Snakebearer's page

Hello fellow RPers.
We've recently decided to leave 4e behind and convert everything into PF instead. We're not using 3 party books.
Also we are all pretty powerful since we've reached level 24.

The other players characters were pretty straight forward conversions. The Dragon Sorcerer just took sorcerer with a dragon bloodline.
The cleric is still a cleric.
The Ranger barely changed anything but gained an animal companion.

And then there is my character. Since we pretty much re-fluff everything pretty heavily, I'll describe him firstly conceptually, and then mechanicly.

Conceptually; "A shade assassin with stolen necromantic powers". He started out as a human warrior, but later used a faulty Wish to gain magical powers and instead got infused with the shadowfell. He then became part shade, and most of his attacks are based on using shadows and darkness to his benefit. He pops out of one shadow and backstabs his enemies, and then jumps back into another shadow.
He wanted more magical prowess though, so he started experimenting with the spell plague and later infected himself to give himself the ability to devour other spellcasters souls and power. He has since devoured several ancient beings, and made some of their powers and knowledges his own.
He has become a spellcaster of sorts, but this generally takes the shape of him infusing his shadows with even more potential. Like flying, projecting a flesh devouring aura and reanimate the dead.

Mechanically; Eladrin Hexblade Winter Pact\Shadow Dancer\Raven Knight, with a LOT of teleports. Main damage comes from charging with his sword. He's essentially perma-invisible as long as he's not stunned. He's MCd rogue to get his hands on more charge feats. Essentially, the spellcasting he has is mainly for utility - he's only got one ranged attack and that's the at will that comes with the Hexblade class. He's not Really a necromancer, but he's using custom rituals with his Ritual Caster feat to ressurect enemies as undead. The spell utilities he's got are things like buffs or terrain altering spells to control enemies or the battlefield.
If we're talking in 4e terms, he's a single target melee striker with a pretty strong secondary aspect as a controller.

The only thing I've managed to narrow it down to is that the Shadow Dancer class seems to add a lot of both the mechanics and fluff the character already has. The summons from the hexblade, and the teleports from both my characters class and paragon.
Also, in 4e, he's a Shade, and this means he's a Fetchling in PF. Thing is; in 4e he's a CHA class, and his secondary is DEX, which suits the race nicely.

So how would you build this character conceptually? Of course I want him to be viable, but no need to be minmaxed. That's a lot less important in our campaign.

My main question is the setup with classes and feats. :)

Thoughts;
Magus; At face value, this seems spot on. Problem is, he drops all the spells that I want my character to be able to use inbetween fights. He also uses INT as a main stat, which doesn't really make him a fair conversion of the Hexblade.
Sorc; Would seem like a good idea since it's CHA based. Shadow bloodline doesn't add anything at all though if I pick Fetchling and Shadow Dancer.. Some of the other bloodlines might fit conceptually though?
Wizard; Wizard has most of what I want except the stats. He's got the summons, rituals and the bonded item could add a lot to immitate the hexblade. But this would means he's a melee wizard.....
Looking forward to your help!

I think what DeathSpot was trying to say that if the troll/giant had levels in fighter, it would be proficient with the armor and weapon.

Otherwise, just animate a high dex non-humanoid monster of the proper CR = Boom. There you go. Plus, make it a bloody skeleton too, and you're ready to own stuff.

But tbh, the skeleton/zombies from animate dead are really meant to be fodder or glass cannons. If you're after "one strong" minion, I'd be looking at Create Undead instead. If you really want a skeleton, make a Skeleton Champion. It retains pretty much everything, including class levels. Downside is that it is intelligent, and gets a saving throw to throw off your commands each day.

Personally, for low level play before Create Undead. Go creative. You really have to compare Natural Armor and Dex mod between creatures if you really want to focus on getting a skeleton with AC (Which isn't it's strong point anyways. Remember, due to the +2 Dex from the skeleton template, the "normal" +3 natural armor for most animals is accounted for.

Like mentioned earlier, these unintelligent undead are not supposed to be comparable to an animal companion, a cohort or a planar ally/bonded creature. It would simply not make any sense.

What is the best way to use the Necromancer's Grave Touch according to you guys? I mean, I'm really hard pressed to find any use for it. Is there any kind of strategic setup I'm missing here that could make it comparable to a 1d6+1 per 1 caster level like most of the other offensive school abilities?

To be honest, I wasn't thinking of swallowed as being a state. XD
Didn't think of it. ;P

Due to it being mentioned in that context, I was rather playing around with the though of it being compared to a mode of using rather than a players state of being used. But I see my big mistake now. ;P

Although, I think I might houserule it either way. ^^ At least to some extent. For example; crafting a wand out of an arm bone from a skeleton, and later put it back before reanimating it. That way it would at least conceptually be aimed by skeleton simply pointing. XD A rather macabre version since PF doesn't have spellstitched templates. ^^;

I hope I gave you some good laughs due to my mistake though. :P

I'm looking for the rules that makes this impossible. :P Instead of just saying it is, could you please say under what chapter it is? ;S

First of all:

To activate a wand, a character must hold it in hand (or whatever passes for a hand, for non-humanoid creatures) and point it in the general direction of the target or area. A wand may be used while grappling or while swallowed whole.

This will probably be a gray area what is supposed to be ruled by the DM to prevent silliness.

First of all, yes swallowing a wand isn't the easiest thing to do. But with time, healing and some planning. Putting it inside the body doesn't seem to be such a farfetched idea.

What I'm looking for is rules that contradict this.

I assume it is the wand being inside the body that allows it to be used while not in the hand. Not the event of it passing through the mouth. Nor the event that it is present within someone's stomach.

If someone manages to implant a wand inside himfelf. Would this qualify for being used without taking up a hand?

Either simply impaling it inside the body, and layer it with a whole bunch of healing for the skin and muscle tissue to heal over it. Or perhaps turning your own armbone into a wand? I have found no particular rules that says this is not possible. A whole lot of pain reducers and help from another spellcaster with the craft wand feat? It's not That farfetched.
Or another idea; as a necromancer with Create Undead. To create a zombielord or skeleton champion (or other corporal intellegent undead) with an armbone effectively working as a wand.

I know this is power gaming in its essence. But I'm thinking of allowing it in my own campaign. Thinking of introducing a BBEG using it, and I know my group - they will use it as well if they get the notion that it will work. Imagine a rogue with Use Magical Device and a wand of for example; True Strike, Invisibility, Fly or Haste? :O All without weapon switching or provoking AoO.

Ideas, thoughts?

I've looked around and have seen a bunch of people use spells in conjunction with items that may or may not have been intended.

For example Beatin' Stick on a weapon that has any kind of wood in it, and then simply motivate it by saying that you bash a monster with the wooden end of the handle? I see no problem with this, it's not broken in any way. Since the action economy is pretty much the same.

This got me thinking. Would this mean that other items can be used in conjunctions like this? I'm playing around with the idea of making a wand of True Strike. Since you're targetting yourself with the spell and not the weapon I see no faults yet. The point is, what if I have a bone wand. A wand is essentially a stick. What if I shape it as a bone dagger? Does this mean that the wand can double as a dagger?

Melee bite +10 (1d6+4), 4 claws +10 (1d4+4 plus rend)

Special Attacks rend (4 claws, 1d4+6)

The rules of Rend says that if two or more attacks hit the indicated damage is dealt. The bold part of the statistics only reads which Type of attack that needs to hit to inflict the rend damage, not the amount of attacks.
This damage can only be dealt once per round. This would mean that if a Girallon hits with one claw during its turn, and later (or before its turn, as long as its during the same round) makes an AoO and hits, the extra damage should be dealt as well. This also prevents the Girallon to deal this extra damage twice if it hits with 4 claws.

My first question is about Special Attacks vs. Special Abilities.
The question is rather to clarify a concept, but also to help me deal with a particular situation I'm in.

My situation: I'm playing a necromancer. I do have Animate Dead spell. So I want to create a nasty minion for myself. So I kill a tatzlwurm (Kingmaker campaign) and raise it as a skeleton. The problem is that the template has so many nasty side effects.

Special Attacks: A skeleton retains none of the base creature's special attacks.
Special Qualities: A skeleton loses most special qualities of the base creature. It retains any extraordinary special qualities that improve its melee or ranged attacks.

Ok, to my problem, if I apply the skeleton template to the Tatzlwurm does it lose its poison gasp or not? It is included in both the Special Attacks and Special Abilities section. And the template states that a skeleton loses all special attacks, but retains any ex special abilties that improves its melee and ranged attacks (which by coincidense Poison Gasp is and does).
I read this in three ways. Either the ability is simply lost because it's included in the Special Attack section. Or it retains the ability, but has no way of using it. Or it simply keeps it?
And to apply logic, the last one seems unlikely since the body does have neither lungs or poison sacs.

I'm just using the Tatzlwurm since that's my immediate problem. But I do really want to know the answer to be able to apply this on other creatures as well.

My second question is about alternate summons. The alternate rules on the SRD suggests that a bloody skeleton is viable for Summon Monster 1. (Does this reduce the Skeleton Summoner feat to being useless? I mean, that would suggest that the feat is kind of redundant. )
Well, the real question is about alternate summons. I know that in the end my DM could say that I could summon what the hell I want, or just say that I can only summon stuff from the basic lists.
But let's say for balance sake, and for an atempt to keep as true to the rules. If I find creatures I want to be able to summon (that makes sense), do I have a good case in front of me as long as the creature is within the right CR? I mean, I see a pattern on the lists between the level of summon spell and the CR of the creature summoned.
Let's say I want to summon a Tatzlwurm (I really like that monster. :P) that has CR 2. That would place it at Summon Monster 3 if I'm right.
But to be honest. I think that the tatzlwurm is kind of powerful for that level. Are there other things I have to consider?

I've had some problems with building encounters for a while now. So I checked around on these forums for examples, and I think I got the idea nailed down now.

I have 4 PCs at lvl 5, which makes their APL 5.
Which in turn makes them viable for facing a challenging encounter with a CR of 6.
To make CR 6 encounter, I have to check the exp total (2400) for such an encounter and build from that. Correct?

Let's say I want my characters to face a group of goblins.
Example: 1 Goblin Druid 4 (CR3, 800 exp), 1 Goblin Ranger 3 (CR 2, 600 exp) and 5 Goblin Chitterbacks (CR 1/2, 200 exp).
This is a good CR 6 encounter, right?

Now, for the Table: CR Equivalencies.. How the heck is that intended to work? It's not mentioned in any rule text, and it seems any forum posts about it blatantly ignore it?
What's the purpose of the table? I mean, according to what I've read, CR does not stack in any way like this? Since I'm only looking at the EXP Budget when building the encounter?

I mean, does this mean I'm off? I have 7 creatures fighting, and they are of mixed CRs individually. How do I apply the CR Equivalencies here? Or is it just there for looks?
Do I take the encounter CR and add CR to it because of their numbers? That sounds ridiculous, but looks like the implied use at first. Or is it to bunch up several of the same creatures to one CR (Which in effect says nothing since I already have the numbers and exp pre-determined?)

Or, do I have to build my encounters in a completely different way to have any use for that table?
I'm playing with the idea of building monsters of my own. I made a Graveknight Goblin Fighter 5 for lols. It has a CR of 6. (4 as base + 2 for template). Meeting him alone gives the party 2400 exp. Do I use this table if I want them to meet him and his identical twin brother? Which nets them 4800 exp total, which is identical to the CR+2 = CR8 = 4800 exp.
This would imply that the real use for the table is if I reverse engineer my encounters. Making the monster first, before deciding on any budget?

Please help me clarify this. XD

/ Snake