Oracle of Sunder's page

Class levels are dropped and creatures without racial HD (like humans) are treated as if they have 1 Racial HD.

The only way to have a skeleton with more than one HD is to raise a humanoid skeleton that has more than 1 Racial HD...

there are plenty of humanoid (to include monsterous humanoid) races that have that, and some of them have high strength.

so if that LV 10 fighter with 20 Str was human, yes he would be a 20str 1d8HD skeleton.

but if he was a LV10 Fighter that was a troll, he would be a 6d8HD skeleton with 21STR

I believe you miscalculated your Catfolk's point-buy...

Taking off her 4th and 8th lvl bonuses to Str and her +2cha headband leaves her: 18 14 16 14 08 16.
if I remove her Catfolk modifiers it leaves her after point-buy stats as: 18(17) 12(2) 16(10) 14(5) 10(0) 14(5).
which equals a 39pointbuy

11,12,13 each cost +1 point
14,15 cost 2 points each
16,17 cost 3 points
18,19 cost 4
etc... so going from 10 to 18 = a total of 17 points

I would buy her : 16 12 14 12 11 14.
So with bonuses she would be: 18 14 14 12 09 18

as for which to play...

without knowing your party makeup or what your GM plans to throw at you, I say play the catfolk. You have her fleshed out more and even have a plan how to role-play her. You can always flesh out the oread and play her in a different game.

Most likely because of its length. It is long enough to have brace, a special ability which is usually reserved for Polearms.

*Thread Bump*

And also, would a normal paladin, that is not wearing gauntlets, still provoke an AoO for using his fists in a swordfight, or would adding the divine bond effectively turn his fists into un-provoking melee weapons?

Remy Balster wrote:

How set are you on Gnome?

Aasimar or Elf FCB are... better.

Either way, the Tiger is the strongest choice...

W. Blake wrote:

Tiger, tiger burning bright!

...

And if you prefer a small race...Aasimar (and tieflings for that matter) have small variants. Same stats, small size. (found in sidebar in Blood of Angels and Blood of Fiends splatbooks)

Well I already have a Half-Elf Oracle, and I have a Aasimar Paladin (both built on str/dmg), but I don't have any small characters, so I figured I'd build around a small character who didn't have to worry about his strength score because he cast Blasty spells and had an Animal Comp to soak for him...

That small Aasimar looks really good though..I'll have to see which benefit I want more...

But there is no benefit where the Bear or Wolf out shine the Tiger past level 7?

The Campaign starts at Lvl 7. My character will be a gnome Lunar Oracle with the Blackened Curse. I plan on casting fire spells while my AC melee attacks.

I dont know what the party makeup will be yet, nor do i know what the GM plans to throw at us.

Im looking at the Bear, tiger or wolf, but I am still open to other Ideas. Im limited by the Lunar Oracle Companion List, and don't know if i'll be able to talk the GM into expanding it.

Thanks for any advice you can give me!

Also im looking at the Gnome Oracle Favored class bonus... Is it worth it to lose out on 7+ skills/HP to get Wall of fire 3 levels early?

Thanks again.

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Yes.

Lizardfolk is an option that would grant two claws, and a Bite.

Actually lizardfolk only grants you a bite and a single claw attack. Most likely a type but as written it's just 1 claw.

That's because he has a Morningstar in the other hand, and therefore cant use it as a claw.

Why they didn't add a shield bash then put: "or 2 Claws" like with other creatures (devils and demons for example) I don't know.

Okay so what's up with the sentence about using another limb when ur BAB goes up that ur not using? Why even put that in there if there wasn't an amount u can use then? The one that states when ur BAB gets high enough, u don't gain an extra attack, u can use another limb that u haven't used for a natural attack to attack with a natural attack?

You mean this? :

You do not receive additional natural attacks for a high base attack bonus. Instead, you receive additional attack rolls for multiple limb and body parts capable of making the attack (as noted by the race or ability that grants the attacks). If you possess only one natural attack (such as a bite—two claw attacks do not qualify), you add 1–1/2 times your Strength bonus on damage rolls made with that attack.

This is for the Limbs stuff I was talking about... One of those Clawed hands carries the sword and attacks multiple times with the high BAB, but does not get to be used as a claw.

Don't read the second "receive" as meaning that a higher BAB gets you those extra limb attacks. The "receive"s are not meant to replace one another... the writers just use the same word.

You receive additional natural attacks from actually having multiple body parts that can attack, and you receive more melee attacks from having higher a BAB.

If you had two claws, a bite, two wings, a tail? you have 6. (3 primary at full BAB, 3 secondary at BAB-5)

Two claws, a bite, two wings, a tail, and a +6 BAB? you have 6.

Two claws, a bite, two wings, a tail, and a +11 BAB? you have 6.

Two claws, a bite, two wings, a tail, and a +6 BAB with 1 claw holding a longsword? you have 7:

Longsword+6/+1 and (1)Claw, Bite, Wing, Wing, Tail all at +1 because they are now all secondary.

Above with 11BAB:
+11/+6/+1 LongSword, Rest are +6 Natural attacks.

Etc...

No.

Kill =/= Murder.

Murder is a specific type of unlawful killing.

Murder that is "legal and unpunishable" is by definition NOT murder.

Not Quite.

It is not Murder by legal terms AFTER the law is applied to it, but the act by itself before you look at it through the eyes of the law... is 'murder'.

If you want to differentiate between the Legal term 'Murder' and 'Murder' : The Evil killing of sentient life. then we can try to do that.

Superman doesn't kill Lex Luthor, Batman doesn't kill Joker, Spiderman doesn't kill Venom, this is all because there is always another option: stopping them without killing them, then trying to guide them back to the path of good. To not try that option is to not respect their right to live, and to be a Good guy you have to respect life.

Mike Franke wrote:

Even though I think this is soundly thought out and in the real world is probably the case, by RAW I do not believe killing is an evil act in Pathfinder. Otherwise it would be impossible to be a good adventurer seeing as how adventurers' main job is killing. The best you could do would be to be neutral.

In the real world "good" people turn the other cheek. In pathfinder good people kill the offender and then kill all of the offender's friends in the vicinity too as standard practice.

This is exactly right. If killing was a blatantly evil act, all of Pathfinder's would be evil since that's sort of what we do.

Its an argument that comes down to the basic fundamentals of justified killing.

If you kill your enemy on the battlefield in a time of war, you are not a murderer. If you kill in the confines of a peaceful society, youre a murderer. But what if you kill the enemy on the battlefield and you enjoy it. Still not a murderer but maybe a bit questionable. This is where my PC has gone to. I don't think its evil to enjoy killing your enemies on the battlefield. Neutral at best.

Incorrect. If you kill your enemy in a time of war you are not CHARGED with murder. But to kill is still murder. It is just legal and unpunishable. That is why people look for just causes to follow so we can justify murder in our hearts.

To continue 'Nearyn's examples:
"I killed a human" - Murder - Evil.
"I killed a human (Evil) because we were at war and our side was more humane(Good) -Neutral
"I killed a human (Evil) and I liked it (Evil)"- more Evil
"I beat the Evil doer and took his ass to jail to stand trial" - Good

Yeebin wrote:

A good character who fights to defend the weak and innocent but revels in the blood of his enemies.

I stabbed a human enemy through the sternum instantly killing him, raised my glaive above my head, yelling to the sky in a rage. While the glaive was over my head, some blood dripped off my blade and fell onto my face and into my mouth and I enjoyed it.

Is that evil?

"Is that evil?" - my favorite game :D

Character alignment allows for nuance. The alignment of acts, do not.

"I stabbed a human enemy through the sternum etc etc... for no other reason than enjoying the feeling" <- Evil

"I stabbed a human enemy through the sternum etc etc... because I was hungry, and he was food, food I needed to eat, to live" <- Neutral

"I stabbed a human enemy through the sternum etc etc... because he was a threat to these poor innocent children" <- Neutral...wait what?!

Yep, cuz killing is an evil act. If tempered with good or sufficiently neutral motives, it becomes a neutral act. But killing is never a good act :)

So? "Is that evil?" ... "Only if you don't have motivation and reason on your side"

-Nearyn

This. Exactly This.

It is Lawful Evil.

The Act of Enjoying the Killing is Evil, but then limiting that enjoyment to only 'Bad Guys' is Lawful.

The lawful evil person knows that killing is looked down upon, but forgets/doesn't-understand/doesn't-care why. If he likes killing, and he notices that people complain less when 'Bad Guys' die, then he starts to kill THEM instead so he can get away with it/pretend to be the 'Good-Guy'. He is more concerned with his enjoyment (Evil) then the fact that every life is supposed to be equal and sacred. He finds a way within the law (Lawful) to get what he wants.
(Lawful Evil in a nut shell)

Gotta have a room for Tea Parties with his imaginary friends...

A room for analysis of demons/etc. so he can research their weaknesses...

***A map room. If he doesnt already have one, then he really is crazy cus he will get lost.

Ill have to think of more later.

Favored Weapon of "Jareth" the Goblin King... Hmmm...

He liked Crystals... : Achemist Fire? Acid Flasks?

His goblins liked long pointy slashing weapons... Horse Chopper?

My favorite: Flames (so he can "set the world on fire")

He definitely has monk lvls, with infinite Ki...

BUT,

Because the gods are so powerful, I try to imagine them not as single-class 20lvl characters.

Instead each and everyone of them are 'super' mystictheurges with 20lvls of cleric 20lvls of wizard, and 20(yes 20) lvls of mystictheurge, with all spells prepared and the ability to cast them all with metamagic spontaneously.

with that as a starting point, I then think... what would separate Mystictheurge (Irori) with Mystictheurge (other god)?

Probably another 20lvls of monk atleast, and a higher-than-the-average-god Wisdom score however high a god wisdom score is... because they are not really stat-ed, and for the above reason.

Does +2 Int item stone give skill points?

Yes.
BUT, you have to put them all into the same skill. S0 a level 10 character that gets a +2 Int item has to put all 10 of those new skill points into a skill they have 0 ranks in and max it out to 10 ranks. (in PFS at least)

The idea behind this is that this way the +2 Int Item gives the Character immediate Mastery of one skill, as opposed to slightly increased proficiency spread out.

For instance: A Wizard with 0 ranks in knowledge(History) puts on the Item... 'BOOM' "I Know all the history someone of my level could possibly know"

I don't see why not. Only a magus can cast a spell and weapon attack, but that's not what you are asking...

How I read the rules for this situation: a 4th level rogue with 18Dex, 10Str, two-weapon fighting, weapon finesse, Minor magic- something, and Major magic- Chill Touch, while flanking an enemy with rapier drawn, and an empty hand could:

Round 1 (Cast spell, move, and touch)
Touch +6(Chill Touch dmg) (+2 to attack for Flanking)

Round 2 (start two weapon fighting)
Rapier +4(1d6+0) +2d6 Sneak Attack, Touch +4(Chill touch dmg)

Round 3-4 (Rinse repeat)
The flanking bonus and TWF penalty in Round 2 would cancel each other out and you would only get Sneak Attack damage on your rapier because the chill touch damage is spell damage not Precision damage from a weapon.

(The Arcane Trickster class has an ability that adds sneak attack damage to Spell damage)

Edit: Just reread your question... I'm not sure about multiple touch attacks in the same round... I think that topic has been FAQed and changed many times and there are many threads that discuss how spells like chill touch actually work. I do know though that the above way of doing it works for chill touch...

I believe there is an alternate Aasimar, that gives +2 to dex and wisdom (Plumekith aasimar). I think it also has some archery traits associated with it. Its spell like ability is see invisibility instead of daylight though... im not sure how attached you are to daylight.

for first level feat take pointblank shot for +1attack and damage when with 30ft

I cant find anything about this in the rules, but I think when awaken was cast on him, you were effectivly upgrading his elemental spirit to an elemental soul... The soul/spirit of somthing is the free will that controls it, so adding another soul would just give his body 2 masters...

I think all you need to turn the flesh golem into a humanoid is just polymorph its body.

Oracle of Sunder wrote:

The Character-making Gods of the messageboards might ask for some more information...

For example:
...
this should help them narrow down the list of characters they will throw at you.

I am not allowed to be human. So I am looking at the Nagaji race at the moment for the plus Strength and Charisma. But I am willing to change.

I am not sure what to sacrifice, but since this guy is probably going to be in the middle in fights, I probably will want to have some survivability.

This is actually an evil campaign, where all the player characters are supposed to be evil. So besides maybe fighting good creatures, I have really no idea.

There is going to be 4-5 other players. One is going to be an Arcane Trickster, an Oracle (I am not sure what he is going for, but I am certain he is not a healer), a War Master, and the other 2 are unknown.

He has not specifically stated that he is not allowing certain materials. So I am assuming everything is fair game. The only restrictions he gave us was that we have to be evil, and can't be any core race besides half-orc.

so non-core races only except half-orc...

Ive seen math that for a +6 strength mod or higher a Falcata is the best weapon to use 2handed (even beating the greatsword, which unlike the Falcata cant be used onehanded with a shield) It will burn one of your feats for EWP.

Power attack is a must as well as weapon focus and specialization in your chosen weapon. Its up to you whether you want to go reach weapon (Lucernhammer is my favorite, but fauchard is 1d10 18-20crit and has trip) combat reflexes, trip whirlwind attack... or just straight up damage and defenses for the rest of your feats.

below is a rough 20pt buy using the assimar without Magic items.
10 Str: 22 (16)+4lvls +2race
5 Dex: 14
5 Con: 14
-4 Int: 7
2 Wis: 12
2 Cha: 14 +2race

I usually prefer heavy shields when I make my Hoplite-style fighters. The Spear, large shield and short sword (or Gladius) combo is more in line with my idea of the Greek shield wall. However, It does lend to not being able to two weapon fight effectively until you throw the spear and draw the light shortsword.

You might want to take lunge (or maybe use a long spear after third level) for the flavor to hit with reach while still being able to shield bash.

With seven characters using 25 point-buy I assume you are ok trading some optimization for more Hoplite flavor...

+ 1 to all previous feat and weapon comments.

definitely get weapon focus spear and Improved shield bash at first level... I've never felt the need to take quick draw though... perhaps TWF or Weapon focus Shield Bash instead?

The Character-making Gods of the messageboards might ask for some more information...
For example:

Do you have a race preference/ preferences in general?
What are you willing to sacrifice for high amounts of damage?
what else would you want to do besides damage/ what is 2nd best thing your character does?
what creatures types do you think your gm will throw at you?
What classes will your other party members be playing?
and most important:
What source materials does your GM allow/not allow?

this should help them narrow down the list of characters they will throw at you.

I usually give a couple chakrams to my lvl 1 martial characters, especially if their primary weapon is a reach weapon.

1GP for a 1D8 slashing, 30ft range, thrown weapon that I can melee with as long as I'm wearing gauntlets? Yes, please!!

If you add high ac to those high saves no one will be able to harm you.

However, if no one can harm you, no one will want to target you.

What do you plan on doing offensivly to make the bad guys want to target you so you can make use of those good saves?

I dont think they would be constant. Items that have spell effects usually need to be activated and have durations based on the caster level, so at that price, every hour you would be reactivating the Mage Armor, and every minute be reactivating Shield.

What's your Class?

Martial classes get martial proficiency automatically. Otherwise you will have to spend a feat.

This has come up in several of the games I play in where people have started to take Leadership. Note: I’m not interested in how your group bans Leadership or how you, personally, don’t like it.

In each case there is a disagreement about whether the cohort should get an equal share of the treasure, or only get a cut from his Leader.

I understand the out of game reasons why wealth wouldn't be split evenly, one player getting two shares, etc. I can see that point of view. In game though, the cohort is his own person. He risks his life the same as the rest of the party. He may contribute as much to combat as, if not more than, other party members.

The fact that he’s the “secondary” is purely out of game mechanics. You hire the Bashem Brothers, who’s the Leader and who’s the “Cohort”.

I could see not paying the cohort if he only ever helps his Leader, but if he helps everyone, takes the same risks as everyone, takes a share of the watch like everyone, then why shouldn’t he be paid like everyone?

The problem is we are trying to use 21st century logic to solve a problem that doesn't exist in the 21st century.

If you are on your computer using this site you PROBABLY don't! in a place where slaves, servants, cohorts or or other people who have different rights exist.

We used to have these things, but we decided that it was unfair of us to treat them so poorly, so we got rid of them.

Pathfinder is reminiscent of a time when slaves and cohorts existed and these people did not have equal rights. Cohorts in particular (for lack of a better term) 'enslaved' themselves to you of their own free will in order to bask in your leadership and receive whatever gifts you decided to throw them.

Viable Yes. Will he be better than a straight up fighter archer? No, but only because he has less feats and needs to spend standard actions to buff himself before he starts to shoot.

Have Erastil as your deity, then take the feat where you use your wisdom modifier for attacks with your deity favored weapon. This allows you to ignore the archers need for dex.

Depending on races allowed you could then be an Oread or dwarf for a higher wisdom, or human if you feel you need that extra feat.

Are you looking to play an archer made out of a cleric? Or more of a cleric who uses a bow?

what spell allows you to create platinum?

Major Creation. Sorc/Wizard 5

1. Make 9 cubic feet of platinum. (1ft/lvl),
2. Buy everything you want.
3. Run like hell before 3hours runs out. (20min/lvl)

Actually, the effects of the Curse are based off of Character Level, not Class Level.

True, but if your character takes a level in a class other than oracle it only counts as 1/2.

so a Ranger 2/Oracle 4 has the curse of a 5th level oracle, instead of a 6th level character.

so it's up to the DM to decide then?

I see it like this: you draw the blades out of the quarterstaff and have a pair of swords (plus a scabbard).

reminds me of the movie with that blind guy that fights with a concealed katana :p

I think that Bald Guy who was the leader of the 'Crazy 88' gang from 'Kill Bill' #1 fights with a double walking stick Katana.

zylphryx, while yes, the bonus may be limited in some ways, it's still a +1 enhancement bonus.

Also, you're right about armor. Masterwork armor does not provide any sort of enhancement but masterwork weapons do.

yes, but masterwork gives a +1 enhancement bonus to attack rolls only it is not the same as the so-named "+1 enhancement bonus" that you magically add to a weapon for 2000gp.

I agree the writers could have been more clear in their distinction between the two, but they are fantasy writers, not lawyers...

I cant actually prove you are wrong per RAW (especially without my book on me), but the intent has always been to have everyone make their weapons magic first, and then add magic properties to your now magic weapon.

cartmanbeck wrote:

There is a difference between having one "natural attack" and one "natural weapon". A natural attack is made with a natural weapon. A creature that has a single natural weapon (such as a single slam attack) would still get the 1.5x damage if they got an extra attack with that weapon from Haste. Does that answer your question?

It would, if the rule was about natural weapons. However, the 1-1/2 STR modifier ist mentioned at at least twice in the rules. Once in the Combat Rules in the CRB and once in he Universal Monster Rules in the Bestiary. Both only mention the exception for creatures with one natural attack.

Don't get me wrong, I think the 1-1/2 bonus applies in these situations, too. I just don't think it's backed by the rules.

Also, a Tyrannosaurus Animal Companion with Haste and 3 attacks, each with twice its Str-Bonus to damage, sounds interesting :D

I don't think "Cartmanbeck" meant that the two rules you mentioned attually stated "one natural weapon" instead of "one natural attack", because you are right and they dont... I think he was trying to explain the difference between having "one natural attack" and having "one natural attack"... which is confusing...

For example:
A Boar has one type of natural attack called a 'Gore'. A human skeleton also only has one type of natural attack, but has (2) claws to make it with.

If they Full attack, the Boar gets (1) 'gore' attack at 1.5xStr dmg to his attack. The skeleton gets (2) claw attacks at 1xStr dmg.

If they use a standard action to attack the Boar still gets his one attack at 1.5xStr dmg, but the Skeleton that has (2) claw natural attacks still only gets 1xStr dmg to his (1) claw attack that round.

So the number of actual attacks they get in a round doesnt matter... as creatures they still have the same number of attacks regardless of how many they use that round.

So you cast "Haste" on both of them the skeleton would get (3) claw attacks each at 1xStr dmg, and the boar would get (2) gore attacks at 1.5xStr to each.

Hope this helps.

Something that will do much damage in melee. the party I am going into has a lack of melee fighter types.

Even if you are only using the core rule book there are several melee roles your fighter can fill.

1. If you only care about dmg, a high strenth "two-handed" build can put out the most dmg consistantly. Go Earthbreaker, Dwarven Dorn Drugar (awesome dwarf weapon btw), or other highdamage/high crit weapon.

2. If by "lack of" you mean your party has zero melee besides you, I might want to focus more "Sword and Board" and be the wall between the enemy and the rest of your party while wielding a Waraxe and Tower Shield.

This build would focus less on dmg but more on staying alive so you can keep the party alive. (You can also still move-action drop the Shield and twohand the waraxe when necessary.)

3. If you arent the only guy who can melee you could also go the two-weapon-fighting route and flank with the other 'melee' guy to ensure both your strikes hit.

This build pumps a little more into Dex/Int than the other builds to ensure you can control the bad guys better with trips/disarms. You can still shieldbash with a Light Shield in your off hand weapon with this build if you want more AC.

What works will depends on your party makeup but more so on what you think you will have fun playing.

If you are still unsure at first level, it pays to stay flexible. Use a weapon you can use in one or two hands, grab a shield and make sure you have a ranged weapon. (at the very least grab a sling, they are free!!)

Enforcer, Dazzling Display, and Shatter Defenses stand out, but are there more?

If your strength is high enough: Intimidating Prowess.

If it is less than +3 though Skill focus Intimidate is better.

Pan wrote:

How does he meet the other PCs? What would motivate him to help them? kind of what I would like to know.

I haven't technically introduced him yet (at least not in-game), but the party has just had their butts handed to them by a huge air elemental while trying to cross a high bridge and infiltrate a castle.

I was planning on having him meet the remaining survivors as they flee from the site. Just a random traveling priest who briefly witnessed their ill fortune and wanted to help. He offers them free healing in the form of potions to get them back on their feet in exchange for learning about why they were trying to infiltrate the castle. Once he learns of their good intentions, he encourages them to try again, even offering to help.

In truth, he cares little for the PCs or their fate. He's hoping their own foolishness will get them killed leaving him free to take all their obviously powerful magical gear. Alternatively, he and his new companions succeed in their quest. His new friends would be practically obligated to share the spoils with him, especially after he performed those expensive burial rituals over their deceased companions...

Even if it all falls apart and he is forced to retreat with everyone else, he has powerful new allies who owe him a favor.

Either way, it's win win for him, unless he gets killed too, but such is the life of an adventurer with nothing else to lose I guess.

The actions you take are important when it comes to alignment, but so are the motivations behind them.

For example: If your party members die, what would he want to do with their gear and What is the reason behing it?

Option A:
"Comrades. you have fallen. You shall be buried with your gear in an honorable fashion."
Or- "Your gear shall be kept safe, I shall use it to Avenge you and Honor your great sacrifice."

Option B:
"Dont worry, Ill take your gear. It doesnt make any sense not to put your gear to good use, its not like you can still use it, and if I happen to find one of your family members Ill give it to them... if they ask about it/ I remember it."

Option C:
"I hope you die. I need that gear. I Cant wait til something kills you so I can use it"

Notice the shift in thinking from careing about the group: "you, you, you" to caring only about your self: "I, I, I." That is essentially the difference between good and evil. A is obviously "Good", B is "Neutral", and C "Evil".

If your character is turned off by the wicked deeds he sees his religion performing against others, he probably wouldnt wish harm on his allies, and should have an interest in their survival. He might be reluctant if their survival cost him something, but shouldnt wish them outright harm.

Let us simplify this: Redward, do you agree that the following options for Double Weapons exist?

Double Weapon options:
A) May make attacks with both ends as per two weapon fighting.
B) May make attacks with one end as per two-handed fighting.
C) A medium creature using either a small two-handed double weapon may make attacks with one end as per one-handed fighting.

CRB p141 wrote:

The character can also choose to use a double weapon two-handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can’t use it as a double weapon—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.

Option A is normal usage.

Option B is the first bolding.
Option C is the second bolding.

If you agree the options for double weapons exist then we can proceed to whether or not those options apply to the Meteor Hammer.

** spoiler omitted **

- Gauss

The Meteor mode option was poorly written, but I think we can all agree that RAI:

1. In Fortress mode you hold the Meteor Hammer with two hands to attack with one end. You hold it as you would a two handed reach weapon, with one hand near the middle of the weapon and one hand close to the butt of the weapon. This allows you to use your main hand to attack with reach and allows your off-hand near the "butt" of the weapon to be used as if you were holding a buckler/small shield (thus the +1 to AC).

2. In meteor mode you hold the Meteor Hammer as you would any other double weapon to two weapon fight with it. (At two points equal distance from the center, allowing you to hit with each end like you would a Dire Flail)

You may use this weapon in two different ways:
Meteor: In meteor mode you use it as a double weapon.
Fortress: In fortress mode you cannot use it as a double weapon but gain reach and a +1 shield bonus to AC.

I believe the intent of the "Meteor" mode passage is to say that you can two weapon fight with it, because if you look at "Fortress" mode it is already your "Option B" way of using it, so "Meteor" mode would be "Option A".

The way I see it if you use Jotungrip with two Meteor Hammers you would have to have both in "Fortress" mode (double weapon "Option B") because you cannot TWF (double weapon "option A" AKA "Meteor" mode) with both ends of the same Meteor Hammer if you hold it in one hand.

Edit: now that I read this I begin to see RAW "Option C": if you are medium, you hold a small sized Meteor Hammer wrapped around one hand. It is now a one handed weapon w/o reach and w/o the +1 AC. If you add Jotungrip it is now medium weapon w/o reach ect.. held in one hand to attack adjacent targets. You could then Jotungrip the other whole Meteor Hammer in "Fortress" mode to attack at reach. (Though to use both in the same round you would still take the TWF penalty)

(The above option looks very similar to how a Dwarf with Dwarven Dorn Dergor Master would TWF while holding and a light shield and a Dwarven Dorn-Dergor.)

I didnt know wizards could use bucklers. I never thought to look.

Whats a "dino familiar"?

There is a "Composaurus?" (I forget how it is spelled) in Beastiary 2 off the top of my head I think it is page 91? It has a poisonous Bite and it gives you +4 to your inititive, but I believe it requires you to have the improved familiar feat.

Nice!! Saving this!!

Why are you trying to add "realism" to a fantasy game? I hope that works for you!

One has to attempt to make the game real. "Real" is the one base line we can all agree on when arguments arise.

Even though it is fantasy, the fantasy has to be believable, if not your mind will keep trying to wake you up from it and you will lose interest.

See my edit above, but yes, one has to treat both the Melee part and the range part of the weapon separatly for the purpose of encantments for balance reasons.

A two weapon fighter has to enchant both of the weapons he uses, a person using a double weapon has to enchant both ends of his double weapon, so I can easily follow the rule saying someone who buys a weapon that has a dedicated part for ranged attacks and a part for melee attacks having to enchant both of those parts even if he cant two weapon fight with them yet.

I believe there is a feat in Ultimate Combat that allows you to "two weapon fight" while wielding a ranged weapon in one hand and a melee weapon in the other. I belive it is called "sword and pistol."
The feat does not however, allow you to treat all the weapons you listed above as double weapons.
"Two Weapon Fighting" stipulates that each attack must come from a different hand so though you might be able to argue that you use non sling end of the sling staff to hit in melee, the 2 muskets you mentioned have their melee ends on the same end as the end that fires bullets.
For example a Halbred has a hammer head, Axe head and a spear head, but you are only allowed one attack because they are all on the same end. A double axe on the other hand only has 2 axe heads but is a double weapon because both heads are on opposite ends of the weapon.

The sling staff says you treat it as a Club of its size when you melee with it making it a one handed weapon... but if I were your GM I would allow you to use the choke up ability the polearm fighter has to use it as a double weapon. Other wise I would have you wield a sling staff in each hand to two weapon fight.

Edit:

Come to think of it though...

As long as the Musket axe is a two-handed ranged weapon...it would mean you pull the trigger with one hand while the other hand holds the end that has the Axe head. In my mind this would make it work like a double weapon while using "Sword and Pistol"... So I would allow it.

I believe the rules call for all the casters to rest for 8 hours, then the prepared casters have to spend 1 additional hour preping thier spells. I however do not have my book in front of me...so I might be wrong.

EDIT: I also recall something saying you can only regain spells once per day.

The clear spindle IOUN stone, when put into a Wayfinder, protects you against being posessed as well as other mind effects. I believe it only cost 2000GP plus the 500 for the wayfinder.

It is the perfect gift for any weak willed figher type you wouldnt want murdering his own party members!!

as for getting him unpossessed...well...i cant think of anything but, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

wouldnt it have a hardness of 22, because adamantine has a hardness of 20 and the +1 adds another 2?

or are you saying that because the battle axe is half wood its weakest part (and therefore the only part you need to sunder) has a hardness of 5 that you add the +2 to, to make it 7?

Edit Ninja'd

Ok, we're looking at:

Deep walker ranger archtype - doesn't gain anything for xbow, but is very thematically appropriate.

Light crossbow and rapid reload.

Feats at 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11: Rapid reload, point blank shot, rapid shot, crossbow mastery, weapon focus: heavy crossbow, many shot.
Ranger feats at 2, 6, and 10: Precise Shot, Improved Precise Shot, and many shot

Are prone shooter or the snap shot chain worth it?

(Vuvu not ignoring you, just don't know much about the inquisitor. I will have to readup on that.)

Point blank master is ok and only requires Weapon spec.

If you have a Int of at least 14 I would take Focused shot.

So for feats: weapon focus, Focused shot, precise shot, IPS, Crossbow mastery, rapid reload, rapidshot, manyshot,

1: deadly Aim
2R: Precise shot
3: Rapid reload
5: X
6R: IPS
7:SnapShot
9:X
11:X
fill in x's with what you want.

Whenever I make a character, I usually buy my own version of a "be prepared" kit (backpack, flint & steel, grappling hook, rope, etc.) It would save me time if you could create a "Preparedness Pack" that already includes the most commonly used mundane items that adventurers are likely to need. Then the GM would know off-hand what's in that pack without the player having to list it all on their character sheet. This would speed-up character creation somewhat.

I know there's something like this in the form of the various kits in the Pathfinder Society Field Guide, but those are specialized for a particular environment (mountain climbing, etc.) instead of a generalized pack.

Another thing that would be useful is an aspergillum so that clerics can have a device to use holy water as a splash weapon when needed. The device could have a rotating top to it so that it doubles as a mace.

an aspergillum different from the one in the APG??

It is not awesome but it is in there.

"Prerequisites: Proficiency with selected weapon, Weapon Focus with selected weapon, fighter level 4th." The Fighter level 4th is what is sticking out to us.

This has been brought up before. I forget which thread, but the result was that the Samuri lvls do count as Fighter lvls for that purpose and you do not need to take a lvl of fighter to take those feats.

...
As for the other swords, I'd only really started in on the theme behind the swords and have only poked around into their design as RL has ever been my nemesis. Now, Envy makes me think of Jealousy and people praising the sword for it's beauty, skill, etc. etc.. So I thought of the Fascination Aura which would allow the wielder to walk down the street and have the people fall to their knees in praise of Tannaris and her (yes, her) bearer. However, Belimarius was an Abjurer, so now I have to poke around into good Abjuration abilities for the sword, first, before going on from there. However none of the Abjurations have really struck my fancy, so nothing concrete on this sword.
...

If it helps... the difference between Jealousy and Envy is ownership of the thing in question.

This begs the question for Tannaris: does she cause other people to be envious of her? Or is the sword itself envious of others?

For instance have you thought of having the sword steal the abilities of the people it strikes?

So if someone with fire resist 5 or haste fights her, upon a successful hit, she takes that ability/spell away from them and gives it to the wielder, because "it looks better on you anyway" and "you deserve it more"

OR

if the sword is envious of other weapons it could steal thier powers and give them to itself... so fighting someone with a flameburst sword would give Tannaris the flameburst quality.

An Envious person is so because they are insecure with what they have, so having the "Sword of ENVY" mimic and even steal the abilities (especially abjuration powered defensive abilities) of those around her to cover what she thinks she lacks seems to fit the bill, at least in my mind.