Valrydus's page

Thanks,

I am glad to know others find these mid-higher level games kindve difficult to run. My players love being more powerful but I find I enjoy my higher level characters less.

I will definitely look in on the troop mechanic, that could be a very interesting way to make a large number of weaker enemies into a ifferent kind of threat.

I also like the idea of the self flanking, I doubt my players will care so stringently about the nitty gritty rules there.

Thanks all

Hey everyone,

I am running a homebrew and I have run into the following real problem: my main group of PCs is in the 10-12 range and are quite powerful but the way my world works does not really lend well to the “there is always something bigger and badder” approach. That being said obviously the BBEG is clearly bigger and badder as are his immediate underlings but it means that the various other factions in the world and NPCs/monsters are generally not a challenge for the party. The world is a lower fantasy world (which means high level magic is really messing with me now ha) and so I am trying to use more Mundane enemies and issues to push the story forward.

Right now my PCs have split into two groups to solve two problems:

The higher level group is about to go to a town that has been overrun by cultists of the dead god that the BBEG serves and is trying to restore to life. The town is in a dangerous wooded area and was home to about 2000 people before being completely overrun by scores of these dangerous cultists. Most of the people have been killed or run out and the cultists are now using it as a place to plan and execute additional offensives from. The head cultist in this town is likely a 6-7th level character (powerful but individually not high up in the hierarchy nor powerful enough to challenge those higher ranking people) and the regular rank and file are 2nd to 3rd level. This job is being undertaken by the 10-12th level characters and my concern is two fold: 1) they will get straight up murdered by the party because of big offensive magics and level disparity and 2) in the alternative the fight will be a massive slog in which the party comes out ahead for the same reasons but takes forever because of the simply massive number of participants needed to make it dangerous.

The lower level party (5) is headed to the home of a company of hobgoblins to slay its general (who is allied with the cultists and has actively sought to assassinate a hobgoblin allied with the party) and install an ally (the other hobgoblin) as the new general. The general is probably 7-9th level and is a martial class. His head advisor is a poison-happy alchemist of 7th level. The party is 6 people all between 4-6th level. I really do not want this to devolve into a massive slog where they move through essentially a city’s worth of hobgoblins, nor do I want it to devolve into a “stealth and assassinate” in the general’s chambers. The sheer number of PCs will make this fight very one-sided without adding either a ton of mooks to absorb actions or something else to help slow the party down. I was thinking of having the general be essentially unkillable (as in infinite HP) until a nearby altar to the dead god is destroyed....or something.

Does anyone have any advice for making less individually powerful people/monsters/etc a challenge without having to simply stack levels? Any interesting ideas for making the encounter more complicated from an action economy standpoint? Hoping someone else out there has dealt with the fact that sometimes lower level enemies are still the ones you need to deal with first in order to later deal with the BBEG but without just rolling up and murdering them with ease and without any fun.

Thanks all and sorry for the dense post.

So I am about to start a game this weekend. I do not have all the details from my players yet (names, etc) but I have class/race/archtype/and some misc.

1) Human bard (arrowsong minstrel) [friends and enemies gives her a horse and she is planning on being a mounted archer.] Sandpoint local, mid 20s. *I allowed the archetype to give her short bow prof rather than long bow.

2) Aasimar paladin (divine guardian and another archtype) [has a story involving being recruited into an extraplanar army as a young man but screwing it up and being shunted back to the material plane. While with outsiders he picked up special training that allows him to bash with a tower shield. I told him i'd allow it if using both hands. It will be interesting...] Been in Sandpoint for a few years, mid 30s from what I have gathered.

3) Aasimar fighter (brawler). Dual wielding. Standpoint local. Grew up in the streets. [dont know much more at this point because the player is probably already in the middle of rebuilding him...just can't make a decision]

4) Human witch (sea witch). [Apparently wants to multi class into kraken caller druid. I explained how rough that can be for a caster. Apparently wants an octopus...I explained this was not a sea adventure....whatever...] Young, late teens. Apparently a pseudo sister to the paladin. A runaway from either magnimar or riddle port. Player deciding.

I do not know how likely this will be to work, ha. Worst part is everyone is a lawyer so here we go.

Hey everyone.

I have a session I'm running tomorrow that includes an alchemist that summons elementals (forget the archetype off the top of my head). I have already had the party fight some fire elementals but I wanted something a bit more unique so I decided on magma.

I am quite attached to the lava puddle ability and I love to use little details in the game because some of my players really like to craft or otherwise accumulate interesting items, etc. I have been flipping through the various rules pages and I cannot see anything that states that the 2ish inch deep pile of cooled lava would be sent back to the elemental plane of fire/earth with the elemental that spat it up when the spell effect ends.

I would love to essentially allow my characters to have a free "block" of what I would treat as obsidian after the fight. They may not care but it could be really interesting for those interested.

I know that I can do this no matter what as gm but at this point I'm just curious to know if I am right that nothing in RAW forbids it.

Thanks all

sneak attack.

evil cleric/rogues with channel negative energy get quite a boost. You don't suffer as much from multi-classing (unless I fundamentally misunderstand rays)

Thanks. I think I make use of some of that for sure.

I suppose the big thing story wise here is that the players do not want to kill all the orcs, they want their oracle to be able to attempt to assume control. (he should be able to manage)

As a result I was thinking of having orc casualties correspond to the difficulty of the diplomacy needed to convince them of his legitimacy.

Since they do not want to kill all of the orcs it will make the fight more interesting since the Magus essentially throws fireballs all day typically, and such spells would be less than ideal.

I think I'm most interested in just having it be clear that the orcs were there and were part of the fight, even if that means occasionally roll and have the players take some nominal amount of damage to show they can't block/dodge every attack. What I don't want to do is exactly what you mentioned, i.e. making every roll and slowing it all down.

There are no mercenaries nearby, and in fact the party has access to teleport at CL 12 only...so they are limited to the main party and bringing the elemental in a portable hole. Their only way to escape safely, should they need it, is to be near the arcanist when the return teleport goes off. This can be super dangerous; they either win or suffer.

The orc camp is hundreds of miles from their HQ.

Thanks again

Hey everyone,

So I run a game in my own home brew world revolving around the acts of a cult of an old dead god trying to restore him to the realm (blah blah blah, really ha)

Long story short the party is quite powerful (lvls 10 and 11 at the moment) an they are about to fight a legit-powerful group of cultists for the first time. They have fought some lower level followers and some mid level cultists (but they were under geared due to the circumstances).

The party:
1) lvl 11 magus (few levels of evangelist)
2) lvl 11 inquisitor
3) lvl 10 oracle (and a cohort that is a fire elemental barbarian)
4) my npc: a lvl 11 arcanist

This next fight is with a number of baddies:
1) lvl 11 cleric
2) 4 lvl 7 inquisitors
3) a lvl 13 summoner (synthesist) [who will not stay the entire time...he is intended to get away]
4) the difficult part.....hundreds of orcs

Here is the set up: So the orc leader (the summoner) has converted to the faith of the evil god, and has turned a large number of his followers. The oracle was a member of this clan in the past and seeks to free it from the rule of this new leader. The party has scryed on the camp and will be teleporting in to confront these cultists. I want to be able to challenge the party (which frankly is quite powerful). I may need to boost the inquisitors a bit, but really what I need advice on is how to use the orcs. There are hundreds of orcs and while they would all die in one decent fireball they would still fight.

What can I do with them that would avoid ridiculous numbers of die rolls (and quite frankly misses)? Has anyone tried to handle these mass fights? I am relatively familiar with the mass combat rules, but I cannot for the life of me remember how they interact with individual actors rather than other armies.

Let me know if any context is needed, but I just want to make sure the presence of a literal army is not ignored in this situation.

Thanks

Hmm good to know.

Thanks.

I haven't actually looked at all the potential uses, in fact I pretty much skimmed looking for those feats that my current fighters have.

I suppose it is a fair criticism that all it does is make fighters a bit better at fighting but doesn't address their out of combat concerns (like lack of skills).

Ill look through again and see if anything can be addressed.

Hello everyone.

I may be a bit late to the party with this, but I was wondering if anyone has taken the "advice" of the Unchained book and given this feat/system to Fighters for free and used it as a fighter mechanic.

If so have you noticed any effects? good? bad?

I am considering doing it, as a way to give fighters, only, that scaling ability that could really help to define them.

Any advice?

I am hoping this is properly in the advice thread, rather than rules. I am less concerned about how it works mechanically and more about the effects on the game/party.

Ya you mention some concerns that I had too. I don't want to essentially create a way for one player to have way more access to wealth than the others.

It also is a massive time sink for the party. I mean the party fought 3 sea drakes from the deck of a ship the other week and this player made sure all three were brought aboard afterward (had to use fly and the help of ropes) to be skinned and plucked of all useful parts.

I told him it took hours....which since they had weeks left at sea was NBD, but there were also dozens of others aboard and the captain was less than pleased with the presence of 3 large monstrous creatures aboard.

I have already given the party (through home rules) the ability to disenchant magic items....back down to masterwork quality and store the magical energy in gems.....through use of some formulas. I do think that having these components makes the ability to craft more interesting and adds something to it flavor wise, but coming up with values is difficult.

Do you think the following may assist this?

1) You must use full crafting cost if going into crafting with no external sources.
2) Bringing rare materials or other components reduces the effective cost of crafting by 20%. This way it is substantial, but not a free means of constant resources. To be fair the problem with this approach is that it doesn't help to determine when materials are depleted.

This is more difficult than I expected.

So one of my players is a Magus with item carting feats. He is our power player: leadership; crafting; kindve a know it all, etc.

He did pose one interesting question however. So I have not been giving a lot of magic items, and those they find are actually gear of those they slay. As a result he is in need of lots of non magical things for crafting. This makes some sense to me, especially since many of the types of items he has been collecting are otherwise perfect spell components or metamagic components.

The items he has include the following: Drake Eyes/tongue/teeth/glands; minerals; hides of various beasts; blood from magical beasts; as well as some plant parts and stuff that would otherwise be used to craft poisons, etc.

He has compiled an algorithm for the purposes of calculating crafting value based on the CR of the creature and the rolls (knowledge; survival; profession ("witched" [for lack of a better term]) that the person makes for collecting. I have not read all that he has compiled, and I know that he will use these in his own game regardless of whether I use them.

What I am wondering is, has anyone out there found some way to give value to things that are not themselves magical (at least not traditionally) for those crafters in their PC groups?

What advice would you have?

Interesting. I don't really see the difference between gauntlets and spiked gauntlets realistically as a means to get around attacks of opportunity, lol, but if thats the rule its the rule. All I can see is a difference in damage die and damage type. Hmm a home rule may be in store here.

I had seen that faq before, but I appreciate your linking it.

I personally am not a fan of it, you can essentially take catch off guard and use any weapon as an improvised weapon. I like that it allows one to essentially pommel-strike their opponents, but I think its too easily exploited.

I think punching with gauntlets is more interesting (also the look on a player's face, heh)

ok.

Gauntlets allow one to deal lethal damage with unarmed attacks. Such attacks are still treated as unarmed.

If I am reading this right...this means that you would still provoke an attack of opportunity without the "improved unarmed strike" feat, correct?

I think at some point I was under the impression that gauntlets essentially removed the need for the feat (at the expense of hand dexterity....for ranged weapons, locks, casting, climbing, etc).

In a related, but less strictly rules related, question does anyone feel that this would be broken?

I would assume personally that part of the reason we provoke AoOs with unarmed attacks is because we would hurt ourselves and would thus be more cautious. Gauntlets would definitely mitigate this to some extent.

I like the idea of the longspear wielder still being able to punch those that get within 10 feet.

thoughts?

I managed to completely forget about Coup De Grace's being full round actions without a feat.

Thank you for reminding me.

With a feat it is helpful for coup de grace. Ha.

Im sorry. I actually had to wonder for a few minutes about whether to post this under advice or rules.

I suppose this is the thought process: "I saw this as a hybrid question. Advice always seemed more about RP and simple build-design. I saw this more as a question about how the rules interact. Its a fair criticism and I understand that it would have been at home in advice as well."

As an ex-post facto validation: Can I assume that the rule does, in fact, work as I have portrayed it? Or is anyone aware of something that gets in the way of 'I see him wiggling his fingers...ergo he is casting.....thus my readied action is triggered' ?

So my rogue will be 9th level soon and is a crossbow user (driver archetype for shooting on the move). He is also a bookish rogue (see feat) with a knowledge of magic. He is well aware, with that knowledge and an 18 int, that concentration is a very important aspect of spell casting.

That being said, I enjoy readying actions to shoot when I see casting (sometimes this means I need to make a spell craft to distinguish casting from not casting).

My question is this:

"Since I am almost 9th level I am considering taking vital strike as my feat. I use a light crossbow. What do we all think about the extra D8 damage for the purposes of forcing concentration checks for dealing damage."

The idea would be to hide (invisibility, stealth, etc) and crowd control a caster. This may mean ducking down in my wagon (custom wagon with plenty of add-ons). The idea being to wait for when that caster is about to throw some nasty spell on my teammates (or heal himself for that matter) and bam: 2D8 + 5D6 sneak attack (+1 point blank) + misc. Forcing that concentration check.

Standard DC = 10 + damage dealt + spell level.

So the question is....again....is vital strike worth the extra 4.5 damage (i.e. +4.5 to concentration DC)?

Even without sneak attack the average damage would be: 4.5 (1D8) + 1 (enhancement) + spell level (lvl 9 so assume 4-5th lvl spell). DC would be: 20.... but with vital strike it'd be 25.

This obviously isn't counting deadly aim or anything like that.

What do you all think? Would vital strike be worth it here?

(in other news....it would also come in handy for coup de grace)

Interesting

I do like the scaled passive bonuses (huge fan of passive bonuses).

Is there any concern that essentially giving a fighter free Weapon Focus / Weapon Spec / Penetrating Blow would be broken? I mean, obviously, this would only be the case if essentially giving the fighter 3 more combat feats would be broken.

I guess my only piece of "criticism" (to be fair its a bit biased simply because of my own understanding of bravery) would be that I feel bravery shouldn't add that extra combat skill i general. I didn't want to step on the toes of Weapon Training.

I suppose a few numbers would help:

Funnily enough that would give a natural weapon fighter a base of +10 unarmed damage and +7 attack. Correct me if I'm wrong but that more than makes up for the difference between 1D4 unarmed and 2D10 monk unarmed damage lol. (obviously flurry would matter here).

Cuup, thanks for posting. I really am a fan of this type of mechanic, and I appreciate your contribution. I like your scaling passives more than my own and frankly if the consensus is that these additional bonuses wouldn't make the fighter too good (heh....) then I think its a great break down.

Is there precedent for having more passive (so long as one point remains...) abilities beyond those initially granted?

I feel like what bravery does is not necessarily make the fighter hit harder than front line fighters, but instead it simply allows the fighter to continue to fight where others would falter.

This means resisting spells, true, but it also means continuing to fight effectively after the fighter's weapon is broken or after he is bloodied.

I want bravery to allow a means to mechanically manifest a fighter's resolve.....which to be fair could be the name of the ability.

I hope that helps.

Hmm. Ok. So something more like this then?

Bravery: same as above flavor text (subject to change)

At level 2 the fighter gains a pool of bravery points equal to 1/2 her fighter level plus her constitution mod. So long as a fighter has 1 point remaining in her pool she may:

1) Use her Con modifier in place of her Wisdom modifier for will saves.
2) Be considered one size category larger for the purposes of CMD.

Beginning at 2nd Level a fighter may expend one bravery point for the following:

Bravery is a renewable resource. Certain situations may work to bolster the fighter and restore to her the bravery she has expended so far. The fighter regains a bravery point when the following occur, though a fighter may never have more bravery points than she would have upon rest.

1) The fighter defeats an equally matched opponent (DM discretion)
2) A fighter succeeds in resisting a feat effect (from spells, combat maneuvers, etc) without use of a bravery point.
3) ???

What do you guys think of this remix?

Thanks. Let me know what you think needs tweaking.

I wanted Bravery to do things that were unique.

1) Size for CMD/CMB is only a small mechanical benefit, BUT effects fun things like maximum sized targets and attackers.

2) Healing: I wanted to think of a way that some of the healing issues can be addressed. I figured a second wind-like mechanic could be cool. It may require rewording....I don't really think that it should serve to remove conditions like bleed...thatd be potentially really broken. Perhaps it should be considered natural healing and not magical.

3) Saves: I feel like being able to shake off some stuff is important. It is called bravery....and I like that Con --> will adds that bonus we all feel like should exist without making fighter a "good" will class. I also think the mechanic of losing one's morale (in a sense) [losing con to will when 0 points] is a good way to say your day has just taken it all out of you.

4) Check Penalty and Non Proficiency Penalty: I was thinking here of like Isildur taking up Narsil after it was broken. Something to address the old "fighter picks up whatever is nearby and by force of will uses it to effect". Same thought went into check penalty thing.

these are the kinds of things that were on my mind. Lemme know if anyone out there has feedback. This may be the kind of thing I look to implement.

Hey everyone. I am sorry if this idea has been brewed up in the past and dissected but I haven't personally seen something on point.

So I love the fighter. I love it as is, but this is not to say that it couldn't be improved on. I have noticed the trend Paizo has been on in giving classes a flexible point based mechanic (Ki, Panache, Grit, Inspiration, etc). I feel that Bravery could follow in suit. Here is my proposition:

Bravery: An intangible, but very real, quality of those that train in arms in a world filled with mystical creatures and arcane magics beyond the ability of the standard person's comprehension. Bravery allows one to face odds that baffle the mind, or to stand up to one with powers you do not understand. Bravery separates those that fight from fighters.

At level 2, a Fighter gains a pool of Bravery points equal to one half her fighter level plus her constitution modifier (1/2 fighter + con). So long as a fighter has 1 bravery point remaining in her bravery pool she may:

1) Use her constitution modifier in place of her wisdom modifier for will saves.
2) Be considered one size category larger for the purposes of CMD.

By spending a point from her Bravery pool a fighter may:

1) Add a +2 morale bonus to any saving throw.
2) Heal a number of hit points equal to your fighter level.
3) Be treated as one size category larger for the purposes of one CMB.
4) Ignore their armor check penalty from armor or shields for any one skill roll.
5) Ignore the non-proficiency penalty for a weapon they are not proficient with for 1 round.
6) Re-roll any will save versus an effect that would cause fear, at a +2 bonus.

By spending 2 points from their bravery pool a fighter may:

1) Treat a successful attack as a critical threat. (still requires confirmation - but can't use bravery for it)
2) Gain (or improve existing) damage reduction x/-- equal to their constitution modifier for a number of minutes equal to their con modifier.

A fighter's bravery pool refreshes each day upon 8 hours of rest, though there a few ways in which to restore points that have been spent without rest, though a fighter may never have more than their max number of Bravery points. A fighter regains a Bravery point when:

1) A fighter defeats a creature in a fight during which the fighter expended at least 2 bravery points.
2) A fighter successfully saves against a fear effect while the fighter has no Bravery points remaining in her pool

Each of these uses of Bravery points is to be activated as either a swift action or an immediate action within its context.

What do you all think? Is this the kind of mechanic that could help to re-energize the fighter and help them live up to expectations?

shameless bump.

Are changelings unpopular?

So I am putting together a changeling character with two distinct personas (a male and a female) each of which is distinct for the purposes of game play. The idea is that this changeling constantly switches between the two personas by the day, bluffing to party members that s/he is cursed to be different people and never knows which s/he will be on any given day. Each will have a distinct personality and "style". This means I need to choose a class that can realistically do two very different things in order to make this ruse somewhat successful.

I have considered the following:

Fighter: has enough feats that I could conceivably use two very different fighting styles, from light-heavy armor to power attack / TWF. Does prevent real mastery in either however.

Investigator: Alchemist / Rogue .... but just not distinct enough IMO.

Cleric/Paladin: Could work, priest and fighter....but I don't see the char as particularly religious. (yet)

Rogue: Something like counterfeit mage or underground chemist could work.

Bard / Skald: Both could work well. A bard and a Barbarian, its just that the song would be a dead giveaway, since there would be no other way to rage. Magician or Sandman could help.

Full Casters: Wont work until higher level.

Bloodrager: Was a top choice of mine, but the late access to spells and the more martial bloodline flavor doesn't draw the line between the personalities sharply enough for me.

Magus: I think this is my best option. I am considering Greensting Slayer AND Staff Magus (should both be available) in order to essentially have a "wizard" and a "rogue/fighter". I can burn arcane points when in "rogue mode" (without obviously using magic) in order to get sneak attack, and I can play off both personalities carrying a staff as pragmatism.

What do you guys think? I know I have left out multi classing. I don't want to actually dilute my power too much. The long term plan is (assuming I ever trust the group) to one day (unless I'm found out) reveal my nature to the party, thus freeing myself to use all my power regardless of my current personality.

Any advice is welcome.

I'll look at older red mantis, thanks.

I guess I'm looking for stuff like the 3.5 assassin and that infiltrator like prc from cityscape.

Long story short I have a rogue that I took minor/magic magic with and the bookish rogue feat and I'm looking at these prcs as a way of going from rogue to caster without multiclassing, as an rp thing. I want very minor casting.

The spell likes may work if I have enough of them.

Thanks. Please let me know if anything else crosses your mind.

Hey all. Im pretty sure this fits here better than advice or rules, so thats why you see it here. I hope I was right.

So which prestige classes are out there that do not require casting to enter (or small stuff) and come with their own casting (meaning their own spell lists and casting comes from the PrC...not +1 caster level).

All i know of is "Prophet of Kalistrade".

Am i missing any?

My understanding is that I can, at least, switch my available spells each day and, best case, switch out as many times as I want per day (10 min each time) so long as I have slots left.

Lol nice ideas. I was thinking about mounted repeating crossbow or something but I'm not proficient with them.

There will be a feature up front similar to a music stand.....a telescoping stand that fans out to cover your head from sun or rain.

So my gm allowed me to customize my 'medium wagon' in our new game. My char is a 4th lvl driver rogue with craft carpentry. I got the greenlight to essentially do what I want (within reason) because I spent 5x standard price (475 v 75 gp).

As of now I have the following:

1) lots of nifty storage, such as inside the seating and in the floor.
2) a lever in the front that releases caltrops in the back
3) a conversion method to switch open-top wagon to covered wagon that uses canvas and a hidden frame.

What other nifty things that are no magical wold you do?

I feel like we have glossed over the idea that he is creating no such thing, that he simply treats a staff like this as a staff with an enhancement bonus of 1/4 it's CL. It's just a staff with ones charge of magic missile to anyone else.

I personally agree that I wouldn't allow a char to create magic items that require a higher CL than they have achieved, but that's simply to slow down creation and incentivize that type of RP.

Fair enough.

I figured that there would be expanded uses.

Hmm ill see what the DM says and see if there is a way to limit things. Not that it'd too big a deal anyway ha.

Hmmm.

So the basic popular understanding is that it wouldn't work? At least by RAW?

Is it something that people would allow? Or is our issue a combination of RAW doesn't allow AND it'd be too powerful?

I suppose the other possibility, 3) if you will, would be that it is a standard scroll but when activated by this wizard would be treated as if that wizard is casting it.

3) sounds similar to 2) except that rather than the scroll have this effect when read by other people, its boosted effects only occur because this wizard is, in effect, casting it now upon reading the scroll thus triggering his trait.

Glad to know others are thinking about it.

Niche market huh? lol

Looking at the "Spell Completion" description makes me wonder -- without counting metamagic feats, do other passive spell modifiers make their way into a spell because a certain caster created the spell?

So....assume im a 4th level wizard with the "Extended Toil" trait (which increases the duration of spells like mount and unseen servant by 50%). I want to make a scroll of "Mount" at CL 4th.

12.5 GP x CL 4 x SL 1 = 50 Gp as my cost to create the scroll.

The spell slot is taken up as though I had casted it....I even went so far as to make it as good as I can (CL 4).

When i read this scroll what happens?

1) Mount (CL 4): 8 hours of mount.
2) Mount (CL 4) (extended toil): 12 hours of mount?

The rules do not (as far as I can tell) really hammer down what happens. If you are making scrolls in order to have access to a spell as though you casted it, because frankly you are better at it than Joe Scroll-Shop Wizard, t would stand to reason that you'd try to impart your talent into the casting.

What do you all think?

I am hoping to use bookish rogue to have access to all 0-lvl spells and many 1st level ones.

Down time could become very productive.

What is the reason that I wouldn't be able to raise the caster level? My CL for the SLAs is my rogue level.

That helps the idea though. It makes it more legit in that the rogue would only be able to make scrolls from the spell known on the date of creation, rather than being a way to create any scroll by raising the dc.

Thanks for the feedback

I haven't inadvertently reanimated a dead horse that has been kicked exactly as many times as necessary to viciate all forum interest have I?

Bump :)

Hey guys.

Can a Rogue with the Minor/Major Magic talents qualify for the Scribe Scroll feat?

The talents say you gain the ability to cast a spell (as a spell-like) with a caster level equal to your rogue level.

I could see it being ok since the rogue technically has the ability to cast a spell and has a valid caster level for it.

I could also see it being not allowed, as the Scribe Scroll feat says "caster level 1" rather than "ability to cast 1st level spells".

What do you think RAW says and would you allow it even if RAW wouldn't?

For the record, I am considering running this by my DM for a Driver Rogue with a magical flair.

He will also be taking "Bookish Rogue and Talented Magician (though we are lvl4)".
- In a sense this would allow quite a fun "fake wizard".

Thanks guys

Fair enough with your flanking point. My mistake. Though I suppose all that matters is that the target is denied its dex to AC or that sneak attack applies.

As for being a ninja, it is something I'd have to run past the DM. We tend not to use the eastern classes when thematically odd.

That sword is nice though, I'll look into it. Thanks

Hey all.

So I will be in a 4th lvl game starting next week and the group consists (so far) in 2 witches, 2 hunters, and a brawler.

I am thinking of running a rogue, since this shtick has yet to be filled. So far my idea is to run a knife master with a ki pool and vanishing trick in order to get a few easy backstabs in.

My question is:

Short of improved feint, flank and dirty trick (for blind), is there any other reliable means of getting your target flatfooted?

To be honest the brawler should be a good flank buddy....but I have this idea of essentially slowly stalking around the battlefield invisible and popping out to stab hard.

ha i know. I didn't even notice.

I had searched something related and this came up.

Didn't see 2012 until after i posted.

I dont regret it :)

Correct me if I am wrong but allowing pounce to grant multiple attacks with sneak attack through Scout's charge should not be inconsistent with Skirmish. (though there is some overlap)

Skirmish still applies in VERY important situations where Scout's Charge does not.....

1) not a straight line
2) rough terrain
3) uphill and other times when charging not allowed (i think uphill anyway)
4) slowed
5) fatigued/exhausted
6) when you don't want to be limited to "first available square" for attack purposes (i.e. flanking position)

I am sure there are others, but I figured I would point that out. This is a quick, off the top of my head, observation so please don't let me get away with a falsehood if there is one.

I am in favor of pounce and scout's charge here....my kobolds just got stronger (in my world Kobolds have 2 1d3 claws and a 1d4 bite).

So I'm running a campaign for one player in my home brew world. I have multiple story lines going but the current one involves the players paladin tracking down a target aberration in the city's old sewer system just as the city (metropolis) is attacked. The player has spent 3 days in the sewers helping a thieves guild (yay rp) only to just now reach the surface again.

I want a gritty urban campaign and so I'd love to know what others have done to set the feel for encounters and just post attack city scape drama,

Spoilers: attack was a combined attack by a fallen paladin (the city's bishop....can't wait for that rp) and a disgraced politician. The anti paladin wishes to restore an old defeated god and is seeking the objects needed for the ritual which he thinks may be partially in the city. The politician seeks to rule the city. The attack included clerics and cultists of the evil god, troglodytes (controlled by pol.), mercenaries and other brigands paid to fight, and an assortment of other creatures including a few demons (summoned by cultists) and ice trolls (historic connection to the evil god).

The city has a population of about 250,000. About 10% of that is still within the walls and I just don't want to mess up setting the scene by overlooking any really realistic or interesting tropes.

Sorry for post length.

So the rules say that magic items (including attended ones) get the better of their save or their holder.

Otherwise unattended items generally do not take damage or need to make a save unless otherwise stated or if the wearer rolls a 1.

If I case break on a non-magical bow currently wielded....the save is for the item. Does it use the save for the item (whatever that may be) or the fortitude save of the wielder?

The reading of that rule though suggests that the vial would do damage after a round.

Its either that or the 1D6 comes from the wording about a vial counting as exposure.

I do not need this interpretation to be true its more of just an interesting question.

Hmm.

So is the reason that the acid flask deals 1D6 because it is the 1 round of exposure?

Or does the acid flask deal its 1D6 from the attack and then 1D6 after a round of exposure?

I am definitely erring on the side of no additional damage, since obviously this would overpower a cantrip....especially when in the context of comparing it to its peers (ray of frost)

thanks

Ok so acid splash....ranged touch 1D3 bla bla.

It says in the spell description that the acid lasts for 1 round.

Under acid affects in the Core Book it says that corrosive acid deals 1D6 damage per round of exposure (except in cases of immersion in which case it is 10D6).

Does this mean that when you use acid splash that 1 round later as the acid goes away the creature that was hit with acid splash takes an additional 1D6 damage?

It says that attacks with acid, such as from a hurled vial or monster's spit, counts as a rounds of exposure.

Is there any chance that a cantrip that creates a non-instantaneous acid effect also counts as 1 round of exposure?

thanks

Well thank you, I was unaware of the FAQ.

I can state for sure that no such rule exists in my world, ha. Last thing I want is to switch every aasamir in my world into EKs.

I do wonder two things though:

1) so when the human wizard 5 / fighter 1 finally qualifies and takes EK at 7 he will have CL of 5 and BAB of 4 and the aasamir wizard 1 / fighter 1 / EK 5 (same casting for comparison) will have CL 5 and BAB 6, 6D10 HP compared to 2D10, and will have weapon spec because he counts as a 6th level fighter too. Why have the developers not already seen the power difference here?

2) does daylight here even count as an arcane spell? I mean it's on both arcane and divine spell lists and considering aasamir blood it makes more sense that a divine source grants the power. I guess there are just so many assumptions.

Well anyway thanks for calling my attention to the FAQ.

What makes any of you think that a Spell-like Ability qualifies as a spell? It does not. It clearly states In the requirements that the character must be able to cast third level spells. Not have a third level spell-like ability.

fair enough guys.

I don't think that ambition is evil just that it can be symptomatic.

I actually have not seen the most recent episode (exam week).

I will reconsider but I do think that being against slavery and what not is not necessarily CG behavior. I guess I am harsh when it comes to her (not to discount any of the problems she has faced or overcome) and I just do not know exactly why.

I guess its opposite effect that Tyrion has on me, going from guy i thought was funny to guy I think must live in order for any good world outcome.

I like the way she has matured and after I watch this most recent episode I hope I can give her another shot.

I am generally in agreement with most of these but I think I am more cynical about Daenerys.

To be fair I have not read the books, but I see her as more N or CN.

I think she is doing what is needed to restore herself to the throne. If that means coming off as the savior to slaves and the breaker of bonds then so be it. I think the story has done a very good job of portraying her as someone learning from the mistakes that she and others have made, making her a powerfully pragmatic character.

While I think she does good deeds, whether or not the intent is pure, she definitely cares first about becoming queen.

This obviously may change as the story continues, and I may be simply corrupted in my beliefs after watching so many other characters fall from grace or redeem themselves.

It is becoming a theme for the rug to be pulled out from under us.

My two cents.