Search Posts
Currently, there are no Charisma-based classes but Envoy. So, if you want to play an 18 Charisma character because you like to chat, you play an Envoy. Then, you try to find a mechanical way to build it. I'd just like to take a second and point at the Solarian.
Foreword: Like many folks here, I've yet to play the game as written. This is just an impression. I don't know if this is a local opinion or one that's more widespread, but I've heard plenty of players say something along the lines of "Race only matters at level 1." What they tend to mean is that race, in 1e, didn't really impact a character. Generally racial traits weren't anything to write home about, and racial feats were rarely selected. 2e seems to have taken that problem and just stretched across the lifetime of a character. Now characters get about the same impact from Ancestry, but it's spread over more levels. When I first saw the changes to Ancestry, I was stoked, but as I read more I got more and more disappointed. My proposed fix echoes a bit of what I've read elsewhere. Boost Races at the onset, then have some of their core abilities grow over time. This is a lot of what feats did for races last edition, but it was tough to justify taking something over Quicken Spell or Power Attack or whatever made your character float.
Agile reduces the MAP by 1, and most unarmed strikes are agile; if you are using Dragon Stance or Mountain Stance it would be -5.I see some folks use -5 for the MAP and some -4. Is this coming from disparate rules in the book. Like Paizo tweaked it at some point and folks are reading conflicting things? Cool beans. That's what I was missing. Thanks.
I see some folks use -5 for the MAP and some -4. Is this coming from disparate rules in the book. Like Paizo tweaked it at some point and folks are reading conflicting things?
And since a monk has a free +1 conditional to every attack, this -4 can be considered just -3 in most situations. Is there any point in playtesting this in a way you know is a mistake? It's clearly at least 1 ki per ki strike. What use are you going to get out of knowingly playing the class incorrectly? You get to tell Paizo that the mechanic that they typoed doesn't work well?
AoO = Attack of Opportunity
No one was able to hit the casters when they were casting.
Sounds plausible. I don't know how I missed that classes give a +2 to a stat. Happy to have missed it. That quoted rule still doesn't make sense, but at least it's a bit closer to relevant I guess.
At 1st level, a character can never have any ability score that’s higher than 18. Just curious why this is here. If we can only, at most, boost a stat to 16 at level 1, why put this in at all?
Speaking of signature skills, the wizard multiclass feat Expert Wizard Spellcasting requires master in Arcana. How can you get that if you can't make Arcana a signature skill? Just to clarify for anyone that might've missed or misread it. You can get a skill to expert without it being a SigSkill. Your character can use this skill increase to either become trained in one skill in which she’s untrained or become an expert in one skill in which she’s already trained.
Actually, if you start the "line" from the upper-left corner of the "red-dot" square and end it on the upper-right corner of the end square in each of those pictures, you can see that the shaded squares are the squares that get bisected. Even in the second image (the 3-then-3), the "line" goes strait through the corner in the middle. I'm not saying that's true. I am saying that the lines in the image are all built one a pattern of 3 blocks.
From the sound of it, the people insisting that lines have to go in sets of 3 squares didn't bother to look at the whole image in the rulebook. There are two examples - half of them - in that image where the line isn't done in sets of 3.All of the templates in the linked image are built of sets of 3. What page are you referencing that has a different layout? Each of those are repetitions of a pattern of 3 until they reach the actual length of the line. The first and second can be viewed as repetitions of a line of 3. The third is a repetition of 2 up one over. The fourth is a repetition of a diagonal. All of them, in a logical sense, can be described as repetitions of 3.
From the sound of it, the people insisting that lines have to go in sets of 3 squares didn't bother to look at the whole image in the rulebook. There are two examples - half of them - in that image where the line isn't done in sets of 3. All of the templates in the linked image are built of sets of 3. What page are you referencing that has a different layout?
I've always felt the opposite, regarding the seven sins. They're putting evil into boxes, which I've always thought fit Devils and the Hells to a Tee. But the 4/7 feels like a clue the PCs should be reacting to. Is there a hint for this room like there is for the others?
Were I going through the trials again, and I found this room, I'd look for the 3 missing cabinets.
I just want to check on one of the class's abilities. On page 7 there's Committed Will. Does this ability mean that if I cast a Shadow Conjuration: Fireball, and 1 out of 12 peasants makes their save, they all make their save? In addition, when a creature succeeds on a Will save to disbelieve the shadow weaver’s illusion, the shadow weaver instinctively knows that the creature succeeded. All observers automatically disbelieve that illusion (although it does not end unless it is a phantasm).
Divination... Necromancy... Same thing.
Keep in mind that that text is immediately preceded by "A successful hold does not deal any extra damage unless the creature also has the constrict special attack." So this will only apply for Tetori monks above level 14. But I hope there's clarification for you on the duration.
Is there a place you'd like formatting / editing notes for the product?
I'm looking forward to trying out the Armor Storm. I don't think Blitz is the end-all be-all, but it's pretty tempting for a secondary.
Would anyone be willing to spoil either what the Scaled Fist replaces or even just if it stacks with MoMS?
I think you may have nipped only half the typo. The spell still reads "1d3 points of fire damage per caster level" as a cantrip. Is your intent to make a cantrip that's leagues ahead of any other and, at higher levels, better than most damaging level 1 spells?
Thanks a million for putting this back out, guys. I've been playing one of the originals for almost 2 years and this really shores up what was missing there. I will note that there seems to be a typo on page 15. Fire Dart says "it deals 1d3 points of fire damage per caster level to a maximum of 10d6." when it should probably just be dealing 1d3 points of fire damage as a cantrip. In the least, the 10d6 is a typo. Again, thanks a ton for the new product and when I've had a chance to chew on it a bit I'll be sure to put up a review.
I'm also pretty interested in this bit. I've been looking for a while for a way to create a character I played ages ago in another system that functioned a lot like a black hole. He wandered across the battlefield, dragging enemies closer and then keeping them close. Among other qualities he had was a difficult terrain aura. The closest I've found so far is the Warder from DSP. Which I like but isn't doing it for me entirely. Anyone have something that might scratch that itch? How about a way to drag enemies closer?
You could consider someone with Repose. That'd also lead to a decent Medusa's Wrath later down the line.
You might also want to check out a breaking weapon, with smashing, that adds 4d6 to your sunder attempts. In a Way of the Wicked campaign, my sundering half giant wields a large sized Breaking, Smashing, Earthbreaker for 7d6 damage on a sunder. Edit to add: with that title, you may want to consider a Meteor Hammer or a dwarven Dorn Durgar
What is dead may never die. That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange Aeons even death may die
I checked at the time of the original post and there were no racial traits that can be trades for slow and steady. Quickened Steps: Although most forgeborn are steady in their gait, some are designed for speed. Forgeborn with this trait have a speed of 30 ft. This replaces slow and steady and fearless. I still feel like the second ability is pretty terrible, even if you were to multi-class to one that requires rest to regain spells why would you wear armor with an arcane spell failure chance? There are classes that this doesn't apply to but Forgeborn are generally not well suited to them. This one seems like it should already be a racial trait since it's so specific and weak. Because you want to be a psion or a cleric that also have to rest to regain PP/spells?
A human with 5 levels of Aegis/ levels in metaforge? Starting at level 5 a character can have three functional arms from their astral suit and a level 5 equivalent mindblade. The Metafoge is what originally made me wish that a soulknife could split their weapons more than once.
Man, I was really enjoying this advice thread for a while.. then someone apparently inexplicably moved it into the rules forum. I wonder why that happened, since it was a thread about advice for a certain build. Oh wait. It didn't. Can you folks take this argument to the rules board and continue there. I know others have asked the same, and that you're likely to ignore my request. But I'm at least going to start flagging your responses and likely get this otherwise awesome thread locked if you keep it up. Seriously, just start another thread in the appropriate forum. <3
Chris, Thoughts on something to allow a multi-armed soulknife the ability to manifest more than 2 blades? Either a blade skill or a feat?
A ring of Chameleon Power will get him a +10 competence bonus for 12.7k Shadow Armor will net him a +5 Competence bonus for 3750. Creeping armor is a flat +5000 GP and will remove ACP from stealth rolls. Mithral armor instead of whatever material he's using will gain a +3 to his stealth checks. That'd be 9k for just the materials, then all the magical stuff he wants on there. Skill Focus: Stealth will grant either a +3 or a +6 to stealth checks depending on level. Note: all of this is spending resources that he could otherwise use to be good at his actual job of getting hit in the face. Edit: I was assuming he had ranks in stealth. Otherwise, that's probably your starting point.
I might have missed this option somewhere, but for a while I've wished that a soulknife with 4 arms could manifest enough weapons to fill those arms. Is there any chance of a Blade Skill appearing that could scratch that itch? Namely, I was going to make a Metaforge with four arms and couldn't find a way to make it viable, other than carry two weapons for my 3rd and 4th hands.
I don't know if you've seen this but it's a build theory with this concept taken to the extreme.
I can't really see any reason to use a poison in combat that isn't either the Stun or the Daze poison. I guess Undead would be a good reason, but that's a good reason to avoid all of them. The bard's best strategy from level 5 on is to figure out what poison he can make with a take 10 with Cilops Venom and then make a ton of that. Maybe also, if he can TWF, do the same with Blossomkiller extract. Paralyzed is by far the better condition to lay on a foe. Once you see that's he's paralyzed, just CDG and move on. I'm likely going to work on a side project making 40 or 50 poisons with spell levels and such that can be subbed in for bard spells. When I've got it thought out a bit I'll toss it up here as well to see how you folks feel about it.
For the record, I'm all about letting someone play their concept. The blind character sounds neat to me. Just do it within the rules. I don't think what deusvult is suggesting would fly at any table. Wear a blindfold. If you need to resolve it at the end of the day. Take off the blindfold. You fluff it as your character is blind and move on. Cast blindness on yourself. At the end of the scenario, Dismiss the blindness. Mechanically you are blind. Fluff wise, you are blind. You just happen to get one less second level spell, every now and again, from your god. Cut open your own eyes and cast remove blindness. Whatever floats your boat. Just do it within the writ of the rules. Also, talk to your GM ahead of time. I can't say that enough. Finding out at the end of the scenario that your GM is going to kill your character (entirely within their purview if you refuse to have that blindness off your sheet) is a thing you should know before the scenario, not after.
and this is one that has to be left behind. Or not. As I currently play a similar character. (Well, "Currently is a stretch. At this point it's "On occasion.") I'm a bit disappointed in myself arguing with LazerX here. I generally find myself pulling for them when lurking on the boards. I've just been in a posting mood this week. The OP needs to be willing to work around the ruling of "~You can't end a session blind." in some way. Done with a Pot of Remove Blindness. The OP needs to find a way to avoid the rule "Don't be a jerk" by not making himself so useless to his party that other players hope his train is delayed and he can't play that day. If you're contributing in some way to the party, and not breaking the rules of PFS, go for it. Just speak to your GM ahead of time to ensure that you're not going to rain on their parade either. Yes, even when you're level 12 and prepping for Eyes of the Ten. Talk to your GM.
Would cure blindness fix the dagger marks As long as the eyes are damaged and not destroyed, yes. Again, speak with your GM ahead of time. Should I say screw it and just make her wear a blindfold and say she blind? 4. Having spoken with the GM ahead of time, don't play at a table where the GM has told you that signing in is character suicide. LazerX, that's a jerk move. In the least, force the PC to pay 750 for a Potion of Remove Blindness, or for spellcasting services.
Hmm I will definitely keep that idea in my head tho idk how my fellow party members would feel if I wasted two level 3 spells for a concept Generally you can cast Remove Blindness after the scenario. If your GM is kind you could cast Blindness on yourself before hand... or do what my paladin does and damage your own eyes with a dagger. my seeker level character is a blind paladin.What is a seeker level Level 12+
Talk to your GM ahead of time. Some will be fine with your PC being blind. Some will not. When they aren't. Wear a blindfold to hide your eyes. You're still blind. My seeker level character is a blind paladin. If you're going for an oracle, you can waste two spells a session in order to play your concept, though that starts at level 6. Blindness will make you blind for the scenario. Remove Blindness will keep you character alive...
Base Classes:
I love everything in here. I have no constructive or destructive criticisms here. This write up is beautiful.
I’ve never wanted to play a witch before, you’ve changed that. Hybrid Classes:
Bloodrager has the word “Arcanist” in it’s class skill description.
Do Warpriests replace the Blessings class feature with a domain, or do they use those blessings and those blessings only? I won’t gush quite so much here quite as much as base classes. I think that all came from reading about Witches last. Is the statement that the bard cannot accidentally poison themselves ambiguous? I believe that rolling a 1 on a Craft (Alchemy) or when applying poison to a weapon qualifies as accidental exposure, correct? That wording is not ambiguous. It is not as helpful to the bard as saying “At third level the Bard gains the Poison Use class ability.” Paizo supports poison based characters by releasing feats, Magic Items and Prestige Classes that require the “Poison Use” ability. Or that augment it. Or that penalize characters without it. Why not name it if it does exactly what you want anyway? No talents, no discoveries. I understand. I was just letting you know what my “Such as” was. I’d named it before the statement you’d quoted. Honestly, if wizard defilers have to prepare their metamagic in advance, this doesn't break anything. It removes the temptation always being there. If it can be applied spontaneously, it makes it an ever present temptation. You might find the proud preserver in the middle of a fight, watching his friends die, wishing he could maximize that fireball. Or make that Hold Person a persistent spell. A preserver will never defile anything if there’s no temptation to do so. I prepared my spells last night when I was nice and comfy in the inn as opposed to being ambushed by some Templar. There should always be that smidgen of temptation to draw just a bit more life from the area if your life or the lives of your friends are at risk. The path of the preserver is supposed to be a trial, right? Its supposed to be something you struggle through. If a Wizard preserver can literally never defile without deciding to do so the night before, it's not really a temptation for anyone other than a spontaneous caster.
Poison Use is a class ability granted to the alchemist, Ninja and a fistful of archetypes that lets them not poison themselves when they roll a natural 1 on the check to create a poison. I’d think that natural 1 penalty would prevent someone from taking 10 on crafting their poisons, though I might be mistaken. 5% chance of possible death seems stressful to me. Poison Use (Ex): Alchemists are trained in the use of poison and starting at 2nd level, cannot accidentally poison themselves when applying poison to a weapon. There are feats and items that augment this ability so it might be worth while using it as named instead of putting it’s mechanics in without naming it specifically. While it’d make the task harder, I feel like the bard should receive more in this trade.Such as...? Mostly what I’d suggested above. Adding some kind of talents or discoveries. A bard is half spellcaster half everything else. These guys replace spellcasting with a class ability they have to spend WBL to use. It seems like the flat modifier to the hyperpoisons will lead to fairly linear saves. Bards will sort out which poison has the best GP/DC ratio and use that exclusively. I haven’t looked at the numbers, but it’ll wind up being something like “That’s Giant Wasp Poison plus Blossomkiller, DC 30 or be paralyzed”
Every effect will have the same DC. That’s mostly why I suggested the Poison Level or something similar. Like what you had initially with the static modifiers per Poison. Most of these look awesome. I like the change to the Paladin’s Divine Bond, though I wish I could have me a Mekillot.A mekillot would just be overkill, I think. I should have noted I was kidding there… Mekillot might be overkill. You can already read that into the text. Defiling allows you to apply one or more metamagics to your spellcasting. It does not say that the metamagics must be prepared, does it? It doesn’t say that they don’t either. I’d assume, as a player and as a GM that if a new rule doesn’t say it’s an exception to the rule, then it isn’t. I somehow missed that the other classes were up. I’ll dive into them asap. Hopefully I’m being helpful instead of a pain in the tail. Great work so far.
In a campaign with almost only undead, I was considering it with the new Monk's Elbow Strike.
This is hopefully pretty easy to answer. I know where I lean, I just want to see what others think. Can the Deadly weapon property be applied to an Amulet of Mighty Fists?
This has been written and edited as a stream of consciousness as I’ve read through the last month of posts. I trimmed it into spoilers as it got a bit long for a normal post. Bardic Poisons:
I do like the idea behind this, but I don’t know that it’s strong enough to replace spellcasting entirely.
It does seem to be lacking Poison Use as a class skill. That seems essential for any kind of poisoner. I understand that they have abilities that let them use poisons, but they are at risk of poisoning themselves whenever making poisons, unlike an Alchemist or a Ninja (or other classes with this class ability). Currently, if the bard rolls on his craft check, and rolls a 1, he is poisoned by his own hyperpoison. Perhaps to tie in what Hayato Ken said back on page 2: Give them Bardic Talents every other level. Allow them to take Rogue Talents (Any not related to Sneak Attack actually seems more fitting here) and maybe even some of the poison based Alchemist discoveries (Like those listed as “Poison Discoveries” here) When looking at the scaling DCs of the poisons, what if you had a static modifier or ”poison level” foe each Hyperpoison? The formula for the newly modified poison could be [base poison] + [“Poison Level”] + CHA. I like using the base poison better than a static 10 as it makes the base poison matter. That said, I think Bards should have regular access to a base poison with a DC of 10 to make their concoctions with for no cost (thus making the Bard’s core mechanic not cost them out of pocket every single time). I do think that they’ve come a long way from the original post. With the most recent update, the above may be irrelevant. I might also add a clause in the Athasian bard that they can use their charisma in place of their Intelligence when Prestige Classing into Assassin. Or, if allowing them to take some rogue talents, include the assassinate trick from the ninja’s advanced tricks. Seems up their alley. Connected I’d like to see this progress like a rangers Favored Terrain (new city every few levels) or maybe the Famous ability of the Celebrity Bard? More the former than the latter. While it’d make the task harder, I feel like the bard should receive more in this trade. I’m excited to see how your take on the Athasian Bard turns out. I’ve been a fan of some of your other works. Elemental Clerics::
It seems like clerics get every weapon (or just about every weapon) as a favored weapon. This seems a bit broader than what clerics usually get. The water cleric can treat that catapult as a favored weapon because it’s made of wood? Or an Orc Skull Ram?
The Fire Cleric gets every heavy and light blade (They can all be made of obsidian) or any polearm with a metal head? If that’s the direction you’re wanting to go, cool beans, just making sure someone said it out loud. I feel like Variant Channeling might be a better route to go for these clerics than Elemental channel. It’s less potent healing / harming power. And it’s actually effective far more often. I really like the added familiars for these folks. Really fits the concept. Other Core Classes:
Most of these look awesome. I like the change to the Paladin’s Divine Bond, though I wish I could have me a Mekillot. Defiling:
I’d toss out that a spellcaster, even a prepared caster, should be able to add Metamagic that they know to a spell they have prepared when using defiling. It makes it more tempting if you’re losing the fight and could choose to maximize that fireball or make that hold monster a persistent, piercing spell. Gladiator:
I feel like Brawler might actually be the best bet for the gladiator. They pick up a Nodachi, an Orc Skull Ram, a Monk spade, whatever. They swing it around for a few seconds [Standard action for Martial Flexibility] and wham! they’re proficient for as long as they really need to be.
Disregard. You said brawler later. In that case, I approve of this decision. Best of luck in all of this.
The Daring Champion loses all mount-based abilities. It's perfectly viable to build it strength based as well, if feeling locked into a dexterity build is your hangup.To be fair, going Strength means either sacrificing some of its abilities (by not being able to regenerate panache), picking from a very narrow set of weapons (that are the small handful that can natively regenerate panache), or taking the same feats you'd use to go Dex based anyway (by picking Slashing Grace so a longsword is no longer a massive trap). I just went to double check and I don't really see anything that requires a Daring Champion to use dex. Why couldn't they walk through their adventuring career with a sibat or a heavy pick or any other one handed piercing weapon. Heck, if you're worried about the crit range, use an Estoc. I play an unarmed swashbuckler using snake style and I don't think I've ever been at 0 Panache in the 9 levels I've been playing him. I can't imagine the Daring Champion with a pick is in much worse shape than that.
The 'as part of a charge' does not normally take into account the idea of pouncing, but by a strict reading, you could Charge -> Attack,Attack,Bull Rush, assuming 3 attacks. I disagree with Skaldi's reading of it, but this is not a clear cut situation. As usual, if you are playing PFS, expect table variation. Some GMs will lean one way, some the other. If it's a home game, just ask your GM.
Yes. One of my favorite PCs uses Snake Style to the same effect.
Archives of Nethys to the rescue! Any chance of you spoiling the Branch Pounce feat, Shadow?
Can you elaborate on why you think it weakens it? If I flurry with a Temple Sword, I now add 1.5 Str on my attacks. If I want to disarm (or trip or Sunder) as part of the Flurry, I don't see anything stopping me as I could already do that in place of an attack. |
