Martial artist monk is solid, but I like taking a one or two level dip into full BAB classes (ranger, bloodrager or fighter) to make it even better. This may not be possible in your campaign.
You will want to keep STR up and perhaps wield a two-handed weapon or a one-handed weapon in two hands for damage (weapons with the monk special ability). Power attack and furious focus are two feats to seriously consider with martial artist monk.
The other thing with martial artist monk is to keep WIS up there to take as much advantage of Exploit Weakness as possible. Exploit Weakness is the signature ability of the Martial Artist monk but does not scale well with CR.
A quinggong monk is an archetype of the chained monk. The unchained monk cannot take the quinggong archetype, although many of the abilities of the unchained monk mirror the quinggong abilities.
The Sacred Fist is an archetype of the warpriest.
I think the Sacred Fist warpriest is more useful to the party because of the ability to cast divine spells. The sacred Fist warpriest may not be quite as an effective combatant as the unchained monk, especially without the time to buff, but the support capabilities are more valuable to the party, especially if the party is heavy on other martial.
As always, party composition dictates the usefulness of another character.
"Monks are proficient with the club, crossbow (light or heavy), dagger, handaxe, javelin, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, short sword, shortspear, shuriken, siangham, sling, spear, and any weapon with the monk special weapon quality."
Since a "monk weapon" that has received a Weapon Modification is still a weapon with the monk special weapon quality, Unchained Monks are still proficient with them.
I suspect that the reason for "you cannot use a style feat before combat begins" is to prevent characters from walking around "in style" 24/7, which would be a bit ludicrous. However, the feat itself provides a loophole "the style you are in persists until you spend a swift action to switch to a different combat style", which could mean that once you have entered combat and used the style for the first time, the style persists forever, or until you switch styles.
The above is all word games. I would think it reasonable to rule that a character can enter the style to do something dangerous, but leaves the style automatically when the danger is passed so cannot keep it up 24/7.
I played AD&D from 1980 to 1986. I have been playing Pathfinder edition 1 from 2013 to present. I have been playing D&D 5e from 2017 to present. My experience has been that I enjoyed playing AD&D and enjoy playing D&D 5ed more than I enjoy playing Pathfinder, but I enjoy building characters in Pathfinder more than building characters in either AD&D or D&D 5e. I don't know whether others have experienced this, but that is my experience.
Here is an outline of a build to 10th level.
Forget normal arrows and buy cold iron arrows routinely (5gp for 50)
1st level ranger
2nd level ranger
3rd level ranger
4th level ranger
5th level ranger
6th level ranger
7th level ranger
8th level ranger
9th level ranger
10th level ranger
I would think that any creature perceiving you would get a will save at the outset. For creatures that fail the save, for the duration of the spell the caster gains the benefit of the spell against those creatures. For creatures that made the save, those creatures would both be unaffected by the spell and know that a spell from the caster tried to influence them, even if they do not know what the spell was.
Brother Fen wrote:
30' of movement should get you to the top of the cliff. With climbing rules you move either quarter speed or half speed depending on the success of the roll. You should have to spend that extra 5' to move into the square at the top - be it part of a full movement or a five foot step.
I can see why someone would come to this conclusion, but it would imply that the 30th foot (6th square) of movement is standing in empty space next to the cliff top before moving the 35th foot (7th square) to stand on the cliff. I think of the movement between the 25th foot (5th square) and the 30th foot (6th square) as being up on the diagonal as the person climbs the last 5 feet (1 square) over the top of the cliff.
Nothing in the CRB explains the situation clearly but I have always ruled that the if a cliff is 30 feet high and the character has a 30 foot movement rate it takes 4 move actions to get to and stand at the top of the cliff (or 2 move actions if fast climbing).
I rationalize this by saying it takes 25 feet of climbing to get the character's hands on the top of the cliff and then another 5 feet to climb over the edge to stand on the top of the cliff.
Golarion has spaceships, guns, androids, robots and an assortment of other tech that are essentially the same as magical effects.
In essence, the game rules are what they are and under the game rules the grease that is produced with the Grease spell is not flammable. If a GM wants a 'realistic' explanation for that, fluorinated grease is as good as any.
In my experience, if the inter-character conflict is at the level of greed or preventing another character from reaching a personal goal, it almost always leads to PvP or at least bad feelings between players.
However, if the characters are disagreeing over deep philosophies, religions or other in-game metaphysical questions that do not impact directly on the practical goals of the characters, even when things get heated there is less likelihood of degenerating into PvP. Finding something that the characters can disagree over without impacting each character's immediate practical goals can be difficult sometimes.
For me, the most important game flavor is the struggle. I like low magic games, where every magic item has meaning, uniqueness AND relevance to the PCs build, which help with the struggle.
The second most important game flavor is the awe. To achieve awe, magic cannot be commonplace. Magic users should be awesome when they cast, doing something that cannot be done otherwise, BUT on a limited basis and without dominating the game.
The third most important game flavor is the ability of apparently inconsequential characters to make a difference. I like the idea of everyone having a special, unique ability that sets them apart and is crucial for success in some circumstances.
I think the weapon list should look like this:
Flavor as desired.
For me, the biggest reason for a no-replay rule is this. If I am new to the scenario and the majority of the players at the table are not, all the fun us killed. Either the re-players kill the fun because they know what is coming up and act appropriately to overcome the problem, or they kill the fun by not metagaming and placing the entire burden on solving the next encounter on my character.
The following is my view.
Chronicle Sheets and the process for filling out Chronicle Sheets should not be tailored for Lodges having problems with players who are cheaters or who are incapable of doing math. Chronicle Sheets should simply list the rewards a character receives for a scenario.
A GM should be able to fill out the Chronicle Sheet once and simply hand it to the player without having to revisit the Sheet. Further, the next GM should not have to bother with Chronicle Sheets from the player's previous scenarios, unless the GM wants to do an audit.
The Chronicle Sheet should, imo, have the following information which the GM can fill out and then give to the player at the end of the scenario.
Official tracking of item buying should be done away with entirely, either on Chronicles or ITS's. Players should be allowed to do that offline without needing GM sign off. If a GM wants to audit a character then the GM can request Chronicle Sheets and the Character Sheet to determine if the Chronicle Sheets and the Character Sheets align.
When I GM, I have zero interest in policing cheaters or math incompetents. If a character seems way out of line to the point of sucking the fun away from other players, I will do an audit. One reason I do not GM a lot in PFS is the Chronicle Sheet requirement.
Chronicle Sheet process should be simple for both the GM and player, providing flexibility for the player to think about character development between games without having to take GM time to sign off on stuff.
I agree with Fadrieldur. Organized play is based on trust. Trying to catch cheaters or math incompetents with make-work rules only angers the trustworthy.
In PFS you will be short range a lot, very much a lot. Therefore, "sniping" is not a great option. However, a 5th musket master gunslinger with 5 levels of rogue and 1 level of sorcerer can be very effective with a view to using the 1st round of combat to 'get in the sneak attack' and then simply contributing decent damage after that. I wouldn't be concerned about 1 shot kills, because PFS is centered around party, not one gal running around and one-shooting everything. This is what I suggest:
Gun: Double hackbut
You will need to invest skill ranks in climb (for monkey style) and stealth (for that 1st shot sneak attack).
Dipping 1 level unchained monk gets improved unarmed strike without sacrificing BAB, but dipping 1 level Master of Many Styles monk gets the monkey style without sacrificing a character feat.
The sorcerer gets you true strike (and some useful utility spells at the expense of +1 BAB).
If you are willing to forego the sneak attack damage, then levels of fighter gets more feats (could be devastating strike, improved critical, weapon specialization, point blank master), or levels of ranger gets more skill points and a few extra feats (Guide archetype gets bonuses to hit and damage on focussed targets as a swift action).
The double hackbut used without the carriage takes a -4 on attack rolls and lands you on your butt, but at 50' range the attack is a touch attack and at longer range you can spend a grit to make it a touch attack.
The breaking of verisimilitude in respect of breaking down doors and the like is highly dependent on the players' and GM's conception of the game. For example, would a martial artist monk with exploit weakness be allowed to shoot down a steel door with a bow or tunnel through solid rock with his bare hands? Under the rules, it should be allowed, though it may take some time. But what the group wants may be different.
My advice as others have stated is talk to the players and see what level of verisimilitude they want.
Attacks of Opportunity is a section described in the CRB on page 180 before the section on Actions in Combat. I would say that an AOO is not an action, and therefore what you describe is legitimate.
However, a 5-ft step is also a no action, so the sorcerer may be able to 5-ft step away after your character's dimension door to get out of range of the AOO.