Rhaddrain's page

Actually as far as i'm aware none of the others are divines and I have asked about undead, nobody plans on playing one or using them so there isn't going to be inter party conflict. (if there was I wouldn't play someone dedicated to stopping the one thing necromancers do) but our campaign will have something to do with a long gone goddess so religious beings will probably come into play including undead.

While i'm at it, is there any particular thing I should shoot for as a Pharasman warpriest using a scythe? I know it's not optimal but the scythe has some interesting quirks I like, for one I would like to use trip and the scythe has trip as a quality. 2d4 x4 damage/crit is pretty cool too, crits are basically a death sentence.

That's generally what I thought, it is pretty clear in her description that she abhors them. Alright, I had kinda figured against a greater threat makes it okay but in the long run circumstances don't matter undead is undead and you have to go. So what would happen if the priest of Pharasma was in a position that they couldn't take care of the undead? (crazy example) like an undead warrior well loved by the people or something similar? I figure same thing the priest would have to deal with it but how if they aren't powerful enough/would be considered a criminal? I assume this is where the "lawful stupid" of being divine comes into play, i'm fine with that, deities are supposed to be all about stalwart ideals to uphold and i mean the example I gave is not exactly something thats going to happen (well, I guess I never know)

Some background, I intend to play a warpriest of Pharasma in an upcoming campaign and the question came up of how I would tolerate a friendly undead who was possibly cursed or otherwise to continue living. Looking at Pharasma it appears that I'm not allowed to tolerate undead no matter the circumstance. So, I figured that it would just have to be the way Pharasma intends and I would have to try my best to lay the undead to rest, possibly convincing them that the afterlife is better for his kind or something else like that. But, in the instance that it is a friendly or otherwise good undead who doesn't want to die what then? Its a difficult question and depends on the circumstances for normal characters but as a warpriest I still have to obey the holy duty of laying dead to rest.

TL;DR: How would a warpriest of Pharasma deal with a good undead who doesn't want to die?

5 + 3hp per caster level and hardness 5 sound about right?
Then if it stays 2nd level the earliest a wizard can cast it would be 3rd level making it a 14hp DR5/- barrier. Sounds alright to me, I do think hp needs a static value so it isn't useless at low level. Then it drops off a tad past level 10, not much but it isn't nearly as viable at lvl 20 as it is below 10. Also I figure the damage would cap at lvl 12 or 15 maxing it at 4 shards for 1d6+1 or 5 shards for 1d6+1.

As for positive energy it can just ignore hardness. I feel like the spell is in a pretty balanced state at this point, probably some fringe cheese stuff someone could accomplish but it has obvious weaknesses and advantages as well as not being a must-take spell.

SO, if it remains this way the spell does this

Lvl 2 Sorc/Wiz Spell

School - Abjuration
1 standard action
Range - Current Square only, dispels if you move 30 + 5ft per caster lvl
Duration: 1+1 rounds per caster lvl

- Provides cover in the direction it's facing in the caster's square and cover on its adjacent sides (+4Ac, +2 Ref)
- The barrier blocks all melee attacks in the indicated direction and has hardness 5 and 5 + 3x caster level hp. If a ranged attack is targeting an entity behind the barrier a miss of 4 or more hits the barrier instead and damages it
- Anyone can pass through the back side but everyone must make a Fort save to pass through the front. Success = move normally, Failure = dazed 1 round and 1d6 negative energy damage
- When Drow Barrier shatters it deals 1d6+1 points of negative energy damage per 3 caster levels, you may split this damage in 1d6+1 increments among targets within 30ft.
- Drow Barrier can be shattered as a swift action and target enemies normally
- Ref halves shatter damage
- If the Drow Barrier shatters by taking too much damage it deals half damage and targets get Ref save to take halved damage again
- Spells pass through the barrier normally on both sides, however you may also target the barrier itself with any attack to deal damage, positive energy ignores hardness if it attacks the barrier and negative energy has no effect if targeted at the barrier.

energy damage deals normal hardness rules of damage to the barrier (1/2 damage then subtracting hardness from damage)

If they made the check to move through the square then they could try to bull rush but probably nothing else (unless they moved out of the front of the barrier). As for the cleric scenario I wanted positive to ignore hardness and deal double damage but in other scenarios having 5+1/2 hardness isn't super great the scaling is o.k. but the point is to make very weak attacks not really matter (like a rat swarm) since they can't break the hardness

Maybe she doesn't know he's really a full-blown devil prince and just thinks he's a lesser devil serving his lords? That gives a more plausible reason for her to not tell people about it in part because of their safety but also because normal devils although uncommon aren't huge world ending news, devil princes tend to draw the attention of entire crusades and the like, or even celestial beings. That said in what way is he obsessed? I know you said to have her "play in his league" but is that all there is to it? Seems a bit mundane for a devil prince to get worked up about that unless he needs her for something specific or I might not understand the scope of her intellect in this campaign, I mean Balor's are pretty damn smart with 24 Int and he surely has underlings of that power. Overall I like the concept, it might be more compelling if the devil has a particular goal in mind to making her serve him.

To be fair if they want to keep the cover bonus it doesn't stack with other cover and they must remain in the single square to acquire any defensive benefit. The only time enemies are forced to deal with it is if the mage has very good positioning or readied an action to stop a charge for example so they should have a pretty decent shield if they do manage the good positioning. They can still be forcibly displaced from behind the barrier or affected by compulsion. I assumed it fair that if they make the save to pass the barriers front an opponent could bull rush the caster out of cover or use other combat maneuvers. I agree with pos/negative energy except I would like positive to be even more effective, like double damage. Imagine the dramatic flair when a cleric blasts a negative energy barrier with his channel positive energy and reduces it to shards :)

Spell description seems concise and i'm not particularly talented at summing up things quickly so I appreciate that since my players can learn this spell and will be encountering it.

I second the idea of the knight being related to the devil prince/possibly being him. Considering devils are the tricky ones that's right up their alley to do something like that, it certainly isn't outside his power to disguise himself and enlist aid from mortals if he can't locate her through normal means

How about this: Ranged attacks can still pass through same as before and caster gets normal cover on the side the barrier faces and its adjacent sides, but if the ranged attack misses by 4 or less it strikes the shield and deals damage, otherwise not affecting the barrier on normal hit or miss. At first it seemed odd (flavor-wise) that it could block all melee but not ranged but it could probably be fluffed as being less effective at blocking very fast moving projectiles since it's still stiff like crystal and would have fractures along its surface and chips. As for game balance windwall should be a separate choice if the caster wants to deal with ranged attacks otherwise as some others have said it would be trying to do too many things at once, I agree with the sentiment.

I'm not entirely sure how positive and negative energy should be handled to not be broken in some way. If positive energy does double damage but is blocked it still impedes divine's but doesn't affect other spellcasters as much since their spells would still pass through. Same for negative energy, if it healed the barrier or got empowered seems like barrier is too strong under certain circumstances. Maybe the barrier could provide some kind of bump to saves against pos/neg energy..... it could be a really small thing mostly for rp because as it stands the barrier is close to the edge, situational but definitely isn't so situational that one shouldn't take it. Possibly a small nerf in health so it's 15 + 2x caster level hp. I like the idea of offensive and defensive capability
without it being underwhelming in either but defense wise it does already provide cover so hp could be lowered a bit, under ideal circumstances the shield is probably on the higher end of 2nd level spells but since it could be destroyed in a full-attack of one powerful enemy and then give no defensive benefits and deal halved (possibly twice) damage. Also if enemies can find a way around and it doesn't block a narrow area the defensive capabilities are lowered quite a bit to where its only about as good as a Shield spell. I like where the spell is sitting like this just not too sure what to do with neg/pos energy if anything.

If I am correct this version has 1 fairly large change i'm considering and a handful of smaller ones. First, the square it is chosen to face blocks melee AND ranged attacks. It seemed a bit overly complex thinking it over that it couldn't just block all physical forces while magic passes through it. The magic would still deal damage to the barrier of course, if a mage fireballed the barrier it would take damage. The barrier still takes damage if it "blocks" a melee/ranged attack (perhaps there should be exceptions to this rule favoring certain ranged or melee attacks). Secondly because it's only possible for one person (or two gnomes in a trenchcoat) to hide behind the barrier it makes sense that the two adjacent sides of the square the barrier occupies would give normal cover since the barrier gets in the way a tad of arrows and sword swings on the sides. The only other change (besides 5 more feet to dispel range) would be that positive and negative energy damage/heal respectively, possibly double damage for positive. Anyhow, with these tentative changes the spell would work as follows:

Lvl 2 Sorc/Wiz Spell

School - Abjuration
1 standard action
Range - Current Square only, dispels if you move 30 + 5ft per caster lvl
Duration: 1+1 rounds per caster lvl

- Provides total cover in the direction it's facing in the caster's square and cover on its adjacent sides (+4Ac, +2 Ref)
- Drow Barrier blocks all melee and ranged attacks in the space it faces. Drow Barrier can shatter, it has Hardness 5 + 1/2Caster level and 10 + 3x Caster level Hp
- Spells pass through the barrier normally on both sides but positive and negative energy damage/heal the barrier respectively.
- Anyone can pass through the back side but everyone must make a Fort save to pass through the front. Success = move normally, Failure = dazed 1 round and 1d6 negative energy damage
- When Drow Barrier shatters it deals 1d6+1 points of negative energy damage per 3 caster levels, you may split this damage in 1d6+1 increments among targets within 30ft.
- Drow Barrier can be shattered as a swift action and target enemies normally
- Ref halves shatter damage
- If the Drow Barrier shatters by taking too much damage it deals half damage and targets get Ref save to take halved damage again

The spell text if a player wants this may need some work.

A barrier of shifting negative energy springs into existence at one side of your current square, providing total cover in the direction it is facing and cover on each adjacent side of the spell (+4Ac, +2 Ref) and hardness 5+1/2Caster level and 10+ 3x Caster level hp. The barrier blocks all melee and ranged attacks infront of it. The barrier takes damage when it blocks attacks using its Hardness as DR. Anyone may pass through the back of the barrier but the front requires a Fort save from anyone attempting to pass. On failure target is dazed 1 round and takes 1d6 negative energy damage, on success target moves normally. The barrier shatters when it takes enough damage to have 0hp. When it shatters in this manner it only deals half damage but still targets enemies. Alternatively, the caster may shatter the barrier as a swift action causing it to deal 1d6+1 points of negative energy damage per 3 caster levels; this damage may be split in 1d6+1 increments among enemies within 30ft. All enemies get a Ref save to take half damage from shatter (this damage is halved and halved again in the case of the barrier breaking)

Finally, I appreciate the input you guys have put in, You have no obligation to my plight so consider your alignments shifted towards good. (Thanks for the help)

If you want to create shards and refocus your attack, I would describe it that way:

"When the barrier is shattered, it breaks into several small shards, 1 per 2 levels of the caster, that fly up and swirl around his head for a brief moment, then blast out at his enemies doing 1d6+1 negative energy damage per shard. The caster can aim the shards at any target or targets within 30', aiming each shard separately. They may all be aimed at one target or any combination of targets as the caster desires."

You didn't address the very overpowered hardness. That was the most overwhelming part of the original description.

You make a very good point, in fact, I had personally misunderstood hardness rules and thought it equated to AC but I believe your suggestion of 5 + 1/2 caster level is appropriate, the hp can be bumped a tad to help out say 10 + 3x caster level since hardness is scaling slowly. This means at higher levels the spell can serve as a complete deterrent to mooks (in a narrow space) and help with more dangerous foes as well. One change I honestly think will help out is if spells deal normal damage - hardness that way spells are a reasonable way to deal with it if they have no alternative and considering it's an energy barrier it doesn't make sense to me that it would resist spells (Takes full damage from positive energy). The reason for it being negative energy is purely because it was created by Drow in my campaign setting, there are other spells that use negative energy (not many but there are some) for wizards and sorcerers.

Little update, Firstly, there should be a range it dispels if you move too far from (say 25+5 per caster lvl ft.) that seems fair. The damage is by far the thing I felt was a bit overdone so something more like 1d6+1 per 3 caster levels seems better suited for damage (it really SHOULDN'T be better than evocation at damage) as for its defensive capabilities it falls off quickly and was intended to be used for 1-2 blows from creature equal to caster's CR and between 3-4 attacks for weak creatures below caster CR. If the enemy destroys the barrier they take half and possibly halved once more so it's intended to be a gamble for damage. You're better off using other spells for flat-out damage but this one has protective and offensive potential however, both can be foiled by the enemy or used to advantage by the caster. Level 2 or 3 seems fair so it isn't something to just throw out all day but isn't too valuable either. Finally, I agree it should atleast be a swift to shatter so that the caster loses the valuable swift in exchange for shatter. The duration should be bumped a tinnnny bit, 1 round plus 1 per 2 caster levels to make it not useless at lower levels. The reason I envisioned it as being able to target foes is that it doesn't so much explode as it overcharges and the magic splits apart (creating the "shards") and then refocuses to attack.

Just as the title says I would like a critique of this spell and perhaps a level it should be placed at. It is intended as a Sorc/Wiz spell

Drow Barrier
School - Abjuration
Casting Time - 1 standard action
Range - Current Square only
Duration - 1 Round per 2 caster lvl

- Provides cover in the direction it's facing (+4 Ac, +2 Ref)

- Drow Barrier blocks all melee attacks however Drow Barrier can shatter, it has Hardness 10 + Caster level and 10 + Caster level Hp

- Anyone can pass through the back side but everyone must make a Fort save to pass through the front. Success = move normally, Failure = dazed 1 round and 1d10 negative energy damage

- When Drow Barrier shatters it deals 1d10 points of negative energy damage per 2 caster levels, you may split this damage in 1d10 increments among targets within 30ft.

- Drow Barrier can be shattered as a free action and target enemies normally

- Ref halves shatter damage

- If the Drow Barrier shatters by taking too much damage it deals half damage and targets get Ref save to further halve the damage

I can't really agree with this. The base alignments of pathfinder are universal truths: If a beings alignment is evil, then that means it is a threat to most other beings around it, and is deemed a (If in most cases minor) threat to existence as a whole. A good aligned being is deemed a benefit (If again in most cases minor) to existence as a whole. As a spell, smite evil calls down the wrath of goodness on an evil being, not what the person or even their god perceives as evil. An evil cultist cannot cast smite evil on, say, a cleric of Sarenrae for this very reason.

If we did use the system I have proposed it would surely have to be taken with a grain of salt, what you said about a cultist is absolutely true, he shouldn't be able to cast smite evil on the cleric but in an instance where a character that would generally have the good alignment would snap, doing something evil like attempting to slay his employer THEN a cleric could smite evil on him during the ensuing fight. I do understand that alignment can be read as a universal truth, but I feel as if that only applies to greater beings like gods. I don't necessarily disagree with anyone on this post, it's a difficult thing to pin down exactly how alignment should be interpreted. The idea I have is more to deal with difficult alignment situations, in the cleric vs. cultist situation abilities would function as usual since the cultist's "good" abilities have negative effects

I agree with Paulicus, i'll give the party the run-down and if it causes trouble we can scrap it. The main reason this came up is because of the example pretty much, if someone (like a PC or anyone else for that matter) was caught or perceived as doing something evil why can't someone just use detect alignment and if it doesn't fall within their alignment take their word? It makes people being wrongfully accused basically impossible and if for example 2 paladins of good but conflicting orders tried to smite each other it wouldn't work. Awkwarrrrd. Anyway the paladin isn't a PC but the basics of this are pretty situational so we will try it out and see how it goes, at higher levels of play where things get DR/alignment and the like it could definitely make the rules confusing/hazy at times.

So myself and my group have agreed (understanding that this fundamentally changes many of the game's rules and effects of abilities) that alignment should only be vaguely determined as in nobody is truly good, neutral, or evil. As such, I feel that a possible substitute for alignment (when alignment is needed for the sake of abilities and effects) is that the alignment of the adversary is decided by the defender/caster.

The basic idea came about from a paladin who fervently follows Ragathiel who could easily see many foes as highly evil when alignment typically wouldn't line up with that, for example someone who came on a sudden windfall of wealth in a small town and refused to share with others could be evil in her eyes and as such I would allow smite evil to be cast by the paladin. It must make sense for the attacker to feel this way about the opponent, so a rogue stealing for profit can't say that the priest trying to call the guard is evil.

I know that there are bigger things to consider like how circles of protection against whatever would operate but as a skeletal outline this seems to work fairly well since it applies to everyone. Nobody in the party has access to alignment specific abilities so the likelihood of cheese in that way is fairly small and can easily be house-ruled to prevent something overpowered from emerging. Side-note: Detect alignment spells or abilities don't exist and chaos/lawful is never chosen except by the DM

Tl;dr: When someone uses an alignment based ability, the person they are using it on has an alignment decided by the user of the ability/spell, IF IT MAKES SENSE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE SITUATION.

Pretty good stuff! I like the unique ideas like gaining permanent hp and the sword Umbral Reaver suggested. I may build off both of those, a cool idea that came to me has something to do with a monstrous transformation, not the most life/death necromancy thing but perhaps the transformation has something to do with the users spirit. On a side note, the PC's won't have a chance (or reason) to use this artifact so its power can be fairly unchecked within reason of course. It would be cool if someone who wanted power could have a use for the item rather than the evil standard of: "I just want to destroy!"

Part of the upcoming campaign involves an artifact that is on the material plane and is transportable so that's really the only limitations. The best i've been able to come up with is that the artifact has something to do with a deity/powerful outsider of death and interacts with them in some drastic way rather than just duplicating high-level spells or something of that sort, so, ideally, it would be a unique ability that has RP elements built into it. I have searched for magical items/artifacts online but nothing seemed suitable so i'm turning to the power of collaboration.

Looking forward to some creative ideas.

Is there really any way to stop a dragon from grabbing someone, flying really high up, and then dropping them? Other than having a very good CMD nothing really strikes me other than maybe flight spells or the like.

I suppose class names don't define the character for sure, but you can't say they don't have an impact. The concept was originally based on a bastard sword wielder with heavy armor so I see no reason a fighter would be worse than another similar class. We simply have a difference of opinion and unfortunately I don't have any experience with bastard swords so I can't help in that capacity but I don't see any reason a fighter couldn't work just fine with your concept, or any other class if you see it as fit. However I wouldn't sacrifice character for efficiency in most circumstances this being one of them.

Rhaddrain wrote:

I'm not a fan of how everyone is saying go barbarian over fighter because "it's better." Anything is viable and he's doing it for flavor reasons. "But barbarian does it better!" So what? It doesn't fit the character very well, his character doesn't rage from what I understand and his character fits the "knight" trope so why min-max because "barbs are better?" In my experience if the DM doesn't suck then he won't make his players suffer from wanting to use flavor and rp more than min-maxing. At least, I don't when DMing.

90% of the time Class does not equal Flavor. His concept is doable with more mechanically viable classes. So unless he specifically wants the mechanics the fighter class offers he's better off picking another class. Oh and for the record not all GMs hold your hand; assuming the campaign was built with all party roles in mind you either pull your weight or not. Oh the other party members is stealing your glory too bad. It's not their fault your class and archetype is not mechanically viable.

That's not exactly what I meant, you don't hold your players hands you acknowledge their choices and if one of them wants to be something less viable/min-maxy for flavor reasons there is nothing wrong with that. If he wants to be a fighter to fit his character's style then that's fine, even if it isn't optimal. Barbarian in particular, unless radically changed, is basically the opposite of his character and would be purely an optimisation. If he wants to optimize sure, go for it, but in the end flavor/rp is the key to this game.

I'm not a fan of how everyone is saying go barbarian over fighter because "it's better." Anything is viable and he's doing it for flavor reasons. "But barbarian does it better!" So what? It doesn't fit the character very well, his character doesn't rage from what I understand and his character fits the "knight" trope so why min-max because "barbs are better?" In my experience if the DM doesn't suck then he won't make his players suffer from wanting to use flavor and rp more than min-maxing. At least, I don't when DMing.

She feels she can accomplish more (and has) if she has access to a massive magical library and other mages works as they discover things. She does have a fun relationship with a group of knights devoted to her (think Janissaries) as well as running the academy, using powerful mages to further her goals. She basically has everything a leader needs at their disposal to do as they please, and she isn't a standard shut-in wizard in the slightest, she has hands in most political rings.

So i dont have a lot of time right now, ill add to this later but I've always enjoyed moral situations that aren't black and white, adds depth to people's choices and decisions. So I already know about a ruler the PC's are going to be introduced to and she's quite the anti-hero. She serves her motives first and silences any opposition but is probably the biggest advocate of magic and its advancement in the entire world. I have a decent idea of how I would RP her, I just don't want the PC's to dislike her, she has reasons for what she does and she treats her people right its just the fact that she's a tyrant that might make the PC's feel disdain for her. She takes most issues into her own hands and is very deceptive, usually a few steps ahead of others, but the crutch from all of this is that she is possibly one of the most over-confident people you'll ever meet. Think of her as the intellectual who would do whatever it takes to expand their power/knowledge. She may be a central NPC to the story and i'm just concerned that her motives and reasoning might not be carried across to the PC's very well.

So i dont have a lot of time right now, ill add to this later but I've always enjoyed moral situations that aren't black and white, adds depth to people's choices and decisions. So I already know about a ruler the PC's are going to be introduced to and she's quite the anti-hero. She serves her motives first and silences any opposition but is probably the biggest advocate of magic and its advancement in the entire world. I have a decent idea of how I would RP her, I just don't want the PC's to dislike her, she has reasons for what she does and she treats her people right its just the fact that she's a tyrant that might make the PC's feel disdain for her. She takes most issues into her own hands and is very deceptive, usually a few steps ahead of others, but the crutch from all of this is that she is possibly one of the most over-confident people you'll ever meet. Think of her as the intellectual who would do whatever it takes to expand their power/knowledge. She may be a central NPC to the story and i'm just concerned that her motives and reasoning might not be carried across to the PC's very well.

A good way to describe the "brutish and less lock-down" would be that he's more animal-like. He can find me and is relentless but he's more the "charge now question it later" type. The shadow demon has a burst of speed every minute, too much defensive capability, and Fear + Teleport which makes him too sticky. The biggest thing is we need to be able to outsmart and outmaneuver him as lvl 1-3's so we can survive until there's a way to physically deal with him

I had looked at a shadow demon and it's fairly close to what we're looking for except that its defensive capabilities are too good, it's not "jazzy" enough i.e shadow demons are generic, some kind of modification could be done to it though. A modified enemy with aspects of what i've described is what i'm really looking for. Shadow demons are a little too good at locking down a target too. something similar but more brutish in its approach and style

I forgot to mention that really any evil outsider a mage could bind would work, doesn't have to be a demon particularly.

Alright so part of my character's backstory is telling his tall tales, these stories almost always include a "good friend named Lewis". This good friend is in reality a demon that has been chasing him for years ever since he stole an artifact from a wizard and caused its destruction. The demon the wizard summoned needs enough skill to track him wherever he might be but it doesn't have 100% tracking, just general area (maybe within 10-50 miles or so) he also needs to be fairly stealthy so he can't just get spotted by everyone.

Here's where its gets complex.

Myself and the party are starting this game at lvl 1 but me and the DM have agreed to have the demon possibly show-up anytime any try killing me. We don't want the demon around forever so he should be within CR 5-9 so the party can kill him once we get enough levels.

The demon needs to be quick-tempered and easily lured but also persistent, like his soul purpose is killing me at this point as well as having some kind of weakness we can exploit to escape mostly, something that restricts mobility would be perfect (like sunlight powerlessness)

This demon is the kind of guy who's name is written in fancy spell-books so he's unique, he's got character not just your run-of-the-mill bloodthirsty demon so give him some "pizzazz" in the looks and abilities department.

On a side note i'm not really concerned with only core pathfinder material, if it works for the concept i'm all ears as is the DM

So im making a slayer who fights with a two-hander (for flavor, mainly) does this seem like it would actually be alright? Im a human taking adoptive parentage (elves) so that I can immediately use an elven curve blade, we are starting at lvl 1 so i dont have my build planned out yet just curious if anybody had done something like this before or if they could give some insight on two-handed slayers.

Question in title

Basically, how would you handle it? I had a low level paladin ask if he could meditate and basically commune with his god, and to say the least I was blind-sided by that. I hadn't even thought of a low level paladin speaking with his god, surely he shouldn't be able to just meditate for a moment and talk to a supremely powerful being as a weak paladin, thats a big deal. So what do you guys suggest for a situation like that? I've thought of something like the paladin being bathed in a warming light or something nice like that but i'm really not sure how to handle it. Any advice? Maybe just a commune with an angel but how would a conversation like that go?

I've seen a lot of people talk about adjusting play to fit a low magic world but I'm looking for a well-balanced way to do it. I know that pathfinder expects different "levels" of magical gear at different levels but I'm looking for a way to let the players still be capable without +1 everything. so I suppose what I'm looking for is just a way to even the field. there will be magic items but they will be very unique almost always. so what do you guys think would work well as a ramping up buff to keep the party on par?

On a side note any other threads on this would be helpful to me

So looking at the Duelist precise strike it should be clarified a little better and I couldn't find an answer elsewhere so I call upon my ancestors knowledge

"Precise Strike (Ex): A duelist gains the ability to strike precisely with a light or one-handed piercing weapon, adding her duelist level to her damage roll.

When making a precise strike, a duelist cannot attack with a weapon in her other hand or use a shield. A duelist's precise strike only works against living creatures with discernible anatomies. Any creature that is immune to critical hits is also immune to a precise strike, and any item or ability that protects a creature from critical hits also protects a creature from a precise strike."

So how exactly does Precise Strike work?

I really like the feel of you don't just get a magic ring off every highwayman and/or tough enemy. So I was hoping to see some cool ideas for magic items! It would be especially great to see something completely unique.
For example I made a belt that pierces the abdomen and shortly after the pc won't feel pain. it has upsides and downsides to it but things like that are particularly interesting

The players are actually low level at the moment but I would still like to see magic items of any level.

And one more thing just to let you all in on what's going on there's a mirror the pc's have that lets them go into a pocket dimension once a day with a magic shop full of crazy stuff. The prices for things are in souls, rare materials, spells ETC other magical stuff so you couldn't just buy it from anywhere! The owner of the shop is an eccentric demigod

Sorry off topic - but when reading the OP title - did anyone hear (to music) "I wanna be the very best, like no one ever was!".

Someone Caught it!

Thanks for all the input, Nearyn's link is quite helpful and I recommend it for anybody else interested.

Main Question: What are really cool things you have wished would happen as a player and what are some of the really cool things that have happened?

Really just dump anything about dming here im a sponge for this knowledge.

So if he did full attack it would be all of these modifiers?

Natural Attacks:
I see these everywhere but they can be rather complex, lets say there was a Glabrezu he is a good example of a weird natural attacker.

Melee 2 pincers +20 (2d8+10/19–20), 2 claws +20 (1d6+10), bite +20 (1d8+10)

(I'm putting anything that modifies the attacks down here but here's a link incase im not looking at something important)
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/outsiders/demon/glabrezu

Str 31
Base Atk +12
(I'm also pretty sure this is assuming that he's using power attack, so -4 attack +8 dam. WITHOUT power attack it would be +22)

that would mean he should have +18 to hit not 20 if im not mistaken...
Also, since these can't all be primary doesn't he have penalties to some of these attacks?

Finally, wouldn't the damage be lower? Unless these are all treated as primary... some clarification on what's primary and what's considered secondary would be helpful.

Its my first time dming so I expected one caster-fella but im not going to make my player do anything. From a dm standpoint a time oracle is really cool and flavorful (much better than a WOOD oracle)

Funny thing is we have a rogue, paladin, barbarian, and now, the one i had magical faith in is an oracle...of time i.e warrior/warrior-support. Darn. Still flavorful and cool, nothing set in stone, and there is always multiclassing but I think being a time oracle with a couple fighter levels could be fun.

So i'm looking at time oracle stuff for one of my players and it looks like they are mostly utility stuff (making baddies old, teleporting a few feet, removing them from existence, ETC)

so should he go more caster-ish or melee-ish?
(by this I mean what is it with time oracles? with the utility I can't imagine going more caster-y would help much so shouldn't they go
martial stat-wise?)

What stats should he want/have
Or, some general tips on what they do well and what they do poorly.
Even a couple suggestions of time oracle abilities/spells to go for would help.

(its 20 point buy, and he is starting at lvl 4 we don't know race yet)

I would like to hear some interesting, original, or fun traps/haunts you have either encountered or created

All good advice worth considering whenever I am going to make situations in which conflicting alignments co-exist. Thanks for the insight masters of rules and creativity.

Even when an npc is evil like the sellsword Nearyn talked about that doesn't mean that he's an A-hole, it could just mean he's generally greedy or cares about himself more than others. So, it's not like a good person wouldn't ally a technically "evil" sellsword.

It always depends on the encounter, I like the idea of a single extremely powerful enemy who can challenge the party but I understand why it isn't easy to setup. in a dragons case it wouldn't make sense (usually) to give it buddies. Especially when a dragon should easily hold its own against 4 adventurers.

How hard do you guys think a BBEG should be? Should they always knock someone unconscious? Should they be short fights but deadly or long and based on attrition?

What are some creative ways to make an otherwise easy encounter difficult, that way a high level party could deal with bandits. On the flip-side what are some creative ways to make a low-level party fight higher-tier enemies?

Also what are good general rules about BBEG's difficulty? or whats fair to give to the BBEG?

You could totally multi-class into barb for a martial oracle! Only downside really is that if he rages he can't cast spells but its a good way to have an "out" when bad news gets too close, and since your starting at lvl 1 2nd level being barb would make most low-level encounters easy with rage finishing the enemies off

Thanks for the advice! Indebtedness or a common goal would be a good fit, and since the bandit I had in mind is closer to a robin-hood type hopefully our paladin of Sarenrae will see a good reason for friendly relations.

I probably should have laid out the npc I had in mind better lol

That's exactly what I was planning on, like the bandit they are going to encounter were going to knock them out initially (or atleast try to) and she is meant to just be taking care of her "boys" basically the leader is meant to have them do a favor for her in exchange for their freedom, but over that they bond and she will help them out in the future.