Sigfried Trent's page

Super cool sword. :) I really like items that can become a characters signature weapon and given them some great visual role playing hooks.

Overall it's a nice balance of mechanics and fluff which is always a tricky thing.

Instinct tells me the book keeping on small damage per round effects can be game slowing. I'd go for more damage for just one round to keep the feel but simplify play a little. Then there isn't much need for the heal rules which don't add that much to the awesome of the weapon. That or simplify to just a heal check. 2 points of fire damage is thematic but I doubt it would ever actually be done in game play.

Mechanically the reforming the blade is vague and possibly pointless. (What happens if you didn't fix it? Does the missing shard make it unusable or just dull?) That said it's a big part of what makes the item awesome, so it must stay. :) I'd simply say that the missing shard is reformed from ambient moisture and that if the blade is ever broken it can be reformed (using your description which is great). I might make it a move action to reform after being destroyed.

That brings up the mechanical question of its hardness and HP which a true rules lawyer might get into so it may be something to include in a final version. (I'd personally just say it is equivalent to steel though that could make someone question why it shards out)

Personally I love the heat vision thing, lots of flavor there and makes it very iconic for the character that wields it.

Hey folks :)

Sigfried here. I'm actually not the original author of Create Wondrous Creature, that would be Scott Metzger who wrote it for the Netbook of Feats back in 2001 as a 3rd edition feat. I did the work to make it pathfinder compatible and various bits of editing/development including a far bit of simplifying it.

Thanks to Benchak for posting the commentary. This is a feat that is not intended as just a fire and forget kind of thing. I like to call them Role Playing feats because they require interaction with the GM on what you can or can't do with them.

But... its always been one of my favorites from the NBOF and Advanced Feats.

OK, so here are my responses to the questions

Q: The question i have is that since this is a rather loosely done feat how should this work? When you are completed do you have a fully grown member of the parent race? or could you stop short and apply the young template?

A: I did not have templates in mind and was thinking the "finished" creature would be a young adult. For simplicity, I'm imagining the mad alchemist or wizard has some means to speed up growth such that the listed duration gives you a fully grown critter. Perhaps its in a fleshy pod or vat of growth slime or you feed it special reagents. The means are left to the imagination.

My main goal was to achieve the conceptual aim, while having the mechanics be fairly simple and not especially unbalancing provided players and GM were responsible with it. (Though the catch made on fractional CR creatures was a good one, I'd say treat them as CR 1 at minimum to solve that.)

Q: Does this qualify as a item creation feat?

A: Yes, that is the intent. In 3.0 we had more official feat categories, Item creation being one of them. In Pathfinder I couldn't find clear precedent for listing it in the feat description, only as an index category. In the NBOF it was explicitly an item creation feat, even though a creature is not really an item. Still, its lab work. :)

Q: Should you be allowed to create your own race with this feat following the (frustratingly loose) monster creation guidelines?

A: Yes. In fact the original author encouraged people to invent their own new monsters with the GM setting the CR for the players creation. As you say, that is murky territory at best. I decided in editing to leave that option open.

My personal philosophy on monsters is that GMs are the best judge of CR, better in fact than the people who make the monsters because true difficulty is kind of relative to your players and their strengths and weaknesses. A good GMs gut check will beat all the CR calculations in the world most of the time.

Of course a big thing of the feat is the critter is not your slave, so if you make an intelligent race, it might thing of you as a god, or a threat, you never know.

In many ways the idea here is not you are making your own army, you are making fun story tools for the game master to entertain you with and of course to express your creativity.

Q(sort of): I ask because I am playing a mystic godling in a current game and I love the idea of having my character who is working towards true godhood tinker with the spark of life and possibly come up with my own race of people. :D

A: Sounds like good times to me :) I'd add that half the fun with Create Wondrous Creature is what happens when you fail the creation roll. :)

In the table for advanced feats, it has the prereqs for Lighten Weapon as Str 13 and BAB +1, and Improved Lighten Weapon Str 13 and BAB +3. In the text descriptions, Lighten the BAB +3, and Improved is BAB +8. Which is the one intended?

Thanks, sorry for the slow reply. As I recall that was something I changed on a late edit after reviewing feedback on the originally published feats. Some felt lighten weapon was a bit strong so I upped the requirements a tad. Go with the actual feat descriptions rather than the table.

Reviewed.

Thanks DM, much appreciated. :)

I have a question about the Complete Advanced Feats. I noticed on page 31 that part of the text was hidden behind the picture. The last sentence on that page starts with "Battle lances tended to resemble...." Then on page 32 at the top of the page start a sentence with ".....strap or special hilt to keep them from slipping out of your..."

Would it be possible to find out what was behind the picture? I am curious blue.

Sorry about that! :( something that crept into the print version for some reason.

The full feat is as follows (the commentary is the part cut off)

Shaft and Shield (Combat)
You can wield two-handed spear-like weapons in one hand.
Prerequisite: BAB +1
Benefit: You can wield two-handed spear-like weapons in one hand.
Special: You do not gain any additional damage normally granted for two-handed weapons when using this feat. Weapons covered by this feat include the lance, longspear, ranseur, and spear.
Commentary - Today when we think of a lance, we imagine the classic jousting lance, but those were specifically made for tournaments. Battle lances tended to resemble normal spears, although for charging they often included a strap or special hilt to keep them from slipping out of your hand on impact.

I find its very situation. What level, what campaign world, how much magic is lying around, what kinds of challenges you face. It also depends on the kind of player.

At high level any full caster is a powerhouse because they have access to powerhouse spells that can transcend reality, one shot kill, and affect large numbers of enemies. But they take proactive planning type players to make them work. If you don't use your spells well or are aware of your vulnerabilities a caster is often a victim.

Honestly, most dungeons are designed for fighters and the other brutes of the party and as a result they do pretty well. Then again, I often find those who play them most are not the more cunning players.

So the newer classes...

Witch = 1
A wizard that can cast heal and has powerful at will spells? Sign me up!

Oracle = 2
Great caster, but that limited selection is... limiting. Man they can specialize well and make great self healing warrior types.

Summoner = 2 (knocking on 1 with the right player)
In a fight, I could go tier 1, but they lack some of the full caster super spells. I find folks undercut the advantage of two sets of actions every turn. Train your eidolon in UMD and Disable Device etc... there are few limit on what you can pull off.

Cavalier = 3 (not sure on these lower tiers)
A great fighter with strong social skills. And don't knock the teamwork feats. Give this guy leadership and a clever player and he's great in combat, a party face, and can bring friends for special needs. And you can work up the animal companion in interesting ways.

Inquisitor = 3
Jack of all trades and pretty solid at it. I don't think there is any way in which they are bad, but its a hard class to "break" and the casting is really limited.

Alchemist = 2
They munchkin well. And don't forget their skills. UMD can be a game changer and they can be built for trapping.

Magus = 3
At low level they are killers, but overall, I'm not impressed with the spell list and they are glass jaws that have to get close to do their thing. Great for peak DPS combos... but kind of a one trick pony despite the gish concept.

Could someone please explain to me why the Witch is a "good" thing? I've looked over the Witch and even with the hexes I just don't see why people refer to it as a powerful class. I'm not sure what I'm missing.

Witch never runs out of spells to cast due to hexes and their spell list has both healing, damage, defense and control spells... aka pretty much everything and no limit to how much of it they can learn.

They are kind of a casters caster with all the tools you need to grow into a powerhouse. Though they require good knowledge of spells to play well, much like a wizard does.

Reviewed here, on RPGaggression and sent to GMS magazine. Cheers!

Thanks for taking the time!

BTW: I'm curious about the fluff text you mentioned associated with feats. Is it presented separately for part of the feat block itself? Also, what is it you enjoy about them?

I've always liked to distance feats from fluff as it can cause authors to limit a feats applicability based on the description they had in mind. But I am always on the lookout for making feats more fun to read when they come in book form.

Reviewed here, sent to GMS magazine and thus it might also pop up on DTRPG. Sorry about the score, I really wanted to like it.

No need to apologize unless your score was lower than you thought it should have been. :)

1.5 does feel harsh and I disagree with some of your balance concerns but I like to get the feedback no matter which way the wind blows and you always lay out exactly what you like or don't which is very helpful for an author.

---- do have to discuss one of your feat comments though... can't resist. :)

Hobbyist vs Skill Focus

The purposes are very different. Hobbyist is meant for characters that want to have a skill proficiency but otherwise cannot afford the ranks in the skill. For instance a fighter who wants to take diplomacy but understandably can't afford 16 intelligence to get the extra skill points. By spending a feat they can gain decent use of a skill. It is there to encourage diversity rather than min-maxing.

Skill Focus is nearly always taken by a character that is trying to maximize a given skill, granting a skill higher than you could otherwise achieve at your level. It would be a big waste of a feat slot to take it to shore up a skill you didn't buy ranks in.

Wow, thanks for the review Charles. I'm honored by your words.

Good point on Adrenalin Surge, the fact it's modern hadn't even crossed my mind but you are right that it is out of place. If this one ends up in a compilation I'll be sure to give it a less anachronistic name.

I think that such a book should have more than one path. Not more than one set of mechanics but more than one story telling path for progress at high levels.

The super hero like deeds of legend with men that can punch through steel and wizards that can dry up oceans is perfectly valid.

So is a vision where heroes take the fight to the realms of gods and take up divine mantle for themselves.

So is a world where heroes become more skilled and wise but essentially remain simply men and women who have survived a dangerous world longer than most.

An epic book should help guide both players and game masters to tell the kinds of stories they are interested in, not to give only a single possibility.

Okay, I *want* to want this, but I already have the Super Genius Games and Rite Publishing magus books. Can anyone tell me if this one has enough really different stuff to be worth it on TOP of those two?

I haven't read the SGG or Rite books myself but I have read the reviews of them and product summaries. I'm fairly certain that you will hardly find any overlap between them. Because I'm focused on feats and have a particular philosophy about how to write them, the approaches and content are very different.

The SGG and Rite books tend to offer a range of additional class materials focused tightly on whatever class it covers with an emphasis on new class options. Advanced Feats books are feats only and more "inspired by" the class and the majority of the feats can be used by other classes as well as the Magus. You may find a feat or two that overlap but I think its actually pretty of unlikely.

I'm confident if you buy any or all of them you won't feel like you have wasted your gaming dollar. Game designers are a bit like snowflakes and we all tend to have pretty different takes on things. Also, the Advanced Feats books have a lot of designer commentary about the class, the feats, real world history, and game rules. I think its a pretty unique approach and most reviewers have enjoyed it.

Either way, have fun creating and playing your magus, it's a very cool class. Just be nice to your game master, magus has some potential to be very potent at low levels when compared to other classes.

I think it is interesting to try and break it all down and peel back all the layers to see whats lurking under the whole notion of Official and Third Party. To some extent this kind of brand identity game has been going on for as long as there is commerce. Though it seems to me the way the game licences work now is new as companies invite others to contribute to the core brand as official 3rd party offerings.

Ultimately when you peel back all the layers, you find some people. Writers, artists, editors and producers who make the products. Sometimes that's just one guy, sometimes its a whole group. When push comes to shove that is where quality comes from. Folks that have both the talent and the motivation to do a good job. One or the other generally isn't good enough.

There is a struggle between compromise and getting the job done. Often to meet budget and deadline you have to do less than you wanted. Often to make a product something special you have to do more than you wanted to. I think the best publishers are those that struggle and fight in that zone. Anyone not making compromises probably isn't actually putting out many products and anyone who doesn't feel a bit over worked and put upon somewhere in the process isn't going to make a top quality game book.

Game companies live and die on their rep, and their ability to make money (sometimes substituting love and second mortgages for making money). So do the individuals that make the products the companies sell. And that is as it should be.

I guess I feel like the brands and the game are two separate things. Intertwined but not inexorably. I like saying "Pathfinder is D&D". And in the hearts of paizo fans that's completely true, yet its something Paizo can't say out loud. This fact speaks to the notion that the game and the brand are not one in the same. It also means that everyone making material for pathfinder is also the game, even if they are not entirely the brand. I'd like to think its the game we all love, not the brand even if we are also fond of the brands we enjoy or produce.

Ok... enough rambling from me.. I can't seem to come to a real conclusion here. :)

Personally, I had a hard time telling them apart or understanding that there was a difference.

I have one of the essentials books and felt it was just a nice summary, but I guess the big changes are int he players oriented one which I don't have.

Seems mostly just some tweaking more than anything else. In play I just let players use whatever they like.

I like the 4E system a little bit better than the saves in pathfinder, though I think in 4E the defenses are often too close to each other due to the mechanic as where in pathfinder there are more definite strengths and weaknesses in the defenses.

In 4E AC is almost always the strongest defense and the others are the softer targets. I don't think it should be like that. Also the 4E mechanic can lead all attacks to feeling a bit generic but I think that is a problem with how they use the mechanic rather than the mechanic itself.

When I run 4E and make my own monsters I tend to change the stats a fair bit, giving critters more drastic shifts in defenses, lowering HP, and upping damage. It has a much better feel much of the time. Too many 4E monsters feel "brick like" rather than "pointy".

I like to have brinks, points, flats... lots of different feeling enemies.

I had an inspired game master who introduced me to a notion that I have repeated in a few of my campaigns.

I often have a secret society of dragon worshiping priests lurking about in my world. The cute part is that instead of being powerful bad asses who ride dragons or command them, they are basically a bunch of really geeky fanboys and fan girls who run a super secret club where they can ooh and aah about how cool dragons are and how cool their super secret dragon club is.

The pay off is when the players, who are always intrigued, get to see behind the curtain and find out how superficial the whole operation is. Of course many of them want to join anyway... cause dragons are awesome yo!

Anyhow, dragon disciples from now on in my games will covet the legendary book of drakes and will work hard to get one of the drakes as their mascot. :)

I provided a full list of the feats that appeared in this book since it appears that I am the first one to review it here. Normally I don't like to list them since others do that and it seems redundant.

Thanks Sasha. I think listing out what's in there is quite handy for folks.

I do think the title should be Advanced Feats and More: Secrets of the Magus, because there was far more than just a listing of new feats. Also some of the feats were applicable for other character classes than just the Magus.

All said the feats are about half the work so that makes sense. Naming products is a funny business, you often name them before you do them so you can promote them and gave art and logos done by the time you are ready to press it out. I felt like a book with feats and nothing else would just be dull reading and I wanted to try making it a pleasurable read as well as useful for the game table.

The feats are typically inspired by the class that the book is based around but I intentionally try to make them as widely usable as possible. The Magus was actually more concentrated than some of the other titles as the class has a lot of "hooks" to tie onto.

Glad you liked it! And thanks for the fair and thorough review. I expect most readers will have a few feats they don't like and others they very much do. I much prefer that to a very safe but possibly boring collection of mechanics.

I think you are right that Magus is a bit munchkin, especially at low level and if the party rests often. My sense is they mellow out a bit compared to other classes at high level and they lack "staying power" compared to fighters and barbarians and such.

Anybody who hasn't bought some (or all) of the individual releases of the series should still pick this up, though. I'm just wondering if we'll see three more PDFs for the Ninja, Gunslinger, and Samurai in a few months.

The announcement that Ultimate Combat would include 250 feats has given me pause in trying to get started on those classes before the book comes out. That is a whole lot of feats and the overlap between my ideas and Paizo's is likely to be big. Even going for core classes it's kind of daunting.

I try to not overlap as much as I can, it just seems like the right thing to do. Feats in ultimate magic were really narrow which left me lots of room to work in.

So if I can find 30 feats for those classes that are worthy and aren't already covered I'll definitely be doing them but it may not be for a month or so after I get to see the feats in Ultimate Combat.

Props to the OP for being fair minded.

To steal a quote from ProfessorCirno in another thread:

"The new D&D is too rule intensive. It's relegated the Dungeon Master to being an entertainer rather than master of the game. It's done away with the archetypes, focused on nothing but combat and character power, lost the group cooperative aspect, bastardized the class-based system, and resembles a comic-book superheroes game more than a fantasy RPG where a player can play any alignment desired, not just lawful good. "
-Gary Gygax, 2004

Of course that would be a critique of 3.0/3.5 given the time frame, not 4.0.

Iv'e played a lot of both and I actually like both 3.5 and 4.0 but for very different reasons. 3.5 seemed like the first version where folks with a strong sense of rules design had a go, and 4.0 feels like a version where they took complete control. It's a well designed game system.

- After 2 years of 4.0, what I like best is the way they handle monsters. Its great, fast, easy, and the monsters are interesting to fight.

- They also did stacking right, establishing clear rules for it and discipline in using them.

- I like healing surges... there are reasons to not like it, but I do. Also the power curve in 4E is really good compared to 3.5. First level characters start fun, and high level characters are not generally game breaking mega-monsters. The game scales more linearly with more powerful attacks rather than degenerating into 12 actions per turn and such nonsense.

Where 3.5/pathfinder is way better

- Characters are fun to make and feel more unique. You just have way more options and ways to express yourself in the game framework.

- Combat is faster... its still a bit slow for my taste... but 4.0 combats can be glacial.

- Spells. They are just more fun. I like the idea behind rituals in 4.0 but casters are just not as fun and flavorful.

- Look and Feel 4.0 is so refined it just feels too mechanical. The flavor is too generic and slick so its just not much fun to read the books.

- Magic items. 4.0 neuters a lot of the fun here in the name of balance and mechanical purity. It just goes to far making them generic and the result is a lot of meh...

--- I'm really hoping the next gen of either or both games takes lessons from 4Es wins and losses and we continue to make D&D better (whatever name it goes under).

I purchased the Print version as soon as I was aware it was available (third-party print product have a history of selling-out if you don't jump on them immediately) Paizo order #1688179 June 10 2011 (arrived yesterday) so apparently I missed the opportunity to bundle in the PDF at no additional cost by a mere four days. Is there any chance of adding the PDF to my downloads post-purchase? It seems unfortunate to have to pay an additional $9.99 now for the PDF or miss out.

Hopefully they can help you out with that. If not, shoot me an email at sigfried@gmail.com

We got the product loaded a little ahead of the marketing effort which should commence shortly. :)

I sure am delighted with the cover and presentation on this one. Wife Anne Trent and artist Christophe Swall really combined powers for awesome on this one.

On my end I really enjoyed writing this one. Magus is a pretty cool class and the feat ideas came pretty fast and furious compared to some of the other classes. I hope folks enjoy reading it as much as I enjoyed writing it. :)

At level 19-20, which is what you're talking about. None, though weapon focus/spec and training add up to +8/10 (with dueling gloves) if my math is correct.

Indeed, which is a fair bit less than sneak attack, and just as sneak goes up as you level, so does the fighters weapon training and fighter only feat mechanics. But rogue is more damage.

But a strength of 30+, power attack, a crit range of 15-20 and the crit feats make it pretty brutal.

But there is nothing in the game that stops a rogue from doing the exact same thing. They get nearly as many bonus feats and neither class gets any bonus strength or crit range... Its just that most folks build dex/finesse rogues and waste feat slots making that viable while never getting any kind of extra damage from it. If you want to be a rogue who does well in combat, it's a bad way to make your character.

Or archery. Base archery is pretty dang badass. I mean if we're talking about wild theoretical possibilities then the rogue wins.

We aren't talking wild theoreticals, we are talking basic numbers on the character sheets and average damage outcomes. It's just that for some reason people thing Rogue = Dex and it doesn't have to be that way. Like any class you can take it in multiple directions and an all out murderous thug who stabs you in the liver is one of those directions that many folks seem to have a mental block on.

Sigfried Trent wrote:

Shadow_of_death wrote:

Why not just play a fighter?

Because fighters don't get 10d6 or more sneak attack damage.

They also don't need it. They do more damage without needing a gimmick.

So which class exclusive ability gives you 35 average damage per swing?

Why not just play a fighter?

Because fighters don't get 10d6 or more sneak attack damage.

Having seen this at Paizocon I can say that this book is pure pleasure! Its beautiful, fun, and just plain cool!

Pretty much every drake idea is "I want! I want!" and the thing is just a beautiful book. Bottom line is if you don't get a copy you are missing out on a small but delicious slice of pure awesome.

Playing the D&D MMO I learned something about rogues in combat. Rogues honestly have some of the best melee damage potential of any class, but... you have to abandon what you think you know about making a rogue.

1. Strength, not dex is your primary stat.
2. Build your rogue like a fighter, take extra attacks, power attack etc..
3. Stop sneaking around everywhere all the time.
4. Unless you are in an ambush, delay your actions and don't go first.
5. Work with the other heavy hitters and set up flanking deliberately and consistently. Or work with the casters to set up states of sneak attack vulnerability.

You hit 80% as hard without sneak attack, and about 150% as hard with it.

But if you play the traditional skill monkey or super finesse master.. ya, not so good in combat damage. And if you spend half the fight hiding and setting up.. not so helpful.

A strength based combat rogue is risky.. but devastating in a coordinated group.

Congrats on the compilation book for print. Are you planing to do more feats books in the future (ultimate magic, ultimate combat?)

Thanks Kindly! Advanced Feats: Might of the Magus should make its appearance soon. :)

At Paizo Con it was announced that Ultimate Combat would ship with some 250 feats! I'm unsure whether there will be much design room left to do feats based on those classes so I think that one will be "wait and see."

Emboldened by the good success of Advanced Feats, I'm definitely going to keep working at the writing and try to make some more fun projects for Pathfinder.

Word on PDF/Print bundle.

Wolfgang (grand Kobold of Open Design) says that he is going to get that set up though it may take a couple days as they will be recovering from Paizo Con. No details yet but we are on the case to try and make it happen.

Just curious are you guys going to be offering a print/PDF bundle?

Excellent question. I will query the Kobold King tomorrow at Paizo Con on this subject and find out the answer. :)

Reviewed.

Thanks DM!

Just to answer some possible questions about the product.

What's New?
There is no new rules material in The Complete Advanced Feats. I expanded a little on the character build descriptions so they had better legs as NPC's and were a bit more fun to read. I was especially happy with The Mighty Mutant build in that regard.

A small handful of feats got very minor tweaks or wording corrections based on feedback from the prior books. Likely the changes would be hard to spot unless you were really looking hard for them. Commentary was added to a few feats that had none in the first two pdfs.

There is additional art in the compile version as I think befits a print product. Christophe Swall did new interior pieces and I included art we commissioned for the Netbook of Feats back in the day by Darrel Langley. I really like the illustration for Oversize Weapon.

In addition to the Eidolon record sheet there is also a mount/animal companion record sheet included that was not in the cavalier book.

Print vs PDF: any differences?
Aside from the obvious, the print version is strictly a black and white interior with a color cover. The PDF is full color, though at least half the interior art is still black and white.

So why the compilation?
The first reason was that it was a common request by reviewers and readers of the original series.
The second reason is it makes for a large enough book to create a print copy of, which was the second most common request, reaches a wider audience, and tickles me pink as its my first print book.

Thank you, that is basically where I am at and what I told my players. "If I decide to allow it, it would be a house rule." I am still undecided yet am considering allowing it.

I wrote up a feat that allows this and I think the cost of a feat is about right to use two weapon fighting with spell combat. I also took the attack roll down a notch, but depending on your power level you could simply stick with the standard -2.

This is from my upcoming pdf Advanced Feats: Might of the Magus

Greatweapon Spell Combat (Combat)
You can use spell combat with a two handed weapon.
Prerequisite: Str 15, Spell Combat
Benefit: You may use Spell Combat while wielding a two handed weapon but suffer an additional -1 penalty on all attack rolls for a total of -3.
Special: A bladebound Magus with this feat may select a two handed slashing weapon for their black blade.

Commentary – Fans of a certain albino fantasy character should not be made to come so close yet remain so far away from emulating anti-hero of choice. I think the attack penalty and cost of a feat about makes up for the extra damage potential you get with a two hander. I was somewhat concerned about reach weapons as that gives the Magus an easy out for AOOs from spell casting but with enlarge person at level 1 and good use of the 5’ step rules they can already avoid these issues much of the time.

I've also got treatments for ranged spell strike and spell combat and lots of other goodies in there. One of the builds included is a Bladebound Elf Magus using a Curve Blade.

I would think with wand wielder and Maneuver Mastery people would be talking about trip and twf staff Magus. Let see some staff Magus builds.

I worked one up for my up and coming Advanced Feats: Might of the Magus book. I multi-classed with monk for mine (Monk 4/Magus 16). I didn't build too heavily for tripping (I already did that with a whip build) but its a good way to go.

You can't do the TWF double weapon action, but I was more focused on switching between spell combat and flurry of blows (which you can do unarmed or with the staff). Of course my build involved some new feats I created for the book but I think you can still do the basic build without them.

The tricky thing for Monk/Magus is where you focus your ability scores. I started with a pretty even spread in Str/Dex/Con/Int/Wis and leveled up into Wisdom all but one level (to grab one more Int for level 6 spells). More strength would have been nice but the Magus list has a fair number of Str buffs you can use.

Its not a powerhouse kind of character, but its versatile and pretty flavorful.

I was having a discussion with my wife about Bookmarks in PDFs. How are they used, how many is the right number and so on.

I tend to use bookmarks in PDFs quite a bit, especially when I'm doing research or using it as a reference to build a character. She likes to use search and feels that bookmarks should be chapters only to avoid clutter (even if they are collapsible).

Of course, everyone has their own preferences and means of using electronic books but we wanted to see what a wider range of people thought about the subject.

Possible questions...
How thorough should bookmarks be?
What kind of content should be bookmarked?
Nested or not nested?
Do you prefer just to make your own or have them already there?

Thanks for your input!
Sigfried Trent

Valectrix

I have to add that leadership breaks nearly every convention there is for how your write feats and the kinds of things they should be able to do.

That said, there aren't any other character build mechanics where it makes a ton of sense either so I can't entirely fault the game for it but it sure is weird from a design standpoint.

I've never used it in a game or had a player use it but I think if someone wanted to I would let them. Its the sort of ability that you really need to have some involvement in as a game master and it can also be a great tool for story elements and the like.

I think I would work collaboratively with the player to "share" the story and behavior of the followers and cohort. Most of the time the player gets to direct them but I can step in and take the reigns from time to time for the sake of story telling or if the player is somehow abusing his minions.

For GMs who fudge the rolls alot....do you have a problem when a player fudges the roll? I mean logicaly you should not. It does make the whole dice in the game silly though...the reasons given can be applied to a player who is doing the same thing.

I don't fudge rolls a lot, but I do it on occasion, often not to save a character but to challenge them more (fights where the bad guys never land a blow can be pretty dull affairs if they go on very long).

I honestly don't mind when a player tips the dice in their favor on fairly rare occasion. If it were really obvious and they abused it to never fail, that would be a problem, but if they at some point decide they really really don't want to fail a given save, especially if the life of a fellow hero is on the line... OK, thats just a bit of creative control of the story. I rather like systems that actually let players do this as part of the rules from time to time.

The #1 rule for cheating is don't let anyone know. The best cheating should be undetectable by everyone else and simply feel like the hand of fate telling a fun story. I only use it when fate is delivering a crappy one of its own accord.

Some of this stuff has been sitting around for twenty! years! give or take, and still in the original shrinkwrap. That seems like a long time to carry inventory. Is it unusual? Or, within the bounds of what passes for normal in the industry?

American Eagle was kind of special, they had looooots of space so they pretty much just kept everything they ever stocked on the shelves all the time. They must have owned the property because for a hobby store it was a huge place. I used to go in there hunting for old mini's of which they had mass quantities.

I'm guessing they aren't entirely unique, but they were very unusual. Places that own the property tend to have bigger stores with older stock and those that rent usually can't afford that and have smaller places and only keep strong sellers on the shelves.

Distributors I know less about but I suspect its similar. If space is not cheap then you only stock what you think you can sell.

The funny thing about this for me is that I've been in that store for years, and seen those products just hanging out year after year prominently displayed, but on line, some of them will sell fast and furious. Amazing difference.

I worked up a monk 4 Magus 16 for my upcoming Advanced Feats book: Might of the Magus.

I went with the Staff Magus archetype which is kind of fun with monk. The two classes don't exactly combo since you cant spell combat and flurry at the same time or the like but they do compliment one another quite well giving you tons of options.

Perhaps I went to far on the stimulation of charging into a group of foes kicking up dust and smashing into them, I will see about removing the blindness, knocking something prone is a week effect (useless if your opponent is flying or swimming). Sometimes you get carried away wtih he rule of cool and the rule of fun.

I think that's probably about right. Permanent blindness is pretty nasty and since it would generally preclude AOOs from the blind target the Magus would be free to fly about the battle from foe to foe blinding them so long as pool points were handy. Much cheaper than casting and re-gaining the spell with pool points. Dropping the blind or making it a one rounder is probably a good call.

Even prone has its moments, either the foe must take the prone penalties or they have to get up and forgo a full attack. It's not all that weak but compared to blindness... at least they have some recourse.

I don't think the fly part is an issue balance wise. You could spend points to fly up to ledges and the like I suppose out of combat but at the cost of a pool point... why not?

Very cool idea for an arcana!

Really really cool idea. Good stuff!

Added a review. Love the book. quick question tho:

Does the bonus to Charm spells from Seduction work all the time, or just against the same people the skill bonuses work with??

My intent was that the bonus applied to all charm spells regardless of the target's normal "interests."

And thanks for the review!

Thanks for the review DM :) And especially for rounding up :)

Personally, as I say in the book I have a soft spot for evil characters and some of my all time favorite PCs were villains in the guise of a hero or were at heart selfish but end up as heroes due to their inevitable fate. But that is the thing of any game, personal taste plays a big part.

I have to agree that Gotcha is not a very attractive feat, or rather its a feat you are very glad a friend of yours took and not so much one you are very likely to take yourself. I was in the mind space of making a kind of selfless defender of others when I designed it, but that really isn't at all a common type of character to play. I was most motivated by the fact there is no defined mechanic for a reaction to save others from some peril when its a common scene in dramatic stories.

Sometimes its easy to get lost in your own focus that way and miss the bigger objective of trying to make every feat have some cool factor or hefty utility for as wide a range of players as possible.

Thanks for your insight,
Sig

you know what stinks is, unlike a book, you can't leaf through to find anything and see if you really want to buy it,

Typically one of the reviewers will post a summary of the feats. But since you asked...

Feats
Cautious Trip: You cannot fall prone when making a trip attempt.
Coordinated Fire: You and an ally gain damage bonuses on ranged attacks.
Defensive Disarm: When attacked and missed you may attempt a disarm maneuver.
Defensive Insight: You gain a bonus to armor class when missed.
Draw Strike: You can draw and strike in one fluid motion.
Ducking Shot: You are skilled at dodging while using your ranged weapon.
Eschew Divine Focus: You can cast spells without a divine focus.
Extended Use: Extends the use of a given class ability.
Extra Judgment: You can use your judgment ability one additional time per day.
Fencing Stance: You gain a dodge bonus when in a fencing stance.
Fast Track: You suffer fewer penalties while tracking and moving quickly.
Fearsome: Enemies shaken by you suffer additional penalties.
Friend and Foe: You and an ally can manipulate attitudes by playing friend and foe.
Gotcha: You can stop an ally from falling or being moved.
Grudge: You gain combat bonuses against a race or organization.
Hammer and Anvil: You deal extra damage to flanked opponents.
Improved Judgment: Multi-class inquisitors gain a bonus to their judgment ability.
Magical Insight: Opponents affected by your spells suffer reduced saving throws.
Magical Savant: You reduce the ability score requirement to learn and cast spells.
Misdirected Strike: You can cause opponents to attack one another.
Meddlesome: Threatened opponents suffer a penalty when casting defensively.
Offensive Insight: You gain a bonus to attack rolls against opponents you have already hit.
Parrying Stance: You can use an off hand weapon to block attacks.
Persistent Judgment: Your judgments persist when you are incapacitated.
Ranged Maneuvers: You can perform certain combat maneuvers with ranged weapons.
Shared Judgment: You grant your judgment bonus to an adjacent ally.
Shared Magic: You can use an allies spell slots to cast your spells.
Subdue: You are not penalized when dealing nonlethal damage.
Team Defense: You gain a dodge bonus when adjacent to an ally.
Track Spirits: You can track incorporeal entities.

Builds
The Bloodhound: A tough as nails holy bounty hunter.
Wolf In Sheep's Clothing: An evil inquisitor that aids others while slowly turning them to the dark side.
The Detective: A cross between Sherlock Holmes and Jacky Chan

What I really want to know is, who did your cover artwork?

That's the work of Christophe Swal

He did all the covers except for the summoner as he wasn't available at the time.

My wife, Anne Trent does the layout for the covers (except for the first installment).

I can't thank either of them enough for the great work they each do.

--

If anyone has persistent PDF troubles, and you've tried re-downloading it, shoot me an email at Sigfried@gmail.com , attach the problem file and I'll try to help sort it out.

Love the PDF, but noticed a couple things.

1) The feat Eschew Divine Focus requires a feat that, as far as I can tell, no longer exists in Pathfinder (Extra Turning). Which would be weird in and of itself as the Inquisitor does not have a turning/channeling ability.

2)The Wolf in Sheep's Clothing example has this feat and not the prerequisite, which makes me believe the prerequisite was supposed to be dropped.

Thanks Andrew!

You are correct, having Extra Turning listed as a prerequisite is a mistake, it should not be a prerequisite for the feat and somehow escaped my notice after many editing passes. We'll get that cleaned up!

Are the feats in this book legal for PathFinder Society play? The book sounds like something I want, but if it's not legal I'll probably have to pass on it. Thx.

As much as I wish they had a way to sanction such things, they don't. Sorry John. Have fun Oracling regardless, its a fun class, even without my feats! :)

Tripping is the most dominant way to take advantage of reach because it costs the opponent a move so at best they get a single attack, at worst none at all. Tripping and reach is a very strong combo.

Another is to take a position in difficult terrain as you can't use 5' steps in it.

Another way to compensate for the no adjacent issue with pole arms is to use armor spikes. They are usable even if your hands are full and are close range weapons so you are always "armed" up close. My book Advanced Feats: Cavalier's Creed also has a feat called Near and Far that allows you to use a pole arm at close quarters which I think is reasonable for the cost of a feat.

As another said, using an ally to help stop the advance or make them pay for it is also handy, and there are feats out there that can help prevent people from 5' stepping with impunity as well.

Last up is to use readied moves against a determined opponent. Ready an action to take a 5' step back if an opponent moves adjacent to you. They 5' step in, you step back, now if they either stand like a fool, or move in taking the AOO. If they stay put, on your turn you hit them and then step back so they are at 10' range and cant get at you with a fiver.

And yes, in real combat, the way you deal with a pole arm is rush at them and hope you can block that first hit and get in under their guard, and if you have the pole arm and you don't get them you need to find a way to move back or to the side to avoid the press. (I used to do some SCA combat) Thats one on one mind you...

So would the Fighter have then been left out if he had a 10 in Int and Cha (no dump) or even an 11 in Int and Cha (putting points in them)? He's still an average Fighter.

Ya probably. He's presumably a hell of a killer but why would you ask him to help you plan an assault if his thinking is at best average? You might want him there to carefully explain what you want him to do, but you wouldn't be planning your military campaign based on his merely typical brain power.

Unless the NPCs in your war council are stupider than Mr fighter, they don't have that much use for him in the brains and leadership department. Of course if he has some wisdom, then he could leverage that in such a meeting, but if all his mental traits are at best baseline average... then the leaders of a war council don't need him there for any practical purpose.

That said, they would have to know mr fighter. Its not like NPCs look at characters and know how smart or stupid they are. Generally the heroes of the story are heroes and NPCs will listen to them based on reputation or because they are desperate. But if its well known that Thugor is not the brightest of folks, then they will likely want to talk with Braingasm the wizard about matters of planning. :P

Why an Eidolon? The whole idea there is its a build your own monster kit where you can make a four armed snake the breathes acid clouds and sticks to walls etc....

Using that system to make a ghost hobbit.... I just don't see the logic in it.

A ghostly half-ling should probably just be a half-ling of whatever class makes the most sense with some kind of ghost template put on it and I'd allow it so long as it was not as powerful as the characters were and it would largely be under my control as the GM (from an RP perspective), though certainly it would be loyal to the character and I'd let them play it in combat situations.

I just think you are barking up the wrong tree from a rules perspective.