Spaceman Biff's page

That is true, I could always take martial weapon proficiency (insert weapon here) as my human feat and then have weapon finesse as my 1st level feat. From there I'm not sure where to go though. On a side note I didn't think you could finesse a scimitar, unless they changed that in pathfinder.

I don't know for sure about the scimitar. I thought it used to but it doesn't list it under the feat. Of course it doesn't list the curve blade either you have to look at the weapon description. of course there isn't a weapon description for the scimitar.

Human Inquisitor

Str: 13
Dex: 14+2
Con: 12
Int: 10
Wis: 16
Cha: 10

Domain: Travel
1: Point Blank Shot
B: Precise Shot
3: Quick Draw or Rapid Shot
5: whichever I don't take at 3rd
7: Far Shot
9: I don't even know

I can't seem to find a way to make a good dex based melee Inquisitor

At 9th you should take Manyshot if you go the archery route. You could take Deadly Aim instead of far shot.

I hear you on the difficulty of making a dex based melee inquisitor. That's why I am in favor with going higher on strength. Best dex weapons are the curve blade (which you don't have no access to), scimitar (only if you go with Sarenrae as your god), rapier (which you don't want), and kukris. IMO

Your other option is to take a level or two of ranger or fighter. Ranger probably more fitting. Even if you take just one level you get all martial weapons and can use a scimitar. Of course you could blow a feat for the weapon you want to use.

AdAstraGames wrote:

Request:

When I build a fighter/wizard, I get both the Simple Weapon Proficiency and the Wizard List showing up under Feats. It also doesn't show "All Martial Weapons" as a proficiency.

Would it be possible to A) clone the bit that says "Simple Weapon proficiency" and B) make it show "Martial Weapon Proficiency", and if either of those shows up, have them override the weird class-based proficiency lists if both are present.

It's kind of disconcerting to see my fighter/mage turn up with a meagre handful of weapon proficiencies on the back of the sheet.

Yeah, displaying that info has been a handle. I'll work on some better logic, perhaps building a block similar to what's at the start of each class ability description in the books...

The long bow, shortbow, and favored weapon proficiency is not working for the Inquisitor. I know it is beta. I tried to adjust the field but I am not that good with excel to fix the right field. Plus it should have hand crossbow added.

While I am at it need a spot to select the domain for the Inquisitor. That could be what is throwing off the "Other" weapon proficiency.

Felgoroth wrote:

Something else I'm considering is using Two Weapon Fighting with Finesse Weapons rather than Spring Attacking with a Long Spear but then the travel domain doesn't really help me either because teleporting is a move action.

Could be fun, just remember that you don't get to bane the second weapon. It only works on the first.

Plus makes it a bit of a hassle if trying to cast spells. Sheathe weapon, cast spell, draw weapon. You would have to take quick draw feat. THought about that whole path as well.

I've been considering a Spring Attack-focused inquisitor myself, but the location on the battlefield where an inquisitor truly shines is weaving in and around opponents on the front line; it makes me wonder why Acrobatics wasn't a natural addition to the inquisitor's class skills.

Someone already mentioned the idea that only a single attack per round will limit the benefit you gain from your Bane ability. Something else to take into consideration is that such a character, in most situations, is going to be sacrificing the use of Solo Tactics and any teamwork feats they may have. I think there's only two teamwork feats that don't require one to be next to an ally, and even those require your target to be flanked. If you're bouncing around the battlefield, the opportunities to make use of these feats could easily be impacted.

That too. The precise strike to give +1d6 damage when flanking and the +4 for flanking instead of +2.

It use to have acrobatics but they pulled it out for the final beta test.

That's why at mid-levels greater invis is great since you can sit their and power attack away with could bonuses and activate the two judgements that bump attack and damage. Plus you could cast keen edge on a weapon if it isn't keen already or if you don't have improved crit.

Focusing on feats that can aid you in this type of an attack style is probably most beneficial.

YuenglingDragon wrote:

Felgoroth wrote:

I suppose I could take Weapon Finesse as my Human Feat and use a weapon I can finesse instead of a Long Spear but I don't really want to use a Rapier (just a personal preference).

Well, you need to do something. With your Str so low you're going to have a hard time hitting and doing much damage. How about dropping your Dex to 14 and making your Str 15. I'd also seriously consider moving your +2 over to Str as well. That way at lvl 4 you can have 18 Str. After that level advancement bonuses can go into Wisdom. As a caster with a slow progression you are never going to have the kind of DC that a full caster would have. All their spell levels are generally higher than yours. Full casters get a lot of benefit from a high casting stat, Inquisitors not so much. If you focus on spells with utility and buffs, a Wis of 14 will do ya just fine.

Because a 15 costs 7 points not 6 and an 18 costs 17 points. If I do what you're suggesting there is no point in playing an Inquisitor because I'll be out damaged by the Fighter, out spelled by the Wizard, Druid, Sorcerer, and Cleric, out skilled by the Rogue, and out supported by the Bard.

Well unfortunately on avergae you "should" always be outdamaged by a fighter, out spelled by the full caster classes, and out skilled by the bard and rogue. The difference is the Inquisitor can do well in all of those categories, just not great like the dedicated, specific focused classes.

I recently made a half-orc inquisitor but we had 22 points to play with and I went:

Str: 14 +2
Dex: 15
Con: 14
Wis: 14
Int: 12
Cha: 8

I took the traits reactive and adopted (humans for the extra feat) and the Travel domain power.

First level feats I debated but took Toughness and Point Blank Shot. Plan to take powe attack and will be all over using the falchion.

Will probably mix in rapid shot, vital strike, manyshot, etc to have versatility.

I thought about the whole spring attack thing but you should keep in mind that at Level 4 you can cast Invisibility, at Level 10 you can cast greater invisibility which eliminates the need for spring attack. Not to mention that you have a domain power that lets you teleport feet per level in line of sight so again reduces the need for spring attack.

I would probably go in another direction with the feats to maximize your abilities.

That's my one complaint. I think the Inquisitor needs Martial weapon prof.

Which is why I made mine as a half-orc so I could get the falchion proficiency free. Plus, the better crit range comes in handy when you get the Exploit Weakness ability.

Have to admit though that I had to strongly consider going fighter or ranger for first level to try and get martial weapon proficiency and the +1 attack bonus out of the gate so you could do power attack at first level.

And I really didn't want to pick a domain just for the weapon but that is another possibility. Especially when I really wanted the travel domain power.

I thought a glaive would be cool but wasn't really enthused about an Inquisitor of Shelyn.

Not all Inquisitors are Lawful. For that matter, there's nothing that says an Inquisitor has to even be subject to Church hierarchy. Not saying they can't be, but it can't be assumed as the default.

I would agree with this. Remember the Inquisitor is supposed to be able to act independent of the church. He is upholding an ideal that he also can hold the church accountable to. For example, if your god is Cayden or Desna so you would be focused in preserving people's personal freedoms to do as they wanted as long as it doesn't hurt anyone or the church. If a higher up in the church starts becoming a bit too lawful and placing unnecessary restrictions on the clergy and populace especially if it is for personal gain, then the inquisitor should be putting a beatdown on that church leader.

Also, if you had a Lawful Good paladin in the party who felt that a villain who was a danger to that ideal or the church should not be eliminated after the party defeated him because of their "moral code" it could come down to a knockdown dragout fight with the paladin because you are not going to let the villain have a chance to get away or do harm at a later date. You will take out the Paladin if you have to in order to get to the villain.

The Inquisitor as designed in mind should be taking orders from the church. They should be acting on the ideals of the god they worship and work to enforce those ideals to the best of their abilities regardless of the "church" since it would also be your responsibility to hold them accountable as well.

Spaceman Biff wrote:

What exactly does the Improved Natural Attack do for you and where is that feat located? If it is increasing damage as I think it is does it stack with the eidolon evolution that does the same thing?

Bestiary.

The bonus is untyped and the names are different so by RAW there is no reason why they wouldn't stack. I'll note, though, that Josh has prohibited the feats from the Bestiary in PFS Organized Play. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't stack in the final version.

Don't have the bestiary yet so does it just increase the damage die one step then?

Just talked with my DM and got approval to playtest the summoner in his weekly sunday game. Will be creating a Halfling Summoner (3rd) and Eidolon.

Got some ideas for the Eidolon that I'm going to mule over a bit however the basic concept is ** spoiler omitted **

Got to hash it out with the DM after he has had time to read up the material. So for now... off to bed.

What exactly does the Improved Natural Attack do for you and where is that feat located? If it is increasing damage as I think it is does it stack with the eidolon evolution that does the same thing?

With the Eidolon's size bonuses, BAB, and augmentable Strength, it seem rather more likely that he ought to be tripping. Not the Summoner.

Then your Human Summoner rocks a long spear and focuses on whipping out damage. You might want to consider starting in Fighter or Paladin for BAB and whatnot. A lvl in Fighter gets you Weapon Focus, Power Attack, and another feat of your choice. Then you just lay down wicked smacks on the tripped enemy.

Need to check but can you go from Paladin to another class without loosing your class abilities?

I have been bouncing back and forth on this and would like to see more postings about different Summoner builds instead of such an intense focus on eidolon (which is cool too but only one piece).

Will be building a Summoner and we get 22 points for build.

Some options thinking about:

Human Summoner (Two-handed Fighter)
Human attribute bonus: Strength
Str 13 (15)
Dex 14
Con 12
Int 14 (Want to have enough for social skills)
Wis 10
Cha 15

Feats: Martial Weapon Prof (Any two-handed weapon); Weapon Focus or Improved Initiative

Human Summoner (Crossbowmen)
Human attribute bonus: Dexterity
Str 10
Dex 14 (16)
Con 12
Int 14 (Want to have enough for social skills)
Wis 10
Cha 16

Feats: Spell Focus (Conj); Improved Initiative
3rd level - Augment Summoning
5th level - Rapid Reload
7th Level - Deadly Aim
9th Level - Vital Strike
11th Level - Rapid Shot

Elf Summoner (Rapier)
Human attribute bonus: Dexterity
Str 10
Dex 14 (16)
Con 14 (12)
Int 14 (16)
Wis 10
Cha 15

Feat: Weapon Finesse
3rd: Spell Focus (Conj)
5th: Augment Summoning
7th on: whatever you feel like

The thing is the class is feat starved so seems like a waste of feats if you have a good balance for your eidolon of offense and defense.

Maybe better to take craft wands, have a high UMD, and extend spell feat and buff and let battlefield control spells fly

Zurai wrote:

Would you please read all of what I wrote? I even italicized it for you in the original post!

The changes mentioned in this thread are temporary and are intended to level the playing field out so that testing can be done that doesn't get derailed by those two issues.

We won't see the final version of the changes until the book is released in August. Right now, removing the ability to wear armor had the same actual effect as equalizing natural armor to animal companions with the least amount of explanation. That's all that's required for a playtest.

It doesn't do that at all.

The eidolons spend evolution points on AC and don't invest in armor.

I'm sorry but simply 'remove the evolution that adds to natural armor' is frankly even easier to write. In fact even 'refer to the druid animal companion chart' for advancement in natural armor would not be hard to write.

So while I did read what you wrote, I'm sorry but I did not accept what you said there.

Imho for a playtest you should attempt to represent the final version, so as to well test it out and if it is as you are portraying it to be then it doesn't do that.

-James

A couple of comments here:

1) Removing the natural armor bonus means you HAVE to invest in wearing real armor to have any viable AC. For flavor reasons some players will want to go that route. The natural armor bonus can be created as metallic, thicker skin, etc.; while armor is armor. Have no problem just removing armor proficiency from the list for an easier mechanic. If you look at the shield ally and greater shield ally abilities the eidolon I believe is geared to be more of a protector so having the ability to have a good AC is needed. Although I agree wearing armor, plus all of the natural armor capabilities is too much. I would rather see wearing armor go away than the natural armor. Of course, you load up on AC through the roof and you have little left for any offesive abilities, or other miscellaneous features.

2) Also, forcing the eidolon to have same rules and progressions as the Druid animal companion is wrong. I believe the focus here is that the eidolon should be a stronger "companion" than the druid's animal companion. Otherwise, how do you make up the balance between the druid's wild shape ability, summon nature's ally, and 9th level spell progression. If the eidolon is no better than a druid's animal companion, why in the world would you play a summoner when you play a druid with more power and a companion that is just as good.

xJoe3x wrote:

I just don't think its right that a summoner is worse with summoning than a conjurer speced wizard.

I would be curious to see the logic behind this.

A summoner can cast 6-8 of their highest level summons per day via SLA. He can also cast normal summoning spells as well. A wizard can cast 2-3 of his highest level summons during the day. Then 3-4 of his second highest.

An example:
Start of round 1 the summoner has 1 BAMF summons on the table already. Wizard has none.

Start of Round 2 summoner and wizard bring out their Summon Monster X (where X is the highest level available summons)

Round 3 Wizard brings out a second Summon Monster X, summoner calls a summon monster X from his spell list.

Round 3 (we'll assume an even numbered level) Wizard brings out Summon Monster X, Summoner brings out Summon Monster X-1 from spell.

At this point it appears the wizard does have an edge, but he's now tapped his highest level power, his summons just get worse from here. When the summoner's first Monster X goes down he can re-summon it, or summon one for the next encounter.

So The wizard has an edge in a single encounter if he novas but the summoner has more staying power and the Eidolon kind of dwarfs a normal summons. So where does "Summoner is worse" at summoning come in?

Unless you are a conjurer, in which case you have a summoned monster on the board already as well. Of course the 20th level wizard (conjurer) also has at their disposal, time stop, which makes the whole thing moot, because the summoner and eidolon will be toast.

The summoner benefit would be hey I can put a monster on the field and move, where the conjurer would have to stand still which would give the summoner an advantage. Now the conjurer has longer summoned creatures, a permanent IX creature walking around with them, and has same casting time. Yeah the summoner can cast summon monster more times, but again, why in the world would you spend round after round doing that anyway. Unless their is a whole army you are facing it doesn't make sense. And if there was a whole army the sorcerer blasting away with area effect spells would be more potent.

The limit of one SLA summon monster at a time makes sense and really has little impact in my opinion since I still have not seen a viable situation come up with any frequency where throwing a ton of creatures out beforehand would make sense.

I agree the casting time and duration were the draws of the class to me even more so than the eidolon since it was unique and had value beyond just combat. I know others have said it but at least in our games we almost never have combats that occur within 20 minutes of one another. Hours? Absolutely. But minutes is rare so it really does not impact a game. But again just my opinion based on playing the game.

To me it was pretty cool to summon a creature to clean up the dead bodies on the field, or bury them, or scout a location. The minute duration offered a ton of versatility that no one else had. Round durations for summons make them only really useful for combat and you have to be able to sit there for a round and do nothing else. Definitely not as exciting to play since I can get most of the same with an existing class.

Spaceman Biff wrote:

Now I would really like to see the people coming up with these monstrosities wander into a city with their eidolons. Even better, what if you are in a city-based campaign? Many of these power builds with dragon-like or demonic looking creatures just are not feasible to be walking around with.

No. No, no, a thousand times no. You do not balance an ability around the idea that the character will arbitrarily not be allowed to use it.

I am not talking about balancing the ability at all. I am saying it is fine as is. My point is everyone is making these builds and saying how overpowered it is based on ideal scenarios.

My point was you are not going to walk around with a huge eidolon everywhere you go 24 hours a day, which people are not taking into account.

Spaceman Biff wrote:

Right but that all takes time as you mention and not very handy if you are in the middle of a combat.

So realistically if you want to park them somewhere and use Maker's Call you are going to have the eidolon at least 25% down. In some cases could easily be 50%. Just another example of limitations that people keep leaving out of the details of how this is so overpowered.

Which is why I would also consider fast healing of at least 1 point. It won't help you immediately in a fight, but at least the eidolon could heal back those points in less than an hour. Also why having UMD for Summoner is good to use wands, and why having the medium BAB and d8s is good since you won't always have that eidolon handy at full health.

Fast healing is a really excellent call. then you only have to worry about emergency healing. It's not available until higher level (10th?) though.

11th level actually which is rough. Wouldn't mind seeing fast healing handled like Improved Natural Armor. You can buy one point of fast healing earlier in the progession (one or two point base ability), and then you can buy one more point every 5 levels a summoner posseses up to a maximum of fast healing 5 at 20th level. Each additional point maybe costing two more evolution points. Haven't really thought the mechanic part through yet.

Spaceman Biff wrote:

As I understand the rule though even with Maker's Call the eidolon has to be within 100 feet of the summoner to not lose hit points. At least I would definitely rule it that way. Maker's call is nice but I don't read that as replacing the proximity requirement for hit point strength of the eidolon.

Totally correct... Hmm, That does complicate things a lot. Makes it a trickier choice. Having him there in a standard but with 25% fewer HP, or having him summonable after a minute ritual.

I would take the HP hit because if I need him at full HP I can still summon him to me, dismiss him then re-summon him. In the mean time he is quickly available and still pretty tough. Worst case scenario with that is it takes 1 minute and 1 round to retrieve him at full HP (Dismiss him then summon him).

Right but that all takes time as you mention and not very handy if you are in the middle of a combat.

So realistically if you want to park them somewhere and use Maker's Call you are going to have the eidolon at least 25% down. In some cases could easily be 50%. Just another example of limitations that people keep leaving out of the details of how this is so overpowered.

Which is why I would also consider fast healing of at least 1 point. It won't help you immediately in a fight, but at least the eidolon could heal back those points in less than an hour. Also why having UMD for Summoner is good to use wands, and why having the medium BAB and d8s is good since you won't always have that eidolon handy at full health.

Checked the lists of messages, but couldn't find this.

Dismissal will get rid of the Eidolon.

Would Dispel Magic do the same as it is a summoned creature?

And if so, what is the effective spell level it has to try to dispel?

I am pretty positive I read in the rules or in a post that Dispel Magic would not work but Dismissal and/or Banishment would.

mdt wrote:

QOShea wrote:

The eiodolon SHOULD be spending the majority of the time in the material plane. It has no duration. Granted, if it looks like a horror from beyond, you are going to have serious roleplaying penalties when it comes to interacting with the NPC's who shoot first and sort the bodies later.

But that is the price you pay for pet sitting for Cthulu.

I'm going to quote this back to you when you get upset because the swamp villagers fired a volley of arrows at your pet green dragon eidelon rather than welcoming you in with curious stares.

Eh... your Eidolon is intelligent and pretty tough, you have a telepathic bond with it and you can teleport it into an adjacent square past 6th level. You park him in a nice forest grove outside the village and he is available as a standard action with makers call.

It's pretty safe to say most Eidolons are spending 99% of their time on the material plane past 6th level. Prior to that? Maybe you have a point but I think most players are going to keep them handy. The telepathic bond makes it quite easy to stash them and call them or get to them in need.

As I understand the rule though even with Maker's Call the eidolon has to be within 100 feet of the summoner to not lose hit points. At least I would definitely rule it that way. Maker's call is nice but I don't read that as replacing the proximity requirement for hit point strength of the eidolon.

What really gets me is people focus heavily on making the huge monstrous eidolons with hoopty abilities and say they are overpowered. Many of the problems raised seem to be based on ideal situations where 1) the summoner has his/her eidolon hanging out, and 2) the summoner is prepared for the combat.

I can say it is incredibly rare that our characters find ourselves in a situation where we know exactly when a combat is going to happen within minutes and have time to buff up. Only spells I ever cast ahead of time are hour per level duration spells. Most of the time it is a situation where everyone makes perception rolls and if you are lucky you are not surprised in the round and at least have the opportunity to act.

Now I would really like to see the people coming up with these monstrosities wander into a city with their eidolons. Even better, what if you are in a city-based campaign? Many of these power builds with dragon-like or demonic looking creatures just are not feasible to be walking around with.

So when your party gets ambushed in the city, the summoner is now subject to the it would take a minute to summon their eidolon. Of course by that point the combat is either done, or close to it. And that would be if the summoner decided they were goign to try and sit there and summon and hope no one attacks them (like that would happen).

I can tell you my first action in that situation is not to use the summon monster SLA. It would be cast Invisibility (or greater Invis if high enough level) so I don't get smacked. Then maybe I would cast a summon monster SLA. Or maybe use battlefield control spells. I just don't see the viability of sitting and summoning moster after monster. That is just plain silly in a party in my opinion. I would rather throw up some walls or take a few archery feats and plink away while greater invised. Which is why the d8's and medium BAB are good things for this class.

Let's be honest here, any wizard or cleric worth their salt can buff up the party, prepare the right attack/defense spells, and cast summon spells for any prepared combat where they know the foe can dictate the location of the fight and wipe the floor with any opponent. The reality is that is rare.

Yes if a summoner were to throw out summon monster after summon monster it slows down game time. I have almost never come across a scenario where that is really practical.

One other thing on eidolons is I think they should get treated like a paladin's mount or the animal companions in that they could wear magical armor or even weapons (if they have hands), but items like rings, boots, necklaces, headbands, etc really shouldn't be available. Otherwise, everyone would want a biped so they could load up on magic items to make super-buff eidolons. I also think it opens up to many issues with I could put horseshoes of speed on a quadruped if it had hooves. But if it is a cat or dog type...uh booties...right. But my biped, boots of speed yep give me those. That's not right in my opinion.