Nyhme's page

I cancelled my paizo subscriptions just for this reason. Rule 0 should be for flow and balance. If you dont understand a rule in game, the gm gives their interpretation and game continues. Then post game you can look for interpretation. Instead it's being used for the GMs to do the heavy lifting of rules interpretation. I like pathfinder because of its crunchy attention to detail. The GM should be spending their time preparing for the story and then as confusion arises should rule on interpretation for the fun of the party and smoothness in continuing the story.

Why buy books for a system that's been poorly edited, has little support and essentially defaults to the cheap rules lite game systems out there of "ask the gm"?

I get paizo only has 25 million a year in revenue. But it would be simple to reach out to the community for feedback on the rules and how they've been interpretated and played out. Then use that feedback with the developers in charge of those areas and give an official ruling.

I love paizo. I just dont feel that they should get a pass for a poorly implemented strategy just because they are the little guy. There are ways to get the multitude of ambiguous questions answered without increasing cost. If this is the quality that we can expect from paizo in the future then I dont see any reason to continue buying the products.

The best ad&d 2e campaign setting had 10th lvl spells. And it's the only thing wotc could ever produce that I'd actually purchase. Though I don't think they'd be able to get Troy Denning to come back so doubt it would be as good as it was. The 4e stuff they put out for the setting was pretty blah. Never played the 4e stuff, since i havent purchased anything by wotc since before they purchased tsr.

But I think the 10th lvl spells in pathfinder 2e was also to make cantrip auto heightening and scaling more smooth. And since cantrips were going to scale that way. It opened up being able to split up some of the 9th lvl spells. I really like how they've done spells and scaling in this edition.

The owl lacks the mount trait. So yes you can ride it this way, however, it would lose its ability to fly.

Source Core Rulebook pg. 214 2.0
You or an ally can ride your animal companion as long as it is at least one size larger than the rider. If it is carrying a rider, the animal companion can use only its land Speed, and it can’t move and Support you on the same turn. However, if your companion has the mount special ability, it’s especially suited for riding and ignores both of these restrictions.

Yes its animal companion not familiar but it's not a hard stretch to assume RAI would apply since corgi mount has the restriction on non land speeds.

Nyhme wrote:

Even still, Treerazor by himself and not played properly is an easy kill. A fighter recieving the aid action to attack from a hafling with a heroism spell, a quicksilver mutagen and a true target only needs a 6+ on 2 d20s to damage and slow 1 him or more devastatingly a spellstrike arrow with 8th lvl searing light if they archetyped into cleric. A ruffian rogue with duel weapon warrior, dual thrower and dual onslaught only needs an 8+ on 2 dice to hit, deal sneak damage and apply debilitation. A giant instinct barbarian with duel weapon warrior and dual onslaught with fangwire is also almost guaranteed to apply a grapple with their hit at range 20 so other than just attacking the barbarian's appendage has to break the gapple to get in melee and yes freedom of movement guarantees success on his escape but that means treerazor is down 1 action and already at map -5. Which a paladin or an observant halfing investigator with foresight cast on them can easily tank. Or a gymnast swashbuckler under 4th lvl enlarge and a whip with a readied action to trip once treerazor steps into range. I can go on with more ways a party can easily overcome treerazor but i think the point is made.

I'm not so sure about your builds here. Just taking the fighter, the quicksilver grants an item bonus, so it doesn't stack with your weapon so net +1, he's also taking 40 hp damage and a -2 to fort saves (very bad against Treerazer). I assume you are using a Halfling so they can have Halfling Helper feat, but that only grants a greater circumstance bonus on skill checks not attack rolls. It would also not be unreasonable for the DC to aid attacks against Treerazer to be very high, say a 40+. So with a 9th level and 7th level spell, assuming a flanking bonus and a critical success on aid, the fighter now goes from a +38 to a +45 against a 52 AC, meaning on two rolls he needs a 7 or better to hit. But that is also only for the first hit. It is more likely to be a +43. Your halfling friend who is using 2 of 3 actions...

Hasted/heroism hafling fighter with cleric dedication And Spellstrike arrows

Setup round wizard makes sure everyone has invisibility at greater than 60 range so trueseeing no issue. Everyone delays initiative for it to line up wizard, rogue, ranger fighter.

Rogue sets up an aid action, Ranger sets up an aid action, Fighter sets up an aid action. Next round wizard does true target time beacon and quickened polar ray needing a 10 to hit(28+7+3+4) on 4 dice(93.75% chance). Ice damage plus drained 2.

All 3 martials are doing spellstrike arrow with their 8th lvl searing light 2 actions, 1 aid action for the next person in line and their quickened action to shoot their spellstrike activated arrow.

Ruffian rogue goes 8 to hit on 2 dice(84% chance 28ish% chance to crit). Bow damage plus 8th lvl searing light damage plus clumsy plus weak piercing 5 plus sneak damage from arrow and spell. Ranger goes 7 to hit on 2 dice(87.5% chance 30ish% chance to critw) bow damage plus weakness piercing plus precision plus 8th lvl searing light, fighter goes 5 to hit on 2 dice(93.75% chance to hit 45ish% chance to crit) bow damage plus searing light damage plus. This isnt figuring the aligned oil on the arrows so theyre doing good damage and made from cold iron arrows. Anyways yea treerazor dead and he wasnt aware of the fight.

Aid affects attack

Aid Reaction
Source Core Rulebook pg. 470 2.0
Trigger An ally is about to use an action that requires a skill check or attack roll.
Requirements The ally is willing to accept your aid, and you have prepared to help (see below).

Doubling the dc from 20 to 40 is absolutely unjustifiable an incredibly hard/unique dc adjustment the highest listed on the dc adjustment chart is only +10. So anything more than 30 isnt even feasible by any stretch. but even still with a few easily aquired feats a 40 is easy to crit the aid.

26 prof, 7 dex, 4 circ from cooporative nature, 3 from heroism and 4 item bonus thats a +44 bonus on your rediculous 40 dc. With thw reroll from luck its very improbable not to get a crit on the aid.

From cultural adapability
Human
Source Core Rulebook pg. 57 2.0
The short human life span lends perspective and has taught you from a young age to set aside differences and work with others to achieve greatness. You gain a +4 circumstance bonus on checks to Aid.

1st lvl feat is hafling luck, 5th cultural adapability 9th helpful hafling 13th is guiding luck. So you have a free reroll.

And dont get me wrong Treerazer done properly should be a ridiculous encounter. However as i told the op, a 5 person prepared party thrown against a solo treerazer will win relatively easily unless they dont know how to prepare.

The Raven Black wrote:

Then it would be easier to follow if you explicitly state it as your personal opinion rather than some kind of undeniable truth.

Zapp wrote:

You need to be trained in unarmed attacks to be considered "threatening" and thus flanking.

Unfortunately, since errata every character class is trained in unarmed combat.

It makes zero sense an unarmed human should be allowed to flank (unless you're in a fist fight or wrestling match).

If you're a monk, yes. Of course, your entire schtick is that your hands and feet are lethal weapons.

If you're a regular western hero, not so much. Even a fighter should need to wield a dagger at the very least before he counts as flanking. And no, wielding a bow or a holy symbol or a wand doesn't count. (I hated the whole stupid Legolas-killing-Orcs-with-arrows routine)

Unfortunately you need a houserule for this to happen :(

My first post contains six paragraphs. I've quoted the entirety of my post unedited. Let's walk through the paragraphs, shall we?

#1: Just a rules fact.
#2: Another rules fact combined with an opinion
#3: This is clearly my opinion.
#4: Again.
#5: ...and again.
#6: Here I clearly state that what I want is not what the rules say.

Don't listen to those who claim otherwise. In reality all they're doing is revealing how they assume I mistake facts for opinions, and how their responses are colored by this prejudice.

Have a nice day

Your main flaw is in the logic of lethal attacks being what causes flanking. The flanking bonus is due to distraction. If you are fighting 2 opponents if one is a 110 pound guy that's slapping at you like a swarm of mosquitos and the other is a guy swinging a baseball bat both are going to be slightly more effective. Being terrified of a bat to the face is going to make the slap more likely 3 stooges poke your eye and having a hand in your face is going to make it harder to dodge the bat.

If youre insinuating that the guy would focus on the bat and dismiss the lightweight slapper. Then you have to accept that he would absolutely be flat footed to the shocking grasp delivered from the same lightweight. But since pathfinder doesnt have facing and flanking is a condition inflicted by 2 characters. It works

Also by your logic the feint action shouldnt exist. Feint isnt lethal its a distraction. If a trained combatant is insitctively capable of knowing if the punch coming from behind is being delivered by a monk verusus a wizard or the same wizard reaching out delivering a touch attack spell.Then wouldnt the same trained combatant being equally capable of knowing that the rogues left hand wasnt actually intended to be lethal?

Additionally with your reasoning then the person slapping the trained combatant wouldnt provoke reactions since for your logic to work it means the combatant is completely dismissing the slappy weakling.

The point is the game is balanced around characters maximizing their attacks with all sorts of buffs, aids and debuffs. So houseruling to fit your convention of common sense is only causing unnecessary imbalance.

Technically allowed since they dont have a trigger requirement. If it said

"Trigger your turn starts"

Then no it wouldnt since they would have the same trigger and you can only recieve one effect from one trigger. And there is no restriction on 2 feats granting the same bonus not stacking unless its a typed bonus or specifically restricting(i.e. nimble elf and fleet stack but tiefling hoofs aren't allowed)

Alternatively 2 completely different named feats with the same trigger wouldnt work. Ie if you were a dual class wizard/monk with effortless concentration and master of many styles. You could only gain either the free sustain or the free stance. Since both have the same trigger. But nothing is stopping you from taking both.

Also you didn't ask this and i assume you didnt mean it this way but figured I'd say it anyway. You still only get to use 1 shield block per attack. But im pretty sure you didn't mean it that way.

And as usual theres the "up to gm discretion" for the multitude of ambiguous rules out there.

Nyhme wrote:

A nektera sprite fighter get sprites spark for sonic damage. Specialize in sling weapon group adopted ancestry halfing grab some titan slinger. Then they can run around saying "pew pew pew pew" and kill things with your finger guns.

Just remember that those 'pew pew' finger guns will only ever have a max range of 20', not range increment.

Well of course. What self respecting finger gunslinger draws down at high noon at more than 20 paces?

A nektera sprite fighter get sprites spark for sonic damage. Specialize in sling weapon group adopted ancestry halfing grab some titan slinger. Then they can run around saying "pew pew pew pew" and kill things with your finger guns.

You could argue theif is even better than eldritch trickster since you can throw daggers and cast electric arc.

But skipping that, this is just a generic tossed togethwr.

Half elf scoundrel rogue
Same ability score breakdown as if you went eldritch trickster sorcerer, bard etc.

Wildborn magic electric arc
Nimble dodge or you're next I mean you are charisma based.

Distracting feint

Otherworldly magic telekinetic projectile.

Magical trickster

Something cool

Eldritch archer

Give your guy a whip, don't need to be trained in it just need the 10' melee reach.

First level standard 0 level badger AC 16 reflex +5 electric arc is superior with the reflex save of +5 versus dc 12 needing to take half damage. So 1 and 2 is crit double, 3 through 12 regular damage and 13 through 19 half and 20 none. 5% no damage, 35% half damage, 50% regular damage, 10% double damage.

Versus telekinetic projectile needing a 7 to hit if they are flat footed and crit 17 to 20.
1 to 6 zero damage, 7 to 16 regular damage 17 to 20 crit. So 30% no damage, 50% regular damage, 20% crit. It loses out even with extra 15% double against the 35% half damage.

2nd and 3rd lvl now we have distracting feint. So use the whip to feint at 10' and drop reflex by half. Now cr 2 blackberry 18 ac +8 reflex so that's a wash. Trickster has sneak now though. So chance for double damage is the same as trickster but you still have the gap for half damage versus no damage. And electric arc can hit 2 targets.

4th lvl now it's equal footing for damage but also consider this. Scoundrel feinting is debuffing ac for melee and reflex and perception for everyone. That's a world of difference versus the trickster creating a distraction.

6th lvl game over there's no comparison now.

Also more fun but won't work on mindless and things that don't understand you. Daze and bon mot. Now your debuffing will for everyone, doing the better damage as mental and a chance to stun 1 and force them to use an action unless they like that will debuff. That's gross and bon mot is so fun. 3rd lvl you could have daze, electric arc, bon mot and distracting feint. Also distracting feint and non mot are awesome together. One is circumstance the other is status. So perception debuffed by 4 or 5. Super easy crit feint there.

Dedication feat restriction

"Special You cannot select another dedication feat until you have gained two other feats from the sorcerer archetype"

Ancient elf

"Source Character Guide pg. 25
PFS Note The ancient elf heritage requires an elven lifespan (a feature that half-elves do not have) and thus cannot be selected by half-elves using the Elf Atavism feat, only by full elves.
In your long life, you’ve dabbled in many paths and many styles. Choose a class other than your own. You gain the multiclass dedication feat for that class, even though you don’t meet its level prerequisite. You must still meet its other prerequisites to gain the feat"

No choosing a dedication feat here. You choose a class.

Eldritch Trickster

"Choose a multiclass archetype that has a basic, expert, and master spellcasting feat. You gain that archetype's dedication feat as a bonus feat even though you don't meet its level prerequisite, though you must meet its other prerequisites."

Choose a multiclass archetype. Not a dedication feat a multiclass archetype. Let's take a look at multiclass archetype.

"Source Core Rulebook pg. 219 2.0
Archetypes with the multiclass trait represent diversifying your training into another class’s specialties. You can’t select a multiclass archetype’s dedication feat if you are a member of the class of the same name (for instance, a fighter can’t select the Fighter Dedication feat)."

Nope it's still not a feat. So ancient elf let's you choose a class that's not your own. Eldritch Trickster let's you choose a multiclass archetype with expert and master spellcasting feats in the dedication. After making those choices you gain the dedication feat. It's 100% legal.

Nyhme wrote:

The real question is it game breaking or even slightly overpowered. No it's not.

The argument that starting with 2 spell traditions is silly. An ancient elf bard, champion, cleric, druid, monk, oracle, sorcerer and witch can all start at lvl 1 with trained in all 4 traditions. Ancient elf rogue can have all 4 by 2nd lvl. All others by 3rd lvl have all 4. And that's using all pfs approved heritage/feat combination and not even slightly stretching rules.

Second argument. That's way too many skills. We are talking an elf rogue here. Ancient elf with scoundrel has all but 2 skills. Ancient elf mastermind can have every single skill. And both of these fall in the every magic tradition by 2nd lvl.

From here it's feat choices as you level. If someone did take 2 spellcasting dedications and they wanted to maximize casting. They would only get a rogue feat that was dedicated to increasing spells at 1st, 2nd and 16th lvls. That's missing out on pretty much everything to make the rogue a rogue. Plus your spell attacks and dcs. Will be lagging by 2 lvls for your 2nd casting dedication.

I can think of a ton of rogue builds vastly more powerful than any combination of ancient elf/eldritch trickster.

Eldritch Trickster is the most lacking of the rogue rackets. If someone wants to lean in on their caster, why not?

Edit: and if you're wondering how I got the elf starting with all traditions. 3 or 4 backgrounds have arcane sense as the free skill feat. If they have primal casting from their class they take share thoughts. If they have occult casting from their class they take wildborn magic. If they have divine casting dealers choice. Then pick a dedication with the last tradition. For the rogue same thing, 2nd lvl minot magic pick your missing tradition.

That's a way to answer an Advice question, not a way to answer a Rules question.

If I decide nothing is gamebreaking about the combination and it will work fine at my table, and tell my players that, that works great.

If...

So what's your point? I can easily reply. "That's a way to answer no question and contribute nothing not answering a Rules or advice question. Glad you took the time to type though.

Edit: And to get to the rules as written answer. It is absolutely legal. Ancient elf "Choose a class other than your own. You gain the multiclass dedication feat for that class, even though you don’t meet its level prerequisite." No dedication feat choice made. Eldritch Trickster "Choose a multiclass archetype that has a basic, expert, and master spellcasting feat. You gain that archetype's dedication feat as a bonus feat even though you don't meet its level prerequisite, though you must meet its other prerequisites" look at that. Choose a multiclass archetype not dedication feat. The choice is the multiclass archetype. Then gain the feat. In the entire stream there is not a single occurrence of choosing a "dedication feat"

The real question is it game breaking or even slightly overpowered. No it's not.

The argument that starting with 2 spell traditions is silly. An ancient elf bard, champion, cleric, druid, monk, oracle, sorcerer and witch can all start at lvl 1 with trained in all 4 traditions. Ancient elf rogue can have all 4 by 2nd lvl. All others by 3rd lvl have all 4. And that's using all pfs approved heritage/feat combination and not even slightly stretching rules.

Second argument. That's way too many skills. We are talking an elf rogue here. Ancient elf with scoundrel has all but 2 skills. Ancient elf mastermind can have every single skill. And both of these fall in the every magic tradition by 2nd lvl.

From here it's feat choices as you level. If someone did take 2 spellcasting dedications and they wanted to maximize casting. They would only get a rogue feat that was dedicated to increasing spells at 1st, 2nd and 16th lvls. That's missing out on pretty much everything to make the rogue a rogue. Plus your spell attacks and dcs. Will be lagging by 2 lvls for your 2nd casting dedication.

I can think of a ton of rogue builds vastly more powerful than any combination of ancient elf/eldritch trickster.

Eldritch Trickster is the most lacking of the rogue rackets. If someone wants to lean in on their caster, why not?

Edit: and if you're wondering how I got the elf starting with all traditions. 3 or 4 backgrounds have arcane sense as the free skill feat. If they have primal casting from their class they take share thoughts. If they have occult casting from their class they take wildborn magic. If they have divine casting dealers choice. Then pick a dedication with the last tradition. For the rogue same thing, 2nd lvl minot magic pick your missing tradition.

I think the whole racket makes no sense. I think the racket should give no skill but allow intelligence to perception. Additionally they can use sense motive against the targets reflex DC for flat footed till the start of their next turn or 1 minute on a critical.

They're analyzing movements to predict where they'll be and the best spots to strike. Recalling knowledge to identify a human wouldn't do that.

It also makes it far less clunky. Reflex DC versus perception is easy and makes sense being used every round.

Rules as written are
"Special You can’t select another dedication feat until you have gained two other feats from the wizard archetype."

Specifically it says SELECT another DEDICATION feat. In both ancientand eldritch they say "choose a class" not a dedication but a class. And then you gain and not select a dedication feat.

You might argue that it mentions you must meet prerequisites, however, draw your attention to it being a special rule not a prerequisite.

Gisher wrote:

That is then used in two independent attack checks against two different opponents.

So if, hypothetically, there was some feat that let you hit the same target twice with Swipe instead of two targets once, would you say that no longer works?

That seems to be the biggest difference between the two mechanics.

Exactly sir! Lets look at twin feint. This feat would be absolutely useless if sneak attack was only applied once.

Twin feint, two weapon flurry, dual weapon blitz, twin takedown all are multiple attacks that have no mention of apply precision to only one. So, obviously with paizo not redundantly stating rules. Sneak to the attacks is the normal and double slice is the exception. Meaning, eldritch shot would fall under the normal.