Taja the Barbarian's page

Behold the kit in question.

1.

Class Skills wrote:

A constructed pugilist gains Craft (weapons) as a class skill.

This alters the brawler’s class skills.

This is stupid, isn't it? Brawlers get Craft as a class skill anyway, so what's the point of this aside from needlessly threatening compatibility with some other Brawler kits? Seems like there should be errata for this.

Technically, this change is unnecessary, but it does emphasize the importance of this particular sub-skill for the archetype (for rebuilding their Constructed Arm feature).

2.

Constructed Limb wrote:

She treats attacks with this limb as unarmed strikes that gain all the benefits of the brawler’s unarmed strike class feature.

My question here is, what happens if this is paired with a kit like Exemplar or Venomfist that loses or adulterates the standard Brawler's Unarmed Strike feature? Is it stuck with piddly damage, or does this effectively provide the full feature?

Offhand, I'd guess the "Constructed Arm" feature is supposed to modify the "Unarmed Strike" class feature (note that this archetype feature doesn't officially modify or replace any baseline class feature), which would make your question moot.

Unfortunately, we are long past the point when PF1 was supported, so you're not going to get any new official errata or rulings.

Oh, and this is an ARCHETYPE, not a 'kit'...

Hi all,

Can you tell me how to calculate the damage for a spell cast by a 20th level / Archmage Tier 6 Magus:

20th CL mythic chain lightning that has the effects "channel energy" (mythic 6th tier Archmage ability), the Empowered Magic Magus arcana and the Maximize Magic magus arcana?

Thank you!

As I recall, the rule on Maximize is that it only maximizes the base spell damage and not the 'Empowered' portion, so what you'd probably end up with is:

Lord Fyre wrote:

Taason the Black wrote:

While there are many Pathfinder rules that do not make a lot of sense to me, none is worse imho than the rule that all paladins have to be LG. With that said, it is impossible to be a paladin of Cayden Cailean since his alignment chart is CG, NG, CN.

The actually concept of paladin is holy warrior for a deity, not some overzealous policeman upholding the law. For that you have hellknights.

Is there a workaround for this or does PF throw its hands in the air and just say not all good aligned deities have paladins?

Given the way that Paizo changed Paladins in 2nd Edition, they agree with this idea.

Gray Paladin exists in PF1

Source Ultimate Intrigue pg. 69

Gray paladins have discovered that in a world of intrigue, a strict code of honor hinders their options. Their divergence from the paladin’s normal code still drains them, but somehow, they have found a way to avoid losing all of their powers.

Alignment: A gray paladin can be lawful good, lawful neutral, or neutral good, though she must still follow a lawful good, neutral good, or lawful neutral deity.

This alters the paladin’s alignment restrictions.
...

Any deity that has Gray Paladin worshipers always could have had 'normal' paladin worshipers as well...

What if I want to do the warpriest build but as a human? Also don’t want to dump my strength into the pits? It should be viable from 1st level as well. I noticed that a 1st level Ranger character that I made was packing over 69 pounds of gear. Very close to being a medium load. If your strength is 16. Eight strength is way less.

Point buys only stretch so far, and high-dex builds can generally get away with light equipment loads until they eventually get some magic bags.

If you go with the (excellent option of) warpriest, you might as well use kukri for their 18-20 crit range. You no longer care that they're 1d3 weapons. At 11th level you can take Improved Critical for a 15-20 crit range.

And if by luck you have a witch who takes the fortune hex then your crits skyrocket (one combat per day). Boring math below:

18-20 range means an 85% if not getting a crit. 85% * 85% = 72%, that is you have a 72% chance of *not* getting a crit on either roll, and hence a 28% chance of getting a crit.

15-20 means 70% * 70% = 49% chance of *not* getting a crit on either roll. That's right, 51% of the time you crit.

Cheers

Just to clarify, you are talking about chances of a Critical Threat rather than an actual critical hit: You still need to confirm the crit, which will be hamstrung a bit by the Warpriest's 3/4 BAB.

Back when we ran through (most of) Wrath of the Righteous, one person played a Tempered Champion Paladin of Tanagaar for full BAB big damage dice Kukri fun.

...

But, more generally, I've always wondered a bit why high level shape shifting type characters aren't able to become fully powered versions of the creatures they can become, like dragons. When you're high enough level to surpass a creature's CR, shouldn't you be able to just be that creature? Or is my understanding of the theory not matching the actual mechanics at those levels?

Because that's been done in the past and it didn't work out well...

Past the early levels in D&D3.0, a caster could match a martial build in melee combat with a handful of spell and/or class buffs, leading players to ask 'why play a fighter when I could play a CoDZilla* instead?' Each evolution of the game since then has been dialing the casters back so they can't easily fill every role in a party at the same time.

*CoD being 'Cleric or Druid' who both had a strong chassis and powerful buffs that kinda made the fighter obsolete.

A fundamental item you are missing is that CR is not based on a single character's power but rather against a whole party of characters for just a single encounter. An NPC dragon's breath weapon is balanced against getting one or two uses before it dies or flees, while a PC Dragon's breath weapon needs to be balanced against being used once or twice per encounter.

Throw in the fact that the PC doesn't actually lose their other abilities (casters still have their spell slots) and shapeshifting spells/abilities become an overpowering option really quickly...

Baseline, such an item would be a Standard Action to activate. In theory, you could build such an item (at greatly increased cost) using a Quickened version of the spell and only require an immediate action to activate, but you would still be limited to one such activation per round.

Keep in mind that Unwitting Ally does offer a Will Save to negate, and a baseline cantrip from a magic item would only be DC10 (or DC12 for the quickened version) to resist, which seems like something your PCs would laugh at if a level 8 foe is considered reasonable...

'Taja the Barbarian' was my first Pathfinder character...and probably my second and third as well: I had finally reached the conclusion that my college friends just weren't going to be able to get together enough to hold a campaign together now that we were dispersed into the real world, so I should create a character that worked 'right out of the box' rather than something that took a few levels to come online (unlike one friend who often built characters around prestige classes that he rarely qualified when the campaign was abandoned). This turned out to be a fairly wise idea, as I created 'Taja the Barbarian' three separate times (twice in Sandpoint for APs, and once as a PFS character) and I believe she only managed to hit 3rd level once...

As for the name Taja, I certainly stole it from somewhere, and her general background (exiled from her home for killing her father) was largely inspired by seeing the 'Mark of the Kinslayer' in a Scarred Lands setting book.

Taja did actually achieve her 'Final Form' as 'Taja the Half-Elf Urban Bloodrager (with a dip into 'Fractured Mind' Spiritualist)' when we ran the last PF1 Runelord AP online a little while back: This time, I built her because the GM wanted us to start with a level in an NPC class and planned on resetting our characters to 1st level after running a prequel adventure, and the rest of the party (swashbuckler, rogue, cleric, alchemist, and bard) was looking pretty ineffective at first level (the NPC level idea was actually dropped during the reset). She is the only character of mine that has actually managed to finish a PF1 AP ('Electra the Oracle' came close, but apparently no one else was keen on actually playing the final module in Wrath of the Righteous, and I have hope that Mia the Evil Mesmerist will complete Hell's Vengeance, but that campaign is on hold at the moment). She turned out to be a strong 'all rounder' character with strong melee ability, some nice spell buffs, and some of the highest Diplomacy, Perception, and Sense Motive skills in the party despite only having an 8 Wisdom and 12 Charisma...

I would start with the level of ranger for first. That will give you better HP and proficiency in martial weapons. It also gives you the option of taking power attack at 1st level, which the druid cannot do because of the BAB prerequisite. Druids do not have any restrictions on what weapons they can use other than not having proficiency in many weapons. Having access to good weapons until you wild shape comes online will make surviving the early levels much easier.

This will also mean when you gain your animal companion at 5th level (4th level druid) you will be able to take boon companion. If you take 4 levels of druid first, you still cannot take boon companion until 5th level. If you do not have boon companion when you gain your animal companion from the animal doming it will probably have around 9 HP and a 17 AC, if you have boon companion, it will probably have around 22 HP and an AC of 20. The first level companion at 4th level will be a liability instead of a benefit. This assume you are taking the animal domain. If you are not taking the animal domain, boon companion is probably not worth taking.

The OP is actually starting play at 10th level, so the effectiveness of the build at any earlier level is largely academic (though starting with a level of ranger is probably wise for the tiny boost in HP).

Honestly, I think I'd probably just go with the actual Animal Companion class feature rather than the Animal domain: The domain benefits don't seem particularly good for the -3 level adjustment to the Animal Companion, even if you can offset this with a feat.

I don't have a lot of personal experience with animal companions, but I'm under the impression that they typically lag behind when you hit double digit levels as their BAB is only slightly better than a Wizard, so I'm not certain if a Huge companion will be worth the complications it will likely bring (it will literally take up a huge amount of space on the map and will have issues in narrow hallways).

1) Use intimidate on the bad guys. Giving them a -2 to hit, skills, and saves is a decent debuff.

...

The -4 size penalty on Intimidate checks against foes larger than you makes this a bit problematic for a halfling or other small character: The Taunt feat will probably work better and probably save you a skill...

One real-world concept you might want to familiarize yourself with (if you aren't already) is 'Heir Presumptive' as it a kinda similar concept:

The Heir Presumptive is the someone who is currently set to inherit but could be expected to reasonably lose that position: If my older brother were Duke and had no children, I'd be the Heir Presumptive until such time as he has a legitimate child, who would become the Heir Apparent and I'd be in line after that child (and any other legitimate children my brother might have, and any of their children in turn, etc.).

In a fantasy world, there would probably be a 'statute of limitations' on resurrections where if they occur after a certain point, any inheritances aren't legally required to be undone (though they might be if the current holder of title and/or property is willing): If you wait 100 years to resurrect a King, he's legally not actually the King when he returns. Death would probably be considered similar to an abdication of some sort: If resurrected, you're alive, but you someone else now holds your position and you have no legal right to your old title.

In fact, there might be a specific title-modifier for such a person to make clear they once held the position (and are due a certain amount of respect accordingly) but no longer do (like 'Pope Emeritus' in the real world).

One thing to note is that Fleet Charge takes a swift action, as does entering a combat style stance: This makes getting a full attack off with Dragon Style even more difficult in Mythic (assuming you aren't running solo and no one teleports you into melee, your partymates will kill most foes before you can get a full attack off). I was originally looking at using Jabbing Style, but that just doesn't work in mythic rocket tag with the swift action crunch: If there is a way around this issue, I'm not familiar with it (styles aren't really my area of expertise).

A Master of Many Styles Monk can activate 4 style stances as a free action at level 15+, but I assume this won't make up for the loss of Flurry attacks. I suppose you could go Greater Two-Weapon Fighting + Double Slice but that's an awful lot of feats...

I ran some numbers the other day and was coming up with an average DPR that was pushing 500hp, and that's just using the basics (Large size with 50 Strength, Mythic Power Attack, +6 enhancement bonus to attack/damage, normal and greater weapon focus and specialization feats, Mythic Heroism, and Pummeling Charge). This is also without taking potential crits into account.

500 DAMAGE PER ROUND.

Most of the published CR20+ mythic foes simply won't survive a single full attack routine like this, which means using maneuvers will typically just drag the fight out for no good reason...

First off, this thread should really be in the Advice forum: I've flagged it to be moved (I assume this is what Azothath's post is supposed to be communicating).

Secondly, are you actually creating a level 20 tier 10 character, or is this a character that will play from level 1 to level 20 tier 10? If you are starting at level 1, are you playing the actual Wrath of the Righteous AP or something home-built?

Thirdly, in my limited experience with Mythic, you are probably better off just pummeling your foe to death: Mythic play is rocket-tag on steroids, and if your foe actually gets a chance to act, you probably did something very wrong...

Finally, combat maneuvers are generally just a bad idea as they tend to fall into one of the following categories with very little space in between:
Completely worthless, as your foes are just immune or otherwise unimpeded (disarming a natural attacker or tripping a flying creature) - or -
Completely overpowered, as your foes are unable to fight effectively once you use them (disarming a foe who is built around a specific weapon, or grappling a low strength caster who wasn't built with a decent escape option).

Either way, maneuvers rarely make the game 'more fun' overall...

There may be specific rules about this that I just haven't come across but it seems like this kind of thing happens often in adventuring media but it doesn't seem like there are clear rules for how to handle this in game.

There is more than one PC in this situation in my game, but for simplicities sake let's just say it's one PC.

The PC is sleeping, no armor or weapons within reach, but their gear is in the same room. They are awoken to find that a group of enemies has surrounded them and one of them has a blade at the PCs throat. The PC is utterly outnumbered.

First of all, its not clear to me whether this PC should be considered helpless or not. They do seem to be "completely at an opponent’s mercy", but not in such a way that would allow for the enemy to, for example, spend a full round to coup de grace them.

Flat footed, on the other hand, just doesn't seem right either. It doesn't seem to appropriately reflect the disadvantage the PC is at relative to their opponents.

So, how screwed is this PC? How would you rule this? Maybe if the PC tries to get away the enemy gets an auto crit but not a coup de grace?

Hopefully I haven't simply overlooked rules that address cases like this specifically but if I have I'd be happy to learn about them.

Thanks!

The simple fact is this sort of encounter just doesn't work in a Hit Point based system and should just be avoided in actual play...

Not really my area of expertise, but I'd consider scaling the uses and speed boost by level as well: 30' bonus to speed 10/day with free action activation is a really strong item all by itself.

Maybe something along the lines of:
Stage 1: +10' Speed for one round (level/day [max 10])
Stage 2: +20' Speed, +1 AC & +1 Reflex Saves for one round (level/day [max 10])
Stage 3: +30' Speed, +1 AC, +1 Reflex Saves & +1 Attack for one round (level/day [max 10])
Stage 4: Haste (level/day [max 10])

Honestly, the summon being ignored isn’t the worst, if you are helping set up flanks. But also, is it worth a 5th level spell to give someone a flanking buddy?

If flanking is your goal, a much lower level summon can almost certainly get the job done without spending a MP on the templates.

Alternately, you can send your companion in to flank.

If you really need a tough flanker, a Spiritual Ally from the party Cleric is significantly faster to cast, uses a much less valuable spell slot, and basically can't be killed (except by SR, which might be an issue)...

...

As to the summoning Hunters get all summon natures ally spells without having to choose them. It really does not take a lot of normal feats to boost those. About all they really need is two feats. Augmented Summoning (and spell focus conjuration). Being able to add a mythic template to an animal will improve its combat ability. Both these templates allow the creature an additional full attack. Agile gives Dual Initiative which gives it two turns each round, Savage gives it Feral Savagery which means it gets two full attacks. A savage Dire Lion with augmented summoning will be something that is not tough to ignore.

With a one round cast time, if anything is still alive for a summoned creature to actually attack, it's either a fight where no one else felt like spending MPs, or your party has done something really wrong*

*Seriously, our party's gunslinger literally obliterated a Vrock in the second module (I think) before anyone else even had a chance to act: He got lucky with crits, but there was no way it was going to survive long enough to actually act, and we were playing with watered-down mythic rules**
**Our GM ran it for a different group with full mythic rules and claims he only got to actually roll for the NPCs 2 or 3 times in the entirety of the last two modules.

Also, remember your summons will still have to deal with demonic DR, which will be extremely common. This DR is a bit of a joke for martial characters since they just need to gear up with cold iron holy weapons (which are plentiful), but your under-level (due to your reduced spell progression) summons will likely have a hard time.

A base CR5 Dire Lion isn't available to a Hunter until 13th level (using a 5th level spell slot) with base attack bonuses of +12/+13 and 1d8+7/1d6+7 damage, which is upgraded to +14/+15 attack and 1d8+9/1d6+9 damage with the Augmented Summons feat bonus. The mythic templates add some defense and extra attacks, but don't seem to actually improve attack or actual damage per attack (beyond the minor bleed damage from Savage).

A mundane CR14 Nalfeshnee is AC 29, 203hp, and DR 10/Good, which means your Lion will arrive late, miss with 70%/65% of attacks, and only do 0-7/0-5 hp of damage.

If that doesn't scream "IGNORE ME" to a level appropriate demon, I don't know what would...

A gambling addiction is fairly incompatible with an adventuring career as the game assumes a certain wealth level: Losing all your wealth (including gear) past the lowest of levels will seriously impair your adventuring, while a 'winning streak' will leave you with too much wealth (until you lose it all, of course).

Realistically, PC wealth past the earliest levels is typically so ridiculously high that it would take forever to actually go broke as few people can afford to wagers hundreds or thousands of gold pieces against you...

The best option for pulling off a perpetually broke character would probably be a back-rank caster character (Pyschic would probably be best, but Bard should work fine if you really want to follow the "Knight's Tale" inspiration).

The actual addiction might be played out as a simple series of 'double or nothing' d20 rolls against the GM (with the assumption that the 'nothing' will catch up with the PC after a few rolls at most)...

Level 5 Mythic Hunter Spell Options:
Baleful Polymorph: Strong option, but probably better for a full caster.
Cure Critical Wounds: Again, you are getting this option really late.
Fire Snake: Weakened by Fire Resistance, but 1d10 per CL might be enough to be effective. Still would probably work best on a caster-focused build to get the Save DC reasonably high.
Geniekind: The duration in rounds is a real detriment here
Stoneskin [Material]: Saving throw bonuses and Fortification(Moderate) effects seem nice.
Wall of Fire: By the time you get this, it's unlikely to actually damage anything, even with the mythic boost.
Wall of Thorns: Probably not great for rocket-tag. Unlikely to do much damage, but the grapple effect might work well.

Level 6 Mythic Hunter Spell Options:
Fire Seeds: It's fire: Enough said.
Move Earth: Seems situational.
Repel Wood: Extremely situational, and such situations are unlikely to involve your Demonic foes...
Wall of Stone: If you already like to throw normal walls of stone around, the mythic version is probably nice.

Baleful Polymorph, Fire Snake and Stoneskin seem like the strongest options here.

Final conclusion:
Mythic Spellcasting actually seems fairly weak for Hunters: The have a handful of nice options, but nothing really awesome. To be fair, though, fighting evil outsiders really isn't their strong point to start with...

Level 3 Mythic Hunter Spell Options:
Battle Trance [Half-Orc]: Nice if you are melee-focused
Burrow: The Augmented version leaving a tunnel for the rest of the party is nice, but kinda specialized...
Call Lightning: Lightning damage is generally really weak, and the one round casting time is too slow...
Companion Mind Link: Sounds nice, but only if you want your companion something your GM doesn't feel is normal...
Contagion: It's evil (literally)
Cup of Dust: More of a 'long term debuff' than a good rocket-tag spell.
Cure Moderate Wounds: Kinda weak for a 3rd level spell option.
Daylight: Nice long-term buff, but not particularly powerful.
Hydraulic Torrent: Fire/Cold damage tends to be underwhelming.
Magic Fang, Greater: Sounds nice, but Demonic DR typically needs Cold Iron (or a 'real' +3 enhancement bonus) and/or Holy to pierce, neither of which this spell can grant.
Named Bullet: The regular version is a great 'rocket-tag nuke' option if you pre-cast a handful of these for a strong archer. The baseline mythic version increases the crit multiplier by one, which is only good if the archer hasn't already buffed it.
Stone Shape: Kinda a niche spell option.
Vermin Shape I: If you are built for fighting while polymorphed, this seems decent.
Waters of Lamashtu [M]: Kinda inappropriate for the campaign.

Named Bullet strikes me as the best option here, though only if your archer doesn't already have a x4 crit multiplier...

Level 4 Mythic Hunter Spell Options:
Arboreal Hammer: Kinda dependent on being near a tree...
Cape of Wasps: Greatly limited by poison-immune foes, and the enlarged size might impact the rest of your party. Too short of a duration for rocket-tag.
Cure Serious Wounds: Getting this kinda late for it to be really useful.
Dispel Magic: Probably best left to full casters.
Flame Strike: Still weakened by Fire Resistance, but better than any other fire/cold damage spell we've seen so far. Probably only worthwhile with a full caster build.
Giant Vermin: I doubt the DR granted will be particularly helpful by the time you get this spell, though the templates might be nice.
Ice Storm: Cold damage tends to be weak against outsiders, and all the terrain debuffs will likely hurt your party more than your foes...
Shield of the Dawnflower [Sarenrae]: Fire damage tends to be weak against outsiders, and the short duration means you'll need to cast it each fight, which is typically a waste of a round...
Spike Stones: Kinda weak damage for how late you get this spell, even with the mythic boost.
True Form: Very niche...
Vermin Shape II: Nice if you are built for this.

Not seeing any really strong options here...

My immediate thoughts on low level mythic hunter spells

Level 1 Mythic Hunter Spell Options:
Anticipate Peril: Mythic characters generally don't need more bonuses to Initiative
Call Animal: Not certain how this spell (mythic or normal) is particularly useful...
Cure Light Wounds: More healing is never bad, but still doesn't seem particularly good.
Endure Elements: Changing this spell to 'caster level targets' and adding Fire Resist 5 and Cold Resist 5 is actually kinda nice with its 24 hour duration.
Entangle: Could be nice, but might harm your party mates if you don't coordinate well.
Faerie Fire: Dazzled isn't very good for a MP expenditure. Blinded is better with the augmented version, but even more costly to cast.
Goodberry: Kinda weak for the MP cost, and the augmented version is somewhat hampered by your limited number of spell slots.
Hydraulic Push: Fire/Cold damage tends to be underwhelming in a campaign full of evil outsiders.
Know the Enemy: Could be pretty useful with its long duration.
Magic Fang: Could be a nice buff for your companion (if it has multiple natural attacks).
Mighty Fist of the Earth [Oread]: Normal or mythic, this is pretty weak without some sort of boost to your unarmed damage.
Obscuring Mist: Size and range boosts generally aren't that useful.
Resist Energy: The base resistance scales up so well that the saving throw bonus probably isn't that useful. Granting resistance to an adjacent ally might be nice.
Sun Metal: Fire damage is generally pretty weak against evil outsiders.

Level 2 Mythic Hunter Spell Options:
Animal Aspect: Not a particularly great base spell, but adding a +2 size bonus to a stat makes it better
Barkskin: Nice DR
Burning Gaze: Fire damage is fairly weak.
Chill Metal: Cold damage and 'damage over time' are both weak.
Feast of Ashes: Too slow for 'rocket-tag' fights.
Flame Blade: Again, fire damage is weak.
Fog Cloud: Typically, size really doesn't matter here.
Gust of Wind: Kind of a specialized spell to start with...
Heat Metal: Fire damage and 'Damage over Time' are both weak.
Pernicious Poison: Too many 'immune to poison' foes
Pox Pustules: Adding weak damage to a weak debuff spell is still weak.
Ricochet Shot: Duration in rounds makes the base spell really weak in rocket-tag fights.
Spider Climb: Nice in theory, but probably weak in actual use.
Summon Swarm: One Round casting time is a major drawback here.
Unshakable Chill: Cold damage is often weak against outsiders.

The spells that look good to me are probably Endure Elements and Barkskin, though I don't recall how well DR/magic will hold up for Barkskin...

Remember that a hunter is a spontaneous caster, so they can only take the mythic version of a spell they already know, which will greatly limit the initial options: Your friend should review the mythic options for their current spells and see if they actually sound good or not. Mythic Spellcasting might be an option that will just work better if they delay taking it until a later tier when their spells known list is more appropriate.

The other thing to keep in mind is these spells will cost MP to use, so play style / party role will be important here: Every MP you spend on a mythic spell is one you can't spend on feats or other abilities, which might be rough for a hybrid class.

Potential options can be reviewed at https://www.aonprd.com/SpellsCustom.aspx:
Select 'Hunter' for Class
Set the 'Level (Max)' to 2 (which is the most power spell this hunter probably has).
Check the 'Includes Mythic Version' box

One final thing to keep in mind is that Mythic Play is basically rocket tag, so any option that takes more than a round to fully come into play (like Heat Metal or Flame Blade) or requires you to act before the rest of the party (like a short duration buff) will often be wasted...

This is mainly a balance issue: Increasing your size is already a significant combat buff for martials (typically gaining reach and damage for an AC loss), and having it boost your speed as well would just make it an even stronger option...

Merry and Pippen just getting picked up by the Urak-hai at the end of Fellowship of the Ring was probably the most realistic portrayal I've seen of the importance of size, but it doesn't really make for a good game, so they sacrificed the 'realism' to make a 'generally better' game.

This is going to depend on how the GM interprets “You can cast any spell.” If you it grants you the ability to cast any spell in the game from any list, it is better than almost anything in the game. If you are limited to casting from your own spell list it is still good, but probably not better than some of the capstones.

Yeah, this is a significant point: How your GM rules 'any spell' is intended (along with how well you personally know all the spells in existence) will greatly impact the actual power of the Secret of Magical Discipline feat.

That being said, you can start taking this feat by ninth level, which means you'll get to use it for over half your adventuring career before any capstone option could come into play, so it's a really strong contender in my mind regardless of the GM's ruling (assuming you don't need the feat slots for anything else, of course).

Would a level 20 wizard benefit more from a alternate capstone like gaining an arch familiar or like a +8 to int compared to taking a level in lore master so he can take some secrets of magical discipline feats? I can’t decide so maybe you all can share some opinions?

Generally speaking, most characters don't actually reach level 20, and those who do generally don't play for very long after reaching this point, which means the capstones don't actually come into play that often.

If you do actually play for a while at 20, it's all going to depend on what you want for your character: You are already a 20th level caster, so capstones and prestige class bonuses are really just gravy...

I found that I made a mistake in my top post. I made an effort to remove all mention of arcane and I missed one. My intent was to make these rings work for all casters.

As for the price, I was considering increasing it by another 50% (2000 gp). The proposal of 12k for a type 1 by Azothath seemed a bit too much.

I'm also not sure if Azothath intended to keep the double spell slots with the rings. I was going for finite number of spells, not doubling the base spell slots of every arcane spellcasting class you had. You can get a lot of 1st level spells if you multiclass enough.

@Taja I haven't heard about what you think of the rings aside from thinking Azothath prices were too high. What are your thoughts?

Considering the Ring of Mysticism also exists, I wouldn't worry about boosting the prices because just because any caster can use it.

Looking at Azothath's suggested prices again, it kinda seems more like an effort to come up with the 'formula' behind the official prices (with the 1st level ring being significantly off but the others being within 10% or so) than establishing what these rings should actually cost....

In order to effectively compete with Runestones (which work for all spontaneous casters), the base pricing should be along the lines of:
[Spell Slot Level]^2 * 1,000g * [Number of Spell Slots Granted]

Assuming a ring grants 4 extra spell slots, that means 4,000g for a 1st level ring, 16,000g for a 2nd level ring, 36,000g for a 3rd level ring, and 64,000g for a 4th level ring.

Honestly, I still think that Runestones/Pearls are the better option as you can start getting them earlier (when those spell slots are most important) and they never become truly obsolete (A level 1 ring should eventually be unequipped in favor of a better ring, but you can 'equip' your Runestones/Pearls forever even if you don't actually use them most days)

I do have to admit that my 'nearly 4th level' Mesmerist would be sorely tempted to spend her 4k gold 'life savings' on a 'four level 1 slots' ring if one became available before a Headband of Alluring Charisma does...

1) the ring works for any arcane caster.

Yes, prepared casters need to use pearls, but those function just differently enough that I'm trying to avoid using them in this comparison.

2) Runestone cost = 200% Pearl of power cost. Both are slotless.

Yep, making your rings comparatively more expensive for prepared casters than they are for spontaneous casters, as long as you accept their limitations (which you often can without significant issue).

3) Runestone only work for spontaneous casters.

Is it the way it works? Are Spontaneous slots that much more valuable? hmmm...

I'm guessing (and it is just a guess) that most of the extra cost for a runestone is the fact that it doesn't cost you an extra standard action to use.

4) MY base calculation for values of these things.

Yes, you can price items however you like, but pricing them so high that most people will just ignore their existence (like the official versions) kinda just wastes your time...

5) The ring takes up a slot. Ring slots are common so you keep it through most polymorphs.

The finger that bears this ring is a finger that can't bear another ring, and there are a lot of good ring options out there.

• Yes, you do keep the ring's effects while polymorphed, which is a plus, but
• No, if your ring actually stays 'out' while polymorphed, you probably have your unslotted items available as well.

6) 4 or 6 Spl slots [ring] is better than 1 Spl slot [none].

But '1 Spl slot [none]' * 4 is better (and generally still cheaper) than '4 or 6 Spl slots [ring]', particularly if you disregard the 4th level versions as you suggest. You kinda seem to be under the impression that you can only have one copy of a specific Runestone at a time, which is not the case...

Just looking at the level 1 versions combined with the 'Wealth By Level' and 'Purchasing Magic Items' guidelines:

• Individual Pearls of Power are craftable at 3rd level, affordable by 3rd level, and can be purchased in Small Towns.
• Individual Runestones of Power are craftable at 3rd level, affordable by 3rd or 4th level, and can be purchased in Large Towns.
• Your version of the Ring of Wizardry is craftable at 7th level, affordable at 6th or 7th level, and can only be purchased in a Metropolis.

The real test would be to survey people playing actual arcane casters and ask which of the following options their character would go for:

• No extra slot items (by the time your rings are available, you probably don't really need the extra slots),
• Pearls/Runestones (being cheaper, available earlier, allowing you to add just one or two slots rather than 'four or none', and leaving that ring slot open for other options, or
• Your version of the Ring of Wizardry.

now that I'm tinkering; change that to

Ring of Wizardry: [ring] ⌈1.25{any arcane}*(NmbrSlot^1.16)*2000*(SplLvl^1.5), 100⌉gp to grant up to 4 spell slots to any arcane caster up to Fourth spell level. A user must wear the ring one day to attune the ring before he gains the benefit. A ring loses its attunement to a wearer after 1 minute of loss or 1 hour of doffed possession(such as taking it off but keeping it in a pocket, this includes magic jar and similar effects).
This item does not accumulate(stack) with other slotted items that grant spell slots at the same spell level. ;^)

Req: Forge Ring, able to cast the number of slots of the spell level to be granted by the ring.
by Azothath

First: 4 slots (arcane) $12500.
Second: 4 slots (arcane) $35400.
Third: 4 slots (arcane) $64900.
Fourth: 4 slots (arcane) $99900.
I worked out the other variants and it looked good. I'll probably repost this!

First off, the 'no stacking' rule is not good when you are effectively competing against an 'easier to acquire' (with their low cost, individual runestones will likely be available long before your rings are) 'fully stacking' slotless item.

The fundamental issue with your pricing is how it compares to the equivalent Runestone costs (all percentages are rough, and reversing the 'unslotted' adjustment includes applying the 'additional power' +50% for each stone past the first):

• Runestone of Power [1st] = 2,000g * 4 = 8,000g vs your 12,500g ring (+50% Cost, or +125% after reversing the 'unslotted' adj).
• Runestone of Power [2nd] = 8,000g * 4 = 32,000g vs your 35,400g ring (+10% Cost, or +50% after reversing the 'unslotted' adj).
• Runestone of Power [3rd] = 18,000g * 4 = 72,000g vs your 64,900g ring (-10% Cost, or +30% after reversing the 'unslotted' adj).
• Runestone of Power [4th] = 32,000g * 4 = 128,000g vs your 99,900g ring (-25% Cost, or +10% after reversing the 'unslotted' adj).

Basically, spontaneous casters will just pretend these rings don't exist (like everyone does with the official versions) and prepared casters will likely make do with their even cheaper (though more limited) pearls...

normally rings run 150% Wondrous Item cost

How are you coming up with this? The Ring of Protection definately doesn't have a 150% modifier in its pricing, nor does the Ring of Climbing and the like.

Note that for a Prepared Caster:
A Pearl of Power operates on command (requiring a standard action) and only refreshes a specific used prepared spell, allowing you to cast that specific spell a second time in a subsequent round. As such, they are typically used between fights.

A Ring of Wizardry, on the other hand, requires no action to activate and can be used to prepare an completely different set of spells in the new spell slots it provides. Even if you decide to prepare multiples of the same spell, you don't have to take three rounds to cast two copies of the same 'standard action casting time' spell.

Basically, Pearls are cheaper, but much more limited than the Rings.

For a Spontaneous Caster:
A Runestone of Power and Ring of Wizardry function very similarly, providing extra spell slots without requiring extra actions. This 'not requiring an extra action' factor is presumably the major reason Runestones are more expensive than Pearls.
In theory, the ring would be superior if you have some ability that requires an open spell slot to use, but even then there is little reason not to use your Runestones before you start using your actual spell slots (unlike pearls, you don't need to use your actual spell slots first).
The one potential drawback of the Runestones is their 'An expended runestone of power recharges its capacity after 24 hours' restriction, but I'm guessing most tables will just assume it refreshes when you refresh your spells.

Ideally, a ring should be about half the price of a collection of Runestones providing the same number of slots (since it takes a specific item slot), but this will make your new rings really cheap (just 2,000g for a ring providing a pair of level 1 spontaneous spell slots)...

My personal 'Lawful Evil disconnect' is Ardad Lili* who has a 'make promises you have no intention of keeping' vibe going on ('Manipulate others with false promises' is literally an edict for her in PF2e).

I guess her 'use the lust of others against them, but don't be lustful yourself' is disciplined and therefore vaguely lawful, but the whole 'Manipulate others with false promises' really feels more Neutral or even Chaotic to me with its complete lack of honor (actual or imagined).

*Disclaimer: I'm currently playing Hell's Vengeance and picked this goddess for my NE Female Halfling Mesmerist, so I've looked into her a lot more than any of the other lawful and/or evil deities...

Yeah, this is basically D&D5e Bounded Accuracy System (where proficiency goes from +2 to +6 over 20 levels).

The major impacts would probably be:
A lot of work on your part to modify every creature the PC's encounter.
Some players being disappointed that they 'progress' so slowly (this is a significant 5e complaint).
Balance-wise, lower level foes should be more powerful and higher level foes will be a bit weaker as proficiencies all be in a +/- 1 point range, which will impact encounter design a bit with a lot of 'trash mobs' (now at a relative +2 attack and saves) possibly being more dangerous than the actual 'boss' (now likely at a relative -2 attack and saves).
HP and Damage Output will continue to be important, so you can't necessarily throw the PC party against foes outside the normal CR ranges and expect things to work well.

I know there is at least one other recent thread on this general idea in this forum, and I'm betting there are many more if you are willing to search a little bit...

Taja the Barbarian wrote:

Knicknevin wrote:

Hi

I can see earlier topics on this discussion but I'm still struggling to understand the wording used and would appreciate confirmation from rules team or a developer on the intended use of this ability please.

Fire at Will (Gunnery Phase, Push) You can fire any two starship weapons, regardless of their arc. Each attack is made at a –4 penalty.

I'm reading this as the gunner can attack an enemy with two weapons attached to the ship regardless of their arc. So I could attack a ship that is in the forward arc with weapons that are not in that arc (hence the regardless of arc text). However, elsewhere on this forum it's stated that it doesn't work that way, and it's would have to be two attacks into the arc those guns are positioned (which, to me, is not regardless of arc as you have to honour the arc placement).

The penalty is the same as a Full Attack so I can see how it might be thought to be that way, and most examples I see used are saying you can attack with a turret weapon and a weapon in the arc facing the enemy starship - but turrets already allow you to act regardless of arc so it's not really saying how this is regardless of arc.

I can also see this as escalation of difficulty for attacking into an arc - a normal attack from an arc to an enemy ship facing that arc is made at +0, a broadside attack has to be into the same arc but fires all weapons in that arc at -2, while Fire at Will allows 2 attacks regardless of arc at a -4.

Any official support on this would be appreciated.

I'm assuming this is a SF2 playtest question and flagging it to be transferred to an appropriate forum.

No, sorry this is a 1st edition question

Ah, so it is: It didn't look familiar, but we adopted the narrative starship combat rules pretty quickly...

My apologies.

If you can't find an official clarification on this, you are rather unlikely to get one now...

Hi

I can see earlier topics on this discussion but I'm still struggling to understand the wording used and would appreciate confirmation from rules team or a developer on the intended use of this ability please.

Fire at Will (Gunnery Phase, Push) You can fire any two starship weapons, regardless of their arc. Each attack is made at a –4 penalty.

I'm reading this as the gunner can attack an enemy with two weapons attached to the ship regardless of their arc. So I could attack a ship that is in the forward arc with weapons that are not in that arc (hence the regardless of arc text). However, elsewhere on this forum it's stated that it doesn't work that way, and it's would have to be two attacks into the arc those guns are positioned (which, to me, is not regardless of arc as you have to honour the arc placement).

The penalty is the same as a Full Attack so I can see how it might be thought to be that way, and most examples I see used are saying you can attack with a turret weapon and a weapon in the arc facing the enemy starship - but turrets already allow you to act regardless of arc so it's not really saying how this is regardless of arc.

I can also see this as escalation of difficulty for attacking into an arc - a normal attack from an arc to an enemy ship facing that arc is made at +0, a broadside attack has to be into the same arc but fires all weapons in that arc at -2, while Fire at Will allows 2 attacks regardless of arc at a -4.

Any official support on this would be appreciated.

I'm assuming this is a SF2 playtest question and flagging it to be transferred to an appropriate forum.

...

Wikipedia describes a ninja as having functions in infiltration, ambush, reconnaissance, and espionage. So these are points we can pivot on. I believe skirmishing would fall under the ambush aspect.

Here's the key problem with the entire class concept: Most of these functions just don't work well in a typical PC party because they fundamentally require you to leave 'non-ninja' party members behind and play solo...

Ninjas in most media tend to operate solo or with other ninjas, which is a fundamental issue with a group-based game like Pathfinder.

On a side note, skirmishing is probably a horrible idea for a Ninja as your foe running away from you and raising an alarm is probably your worst nightmare: You need to kill your foes quickly and quietly, which is basically infeasible in a hit point based game.

...

Fey Form 1:T4 (as it's a wizard base spell) is a rather expensive potion that exceeds Brew Potion RAW guidelines (SplLvl≤3 & personal spell). Fey Form 2:T6 is what you are talking about with +6 Dex (so wet noodle kudos to your GM for suggesting clearly illegal stuff). So get a Wand and use UMD, and a wand key ring if needed. Don't forget to tell the creator that you want to be a sprite or quickling so he sets the basic form in the wand(less guesswork). It'll be faster AND cheaper in the end. You will do tiny weapon damage as a tiny fey. Wand Fey Form 2:T6@11(=CstrLvl) [50] $49500. BUT....

Wands are limited to 4th level or lower spells, so you should never see a Wand of Fey Form II [alchemist 5, arcanist 6, druid 5, hunter 5, investigator 5, magus 6, shaman 5, sorcerer 6, witch 6, wizard 6]. If the GM is ignoring this limit, a Druid or Shaman could create one with a price of 33,750g (Spell Level 5 * CL 9 * 750g).

General Warning: Trying to mix actual physics or economics with game rules never works well.

Just a reminder of how tiny creatures work in melee combat (assuming you don't have a reach weapon like a Elven Branched Spear)*:

Source PRPG Core Rulebook pg. 194

Creatures smaller than Small or larger than Medium have special rules relating to position.

Tiny, Diminutive, and Fine Creatures: 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.
...

*RAW, even a reach weapon doesn't actually help you here (doubling your natural reach of 0' is still 0'), but I believe ruling that a tiny creature with a reach weapon has a 5' reach is fairly common...

Thank you all for your input. My GM just made clear to me, that he doesnt acually care how overpowered his ruling would make me....

...and i am off to maky fly-speed 60 30 DEX Killer-Sprite.

You really need to read the Polymorph rules and the Fey Form spells before moving forward: There is A LOT to study here...

Also, note that Tiny size Fey and Fly 60' both require Fey Form II or higher to achieve, which is a 5th or 6th level spell at best and puts it well out of potential potion range even if you ignore the personal spell limitation.

Hi,

i am currently playing a very combat-effective Rogue (12)/ Fighter (Weapon Master( (2), character. However, recent combats have shown that combat mobility is a bit of a problem, especially compared to our lvl 14 Fighter (Archer).

So i was thinking about how to travel over the battlefield more quickly and my GM suggested that simply use Fey Form potions, chose a tiny fey and be not only extremly fast but also considerably more effective in combat since +6 DEX is massive for a DEX-based rogue.

My GM is under the impression that you get to keep, and you use, your normal gear, attributes and HP even in fey form. Is that really the case?

If not, can you think about any other way to traverse the battlefield quickly without sacrificing the attack action in any given turn?

Source PRPG Core Rulebook

Definition Type Subschool
...
When you cast a polymorph spell that changes you into a creature of the animal, dragon, elemental, magical beast, plant, or vermin type, all of your gear melds into your body. Items that provide constant bonuses and do not need to be activated continue to function while melded in this way (with the exception of armor and shield bonuses, which cease to function). Items that require activation cannot be used while you maintain that form. While in such a form, you cannot cast any spells that require material components (unless you have the Eschew Materials or Natural Spell feat), and can only cast spells with somatic or verbal components if the form you choose has the capability to make such movements or speak, such as a dragon. Other polymorph spells might be subject to this restriction as well, if they change you into a form that is unlike your original form (subject to GM discretion). If your new form does not cause your equipment to meld into your form, the equipment resizes to match your new size.
...

Source PRPG Core Rulebook pg. 551

The creator of a potion needs a level working surface and at least a few containers in which to mix liquids, as well as a source of heat to boil the brew. In addition, he needs ingredients. The costs for materials and ingredients are subsumed in the cost for brewing the potion: 25 gp × the level of the spell × the level of the caster.

All ingredients and materials used to brew a potion must be fresh and unused. The character must pay the full cost for brewing each potion. (Economies of scale do not apply.) The imbiber of the potion is both the caster and the target. Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions. The creator must have prepared the spell to be placed in the potion (or must know the spell, in the case of a sorcerer or bard) and must provide any material component or focus the spell requires.
...

Source PRPG Core Rulebook pg. 197

When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.

When in doubt about whether two characters flank an opponent in the middle, trace an imaginary line between the two attackers’ centers. If the line passes through opposite borders of the opponent’s space (including corners of those borders), then the opponent is flanked.

Exception: If a flanker takes up more than 1 square, it gets the flanking bonus if any square it occupies counts for flanking.

Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus.

Creatures with a reach of 0 feet can’t flank an opponent.

If you are just looking for mobility, a simple potion of Fly would grant you a 60' Fly speed for 5 minutes...

Feats that grant extra uses of class abilities, like Extra Channel or Extra Rage, effectively grant the affected ability a pool of additional uses each day. If you have levels in multiple classes that have the same ability (or abilities that are counted as others for the purposes of meeting feat prerequisites, like the skald's raging song counting as bardic performance), this single pool applies to all those abilities together, and doesn't grant extra uses to each one separately. You may spend this pool of uses each day on any of these abilities in whatever manner you choose.

For example, if you have levels in both barbarian and bloodrager and you take the Extra Rage feat, you gain 6 extra rounds that you can either use to rage or bloodrage or split between the two. The feat does not give both an extra 6 rounds of rage and 6 rounds of bloodrage—it gives you exactly 6 rounds each day that you can use for either one of these abilities. One day, you might use 4 of these rounds for rage and 2 on bloodrage; the next day, you might use 3 on each.

Mysterious Stranger wrote:

The big problem with the paladin is your deity’s alignment is chaotic good and as a paladin you must be lawful good. Since Diving Fighting Style has a prerequisite of matching your deity’s alignment you do not qualify for it and the whole build falls apart. Even if that were not the case the conflict between your alignment and your deity’s is likely to cause problems. What do you do when the paladin’s code conflicts with the code of your deity? ...

Divine anthology (which AoN uses) changed the alignment prerequisite to just worship a deity with a fighting style.

...

Per the general interpretation*, worshipers of Desna still need to be Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, or Chaotic Neutral to get any mechanical benefit, while a Paladin (Divine Hunter) needs to be Lawful Good.

Even the Grey Paladin archetype doesn't work for Desna's faithful as they still 'must still follow a lawful good, neutral good, or lawful neutral deity.' Desna is just too much of a free spirit...

*Please note that if you ignore the cleric's 'alignment must be within one step of her deity's, along either the law/chaos axis or the good/evil axis' alignment restriction because the Paladin's entry doesn't explicitly state it, then Baphomet, Deskari, and Nocticula are also completely valid options for a paladin's worship...
Honestly, the inability of mixing Paladin and Desna's Fighting Technique is probably the only reason the technique got published in the first place. Also, note that this specific technique is the only one that is not PFS legal, presumably due to its sheer power.

Occultist strikes me as particularly bad as they lost access to spells without their implements.
Wizard without a spellbook is fairly useless once they burn through their previously prepared spells...
Alchemist / Investigator likewise lose extracts without an alchemist's kit, but at least they have other class features of use...
Gunslinger without a gun is just a very bad idea.
Most Swashbuckler builds would be problematic at best without their weapon of choice.
Several Divine classes might be significantly hindered by a lack of a holy symbol.

Most other casting classes, pet classes, unarmed attack classes, and shifting classes would probably work just fine.

The other martial classes would probably be fairly build dependent.

The fact that some classes/builds are completely screwed by losing their gear is the reason this just doesn't happen in most campaigns...

Taja the Barbarian wrote:

Crusader grants more 'followers' than Leadership does (as you add your mythic rank to your leadership score) and grants them a free surge usage, but does not give you a 'cohort' or even boost any cohort you might already have.

If your Leadership score is 25 or higher (not at all hard to get even in non-Mythic games), you get no more followers. It doesn't matter what your Mythic Tier is, you cannot exceed a 25.

Therefore, Crusader doesn't get you any more followers. In fact, it gets you one fewer "follower" in the generic sense. A cohort is just a specialized, higher-level follower. And if you don't get another cohort from Crusader, you get one fewer follower than you get from the Leadership feat.

Perhaps not for a 20th level character like yours, but it will provide more followers (at least for a while) for anyone who takes it at lower levels: It is a '1st tier' power, so you could take it while still in your single digits if getting mythic ranks like Wrath of the Righteous gave them out.

Mysterious Stranger wrote:

I would verify with your GM that you actually get a second cohort. Crusader specifies you gain double the number of followers but makes no mention of extra cohorts.

I see your point, but It would seem odd that a Mythic ability would give you fewer followers than a common feat, yes?

'Follower' and 'Cohort' are two distinct categories: Crusader grants more 'followers' than Leadership does (as you add your mythic rank to your leadership score) and grants them a free surge usage, but does not give you a 'cohort' or even boost any cohort you might already have.

Crusader (Ex) (Mythic Adventures pg. 21): Your prowess and ability draw countless followers to your banner. You gain followers as if you had the Leadership feat. In addition, you add your tier to your leadership score when determining the number of followers you gain. Whenever you are within 100 feet of such followers, each follower can use the surge ability once per day without needing to expend mythic power. The followers use the same die type as your surge ability. If you have or gain the Leadership feat, you gain followers from both this ability and the Leadership feat (in effect doubling the number of followers gained).

D&D3.0 Swim had a '-1 penalty per 5lbs of gear you are carrying or wearing' instead of the normal armor check penalty.
D&D3.5 Swim had double the normal armor check penalty and encumbrance penalty.
PF1 Swim just has the normal Armor Check Penalty / Encumbrance Penalty.

Source PRPG Core Rulebook pg. 549

Many factors must be considered when determining the price of new magic items. The easiest way to come up with a price is to compare the new item to an item that is already priced, using that price as a guide. Otherwise, use the guidelines summarized on Table 15–29.

...

Not all items adhere to these formulas. First and foremost, these few formulas aren’t enough to truly gauge the exact differences between items. The price of a magic item may be modified based on its actual worth. The formulas only provide a starting point. The pricing of scrolls assumes that, whenever possible, a wizard or cleric created it. Potions and wands follow the formulas exactly. Staves follow the formulas closely, and other items require at least some judgment calls.

Higher Caster Level = More Powerful Item = More Expensive Item.

There are no 'hard and fast' rules for Caster Level here because there are a lot of judgement calls to be made: Boosting the CL on a Ring of Invisibility does make it a better item, but most of the time no one would really notice the difference, while boosting the CL on a set of Vampiric Gloves would be a major boost to both damage inflicted, temporary HP granted, and SR penetration chances. As such, the existence and pricing of non-standard items (including 'standard' items with higher caster levels) is left up to the GM*...

*To be fair, the existence and pricing of standard items is technically also at the GM's discretion, as the GM decides what is and isn't allowed in the campaign...

Considering you are playing a demon-centric campaign, Antilife Shell is an incredibly horrible option:

• It does not ward against outsiders, and
• It will likely ward against your fellow party members, preventing them from maneuvering around you in any even slightly confined space.

Self-Necro for a follow-up question: Is Hideous Laughter from an evil caster blocked by Protection From Evil? I've been reviewing the relevant FAQ and can't quite tell if forcing someone to RotFL falls under 'exercise control over the target' or not.

Protection From Evil: Does this work against all charm and compulsion effects? Or just against charm and compulsion effects where the caster is able to exercise control over the target, such as charm person, command, and dominate person (and thus not effects like sleep or confusion, as the caster does not have ongoing influence or puppet-like control of the target)?

The latter interpretation is correct: protection from evil only works on charm and compulsion effects where the caster is able to exercise control over the target, such as command, charm person, and dominate person; it doesn't work on sleep or confusion. (Sleep is a border case for this issue, but the designers feel that "this spell overrides your brain's sleep centers" is different enough than "this spell overrides your resistance to commands from others.")

At first glance, I'm thinking this spell fundamentally denies actions rather than controlling them, so PfE does not protect against it, but I'm not particularly confident in this conclusion...