if it's in your pocket you arn't adjacent; you are occupying the same space. Tere is a difference.
If it had called out 'adjacent squares' I would agree, but while a lot of cases do, this doesn't.On this page under the section on melee attacks:
Melee Attacks wrote:
With a normal melee weapon, you can strike any opponent within 5 feet. (Opponents within 5 feet are considered adjacent to you.) Some melee weapons have reach, as indicated in their descriptions. With a typical reach weapon, you can strike opponents 10 feet away, but you can't strike adjacent foes (those within 5 feet).
The familiar, by this definition, is adjacent. Additionally, tiny and smaller creatures have a no reach, meaning they need to be sharing the space of any ally or enemy they want to touch or attack. Would this mean that 4 tiny creatures sharing a space aren't adjacent to each other?
For the purposes of activating teamwork feats like Shake It Off and Allied Spellcaster, an Inquisitor with Solo Tactics needs to be adjacent to an ally. The ally doesn't need to have the feat, and as far as I can tell it doesn't even need to qualify. This means I could stand next to a Barbarian and still benefit from Allied Spellcaster, though I wouldn't get the +4 bonus from an ally having the same spell prepared.
How far does this extend?
If the party summoner has a herd of Aurochs on the the field and I stand in the middle of them do I stack up Shake It Off bonuses? Would I get the same benefit from his eidolon? By my logic the answer is still yes.
However, if I have a diminutive familiar (from whatever source) in my pocket do I get a +1 to my saves from Shake It Off, or the bonus from Allied Spellcaster? Would this not count as adjacent, since we share a square? Does the familiar count as an 'ally' for these purposes? For that matter, how would an intelligent item work in this scenario?
I played a chef character recently, and played it as a ninja who dual-wielded a chef's knife and a skillet. In retrospect it would have worked well to play as a vivisectionist. That way I could have my food be magic without the feat tax I had (master craftsman (profession:chef) and brew potion with the permission of the DM). A few of the vivisectionist abilities don't fit flavor too well, but since he had skill as a butcher, but no ability to make bombs, I figure sneak attack would be a good replacement.
I hate the commoner rail gun as an example. For the first 90% it has to use rules as written, ignoring common sense, so the commoners can all delay their actions and move the stone 1 mile in 6 seconds. Then, all of a sudden, it has to use common sense to say that a stone moving 600 mph should do a lot of damage, rather than consistently using the RAW to say it does about 1d2 damage with a 10 ft. range increment being thrown by a commoner, and using a penalty to hit for using an improvised weapon.
That being said, I have problems with action economy as well. In my understanding, the actions are all supposed to be happening more or less simultaneously, but the rules do not represent this well. In the games I've seen that do represent this better (GURPS mostly) combat drags insanely, though. I don't really know a better solution.
Yes, you can load them all up like that. I played with someone who used this class. This class is balanced terribly. Thankfully, the person I played with kept things from getting too absurd, but he did make the gun you described, minus burning hands. Also, the ability to take spells off any list lets him get things like Haste as lvl2 and Summon Monster 5 as lvl4 (both from the Summoner list) gets bad. If he wanted he could fully buff our whole party, summon backup, and kill an enemy in a single standard action. If his uses ran out he just needed a UMD check to bypass it. That whole weird science mechanic is poorly thought out and broken. I wouldn't touch it unless you can really trust your player to keep things reasonable.
In the last game I played in we fought off some assassins just as we entered mid-levels and pulled a +1 and a +2 dagger off of each one. There were 6 assassins in that fight. Those daggers never stopped being useful.
If I'm playing a melee fighter type I will usually et a few javelins in my inventory just so I have something to do wen I'm out of melee range.
I have to agree that I dislike the Ronin's challenge ability. It actually prevented be from choosing that order when making the Samurai I will be playing in an upcoming campaign.
We usually play at the home of the player with the best space for it. At the moment this means my apartment. Last year it was a meeting space in my friend's res. hall. I have never played in a FLGS, since the only one near here is typically full of very rude warhammer players, and the store tends to mostly support warhammer style games.
I have to agree with Will saves, ironically, being the most important on heavy hitters like Barbarians and Fighters. I know that if my party Barbarian was coming at me with his weapon drawn I would be invisible and running immediately. Admittedly, we allow some 3.5 material in our games and the Barbarian's player is an absurd power-gamer. I am the only party member who could break his DR on average, and even then I can only do so when sneak attacking. Even in a normal situation, however, a well built fighter could full-round a sorcerer or wizard straight into the grave.
If that is the attitude you are going to have about trying to discuss an issue, I recommend you just boycott the class and move on.
It really is quite sad this beautiful thread was jacked by a pointless argument over charisma. I really have to thank you for this, Ashiel. I think I may start trying to get my next game to be a 15 point buy. I really like the look of these character. Also, somehow my group's current "4d6 drop the lowest" turns out higher than the average 25 point buy quite often....
Half the reason I enjoy playing martial characters is that they surpass realism pretty quickly. Anything past level 6-ish is well beyond anything the real world has ever seen IMO. That holds true matter the class.
It is really just a matter of personal play style, but I love the thought of my fighter climbing out of his crater and dusting himself off for the rest of the fight.
This was at a time when we had gone through quite a few huge battles without leveling, and the DM tallied it up to realize we actually had earned two levels in this time. I had planned on putting my monk into one psychic warrior level, followed by Elocater, so I got to do both in one shot. I had some splitting headaches prior to leveling, and trouble sleeping. Once I leveled I started levitating without noticing, and would use powers "involuntarily" in combat.
My former roommate's sorcerer had this running joke where whenever we got attacked he would try to jump up and fly away to escape the fight, then begrudgingly participate when he couldn't. When he could finally cast fly he tried this and, in his "surprise", crashed into the ceiling of the cavern.
I miss that campaign...
The OP's request never mentioned anything about it being strict PFRPG, so I went with the class I thought was most accurate.
Also, there were some crazy acquired templates slapped on some of the supporting characters during the show that should be accounted for. Just look at Jack Harkness.
My three favorite offbeat characters that I have actually played were the following:
An awakened potted plant psion. He was eventually re-planted into a psicrystal shaped like a planter so he could move.
A human chef (ninja). He was broke and his prospective future wife wouldn't marry him unless he had a job. In his case he was a ship's cook. He dual wielded cooking knives (kukris) and all his ninja abilities were simply gained during his "unusually intense" culinary school days.
A shifter druid (in-game he was a cursed human, shifters didn't exist in-setting) who was haunted by the spirit of a magical elk he had killed as a teenager. In stressful situations the elk would take over and allow him to shapshift (into elks from wildshape, elk hybrids from shifting), cast spells, etc. Effectively all of his druid abilities came from the magical elk that only he could see. It was unclear whether any of this was actually the case, or he was simply insane.
I personally would choose sorcerer over wizard, but only for my personal RP reasons. I prefer not to play bookish types, but I have seen some of my friends play very compelling wizards. I read X-Men a lot when I was younger, so I have a soft spot for the whole "confused youth develops powers and feels like an outcast" shtick, and that seems to come more from the sorcerer side.
I personally think The Doctor is a Factotum from Dungeonscape in 3.5. It's a jack-of-all trades intelligence based class. All of its class abilities are thematically based on the factotum picking up skills here and there during his travels, which sounds just like The Doctor in my mind.
Timelord would have to be a whole new race that gave huge mental ability score bonuses, and had an ability similar to timeless body where your physical stats did not degrade as you aged (among other little tricks). If I were to make a character based on the doctor I would (reluctantly) play an elf. Maybe create some RP trick where he appears to be human.
As for the Sonic Screwdriver, the TARDIS, slightly psychic paper, etc. they would have to be made individually.
Not to de-rail a FANTASTIC interior design thread, but the problem I have with the ki mat also has to do with the required check. You have to make a straight wisdom check against a dc 10+your current ki pool. Unless your ki pool is nearly spent it's going to be tough to make that check.
One that a buddy of mine loves is Binder(ToM)/Paladin. Con/Cha base on the binder, so there is no MAD problem with paladin. Binders have a ton of awesome passive abilities that compliment the paladin well. The passive abilities don't take away from action economy either. The flavor of it is tricky because pact magic could be considered a gray area for the paladin code.
You really should have read my second post on the subject. If there is one person going against the entire group then yes, he's wrong in that case. One person against the fun of the group is incorrect. My problem is with DMs who are that one person, who view the game as their game rather than being something that belongs to everyone who is playing. It's like those snotty girls in elementary school who dictated who everyone was when playing house.
Abraham spalding wrote:
If you are in a group of people who, DM and PC alike, would like to play a human-only setting that is very different than having a DM who just "doesn't like asian themed characters" and tells you to make your Monk into something else. If the player whose character is being changed is the one who is going against the fun of the group then it is reasonable to ask him to alter a character.The problem I have is with DMs who are enforcing character change on their own, even when they are the only person who objects to a ronin or a desert bandit. It's just that negative DM mentality that just because he/she isn't in the party he/she doesn't have to be a team player.
I think I really have a problem in general with DMs who restrict character choices for reasons having to do with theme, European-based nonsense or not. Restricting options for power reasons is fine, but not letting a PC play what they want just because it doesn't fit your ideal setting? That's just a pointless power trip. This is a cooperation based game and treating your DM status like some kind of license to infringe on other players' fun is just poor taste.
I don't mean to personally attack anyone who does DM this way, I just disagree with that DM style.
Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
i don't mean non core races, he plays with the misconcieved idea of D&D=Medeival europe and doesn't allow most of the non european concepts. i have proposed mikos, ninjas, desert bandits, elemental mystics, and a lot of similar things. almost all of which were core classes with human as the standard race. i hate having to bleach my characters white before i can play them.
That really is odd, I've never seen a DM rule out characters purely for thematics. Non-core races would be understandable, as if I'm running a Forgotten Realms game I don't really want the world's only warforged in the party, but a desert bandit? That's fairly easy to fit in even with a medieval Europe kind of setting. You seem like the type to work out solid back-stories so I'm sure you'd be able to fit in exile fro your homeland or something to explain your presence.
Ki points don't quite scale in the same way though. The abilities of other classes increase per unit spent (such as rage/song uses rounds only, channels are always per use). Monks have to spend more points to get more uses. One ki point will always only get you a +4 to AC, or a +20 acrobatics. To use the later abilities you need to use more ki points, whereas other classes still use only one unit.
I would personally consider houseruling the feat to increase ki pool to 3/4 level+wisdom. At level 20 it would only give you 5 more ki points.
I have a character right now with an interesting plan contingent on his death. He is a Shifter druid with all his racial substitution levels, and his Beast Spirit is an intelligent caribou he killed that is haunting him. He has verbal arguments with it, and those around him only hear him yelling at nobody in particular. When he dies I am just gonna let the caribou take over his body. He'll just be the same character, only his alignment is going to change from NG to CN, and I might have him use normal wildshape rather than wild shifting and have him spend a lot of time as a caribou.
You could go with something similar where your character has some kind of plan contingent upon his death where he can still basically be the same character.
I always felt the Exalted Feats were the least impressive feature, especially if you were a Monk. The good feats get burned out VERY early, and many of the Monk-specific feats require high Cha...making the Monk even more MAD. The bulk of the stuff worth taking was more vows.
It doesn't offset the lowered spellcasting entirely, but it is worth noting that the sheer lack of MAD on a Ora/Sor means your DC's still won't be horrible. That being said, I still don't recommend it. I tried it in 3.5 with a Favored Soul/Sorcerer build and it was painful.
Speaking of 3.5, if you are allowed 3.5 material I would recommend looking at Arcane Hierophant. It has a medium BAB, wild shape, armored spellcasting, and other goodies along with being a double-caster. The only added restriction is that you have druid levels.
It could be much worse. The biggest math nerd I play with is really heavily focused on powergaming his characters, while the writing major just focuses on making his really f***ing cool. I'd much rather fall in the latter category.
I was thinking of throwing all sense of balance out the window and rewarding all levels beyond 20th with 15 points to spend as from the Mutants and Masterminds system. I would have to convert a few things to deal with hit points rather than the Toughness save system. I should run this by my players...
Are you seriously just going to change the units to inches instead of feet and make them have this WHOLE argument again? You complain about Mynameisjake picking on you... but I'm having a damn hard time not getting nasty about this and I consider myself a fairly kind person.
This has actually been a problem in my games. Essentially magic item creation is now only 3 feats: Arms+Armor, Rings, Wondrous.
"What do you mean Immovable Rod? This is an Immovable Stick! There's nothing saying I can't make a slotless Wondrous Item that does that, right?"
The pricing gets funky, but we're in a setting where we can't purchase any items, it's all self made. So this is letting people get items that would have been impossible without extra feats.
We even had a few party members do that exact same "ring of shield" trick that the OP described.
I have 2 I particularly liked. Ghontix and Garath.
Ghontix was an exalted, Half-Actic Elf, Arcane Hierophant. He and his celestial baboon were summoned from death to serve a treant Demigod. In his past life he was an evil ranger, he had repented in death and was brought back in a very weak body. He teamed up with a CN Half-orc binder and a LN wyvern-riding mercenary whose antics often went against his exalted principles. They spent most of their time on diplomatic missions between countries that invariably fell into violence. This frustrated Ghontix who, in spite of 20+ Cha for the whole campaign, proved to be a horrible negotiator.
Garath was a Half-Elf Monk/Psychic Warrior. He was raised among evil worshipers of Wee Jas, but had so little magical aptitude that he was looked down on and made to do only physical work. He was taught the basics of painting and fighting arts by another one of the laborers at the commune. As an adult he struck out on his own, eventually falling into work as an inter-planar mercenary of sorts. His first exposure to the astral plane awakened his dormant psionic ability. In spite of his upbringing he was a worshiper of Wee Jas, and would often draw portraits of recently deceased PCs/NPCs. He was the only character that made it from beginning to end in that campaign. The others all switched out or died along the way.
I used to have a copy of that book, and it was great. I wish I knew what happened to it.
OP: If you could find a way to incorporate the Iaijutsu Focus skill that OA had it would probably help. See if your DM will allow it.
Aha, I had to re-read the one from the Forgotten Realms setting. I had a player pull the wool over my eyes with that the other night. I'll have to have a chat with him.
I don't believe it would in this case. The character in question has the Mind Over Body feat so he uses intelligence to calculate HP.
Abraham spalding wrote:
That's kind of what I was figuring, I was hoping for some kind of subtle rule magic I was missing. Thank you for clarifying.
I'm working on a level 20 monk build with 3.5 material allowed and I am bad at keeping track of stacking effects.
Let's say he is wearing a Psychoactive Skin of the Hero:
This psychoactive skin continually grants the wearer a +3 deflection bonus to Armor Class, a +3 resistance bonus on all saving throws, and a +3 enhancement bonus on attack rolls.
Has permanent Greater Magic Fang, and is wearing an Amulet of Mighty Fists that is giving a straight enhancement bonus rather than any special weapon abilities. Would these effects stack?
@stringburka: I think what he's getting at is the old 3.5 prestige classes that don't account for the different types of monk progression in Pathfinder.
Maneuver training is technically a bonus feat that uses your total level, not your monk level, so that doesn't need to be changed.
The only thing that really needs to be added in my opinion to fix the 3.5 monk PrC's to Pathfinder is the flurry of blows BAB. I played a level 15 character that was using an old PrC so I had the DM add the FoB progression and it worked just fine.
I can see the argument that channel energy turned clerics into dedicated healers, but in play I've felt it was the opposite. When I played 3.5 clerics I would quite rarely even use turn undead, so I felt like I was wasting my class ability. I am glad they got rid of that. Furthermore, I like channel because now when the party is whining that they need a heal, I can pop off a channel and not have to waste valuable spell slots. I can afford to do other things BECAUSE of channel, because I still have spell slots left that weren't used for healing.
I think rage powers should be along the same power-level as evolutions on eidolons.
Sadly, they are not. High leveled eidolons are pulling in evolutions that make them huge, fire breathing, fast healing, 8 limbed beasts. A barbarian rage is powerful, but even with mighty rage buffing his strength and con by 10, that class-feature-beast is probably better. This could be fixed at least a bit by making better rage powers.