Rockhopper's page

He's a combat specialist (high BAB) that optionally has a horse (animal companion) which isn't necessarily with him at all times or ideal for battle (-3 levels); he's athletic and good at a variety of talents and odd jobs (lots of class skills/ranks).

If you can't tell, I'm sizing him up as a Ranger. There might be a good archetype to drop Favored Enemy for something more appropriate, unless you wanted to take it for Moblins (orcs?) or Evil Outsiders or something. One problem, though, is that he's generally pure of heart and quite courageous (courage is kind of his 'thing') so his Will should be high. I'd give him Iron Will and Improved, at the very least, on top of a good Wis.

Link tends to fight alone, and he's not the type to prance around with his ocarina during battle, so Bard isn't quite the right fit. He rarely works directly for any deities, and he sometimes defies major established orders/engages in mischief, so Paladin wouldn't fit.

As for his race, I'd say half-elf. He doesn't demonstrate the frailty of an elf and seems to have a rather human build. Human would work if it's implied that "Hylians" are "humans" and other races are adjusted accordingly.

He should have a fairly even Str and Dex, light armor, and amass plenty of thrown and ranged weapons for beating DR or fighting enemies at various ranges. Fighter, or a dip in Fighter levels, could work if you really wanted to capture his diversity of weapon skills (or pick up Courage). Cha could optionally be a dump stat (silent hero, tends to have to do errands/quests to win people over rather than charming them) or a high stat (performance ability, tends to make a wide network of friends and supporters over time).

So, you roll a 20 on your Fireball. The party's out of luck. You roll a 1, they're fine. You roll a 14, you probably get most of them.

Individual rolls make things more interesting for the group. Sometimes the cleric will survive and the rogue will mess up, sometimes the whole party makes it except one person or vice versa.

With that dex you should stick with medium armor, of course, unless you expect the game will have a lot of skirmishing and such. The temptation to go at 40 feet per round is high but that's what a mithral breastplate is eventually for.

Great ideas! Might I suggest a check (like Wisdom + levels in ki-granting classes) to successfully understand the techniques? It could balance this feature a little better for those who would try to fully access it by level dipping, plus I picture monks occasionally struggling to master an advanced secret and having to redouble their training and studies.

Happler wrote:

Rockhopper wrote:

The bastard sword is an exotic, one-handed weapon based on which table it's listed in, therefore I'd say the appropriate proficiency feat would be exotic. That is its true nature, even if you can use it martially (you can technically also use it as an improvised weapon).

+1

The best way to look at the bastard sword is that it is an exotic weapon, that happens to allow martial use if you want to (albeit only two-handed).

That way if something states that it gives proficiency with baster sword, it basically gives the feat "Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Bastard Sword)".

I'm inclined to look at the the opposite way. It's a martial weapon that can be used in an exotic way.

I'm curious what your inclination is based on. Mine's based on the table they put the weapon in when both could have been appropriate.

AT suffers when it first takes its multiclass levels and shines when it gets its later abilities. For games that have a lot of non-combat scenarios, it's an excellent setup.

If a GM is getting angry about something that is an ever-present possibility within the system, they should probably build their sessions differently or start implementing house rules. That or try a different game. Or just have a drink or two and try to laugh it off. Or rethink the philosophy of what it means to be a GM. Or get anger management. Plenty of options!

In any case I think BBEGs are ideally less about raw HP and AC and more about the situations they create. They're not just sitting in that special room waiting to be challenged. They're posting bounties for the PCs' heads. They're blackmailing you with what you want most. They're rigging traps and summoning nightmarish foes to harry your advances. They're spying, scrying and plotting ten steps ahead. If you break them down to the HP and the AC and are disappointed with how easily they go down, just remember that it's the HP and AC that went down. You must somehow transcend those numbers to create a truly memorable BBEG, and it's not always easy.

Another idea: grab an Eldritch Heritage. You'll have the Cha for it, and it might give you some useful abilities, but moreover, you can have dragon blood or be demonspawn or whatever suits you. That's pretty metal.

Action

Deceive Someone: Attempting to deceive someone takes at least 1 round, but can possibly take longer if the lie is elaborate (as determined by the GM on a case-by-case basis).

Feint in Combat: Feinting in combat is a standard action.

Deliver Secret Message: Delivering a secret message generally takes twice as long as the message would otherwise would take to relay.

Check out these three functions of the Bluff skill. Note that "Deceive Someone" is its own separate function independent of feinting.

Secret messages aren't deceitful, they're just private. A Monk might deliver a secret message regarding one's family member or other personal matters without dishonesty being an issue. Similarly, a feint isn't a deception, it's a combat tactic.

And if you know much about martial arts, you know someone can perform a false or provocative blow that is still quite laden with intent to hit. I don't consider it dishonest.

Rockhopper wrote:

I think, since the Monk doesn't get all the nice things it wants flavorfully or mechanically, either/or is better than nothing, so if I have to flurry with one fist to get proper enchantments, I'll take it. Considering the developers have nerfed the brass knuckles but haven't done so in an official errata/FAQ manner, a core rules Monk is lucky to get any benefit at all here.

That said, houseruling the function of brass knuckles to be more like mini-Amulets of Mighty Fists is reasonable and hardly broken for Monks. I'd probably run it such that a set of knuckles could be crafted that work like magical boots or gloves: both must be enchanted as one item and worn in a pair to apply their powers to the character's body.

You're likely referring to SKR explaining how Adventurer's Armory brass knuckles work. That post was from before the APG came out, where the brass knuckles were reprinted and changed.

I'll have to go look the thread up again, but I'm pretty sure his change of heart on the matter was after the APG release.

Edit: Scratch that. It was pre-APG release.

So it's possible their ruling was absolved by the APG, but many people seem to think otherwise.

Looked up some spells that'd be good:

Chord of Shards
Ear-Piercing Scream
Unnatural Lust

And those are just level 1. They're from UM, so I hadn't heard of them. There are tons of Bard spells that either do something totally sweet, or at least have a really metal-sounding name.

In a world where a one HD creature could easily be surrounded by 5 HD creatures that have the power to consistently fool it with spectacular powers, it may become jaded and skeptical that anything it sees or perceives is innately true. Add in an inadequate education, a secluded lifestyle, racial factors (only the dwarven gods are real!), and character flaws and you could easily have a partial, if not total atheist. Of course, the events of a campaign might break that philosophy pretty quickly or at least refine it.

If the hungry ghost is going to be a really exploiting cheese-bag, he is going to pick up a whip.

A whip does not deal any damage to people with armor, so he can go ahead and spank his buddies all day, until those crits is going to grant him full hp/ki/temp hp.

And the role playing ramifications are really amusing, too!

I think, since the Monk doesn't get all the nice things it wants flavorfully or mechanically, either/or is better than nothing, so if I have to flurry with one fist to get proper enchantments, I'll take it. Considering the developers have nerfed the brass knuckles but haven't done so in an official errata/FAQ manner, a core rules Monk is lucky to get any benefit at all here.

That said, houseruling the function of brass knuckles to be more like mini-Amulets of Mighty Fists is reasonable and hardly broken for Monks. I'd probably run it such that a set of knuckles could be crafted that work like magical boots or gloves: both must be enchanted as one item and worn in a pair to apply their powers to the character's body.

Not sure what you guys are talking about, I'd make a dragoon as a soulknife lich whose phylactery is a construct that shoots eldritch blasts. Oh, right.

As the above posts mention, flight is probably the best way to simulate a dragoon - d20 jumping penalizes the heck out of vertical jumps while dragoons scoff at DC 100. It's apples to walruses. I like Umbral Reaver's idea, too, and I'll definitely check out the Tome of Battle stuff when I get a chance.

I've been plotting out a d20 game based on Final Fantasy myself, and the way I planned to handle the infamous Jump attack (and to copy the uncertainty of landing time from Final Fantasy Tactics) is to use a d20 roll that determines how many ticks of "initiative count" you're in the air for. Upon landing, I'll probably use fall distance damage mechanics against the enemy for bonus damage, but not against the dragoon - they expertly transfer their momentum into the enemy, perhaps with a level-based maximum.

The bastard sword is an exotic, one-handed weapon based on which table it's listed in, therefore I'd say the appropriate proficiency feat would be exotic. That is its true nature, even if you can use it martially (you can technically also use it as an improvised weapon).

Skill Focus: Perform (Acting) on my Bard for Versatile Performance, to make a master of disguise/lying. Our games are usually fairly straightforward, so I have to get creative to make good opportunities to use these, and they're often more for my own amusement than to advance the game. But it's a fun idea and it just looks so darn good on the sheet.

Jadeite wrote:

I'd say, if anything, anime shows have gotten better.

If you've found any relatively new anime that's on par in quality with Outlaw Star, Trigun, Cowboy Bebop, and the like, PLEASE SHARE.

26 episodes? Sci-fi? Newer than the series you mentioned? Maybe you'd like Gurren Lagann.

On a side note, Ichigo is a somewhat poor representation of a Magus considering he is utterly incapable of using the magic system in Bleach - replace the Magus spells with a Master Chymist feature and we're talking.

Kuchiki Byakuya is probably the best example of integrating spells and combat - now if anyone wants to stat up a magic weapon for his Senbonzakura, they'll be my hero. (Sword that can perform a "Flurry of Blows" as if with Keen Shuriken as a standard action?)

By the same logic, having a 15-20x3 weapon would be the same as getting a 9-20x2 weapon. Just throw in an elven curve blade and power attack, and you're god. >_>

Well, you'd hit a point where some of those 9s would miss even though they're threats. Granted, you'd be very powerful even if you'd have a few "aw shucks" swings.

Hello, Yuki.

There are many words you will see in Pathfinder books. Some words are much more useful than others. If you look at the Index of a book, or the Glossary, you will see lists of words that have a specific meaning. These words help you use the rules of the game.

I will give you an example of useful words. This is text from the Glossary.

Fascinated: A fascinated creature is entranced by a supernatural or spell effect.

Here are a few words that are useful. "Creature" is always used to talk about one character. "Creatures" means two or more. You will see this word very often and can always trust its meaning. This is a very easy example of a useful word.

"Supernatural" is used to describe some abilities. There are rules for supernatural abilities, so whenever you see this word you can look up those rules until you are familiar with them.

I hope these examples are not too simple. The point is that they appear many times in the rules and you can trust their meaning.

Let's look at a word which is not "useful" in the same way. The word "entranced" in the above quote is not a word that helps with the rules. It is just an English word to add meaning for the reader. You will not see "entranced" in many descriptions of spells, so it does not help you follow the rules. It might take a lot of time to look up a word like "entranced" in a dictionary but it will not give you much help.

There will be words you may not know well, but some of them are not very important. The most important words are ones you can find in lists, like the Glossary or Index. When you see these useful words in sentences, you can sometimes understand the rules.

Here is another sentence about Fascinate:

The creature stands or sits quietly, taking no actions other than to pay attention to the fascinating effect, for as long as the effect lasts.

This is a long sentence. Perhaps in a sentence like this you may not know every word. So let's pick out the important words:

The creature stands or sits quietly, taking no actions other than to pay attention to the fascinating effect, for as long as the effect lasts.

By finding the useful words you may understand a sentence without knowing every word. The creature takes no actions if it is being fascinated. The other words may help a little, but "sits quietly" is not in the Glossary, so it will not help you very much.

Let's look at one more sentence about Fascinate.

It takes a –4 penalty on skill checks made as reactions, such as Perception checks.

This type is easy. Whenever you get a number, like "-4" just figure out where the -4 goes. In this case the -4 is on Perception skill checks. "It" is still "the creature", of course.

Sometimes there may be many words in a sentence. These words may be interesting, but not as useful for learning the rules. If you are often in a hurry, learn to find the useful words and you will understand rules more quickly.

Remember well the important, useful words:

Actions (standard, move, swift, free, full-round)
Abilities (extraordinary, supernatural, spell-like)
Schools of magic (abjury, enchantment, evocation, necromancy, etc.)
Creatures (animal, dragon, humanoid, magical beast, undead, etc.)

There are many more. It is not an easy task to understand all of them, so take your time.

I hope I have been of some help to you.

Fozbek wrote:

Of course, all of that wall of text is probably just the reaction you wanted. I seriously doubt that you actually watched even close to 50 episodes. My guess is less than 10. Either that or you just went in so prejudiced against it that you refused to see what is there. Your insults add to this perception.

Was that the reaction I wanted? I dunno about that. I was hoping someone would post a response of some kind though.

In any case, as of this writing I have watched the first 65 episodes. You are welcome to test me if you'd like.

For better or worse I will likely keep watching it too, not because I like it, but because it's the summer and all my normal shows have dried up leaving me with nothing better.

Any redeeming qualities? Things you'd actually like if they didn't take so long to play out? I'm just curious about your mindset considering how much you've invested into something you seem to be fundamentally opposed to... perhaps you like having something to hate?

I try to go for first names that are uncommon yet short - almost always two syllables, now that I think of it. I usually go to BehindTheName.com when I need to come up with something, whether there's a letter I want it to start with or I want a certain meaning.

I have this sneaking suspicion that the devs would rule that even though you can be armed in more than two arms, Spell Combat is a special action which strictly involves two of them, but that you'd then be free to use the other arms for attacks of opportunity.

While on this matter, natural attacks count as light weapons, right? Could someone, for example, under the effect of Form of the Dragon use their bite as the light weapon attack and a dragon's forelimb as the casting/somatic hand (as dragon forms are specifically described as being capable of somatic motions)?

Note the Bestiary text for taking a roc as an animal companion:

Rocs taken as animal companions by druids or rangers are typically newly hatched birds—a baby roc is the size of a person and ready for flight and hunting within minutes of hatching. Unfortunately for druids seeking animal companions of legendary size, an animal companion roc is limited to Large size—still large enough for a Medium druid or ranger to use the flying beast as a mount.

This leads me to believe that the additional animals made available in subsequent sources are open to GM discretion for rangers despite the limited selection in the Core Rulebook.

The feat Boon Companion can do great things...

If you're vowing to live with naught but the rags on your back, shouldn't you get Survival as a class skill? Or is the idea that you get by on your own with little help, but you're not supposed to be good at doing so, either?

If your party is pumping the equivalent of thousands of gp worth of items into you via potions, scrolls and wands, I think it defeats the purpose of the vow almost to the degree of a Paladin letting his party do all the evil things so he won't have to.

Edit: These two thoughts are total non-sequitur, in case they seemed otherwise.

Guys if you have the chance to take Dig(excrement excavation) do it. When your in the wilderness and have a 100 orcs coming your way just dig a pit under their feet and run for it!

booger=boy

Morbidly curious whether that was intentional.

Guilded weapon property?

Where is that at?

Pathfinder #10 22

It's a +1 that replaces Strength damage with Wisdom, never at a 1.5 or 0.5 regardless of offhand, main hand or two-handed.

I wouldn't know Pathfinder #10 22 if it hit me in the head (might be from Paizo's days making 3.5 material?) so as for its core legality, I'm not sure.

Nobody expects the Red Mantis Assassins! Our chief weapon is surprise... surprise and fascination. Fascination and surprise are our two weapons. And sawtooth sabres...

So far the consensus seems to be that you need a Sorcerer, Bard or Summoner. Paizo staff members clarify that a Spell-Like Ability does not count when spells themselves are required for prerequisites.

Here's a quote on the matter, though the Witch itself wasn't out at the time.

Edit: the link might not stay at the relevant section so here's the text:

Q: With a wizards Arcane Bond's power to allow for casting arcane spells spontaneously can they qualify for the Dragon Disciple Prestige Class?

A: (James Jacobs 11/20/09) First off... I'm not a big fan of saying what you can and can't do in your home game. And as a result, I'm generally hesitant to lay down the law for things like this, since I can see the attraction to go either way. What it really boils down to is if the GM wants to let wizards qualify for the class... that's cool. Arcane bond's power to allow a wizard to cast an additional spell was not intended to let wizards "sneak" into prestige classes that do this, but there's no game balance reason as to why they shouldn't be able to do it. But for materials we're publishing, though, and for building NPCs who might have this class, being able to cast arcane spells spontaneously means "being a bard or a sorcerer" at this point.

The deck is amusing for new players or for campaigns or groups where getting past level 10 is a lost cause. Also good for groups who love living moment to moment and having great stories to tell. For people who put a lot of effort into characters and like to watch them grow, the deck can muck up their investments and derail the game.

Shouldn't a penalty apply to the character and the DC increase apply to the challenge? I.e., I get a penalty to skill checks because I'm drunk/armored/whatever, while the DC goes up if the task itself is harder?

I can't tell from your statements so I'll just point it out in case it's unknown to anyone: while Surprise Spells can add Sneak Attack damage to any damaging spells, it's widely accepted that any spell with a d20 attack roll can be treated as a Sneak Attack simply by possessing Rogue (or Assassin or whatnot) levels. As such, any of the mentioned Touch or Ray spells are great early on, while late-game at Arcane Trickster 10, bursts, lines, cones and the like all can deal Sneak damage.

This gets me thinking that the Bard's sonic spells could actually be pretty powerful.

I had a fun 3.0 encounter where my dwarf met some Xorns arguing about who got to eat what gems. Interesting creatures as they're not evil yet could come to blows with the party if both sides really wanted some particular minerals. It must've been an oversight that they had no language listed.

Great question. The fact that it adds a +4 really does make it feel like a "similar" ability since the feat removes a -4. Sometimes we get useful text like "this attempt provokes AoO as normal".

I unknowingly used a gem of corrupting wishes in 3.5. I wished to power up my bow to kill the final enemy of our campaign. DM decided since the bow was an artifact the wish couldn't destroy it, but instead he made the weather turn foul to impair ranged attacks.

Of course, then the gem started to explode. I had some indication it could do that, so I threw it at the dragon and did 696 damage. I died in the blast, but hey. The big loss was our friend who'd spent over an hour making a colossal dragon out of clay for the battle mat.

Intensified Spell, however, would add the extra damage, I believe?

"Neither has a single stat below 15"+
"The GM had them reroll in front of him, but the new results were even better on the whole than what they had"+
"Recalling now, I think I overheard--wasn't sure if they meant it happened with these characters--that if someone rolled three 6's, their previous group would also add the 4th to the total."

I'm sure they're cheating somehow, or else just totally butchering the concept of the rolls with exceptions and bonuses. Average roll on 3d6 should be 10.5. 4d6, drop lowest, should give you 13. 23% chance to roll a 15 or higher on any given score, and let's be extremely fair and bump that to 30% to allow for racial bonuses being greater than racial penalties overall (even though circumstantially a case could be made for lowering the % as well). To get four out of six scores of 15+ each is a total likelihood of less than 1% - for both of them to get all six at 15+ is just absurd.

I would be most displeased to be in your situation but I'm not sure what you should do. At the least, I'd say demand a chance to roll your own stats - and use the process of narrowing down the roll method being used as a means to demonstrate that their own numbers are bogus. Using it as a personal attack against them would probably be counterproductive, but using it to demonstrate the brokenness of the rolling system is fair.

The word "meaningfully" isn't very meaningful here. What does it mean to be meaningfully affected? I would think meaningful effects include ignoring hardness, weighing less, resisting energy, etc. Substance on the other hand is what it is. If something is weak to silver and this is a form of silver, how can it be "meaningless" to hit it with silver? That's what RAW would have you accept if you look for the strictest meaning in the words.

I think in this case we're left to interpret what a "meaningful" effect of material composition is, because it's not a binding mechanical term you can find in the glossary like a swift action or a circumstance bonus.

I recall some feats or class features in the 3.x days ruling that if you already had them, you'd get a bonus one of your choice (or Improved whatever, or it stacks from multiple classes) but a lot of other books stated that if you already had the feat, you gained nothing. Overall, I prefer the former and would generally houserule it for people, but I could see some exploits, like taking Finesse Rogue, a totally optional talent, to treat as a bonus feat - especially when there's already a similar bonus feat option as another Rogue Talent.

Don't think I've ever seen anything about bonus spells like the OP has mentioned, but I don't think it's unbalancing to allow it - there's something wonky about thematic Sorcerers (with that particular power literally flowing through them) tapping into a relevant bonus spell two levels later than the Wizard can take it.

Alternately, I think something you could pull off closer to the rules would be taking the spell early, and thus not getting it as a bonus spell, but then swapping it out for another spell when you get the chance - it was NOT taken as a bonus spell for you, so those rules about not getting rid of bonus spells for other ones shouldn't apply - and I would think the bonus spell just might then poof onto your spells known since you're technically supposed to have it. That is not explicitly RAW but I don't see it as opposing RAW either - just one way to interpret an odd scenario.

3.5 had a blade bow, a magic weapon that could switch between ranged or melee. Forget what book it was in, maybe the magic item compendium. Not sure how quick the switch was.

I do hear that Dragon Disciple after level 8 is sub-optimum. I've also seen people recommend taking Eldritch Knight levels at the end, but in your case you're benefiting from the Fighter class features. Notably, you only lose one level of spells by dropping two levels of Disciple. You can probably make do with Blindsense 30 and in many games 90 feet of flight is overkill (fun overkill but still).

And yeah, at 20th level with partial casting, Quicken may or may not be great, but it's worth having in case you need to squeeze any basic but useful spells into dire situations. Normally any build that has so many caster levels should be prepared to capitalize on it, but the Disciple seems so uniquely synergistic that it can get away with the spells being secondary.

There are a lot of ways to go with Disciple but considering your emphasis on hammer combat I think your current build is superior to your old one. You lose the Form of Dragon II SLA but with so many feats in your hammer you're better off only transforming when a dragon's racial features are advantageous to you.

Have you figured out any ways to take advantage of the +1 energy damage per die ability? There might be some niche spells out there such as in the APG, 3rd party materials or wherever else you and your GM are comfortable drawing from that could give you some type of acid damage you could incorporate into melee, or at the very least, cast in a pinch.

Is the plan to play all the way to 20? Should be a fun character in any case, but I have to admit I find something fun about playing hybrid characters - they transform from level to level, having to depend on new methods and powers over time. I had an Arcane Archer in 3.5 who could barely afford a bow at level 1, at level 2 was actually handy with low level magic, filled in for melee sometimes around 3 to 5, then somewhere around 8 or 10 became this DPR monster. I hope you'll have a good time, and who knows, maybe you'll wind up adjusting that build as you realize the character's potential.

I recommend taking a look at the way the Summoner's Eidolon handles claws and slams based on how many limbs it has. While by RAW it appears you can combine all these attacks, there's a case that can be made on RAI for preventing some of them depending on whether you think Eidolon rules reflect overall intent on natural weapons vs. strictly the internal balancing of the Summoner class features.

Ultimately I think the best deal breaker for you will be whether or not this many attacks will be overpowered when used on your players. At any rate I think this is pushing it for the most possible attacks on a humanoid creature without class levels, which is amusing if nothing else.

Very nice. I once started up an Abyssal Sorcerer with a level of Barbarian with an intimidation theme, but never got to use her much. I'm seeing similarities here. Something you haven't mentioned but could easily think of is the half-elf's bonus feat of Skill Focus. Take that for Intimidate for what turns out to be a massive bonus at level 10.

Barbarian has some potential in place of Fighter here but you seem to have Fighter fairly well incorporated and the bonus feats help keep the build together.

Always remember the +4 size bonus to intimidate checks if you're larger than your opponent; even if you're out of Dragon Forms, Enlarge Person is a great spell to carry as it has great synergy with a two-handed melee build, let alone an intimidator.

I like the idea of three categories, one active apiece. One thought, though: if they can be dispelled, but are free to reapply, what if anything can truly stop them (besides Antimagic Fields)?

As for the name and the theme, I keep thinking of knights whose heraldry is displayed on their shields, but instead of some knightly order, it's a proud magical bloodline. The name herald is used for other classes, and I can't seem to find other good words related to it, but at any rate it made me really interested in blazon, so I guess I got something out of the deal.

Counting as magic is occasionally pretty useful, but I agree Eldritch Claws comes a little late for say a Druid who can just cast Magic Fang/Greater anyway. It can be handy for a savage Barbarian, Ranger or Fighter though. Don't forget, dragons have DR/Magic, and you never want to be caught unprepared by one, so if you know your game will have some, this feat could be handy. You could also give Eldritch Claws directly to an Animal Companion with enough Int, or an Eidolon, but depending on the campaign and playstyle this may be more or less a waste.

In the game I've been playing, I've kept an alchemical silver dagger with my Bard and I have Arcane Strike. Little did I know I'd be fighting vampires AND devils on the same island. My combination of weapon properties was the only thing that could overcome their DR. I was outdamaging the Barbarian! I took the Versatile Weapon spell to help keep this from happening again.

Edit: I thought of a good use for this feat even on a character who has magic weapons. Let's say you're an orc with a bite attack or a Fiendish Barbarian with horns. Or both! Your main weapon is your great axe, since your bite and horns are at a -5 and don't get 1.5 strength. They also don't get multiple attacks per round, so you've pumped most of your money into the axe. But you still like the added damage from your natural weapons, and you'd like to make sure few foes can shrug them off. Invest in this one feat and save thousands on an Amulet of Mighty Fists (and thus you can keep the slot free for Natural Armor, too).

Only problem is Eagle's Splendor won't stack with Headband of Charisma. They're both the same type of enhancement bonus, so you merely take the higher of the two.

Isn't the main issue of archetype vs base class one of how many pages it takes up in the book and how far it strays from the existing classes? I would argue that for a homebrew class, which one he calls it is mostly irrelevant. The most important thing to take from archetypes would be to compare and contrast overall power and balance of class features to determine whether his class is appropriate for use.

You might want to make enhancements that play off each other, building up just like feats - the character will have to invest maybe 4 to 10 levels to earn an advanced enhancement. Some should also obviously be available at higher levels only. A few enhancements should offer bonus feats, kind of like certain Rogue talents offering feats like Weapon Finesse. One thing to try would be adding an enhancement which is exclusive to each bloodline or only available to certain bloodlines (Infernal/Abyssal, Red/Gold/Brass Dragon/Fire Elemental, etc.) to offer unique build options.

I would definitely recommend special weapons that are built into the class. Look at the natural weapons the Barbarian totems and the Sorcerer bloodlines get. The Dragon Disciple is a good example of something you could pull off here, only in different ways. Consider making some bloodlines which can create a magical weapon out of thin air, or transform their weapon/armor into something that suits their bloodline. Look at the Paladin's Divine Bond ability for their weapon and you'll see what I'm getting at. I might offer more detailed suggestions in this regard once I've given it more thought.

Lastly I would suggest avoiding having a primary "casting" stat. After all, you said how this class doesn't cast spells, so steering it away from having some dependency on Cha will help separate it from a mere arcane Paladin and make sure it's more comparable to a Fighter.

If you were going to play a character from 1st to 20th level how would you go about having them become a king and create their own nation, what tactics would you use?

If you were a GM what would you require a player to do to become a king figuring they were not born of royal blood and just claiming a birthright?

I'd almost certainly use a Bard of some kind. The Charisma, social skills and skills in general are very important. Inspire Courage seems appropriate for a brave king and his loyal men. Leadership would be a must-grab feat although proper diplomacy checks with non-follower NPCs and working with the setting's economy to be able to hire soldiers and the like would also be key.

I'd probably take an Arcane Duelist archetype so the king could take a flavorfully appropriate suit of armor at some point and if necessary hold his own in one on one combat.

Any tactics more particular than that would probably depend on the world. I'd focus on very outgoing and bold roleplaying, but I'd say don't spend all one's time earning the favor of a few needy people unless those people command villages, legions, ideologies, etc. An epic king would need to keep moving forward and leave awe and admiration in his wake (for his followers, hirelings, party members, etc. to foster from there).

For a player to become a king in a game I were GMing, first of all there would have to be some cultural precedent. Maybe there were great kingdoms of old that once governed the lands now comprised of small rural communities and some trade outposts. The PC would have to live up to some standards I'd set to reinstate the old kingdom system, whether it was some magical test or sacred artifact or simply just stirring up old political ideas and forming some bonds of debt and servitude among the peasants. If there were an existing power structure, the kingdom to be would either need to liberate itself or overtake the current system entirely at which point the PC trying to be king would need to get extensively involved in reconstruction.

This kind of game could be played in a lot of different ways, or it could be played in increments of different styles, "chapters" if you will - one of training, or driving orcs or dragons out of the land, or reestablishing peace between disputing groups (mix of favor performing and sniffing out corrupt individuals who are fueling the conflict,) or questing for sacred items, or waging a war of liberation, invasion, unification, etc., or one of simulationism, upkeep and peacekeeping, or even one of war between major nations. I'd base what kinds of chapters to use on my group, what interests them, what did or didn't go over well and what I think would best substantiate the growth of the whole king concept.