SorasTG's page

People seem to be confusing "neutral" with "jerks that never give a damn" which misses the point. Neutral characters have ethics, particularly for extreme acts. They lack the extra devotion to say work to crusade for change, and may occaisonally deviate themselves, but they do entirely not care about something that doesn't happen right in front of them.

Most people IRL are Neutral.

A CN character could well be worried about what that sanctimonious murderer will decide is "evil" next and slaughter out of hand, it might be the CN character for daring to say enjoy music, taverns, and romantic adventures out of wedlock.

Better still *because* they are neutral they also probably lack any extra ethics to speak against taking some petty vengeance in lieu of their feelings.

In order:

1. Its not that its not possible but you are looking at a very literally minmaxed build. Its almost begging the GM to screw with you leaving such obvious gaps. (How's about all your potions and wands and no Haversack, 23 light load means even light weight are not trvial)

More importantly plenty of people aren't always going to want to play to the scrawny anti-social wizard sterotype, they'll want some different flavor. Furthermore its a build with very little flexiblity in concept, you HAVE to be all spell no considering EK class, no polymorphing into something more modestly melee capable, not having anything social as back up when Charm Person runs out on that NPC. Your options for doing something "less optimal but fun and still playable" are far less open.

Even to the most cold-blooded munchkin should have concerns with say locking themselves out of more Initiative and HP and shoring up their own saves. Or a CMD even that is that is that much poorer. That's why 18 (paying 16) or even 17 allows you a lot more stat points to play with, for a +1 and some spells.

Now sure in strict sense of what's "likely" you might well be the most optimal. But the problem with what's likely is you have to win everytime but only loose once so even lower probablities are of concern.

2. All the feats I mentioned are available at level one. Only Step Up has a pre-req of... BAB+1.

3. What other spells? Please be specific. With a focus on lower levels if you could.

Debuffs on the whole have the problem of not actually killing your enemies, considering a wizard alone thats a troublesome issue. Summoning needs 1 round of casting to do. Anything with a duration under 5 rounds poses something of a problem in application. You are a long way away from having a thousand and three tricks like later levels.

4. You are confusing when I stopped talking about the fighter. The fighter is not the best example relevant example, 3 goblins or kobolds are more like your classic low level play. Or any of the nigh infinite options out there you have to face potentially.

However on the proverbial fighter when exactly did I mention Power Attack?

I find the notion you simply assume that interesting. Honestly I'm not sure if its all that much benefit to a low level character, I've always worried more about hitting period. I think Power Attack can wait a few levels unless I feel I need Cleave ASAP. Even then of course if you notice... I presented Step Up or ReachSpike options for countering casters. I did not at any point require all of it together any more then when I mentioned it I was actually talking about a fighter.

In point of fact Step Up is if anything counterproductive for a Reach+Spiked-Gauntlet combo. Because with ReachSpike you want your enemy to be dumb enough to 5' step away from you. Step Up is for when you start with a Greatsword not a Glaive.

5. And loose your little wand drone, scout, second Perception check with Scent, improved ally, and be one disarm/sunder(or out of combat theft) away from penalties on all casting?

Its a choice, but not an obviously completely superior one nobody is ever going to not take.

Which is the thing these arguments tend to miss and the point I was trying to get across in the first place. Its easy to duel specific examples back and forth, but PF doesn't present any one option. The what's the "best" option game was irrelevant the moment Pun Pun was developed for 3.5. Even before that it wasn't a sea of Batman vs CoDzilla in actual play.

A wizard could easily have a 16 on its save by level 1. Fighter? Give him a +2 save (1 trait 1 wisdom)? He has to roll a 14 or higher (65% failure chance) or be in capable of acting for an average of over 8 rounds and helpless (meaning he can be coup de grac'd) for 5 of them.

I'm sorry but starting with a 20 in primary casting sounds easy to you maybe.

To me it sounds like on a 20 point buy I spent 17 of my points. Leaving me with a measly +1 for one more stat before I need to start dumping hard. I think a lot of people will not feel happy with the two 7s they then need to get two 14s for Dex and Con. I personally have negative attribute aversion disease to begin with.

Also for that same buy a Fighter willing to also severely dump and take 18 in Str can afford a 14 Dex/Con/Wis so can have a plus +2 there. For this exact situation a trait and Iron Will would not nessecarily be a bad idea. What's that you cast Grease instead? Still a +2 anyways, maybe Lightning Reflexes. And even if it works then what? Hope you get lucky with that light crossbow you can barely lift before they can get up and make a 10 DC to get out of Grease? Spell Focus? Well if you are willing to be an Illusionist I suppose thats a reasonable choice.

Of course not like actual play is dominated by fighting PC classes you are well situated to beat.

Its still only a 15' cone on a fragile platform. It doesn't matter how good you spell DC is when you face 2+ creatures more then two squares apart. Or are undead, or constructs, or any number of things. Or can make will saves well.

Or have just have better initiatives. Even if you survive the hit its not like Defensive Casting is a walk in the park anymore. Five ft step? Meet Step Up, Large Size, or Reach+Spiked-Gauntlet.

Now I'd still say Color Spray is probably the best 1st level spell for 1st level play. And certainly casting is a high high powered option overall.

BUT its not half as omnipotent as hyperbole would suggest.

Especially when you have to prepare it every day and low level, how many Color Sprays do you think you need today? 50% of your total spells, 25%?

Dimensional Hop specifies willing creatures. As does Dimension Door and Teleport.

Unless you find one without that limitation you can't.

(You can tele-spam attacks though with Dimensional Dervish, a steep requirement though)

If we started preventing classes and archetypes from fulfilling certain roles because it obviates certain other classes that people are or aren't playing in the current game, we'd need to ban all the primary casters first.
I'd allow this one. It's more a problem with the rogue than the archaeobard.

When something is obviously better among nominal peers that's at least equally problematic as being op'd for the macro-scale game as a whole.

A caster no matter what their particular build and effectiveness is still "conceptually" different then a tank or a skill-monkey. Because a caster is simulating a role not being in it. So you will attract different sort of players to the classes. You play a caster to use magic first, what that magic does becomes a modestly secondary concern. This is kinda a "its about the journey not the destination" thing in mechanics.

That difference essentially doesn't exist for the Archeologist and Rogue. Unless you have some hardcore objection to magical dabbling you are left with little but the cold calculation of numerical advantage to decide between the classes.

Anyone care to argue the Rogue beats the Archeologist?

So that's the real problem regardless of how it plays in the greater game. In this case I tend to think the Archeologist is the model for what the Rogue should be, but I'm not precisely happy about that either.

Also, you're the GM. They don't need a cleric unless the adventure you throw at them makes them need a cleric.

Yeah its not like anything stops the GM from handing out a use activated Widget of Heal or convenient chests full of healing items, or protective amulets. For free.

WBL and item creation costs are guides and tools not requirements.

I really like those ideas for the cutie marks. It is supposed to represent the thing your best at after all so it could be a little stronger.

A bit min/maxish abusable but then it's a game where we're going to attempt to play colourful ponies so that can be alright.

Well I must admit my real answer to balance is largely thus:

Ponies. Are. Awesome.

So I kinda went with some intentionally awesome stuff. If concern on power they can each be turned down rather easily. Make the SLA a 1/day thing and you have the Tiefling/Aasimar abilities. You can pick up +1s and +2s from the right traits half the time.

Or alternately don't make this a built in thing but a 1st only Feat. You pick it or loose it and your cutie mark just isn't a prevalent part of your character as a result.

Or make it not stack with certain similar abilities like Spell Focus.

Anyone going to play Ponyfinder probably isn't going to be knocking around Goblins in Sandpoint next to Seoni so balance is mostly a question of against itself.

How so? I don't see your logic. Worse, I don't understand peoples not wanting people to take eldritch heritage with wildblooded bloodlines. If you relabeled it and said it wasn't wildblooded it wouldn't be any different than a normal bloodline.

Because Sylvan modifies the Fey arcana and 1st level bloodline power into a single ability.

Unless its called out as unique somewhere why is it different? My answer is it isn't because the Wildbloods are intended as archetypes modifying existing bloodlines, so it isn't different except mechanically.

Add how all the Wildblood stuff is phrased as replacing ordinary bloodline abilities and such.

And Eldritch Heritage only mentions the bloodlines, not modifications to bloodlines via archetype. Ergo since you need the archetype to modify the bloodline ability, and you don't get that from EH, you don't get the different ability.

I'd agree most of the switches are not exactly going to free Rovagug. If anything most Wildblooded powers tend to be less useful, you take them for the arcana. However I don't think they are supportable as RAW so if you do it you need to have that understanding you are house ruling.

I generally like house ruling, but I also tend to dislike trying to "sneak" things in that aren't both clearly possible and intended to be.

Yeah my concern with the bonus feat is loosing the special flavor of the cutie mark: "How the heck is your 'special talent' Improved Initiative?"

Some feats are just too generic for it to be an open thing. I'd think a decent list of options could be put together though with potential stuff good stuff for any approach. Like say:

Mark Spell- Select one spell of 3rd level or lower. This spell becomes a spell-like ability usable [some number scheme] a day with a CL equal to your character level. Alternately you may later choose to add this spell to your spell list as a bonus spell, loosing the spell like ability. If you apply metamagic feats to this spell, you may treat its actual level as 1 lower (minimum +0) for determining the spell’s final adjusted level.

Magic Mark- Select a single spell descriptor (eg: fire, good, polymorph) and whenever you cast spells of that type they enjoy either a +2 caster level bonus or add +1 to the DC for all saving throws against that spell.

Martial Mark- Select either a single type of weapon or combat maneuver, rolls for the selected weapon or manuver enjoy a +1 bonus. At [some leveling scheme] this bonus increases to +2/etc. If you select a weapon you also gain proficiency in that weapon.

Skill Mark- Select a single skill, you gain Skill Focus as a bonus feat for this skill and it is always a class skill for you. At 6th level you may take 10 on checks with this skill even if endangered or distracted, provided you may ordinarily take 10 on the usage under peaceful conditions.

Maybe a few more along these lines.

Unless there's been an FAQ I haven't heard about, this is not true. It's contested whether bloodline archetypes are not bloodlines (I personally think this is a load of tripe).

The other half is 100% correct, can't take the feat multiple times.

Well the Wildbloods are listed as archtypes that modify a bloodline. Ergo they are NOT bloodlines themselves but archetypes that require a particular bloodline. And EH specifies bloodline not archetype. Though in most cases I think the switch is probably reasonable in play, that's not the same thing. Unless you can point to something particular about the Wildblooded archetypes?

Still wouldn't work for Sylvan though so kinda a moot point here. But probably an object demonstration the Wildbloods are archetypes modifying bloodlines, not actually bloodlines.

@Da'ath: I actually find you needing to looking that up oddly comforting in a way. Proof the world isn't as small as I sometimes fear. If you are interested I've always found knowyourmeme's page probably the best quick overview of the phenomena.

And while I don't know it to be true I do know a Brony dad that watches the show happily with his daughter... so wouldn't put it past possiblity to happen.

@Morgen:

Well the "non-dextrous" I will just agree to disagree on despite pony hooves having potential explanations for their implausible utility. I kinda understand their point though.

I think the Cutie Mark needs a bit broader support though. Its a special talent not just a skill in a PF context. I don't feel the differences between say Twilight, Shining Armor, and Celestia are well represented by all having a +4 in Spellcraft. Rainbow Dash's +4 in Fly is better but doesn't make her faster, Rarity's Craft doesn't explain her Gem Spell. And hypothetically you just know someone will want their Fighter Pony to have a Cutie Mark of their weapon of choice.

I think the simplest solution would probably be to make the Cutie Mark a Bonus Feat. Maybe with some guidelines on what that would be.

Also they need a Weather Pony class at some point and I think Earth ponies could use something to support that whole subtle earth connection thing.

I am really not trying to be rude, elitist, or whatever, though I know it might seem that way, but: is this a joke, a thing for kids, or ...what?

I vaguely recall a MLP joke conversion a while back and am not sure whether this is a continuation of it (i.e. beating a dead horse - haha), which is why I ask.

So haven't been around the net much last few years huh? ;)

To answer your question: serious. Its a Brony ... thing... to take over and convert anything we can to have its place in the Herd. That said don't take it tooo seriously

I'm acquainted with several folks that are actively playing pony RPs, btw.

Depending on the requirements I might disagree with that line of thought. A determination that something is "effectively the same" is a determination not a statement by the RAW that it IS the same.

For one you're citing the race building rules both times. I'd argue thats referring to the requirements on the other race building traits in that book. Various abilities like energy resistances carry type pre-reqs for creating a race. I'm not sure we can take anything from those guidelines as going farther.

And without a source on the specifics of the FAQs I would hazard the contradiction is not actually anything of the sort. Racial Heritage explicitly lets you count as a member of another humanoid race but doesn't say type anywhere. If that's all they were the feat would be simpler "Gain X subtype" and go. Yet there not listing it and half-orcs/elves listing such things separate from their own dual subtypes I feel is a deliberate design choice. To separate type and race.

Now that all said if you were say wanting to be a Half-Celestial Humanoid wanting an Aasimar feat... I'd say reasonable grounds to ask a GM (since hey they let you take a template) to allow it and even sensible and recommended as the sort of flexibility you should have with pre-reqs like that. But not automatically equivalent in all cases merely from sharing types. A Half-Celestial Horse not so much.

Half-orc is a Race of Type: Humanoid with both the (human) and (orc) subtypes. Type and subtype are not the same thing as race. Otherwise Aasimars, Tieflings, etc would be the same race and could take all the same abilities etc. As they are both Type: Outsider subtype:(native).

Racial Heritage could get you into in Blood God Disciple but neither Eldritch Heritage nor Orc Bloodline would. Still could be a good idea to pick up Eldritch Heritage later on when you can get the Improved version.

That makes me think. While being able to hit the 15' diagonal square may seem simple for medium creatures with reach...

What about greater Reach lengths. Reach plus Lunge and Enlarge Person. And Huge etc creatures built with the same?

And if you can reach the 15' diagonal with a 10' reach, what about AoOs against those that simply pass through that 15' space and never approach closer. Especially when thats a monster using it against you.

Alright, just making sure I am understanding this correctly: approaching a creature with 10 foot reach diagonally, the squares you are moving through go from 15' to 5'. So there is no square you are moving through that is 10' away from them. James Jacobs asserts that the gamespace has an area 10 feet away that you are in fact passing though, though it is not displayed on the grid. So my question is... where is that? During the AoO, the approaching creature is somewhere, not on the grid. We know that that somewhere is 10 feet away, so sure, the AoO can be made. But what about readied actions and other actors? The rules don't seem to provide a sufficiently defined space for the approaching creature.

If you have a readied action for "when X is 10 ft away" or the like it triggers on X's movement between squares 15' and 5'

If its something like a normal AoO you make your attack, deal your damage and let the approaching creature finish its movement action.

The only ambiguity to me is if you do something to stop that movement. Trips or Hold whatevers beg the question of where the targeted moving creature ends up.

The statements on the last page suggest to me they would revert to the 15' square but I can't describe why well.

You could maybe convince a GM to leave your stopped target on the point between the 15' and 5' squares if there's no further complications just remember the stopped creature is 10' away from you for any relevant case. And that moving to any of the four squares around the 10' point is a 5 ft first diagonal movement.

Though that would need a further ruling on any third party entering this equation.

Ultimately a square grid can't handle a radius. You can probably exploit any way you rule this tactically... but that's why you have a GM to make calls for just cases like this. I know I'd prefer the "reality" of the radius being honored however wonky the grid over say the magically growing reach weapon. (Reach is awesome enough thank you)

The suggested Fast Learner bonus feat sounds wonky to me. If you want to encourage play for other then humans then don't use a bonus that is still tremendously useful to any class. Especially considering any use with alternate fave class bonuses.

Why not Focused Study variant trait. It replaces the bonus feat with a free Skill Focus at 1st, 8th, and 16th level. Sure that's even more extra feats but its Skill Focus. It helps your skill users and reinforces a theme of humans as distinctly skilled not merely distinctly generic.

Ignoring the fact that Fortitude has always been a weak save for wizards. Or that no matter how many hit points you have, more are always desirable. Giving wizards an average of 1 extra HP per level in no way diminishes the value most players place on a 14 CON.

The 1 HP/level is frankly only much of an advantage over Sorcerers. Everything else off the top of my head has either better HD or better skills. And Cha skills are lots of fun so its very tempting.

So archers don't need CON, but casters do?

And because casters need PRIMARY STAT and CON, it makes them MAD?
Whatever, I'm done bashing my head against this particular wall.

I guess the "maybe" was lost on you?

An archer using a martial class can fall back on primary Dex, armor, good HD, and strong Fort saves. All of which is not so for all casters. Its not optimal but with a little sensible tactics I call it still playable. I'd do it simply because I feel I should RP Int/Wis/Con penalties and so avoid them like the plague. Course I don't take any penalty I can avoid because I think they all suck.

The greater truth is still that everyone needs Con just about equally.

I find Ponyfinder both vexing and delightful.

On the positive ponify... everything

On the down side many of the choices are puzzling. Like how they've forgotten natural attacks for the pony races. What the applebuck!?

(Nevermind they seem to want to try balancing against normal play, which ponies on the show are just... not. That's understandable given that quite aside from Sonic Rainbooms Dashie pulls things like kicking through multiple trees in a single kick which just doesn't model well on PF)

This is incorrect for several reasons. Fighters et al are MAD because they REQUIRE several attributes to stay alive.
If you want damage and attack, get STR. If you want armor, get some DEX. If you want health, get some CON. If you want to not be useless outside of combat, get some INT.

Yeah those are all nice but they are bought on the basis of what's left after having decent Strength first. When its the 10 point buy or everyone rolls iffy on 3d6 Gygax old school style, you can live with penalties for anything but Con and Strength if you really have to. Because as the Fighter your first job is still broadly assumed to be hitting things with your sword and as long as you do that you do your job.

And nobody can afford a Con penalty excepting maybe an archer build.

Here's how the wizard deals with that.

DEX? For what? Mage Armor, baby! Pump INT. Damage? Meh, damage is for suckers, but if I needed to, I could. Pump INT. Health? What ever for, I have Stoneskin. Pump INT. Utility? Yeah, here's a spellbook, pick a page. Pump INT. Oh look, that INT gives me skill points!
With INT, they do EVERYTHING.
Yes, the only reason to do it is nerfing. BECAUSE. THEY. ARE. TOO. GOOD.
And I, for one, do not agree with the "spells per day based off one, maximum spells of another, saves off the third" approach, because it screws over actual specialists, the "good" build that has built in strengths AND weaknesses. That's why I proposed the casting-stat-by-school approach.

Of course but that's because when your primary job is to cast a spell that has far more options.

You are being a bit hyperbolic there though.

Mage Armor isn't Dex, its a Chain Shirt, you take a slice of your abilities to replace a 100 gp item anyone can have. Sure its better for specific things but it doesn't improve either, and there's always a loose chance your GM will play the "you haven't cast it/ it ran out" when he runs a random encounter while traveling or some such. Its still great because mages don't get armor, even OP'd for its level, but it doesn't replace a stat that also gives saves, initiative, and stackable AC.

Stoneskin, at 250 a pop is a poorer option now. Literally. Its good but it makes it a judgement call on when to use it as opposed to effectively 24/7. And DR is beatable for the properly prepared, and even without that high damage will still eat you up.

Utility you mean scrolls and wands right? Otherwise did you prepare that useful spell today and if you did how much does it cut into your depth in a fight. Sure you can just rest or what not, but if your GM is letting you freely control time like that nobody should complain. Resting to prepare Identify (or whatever) is seriously the same as running back to town and paying the magic shop to do it, its a conscious choice that time is not a factor anymore. Now scrolls and wands of course change that but that's getting into gear where there's lots of options for everyone. Nevermind the skill monkey should have UMD. Yes there's questions of relative economies, but options are there.

This is all not to say casting isn't the most powerful skill in the game. It is. I personally strongly support a judicious nerf, which is why I proposed some. I just find trying to build in MAD a bad one. While more spells and such are nice, the real stat boosting reason is for save DCs. Ergo you will just change the "primary" stat for certain builds. Or maybe shuffle the strengths of various full casters for certain niches.

you need a certain amount of str but speed comes from agility and agility is dex

Well "in reality" not so much.

In reality when you want to hit harder you also pretty much automatically hit faster. Force is mass by velocity, energy is mass by velocity squared, and mass is generally constant. If you aren't hitting someone faster you aren't hitting them harder. And since muscles are what do the hitting... strength is speed.

Or thereabouts.

Dexterity really "shouldn't" be about being faster but about being more precise or maybe more efficient. You have less force but it goes where you need less or less is 'wasted' and such.

Now before the gods must smite more female catfolk how much of that should apply to abstract RPG mechanics is an open question.

Anyways...

For my verisimilitude I think that Dex damage shouldn't apply whenever a Rogue precision damage doesn't, it shouldn't add 1.5 when two handed, but say full off-hand is fine. Which I think keeps a good mechanical trade off too. And Power Attack working is fine, just adding a little power back in. Besides anyone using this would grab Piranha Strike if they knew of it.

MAD casting is a pretty icky idea. It makes it less fun to play one, more busy work to build a character, and won't make a lot of actual change when all is said and done.

Worst for me personally about the original idea is it would reduce the flavor of the different casters. No more the idiot sorcerer who infuriates genius wizards by getting spells just as good. Or the Einstein of the arcane with brillance but no social abilities and a questionable taste in fashion.

Other MAD cases are generally born from either trying to do multiple things with a class. Your base melee doesn't need more then Str, your archer needs Dex. Its doing multiple things other then fight/cast/skill that give rise to MAD, or trying to change up the basic formula by say not using Str to fight. There's really no such need for casting.

So really only reason to do it is for nerfing. Which there are probably better options. As long as spell DCs are improved by a stat then a build around save-or-lose/suck/etc will just boosts the relevant stat.

So better nerfs to be had. Like putting absolute limits on save DCs, or lowering DCs for certain effects.

Course probably the simplest nerf is just change what action you need to cast a spell. Imagine if standard spells took a full round action or 1 round to fire.