Rodinia's page

The Feebleminded PC can continue to breath. Others need to feed, tend, and clean him, else he will gradually succumb to dehydration and bedsores. That's it. PC is doomed without a Heal spell. Feeblemind is basically a 'save or die' spell that's harder to fix than death ...

Magistrate Vargri is a PFS Bard-1/Inquisitor-X. Brawler is a great foundation class for any martial character. Level 1 Brawler's Martial Flexibility is exceptionally useful, such that it has it's own guide.

Like you, Vargri is not interested in high level play. His build came together at 5th level, when he gained Spring Attack and access to Whirlwind Attack. Martial flexibility is great, and can be worth losing out on one Inquisitor level.

Vargri often takes Tandem Trip as his Teamwork Feat. This makes him supremely effective at tripping when tripping applies.

I realized why it bugged me so much when you proposed making the longspear (or any reach weapon) an Agile Weapon. It's because there's a gigantic rules-exploit here one can drive a truck through.

Normally, no real reach weapon (i.e. exclude whip) can be agile. Number of AoOs is hugely important to reach fighters. Normal (Strength-based) reach fighters have to balance attack effectiveness (Strength) with AoO count (Dex). If one eliminates Strength from the equation then a Dex-based reach fighter will be far more effective. It opens the door to allow a DEX-based character with huge reach (30' reach is quite possible), solid damage, and a huge count of AoOs to dominate the battlefield. I doubt that was the intent.

The reach tactic style of fighting is already tremendously effective. There's no need to give it such a huge boost. Agile polearms lead to all sorts of absurdities.

Thanks for sharing your new weapon tables!

PFS Rodinia has an axebeak boon companion. They are a tag team pair and do not charge. Quite a few PFS scenarios are not appropriate for pets. Perhaps 1 in 6. No 'fragrant' giant carnivorous birds at high-class social events, nor on small row boats. Fortunately, the difficult dungeon situations are viable for pets, especially if the Large pet in question has the Narrow Frame feat.

A lot of PFS battles occur in cramped or underground spaces. Charges are rarely possible in such situations. Other players block charges quite consistently. For chargers, it seems like charge lanes are open about half the time. This gets a bit easier after 'PFS middle age' (7th level) when Wheeling Charge comes online. The only chargers I've seen consistently get a charge lane are those on giant geckos. I've seen a few flying chargers, and they work OK outside but not so much in confined spaces. PFS GMs do enforce rules for flying, so crowded indoor spaces don't work for flyers until hover comes online, usually between 4th-7th level.

Like people say above, there are several different ways to do Mounted Combat in PFS.

It wasn't confusing at all. Just a bit different from the standard weapons tables.

I'd argue that the longspear is already far more effective than longsword in Pathfinder combat. Longspear (which must be carried) was historically a Primary Battle Weapon, while longsword (which is a sidearm) was generally a secondary weapon. It seems Pathfinder players gravitate more to swords than spears, but there is little doubt that spears are generally superior. It makes sense that most primary battle weapons are more effective than most secondary weapons.

Not sure what kind of feedback you want. I've looked over your charts and noted the similarities and differences. That's an awful lot of work for rather small changes. Your players will need to invest some extra time learning and considering your non-standard weapon tables.

Regarding spears, and their portrayal in cinema, I think you mistake skill for agility. The spear has historically been the primary weapon of warfare, most of the world over, through most of recorded history. This is because it works well [Youtube spear sparring videos]. It requires strength and skill to use a spear effectively. This martial artist suggests the spear is not a particularly finesse-able weapon, rather that's just what competent spear combat looks like to the unschooled eye.

I totally agree with you that all spears should be monk weapons. Do a youtube search for 'Shao Lin spear', if you need clarification as to why. Failing to give monks proficiency with the long spear (or any reach weapon) is just silly, and probably a holdover from AD&D version 1, which made the same mistake but no one cared because back then the spear was a lousy weapon.

Not sure what you are trying to say, Monkey_V. Please elaborate.

I know you expressed preference for sword-and-board. Do that if you want, but know that it's not your Dwarf's most effective way of defending himself. Note I said 'defending' not 'attacking'. A big two handed weapon is stronger on offense, of course, but that's not the point. Your Inquisitor may be much stronger on defense if he uses a big two-handed reach weapon, like the Dwarven Longaxe or Dwarven Longhammer. This is because most reach weapons are defensive weapons. Many foes will avoid you, and the people near you, because they don't want to give you a free attack (AoO). If the foe rushes you anyway then you get a free attack, and may kill the foe outright with your Big Damage. The result is that your PC will take fewer attacks, and especially fewer full attacks (depending on your tactics). This effect often gives more defensive value than a shield. The defensive value of reach weapons is quite real in the Pathfinder game, but is mentioned nowhere in any rule book. Only people who have played the game a lot, or who are told about it, will typically know this. In the Pathfinder game the best defense is usually a good offense.

@OP: It won't help you deal with the Master Summoner, but I note someone above suggested arming some of your goblins with reach weapons. This is rarely done in published adventures, which are targeted at non-optimized iconics, but it's an easy way to increase the power of humanoid monsters. A goblin with a reach weapon is at least 20%+ tougher than one without.

Longspear is a common, simple weapon that will serve an Inquisitor exceptionally well. An Inquisitor might expect to inflict roughly 1.5x to 2x more damage with a lonspear as compared to a longsword.

@Rodina: I believe you need a free to use the flagbearer feat, which would restrict reach weapon use to the lance while mounted. I could certainly see that being more effective than mounted combat & power attack at 1st.

Incorrect! Flagbearer requires that you hold the flag in one hand, not that you have a free hand. Big difference. The wording is to prevent this, where you can ignore the flag and not hold it. You are free to hold your flag in two hands.

I agree with you that Flagbearer is probably a much more useful feat, especially at low level, than Power Attack or Mounted Combat. Especially combined with your two handed reach weapon.

Flagbearer works with reach weapons. Besides common sense, there is lots of both in-game & historical precedent. The Banner of the Ancient Kings specifically calls out Flagbearer as working with longspear. It's pretty obvious, to this GM, that a flag should be mounted on a pole. A polearm has a pole. I've yet to encounter any GM who did not allow this, although I've seen a couple posts in the forums from GMs who didn't like it, for some reason.

You wield a reach weapon, yet lack Combat Reflexes? Combat Reflexes is the ticket to maximum effectiveness with a reach weapon. Get multiple attacks from first level! Foes will frequently provoke several AoOs; you may as well scoop them up.

Also, Flagbearer is most useful at low/mid levels, where it's great. By 13th level even the +2 you'll give is no longer a big deal. Plus you're retired.

I'd find a way to work in Combat Reflexes and Flagbearer at low levels, when they give the most benefit. Both those feats offer you far more than some you chose.

Is it not rather bizarre that the Monk, supposedly master of martial arts, utterly lacks proficiency in reach weaponry, such that one must dip a level of Fighter? This despite longspear being a standard weapon of Shaolin, which is the closest model in the real world for the Monk class. Weird design oversight! :-)

Reliquary weapons don't solve the problem of a free casting hand. That requires either a light shield, a two-handed weapon and no shield, or GM hand-waving.

By the rules, a caster needs a free hand to cast. A small shield can leave a free hand, but not a large shield. Many GMs ignore this issue, to avoid further penalizing already-disadvantaged sword-and-board casters, but it is how the rules work. Holy symbol need only be 'presented strongly', but a spell is a spell and requires a free hand. Personally I'd allow Lay on Hands to work with any part of the body. I've yet to encounter a paladin who performs sexual healing [Youtube: Marvin Gaye], but it seems quasi-reasonable ...

My clerics mostly wield a two-handed reach weapon, which completely obviates this problem. It also results in more offensive power and, arguably, better defense. Really, more effective all around in many cases. Were I to play a cleric of Iomedae, who can access the Tactics subdomain, that excellent longsword would come out whenever I needed my primary backup weapon. A Large Shield, which requires a dedicated arm and hand, probably would not be in my inventory. Nowhere do the rules explain that a reach weapon has defensive value, but it is so.

No reach weapon? Your two-handed-weapon hits very hard. If it were a reach weapon you would get extra attacks with it. This would almost certainly increase your damage output. This would also improve your defense (you take fewer full attacks plus some foes would hesitate to approach) and would better protect the squishies behind you. Seems like a win for you all around, and a loss for your foes. Perhaps that's not the style you seek?

Many people seem to consistently misinterpret the recent FAQ about 'hands', hands, and weapons. That stuff doesn't apply to this situation. It's incorrect to say that one can't attack with Armor Spikes if another 'hand' has already attacked. It's correct that you can't use Armor Spikes if it would give you extra attacks beyond what you are normally due, based on your BaB. This error comes from conflating TWF with other situations that are not TWF.

The mention of 'cestus' was a distraction. Replace cestus with Armor Spikes and repeat the question. This because a cestus wielder can never simultaneously threaten with both cestus and polearm. An Armor Spike wielder can and does threaten with both Armor Spikes and Polearm.

@OP: The rules are not explicit on this point, but I'd never allow a cleave to use two different weapons at different reach . No way. I'd interpret Cleave to only allow two attacks against foes threatened by the same weapon. One could argue it doesn't explicitly say that, but it's pretty clearly the intention.

Answer is the same: No! Your cleave needs to be with a single weapon based on any reasonable RAI.

A reach fighter can get by just fine with only the feats Combat Reflexes and Power Attack. Your attacks hit hard, and you get a lot of them. Combat feats beyond those two, while never bad, are just gravy. This is why any class with decent strength and dexterity makes a solid reach fighter: few feats required to perform well, so low barrier to entry. Those two feats get you 70% of your max damage output, lots more feats get you that extra 30%.

With just those two feats you have solid combat options:

* Attack for damage. Despite all the discussion about fancy combat tricks and maneuvers, you are often best just attacking for damage.

* You can trip just fine, even though you don't have the Improved Trip feat. Just be certain the foe does not threaten you when you attempt a trip.

A large fraction of your damage, especially at early levels, is likely to be from AoOs. This largely depends on how effectively you and your allies use reach tactics. My reach fighters usually inflict more damage via AoOs than via direct attacks, although that's partly because I often play Clerics who cast a spell on their turn.

The more tactically able are your allies, the more effective will be your reach fighter. Your biggest problem is likely to be your own tactically challenged 'allies'. For example, if one of your allies always rushes the foe, without considering the tactical situation, this will usually deny you AoOs, greatly reducing your damage output. Often, the 'allies' who do this wind up inflicting less damage than they prevent you from inflicting, when they could have just waited a bit and you would both get in your whacks. Thus 'tactically challenged'. So, look to your allies, consider how tactically competent they are, and whether they are willing to work with you.

Using reach weapons effectively is more a question of tactics than of actual class abilities. None of the rule books say anything about this.

Both the class abilities you reference just give ways to threaten adjacent. Threatening adjacent is not particularly important with a reach weapon. One can accomplish the same effect with 50 gp CRB Armor Spikes. Why would one care to do so, though?

There are a few reasons to wield a reach weapon:

* Control the battlefield: foes don't want to move near you
* Protection: melee foes must come close, provoking an AoO, before they can attack you
* Action economy: Do something on your round, and hope foes choose to impale themself on your spear on their turn

Note how none of the above involve threatening adjacent. That only becomes important when a reach weapon is no longer useful at reach. It's a failure mitigation strategy. Instead of working to mitigate failure, perhaps plan so you don't fail in the first place.

* Ready an action to attack the first foe to come within reach. This gives you two attacks on anything wishing to become adjacent

* Leave room to 5' step away

* Know how your group will respond to a foe getting close. E.g. Do your allies wish to get adjacent to foes to trade Full Attacks, or do your allies wish to keep away from foes?

If he uses a weapon with the Trip property this at least eliminates the risk of rider and mount falling over inside a Giant's threatened zone.

I do not use maps, and no DM that I've played under has.

My problem with map/mini style play is that it takes the players out of their character ...

If someone likes maps, that's fine for them. They're not for me, and the game is quite playable without them.

Precise opposite experience here. I love tactics. With some systems I'm fine playing with no map (e.g. Warhammer RPG), but I find that Pathfinder fails miserably without a combat map.

If I were going to play Pathfinder without a map I'd carefully avoid all the many tactical options that depend on a map. Actually, I'd just leave the game, because I'd instantly know it was not one I'm likely to enjoy. Some reasonable options still exist, but none of the ones I most enjoy. Most of my favorite approaches are rendered pointless without a map. Examples of character types and builds that depend on a map for basic function:

* Anything involving a reach weapon & AoOs
* Anything that involves precise positioning
* Anything that hinders enemy movement
* Anything speedy. Lacking a map, there's little advantage to fast movement.
* Basically anything that relies on tactics

Personally, for me, playing without a map gives a big YUCK! feeling, because it eliminates most opportunities to use smart tactics. Others are entitled to their own opinion, and are welcome to play without a map

Were I to build a CORE arcane melee fighter I'd choose a variation of #3 Eldritch Knight. It's not great, but would work. This because the Wizard's Divination (Scryer) school is APG, not CORE, eliminating this early entry route to Eldritch Knight. I'd use any polearm for action efficiency: cast an Arcane spell for my Standard Action, position myself to scoop up AoOs when possible. Burning Hands or Color Spray will be consistently good options, as they put you 15' from the foe.

Human CORE Gish uses a polearm
Fighter-1/Wizard-5/Eldritch Knight-X
Feats: Combat Reflexes, Power Attack, Improved Initiative, [here be wizard stuff ... ]
I'd avoid additional martial feats, except for the few juicy ones you get after 6th level from Eldritch Knight.
STR > INT > CON > DEX > WIS > CHA

Sadly, this approach is down 3 BaB and 2 caster levels. So at venerable 10th level, near CORE PFS retirement, this character will fight as a 7th level fighter and cast as an 8th level Wizard. You won't be terrific at either role, but you sometimes fill both at once.

When you are actually high enough level that Come and get Me finally kicks in you'll have to reconsider your weapon. Versus short-reach foes the reach weapon may be a problem. Versus foes with reach, which will likely be most of them by that exalted level, a non-reach weapon may be a problem. Perhaps keep your options open.

Do note that characters who use reach tactics, as you are suggesting with an Eldritch Knight, tend to take less melee damage than other front line fighters. It's possible to survive with fewer HP. This is because you mostly avoid taking full attacks. Should you decide to instead trade Full Attacks, of course, you take as much damage as anyone.

Out of game: Are you saying the customer base isn't familiar enough with the core rules to handle giants with reach weapons? It's mechanically just like Enlarge Person ...

In Game: Are the supposedly intelligent leaders of these monsters not smart enough to act in their own best interest? Are they trying to make things easier for sub-standard PCs by having their minions deliberately use sub-standard tactics?

Perhaps consider this sort of option for Hard Mode with Advanced Players. There must be some demand for that.

I'm really hoping we see some giants who use smarter tactics when appropriate. My players use smart tactics to eliminate them, some giants are intelligent, and even the stupid ones will follow orders from, say, a smart Rune Giant.

For one example, giants get immense tactical benefit from using reach weapons, like spears and polearms. A Hill Giant with a reach weapon gets to full attack from 20' away where the foe can't full attack back, plus it's almost guaranteed to get an AoO, plus they tend to be hard-hitting two handed weapons that take maximum advantage of giant strength. Your basic hill giant with a longspear is at least 30% more combat effective than is one with a greatclub. I know this by sometimes so equipping them when I ran RotRL. The difference is large enough that it would be reasonable to sometimes adjust the Tier from Low to High simply by equipping the giant with a polearm. Yet I can't recall a single instance , in any published Paizo module, of a giant wielding a reach weapon. Why is that?

Both solid answers! Do beware of high giant CMDs, making acrobatics dicey against them. May the dice fall in your favor. Rodinia, already a noted Giantslayer, dubs thee (whichever incarnation you choose) an up-and-coming Giant Slayer!

Smart giants would extend their existing reach advantage by wielding a longspear or other reach weapon. This would let them full attack at 20' reach while still getting an AoO against anyone who tries to close, giving them a much bigger advantage against we puny human-sized creatures. Neither Rodinia, nor any of her other incarnations, have ever heard of any published Paizo adventure where they do so. Has anyone else?

You'll be fighting lots of giants in the Giantslayer AP. Two questions come to mind.

Question 1: Giants hit hard and have reach. What's your plan for avoiding a reach AoO from every giant you face?

Question 2: Giants hit hard and get multiple attacks on a full attack. Will you have a way to deny full attacks to your giant foe? If not, what's your plan for surviving the inevitable full attack from every giant you fail to kill with your first attack?

Once you have an answer to each question you are ready to become a giant slayer.

This probably doesn't help Duke, but I feel the need to point out an alternate fighting style as it relates to the above excellent Hill Giant example. Nicholas storm's demonstrative example, just above, assumes the PC will be taking a full attack each round. Smart tactics can often avoid the full attack, effectively halving incoming damage in this case.

For example, a tactically-oriented reach-style fighter like Rodinia (with at least 20' reach, not that hard to get) would engage that same hill giant in a way that reliably denies the hill giant it's full attack. Damage output remains roughly the same. Whatever is the average incoming damage per round, cut it roughly in half for this fighting style. This accomplishes the same thing as having much better AC and/or a lot more HP.

Next time you see a close-in fighter taking a beating from full attacks, consider that tactical means usually exist to avoid taking that abuse. This demonstrates the defensive nature and value of reach tactics, which are nowhere mentioned in any official Pathfinder book. I point this out because many players seem unaware of this option.

Use a reach weapon and whack or trip foes who try to get past you with powerful two-handed AoOs. Doh! I almost forgot! Monks, who are supposedly masters of the martial arts, are not proficient with any reach weapons. Not even the longspear, despite this being the original melee weapon (along with the bone club) and a foundation weapon of Shaolin martial arts.

First off yes the dms love love martial and most everything charges into their waiting blades.

So, given these tactics, have your martials learned to use reach tactics? That's the way to exploit charge-happy opponents ...

Really,it sounds you are making a fine contribution and they just don't notice. I second what Cheburn said: actually track how much extra damage you contribute. Count your bardsong, the haste, other buffs, et cetera. I'd not be surprised if you were pulling 20-30% of total damage. I'd also not be surprised if some martial-happy group members were ignorant of this, because it's not altogether obvious that many small numbers add up to big numbers.

As you all level up the casters come to dominate more and more. Sure, the martials still do the damage, but without your Fly spell they could never have reached the foe.

Dennis Deadsky wrote:

What's the purpose of such a change? This seems like a clear case of "If it's not broke don't fix it."

My players hate the 'stand still and bash things with a refrigerator' model of combat. They find frontline tanks dull and annoying; in fact, their current group's frontliner is just an NPC hireling with the tactical prowess of a rutabaga. (They only brought him on board a few sessions in because none of the players wanted to be a meat shield--their exact words.) The Thug, as they call him, simply throws a two-hander around and Power Attacks... and they're still irked that his strikes are occasionally more effective than the archer and 2WF ranger's. Now that they're at a level where DR is becoming a factor, this problem has only worsened.

This is a Core-Book game; the players have no desire to learn any more rules, much less seek out 'builds' and feat combos to make their characters more combat-effective. And they LOVED 7th Sea, with its emphasis on style, mobility, and panache over brute force. So we're looking for the simplest possible change that will favor a high-mobility, swift-strike model of combat over a two-handed bludgeoning model.

So, the players find the static 'stand still and bash things with a refrigerator' model of combat dull. I don't blame them. Have they tried tanking with reach tactics, instead? This is a much more dynamic combat style, in that constant tactical movement works best. It's still big two handed weapons, but suddenly the last thing you want to do is get locked-in to a bash-fest. Note that the worst problem with this approach is tactically challenged allies.

This approach is entirely CRB, but requires the group tactically cooperate. If they do cooperate it works really well. Not all players are willing and able to play nice with others, though. A single loose cannon idiot can muck up the entire team's battle plan. If you leave the fool to die of his own stupidity he'll only do it once, though :-)

Every core class except Monk and Wizard is proficient with the longspear. It costs nothing to carry one. Your AoOs won't matter, but you can still give him +4 on his, which is huge. At the very least carry an extra longspear, in case someone finds it useful. Just a thought ...

If he used a Tower Shield he'd have to give up reach. Fail! Having lots of reach is hugely important to this build! Having Combat Reflexes, Paired Opportunists, and Combat Patrol without reach just seems silly, considering the synchronicity those things have.

Suggestion: since he'll give Paired Opportunists to allies, perhaps encourage other PCs (like yours!) to also use a reach weapon. That way you both get those yummy +4 AoOs. That's how Rodinia operates, and it works really well. As a mounted 5th level cleric she would often pull an effective +21 to hit on AoOs, which would hit for about 25 HP each. That's +3 BaB, -1 Power Attack, +3 Strength, +1 weapon, +5 magical buffs, +1 higher ground (mounted), +1 trait bonus to AoOs with polearm, +4 paired AoO, +4 for prone target (tripped by axe beak animal companion). This approach makes for a very effective Tank style character.

You will be fighting lots of giants. Giants have reach. What's your plan to avoid AoOs from giants?

Amrel wrote:

First in the AAO rules it says characters normally get one a round. It doesnt say anything about outside of their turn. If you have it reset on their turn they can get multiple the first round, which only including the AAO wording breaks the rules.

Second that quote from combat is spot on! Good find! I would have to agree based on that.

They won't be making any AOOs in the first round before their turn, because they'll be flatfooted and therefore unable to do so.

Unless they have Combat Reflexes.

Just the ability to make AoOs when flatfooted justifies Combat Reflexes. Getting extra AoOs from 12+ DEX is gravy. You'd really give up extra attacks so your single attack could be slightly better?

Have you considered getting Combat Reflexes, instead of Weapon Focus, at 1st level? You start with a reach weapon. Combat Reflexes gives you extra attacks. Extra attacks are worth a lot more than +1 to hit. Seems weird that a reach fighter would neglect Combat Reflexes, the basis of your fighting style, until 10th level ...

Let's try a basic reductio ad absurdum.

Rodinia is a Cleric with the Plant(Growth) domain.

Rodinia can cast the first level spell Enlarge Person, which is not normally on the Cleric list. Because she has the Plant(Growth) domain that spell is on her spell list. Rodinia can reliably use a wand of Enlarge Person, without needing to UMD.

Rodinia can not cast the first level spell Truestrike. Some domains, like Luck and Destruction, get that spell. Rodinia does not have any domain that grants Truestrike, and it is not normally on the cleric spell list. Rodinia would not expect to be able to use a Wand of Truestrike without needing to use UMD. Nor should your friendly cleric with [some other domains that do not give Truestrike].

It sounds like your friends are trying to argue that if any type of cleric, ever, has access to Truestrike, then it's on the 'cleric' spell list and therefore every cleric can e.g. use a Wand of Truestrike without UMD. That way lies madness. E.g. Paragon Surge exists, so every spell has been on some Cleric's spell list sometime. Therefore a cleric never needs UMD, because all the spells are already on their list. Uh huh.

All in all, this sounds like a fatuous claim by someone wishing to use certain wands without needing to UMD. I 100% agree with you, OP.

The 'rules' may not be 100% clear on this distinction. The best we have is what's quoted above. Go with what seems reasonable. I know what seems reasonable to me.

If you don't start out proficient, and must spend additional feats, then they are effectively not on your list. Longspear is the original reach weapon, and at the core of large aspects of ancient martial arts. Is it ironic that a Monk might consider dipping a level of Rogue or Sorcerer to get access to a better weapon?

The biggest problem with the Monk weapons list is the complete absence of any reach weapons. The only other core class that can't use a longspear [Shaolin monk performs introductory longspear form starting 6:12 into video] is the Wizard! That's quite an oversight!

Here's a mid-level human cleric and mount who sometimes gets 11 attacks per round. Similar to what Imbicatus suggests above, really. The same build would work for any mounted humanoid, and doesn't need to be a cleric. This defensive build only gets this huge number of attacks when several foes are stupid enough to move close. Fortunately for you, that sort of aggressive-to-the-point-of-stupid behavior is exactly how many player characters tend to fight. You know your players.

This build is not particularly dangerous if your PCs are cautious and use smart tactics, but is crushingly effective against tactically-challenged loose-cannon PCs who always rush into battle.

P.s. The link mentions Haste from an ally, but a cleric can self-buff the Haste effect in several different ways. Also Haste is not very important in this case. Note that, if the rider is a spell caster, it can move and cast a spell every round, yet still take up to 7 AoOs if anything tries to approach. This build is most effective as a Spell Caster on a Martial Chassis, although it also works for a pure martial.

P.P.s. This build is especially effective against PCs built to fight adjacent to foes, such as TWF. Add in Longarm, some Spell Resistance, the ability to Deflect Missiles, and Enlarge both for 15-25' reach, and this monstrosity can possibly stand up to an entire party for a while.

P.P.P.s. Again, it depends how tactically savvy your PCs are. This build approach is a trap for stupid. A stupid PC will try to rush this foe, with humorous (from GM's perspective) results. I.e. First the charger gets tripped at reach by the mount, then takes a prone AoO (extra +10 to hit!),then must eventually stand up and take 2 more prone AoOs (at extra +8 and +10 to hit from mount and rider, respectively). It can do this versus several foes each round. Tactically savvy PCs will refuse to engage, and will instead hang back and pound it with missile fire and spells.

If it were the case that energy resistance did not apply to each ray separately (it does) then a particular PFS scenario would have lead to a certain TPK. There's a boss in the a level 8-9 adventure who does a Quickened Scorching Ray every combat round, and takes a long time to put down. Even with Communal Energy Resistance (at level 6) on everyone it still almost wiped us out. Had every attack done an additional 20 HP there would have been no doubt.

Consider having your character adopt an 'offensive stance' and a 'defensive stance'. This regardless of your particular combat style and feats. Mostly you will be in 'defensive stance', but sometimes your personal defense does not matter and you just want to drop an enemy as fast as possible. All three of your allies use missile weapons, so you will be their protector. E.g. A monster trying to eat your allies may pose little threat to you, but may be a dire threat to your allies, so you will want to switch to offensive stance to bring it down ASAP.

'Offensive Stance' may just mean dropping your shield and gripping your weapon in two hands. You may find that, with the group you describe, you may spend a lot of time in 'offensive stance'.

Rodinia has Growth Domain. If you are going to use Growth Domain for cleaving a big threatened area you may as well use a reach weapon. Cleave still won't work very well, because foes rarely clump up, but that makes it better. Rodinia tried Cleaving and it just didn't happen very often.

Seriously, the best use for Growth Domain is to get BIG with a reach weapon, so you threaten a 50' diameter. This almost guarantees foes will provoke AoOs during their movement. This is a very effective way to get more attacks.

The discussion of a pet build centered around Combat Reflexes and Paired Opportunists confused Rodinia. Rodinia has these feats and a pet, yet uses them in a totally different way. They use those feats constantly to devastating effect. She and her axe beak mount both have reach, so foes provoke AoOs whenever they try to get close. We both take yummy +4 AoOs and wind up routinely inflicting lots of damage. Rodinia and mount seem to average about one paired AoO each per combat round. It seemed really weird that someone would suggest a martial pet PC have the feats Combat Reflexes and Paired Opportunists without both also having reach.

Obviously that won't help notty235 at all: his pet is a tiger,which lacks reach, and he has no intention of riding it. Just had to express surprise at seeing those great feats suggested in what seems such a non-optimal way. Perhaps I misunderstand, and AoOs will come more frequently than just critical hits.

I've actually seen this used in PFS play quite a few times. VOs were present. There's really no question but that this works RAW.

I agree, the writers who created the feat probably didn't consider it being used by a rider and mount. However, that's the only way it's even remotely useful.

It's not really a very powerful combination, at least not in PFS. This because PFS foes only infrequently have reach and hardly ever use smart reach tactics. E.g. The stupid evil NPC Druids in one PFS scenario who have the Growth Subdomain, yet only use it for the piddling extra damage and don't even try to generate AoOs. I can only think of one PFS encounter, ever, in which a foe made exceptionally good use of reach tactics. It was a big carnivorous plant, and it literally ate Rodinia.

In a home game, in which the GM sometimes introduces melee foes who make smart use of reach tactics, this ability would be much more useful.

Rodinia and her mount are currently debating whether or not to take Escape Route by PFS level 8.

@OP: You are Strong, have DEX 14, and have Combat Reflexes. Why would you wield a Greatsword rather than a reach weapon? I'm confused, because that just doesn't make any sense. In your situation a reach weapon is totally superior to a greatsword.

Like RumpinRufus says, the way to minimize combat damage you take isn't to have high AC, it's to avoid taking full attacks. That's just one thing a reach weapon gets you.

@ Diego Rossi: That's just plain wrong. It's already well established that Escape Route works as That Crazy Alchemist just used it. A GM might create a house rule disallowing it, although I don't see why.

If this teamwork feat does not work for a rider and mount, please provide even one example in which this teamwork feat makes even the smallest bit of sense.

...Granted, it's much better if you can standard action summon. You qualify for Sacred Summons, although the list of monsters you could potentially summon with that feat is pretty shabby.

A Cleric of Erastil can get a boon to summon Sacred Celestial Elk on the Summon Monster II list. This get 2-4 Celestial Elk as Superior Sacred Summon Monster III. That's not shabby.