two-handed, try again. Kukri? Slashing. That leaves two weapons that don't totally suck, the short sword and the rapier, and of those two, one of them (short sword) still does suck somewhat. The ONLY weapon that does decent damage, can be used with finesse, AND can be used with all of the Duelist class features, is the rapier.

Look, I know the Duelist is based on the image of the swashbuckling hero of yore. And I'll admit, that's the image I had in mind when I first started creating the character. But the class features of the Duelist would also work well for other concepts -- like a gladiator, or pit fighter type character -- The Trident would make an awesome weapon for a duelist, if it weren't for the fact that in using it, you're giving up use of your Weapon Finesse.

I know PrC's are supposed to represent more narrowly defined roles than base classes. But a PrC that almost inevitably herds you into one choice of weapon? Only other I ever saw do that was Master of Chains in 3.

*mutters to self* This time the boards had better not eat my post....

OK, gonna try this again. I've been working on a character concept, and this time want to ask the gang here for input BEFORE I commit him to play. I've been thinking of playing a Duelist for a while, I've been curious about finesse-based fighters (small f, not necessarily the Fighter class) for a while, and might have a chance to play one some time soon. Duelist seems the best path for the type of character I want to play (Errol Flynn-style, big on flashiness and style as well as combat effectiveness, being able to defend against multiple attackers at once, etc.), but HOW to get her there... I have come up with a plan, and a reason for it. Here are the base assumptions I'm using:

1. I want to be able to create the character using only Core Rulebook material. Anything from other sources are questionable, since I don't have much of a budget for buying new gaming material right now.
2. I want to get her to the Dueist PrC as quickly as possible without compromising one other goal:
3. I want her to have Improved Uncanny Dodge. It just seems like a no-brainer for this type of character.

The game that I'm considering her for will start at level 7. She won't quite be to Duelist by then, but she'll make it at L8. Here's the progression I hjave in mind:
Race: Human
Level:
1 Barbarian 1: Fast Movement; Rage. Feats: Dodge, Improved Initiative
2 Barbarian 2: Rage Power(Unexpected Strike); Uncanny Dodge
3 Fighter 1: Bonus Feat (Quick Draw). Feat: Mobility
4 Rogue 1: Sneak Attack +1d6; trapfinding
5 Rogue 2: Evasion; Rogue Talent(Weapon Training). Feat: Spring Attack
6 Rogue 3: Sneak Attack +2d6; Trap sense +1.
7 Rogue 4: Rogue Talent (Finesse Rogue); Uncanny Dodge (stacks with Barbarian UD to be Improved UD). Feat: Dazzling Display

And suggestions?

Bump

So I've been reading several threads about Low-Magic Settings, and it got me thinking about one of the pet projects lurking in the back of my mind, and I've decided maybe this would be a good time to bring it up and see if anyone has any thoughts on it.

What I'm considering is a Low-ADVENTURER setting.

It's become almost axiomatic in most fantasy games with which I am familiar, to the point that it's frequently lampooned, even by afficionados, that most fantasy worlds are pockmarked with ancient ruins, dungeons, monster lairs, and various and sundry other scary-but-potentially-profitable "secret" places, that the landscape between said locoations is lousy with monsters, villains, demons, a laundry list of horrors guarding the treaures, and that said worlds are also crawling with bands of adventurers intent on finding those hoards amd fighting those hordes, all in the name of bringing back the booty. This leads to adventuring, and outfitting adventurers, being one of the chief industries of most fantasy world economies.

The problem with this is that not only does it approach silly to the point that only a quantum physicist can tell the difference, but it, at least in my mind, greatly diminishes the "specialness" of the PC's. I was introduced to the fantasy genre through fiction, not through gaming, and so my concept of a really special hero is a mundane person being thrust into dire events and accomplishing things greater than themselves.

So what I want is to develop a setting much more like dark ages myth -- where brave heroes are few and far between, where the treasure in an ancient ruin is the goal of the whole adventure, not just another step in the process, and where minor monsters and wild beasts may roam the countryside, but BBEG's are fewer, farther between, more epic -- a single dragon may be feared across most of an entire continent, and the region where it dwells a place few people go, and from which fewer still return. A place where other than feudal armies, and well-organized caravans, few people leave the safety of their home fiefdom, and just by setting out as a first level heroic character, you are already on the path of having an edda recited about you.

Here are a few of the ideas I've had about how the setting would change the mechanics of character creation and development, and vice versa:

Magic users would be extremely rare in such a setting, and highly feared. PC's would have access to all the standard magic using classes, but Wizards and anyone else who relies on spellbooks would have one disadvantage: They would be far less likely to find an outside source of spells -- there just wouldn't be that many spellbooks or scrolls other than their own out there. They'd still get new spells at each level, I can hand-wave that by saying they developed the spell on their own, like a mathematician coming up with a new equation.

By the same token there wouldn't be magic shops in every town, scrolls and potions and wands and magic items are very rare indeed.

Except for professional men-at-arms and the nobility, almost noone would have access to martial weapons, let alone exotic -- the labor and materials make them prohibitively expensive for most people. PC's may start the game with one martial weapon, except for Fighters, Paladins, Barbarians, Rangers, and Rogues, who may start with either two martial or one exotic weapon. This is explained as somehting they inherited, or earned for previous service in an army. As the game progresses, finding replacement weapons or getting weapons repaired would become incresingly difficult.

That's all I have so far, any other thoughts?

I just wanted to clarify something regarding using trip as an Attack of Opportunity with a Guisarm. The rules state that:

A) Entering a threatened square does not provoke an AoO, but leaving one does.
B)An attack of Opportunity is resolved BEFORE the action that triggers it.

Therefore:

If my character wields a Guisarm, which has reach and trip, he threatens all squares 10 feet away from him. If an enemy is 10 feet away, because of A above, if that enemy tries to step inside the Guisarm's reach, the enemy incurs an AoO. If I use the Guisarm's trip ability as my AoO, and succeed, because of B above, the enemly falls prone BEFORE stepping inside the Guisarm's reach, and is prone 10' away, thus vulnerable to a regular attach on my actual turn.

Do I have that right?

I'm working on a concept for my Barbarian character, and I want some ideas about how to achieve the specific concept.
Bear in mind that I'm trying to do it within the parameters of the classes presented withing the PFCR.

To preface this, I want to explain that the concept has evolved. Originally I just wanted to focus on him being an "All comers" tank -- specializing in taking on multiple foes at once. The dialogue between Fezzig and the Man in Black in The Princess Bride comes to mind.

But that has evolved into the concept of what I call a "Disruptor". I want him to be the guy who messes up the othetr side's plans. Primarily, I want him to be capable of tying up enough of the other side's forces to prevent them from flanking the other party frontliners, to fill up avenues of manouver, and be the opportunist who steps in and puts his party mates in the position of suddenly flanking a bad guy.

Prior to this concept gelling, this is what I've done with him so far:

Level 2
Human
Str 20
Dex 15
Con 16
INT 12
WIS 14
Cha 9

Rage Ability: Intimidating Glare

Feats:
Power Attack
Intimidating Prowess
Power Attack

Flaw (3.5 concept allowed by my GM):
Uncontrollable Rage

Weapons: He started out with shortspears and a battleaxe, then he discovered the Halberd.

I'm committed to Barbarian as a class through Level 5 for the Uncanny Dodge 2, and I'm interested in the Unexpected Attack Rage power at level 8.

Thoughts?

Bump

OK, here's what I came up with for Domain Spells, trying to focus on a thematic tie-in, and using only the spells in the core rulebook. Some of them are obvious, some a stretch, but more consistent than anything else at their level:

1st – Remove Fear; 2nd – Delay Poison, 3rd – Create Food and Water, 4th – Neutralize Poison, 5th – True Seeing, 6th – Hero's Feast 7th – Regenerate, 8th – Spell Immunity, Greater; 9th – Heal, Mass

Having taken to heart the advice given to me in this thread, I've decided my Power Broker character will stick almost entirely to the Bard class (with maybe a couple of minor dips). I also intend to work on brining his usefulness in combat up a bit -- mostly as a buffer.

But I've also decided that if he's going to have his hands in a lot of different cookie jars, it would prrbably be best for him to have sources to rely on that are more trustworthy than a diplomacy roll, and more obedient than fellow PC's. Hence, the decision to aim for the Leadership feat.

The question becomes what to do with his cohort. The followers are a little more generic, but the Cohort seems to be a well-fleshed out NPC. My DM will allow me to build the cohort myself, even though he will run it, so I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions as to what class would be a good base for such a cohort, given what you see in the previous thread about my character concept.

One thing to note: my leadership score SHOULD be high enough to abnsorb the -1 penalty for differing alignment, and my character's NG, so the Cohort coult be any alignment except the evil ones.

Given the 2-level mandatory difference between leader and cohort, I'm thinking that any in-combat usefulness of the cohort would be as a bodyguard for my bard. But what I'd really like is a cohort that's useful out of combat as well, a lieutenant, or in the case of my bard's character concept, a chief spy or informant. I was thinking of aiming for either arcane trickster or shadowdancer, with rogue as the base for either one.

Any other ideas/thoughts on these two classes?

I'm fairly new to Pathfinder -- I'm playing in my first Pathfinder campaign, and we're only up to Level 2. I've played D&D for years and years, but Pathfinder definitely opens up new possibilities, and I was hoping for input regarding one of my 2 characters: My bard.

Let me preface this by saying that what I'm NOT looking for is a way to make hin a party buffer or a combat bard -- the party is well-mixed enough that that is not his primary function, and in fact the rest of the party has no problem getting between him and the enemy. Nor is the the (as someone put it in another thread) a prancing lute kinda guy.

What drew him to the bardic profession most was his love of knowledge annd his way with people. He's a half-elf, and his L1 feat is skill focus (Knwoledge: History) and his racial bonus skill focus is Perform Oratory, with his level 2 versatile performer going into Perform: Oratory, so he already has some really wicked rolls for those two skills as well as Diplomacy and Sense Motive. He's already found himself thrust into the role of party leader outside of combat. What I envisioned for him is a sort of power broker, half diplomat and half kingmaker, a trusted advisor to those in powerful positions, the power behind the throne. The Prestige Class Pathfinder Chronicler seems well-suited for that, but I was wondering if anyone had any other suggestions for feats, thir party (3.5) material, etc. with good input for him. I was disappointed with both Song & Silence AND Mongoose' Quintessential Bard II when it comes to this particular angle on the bard.

Thoughts?