Smite Neutral's page

I am starting a new campaign, not pfs, and one of my fellow players is new to pathfinder and wants my help with his build. He wants to play a tiefling magus, with a dex-based melee style. I have no experience with the class, and all I know about dex-based melee is that he needs weapon finesse at lvl 1 and then either the agile weapon property or the dervish dancer feat.

I know about the magical lineage trait with shocking grasp so it can be intensified at level 7, or level 6 with feat retraining. I also know that wayang spellhunter does the same thing and that while cheesy he could take both naming shocking grasp, and then abuse quicken/maximize.

My question is what should this build look like up to level 7 or so? Is there any advice I should give him? What is mandatory for this kind of build? I still don't quite get how the class works entirely. How does he deal with concentration checks while using spell combat and spellstrike? Combat casting and focused mind feel like a waste of resources. Lunge seems promising but comes online late.

So far I've got

Base tiefling (+2 dex, +2 int, -2 cha). the alternate racial traits didnt seem very useful
Base magus. I havent checked out the archetypes but may read through them.

Traits: magical lineage and ?

Feats:
1-weapon finesse with a rapier
3-either dervish dancer, or he waits until he can afford agile, or he retrains out of dervish dancer when he can afford agile, his choice

Unflappable and strong heart traits pump the dc. Being an android grants immediate immunity to fear. 3 level dip in paladin. High-level spells like bestow grace of the champion. If I were you I would use the search engine on archives of nethys. Search "immunity + fear" "DC + demoralize" etc.

EDIT: androids are immune to emotion-based effects so that might not work for your purposes.

Can I wield a potion in one hand and a two-handed weapon in the other? I am wondering if I can move action drink with accelarated drinker, free action drop potion, standard action cast spell/use ability, free action grip two-handed weapon with other hand, then full-attack the next turn.

Benefit: You may drink a potion as a move action instead of a standard action as long as you start your turn with the potion in your hand.

Two-Handed Weapons: What kind of action is it to remove your hand from a two-handed weapon or re-grab it with both hands?

Both are free actions. For example, a wizard wielding a quarterstaff can let go of the weapon with one hand as a free action, cast a spell as a standard action, and grasp the weapon again with that hand as a free action; this means the wizard is still able to make attacks of opportunity with the weapon (which requires using two hands).

As with any free action, the GM may decide a reasonable limit to how many times per round you can release and re-grasp the weapon (one release and re-grasp per round is fair).

—Pathfinder Design Team, 03/01/13

Thing is, the horacalcum weapon material does the same thing as the trait (+1 on attack rolls) so since the trait locks you into cold iron/silver, it isnt that useful aside from saving you gold in the early game. So is there any RAW reason to believe that a 49.9% cold iron weapon isn't "made of" cold iron? Or as worded does this work?

Why did the special material rules mention making items out of more than one material? This is the first time I have seen it be relevant.

EDIT: Now I see why you would rule that way. The trait counts as "the benefit."

If you make a suit of armor or weapon out of more than one special material, you get the benefit of only the most prevalent material.

If I make a weapon out of two materials, cold iron and some other more prevalent material, i would not be able to bypass cold iron DR, but would instead get the benefit of the more prevalent material. However, would I still get a trait bonus to attack rolls if I have the trait below?

Benefit(s) Select either cold iron or silver. You begin play with a masterwork melee weapon made of the material of your choice. You must be proficient with this weapon, and its combined cost cannot exceed 500 gp.

You gain a +1 trait bonus on attack rolls with weapons made of the selected material.

I am feeling now that it is probably option B, and am going to make a case, but please correct any logical errors I make.

"Using demoralize on the same creature only extends the duration" means you add the durations together, rather than replacing the first effect with the second or overlapping the two effects. While replacing/overlapping would still "extend the duration" if you rolled a high intimidate check the second time you demoralized, in most cases it would not extend the duration. Since it would not always extend, adding the durations seems to be the most logical meaning.

"Demoralizing the same creature only extends the duration" is not optional, and skill unlock doesnt seem like it must trump this rule for any reason, so I don't think option D is correct.

Skill unlock states that whenever you demoralize and beat DC by 10 or 20, (this most likely means even when you are demoralizing to extend duration), apply an effect based off of pass/fail of save. "Extend duration" doesnt seem like it must trump this, so option C is out.

Now we must choose between A and B. Say an effect altered the effect of intimidate to 1 round dazed, then 1 round dazzled. If you "extended the duration" with a second demoralize, it would most likely be 1 dazed, 1 dazzled, 1 dazed, 1 dazzled (rather than 2 dazed, then 2 dazzled, or 2 dazzled then 2 dazed). Feels like a stretch to say that "extend the duration" means you can rearrange ordered round effects. The same applies to this situation, so option A seems less likely than option B.

For anyone making an unchained rogue or demoralize build and considering skill unlock for intimidate, know that a GM may also interpret it this way, which means using it more than once on an opponent will not be worthwhile.

By my reading, this is a stacking question.

So, the specific stacking rule for demoralize says it extends the duration.

The specific rule for the Intimidate skill unlock says the total duration cannot exceed 1 round plus 1 round per +5 for astrisked abilities.

Thus, your first +20 DC success you've got cowering for 1 round or panicked for 1d4 rounds (not asterisked) and frightened for 1 round plus 1 round per +5 (asterisked).

If you hit them again and fail to exceed the Intimidate DC by 20, you apply the shaken condition on top of the active cowering or panicked conditions.

If you hit them again and you do exceed the DC by 20, they get another save. Cowering doesn't apply a penalty to their saves, but panicked would mean they have a -2 on their saving throw. There's nothing otherwise in the Intimidate skill unlock rules that says they don't get a save if they've failed once before.

If they fail their save, apply the specific stacking rule for demoralize. Extend the duration of the cowering or panicked condition by 1 round or 1d4 rounds.

Don't extend the frightened condition, as this specifically says it cannot exceed 1 round plus 1 round per +5. If your Intimidate check beat the DC by +25 instead of +20, you'd use the new duration instead of the old one, though.

It states that the TOTAL duration cannot exceed x rounds, which applies to cowering/panicked as well, not just frightened. The asterisk refers to the entire effect of failing the save. Also, I failed to quote the text about what happens if you dont beat it by 20, sorry. If you fail to do that but still beat it by ten, opponent must save or be panicked for 1 round (or frightened 1d4 rounds) and shaken thereafter (total duration not exceeding normal intimidate duration. Passing save means just shaken condition).

I am confused why you said that, if skill unlock didn't apply the second time (creature is just shaken because it passed save or you didnt beat dc by ten), then the shaken condition would overlap with the skill unlock effect. Would it not just "extend the duration" as per intimidate rules? I admit the skill unlock might alter the extend rule, (see option D above) but I can't think of why it would.

I didn't notice that the "this effect cannot exceed x rounds" text might mean that you can't add more rounds to the effect with another demoralize. (No option C). That felt like a stretch to me as well, especially since they had to make a save to avoid the effect that you would be extending effortlessly, and skill unlock states that they must make a save whenever you demoralize.

Yes this is a long question, sorry. I have provided all the relevant text to save you some time.

Using demoralize on the same creature [the creature that has just been demoralized] only extends the duration; it does not create a stronger fear condition.

I am an unchained rogue with the skill unlock for intimidate. Let's say level 15.

With sufficient ranks in Intimidate, you earn the following. An asterisk (*) indicates the total duration cannot exceed 1 round plus 1 round for every 5 by which you exceed the DC.

15 Ranks: If you exceed the DC to demoralize a target by at least 20, it is cowering for 1 round or panicked for 1d4 rounds (your choice) and frightened thereafter.* A Will save (DC = 10 + your number of ranks in Intimidate) negates the cowering, panicked, and frightened conditions, but the target is still shaken, even if it has the stalwart ability.

I intimidate an opponent and beat the DC by exactly 20. Opponent fails save and is cowering for 1 round, frightened for 4. (Here's the hard part) I intimidate again in the same turn (via cornugon smash or something) and beat the DC by 20 again.

What happens now? I used to think I knew, but am not so sure anymore. I am wondering about the strictest of RAW, not about how it SHOULD work. Is it...

A. Opponent has to make a save. Say they fail (1 round cowering then 4 shaken normally). The durations are added together ("extended"), and opponent is cowering 2 rounds then frightened for 8.

B. Same as above, but goes 1 round cowering, then 4 frightened, then 1 cowering, then 4 frightened. ("Extended" meaning tack on the new effect at the end of the original)

C. Opponent does not make a save. "Demoralizing the same creature only extends the duration" here means that demoralizing again does nothing but extend the duration of the first demoralize effect (trumps the make a save requirement) so beating dc by 20 means adding 5 more rounds of frightened

D. The skill unlock trumps the "extend the duration" requirement of demoralize. The effects would just overlap, but since they do the same thing, one would make the other irrelevant.

E. Something else I am not seeing.

Personally, my gut says B, as I took "extend the duration" to mean that the result of the second demoralize happens after the result of the first demoralize.

Benefit(s) Select either cold iron or silver. You begin play with a masterwork melee weapon made of the material of your choice. You must be proficient with this weapon, and its combined cost cannot exceed 500 gp.

You gain a +1 trait bonus on attack rolls with weapons made of the selected material.

If you make a suit of armor or weapon out of more than one special material, you get the benefit of only the most prevalent material.

Can I take the ancestral weapon trait, acquire a weapon out of cold iron/silver as well as a second material that is "the most prevalent," and still retain the +1 to attack rolls while also getting the benefit from the most prevalent material? Obviously I wouldn't still be able to bypass silver/cold iron DR, but does this work?

Example, with this trait and a weapon made of cold iron and horacalcum, would I get +2 on attack? (+1 trait bonus from ancestral weapon, +1 circumstance bonus from horacalcum)

Speaking of which is there a better weapon material than horacalcum? (+1 circumstance bonus to attack rolls)

So I think I may have found my answer. For this character, fate's favored is effectively just a +1 to saves, assuming I go half-orc (credit: pizza lord). But, upon closer inspection...

Select either cold iron or silver. ... You gain a +1 trait bonus on attack rolls with weapons made of the selected material.

If you make a suit of armor or weapon out of more than one special material, you get the benefit of only the most prevalent material.

Bit of a rules question, but does this work? Could I make a weapon out of two materials (when affordable), say cold iron and horacalcum, make horacalcum the "most prevalent," and gain +2 to attack rolls with that weapon? (+1 trait bonus from ancestral, +1 circumstance from horacalcum). Or would it be better to get a +1 to saves from fate's favored to shore up the fighter's weak saves? Can't do both as I am sticking to adopted as the second trait.

EDIT: moving to rules forum

What's your base class anyway? Some traits are good because they interact with class (or race) abilities, so more info would be useful.

Unsure. For this campaign, probably a fighter. Defender of the society seems solid, if not boring, but I may play another class. Any trait ideas?

Buying a wand of Enlarge Person and getting an ally to use it on you before likely battles costs 15gp per charge, cheaper in the long run than using potions. (Assuming you have at least one ally with it on their spell list.)

Unfortunatley, enlarge person is 1 min/level, so with a minimum caster level wand it wouldn't be easy to precast. That said, drinking as a move action still keeps me from getting in position to full attack in melee, so unless the enemies charge me that trait doesn't help with action economy much either.

What are the best traits in this game right now? Thinking long-term so I tend to avoid things that I could buy (money savers). I imagine fate's favored is the best if I can find some luck bonuses.

If you have adventurer's armory 2, probably better off grabbing well provisioned adventurer equipment trait, you get a 1000 gp package (each package at least some consumables and good gear).

I do not, but sounds intriguing. Is it just 1000gp for a trait essentially? What exactly does it do? If its just a money saver I could just grab ancestral weapon trait instead of buying a horacalcum weapon (saves 4-6k).

I am putting together an intimidate build.

I am taking the adopted trait for fiery glare (take 10 on intimidate checks). This trait is both race and social.

I am having trouble figuring out the best use of my second trait.
-I already have intimidate in class so traits like omen don't help, and it feels like a waste to get a simple +2 intimidate trait like dominator, or a +1 trait with some other minor effect.
-Memorable is effectively +5 in most situations but that is a social trait and competes with adopted.
-Having failed to think of anything that was both on-theme and useful, I considered the minmax traits. Ancestral weapon is a trap. Its not a simple +1 trait bonus to attack rolls. It locks you into a cold iron or silver weapon. If you use a horacalcum weapon instead you get a +1 to attack rolls anyway, so the trait just saves you some money. I like fate's favored, but our party won't be casting any luck bonuses on me, and the campaign probably won't reach the point where stone of good luck is affordable. (Maybe the whole party should take fate's favored and we all chip in for a wand of prayer? Its that good of a trait).

-The best idea I could come up with is accelerated drinker for potions of enlarge person. I spend the first round buffing so my move action is free to use on enlarging, which gives me a +4 to intimidate for being larger, +5 if I have the intimidating prowess feat. Main problem is that it costs 50gp per encounter, which adds up.

Any good trait suggestions? Intimidate-related or just plain useful, doesn't matter

Is there any way to lower the cost of enlarge person potions? Besides asking an ally use their spell slots to precast it on me? Are the potions a good use of 50gp per encounter? Should I just use it on one or two encounters per scenario? Is it worth a trait in that case?

Bump. No experience with this? I can't find the answer. I assume CL would go by hit dice?

The deific obedience feat grants spell-like abilities at level 12 for most deities. For example, every day, desna allows a choice between 3x sleep, 2x silence, or 1x deep slumber. No mention of CL is made.

If one gains a spell-like ability that isn't tied to a certain class, like through a racial ability or a feat like deific obedience, and the ability description makes no mention of caster level, what is the assumed caster level for the ability? Is it equal to hit die, or does the character use their highest cl class? I can't find a definite answer and I could see an argument for either.

The problem is that animating dead is an evil act. Do it enough and local law enforcement or other groups opposed to such activities are going to come along and stop you either by killing you or tossing you in a nice cozy dungeon. If you are too powerful for them to lock up then you are powerful enough to attract a group of adventurers who come along and kill you and take all your stuff. If you are lucky and become powerful enough that they can't actually kill you they just imprison you beneath Gallowspire for a few hundred years.

So then there really is no downside to this strategy besides GM intervention and an upset table? Just asking if it works, I know its horrible.

There is a lot of bookkeeping. I'm not sure how much fun that would be.

None. But maybe for some people. And As alaphus, that was just an example the guy gave. A player could start comrolling ridiculous numbers with the command undead spell as soon as they, or an ally, could cast animate dead. Agreed that the undead would become irrelevant at high levels. Then its time for other exploits like blood money+fabricate to make diamonds for wish, or just 52 strength and blood money for free wish.

It's not for free, it means you're dedicating spell slots to keeping control. You're continually paying.

Allowing Word Magic is not really standard practice to begin with. It's not really as if "oh well, no Blood Money because the GM isn't crazy? I'll just use this obscure optional system instead" is likely to work.

So if GM doesn't like blood money or words of power, you are only limited by your gp (25gp/hd of undead) your second level spell slots, and your caster level. Maintaining hundreds of hd of undead seems like a pretty efficient use of 2nd level spell slots to me.

EDIT: Found a thread about some guy who saw this spell's potential.

If we use every spell slot available to us at level 20 to take control of 20 HD skeletons, that's 240 HD worth of skeletons from Command Undead alone, and it lasts for TWELVE DAYS at level 20. Our spell slots obviously reset each day, so there's massive exponential growth to be had here if you can keep track of when each skeleton will fall out of your control.

So if that guy used his second level slots on command undead every day for 12 days (and managed to find/create 240hd of undead per die), he could maintain nearly 3000hd of undead from the command undead spell alone. Thats without using wands of command undead. Starting to get why pfs doesn't allow permanent durations.

School necromancy; Level sorcerer/wizard 2; Domain inevitable 3

CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (a shred of raw meat and a splinter of bone)
EFFECT
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Targets one undead creature
Duration 1 day/level
Saving Throw Will negates; see text; Spell Resistance yes
DESCRIPTION
This spell allows you a degree of control over an undead creature. If the subject is intelligent, it perceives your words and actions favorably (treat its attitude as friendly). It will not attack you while the spell lasts. You can give the subject orders, but you must win an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn’t ordinarily do. Retries are not allowed. An intelligent commanded undead never obeys suicidal or obviously harmful orders, but it might be convinced that something very dangerous is worth doing.
A nonintelligent undead creature gets no saving throw against this spell. When you control a mindless being, you can communicate only basic commands, such as “come here,” “go there,” “fight,” “stand still,” and so on. Nonintelligent undead won’t resist suicidal or obviously harmful orders.
Any act by you or your apparent allies that threatens the commanded undead (regardless of its Intelligence) breaks the spell.
Your commands are not telepathic. The undead creature must be able to hear you.

Am I missing something here? So you can already create unintelligent undead for free via animate dead and blood money (or through the experimental spellcaster and the undeath wordspell if GM bans blood money), and just bind the ones you can't control with the command undead spell, and keep rebinding them every x days, for free. Thats a virtually unlimited army. Is there some major weakness to this? Dispel magic affects command undead, but that only affects one creature per casting, and may fail. Antimagic field, but that would work on a necromancer even without command undead. I suppose the GM could just put them in a position where they are unable to rebind their minions, but then they can just make more free minions later.

This next one's an advice question: If a player tried this, how would you handle it? Ban blood money? Ban undeath word? Ban command undead the spell? Set a max hit die limit? Use pfs rules so effects aren't permanent?

Say I use animate dead on a lvl 5 human warrior npc to make a skeleton.

A skeleton drops any HD gained from class levels and changes racial HD to d8s. Creatures without racial HD are treated as if they have 1 racial HD.

What does that mean exactly? The npc has no racial hd right? Surely that wouldnt mean I roll 1d8 for hit points instead of 5d8 right?

Say I apply an intelligent undead template to it somehow, a vampire for example.

Change all racial Hit Dice to d8s. Class Hit Dice are unaffected.

Also,

An undead creature has the following features.... Skill points equal to 4 + Int modifier (minimum 1) per Hit Die.

So since it has no racial hd, the change to d8s wouldn't matter? It would use its class hd (5d10)? The vampire entry makes no mention of changing skill ranks to 4+int mod/level, so I keep the warrior's 2+int mod/level?

Magical knack has never been mandatory.

So, here's my opinion on the Dread Vanguard Archetype.

Beacon of Evil is a pretty awesome ability set, but virtually all of it can be duplicated with spells (except for the fast healing), and the antipaladin loses the flexibility that spells offer. It's a tough sell on that ability alone. Dark Emissary is also nice, but it comes online later and is less likely to see utility than the Aura of Sin, particularly since you're not necessarily in control of whether or not you can stay at any site that you create with the Dark Emissary ability.

All in all, it's difficult to say whether it's optimal or not, but I lean toward not because your abilities are far less flexible and depend a lot upon both allies and location, which aren't always the antipaladin's forte, nor are those factors always under the antipaladin's control.

Best wishes!

Thanks for your input! A lot of great observations that I hadn't thought of. A lot of half-casting builds don't get as much use out of magical knack, the flexibility that spellcasting offers is extremely important, and beacon of evil is very dependent on the party.

I agree that in general beacon of evil's effects can easily be duplicated (and exceeded) through spellcasting, but I will add that in the right party (an unusual one), it can worth it. A mass buff of that scale can be devastating with help from a brood summoner, a necromancer, or a large party that attacks often, especially when the buff scales at level 12. Additionally, aura of sin is actually a part of the beacon's effects (extended to 30 ft as well!).

That said, using beacon properly means playing well with others, which isnt always possible for an antipaladin (as bodhizen pointed out). Also, there are certain antipaladin spells that are just too important to lose. If your GM allows animate dead, for example, dread vanguard becomes far less attractive.

Does anyone have any experience/opinions of the dread vanguard antipaladin archetype?

At first glance, it seems worth it. With at least two other bodies nearby, beacon of evil seems more powerful than anything the antipaladin spell list could muster, save animate dead, but most GMs (mine included) modify/ban that. While there are a few gems on the antipaladin spell list, they are all attainable with a wand and umd if need be, or a ring of minor spell storing, or a caster in the party. Giving up casting also frees up a trait, as magical knack is no longer mandatory.

Does anyone see any reason not to give up antipaladin spell list for the dread vanguard archetype?

You might also consider variant mutliclassing, which is where you take all your levels in one class (the "primary" class) but give up half your feats for abilities from a "secondary class." There's also hybrid classes if you aren't aware of those. For example, if you wanted to multiclass fighter and cleric, you may as well be a warpriest.

This website has been the most helpful resource I have found for building pathfinder characters. If you're willing to do the research, type variants of the word channel into the search engine (i.e. channel, channels, channeled, channeling)

I know of:

1. Use magic device skill, dc 20 to use a wand.
2. Ring of spell storing (or minor version) and a caster ally to store spells in it.

Any other methods?

If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks.

If a character has the ability to make an attack as a swift, immediate, or free action, are they required to use the full-attack action to do so? Can they move, standard attack, then attack with their swift/immediate/free action?

So, from what I gather from the posted threads and the dev's responses, alternate classes are (most likely) NOT considered to BE their base classes, but are completely separate classes, because they have their own archetypes? And in order to have archetypes, they have to be distinct classes?

Is that correct?

They don't stack. Monastic legacy alters base damage. Ascetic strike replaces the altered base damage.

Relevant text:

The antipaladin is an alternate class. Making use of and altering numerous facets of the paladin core class, this villainous warrior can't truly be considered a new character class by its own right. By the changes made here, though, the details and tones of the paladin class are shifted in a completely opposite direction and captures an entirely different fantasy theme, without needlessly designing an entire new class. While a redesign of sorts, this alternate class can be used just as any of the other base classes found in the first part of this chapter.

Alternate classes are standalone classes whose basic ideas are very close to established base classes, yet whose required alterations would be too expansive for an archetype. An alternate class operates exactly as a base class, save that a character who takes a level in an alternate class can never take a level in its associated class—a samurai cannot also be a cavalier, and vice versa.

These seem to directly contradict each other. My first impression from the APG is that an antipaladin is a paladin. My first impression from UC is that an antipaladin is not a paladin. If I had to guess, "alternate classes are standalone classes" implies to me that alternate classes are not considered to be their base classes. Does anyone have a different interpretation?

Are alternate classes considered to be their base classes? Is a ninja technically a rogue? A samurai a cavalier? A paladin an antipaladin?

If an effect depends on a character being a paladin/rogue/cavalier, will that effect work on an antipaladin/ninja/samurai?

Having looked into this, I found out that the entry on alternate classes in the ACG is marked for errata, so I wouldn't trust that. It states that alternate classes are "technically archetypes," which seems to contradict the alternate class entry in UC.

Armor Spikes says they do their extra damage "on a successful Grapple Attack." So with the possible exception of Grapple Checks made to escape a Grapple, that seems to clearly mean all Grapple Checks, not just checks made to Maintain and Damage.

This is the strictest RAW. Since RAI is very unclear, this is what I would go with personally. That wording could just refer to the ability to use armor spikes when damaging as part of a maintain check, however, or it could just be a mistake on the author's part.

So if you choose to make a grapple check to maintain the hold, choosing to deal damage, using your armor spikes, you deal extra armor spike damage in addition to your armor spike damage?

EDIT: the answer to the OPs question depends on one's interpretation of "extra damage on a successful grapple attack." It could mean damage after every check, it could (less likely) mean extra damage after only the initial grapple check, it could mean only that you can choose to deal armor spike damage on a successful maintain check (see grapple rules), or the text might be a mistake on the author's part that should be ignored.

To answer my own question, I found this in the CRB.

Bonus Types: Usually, a bonus has a type that indicates how the spell grants the bonus. The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don't generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus of a given type works (see Combining Magical Effects). The same principle applies to penalties—a character taking two or more penalties of the same type applies only the worst one, although most penalties have no type and thus always stack. Bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source.

Penalties work the same way as bonuses. No special rules. Typeless penalties stack unless something indicates otherwise or unless the penalties are from the same source. This would mean that whether intended or not, aura of despair stacks with aura of depravity, and depravity would stack with cowardice if there was an effect that was both compulsion and fear (for example, maybe miasmal dread and signature skill: intimidate)

So I will probably never use a level 17 antipaladin, but out of curiosity, does aura of depravity stack with everything?

Each enemy within 10 feet takes a –4 penalty on saving throws against compulsion effects.

Specifically, does it stack with aura of cowardice and aura of despair?

causes all enemies within 10 feet to take a –4 penalty on saving throws against fear effects.

enemies within 10 feet of an antipaladin take a –2 penalty on all saving throws. This penalty does not stack with the penalty from aura of cowardice.

I assume these are all typless penalties and stack with each other unless they specifically say they don't (despair says it doesnt stack with cowardice). Is despair not stacking with cowardice a case of specific trumping general? Or is it a case of the authors using a stacking rule of which I am not aware. As I understand typeless penalty stacking, despair stacks with depravity (total -6), and would also stack with cowardice (total -8) for an effect that is both fear and compulsion (if that exists).

Since an effect is everything packaged within it (all the bonuses the effect provides), I would say any morale bonuses provided by that effect increase by +1. So, for the paladin archetype, it'd apply to all those bonuses that are morale bonuses.

It's unclear to me whether "that bonus" above means all morale bonuses as you say or just one. It would be clearer if they worded it like "Once per day, when you generate an effect that grants one or more morale bonuses, increase each bonus by 1 for all creatures affected," but they didn't. It may be that wording it like this would sound too awkward, or the authors didn't consider effects that granted multiple bonuses when they wrote it. Since RAI seems unclear, I want to go with RAW, which seems like it would only affect one morale bonus? Am I wrong about the RAW?

The wording does not seem to indicate that your companion must be an animal in order to be affected by spells that would not normally affect its type. The word "animal" in parenthesis just seems to be a clarification that your companion's type is animal. While an argument could be made against this, it would be the less logical/likely interpretation, and no reasonable GM would enforce it.

Rousing Courage is a religion trait from divine anthology.

Once per day, when you generate an effect that grants a morale bonus, increase that bonus by 1 for all creatures affected.

If an effect generates multiple morale bonuses, such as a barbarian's rage, does this trait apply to all of them or just one? Would a barbarian have to choose between strength, constitution, or will saves? Would a warrior of the holy light paladin have to choose between attack rolls, damage rolls, ac, or fear saves? Or would this trait increase all morale bonuses generated by an effect?

I cannot find rousing courage trait online, where is it from?

Archives of nethys

I have a character I am about to make that could really benefit from the Rousing Courage trait. Is there a way to get a religion trait without worshiping that deity? Kindof like race traits and adopted? Also, that trait applies to multiple morale bonuses granted by the effect, correct? Like warrior of the holy light paladin would grant +2 morale bonus on attack, damage, ac, and fear saves?

Ah. I see it got an FAQ.

I know of:
-courageous weapon property
-fascinated by the mundane story feat
-rousing courage trait
-imperious bloodline power

Smite Neutral wrote:

zainale wrote:

so size matters?

Doesn't it always? Anyways:

Tiny, Diminutive, and Fine Creatures wrote:

Very small creatures take up less than 1 square of space. This means that more than one such creature can fit into a single square. A Tiny creature typically occupies a space only 2-1/2 feet across, so four can fit into a single square. 25 Diminutive creatures or 100 Fine creatures can fit into a single square. Creatures that take up less than 1 square of space typically have a natural reach of 0 feet, meaning they can't reach into adjacent squares. They must enter an opponent's square to attack in melee. This provokes an attack of opportunity from the opponent. You can attack into your own square if you need to, so you can attack such creatures normally. Since they have no natural reach, they do not threaten the squares around them. You can move past them without provoking attacks of opportunity. They also can't flank an enemy.

So Chess Pwn means a tiny fairy must enter the space you occupy if they want to attack you. To do so, they must move OUT of the square adjacent to you, which you threaten, so an AoO is triggered.

Well not just that. Moving out of a threatened square, and moving into my square are 2 separate AoO generating actions.

So combat reflexes and tiny fairy charging you from far away would be 2 AoOs then (assuming you have 5ft reach)? Or does moving into your square follow the "no more than one AoO for a single movement" rule?

EDIT: So according to that faq, the rule above does apply to this (It shouldn't though). A charging fairy only provokes once.

The command undead feat was written waaay back in core, when the lawful good paladin was the only class besides cleric that could channel energy. Nowadays, "cleric level" is generally accepted to mean the class that grants you channel energy. Multiclassing/ prestige classing lowers your caster level. Sucks but thats the price you pay for versatility.

Some advice regarding necromancy (you probably already know all of this):
Command undead feat
Animate dead spell (don't forget desecrate for more hd/hp. Make bloody skeletons whenever possible. Fast zombies if not)
Blood money to save on material components
Command undead, the spell
Agent of the grave prestige class

You can control a nearly unlimited army by animating undead then controlling them with command undead, the spell. The amount of hd you can control is limited only by your GM's tolerance of your shenanigans. Even though juju oracle doesn't have command undead on their spell list, theyre still good necromancers because umd (for wands of command undead) is a cha-based skill. If doing this and using traits, be sure to get one that makes umd a class skill.

so size matters?

Doesn't it always? Anyways:

Very small creatures take up less than 1 square of space. This means that more than one such creature can fit into a single square. A Tiny creature typically occupies a space only 2-1/2 feet across, so four can fit into a single square. 25 Diminutive creatures or 100 Fine creatures can fit into a single square. Creatures that take up less than 1 square of space typically have a natural reach of 0 feet, meaning they can't reach into adjacent squares. They must enter an opponent's square to attack in melee. This provokes an attack of opportunity from the opponent. You can attack into your own square if you need to, so you can attack such creatures normally. Since they have no natural reach, they do not threaten the squares around them. You can move past them without provoking attacks of opportunity. They also can't flank an enemy.

So Chess Pwn means a tiny fairy must enter the space you occupy if they want to attack you. To do so, they must move OUT of the square adjacent to you, which you threaten, so an AoO is triggered.

Short answer: yes.

Long answer: Bonuses to the same thing stack unless they are the same type of bonus. Untyped bonuses and circumstance bonuses are the exception. They stack with themselves. The +5 bonus to maintain a grapple is a circumstance bonus, and the +4 bonus from the grab special ability is untyped. Theyre different types, so they stack. In this case, even if either was the same type as the other, they would still stack. If, however, both were a morale bonus, they wouldn't stack, and you would use the larger of the two, so it would be +5 to maintain.

I failed to quote all relevant text. Sorry. I would like to point out that "whenever the antipaladin uses ToC to deal damage" just means as opposed to using it the other way, to heal undead. (You can use it to deal damage, fail to deal damage, and a cruelty would be applied at the same time the damage failed to be dealt. Dealing damage isnt necessary to trigger cruelty. Its triggered by choosing to use ToC to deal damage). If not for this alternate use (healing undead), cruelty probably would have said "when you hit with ToC, X happens." Also, "when you hit, X happens" does not mean that X happens before damage is dealt. X happens at the same time that damage is dealt, since damage is also dealt when you hit, just like X. It seems extremely illogical, to me, that an effect triggered by a hit would occur before damage is dealt. That can't be the intent.

To quote claxon again,

The order is:

Hit
Apply damage/cruel(apply sickened)/conductive(apply touch of corruption (including cruelty))

[Cruel and cruelty] are triggered and resolved at the same time. In order for either to apply to the other the other effect would need to have already been resolved.

To review the concensus of the thread, as claxon explains above, pathfinder has no rules for ordering the resolution of effects triggered by the same action, so MOST players assume that these effects resolve simultaneously. Others allow the user of the triggering action to choose order of effect resolutions, but that seems less logical, at least to me.

IF you believe that multiple effects triggered by the same action should be resolved simultaneously, then, as Loengren explains above, these effects cannot affect each other. Conditions are checked before the effects are resolved. Since all effects resolve simultaneously, they cannot be part of the conditions checked, because they haven't resolved yet.

So, as silly as it seems, this would mean that if an attack made a creature immune to ice damage but also dealt 6 ice damage, the creature would still take the ice damage.

Okay, so im gonna go step by step and tell me if im wrong.

1. Attack is rolled. Attack is successful.
2. This triggers weapon damage roll, cruel, and the choice to use conductive. Weapon damage roll and cruel are added to what is hereafter known as "the mix." Everything in the mix will eventually resolve simultaneously.
3. You choose to use conductive. This triggers touch of corruption damage roll, which is added to the mix. THIS triggers cruelty save.
4. Creature rolls fortitude save. Cruel hasn't resolved yet so no penalty. Creature fails save, so now cruelty is added to the mix.
5. All effects in the mix now resolve simultaneously, and do not affect each other. The effects include weapon damage roll, touch of corruption damage roll, and cruelty.

Sound right/reasonable?