Sonchezz's page

Raestlin wrote:

Yeah I guess its a waste of time to buy something called a Core Rulebook for Pathfinder, I mean its just 3.5 right?

*casts Banish on this argument* Some of us like our shiny new books and WotC won't print/distribute 3.5 any more (and I don't like piracy except when wearing a patch).

Fire and frost isn't so bad - I liked the argument that people don't care if you enchant say, Fire and Acid together. Since it's 'just a magical effect' I'd be inclined to say "It's a fantasy game where magic shoots from fingertips". It certainly isn't anything new in lore/gaming so it's not really a surprise that some people would interpret the rules to allow both. My own opinion? If the rules swing in your favour, SEIZE THEM WITH BOTH HANDS AND A FOOT!!! (Also get some teeth into them and growl insanely at anyone who tries to take them away. YMMV)

Yarp, the above has zero mechanical or rules-based thoughts, however a dude on this forum said people can have opinions so I do.

I think that long ago this went from a lets discuss the rules thread into a name calling/ you're insulting the way I run games/ I hate other people who do things differently than me thread, and it shouldn't be. Regardless of what the rules are you can play it however you or your group wants in your game, that's not the question here.

Now I know most people here think you can have multiple commands at the same time, but to me the wording makes it seem the other way around.

I'd much rather have a discussion arguing about what the rules actually state than about what people want them to state or how they play. I know that the base issues here are 3.5 vs pathfinder, the similar wording between the two, a 3.5 WotC FAQ, and what the original intent of those words and the system/s actually are. Personally without wasting some DEV's time I'd like to get a better ruling on this, but at least can we have ordered discussion rather than bickering?

addy grete wrote:

Can a weapon be enchanted with both frost and flaming special abilities?

From the Combat Section of the Players Handbook wrote:

A swift action consumes a very small amount of time, but represents a larger expenditure of effort than a free action. You can perform one swift action per turn without affecting your ability to perform other actions. In that regard, a swift action is like a free action. You can, however, perform only one single swift action per turn, regardless of what other actions you take. You can take a swift action anytime you would normally be allowed to take a free action. Swift actions usually involve spellcasting, activating a feat, or the activation of magic items.

From the Magic Weapons Section of the Players Handbook wrote:

Upon command, a flaming weapon is sheathed in fire that deals an extra 1d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit. The fire does not harm the wielder. The effect remains until another command is given.

Bold is me.

This basically says you can give one command a turn, flaming or frost, then if you give another command it undoes the first. So you could have a flaming and frost weapon, just not at the same time.

This prevents ridiculous dice stacking.

This is exactly how it's supposed to work and why fighters do not continually stack damaging powers like this.

Sonchezz wrote:

Let me try to list all the major changes to the Summoner just to keep everyone on the same page.

Can't use summon monster class ability in conjunction with other summon monster spells

Where is this? If it's the last few lines of the Summon Monster SLA entry I'm not sure I read it the same way you do. The last line refers only to the Summon Monster Spell-Like ability, not the Summoners ability to cast summon monster spells.

--Vrock, Paper, Scissors

If I got that wrong sorry, it's just how I read it, amd how I've heard other people talk about it.

Let me try to list all the major changes to the Summoner just to keep everyone on the same page.

Eidolon
HD reduced 2
8 less skill points due to HD
BAB reduced due to HD
Saves lowered due to HD
Maximum Attack limit added
One less feat

Summoner
Summon Monster ability lasts minutes instead of hours
Can't use summon monster class ability in conjunction with other summon monster spells
Spell list greatly changed, no longer similar to a full caster
(Look at Zurai's post for specifics)

I haven't got a chance to playtest with these yet, but it seems pretty harsh. The Max Attacks were desperately needed as I've seen from the earlier playtests, and the Eidolon seemed to be a little overpowered in play, but taking away several of the best spells a summoner gets, or moving them to higher levels will really make my summoner do less in combat. Considering he didn't do much anyways, that really disappoints me.

Like I said, I haven't got a chance to play yet, but the new spell list seems pretty harsh.

Planning to playtest soon. BTW Did I miss any other changes?

I've always hated when classes had seemingly overpowered effects like this. It reminds me of some of the crazy prestige classes from 3.5 that I always thought were just unnecessary to the system and had a tendency to steep the playing field for certain players and make the game less fun for others.

So far I've been pretty happy with the classes in Pathfinder (minus the already fixed issues within the Summoner) but I'd hate for something like this to be possible in the final edition. So far I've been playing pathfinder predominantly with only pathfinder material, no house rules besides game supplements like the crit hit/miss decks, but things like this were one of the big reasons I switched from 3.5 to Pathfinder.

I haven't seen this actually play out yet and I hope it's not as completely crazy as it seems here, but if it is I really hope it's addressed before the final version.

Just change the class name to Van Hellsing, The Class /sarcasm

I agree with your basic premise Surkin, but sadly I think the witch starts to fall into this category too, and perhaps the alchemist as well. These classes just seem so concentrated on the one thing it is that they do.

This isn't to say that there are no choices within these classes, it's just from a role playing aspect I can see the cavalier as a good/bad knight and that's it. The same goes for the witch though, and possibly the alchemist.

New oaths or abilities are not the problem, it's the limited scope of the class in terms of roleplaying, IE a cavalier is always a knight, any type of knight but still a knight. It's good to fill thee niches, but I'd rather have a class that can fill more than one niche, and is a little more versatile.

The build for secrets is a cool idea, but I think it's implementation is pretty poor. With the exception of one of the abilities nothing will help with combat and even though I'm not a combat heavy person, I think that needs to be corrected.

Also in the games I DM, I generally don't like it when players find quick and uncreative ways of making it through a dungeon by scrying and divination to bypass entire puzzles or areas, and this is precisely what this class seems to be for. It takes the fun out of quests, makes it boring for other players, and discourages players from actually doing something, when they can just skip over it.

I have a suggestion for the Oracle of Bones, specifically the Raise the Dead ability.

As written the ability is thematic and could be a strong role playing aspect of the class. Unfortunately the ability seems pretty useless except at level 1 to maybe 3.

I would propose possibly changing the ability completely save the name.
Instead of raising a generic zombie or skeleton from out of nowhere, you instead may attempt to raise an existing corpse as a standard action. Create a DC and use the corpses previous Will save. If it fails the save its type changes to undead, it loses all spellcasting ability, loses all supernatural abilities, and loses all special abilities that are con based. The creature remains under your control for a number of turns equal to your charisma modifier and then returns to a corpse state.

This ability seems like it would stay effective throughout the game. It is thematic of Raising the Dead rather than generic zombie/skeleton summoning. If the DC was correctly tiered it should create a situation where common enemies can be raised but elite or boss type enemies would be hard if not near impossible to raise.

I agree. When I first saw the Oracle of Bones, I thought that it would make an excellent necromancer type character, but Raise the Dead seems really pointless, and it feels the same as summoning dead rather than really raising anything.