RotBot's page

Thanks for the suggestions, I'll definitely look into both of them! still open for more suggestions, have a few days to hash out a definitive setup still.

Hey all! long story short I'm starting a new game at level one and the party is lacking in healing and blasting.

So, I wound up settling on cleric even though I've played battle clerics to death. They're fun, they're awesome, but I still wanted to get away from using a traditional weapon buffed to high hell by strength-infusing spells. The idea of a heavily armored blaster caster came to mind, but that's no good in pathfinder for some reason, even thpough there's plenty of ways to become just as survivable with minor spell use.

I then came up with the idea for a death and ice domain cleric that used a mix of some offensive ranged/aoe spells, some touch spells when things get too close, and a healthy dose of offensive channeling. I love the concept thematically, but:

*As it reads, offensive channeling is going to hurt *me* too, at least until 8th level? That aside as cool as (offensive) channeling is thematically, it seems like they threw it in the trash right after coming up with it-the core ability scales terribly, and the feat support is horrible as well. I'm waffling on whether quicken channeling is worth it or not and would love to hear feedback. This ability is also fueled by charisma, which does basically nothing else for a cleric.

*death and ice domains have some nice spells but they're primarily down the road, and their low level abilities seem pretty weak. I'm starting at leveling one.

*melee touch attacks are based on strength, ranged ones are based on dex, and traditional save inducing spells are based on wisdom. I also need three separate feats to increase all three by one measly point. If I had to settle for one, it would probably be aoe blastey effects, but this is of course clerics weakest point out of all three.

So, what seemed like a cohesive idea in the heat of the moment is unraveling into a huge mess now that I'm stepping back and looking at it, leaving me saying "oh yeah, that's why I always just make battle clerics" everything just comes back to strength with them, not a bajillion separate stats and feat requirements.

Anyway, I'd really appreciate advice on if any part of this concept can be salvaged without turning it into something it isnt(please, no weapon builds or pet/summon builds). If it's as messy as it seems to me I'd be willing to go back to the drawing board on other ways to build the core character concept of someone who can just heal and deal magical damage while wearing armor. I've glanced over oracle but it also seems pretty disjointed in its abilities(the seeker archetype seems like it could be really strong toward the end if anyone has feedback for good caster oracles), and read a bit about unarmored fire domain clerics theologian archetypes, but fire is like the least interesting element and theologian loses all armor ANYWAY, so why the hell not just be an actual g+$%!#n wizard at that point?(healing spells I guess). Shaman and witch just look like they're getting further away from the raw energy effects sort of caster I wanted to roll but maybe I'm overlooking some variant that makes them awesome.

Sorry if I sound frustrated, but...I am. I feel like the whole game is designed around either never wearing armor and just using super magical defenses, being lightly armored and super melee oriented, or being heavily armored and melee oriented and hopefully you can figure out a way to get flying or something. Why is mixing martial offenses with magical support/defenses such a big thing, but mixing magic offenses with martial defenses is so atrociously taboo? It isn't just a sacred cow, 3e had classes that could do it even if they were somewhat lackluster. Is it specifically due to legal issues of not wanting to make anything too similar to 3e's classes? I really wish "just go play 3e if that's what you want" was an option, but I'm playing this with my friends to play with them, not playing it with randoms just to play an rpg.

I truly appreciate any tips on how to salvage something that seemed cohesive until I looked at the mechanics.

The psionics and inquisitor ideas seem like good ideas... kinda sad nickelback asked for advice when it sounds like their heart is set on doing the EK thing already.

That said: even if you're stuck on the arcane magic for some reason, why wouldnt magus work? flavor is the most malleable thing ever. would your dm really have a problem with you flavoring spell flurry as "make a ton of crazy weapon attacks and then force lightning a single target", so long as it didnt change mechanics at all? I really don't see jedi as full blown arcane casters...

As for my own advice to the DM, even though they aren't so medieval/fantasy themed, this makes me think of 'the last of us' and some of the vaults from fallout 3 and new vegas. Might be good places to look for inspiration!

I propose a different angle for the crystal tube man: a powerful former Adept. He had Divine power instead of the Arcane of a wizard and he had a familiar. The familiar was supposed to carry on routine experiments while the Adept slept. Unfortunately the fungus got to it but somehow while it's body corrupted the universal energies that empowered it kept it's mind from being consumed.

You could make the familiar anything; a fungal animal, a qlippoth, or a custom creature. You could also delve into improved familiars for a starting template. Whatever the case, this creature then is the only thing that can save or doom it's master.

As for stuff in the dungeon you've got a good handle on the monsters. What about unexpected environmental hazards? Look to the Pyrotechnics spell; sudden disturbances in the dungeon can cause spontaneous choking clouds or just a "fog" of spores. You could impose other fog spell effects like Fog Cloud, Stinking Cloud...

And why stop there? Perhaps have some of the spores be delivery systems for different Adept spells. Spores that suddenly drop a burning hands, a light or a Divine Shield. The possibilities are endless.

I certainly have nothing against divine flavor, and tend to run a lot of divine characters myself, but: why? You don't really give any reason for using an adept instead of a mage... if anything it would make even less sense as an adept, as they should have better access to spells that should already be able to cure strange diseases and infections.

Does anyone have UMD? It's one of the best skills available. Assuming someone does, wands of curing can go a long ways. Also maybe getting on friendly terms with an npc healer for bigger issues.

If you do go with the dmpc I wouldn't try to optimize the character too much. They should be actively seeking something like the leadership feat or another player to play a cleric, and be happy when they find one, not reluctant if the badass dmpc archer leaves the group.

edit: my bad, zen archer is a monk subtype and not a feat anymore. XD

Thanks for the advice, all! I don't think the party is going to have a dedicated healer, so cutting Koya might not really hurt the plot, but I feel like it might hurt the party. As a frail old woman its easily justifiable for her to hang around 'base' anyway. And it seems weird to cut the caravan owner

one of my players seemed a little miffed when I mentioned cutting Shalelu, maybe I'll throw out the relationship option before cutting her completely, but I normally don't like getting too much into that sort of stuff.

Making Sandru somewhat antagonistic seems like a good idea on its own, I guess the main possible issue is that anyone more loyal to him than the others via background might take his issues to heart, causing a rift in the party where the half of the party with the proprietary claim to the wagons might start asking "why are we even doing this, anyway?" I think at least I'll make him a bit more reluctant and grousey, thanks for the inspiration!

ive heard a lot of griping that the npcs dont tend to do much the further into the campaign you get, especially aside from ameiko. i havent had much of a chance to look through much of the content yet, but i want to keep ameiko for the plot, Sandru so they have someone around that knows caravaney stuff, and the old woman, mainly because I'm probably going to be running with a small party and extra support magic is always handy. i was wondering just how vital Shalelu is to the overall plot, and if some fiddling on my part would allow things to run smoothly without her? maybe i could give sandru a ranger level so he could take on some of her responsibilities, and maybe impart some of her knowledge to the party druid?

thanks for any insight.

Thanks for the responses. She is aware of pounce and come and get me, which is why she took lesser beast totem and combat reflexes. She is just frustrated that her only option is still "attack" and not that creatively either. She has looked at superstitious, but she is worried about saving vs friendly spells too. In addition, it doesn't help that the cleric and rogue are both racing her to the front line. She cant really find a spot to protect or jam up.

I don't think a greatsword or nodachi is so much better than the earthbreaker that it is a must. I will continue to encourage her towards a reach weapon.

Like I said earlier I think I will encourage her to carry potions of enlarge person, since those should help out her reach and damage.

If you're the dm you could try to make less bottlenecked spaces. Theres also really no reason a rogue should be racing her to the front lines(and moreso winning against someone with improved move speed) as opposed to trying to set up flank with her or the cleric.

To a certain extent it just doesn't make sense that she wants to be a barbarian but also wants to be able to do more than just attack... barbarians are some of the best attackers as is. Has she considered multiclassing if she wants more shamanistic powers? Does she know that multiclassing is always an option when she gets a level up? What exactly is she expecting to be able to do that she's annoyed she cannot do?

I'll suggest something that hasnt come up yet- as some have mentioned, wizards definitely aren't a great choice, limited spells make choosing a specialty school pretty important and rationing magic critically importan. neither are magus due to dealing with concentration checks and all the finer points of an arcane gish.

Have you thought about suggesting cleric instead? It's much easier to play and more forgiving, while still having a fairly gishy flavor. And theres no rules that say you cant bend a classes flavor to suit a particular idea. so she'd still be an elfey fighterey casterey type. clerics can be so much more than party first aid kits and boring holy men.

I am currently hopping my gm Will accept my combo of the enforcer feat and the Frostbite Spell delivered via spellstrike.

And god luck with the game.

That's an awesome combo, hopefully it works!

Spellstrike (Su): At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack. Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell.

Spell Combat (Ex): At 1st level, a magus learns to cast spells and wield his weapons at the same time. This functions much like two-weapon fighting, but the off-hand weapon is a spell that is being cast.

Theres no faq on it because its blatent. The idea that spellstrike cant be used with spellcombat is nonsensical. Spell strike lets you cast a spell with a range of touch through a weapon. Spell combat lets you cast a spell and make attacks. Its not just common knowledge its right there in the text.

As for an E6 magus, you can still shine, but you have to watch your resources. Also, I particuarly like the hexcrafter in E6, as the right hexes can give you some much needed longevity, and the flight hex is just right for an E6 game. (I am currently playing a 6th level hexcrafter magus and loving it)

Hey thanks for the response. I think I'll try snipping your quotes with the bolded text and hopefully hell be fine with it with a closer reading. interesting points on the hexcrafter, especially the flight hex, I'll try to keep that in mind if I'm in a game like this again and want to roll magus again! The main idea behind using kensai was being able to stack my intelligence up for more ac than normal(and still use an armored kilt!), but I can definitely see flight being a worthy tradeoff for that. If anyone has any other ideas for how to approach this while avoiding the "player vs dm" situation, or any other thoughts on E6 Magi, I'd love to hear them.

Hey all, I'm currently playing in an E6 campaign, with the magus(kensai) class. (more on E6: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?206323-E6-The-Game-Inside-D-amp -D

The DM in general has been cool with making small allowances- letting me treat my scimitar as a finesse weapon, etc. I try to be very transparent and polite with DMs about what my goals are with my build.

I went into the class thinking its only redeeming quality, beyond the cool arcane pool buffs, was its ability to get two attacks with spellstrike + spell combat, considering in an e6 game it will never get third level spells, or a second normal attack. The kensai dervish seemed like the only setup that even made the class really worth it compared to the damage a normal level 6 barbarian, rogue or even fighter can pull without concentration checks(still very risk at level 6) and expending limited resources and etc.

Anyway, while I was pretty proud of discovering the dervish combo on my own after finding the guide on this board, using arcane mark as a "flurry" attack hadn't occurred to me at all. I just moved up to level 2 and gained spell strike, so I figured I would shoot the dm an email asking if he was okay with that, or if I'd have to wait and learn close combat to use ray of frost/etc to "flurry" with 0 level spells.

His response totally blindsided me. He feels like the arcane mark flurry isn't even an issue, because spell strike and spell combat are two totally separate actions, and you can only use one or the other, not both in tandem.

So.....I know there's plenty of threads discussing the finer points of spell combat + spell strike, and have found the comment from the lead designer saying he doesnt the the arcane mark thing is OP, but I was wondering if there is maybe some actual article where a paizo dev flat out states in simple terms that there is no reason why these two abilities should be exclusive, and/or that they were designed to function in unison. I know it just seems like common knowledge on the board, but I'm not sure if common knowledge will be enough for my dm to say "okay, thats cool". I think he's just having a kneejerk reaction to being able to get two attacks and a spell attack on a class that normally has a single attack or attack + spell, without looking at how limited my resources to actually use the abilities are compared to more standard damage dealers. I'd like to be able to just give him a very clear official statement about how the abilities work rather than have the whole thing devolve into an argument. If he houserules that the abilities don't work together, my character is basically relegated to being a gimpy bard instead of a gishy blade master. D:

I'm also curious if anyone has any points to discuss on an E6 magus in general, it seems like a lot of the "good" stuff comes into play between 9 and 12. Magical lineage loses a lot of appeal with such limited spellslots, combat casting suddenly seems practically mandatory, arcane strike still seems handy, expeditious retreat suddenly seems really good, since fly and haste are off the table. I'll probably look into expanding my arcane pool and arcanas known to give my magus more overall oomph and flexibility. Thanks for any feedback!