| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since it has already been necro'ed.....
There is a half-succubus template on pg 54 of Demons Revisited.
And since we are specifically discussing huge mounts, they would have reach.
Dawnflower Anchorite (9/10 casting; can progress channel energy, domains, animal companion, etc). Evangelist advances all Cleric class features 9/10, plus faster Obedience benefits Stargazer full spell progression; domains progression (and 3rd domain); channel progression with The Mother's arcana; other fun stuff Keep in mind that Souldrinker will be changing when it is reprinted in the upcoming Book of the Damned in September. The Energy Drain ability will be significantly different...
As Java Man says, the rules state you "share your mount's space during combat." That pretty much answers all your questions. 1) You occupy all the mount's squares. 2) You aren't any specific height, you occupy all the mount's squares. 3) You have 5' reach from any/all of your mount's squares. You get a +1 to attacks, for higher ground, on any Large or smaller unmounted combatant in melee. 4) It works just fine.
Vermin Tamer Cavalier (Heroes of the Darklands)
that Witch archetype that has to sleep on a pile of treasure inherently don't really travel well, It's 1,950 gp worth of treasure at 20th level. You can carry it as a single gem stone. It isn't even enough to cast Raise Dead. In fact, I thought it would be a cool idea to make a "Leprechaun" character as a Gnome Wyrmwitch with a "pot" of holding for his hoard.
linktified!
I don't know, I can't think of any wiggle-room or loopholes here.... In addition, other spells that change your size have no effect on you while you are under the effects of a polymorph spell. So no spell, [Polymorph] or otherwise, can change your size while under the effects of a [Polymorph] spell. So no combining Form of the Dragon with any spell that increases size. There is no general rule printed that non-[Polymorph] size increases don't stack, but every size altering spell I can find includes the text that they don't stack with other magical size changes. And of course, you have this FAQ that does kinda codify that size changes don't stack (though it references "rules on size changes" which don't actually exist anywhere).
From a very strict reading of the rules, you could argue that a non-spell size increase could stack with a [Polymorph] effect.
Since we're sharing totally anecdotal stories, the group I have played with since college (so 14 years or so) has had multiple people take Leadership and the player built and ran the cohort, and its never been a problem. Reasonable limitations on cohorts make sense. But then, most DM's put reasonable limitations on PC creation too, so it's not a special rule for cohorts. As for a player with a cohort being a time hog, its no different than the druid with an animal companion, or summoner with eidolon, or wizard who casts summoning spells. Everyone should be courteous of their fellow players' time.
Hook Fighter feat, from the new Adventurer's Armory 2 Treat a grappling hook as a heavy pick (including no penalty for improvised weapon). Can use as a melee weapon or as "whip type" weapon out to 15 ft (but don't threaten). Changing from melee to whip is a move action. You must be proficient with whips to use it this way. You can Reposition an enemy, pulling them closer to you (as the Reposition combat maneuver). Basically, Roadhog the feat Prereq: BAB +1, and that's it :)
The feat works just fine. SN can't exceed half your character level. Not class level. So Wizard 2/Rogue 1. Take feat, feat add 1d6 SN (3/2= 1.5 rounded up to 2, so max 2d6 SN). Level to Wizard 3. Enter Arcane Trickster.
To me, the better option to improve the balance would be to stat more of the demigods of the lesser represented alignments. Protean Lords, Primal Inevitables, Psychopomp Ushers, etc. The cause of the imbalance is a focus so far on certain types of outsiders, and can be corrected by providing information about the most powerful of other types. Keep Nocticula CE.
He could have a wizard archetype that trades the spellbook for keeping spells in his familiar, like Familiar Adept or Spirit Whisperer.
Well, we know there are other Eldest that haven't been stat'ed out. First World, Realm of the Fey provides a list of other Eldest: Apholine the Flame, Baba Yaga, Enchar the Sign, Oleron the Cancer, and Rhoswen the Fellnight Queen. I would think that the Horned King of the Wild Hunt would probably also qualify. Now, its true that it is hard to say any of these additional Eldest would be good either based on their descriptions, but there is certainly room for other Eldest who are good.
Hellknight -- both types. Apart from needing to be updated to work well with newer material ....They were both just updated and reprinted in Adventurer's Guide. Or is there still something you feel is missing? I love the idea of the Mystic Theurge. Those early levels working your way up to it are painful in the extreme It depends on your build, and what your DM allows. The feat Equipment Trick (Sunrod) would get you in earlier, or the Faith Magic arcane discovery on a Wizard/Arcanist to access it with just a single level of divine casting. And options to use various stats for spell casting (Feyspeaker Druid, Elder Mythos Cultist, etc) has opened up more options for classes working together without being too MAD. Maybe if they added the feature that PrCs could increase your base class's abilities, it would have lessen the loss. I recall in Complete Scoundrel for 3.5 that PrCs had something called "+1 level of existing class features", that would have helped a lot. Which is why the best PrC's DO advance your base class features. None of them. Prestige classes are from a bygone era. Archetypes are where it's at these days. :-) BLASPHEMY!! I like archetypes, but I like prestige classes. At least when they are well done. Pathfinder has changed the balance of things, which does make many PrC less attractive. But good prestige classes are certainly something that I feel still have a place in the game, and I look forward to seeing the new ones they have in upcoming books. PrC I like include: Battle Herald
Previous long thread about this Basically, I still disagree with James. Every version of Gauntlet (and similar wording in most similar weapons) says This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack. Your opponent cannot use a disarm action to disarm you of gauntlets. You are using the gauntlet to make unarmed strikes. No just an unarmed attack, but specifically an unarmed strike.
Addition.... X+(X/2) requires no multiplication.
No, its not "splitting hairs." The Patron is listed by theme, it is not the theme itself. The Patron is something that has power over the theme. The line you quote refers to the name of the Patron (the thing granting the power) not the name of the theme (which is already listed). There are multiple possible Destruction themed Patrons. They are all referred to by the theme, Destruction, but are all various different things. They could be Rovagug, or a powerful daemon, or anything else the PC and DM come up with the fits the theme of Destruction. The witch could find out its name and desires, she could never bother, or could actively avoid finding out. In some games what exactly is the Patron could never be considered important, in others finding out the source of a witch's power could be a primary goal and either helping or thwarting it. Patrons are described as having a name, that they can be learned about, and they have agency (as they are described as having goals) not merely disembodied ideals.
But that's the point, the deity wouldn't be on the list of themes, because it is a list of themes and not the actual Patrons themselves....
What a Patron is, is up to the GM and Player to decide. So could a Deity be a Patron...almost assuredly. Does that mean every Witch's Patron is a Deity...not at all.
With respect, there is no aurora Patron. Your wrote the aurora theme, that is granted by a Patron. Could Pulura be that Patron? Yes. Is Pulura the only possible patron that could grant the aurora theme? No. This patron is a vague and mysterious force, granting the witch power for reasons that she might not entirely understand. While these forces need not be named, they typically hold influence over one of the following forces. the witch gains power from her communion with the unknown. Generally feared and misunderstood, the witch draws her magic from a pact made with an otherworldly power. Communing with that source, using her familiar as a conduit, the witch gains not only a host of spells, but a number of strange abilities known as hexes. As a witch grows in power, she might learn about the source of her magic, but some remain blissfully unaware. Some are even afraid of that source, fearful of what it might be or where its true purposes lie. So Patrons are a "mysterious force" or "otherworldly power." They "grant" a witch her power through "communion" using the familiar as a "conduit."
I have such very very high hopes for this! Definitely a must-buy!
Patrons are not necessarily, but can be, Deities. For example, the Stargazer PrC in Paths of the Righteous has a sidebar dealing with Witches who choose Pulura as their Patron.
ASM only works on conjuration (summoning) spells, so it doesn't work with planar binding. I never said, or implied that it did. I compared the cost and effect of a Heightened Mount altered with Alter Summoned Monster, versus simply casting a regular Planar Binding.
I understand that many people are of the opinion that the ASM + Heightened Mount is (take your pick: broken, cheesy, overpowered, abusive, etc). And I can understand why. If you compare it to Summon Monster IX, then (at CL 20) you have: 9th level spell - Glabrezu without teleportation, summoning, or wish (20 rounds) Compared to 9th level Mount + ASM: 9th level and 2nd level spell - Glabrezu without summoning, but possibly with their other SLA, for 40 hours(!) That certainly seems way more powerful! Even with the extra cost of the 2nd spell slot. But Summon Monster IX isn't our only (or even best, necessarily) point of comparison. Comparing Heightened Mount + ASM to Planar Binding, things look different. 9th level spell + 2nd level spell - Glabrezu without summoning, but possibly with their other SLA, for 40 hours. 6th level spell - Glabrezu with summoning, teleportation, and wish for 20 days! And with the Arcane Discovery "Truename" you have the effect of the Planar Binding, at will with no need for bargaining or payment available at 11th level. You could use Greater Planar Binding and get a Marilith or Horned Devil (with all abilities), for the same 20 days, and the "cost" is still less than HM+ASM (only one 8th level spell). And Calling is usually more advantageous than Summoning as many abilities that protect from summoned creatures don't affect called creatures such as Prot from Evil or Antimagic Field. So, while it is jarring when first seen, I doubt it would in practice cause imbalance. Side note: For the Planar Binding spell, I am assuming a service such as "I am on my way to XXX to destroy YYY, come and fight with me on my quest" as a kind of open-ended service as described in the spell as lasting 1 day per CL.
If we all now agree to "Table Variance", then I'm good with that idea. I don't have a problem with table variance. I just feel it is a background assumption that should be kept in mind in any discussion, rather than an argument for/against something. In a rules system as complicated a PF, played by as many people in as many locations, all with their own expectations; rule variance is to be expected. But if there is a question about what a rule says, the fact that some (many? most? but not all) DM's might find this or that idea to be overpowered is better handled at that table by that DM rather than in a discussion about what the rule is. Now sometimes language can certainly be read in more than one way, and I am not trying to say that "how it should be" has no part in the conversation. But statements about how something "should" work should also probably be distinct from how it "is" written. Table variance is too wide a spread to be addressed in every rule discussion. I mean, we had a thread not long ago because someone felt that traits were overpowered. Traits! Using the ASM+Mount discussion as an example, I am totally cool if someone says "I think this was a mistake not caught by the author/editor. I wouldn't allow this combo." But a position of "nope, doesn't work," just falls flat to me given the way the rules are written.
It isn't an issue in PFS, as it is banned, and in a home game you're running, Rule 0. More broadly, differing expectations about what your particular table of PF "is" can be an issue. But it isn't solved with rules, and is more fundamental than this one issue. I have played at plenty of tables that this wouldn't have caused anyone to bat an eye. There is variation in expectations.
Well, technically Common is also a regional language in Golarion. It is Taldane, language of Taldor and the Taldan people. Most people in Avistan speak it as Taldor previously encompassed the majority of the continent.
they'd limit it to various Summon/Conjure spells, leave the duration alone, and restrict using Heighten. I also think they might do it without changing the spell. I don't see how they go from "conjuration (summoning)" to "only these summon/conjure spells" without changing the spell; but we already have FAQ's that would certainly indicate that Heighten does work in this combination. It lets you use a higher-level spell slot for a spell, treating the spell as if it were naturally a higher level spell than the standard version. cast it as a heightened spell and treat the spell as the level of the spell slot you're using. Heighten Spell is really the only metamagic feat that makes using a higher-level spell slot an advantage instead of a disadvantage In case you feel I may be using any of these quotes out of context, link and link Personally, I would wager that this will turn out like Glorious Heat. They may admit it was a combination they hadn't thought of, PFS issues a campaign specific ruling (already happened, it's banned), and then it never changes. Heck, they even reprinted that one, and still left the wording the same.
Time Stop is a 9th level spell. Dual Initiative is a Mythic ability. "Excessive" doesn't really have meaning in this context.
Nothing states you two-handed weapons need a primary hand, only that you need two hands. Supporting using a two-handed weapon with two off hands
Spoiler: There is a kasatha NPC in Iron Gods that dual wields two-handed weapons
There is this thing about saying "Pazuzu" a few times....
So basically Hags, then.
Great, then point to the part of Mount that says anything about how your summoned horse can't attack, or be used as a pack animal, or anything else you could do with a 100% mundane horse you purchased..... Wait, its not there? What do you know, it isn't. You can have the horse summoned by Mount attack enemies. You would need a skill check, but that's because its an untrained horse, not because of anything in the Mount spell. Once it isn't a horse, but an intelligent creature, you can just communicate your desires to your willing servant, and they will do the best they can to accomplish them.
None of that matters. ASM doesn't care about the effect of the original spell, only its level. And Heighten Spell changes the spell level for "all effects dependent on spell level." Yes, all a 9th level Mount spell can do is summon a horse. But it is still 9th level. There is nothing different in this than the fact that Heightening Magic Missile to 5th level prevents a Lesser Globe of Invulnerability from stopping it. Both instances are based on the level, not the effect, of the Heightened spell.
I think you missed my point. I was not arguing this would apply to the Mount spell. I was using it to support the idea that summoned creatures still have those abilities, even if they can't use them.So if you summon them with a spell that doesn't have the prohibition, then they can use the ability. So you see, we agree.
Easy, because spells do what they say, and no more. That has long been a guideline for all discussions of rules. The rule says it can't use the ability. So it can't. Nothing says it completely loses the ability. So it doesn't. That was very simple. The mechanic does exist. There is a line in a spell effect that says it can't use the ability. There is your mechanic. Same as the effect of Fly says you can fly, without providing explanation on how you achieve lift. Further explanation is unnecessary. So it only serves you for mount related tasks. Glabby will grapple you, and carry you. No, because (AGAIN) there is nothing limiting your Glabrezu "mount" from doing other things. Just like nothing limits your horse mount from doing other things. There is no restriction anywhere that will limit your summoned creature to carrying you and nothing else. As an aside, and I doubt it will necessarily sway anyone's opinion, but look at the Monster Universal Ability, Summon.
A creature with the summon ability can summon other specific creatures of its kind much as though casting a summon monster spell, but it usually has only a limited chance of success (as specified in the creature’s entry). Roll d%: On a failure, no creature answers the summons. Summoned creatures automatically return whence they came after 1 hour. A creature summoned in this way cannot use any spells or spell-like abilities that require material components costing more than 1 gp unless those components are supplied, nor can it use its own summon ability for 1 hour. An appropriate spell level is given for each summoning ability for purposes of Will saves, caster level checks, and concentration checks. No experience points are awarded for defeating summoned monsters. It is much clearer here that while access to the abilities are lost, the abilities themselves are not. The summoned creature cannot use "it's own" summon ability.
Let's look at at what Texas Snyper said again... cite other examples where spells, feats, etc use "descriptor" for a group of weapons and not [specific weapon] or a defined weapon group as above. "sword-like" is a descriptor and not a [specific weapon] or defined weapon group. He asked for an example I gave it to him. I was, very specifically, not making any argument in support of great club = club. Simply that using a descriptor rather than a defined rules element has happened, at least that one time.
In case Anzyr didn't convince you, here is the FAQ: "Heighten Spell is worded poorly and can be confusing. It lets you use a higher-level spell slot for a spell, treating the spell as if it were naturally a higher level spell than the standard version. Unlike Still Spell, which always adds +1 to the level of the spell slot used for a spell, Heighten Spell lets you decide increase a spell's level anywhere from +1 to +9, using a spell slot that is that many spell levels higher than the normal spell" The Glabrezu can now Summon other Demons (that are not under the players control), then Teleport away so it can't here any requests the player makes. Sounds like a good plan to me. Ahem.. serves willingly and well
I don't need a rule that says "how" they are denied the ability. I have a rule that says they can't "use" the ability. That's it. "Have" and "use" mean different things. Nothing states the ability is removed, only that it is unavailable. Regarding using/limiting the combo, I totally understand why a DM would. I would leave Heighten alone. The "problem" as I see it are Mount's duration and getting SLA normally unavailable. The SLA seems pretty easy. Either just make the SM/SNA rules part of the general conjuration (summoning) rules (most summoning spells reference those spells anyway), or just add that line to ASM itself. The duration issue would either require ASM to have its own duration, or maybe just removing Mount from being eligible (make it a conjuration (creation) spell that makes a horse-like being of force, for ex). I don't know that I would institute any changes, because most people I play with wouldn't abuse the crap out of it, and it could be fun if kept toned down. I have seen people talking about using it with Sorcerer to increase their flexibility, and that's a cool take on it I like a lot.
Yes, Mount qualifies to be affected by Alter Summoned Monster.
Yes, Heightened Mount would let you access higher level SM/SNA spells.
It does seem that a monster summoned by Mount/ASM would have all non-summoning abilities. While not being able to use summon abilities is in the general conjuration (summoning) rules, the ban on other abilities are in the Summon Monster spell itself, which is never cast.
No, it works on any conjuration (summoning) spell, as shown in the effects section, as long as you have a valid target. The inclusion of the last line about eidolons is pretty strong evidence they at least considered it would be used with other summoning spells/abilities. While reasonable, nothing in ASM references SM/SNA except for what monster you can choose No, "can't use" does not mean "doesn't have." Creatures summoned with SM/SNA have their normal abilities but are barred from using them. Creatures summoned with Mount/ASM would also have the abilities, without the same restrictions Great, nothing about it being a "mount" restricts if from fighting, or even requires you ride it. Sure, getting a horse to attack may require a Handle Animal check, but that's because the horse is an animal, not anything in the Mount spell. The new creature is (probably) not an animal, so you can just tell it to smash face, and it is probably happy to do so Is it conjuration summoning? Can you target a single summoned creature? Then it does/doesn't work depending. But Mount works.
Spiritualist, especially Haunted or Necrologist
Remember there are archetypes that may help the Wizard, Arcanist, and Magus more palatable for your setting. Spirit Whisperer and Familiar Adept Wizards, Unlearned Alchemist, and Eldritch Scion.
Umm...no. The equivalency doesn't have to work both ways. All Drow can take Elf feats, because the requirement Elf means "have the Elf subtype" but Elves cannot take Drow specific feats. All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares. So just because Flurry is considered a Full Attack, doesn't mean you can do something on a Full Attack that specifically requires you to Flurry.
That's fine, cause opponent isn't a defined word. Your opponent is who you say it is.
I would disagree. A touch range spell is a touch attack even if used on an ally. The rules allow you to automatically succeed, sure, but that doesn't change the nature of it being a touch attack. A Coup de Grace automatically hits without an attack roll, but you can be sure it is still an attack. Using Spell Storing armor to get two buffs in a round seems more like creative use rather than abuse. It helps action economy that one round, but it costs the same resources, and its just the one round until after combat is over and you can "fill" the armor again.
"General rule: If a class ability modifies your spellcasting, it applies to your spells from all classes, not just spells from the class that grants the ability. (The exception is if the class ability specifically says it only applies to spells from that class.)" So all classes, not just witch.
Mooncursed Barbarian sounds like it would fit.
Baker, Gardener, or Herbalist would all be appropriate for a Witch, I think
Thassilonian specialists still get school powers. The only changes are gaining the extra spell per level in exchange for losing specific schools as prohibited completely.
I just found the Stargazer, and it is AMAZING! Its nice to see a PrC that advances base class abilities. And it works well with multiple base classes for qualification. The bonus spells from the Stars subdomain functions as a good replacement for lost Bloodline/Mystery/Patron/Spirit spells. It stacks with familiar, domains, channel energy, hexes, revelations (partial), full spellcasting, plus Sidereal Arcana. Seems like it would work well with Cleric, Sorcerer, Oracle, and Witch. Wizard and Shaman would work as well, perhaps not quite as well. You could use it to add the Coven hex to any spellcasting class (YAY!) so potential covens have many more options. I hope if they do a Paths of the Wicked PrC book for evil, there is a class with a similar option for Mestama or Lamashtu. One quick question, HD and BAB are normally linked in PF. This class has a d6HD but 3/4 BAB. Was this exception to the general rule intentional?
Dana Song is a young woman from the upper peninsula of Minkai, near the Forest of Spirits. Always taught to be conscious of the spirits that share the world, she wasn't too surprised when she started hearing one speak with her. What was a little more surprising was when she finally met the spirit, following months of magical instruction it provided, was that it turned out to be a being of the upper planes rather than a local kami. Forging her connection with the deva, Dana has made it a mission to protect others. Despite her young age, she has become quite well known for her missions against the Oni and Hobgoblins of Tian Xia. D.Va is a Synthesist Summoner, who can call and wear a Monadic Deva as a suit of celestial armor.
Which deities the cult reveres would depend on what the underlying theme it is focusing on. For a general "Freedom" cult Cayden Cailean, Desna, and Milani seem like a good starting point. Probably add Calistria in there as well.
|