Nikolaus Athas's page

IF the class has been designed correctly then it should have very close to the DPS of every other class when played intelligently so that maximum bonuses are active within the party and maximum penalties are active on the enemy.
If what you are wanting to know is "Does the Necromancer do more damage than everyone else consistently" then the answer should be *no* otherwise the class is broken according to the PF 2e design space.
PF 2e is intentionally and *aggressively* designed such that no single class out performs any other consistently. Individual classes may be capable of doing some burst damage, but that usually comes at a cost of resources of some type which take longer than the 10 min down time available, resources that may be needed later in the day. Or that can only be done once a day or for one action only per battle etc.
That's the trade off.
So in the Necromancers case the "Big Bang" stuff still comes mainly from the Occultist list , enhanced with the one physical attack that a thrall can do when summoned. Necromancers are only a 2 spell per spell level class so you can see how its limited.
Constant damage comes from the Thrall summoning plus a Grave Cantrip.

No errata needed, imo. You're right that negative isn't normally an option for the resistance ability, but that's fine because the shadow familiar says it gives it to you. Specific trumping general and all of that.

But even if it was completely unusable nonsense, it wouldn't prevent you from taking the specific familiar because those aren't requirements, they're granted abilities, as in things you're given for picking that familiar type.
The requirement is just that you have seven familiar abilities available. You spend 7 ability slots on the familiar type, and then gain darkvision, manual dexterity, master's form, resistance (cold and negative), and shadow step along with become shadow, slink in shadows, and steal shadow.

Ah! I am Today days old learning this! Thank you for your explanation.

Hi all,
I was looking at building a Witch/Shadowcaster with the end goal of having a "specific" shadow familiar for Society play.
However when I looked at the requirements needed, I saw that one of them - Resistance to Cold and Negative (remastered Void) - is not possible under the current Familiar abilities.
Under the Familiar abilities for Resistance you can only choose 2 of Fire, Cold, Acid, Electricity or Sonic.
Am I missing some errata or FAQ?
I tried looking for anything under Witch, Familiars and the relevant books but nothing seemed to come up.
Hope this is my Google-fu failure and not a oversight.
Obviously in regular games the GM could just allow it, but as it is Society play this needs to be clarified if it isn't already done.
To be clear this issue isn't just a Society one, because currently as written it is impossible to get a "specific" Shadow Familiar.

Thanking you all.

Bye owlbear! We will miss you!

Say hello to Pandaparrots!

Casts Thread Necromancy!

I too am curious about this statement, but the way I interpreted it is that by taking the Psychic Power feat, unlocks the Limning Light Supernatural ability as one of your "at-will" powers.

The point of adding that checkbox was to get players to try out the card game. To be able to get it another way would defeat the purpose. If you really want it, ask around and see if anyone has the card game set needed for it. You might find you enjoy the game, and at worst you've spent an hour playing a game...

Unfortunately It wasn't popular here and competed unfavorably with actual PFS sessions.

In the Season 10 rewards sheet , one of the items that a player can do to gain points is "Successfully complete a scenario in Season 5 of the PF Adventure Card Guild".

Is there an alternative for this item that is appropriate as we don't play Adventure Card Guild.

Thanks

Edit: Just to clarify even if the player completes all other tasks (except GMing which he is too new to do) he can only complete 6 tasks and thus denied the 7+ reward.

Thanks That was what I was trying to find!

Hi Brains trust,

I've been looking through the rules and the forums and I can't find any specific rule regarding whether or not the Heaven's Mystery Awesome Display would interact with the non Oracle spells cast by this character.

So basically if said character has this Mystery but casts Colour Spray from his Mesmerist spell list, does he modify the spell as per the description of the Mystery? Or does he have to cast Colour Spray from his Oracle spells?

Please show me a reference either way if possible (FAQ or the like if not a rule)

Many Thanks

Hi all,
I have a bit of a corner case question that I'm trying to get my head around.
An Occultist only has access to the spells of his chosen implement schools and can only cast 1 spell of each level of that school as chosen.

If they buy a Shard of Psychic Power that contains a spell of one of their known implement schools then my understanding is that they can use one of their spell slots to cast the contained spell, in effect having a second spell of that level for that implement school.

For example if they have say Illusions as an Implement school and chose Blur as their known second level spell, but also have a Shard with Mirror Image in it then they can cast Blur and Mirror Image as needed (up to the numbers of times per day that they can cast second level spells)

Now here are my questions.
What if the Occultist buys or finds a Shard of Ablative Barrier, which is a 2nd level spell of the Conjuration Implement school which they have not selected.
How do they use it?

a) Can they use it "as is" because while they do not have the school, it is on their spell list?

b) Can they use it with UMD?
i) If so what would the target DC be? Do they have to emulate a class ability (of having Conjuration spells known) which is a DC 20?
ii) If i) is the case do they use their actual caster level or do they use their UMD roll -20 as per the UMD rule for emulating a class ability?

Thanks!

Hi all,
and thank you for the replies. This would probably get even muddier if I say I was thinking about doing this as a PFS character, who has the Boon that allows a Thassalonian specialist. Given the advice given by a few about getting a GM ruling I would probably be facing a lot of table variation if I tried this.

So without some kind of 'official' ruling on this I suppose this concept goes into the "Characters That Could Have Been" folder.

Thanks once again for the feedback.

Hi all,
I have been looking around for a definitive answer to this and I have found some older threads that discuss whether or not the Thassilonian Specialists can take focus schools (they can't) but I couldn't find anything that talked about combining archetypes.

My take is that it is a legal combination because as far as I can see:
a) The Thassilonian Specialist of Gluttony doesn't alter any of the school powers.
b) The Hallowed Necromancer only alters the school powers.
c) both require you to make Necromancy your school.

Is this right?

Well that seems to answer that, and I will concur the wording.

But wow - somehow a Monstrous Physique II caster (around level 7) has ready access to pieces of a Mythic creature - see Anunnaki CR18/Mythic 1

Anyways thanks for that clarification guys.

I have seen a number of posts about how awesome the Monstrous Physique line of spells are and how they work - this isn't a post about how Polymorph works or the like, as I understand the mechanics of the rules.
I also understand the list of allowable monstrous humanoids allowed or more importantly the legal sources they can come from.

No my problem within PFS is this:
A lot of posts suggest taking monsters like the Calikang or the Chardra or even the Gargoyle but none of them address the real limitation of this spell - the material component.
From the spell description:

Components V, S, M (a piece of the creature whose form you plan to assume)

How is a Level 7 ish caster get his hands on part of a CR 12 monster in the case of a Calikang (apart of course from defeating one) as an example?
A 5th level caster encountering a gargoyle is within tier, but they still need to have played an adventure when they encounter and defeat one.

Is there some kind of handwave within PFS that removes this requirement?
Otherwise you can only use Monstrous Physique on forms of creatures you have encountered during sessions and more so you need to keep a record of said monsters and the adventure you encountered it in.

Thoughts and Clarifications anyone?

Actually in my opinion I always thought the Alchemist was the closest thing to a Warlock with the Bombs being the equivalent of the Arcane blast , and their discoveries being all the other weirdness that the warlock got.
Thematically about the most different two classes possible, but mechanically very similar.

What I'm seeing out of all of this is that Pazio has tried to extend the playable range of the game, whilst also discouraging Multi class dipping for front end loaded advantages. At least so far. And all else aside I see that as a good thing.

Yup I'm getting the same error

As mentioned before the Fire oracle has the Tongues curse and uses Greater command which means only Abyssal or Celestial speaking foes will get affected. BUT I saw another issue which doesnt seem to have been addressed here,
He is supposed to take to the air (on his wings of Flame) and then start using fire spells with his meta magic feats.
1) he has no Fly skill. with his Dex and his armor he cannot fly particularly well as it only adds to be a +1 bonus.
2) using metamagic feats with a spontaneous caster is a full round action. He can't be flying if he wants do do this. He may be able to hover as a non movement action (I have to check this) but even then he has to roll a 9+ or fail and fall out of the sky.
Is this intentional? I can see that it could be because a flying flame oracle that is well played is a horror and could be as much a tpk threat as the mimic.

That's fine. Happy to get the intent of that clear. So no admixtures.

Can I make one more question regarding this?

A gloom does not qualify as a bomb for

the purposes of feats or discoveries.

Does this also apply also to the "Bomb Admixture" line of extracts? ie can glooms be modified by these or not?

For the record a quick synopsis of this line:
Targeted+ - no splash, but extra damage to target
Shadowy* - target and up to 3 gain concealment but limited vision
Lightning lash+ - target and up to 3 electrical tether effect.
Viper+ - create venomous snakes that attack target an up to 3 splash victims
Languid* - creates fatigue in target and up to 3 targets.
Caging - creates a force cage of splash radius

* these duplicate discovery effects of Glooms so probably redundant, but lend to the idea that Glooms can be adjusted by this spell line.

+ these effects go against the shadowy vague effects of the glooms so lend themselves against the idea that Glooms can be altered. Also Gloom Chymist loses poison use so venomous snakes are a bit counter concept.

So as you can see the argument can go either way and I'm just curious as to the intent of the writer.

(to be honest the admixture line of extracts don't add much to the Glooms but they are pretty much the only line of Alchemist only 'spells' so I would like to see them retained or a line of Gloom Admixtures ...)

Yes I figured it was an archetype that probably lends itself more towards Battlefield control and body modification than out and out ranged damage. Which is fine as I have already played a bomb focused Alchemist.

Hi all,

In Blood of Shadows the Alchemist archetype replaces its Bombs with Glooms.
It goes on to say that Glooms are NOT bombs for the purpose of feats or discoveries.

This would imply that the fast bomb or precise bomb discoveries are unable to be used with glooms.

Im pretty sure this is the case but Im just asking because my searches haven't found much reference to glooms anywhere and I just wanted to make sure.

thanks

Interestingly enough I'm not sure that a Nagaji Aspirant can take the Serpent domain either, as that Domain modifies Venom Immunity, while the archetype replaces it ...

Ok guys and gals, thanks for your inputs. Pity though.

Hi all,

just putting some ideas together and I was wondering if taking Scalykind as the domain for Natures Bond on a Nagaji Aspirant (Druid archetype)be allowed.
It is a domain offered by the Godess Nalinivati who is an ascended Naga (and now the patron of Naga and Nagaji) and it is said was the one who gave free will to the Nagaji.
Seeing also that it appears that the Nagaji Aspirant is not so much a nature based as Naga based worship this would be a good fit.

The domain is PFS legal but it is not one under the Animal/Terrain Druids list.

Thoughts?

Yes but the reflex save would be class base plus any magic then -5 (because 0 Dex). PCs or relevant NPCs are heroic you know ...

So at the time you took the feat you had the requirements, but once you took Gunslinger you invalidated it?
I would have disagreed with you in that I didn't think that feats could be invalidated that way but the example of Power Attack while using a belt (or only while raging or whatever) is a valid counter to my point.
So please disregard my argument. I believe that you have the right of it.

I don't agree with the thoughts here. Each class I would have thought would get treated separately.
Say for example you played a Divine Hunter (Paladin Archetype) and took Amateur Gunslinger [Quick Clear]. Next level you choose to play a Mysterious Stranger. (Good synergy with CHA)

The Gunslinger becomes the Mysterious Stranger Archetype and THAT causes the Gunslinger CLASS to lose its Quick Clear class ability.

Your Divine hunter still HAS Quick Clear which he can use even though the Mysterious Stranger doesn't get that deed.

While the Amateur Gunslinger Feat gives you the option of trading it out for extra grit, you don't have to. Nothing in the wording of the feat states that you lose the abilities granted by the feat once you become a Gunslinger.

If losing an class ability was absolute across all your classes then you could not build any character that loses an ability to an archetype and then dips into a class to regain it
Some examples
A Scout Rogue dipping into Barbarian or Shadowdancer or Archeologist Bard:- the Rogue loses Uncanny Dodge but Barbarian, Shadowdancer, some Bards etc also have it and thus the Rogue can regain it.
A Ranger taking an Archetype without an Animal Companion, then becoming a Druid and regaining it
A Wizard who loses his familiar due to Archetype swapout, taking Eldritch Heritage and getting it back.
A Melee class that loses access to some weapons (or armor) taking a martial proficiency in a lost weapon or a level dip into a class to regain them.

All of these I have seen in play in PFS, indeed the Paladin build I mention above has been OKed by our Venture Captain.

Sorry to do this but a shameless bump to try and get some attention to this issue.

Actually this is more important than I thought especially at 9th level and above, because the special features of both Bloody and Burning skeletons are dependent on their Hit dice.

Hi all, I have a question regarding the HD or Level of the Necromatic Servant.
Now the rules as written indicate that the Hp of the servant are equal to 1/2 the Occultist's, and that it uses the same BaB and gets a damage bonus equal to 1/2 the occultists level, but there is no mention of its HD or saves.
I don't mind if they stay at the base 1 HD skeleton or 2HD zombie, but would like some clarification if that isn't the case.

Cheers

Hi all, I recently came across the opportunity to gain a follower and was looking at the description of the Lookout as per the Society primer page 28.

Now I remember that somewhere along the line it was stated, that a vanity follower is assumed to be of your own race.
Given that my character is a tiefling does this mean that the follower is also a tiefling and hence has Darkvision? This can make a huge difference in its usefulness to me.

An easier way would be to use a wakizashi, it's like a finesable katana

And then use Lead Blade on it :D

The armor spikes as "Weapons in their own right" are seperate from the armor. You can either have a bonded item armor or bonded item weapons, not both

But I could then later purchase armor spikes to modify the armor correct? Even during character creation? I know that they wont be MW and unbreakable like the armor is.

Hi all. title says it all basically.
It has been established in other threads that basically any generally available item can be made into a Battle Host's Panoply Bond, including things like full and field plate.

Special material or enchanted armors can't which is fine, but I was wondering if Armor spikes could be part of the armor when starting the character either for free or paid on character creation.
If not then would it be allowable to add armor spikes later? And can the Armor be enchanted later? (I know that the armor spikes need to be enchanted separately as weapon bonus)

cheers

Umbral Mage Armor - Level x hours worth of dim light plus +4 AC

The point of difference here is as follows:
Casting Shadow Conjuration is not casting the spell. It is casting a spell that is able to mimic the effects of the spell Gloombolt. As far as I can tell this is wholly within the limitations of both spells and the ruling of the PFS additional resources but I would like to know that this is as intended.
There is no language currently that states that restricted racial spells cannot be mimicked by spells that produce quasi-real effects, like the Shadow-X line.

Let me be clear here - I am not saying that I can cast Gloombolt, (even though I feel that I should). What I am saying is that the Shadow Conjuration spell should allow me to duplicate it regardless of the fact that it is racial. The PFS designers may come along and say no, and I would respect that, but currently there is nothing that says that I cannot, which is what I wish to have clarified.

I can provide a similar case which doesn't require racial spells - the Thassalonian 'Pride' Wizard Archtype who casts Illusion spells but cannot cast any Conjuration or Transmutation spells at all, not just double cost but prohibited.
She does have access to Shadow Conjuration - an illusion spell - which allows her to cast mimicked lower level Conjuration spells, and Shadow Transmutation - which allows her to cast lower level mimicked Transmutaion spells.
Based on your argument these 2 spells (and their associated greater versions and other variants) should not be allowed because they would mimic a school of spell that is prohibited even though the seplls themselves are actually Shadow and not Conjuration etc.

See why I am interested in this?

(edited for clarity *I hope*)
when I say Gloombolt I mean Gloomblind bolt my bad.

My Kensai magus used an Aldori dueling sword with Slashing Grace, so was already nerfed. I haven't felt like it made the character unplayable at all so far.

Sorry for the Thread necromancy but HINT: At 6th level take a level in Aldori Swordlord prestige class - trust me you will thank me for it ...

This is why some clarification in regards to these kind of spells (Shadow line) is needed.
Especially as in this case thematically it makes perfect sense that a archetype caster who manipulates shadow energies, can duplicate a spell that a shadow race uses, which is powered by shadow energies.

Seriously IMBO Gloombolt *should* be on the Shadowcaster list. Its a spell developed by a race of beings who have the greatest interaction and presence in the PFS world at the very same place that the Archtype originates from. If nothing else my Shadowcaster would have seen and know of the existence of such a spell (and indeed most shadow/fetchling spells).
Using a 4th level slot to duplicate a 3rd level spell should be a fair compromise in my (again biased) opinion given that I can't cast the specific spell - I can't actually cast it because I'm not a Fetchling and don't have enough shadow in me(and unless I have access to a time machine and travel across the planet IRL I can never have a PFS legal Fetchling) but I as a Shadowcaster should be able to duplicate it and it's effects.

Even looking at Shadow Conjuration's description it clearly states:
"Shadow conjuration can mimic any sorcerer or wizard conjuration (summoning) or conjuration (creation) spell of 3rd level or lower." [emphasis mine]
No mention is made of any restriction due to race or origin. I'm not casting a prohibited spell, I'm mimicking its effects ...

Now to be honest I haven't thought through all the implications here. This MAY open up some abusive can of worms which may have been considered by minds far superior to mine.
Which brings me back to my hope that some clarification comes out - even if it is like James states above a big no.

But more on topic - Personally I think that it may have made more sense (and may still make more sense) to allow only ONE of each type of now invalid races to be attached to a PFS Id. This would allow those who were 'late to the party' to be able to build a single tiefling and aasimar character for play without flooding the table. Eventually they will level themselves out of play. For the record I have 2 'vanilla' Tielflings (even though I had Blood of Fiends) and no Aasimar (because at the time I couldn't think of an Aasimar concept I liked).

Oh and without a shadow of a doubt the Unchained Summoner was horribly broken - due mainly to the spell list NOT Eidelon - and should never be allowed again in PFS, IMO.

+1 on wanting grippli, so I can create Crazy Frog the bard.

You *DO* and *Im* going to Telekinesis him right into a Blade Barrier!

Ok Here is a variation to this issue.

Could a caster using Shadow Conjuration or Shadow Evocation (of the appropriate level)be able to duplicate a racial spell?

Specifically - A Human Shadowcaster uses Lesser Shadow Conjuration to cast a quasi-real Gloomblind Bolt (normally a Fetchling only spell)

How legal would this be?

(And as an aside does anyone know if there is a boon to allow anyone play a fetchling?)

I would chime in here to agree that in general while the spell would fail to be 100% real, it would still be 20% real. But it has to be looked on a case to case basis.

So shadow gorilla standing in the door way would get to attack (and with 20% real hp probably 1 punched back to the shadow plane).
My reasoning here is that Golems or other High SR creatures don't 'unsummon' summoned creatures just by interacting with them. So while the Shadow Summoned Monster is revealed as such it is still a summoned creature and not a pure illusion.

The pit however I'm not sure about because it isn't really a pit it's a dimensional space.
If you could use some kind of "Shadow Dig" then I would rule that yes it would be 20% effective because 20% is REAL displacement of the ground. But the create pit line produces a dimensional space so to speak even extending to making 50' drops on board a 20' high ship for example.
As the whole thing is a spell effect regardless of shadow or not then I would say the GM ruled this case correctly.

A shadow wall of Stone or Iron would have 20% of the hit points but would probably have the full hardness as the material is STILL stone or Iron, just not as much of it (the rest is buttressed by shadowstuff)

Intellect Devourers. ONE of the party have been taken - but WHICH one?

Thanks. That clears it up.

Ok but instead of costing 1 Arcane point it costs 2 correct?

Whenever the magus enhances his weapon using his arcane pool, he can spend 1 additional point from his arcane pool to add the returning and throwing abilities to the list of available weapon special abilities.

I'm not 100% clear in how this works:

If they have the Arcana above do they then:
A) Spend a further 1 point and it becomes a +2 flaming returning thrown sword?
Total pool cost = 2, enhancement cost = +2
or
B) Spend 1 point to allow them to be able to add thrown and returning for an additional enhancement plus each on top of the +1 Flaming, which would only be possible at level 5 if they did not make the sword Flaming (Base +1 sword, 2 enhancement bonuses due to level 5, cost of 1 each for thrown and return.)
Total pool cost = 2, enhancement cost = +4

For the record Im leaning towards B, but A would be nice.
I'm hoping I've made my confusion clear.

cheers

Thematically fire is seen as a cleansing agent when applied against evil.
Ice on the other hand is associated with death and darkness. Thematically in literature I mean.

Given that UMD allows you to totally ignore class, race, proficiency and alignment restrictions then it is an immensely powerful skill - hence it is never a casual use of time.
The only class that gets even close to being able to take 10 on it is the 19th level bard who mechanically as well as "historically" are the Knowledge specialists. 10th level rogue just does not cut it I'm sorry to say especially as it does not say that it overrules specific limitations, unlike the 19th level bard ability which does.
I do concur that the wording is somewhat ambiguous and it would be nice to get a confirmation on this.
HOWEVER in saying this, one needs to look also if this is under PFS or home play. If it is under home play/table variation, then go with what the GM says, if it is under PFS always assume the less powerful interpretation and you will not be disappointed.(In my experience)

Perhaps the Wild Child can convey the meaning of their reports by the power of ... INTERPRETIVE DANCE!!!!
(sorry Im just joking - that would be a bard dip ....)