Thorgrym's page

Showing the work on a true statistical analysis is far beyond what I can type into this form, but given some assumptions, such as 20th level fighters, +44 to hit (+20BAB, 2 weapon focus, 10 strength, 6 weapon training (gloves of dueling), +5 weapon, and +1 inherent (ioun stone), wielding two handed falcata vs. the falchion using power attack and furious focus, gives the following:

(Note in the 20th level fighter category, crits are automatically confirmed so no calculations are needed to adjust the probable damage output of every critical hit by calculating all the possible die rolls to confirm said critical)

Falcata damage averages 246.45 per round for EITHER the falcata and the falchion versus AC 36. Damage rises to 318.525 per round if using boots of speed or haste.

WHOA! That means the items are balanced right? Well, not exactly, because we don't start and play 20th level fighters with ideal gear through every adventure. Furthermore, this was merely versus AC 36, and the numbers skew towards the falcata's favor the higher the AC goes up from there. The damage output is the same for armor classes below 36.

What about the same gear on a 12th level fighter? Then we have to worry about even if there ARE critical threats, we have to roll a d20 on every confirmation which also has to hit the AC on that given roll. Will the weapons be even?

Oddly enough, the weapons are exactly even up to attacking armor class 29. As the AC goes up, the falcata becomes more powerful. At AC 29 or below, the average damage output is actually the same.

Example (above gear @ 12th level), averaging for all possible die rolls and potential and confirmed crits):

Falcata average damage per round vs. AC 34 = 99.975
Falchion average damage per round vs. AC 34 = 94.395

Now, I have to admit that I was shocked by my own work. I have a player using a falcata two-handed in my campaign, and I struggle as I look at the weapon and ask "where is the other hand? On the blade?" Not to mention, the bursty crits for 100+ points of damage are hard to believe.

Now, if average damage is what balances a weapon, and across a campaign perhaps it is, then the weapons are roughly the same. However, a falcata can be wielded 1h at any time, which offers some strategic advantage, and it is incredibly bursty, which should offer more advantage as well. However, it does take a feat to use...

The falcata is overpowered as written. There are four axes to this argument:

I) Any damage calculations have not compared it through the levels and seem to forget that as written it could be wielded one- or two-handed on the fly. That flexibility is a powerful option for a professional fighter choosing when to sword-and-board.

II) The damage output when two-handing a falcata is ridiculous through the levels when wielded by a barbarian or fighter using power attack. The criticals are simply too strong to be ignored.

III) Any argument that says that the rarity of a weapon is a balancing factor is moot if one character has Craft Arms and Armor, and any smart party will have it.

IV) Any basis of historical context is thrown out the window if it is somehow wielded two-handed. Which is of course impossible. It may as well be a powered chainsaw from Warhammer40k. The design of the falcata's haft is very similar to a rapier or some cutlass styles. Only one hand can wield it.

--the item can be perfectly balanced by taking the last line from the rapier and applying it to the falcata. Simply state that the 1 1/2 times strength bonus cannot be applied when wielded two handed.

Hi all. What happens if you take a unicorn as a cohort and you keep gaining levels? Unicorns gain experience points too! What if you wanted to play a Unicorn in Pathfinder?

Apologies in advance for any rules violations. This is created with the best intentions of the Open Source Games Licensing Agreement.

Presenting the Unicorn Cavalier!

Unicorn Characters:
Unicorns are defined by both their racial and their class levels. A unicorn’s challenge rating is equal to her class level + 3. Unicorns possess all of the racial traits:

Unicorn Effective Level: Unicorn characters with a heroic class begins play with 75,000 experience points and are considered for most purposes to be 9th level characters (including as use for cohorts). For special effects governing hit dice, unicorn characters possess four HD of magical beast in addition to any class levels.

Unicorns do not receive any proficiency in weapons or armor due to racial hit dice.

Ability Scores: Unicorns with heroic class levels are not built like other characters. Instead, their starting ability scores are Str 18, Dex 17, Con 16, Int 11, Wis 21, and Cha 24. Then, apply the following modifiers in any order, assigned in a manner that enhances the class abilities: +4, +4, +2, +2, 0, and -2. Unicorns with NPC class levels do not gain these modifications and begin play with the base scores.

Large: Unicorns are large creatures, often standing 5' at the shoulder, 8' in length, and are approximately 1200 pounds. They take up a 10' square without squeezing. However, Unicorn characters only have a 5' reach. Unicorn characters have a -1 size penalty to armor class and to attack. They gain a +1 bonus to CMB and CMD. They suffer a -2 size penalty to fly skill checks and a -4 size modifier to stealth checks.

Stable: Unicorns have four legs, and gain a +4 bonus to CMD versus tripping attacks.

Racial feats: Unicorn characters begin play with two free feats. The unicorn must qualify for these feats normally.

Racial hit dice: Unicorn characters begin play with 4 racial hit dice, calculated normally. They roll d10s for hit points.

Racial BAB: Unicorns have a +4 BAB before any other modifiers.

Languages: Unicorns can speak Common and Sylvan for free.

Racial skills: Unicorn characters have (2 + Int mod) x 4 skill points from racial hit dice. Their racial class skills are Acrobatics (Dex), Climb (Str), Fly (Dex), Perception (Wis), Stealth (Dex), and Swim (Str). Unicorns have a racial bonus of +3 to Survival checks made in forests, and gain a +4 to all stealth checks.

Unicorn vision: Unicorn characters possess both Darkvision 60' and Low-light vision.

Racial saving throws: Unicorns possess a +4 racial bonus to fortitude and reflex saves. They also possess a +1 racial bonus to will saves. All of these bonuses are derived from their racial hit dice.

Racial immunities: Unicorns are immune to charm and compulsion effects from evil creatures. They are also immune to poison.

Racial natural attack forms: Unicorns are always considered armed and always threaten. A unicorn gains a gore attack with its horn at its BAB (base damage d8), and gains a secondary attack with two hooves at -5 to hit (base damage d3) when using a full attack option.

Powerful charge: A unicorn does double damage on a charge attack with its horn. If another ability grants double damage on a charge, then the combined effect grants triple damage.

Special Abilities
Magic Circle against Evil (Su) This ability continually duplicates the effect of the spell. The unicorn cannot suppress this ability.
Magical Strike (Ex) A unicorn’s gore attack is treated as a magic good weapon for the purposes of damage reduction.
Wild Empathy (Su) This works like the druid’s wild empathy class feature, except the unicorn has a +6 racial bonus on the check. Unicorns with druid or cavalier levels add this racial
modifier to their wild empathy checks.

Spell-Like Abilities (CL 9th)
At will—detect evil (as free action), light
3/day—cure light wounds
1/day—cure moderate wounds, greater teleport (within its forest territory), neutralize poison (DC 21)
Special: Unicorns with levels in spellcasting classes add their caster level to their effective caster levels for spell-like abilities.

Unicorn Cavalier
While many unicorns strive to perfect their forests, spending all of their time caring for the creatures and the verdant foliage under their care, others spend as much effort dedicating themselves to a cause. These unicorns, known as cavaliers, swear themselves to a purpose, serving it above all else. Unicorn cavaliers are skilled at fighting, and are often found charging across a battlefield with the symbol of their order trailing on a long, fluttering banner. The unicorn cavalier’s true power comes from the conviction of his ideals, the oaths that he swears, and the challenges he makes.

Role: Unicorn cavaliers tend to marshal forces on the battlefield, using their great speed, talents and challenges to control the flow of the fight. Outside of battle, unicorn cavaliers can be
found advancing their cause through diplomacy and, if needed, subterfuge. The unicorn cavalier is no stranger to courtly intrigue and can hold his own in even the most delicate of social situations.

Alignment: CG.

Hit Dice: d10.

Class Skills
The unicorn cavalier adds the following skills as class skills: Bluff (Cha), Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Profession (Wis), and Sense Motive (Wis).

Skill Ranks per Level: 4 + Int modifier.

Class Features
The following are the class features of the unicorn cavalier.

Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Unicorn cavaliers are proficient with all types of armor and barding (heavy, light, and medium) and are considered combat trained in all cases. Unicorn cavaliers are also proficient with all simple and martial weapons as well as shields (except tower shields), but cannot wield most of them without powerful magic due to their lack of hands.

Challenge (Ex): Once per day, a unicorn cavalier can challenge a foe to combat. As a swift action, the cavalier chooses one target within sight to challenge. The cavalier’s melee attacks deal extra damage whenever the attacks are made against the target of his challenge. This extra damage is equal to the cavalier’s level. The unicorn cavalier can use this ability once per day at 1st level, plus one additional time per day for every three levels beyond 1st, to a maximum of four times per day at 10th level.

Challenging a foe requires much of the cavalier’s concentration. The unicorn cavalier takes a –2 penalty to his Armor Class, except against attacks made by the target of his challenge.
The challenge remains in effect until the target is dead or unconscious or until the combat ends. Each unicorn cavalier’s challenge also includes another effect which is listed in the section describing the cavalier’s order (as noted in the Advanced Player's Guide).
Mount (Ex): A unicorn cavalier is a fine steed but does not gain a separate mount. Instead, the unicorn cavalier gains certain bonuses from the cavalier's mount ability. These bonuses are derived in the same way as a druid's animal companion, using the unicorn's cavalier level as his effective druid level.

A unicorn cavalier does not take an armor check penalty when a rider uses a ride check while riding the unicorn cavalier. A unicorn cavalier’s mount does not gain the link or share spells special ability.

The unicorn cavalier gains his HD, saves, skills, and feats from being a unicorn with cavalier levels, so the unicorn does not gain most of the bonus abilities from chart 3-8 of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook. The unicorn cavalier only gains the natural armor bonus and the Str/Dex bonus as listed in the chart, using his cavalier level as his class level. In addition, at 4th level, unicorn cavaliers advance, gaining a +2 advancement bonus to Strength and a +2 advancement bonus to Constitution. This is in addition to the Ability Score Increase benefit gained every four levels.

Order (Ex): At 1st level, a unicorn cavalier must pledge himself to a specific order. The order grants the unicorn cavalier a number of bonuses, class skills, and special abilities. In
addition, each order includes a number of edicts that the unicorn cavalier must follow, some of which may be in general conflict to his alignment. If he violates any of these edicts, he loses the benefits from his order’s challenge ability for 24 hours. The violation of an edict is subject to GM interpretation.

A cavalier cannot change his order without undertaking a lengthy process to dedicate himself to a new cause. When this choice is made, he immediately loses all of the benefits from his old order. He must then follow the edicts of his new order for one entire level without gaining any benefits from that order. Once accomplished, he gains all of the bonuses from his new order.
Note that the names of these orders might vary depending upon the campaign setting or GM’s preference.

Wild Empathy (Su): This works like the druid’s wild empathy class feature, except all unicorns have a +6 racial bonus on the check. Unicorns with cavalier levels add this racial
modifier to their wild empathy checks.
Tactician (Ex): At 1st level, a unicorn cavalier receives a teamwork feat as a bonus feat. He must meet the prerequisites for this feat. As a standard action, the unicorn cavalier can grant
this feat to all allies within 30 feet who can see and hear him. Allies retain the use of this bonus feat for 3 rounds plus 1 round for every two cavalier levels the unicorn possesses. Allies do not need to meet the prerequisites of these bonus feats.
The cavalier can use this ability once per day at 1st level, plus one additional time per day at 5th and another time per day at 10th level.

Unicorn’s Charge (Ex): At 3rd level, a unicorn cavalier learns to make more accurate charge attacks. The unicorn cavalier receives a +4 bonus on melee attack rolls on a charge (instead of the normal +2). In addition, the unicorn cavalier does not suffer any penalty to his AC after making a charge attack.

Banner (Ex): At 5th level, a unicorn cavalier’s banner becomes a symbol of inspiration to his allies and companions. As long as the unicorn cavalier’s banner is clearly visible, all allies within
60 feet receive a +2 morale bonus on saving throws against fear and a +1 morale bonus on attack rolls made as part of a charge. At 10th level, these bonuses increase by +1. The banner must be at least Small or larger and must be carried or displayed by the unicorn cavalier, or may be mounted to his saddle.

Bonus Feat: At 6th level and at 12th level a unicorn cavalier gains a bonus feat in addition to those gained from normal advancement. These bonus feats must be selected from those listed as combat feats. The unicorn cavalier must meet the prerequisites of these bonus feats.

Greater Tactician (Ex): At 9th level, the unicorn cavalier receives an additional teamwork feat as a bonus feat. He must meet the prerequisites for this feat. The unicorn cavalier can grant this feat to his allies using the tactician ability. Using the tactician ability is a swift action.

Mighty Charge (Ex): At 11th level, a unicorn cavalier learns to make devastating charge attacks. Double the threat range of any attack during a charge. This increase does not stack with other
effects that increase the threat range of the weapon. In addition, the unicorn cavalier can make a free bull rush, disarm, sunder, or trip combat maneuver if his charge attack is successful. This free combat maneuver does not provoke an attack of opportunity.

Demanding Challenge (Ex): At 12th level, whenever a unicorn cavalier declares a challenge, his target must pay attention to the threat he poses. As long as the target is within the threatened area of the cavalier, it takes a –2 penalty to its AC from attacks made by anyone other than the cavalier.

Many unicorn cavaliers belong to the order of the lion. Sample benefits are provided here for completeness. A full list of orders may be found in the Advanced Player's Guide.

Order of the Lion

A unicorn who belongs to this order has pledged himself to a sovereign; be it a king, queen, or even the local warlord. Unicorns of this order are stalwart and dedicated to their cause, willing to go any length to ensure the safety of their masters and their domain.

Edicts: The unicorn cavalier must protect the life and lands of his sovereign at all costs. He must obey the commands of his sovereign without question. He must strive to expand the power and prestige of his realm.

Challenge: Whenever an order of the lion unicorn cavalier issues a challenge, he receives a +1 dodge bonus to his AC against attacks made by the target of his challenge. This bonus increases by +1 for every four cavalier levels the unicorn possesses.

Skills: An order of the lion unicorn cavalier adds Knowledge (local) (Int) and Knowledge (nobility) (Int) to his list of class skills. An order of the lion unicorn cavalier can make Knowledge (nobility) skill checks untrained. If he has ranks in the skill, he receives a bonus on the check equal to 1/2 his cavalier level (minimum +1) as long as the check involves his sovereign.

Order Abilities: A unicorn cavalier belonging to the order of the lion gains the following abilities as he increases in level.

Lion’s Call (Ex): At 2nd level, an order of the lion unicorn cavalier gains the ability to rally his allies. As a standard action,
he can give an encouraging speech which grants all allies within 60 feet a competence bonus on their saving throws against fear equal to his Charisma modifier and a +1 competence bonus on attack rolls for a number of rounds equal to his cavalier level. If an ally within range is under the effect of a spell or ability that causes him to be frightened or panicked, he can immediately make another saving throw to resist the effect (if allowed).

For the King (Ex): At 8th level, an order of the lion unicorn cavalier can call out to his allies, inspiring them to greatness. As a swift action, the unicorn cavalier can grant a competence bonus equal to his Charisma modifier on all attack and damage rolls to all allies within 30 feet. This bonus lasts for 1 round. This ability can be used once per combat.

I DM a campaign where characters from the Council of Thieves campaign abandon the campaign at the behest of the Pathfinder Society and embark on the Kingmaker campaign.

Name: Mercedes
Race: Human
Classes/levels: Barbarian 8
Adventure: The Varnhold Vanishing
Location: Valley of the Dead, level 2
Catalyst: Onslaught (dungeon pull) by destroying you-know-what
The Gory Details: They were in the room before the tar, and then it happened. They tried to pull in all the monsters into that room and then Mr. V showed up and tried to teach them a lesson.

Before it was said and done, Mercedes had been level drained 6 levels (restored in the fight by the cleric though), and was cursed for loss of Con, permanently paralyzed, and was coup de graced by Mr. V.

Name: Logan
Race: Half-Elf
Classes/levels: Bard 8
Adventure: The Varnhold Vanishing
Location: Valley of the Dead, level 2
Catalyst: The stealthy rogue popped the Piscodaemon and when challenged, the party said, "stand back in the name of <insert party name here>" which of course started a fight with the Piscodaemon, who should have had "BMF" stamped on his forehead.
The Gory Details: BMF crit the cavalier for 42 points of damage (+ sickened + bleed) which was very painful but thankfully he had a ring of freedom of movement to stop the grab and constrict. The fighters encroached into the room, leaving the spellcasters in the middle (there are 6 characters including cohorts), and the bard was in the back in the hallway. BMF stepped back and greater teleported to melee range with the bard, the enchantress, and the cleric, and the bard cast invisibility defensively and took a 5' step. The fighters tried to come all the way back but the Piscodaemon easily massacred the poor bard the next round.

I am running the Fellnight Queen module and one of the players is playing a 5th-level rogue/2nd-level shadowdancer.

He is dominating EVERYTHING thanks to his Hide in Plain Sight ability, high Stealth check modifier, and ability to Spring Attack.

He has since made a habit of springing in from hiding, attacking with sneak attack, springing out and making a hide check. Even when he takes the -5 penalty for moving over half his speed (which is 40 ft. by the way) enemies still can't find him! Shadows and concealment are always EVERYWHERE (look around and count the number of shadows within 10 feet of you, they are next to impossible to get away from).

I'm beginning to think that this ability is broken. The module and bestiary stat blocks simply don't assume they will be opposed by Stealth masters (they have a +0 to +5 Perception modifier VS his +13).

Nothing in the module is ever going to find this guy while he continues to pick them apart.

How do I challenge such a character? Am I overestimating/misreading HiPS in some way?

Sorry, you are letting your rogue player get away with murder. (Literally)

After reading through the hundred or so interesting comments, my position has not changed...not one bit. Here are my thoughts:

-=-=-

Presupposition 1: Stealth has, and will likely always be, in the eye of the beholder. You aren't hiding from yourself, and blind people aren't better at hiding just because they can't see well.

PS1--you hide from your opponents; you don't hide.

Presupposition 2: If you read the rules for perception carefully, you learn a great deal more about stealth than from the stealth rules themselves. It goes in to detail about observing people and how difficult it is (normally impossible) to hide when someone is watching you. You can also observe people with senses other than sight, so if someone is making a lot of noise, you can continue listening to them and they cannot hide while being observed.

PS2--A person doesn't "stealth." They attempt to use Stealth. Anyone can attempt to hide in dim light against most creatures.

Presupposition 3: Shadowdancers can attempt to hide while being observed as long as they are within 10' of an area of dim light. Note that the wording is very specific, and although one could point out the difference in the Assassin (Asn) write-up, we are a) talking specifically about Shadowdancers (SD), and b) the first printing of the Pathfinder Core Rulebook had an error that showed there was at least one copy-paste (copypasta) error between Asn and SD. If one version was clarified, it is reasonable that the Shadowdancer one is more accurate, as the original had the word Assassin in the SD's description, not the other way around. Even if you do not believe this, the SD description is very specific, mentioning dim light (harkening back to illumination rules). There is no reason to believe that the tiny shadow caused by a blade of grass is what the SD pulls from in normal daylight. No GM would be expected to have to deal with that level of minutiae and lighting is rarely mentioned in published modules. The simpler explanation is overwhelmingly more plausible.

PS3: Shadowdancers have a magic ability to "pull" from dim light 10' away. Other than the statement that they can do this while being observed, there is no reason to believe it is more powerful or complicated than this.

Thus, if one assumes that the world's ability to perceive is based upon the observer (which I believe 99% will agree with), and that illumination rules define when one can stealth and what the penalties are to perceive someone (probably 90% on this one), then it is not a stretch to reason that Shadowdancers merely get to break only one normal rule (hide while observed) as long as they can use their magic power to pull from the area of dim illumination.

Does this mean that they can't use this versus an elf with low-light vision if the SD is being observed?

Of course the Shadowdancer can, but if the area he pulled from (the dim illumination) is considered normal light to the elf, then the elf does not need to make a perception check and automatically sees the SD if he was already observing him. The shadowdancer uses his magic, and the elf shrugs his shoulders because the SD is still under observation in normal light, TO HIM.

What you say? It sthpathifically says...

If you believe that the area of dim light is in the eyes of the stealther, and that the power works, you are using faulty logic of Affirming the Consequent. Here are some examples:

Every rogue I have seen is tricky, so all tricky people are rogues.

[i] My human shadowdancer is blind, thus he can stealth anywhere because it is dark to him.

Many of the examples I have seen are convoluted and difficult to believe. Having an observer with Super-Ultra-Vision would certainly not cause the SD's magic to fail, just fail to hide against that observer. Likewise, if the SD is an elf, he does not have to run further away from the torch just to use his magic ability to attempt to stealth.

Thus, the implied game effect of Hide in Plain Sight is simply thus:

"Hide in Plain Sight (Su): The Shadowdancer can hide while being observed if he is within 10' of an area of dim illumination. This ability, in effect, pulls the dim illumination 10' closer to him allowing the use of a stealth check against most creatures."

And version 1.5:

Kingmaker Sheet V1.5

Someone asked for testing on this for different versions of excel.

In excel 2003, it does not support more than 7 layers of nesting for formulas. The error displayed, in those cases, is #VALUE! and appears to show up in the City Summary Tab, in the bottom field in the Major Buildings area for each summarized city.

Otherwise, it appears to work great. THANKYOUTHANKYOUTHANKYOUTHANKYOU!

Did I mention thanks?

I got this:

From the item in question:

"these iron shoes come in sets of four like ordinary horseshoes. When affixed to an animal's hooves, they increase the animal's base land speed by 30 feet;"

From the exploration and movement section of the book:

"If you want to determine whether your character's gear is heavy enough to slow him down more than his armor already does, total the weight of all the character's items, including armor, weapons, and gear. Compare this total to the character's Strength on Table: Carrying Capacity. Depending on the character's carrying capacity, he or she may be carrying a light, medium, or heavy load. Like armor, a character's load affects his maximum Dexterity bonus to AC, carries a check penalty (which works like an armor check penalty), reduces the character's speed, and affects how fast the character can run, as shown on Table: Encumbrance Effects. A medium or heavy load counts as medium or heavy armor for the purpose of abilities or skills that are restricted by armor. Carrying a light load does not encumber a character."

Followed by:

"Table: Armor and Encumbrance for Other Base Speeds provides reduced speed figures for all base speeds from 5 feet to 120 feet (in 5-foot increments)."

So the horseshoes increase the base speed. The armor or emcumbrance reduces the base speed dependent on what that base speed is.

So we:
1. Find the base speed -- horseshoes of speed increase the base speed.
2. Reduce the base speed for emcumbrance and armor (which is our final speed). Since this requires knowing the base speed first we natural apply anything that changes the base speed before reduction for armor to get final speed.

+1 post Abraham. Thanks for the diligent explanation.

Are we the only group that uses D20Pro? We tried another product, invested about $100 in it, and then abandoned it as junk. We ended up buying D20pro licenses and we've been using that since last August when the Pathfinder core rulebook came out.

It has a small learning curve, but it handles combat so beautifully (with minor tweaking for PF) that I could not imagine gaming over the internet without it.

We also have a vent server for VoIP communication.

I'm saying not. The reason is simple, as things stand, high level play, pathfinder or not is cumbersome.

I would really like to see Paizo use the epic levels rules to reboot high level play.

For example, Vital Strike work great and I'd like to see either more feats like it or some way for Paizo to make Base Attack "pay" for feat attacks. Which means capping the number of extra attacks from BAB. This is a silly example, but think Vital Strike > Vital Strike > Cleave in 1 turn.

I say that 3.0 Epic is not compatible due to some of the reasons posted, and that Pathfinder has rewritten the power curve somewhat. Also note that the XP scale makes leveling pretty difficult very quickly in Pathfinder.

Also note that classes with straight 20 levels are already rewarded with class-based powers that only apply to people with 20 levels, so adding Epic on that is a little hard to stomach.

If you give additional power through feats then you'd have to be careful to not step on a lot of toes. Why don't big monsters have those feats? Are some restricted to straight classes (e.g. 24th level fighters--they already got a reward for sticking to their class...)

Obviously it is messy. You would have to carefully look at power banding, the explosion of magical items, and examine the magic system. I think there should be some kind of ritual system for epic spells, but likely nothing that directly works in combat. Think 4th edition style rituals, but with an epic flair.

Mix and matching classes seem to allow for some neat epic play regardless of adding epic classes, feats, or special weaponry.

There's probably little issue in continuing to use the magic item rules from 3.0 epic, however (like how to make a +7 cloak of resistance).

Other than the DM going "Hold on Skipper, I don't care what the books say, you aren't making money," what is to stop 9th level wizards from ruling the world atop their piles of cash?

Example character:

Human 7 Wizard/2 Loremaster, point buy. Starts with 16 int. Raises to 18 with +2 racial bonus. +1 point to Int at 4th and 8th = 20. Crafts +4 Int headband by 9th level. Int = 24.

+1 Lore secret to skills. Take 4 ranks of craft (jewelry) for instance.

+12 Craft (Jewelry) skill (+4 ranks, + 7 int, +1 lore secret)

Suddenly the Loremaster can purchase raw materials (corundrum, uncut rubies, for instance), and cast Fabricate as a standard action, making (taking 10) valuable rubies.

Buy 2,000gp of raw materials, cast fabricate = 6,000gp of jewelry.

Sell at full price. Rinse and repeat.

Obviously this is just one example. It could be done out of anything, although weapons and armor would sell at half price, generally. But if you crafted anything that was effectively currency, you would break the game by 9th level.

Some ideas:

Craft (coinmaking)
Craft (gemcutting)
Craft (jewelry)
Craft (sculptures)
Craft (art)

If a paladin casts Holy Sword on a double weapon, does that apply to both heads of the weapon?

No. Double weapons are treated as two completely separate weapons for enchantment purposes. See the Paladin description of Divine Bond as an example of how this is reflected in the material.

This is worth consideration (and a fun read) but maybe you're requiring too much exactness from the system?

If you have a player who would earnestly argue that she could wear two sets of platemail because of the RAW, then your game has a poor sense of simulation. As a DM I'd rather just say 'no' than rewrite a corner of the rules to say it for me.

LOL, I would never do it and never allow it in one of my games. I just wanted to point out some sillyness in the rules RAW, and some simple suggestions to clean up some of the problems.

In addition, I don't see a need to have so many different types of similar slots that have overlapping function, especially since there are so few examples of items that can even be in those slots. It would not surprise me that no additional chest slot items exist for Pathfinder (only) material right now.

One of my players brought up this interesting scenario:

E
E
A

E = medium sized enemy
A = medium sized melee attacker with a 5' reach.

When deciding to use Cleave, can you attack the adjacent enemy, then assuming it drops, 5' step directly forward to then attack the second enemy?

The rules clearly support that you can move DURING an action such as an attack action using cleave with a 5' step, but only if you have not already moved that round (pg. 189). So Bravo.

However, due to the wording of Cleave, this could be a moot point depending on the positioning of the enemies. It does not state that the second target had to be within reach of you when you made the first swing. Thus, you could swing, kill, step up as a 5' move, swing again at a target that was adjacent to the first. This could be a crucial step if you also have great cleave.

However, please remember to observe the other rules as well. Observe difficult terrain. Observe the fact that you may not take a move action to move and then also get a 5' step, etc.

RAW, I do not believe there is any case that a 5' step is not allowed. It looks to be very straightforward if you take off your 3.5E hat.

Where I struggle is when magic gets really involved. I've heard the debates regarding whether mages have the skill or not.

However, consider the following:

Human wizard/loremaster, total level 9.

High intelligence + magic item boosting Int, + ranks + loremaster equals a pretty impressive craft skill for just about anything.

Example 3 ranks (stonemason) + 7 (Int) + 1 (Loremaster) = 21 DC by taking 10.

Cast Wall of Stone.
Cast Fabricate.

It appears by spamming this and taking ranks in Engineering and all sorts of other things, a wizard can pretty much build anything they want, nearly for free.

<clipped>..And yeah; the secret door thing is now simply a bonus on Perception checks.

So, is this right? The elven rogue with the trapfinder talent gets no free checks to find secret doors, unless the secret door is/has a trap and he approaches within 10 feet?

That's pretty funny to me. :)

Now that I've spent some real time looking through the core rulebook's list of magic items (I normally GM so I typically use it as reference), there are definitely some 3.5 things I consider nonsense that still made it through in to Pathfinder. I have adopted a rant-like style to poke some humor and hopefully you will see my viewpoint of what is silly. The "chakra" concept of 3.5 is still here as slots, and many of them are really just begging for abuse by high-level characters who craft magical items.

Here are the slots:

Armor: suits of armor.
Belts: belts and girdles.
Body: robes and vestments.
Chest: mantles, shirts, and vests.
Eyes: eyes, glasses, and goggles.
Feet: boots, shoes, and slippers.
Hands: gauntlets and gloves.
Head: circlets, crowns, hats, helms, and masks.
Headband: headbands and phylacteries.
Neck: amulets, brooches, medallions, necklaces, periapts, and scarabs.
Ring (up to two): rings.
Shield: shields.
Shoulders: capes and cloaks.
Wrist: bracelets and bracers.

Here are my thoughts:

The Body slot should be removed and Druid's vestments should be Chest slot.

The body slot drives me bonkers. There are 9 noncursed items in the book that fit in the body slot. Eight of them are Robes. 1 is Druid's Vestments, which give one more wild shape/day. I don't really understand why you should be able to wear Robes of the Archmagi and Hide Armor of Heavy Fortification, much less Full Plate. It would not be a big imbalance if robes took the armor spot, and keeping both invites abuse by high-level crafters stacking abilities into both spots. The Druid's Vestments, which clearly are clothes worn over the top of armor, is the only one that I think should go with armor. Make Druid's Vestments a chest slot item.

Still not convinced? Look at this:

9 items in the core rulebook can fit in this slot. There are FOUR more that are cursed items. Two are robes. That makes sense. The other two? Full Plate. If you carefully read the rules, and look at Armor of Rage, I could have a character that would want that armor and another set of armor as well.

Yes, my paladin could be wearing two sets of Full Plate. One set she thinks is Full Plate +2 (and it is), and the other is a set of Full Plate that she thinks is Armor of Command, but is actually Armor of Rage. MY PALADIN CAN WEAR TWO SETS OF FULL PLATE. Why is that not wrong?

The Chest slot should be reworked.

This thread started with looking at a Handy Haversack and I wondered why it was an unslotted item. It is a very useful item; I argue that it is a necessary item for mid- to high-level adventurers, and it does not occupy the chest slot? Pathfinder did away with a back slot and has shoulders instead. Where do back items go? Is that not the back of the chest? Are the TMNT Shells of Heavy Fortification unslotted items?

Why is there an entire slot devoted to THREE items in the core rulebook? They are: Mantle of Faith, Mantle of Spell Resistance, and Vest of Escape. Mantles are described as being worn on the outside of normal clothing or armor, so perhaps this is similar to a heavy tabard or a religious person's ceremonial garb (think holy vestments). It sounds a whole lot like Druid's Vestments, but those, alas, are body slot, even though the description is nearly identical (worn over the armor).

The list above says that Chest slot is for mantles, shirts, and vests, but only 2 mantles exist and 1 vest. Druid's Vestments isn't a vest, apparently, but more like a mantle, except it is not a mantle, even though it is religious (nature). What is a mantle again? Here you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mantle_%28clothing%29. OK, I understand now. Mantles aren't religious vestments, but an overcoat. Is that why it is a Body slot item? I bet NPCs get mad at me because when I have to pay for something, I have to push aside the folds of my cloak and my vestments and my robe to get to my Handy Haversack that's worn outside of my Armor(thank goodness). But somehow, I still manage to procure anything as a move action.

OK I understand. Druid's Vestments aren't really vestments, they are like mantles, and mantles are clearly not cloaks because cloaks are shoulder items and mantles are not. Clearly, Druid's Vestments/Not Mantles are Body slot items. Mantles of Faith--which ARE Religious Vestments, are not Body slot vestments and are thus Chest slot items.

I would have worn a shirt instead, but alas, there are no magical shirts in the core rulebook. At least I know what slot they are. CHEST. I emphasize that because you can't wear a shirt under your vest or mantle. Well, actually you can, but it loses its magic for some reason that only the developers of 3.0 understand while my Druid's Vestment/Mantle of Faith/Cloak of the Bat/Wildwood Fullplate-wearing druid gets off scott-free.

General Helm confusion--perhaps Head and Headband should be the same slot.

Perhaps game mechanics demand separate magical item slots for these items. I am still confused about helms and other head items though. Although suits of full plate and any heavy armor (even light armor) comes with some sort of helm, when you get a magical set, you can apparently throw it away because either:

a) The magical helm does not stack with your Helm of Underwater Action, or
b) Helms that come with magical armor are nonmagical.

In any case, you do not lose armor class for taking off a helm, so I suppose that all helms are purely for ornamental reasons.

Proof that helm does not offer protection: http://www.downloadmunkey.net/images/blood-raven-captain.jpg

UR doing it wrong:
King Arthur: Obvious use of a helm and a crown. Only one is magical, Art! http://www.flamingfun.com/files/478/kingbike.jpg

UR doing it right:
Generic knight: Obvious use of a coif (helm) and a headband. http://historyshop.piratemerch.com/images/knight_headband_100992.jpg

The Shoulders slot should be renamed Cloak slot and Wings of Flying should be changed to Chest slot.

So, let's see if I have this straight: I can wear two sets of full plate along with my robes, mantle, and wings of flying, but I can't wear wings and a cloak?

I hope you enjoyed reading it as much as I had writing it.

<clipped>...the armor argument on getting hit/DR is a hand-waver. Just drop it. Mathematically, it all winds up to the same thing. With armor, you get hit, but you don't get hurt. Functionally, that is exactly the same as not getting hit...<clipped>

This would be true if we were simply talking about like creatures wailing on each other in melee. However, once you start adding touch attacks this argument flies out of the window.

There should be a single integrated mechanic for attacks that goes something like this:

D20 + [your composite attack bonus] versus a DC of Physical Defense = damage declared.

Damage declared - Damage Resistance (if any, composite of armor, toughness, etc) = damage taken.

[composite attack bonus] combines training, levels, magic, weapon, etc. and the mechanic allows for a 1 hp glancing blow (depending on DR).

There is no need to roll a damage die for weapons in modern-day d20-based RPGs. Why take the time to roll out the d6 rapier versus the d8 longsword? There's really only 1 point of damage, on average between them, and an integrated combat roll where the d20 result directly influences damage done solves any need for variability.

This way you can have shields make you harder to hit (and reduces damage done by proxy), and armor just reduces your damage. It also allows for easy handling for ranged touch, because it may deflect off of your shield (if you decide shield contributes), but if it struck your armor, you've been hit, ignoring DR(for instance).

I think you need to stay away from spontaneous casting. That's the sorcerer's thing...<clipped>

If this were a 3.5 discussion, and especially 3.0, I would agree with you. However, in PF, I think that the Sorceror and Wizard are much further apart than just spontaneous casting versus prepared casting.

Furthermore, if I had two players, a 10th level evocation sorceror and a 10th level diviner wizard, and the diviner purposely left a quarter of his spell slots open to prepare for a big fight once the party learned more about their enemies, I do not believe that feats allowing the wizard to prepare in 15 minutes without a spellbook makes a material difference in game balance, but would certainly reduce the mental stress (and perhaps physical burden) on the wizard. The price mechanics of maintaining separate spell catalogs in multiple places out of paranoia is unfairly singling out the wizard IMHO in a game where total cash seriously contributes to character power.

The RAW is pretty clear concerning death

D20pfsrd.com wrote:

Dead

When your character's current hit points drop to a negative amount equal to his Constitution score or lower, or if he succumbs to massive damage, he's dead. A character can also die from taking ability damage or suffering an ability drain that reduces his Constitution score to 0 (see Special Abilities).

Certain types of powerful magic, such as raise dead and resurrection, can restore life to a dead character. See Magic for more information.

Instant deadification.

I couldn't agree more. If you want leeway, fudge the dice and damage, not the rules.

I've never had a player take this feat in any of my games.

I was just wondering if anyone out there has taken it, and if so, what kind of benefits can it really give you?

Apart from the rare occasion when the GM might deny the wizard of his spellbook, I can find no other application for this feat.

In fact, I am thinking about homebrewing the darn thing to just allow the Wizard to select a number of spells equal to his int modifier that he can spontaneously cast by expending already prepared spells.

anyone?

Personally, I think the feat as written is too circumstantial, important in campaigns where GMs are likely to single out the wizard, otherwise, not important enough and not powerful enough to compare it to, say, Silent Spell or one of the really good crafting feats.

Although I think the Vancian system needs a complete overhaul, here are my recommendations for Spell Mastery compatible with PF/3.5e gaming:

Spell Mastery
Your significant intellect allows you to master spells you have studied for a period of time. You can prepare most spells without referencing your spellbooks.
Prerequisite: 1st-level wizard, Intelligence 15+
Benefit: Every spell you know with a spell level less than the highest spell level you can cast are now mastered. From this point on, you can prepare these spells without referring to a spellbook.
Normal: Without this feat, you must use a spellbook to prepare all your spells except for read magic.

I would recommend another feat to make it a tree:

Spell Savant
You have an eidetic memory when it comes to spells you have learned. You can prepare spells by picturing your spellbooks in your mind.
Prerequisite: 1st-level wizard, Spell Mastery, Intelligence 17+
Benefit: You can prepare any spell that you know without referring to a spellbook.

'Lo you all.

All the players in my pathfinder group are new to D&D/D20/Pathfinder - some like "oh, 10 years ago I played 2 evenings AD%D" while others are more like "cool, I've played a german RPG for the last 10 years and only in decemver 09 I realised that there are other roleplaying games".

This means - we really dont have a clue. None.
No feeling for character building, the "consequences" of choices on low leves, when to buy what kind of eq, what spells are more efficient etc.

I realised that after I've read a part of treantmonks wizard guide - and our bard wants to rebuild his char after reading the bard guide.

So I ask you all for help.

Really - any guide, FAQ, help,... you know and that works for the Pathfinder RPG would be a great help.

(at the moment our group (edit..) eerr.. party.. consists of a fighter, cleric, bard, paladin, sorcerer and monk)

Thank you all - for reading that and maybe for some help.

Good Night

Good comments by all. My recommendations:

1) Everyone must read the combat section, possibly twice. There are so many things that can go wrong there (oh I forgot about this) that it is important to learn the terminology and what is a standard action and what is not, and what provokes opportunity attacks.

2) Don't sweat the classes. Pick a race and a class and stick to it and have fun. Don't both with multiclassing, and possibly even prestige classes. There's enough fun in the base classes to go around at least once or twice.

3) Be open minded. Don't worry about picking the wrong feat. If you find that it is a useless thing for your play style, perhaps your kind-hearted GM will let you trade it in for a more appropriate feat in the future. If a player never uses a feat, I always let them replace it if it doesn't fit their character, especially if a new book comes out that makes them say, "Aww man if I knew that I wouldn't have..."

4) Have fun. The boards are full of guys who have played these kinds of games for years, and there are plenty more who keep re-using 3.5E rules in Pathfinder erroneously. There are subtle changes in Pathfinder whose effects shake the mountain in their impact in gameplay.

For the record, in the Adventure Path Council of Thieves I am GMing, the only party member deaths have been:

--A mystic theurge, who died to an Erinyes. However, he was rezzed the next round by the Breath of Life scroll found earlier in the adventure.

--And a paladin.

Yes, the paladin is the only death, defeated by 3 shadows in melee as the exhausted party was making a hasty exit from the Nessian Spiral. She was turned in to a shadow herself after taking 17 points of strength damage in two rounds,and they had to kill her after she raised as a shadow herself. Gruesomely awesome end to my wife's character.

Hi All,

we had an encounter recently in my campaign featuring a young green dragon. My party consists of 3 level 7 characters. One of them is a Half-Orc paladin. He and the others managed to kill the dragon in 2 rounds. But without the others he would have killed it in 3 rounds. No big magic equipment just using class skills.

He has str 18 and chr 16. He used a nonmagical great axe. He had 2 rounds to prepare and used magic weapon and bull strength. And he also used smite evil.

So at level 7 he attacked the dragon:
+17/+12
He dealt
d12+24 damage
With each hit. No damage reduction.

He hit the dragon 4 times in 2 rounds for approx 120 points of damage. The dragon had 133. The dragon did approx 40 points of damage in these 2 rounds (breath weapon 1st round, 7 attacks the second).

My problem is that this should have been a CR9 encounter for a level7 party. I don't think it is ok for a level 7 character to defeat a CR9 encounter without effort. And he can do it 3 times a day easily, using lay on hands to heal himself in betwean battles.

I agree that the Paladin is the champion of good, but this is way too powerful. None of the other classes can do this. A fighter or a barbarian may be able to defeat the dragon alone, with luck and serious injuries. A spellcaster can maybe defeat the dragon with a lucky spell, but they have to overcome spell resistance too.

I know that nerfing classes are not a popular thing. I would recommend reducing the duration of the smite for a single round. He can still kill the dragon in 3 rounds but he is using all 3 smite attempts to do so.

What do you think?

Brain

Like many of the others, I have real questions about how the combat was under-played from the dragon's side. A young green dragon is CR8, not CR9.

1) How did the paladin have two rounds to buff with those spells and the dragon, with the dragon's +15 perception and blindsense and darkvision? If it was in a dungeon (why would a green dragon be indoors?), someone casting buff spells would merely present a perception check of DC 10 + 1 per 10', so the dragon, 40' from the "door" would have to roll a -1 on a D20 to detect them.

Besides, you'd be more likely to encounter a young green dragon resting just underwater and out of sight than one standing in a dungeon. He detects you, you don't detect him. Think of a wolf spider.

2) How did the paladin get 4 attacks in the first two rounds? Did the paladin take two full attack options? Did someone teleport him into melee? This math makes no sense, and makes me question the entire encounter. Most likely the dragon's first action would be either entangle spell or 6d6 acid damage from a distance, getting as many party members as possible.

3) Why was the dragon focusing on the Half-orc? Was it because of the damage? This dragon is built for power attack, cleave, and great cleave. When (if) he closed, he would have likely used flight as a move action to coast overhead and land in the back ranks, using bite with reach to attack with power attack the least armored foe, attacking at +10 to hit with a bite and doing 2d6+16 points of damage, and then cleaved at +10 to the next least armored opponent, and if that hit, striking yet a third.

4) A prepared party of 4 7th level characters, fully stocked on spells, etc, and one of whom is a paladin should not have a terrific challenge with a young CR8 dragon. Weak casters may die, but that's about it.

Edit--I guess he's actually a juvenile green dragon, so a little more hp and to hit and damage, and he has frightful presence, which may shake up the back rows (not the paladin), otherwise same tactics.

Here is my submission for what could have been a great CR12 "boss fight":

The Lair of Lady Ayma Ionescu

Lady Ayma rests in her lair in quiet solitude and contemplation to her shrine of the god of Madness. She jealously guards this lair as both her safe haven for rest and as a spot to commune with her god in how to bring the world to its knees through manipulation, paranoia, and despair. Lady Ayma does not like visitors, but she is eager to test heroes that think they can best her. If for no other reason, she covets their magical gear, which she plans on dismantling or trading them so that she may craft cursed items to distribute to hapless leaders of the land.

Gerhardt, a poor 1st level fighter, stands guard at the front gatehouse or doorway, pressed in to service by means of domination. He has no idea that Lady Ayma is a vampire, but knows he must do her bidding and fight to the death to guard the entry hallway. This tactic is merely a ruse, as Lady Ayma keeps her thrall enchanted with a status spell, such that if anything ever happens to Gerhardt, she knows to start preparing before beginning her assault on the invaders.

The entry hallway is blocked by rubble. It should take a party of adventures d4x10 minutes to clear the rubble and search for traps to make it to her shrine safely, giving her plenty of time to buff behind closed doors and set her trap. If they take too long, she will give up her desecration bonuses from the shrine she has erected and come out in gaseous form and pass through the rubble, coming out in a frontal assault once prepared.

Once alerted, she starts with the most powerful spells first, followed by placing silence on a gem on the other side of the room. She finishes with Harm, keeping it charged until she can attack, which she combines with a slam attack from a safe hiding place. She may retreat to the silence field if casters become an issue, and she can safely cast from there with silent spells.

Trap

Lady Ayma Ionescu

Tactical Notes

Heh. thx. I've been looking for help like that.

I could tweak his stats to up wisdom.

I have a few short questions (I don't want to derail this thread... so pm if you like):
1) I don't see how a melee rogue focusing on strength is going to blow that build out of the water. Difference in damage is +6 per hit. The to-hit will be similar. AC would be the same. Are you saying rogues should just not be in melee? Could you elaborate a bit on that?
2) I like a relatively high Charisma on the rogue. Are you saying I need a dump stat to make him workable?
3) I see what you are saying above. If so, what combination of feats do you recommend to the 2hand wep rogue?
4) TWF seems like it is problematic if it requires one to stand still to use it. Right?
5) So... an archer Rogue?

Thanks for the help (quite genuinely).

Haha good questions Gelmir. It is always easier to pick apart someone else's idea (i.e. "complain") than to show how it could work much better (i.e. "help") Let me try to offer some things I have observed as a DM running almost all of the published content campaigns since 3rd edition came out and then PF.

(Of course, certain builds are better at certain levels than others, and builds focusing on surviving 1-20 aren't the same as "build me a great x level character.")

1)"Str rogues no better?" Actually in the builds I've seen, it appears that rogues actually need the rogue talents as soon as possible (i.e. talents don't come soon enough!) to help them survive rather than slowing talent progression by dipping in to other classes, like 2 levels of fighter. I wager that a Dex rogue with 13-14 str (point buy) using a scimitar, weapon finesse, and the pathfinder dervish dance feat that allows you to finesse scimitar and add dex damage to scimitar is the ideal offense/damage build for a "Dex" Rogue, and an uber-strength (start with 18), low dex Ranger/Rogue (seems strange, but very true) is the ultimate "Str Rogue."

2) "Cha rogue viable with point buy?" Yes, very much so, but you should then focus on Improved Bluff and UMD to make you a winner. Excellent short range rogue, but not necessarily the maximized damage in melee guy. Good skirmisher/vital strike 1-hand + shield/buckler concept.

3) "How to build optimized 2WF rogue?" See Rgr/Rog idea above. Once you work out the math (because ranger lets you "break the rules and get the feats without qualifying"), it is impressive, but a wonky RP idea unless you pretend that you are Aragorn but you look like Conan.

4) "TWF useless on the move?" This is the classic stand still and get X sneak attacks versus skirmishers using 1 mega vital-strike sneak attack concept. Only problem is that BBEG and big monsters usually have the upper hand in trying to get to you versus you get to them, but can you stand still enough and live? Get a Cloak of Improved displacement for the big fight. (15 rounds of 50% miss chance) and/or improved invisibility if you are a UMD/Arc Trix - type.

5) "Melee Rogue pointless?" Problem is that most campaigns almost wholly feature fights at close range. Certainly 99% of published modules do. Plus, archer rogues lose opportunities to sneak attack as often as melees and put more enemy focus (aggro?) on the few(er) friends actually up in melee. The math and most adventures alike actually favors the flankster rogue who prays that the "tank" gets more attention than he does.

Having the distance bow and hide only helps you if your DM lets you out on the open plains at 600 feet and snipe all day while the other players watch. Usually the question is more about which opponent just flanked the archer...sigh.. :)

I think the OP's post was motivated by the discussion in this thread: http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/general/viable1WeaponRogue

I was trying to figure out a viable NON-TWF rogue. I came up with 2 builds both of which use The Elven Curved Sword: (clipped_

Not to be mean, but I've posted before on the non-viability of dex melee character builds.

This character is dead, even with his rare Elven sword.

1) Whirlwind attack 10' on a surprise round is rarely, if ever, going to happen in standard adventuring and is effectively little advantage in combat.

2) This character, through the levels, is more dangerous to the party than he is to his enemies with his insanely low Will save.

3) In the higher levels, he is really depending on Power Attack to keep his damage optimal. At 11th level, a lunge power attack with this character is at a -3 to hit on his to hit not exceeding +18 (assume +4 dex item +2 weapon 2 points in dex). A melee guy averaging hitting AC 25-26 to deliver a whirlwind attack is only going to be effective at hitting unimportant enemies. The damage will be roughly d10 + 5d6 (if sneak attack) + 2 (weapon) + 9 (power attack) + 3 (strength) = an average of 37 (sneak attack) or 17 (normal hit). Your AC -2 for the round due to lunge, which will likely make the rogue's AC 24 (+3 mithral chain shirt, gloves of dex +4, ring of protection +1, amulet of natural armor +1), easy fodder for enemies in melee at this level.

But at what cost? Let's say you encounter a big monster and you win initiative and indeed sneak attack it.

Will save is horrible at +4, +6 vs. enchantment ( +3 (base) -1 (Wisdom) +2 (Elf) (+2 resistance) and makes this character incredible charm or domination fodder at 11th level.

Hit points are not good with a 26 AC for a melee character. This character would have roughly 69 hit points at 11th level, assuming that he chose rogue as his favored class and did not choose skill points but pumped his hit points at every opportunity.

Let's simulate 1 round of a fight at this level. You are in a fight with a melee-type enemy. I pulled a random creature out of the Bestiary, a CR12 purple worm. He chooses to attack the rogue this round from 20 feet away, but the rogue has closer due to his melee nature and got in a sneak attack for 37 points of damage and a bleed effect. You won initiative and took the monster down to 82% of its hit points. Note that flat footed, the rogue would need a roll of 9 to even land a sneak attack.

Attack 1: Bite, power attack, no awesome blow. +25 reduced to +20 to hit, needs a roll of 6 to hit. Average roll = Hit. Damage = 4d8+12+10 = average roll = 40 points of damage + grab (+36 grapple CMB). If the rogue does not have Freedom of Movement, he's going to be grappled and swallowed, and will be dead next round unless he's already dead. We aren't done yet.

Attack 2, rogue is down: Sting, power attack, no awesome blow. +25 reduced to +20 to hit, needs a roll of 6 to hit. Average roll = Hit. Damage 2d8+12+10 + poison. Average roll = 31 points of damage + poison (Fort DC25, must save 3 consecutive times during the 6 round effect. The rogue's Fort save will likely be +8 (+6 base, +2 resistance). This means that the rogue will have to roll a 17 each round to not lose d4 strength each round and will have to save 6 rounds in a row unless he rolls 17 three times in a row (which will not happen). This effectively means that in 5 rounds, he will have saved 1 time, and will have taken an average of 10 strength damage.

So in summary, this Dex-melee 11th level build with typical equipment lasts six seconds against a big monster appropriate for the party. He approaches, swings and does damage to the 200 hit point monster, but is knocked to -2 hit points, unconscious, dropping his sword, grappled about to be swallowed (unless freedom of movement) and poisoned (unless immune)with average dice rolls of 10.

Weapon Finesse is not a feat you design a melee character arround if you want to be dealing maximum damage, but you can use it to make non-optimized characters who are still quite viable or allow a non-melee character to become viable in melee. I think it works quite well for its intended purpose.

If your first statement's implications are true, then there would be no need for a rogue sneak attack concept to balance the character in D&D, but it is there. Since damage is king in D&D (e.g. 1hp enemies fight as well as 1000hp enemies), then damage output is the primary concern for any class where spells are not the #1 option.

Weapon Finesse...no, a viable dexterity-based melee build, is a giant wart on D&D 3.0, 3.5, and Pathfinder alike. Multiple classes and prestige classes were invented with questionable crunchy mechanics to get around/over/through this serious problem, and in PF the problem still exists, especially for multiclass characters.

We also tend to only focus on the feat-laden fighter, but other classes consider this a problem as well, and due to the lack of feats, it is often a larger problem. For instance, if you want a Paladin but do not want Str to be your #2 stat but want to be high Dex, it cannot be done. Mechanically it is a significantly inferior character, no matter how many feats you throw at it in the game.

Likewise, a melee-oriented Dex ranger pales to any other Str-based melee build in the game. Pathfinder Aragorn has to be high strength, not high Dex, especially in point buy.

I see where you're going with this, I think that, mechanically speaking, both of your suggested feats are too much. They both break the mechanics of the game (see the spoiler at the end for my explanations why I believe this to be true).

Instead, I propoe these new Feats:<clipped>

DM Blake, +1 for your post. Excellent research and thought-provoking mechanics discussion, worthy of addition to a Pathfinder revision.

My only advice would address another smaller mechanics issue, which is clumsily addressed by a separate feat in one of the Pathfinder splatbooks.

For your Greater Weapon Finesse feat, add scimitar to that list. That solves the problem of the dervish concept in Pathfinder and also makes some fantasy novels ring more true. Statistically there is no reason to include rapier and not scimitar. Regardless of how we believe those weapons "would be used" in combat, statistically the scimitar becomes a very inferior weapon with any dex build.

Thorgrym wrote:

Here's a summary of what I want to see in a Pathfinder 2.0 that significantly deviates from Pathfinder: <laundry list>

I have to commend the fact that you seem to have clearly delineated what you want from a FRPG. My question is twofold: is there no extant game system that accomplishes these goals, and why would a game incorporating these drastic changes need to be labeled "Pathfinder"? It seems to me that a great number of the gripes people have with D&D 4e is that a significant number of long-standing D&D tropes were discarded in favor of "balanced mechanics". How would a "4th editionization" of Pathfinder avoid this splitting of the fanbase?

I recently read Monte Cook's article in Kobold Quarterly 12 (IIRC) about game balance and agreed with much of what he wrote concerning the origin of true game balance. A mathematically balanced game would, by its nature, be stagnant. Nothing new could be introduced to the game without the risk of introducing imbalance back into the system. Part of the draw of Pathfinder for me was the reduction or reboot, so to speak, of the 3e rules sources. Switching to a new or significantly changed rules system would necessitate yet another extensive play-test/revision/release/errata cycle.

Zo

Nice comment Zo:

It wouldn't have to be Pathfinder. I've loved D&D since I could write in cursive, and up until 4th edition did I eventually part ways. Don't get me wrong:

I think 4th edition has some fantastic ideas we should all learn from

Unfortunately for me and the people I ever game with, in extended playtesting the power curve is so flat, and the combats so long and uninteresting that it promotes the "15-minute work day" as one of my friends puts it, and "you can't go back."

That means, that once you've had steak (you maximized fireballed for 10d6 damage DC21 save), you don't want hamburger (Hey at 21st level I can blast you for 5d6 damage, but I know you have 200 hp).

Regardless of whether you are a power gamer or not, I doubt the average player can get excited over doing d4 damage as a warrior, even if everyone has 3 hit points. (Trying to cite an extreme example).

Not trying to cause a flame war or incite anything. For ME (and I was the last hold out amongst my gamer friends), and for my gaming friends, 4e was so balanced and flat, and lack of interesting magic items that it sucked the fun right out of the gaming experience. It made us so jaded that we quit fantasy roleplaying for about a year, which was probably a well-needed break to reboot our expectations.

Pathfinder just showed us promise. You can take a system that we enjoyed but feared its excessive broken mechanics and take a good shot at fixing broken things.

PF still has things wrong, and broken, but they aren't as glaring in most cases...and don't get me wrong, I fundamentally believe a reboot of the system could be a great thing. Rebalance EVERYTHING.

Why is the Maze spell the spell level it is? Because that's what it used to be. Are all 5th level spells equivalent in power or effect or impact to the game? Absolutely not. Should Heal be a 6th level spell? I fundamentally disagree, but some of the higher game is based on the old adage of having a dedicated healbot to a lesser or greater extent.

In 2nd edition (and it had FLAWS), we ran many campaigns WITHOUT a healer, and it wasn't the easiest, but it wasn't glaringly obvious. This wart has been in the game for a long time. I don't remember anyone crying that a cleric wasn't in the party in Dungeons and Dragons (original game), even when characters were in the teens and 20s levels.

Hypothetical situation here. Paizo decides to start working on Pathfinder 2.0, a totally new PnP RPG. It's not based on 3.x, 3.P or 4E. It's going to be completely brand spankin' new.

What radical departure(s) are you looking for from Pathfinder v1? You want less attacks at high levels or fewer spells per day so that high level play moves faster? You want SoS spells completely removed from the game? You want Barbarians removed and have the Fighter class able to cover that niche with selectable class abilities? You want that worthless Bard class out of core or maybe add in the Warlock type class? Maybe you only want three generic classes that you can build any concept imaginable? Is magic risky yet insanely powerful or can any schmuck with a $2 prayer book heal the party? Death to the Vacian spell system? No more HP?

What do you want? What are you pushing for?

This is a great question, and one I'm happy to answer. What are your concerns:

Your old books won't work? Covered.
Your existing characters can't transfer? Covered.

Here we go. It may not be obvious to people who haven't really read the back end of the Bestiary. They broke down every type of monster down to their fundamental components (BAB, ability scores, saves, abilities, types, etc.) and standardized them, and then rebuilt the monsters we love and hold dear, and they start making a lot more sense, and sometimes come up to nearly identical stats.

Pathfinder 2.0 should be the same way. Think of it like this: existing Pathfinder 1.0 characters COULD be built in the 2.0 system, but it is only one possibility.

Pathfinder 2.0 should be balanced mathematically. Everything should cost points. EVERYTHING

You want another feat? Buy it.
You want to learn how to cast arcane spells? That's going to really cost you to start, but picking up a second spell isn't so hard, but then it starts getting more difficult again as you try to achieve the pinnacle of perfection.

It could easily be nested in trees and have requirements to get to another grouping of abilities, and NOTHING should be linear. Getting a +1 BAB should be pretty easy, +2 is a little harder, etc. to where getting to +20 should take a significant effort.

Then, if there is errata, it isn't major, it just changes the COST for certain abilities/feats/powers/spells.

If anyone plays DDO (recently), you'll see how they've rebuilt the game into an easy mode and a custom mode. You can pick a "build" or a "kit" and level up, just like how in Pathfinder you become a fighter and level up as a fighter. Or, instead, you can customize every step of the way.

Here's a summary of what I want to see in a Pathfinder 2.0 that significantly deviates from Pathfinder:

1) Fix Armor Class, it is a dumb concept.

Heavy armor, without significant magic and/or training, shouldn't make you harder to hit. It makes you much easier to hit. However, most attacks will have a much harder time wounding you, and even if they do, it won't hurt as much.

Learn from the designs of alternate systems such as MMOs, Iron Heroes, and Grim-N-Gritty to learn more about how armor, even some magic spells, should focus more in the direction of damage resistance than purely armor class. Even ancient systems like Warhammer 40K in the 1990s had a rating to help even naked troops soak up some punishment, and they only used single d6s!

2) Fix Hit Points. It is a dumb concept.

Characters with 90 hit points and 89 points of damage fight just as well as characters with 20 hit points that are unwounded. The abstraction made sense in the 80s, but so did the Dungeons and Dragons cartoon. Now they are both silly.

Learn from Star Wars Saga Edition and improve it with a life bar. Look at Iron Heroes and Grim-N-Gritty to brainstorm new ways of showing how your bestial barbarian is shrugging off pain, while the sickly elven wizard is crying over a hangnail.

3) Fix the Vancian spell system, it never makes sense.

Wizards and Clerics must be irate over sorcerers and favored souls. They don't forget! How come the 30 intelligence 20th level wizard keeps forgetting magic missile when an 8 intelligence, 15 charisma sorcerer never forgets. Game balance, game schmalance. Fix it!

How come every 5th level wizard who learns fireball does the same freaking damage with only a slight deviation in DC due to ability score? With point buy it is almost guaranteed to have about the same effect in campaign A vs. campaign B.

4) Fix Spell Level versus Character Level. It is confusing in its inconsistency.

You have to be a 9th level wizard or a 10th level sorcerer to get 5th level spells? What level bard do I need to be to get to 5th level spells? Why is one single spell a different level spell for a cleric versus a paladin versus a bard. What DC do I set for my rogue using Use Magic Device? The Bard version?

That's dumb. Change the mechanic altogether. Hopefully build out spells much like a feat tree is built today, and get progressively more expensive.

5) Quit making all X level Y the same, but just with slightly different feats/spells.

Why does level X equate to a fixed number of skills/feats/abilities, etc. Why do all 5th level barbarians have improved uncanny dodge? It is silly! Make abilities/spells purchased, and you don't have to wonder about how fair or unfair it is that my fighter has a fixed number of feats but the wizard gets more powerful every time we run across a spellbook!

6) Don't accumulate XP, spend it.

Why do we keep earning experience points? I have 1.3 million XP, how about you? Only 1.2? You should SPEND experience points to buy a level/feat/ability, etc. Not the other way around. Keeping 150,000XP is like having 150,000gp in your pocket. It doesn't help you unless you are saving up for something fierce.

7) Fix money. It harkens back to an ancient version of D&D and economy based on it never makes sense in a medieval magical fantasy world

So, let me get this straight: I am 14th level now and I have 123,000 gold pieces, and when I get to the mega city, they actually have such an economy that I might be able to find a +2 adamantine ghost touch dwarven axe for sale? Are they out of +1s? Who is buying all these magic items at half price and why can't I? Who actually keeps +1 icy burst kukri?

Where is all this money getting stored? Vaults? Flimsy cloth bags with extradimensional spaces? Why aren't high level liches, vampires, and rogues making off with all of it to build their magic item empires?

Too many items, too many transactions, too little sense. Seriously, sell anything at half price makes no sense. They would have to be high enough level casters to even prove that the items weren't cursed or harmful or misrepresented such that they would care less about buy up the spare +1 leather armors, and even less about trying to resell them at retail value for profit.

Again, DDO is a great example of what a live economy actually produces. +1 Adamantine Full Plate? Pretty cheap. +1 Adamantine Chainmail? Worthless. +5 Full Plate, fairly cheap. +3 or less anything? Worthless. Chainmail? Worthless, even mithral. Now, mithral breastplate..now we're talking. +5 Mithral Full Plate? Priceless.

How much demand is there for +1 leather armors anyway? Anyone who is worried about raising their armor bonus from 2 to 3 and avoiding the minor armor check penalty associated with studded leather...oh wait, that's no one.

Advanced Topics

Physicality

Pathfinder and other D&D-like game systems are still a system of stand in front of another character and roll against a static number to damage, but it doesn't matter until they are dead systems.

How come a 20th level trained fighter at his home without his armor, probably has the same armor class as a farmer boy (young 1st level adult with age adjustment to dexterity) and can be easily hit by a house cat about 2 times a round? (Look up the stats for a cat. Seriously.)

As much as 4th edition made me grimace, at least they made progress in what combats could look like, with marks, etc. that at least made it adjustable.

In fact, it is still very difficult to make a fighter based off of anything but strength and make it work as well. He'll never truly match the power fighter. It is mathematically impossible.

Likewise, there is no mechanic for savvy versus youth/strength other than level. That must mean that every 35 year old soldier must be higher level than the 20 year old swordsman-in-training, right? Why do casters get better with age?

Gear

Gear makes might, not character power, depending on the circumstances.

Fear the 20th level naked sorcerer with a contingency spell and nothing to lose, who can do hit-and-teleports until he conquers the galaxy. The naked 20th level barbarian is basically reduced to a sweaty wrestler.

A 10th level party is captured and thrown in jail. This is going to be fun for a couple of characters, a miserable experience for the rest. Why do monks and sorcerers get all the fun? Even the rogue smiles, but only if he gets to hide.

Magic Item Knowledge

To be the best non-caster you can be, you have to truly study every magic item possible and build for it with friends crafting items or buying it on your own.

How come the characters with the least knowledge of magic have to know the most to be effective? What is this deflection bonus again? OHHH, this is an ENHANCEMENT bonus to natural armor! If it were realistic, the casters would end up with all the good loot, and all the non-casters would be in +1 gear castoffs or pretty things. Who would be the wiser?

Come on. Ridiculous concept.

Reward role playing or at least playing your role
Not sure how this is done, maybe there is an MVP for every game session and they get an extra point. Something needs to be done to incentivize character development and fun. At least in 2nd edition AD&D fighters got extra XP for killing, wizards got extra spells for casting spells, etc. It wasn't fair or even, but it was something.

Anyway, this is a start. I started breaking down Pathfinder and doing this on my own and it is laborious hard work. I'm up to 65 pages of material but it is about 5 percent 'done' and probably will never see the light of day.

But, I can daydream.

Name: Euridice Ferrier

Race: Half-Elf
Classes/levels: Cleric 3/Sorcerer 2
Adventure: What Lies in Dust
Location: Massacre House Mausoleum
Catalyst: Female Dread Mummy Monk
The Gory Details: After dispatching of some skeleton fodder, the Mummy rose up from a corner behind the party. Euridice turned to look only to meets its Gaze of Despair. Failing the save, she was paralyzed as the rest of the group moved in to attack. Blatantly accepting any attacks of oppurtunity, the mummy flew before Euridice to deliver a coup de grace one round later with her shocking burst temple sword.

I anticipated this being a tough fight, but the thing is; Euridice is the PC with most of the fire damage attacks. Taking her out made it a lot tougher for the rest of the group.

I suppose this was rebuilt by the GM as a customized encounter?

Name: Ella Jeggare
Race: Human
Classes/levels: Paladin 4
Adventure: The Sixfold Trial
Location: Asmodean Knot
Catalyst: Shadows
The Gory Details: Since the party did not find and/or take any of the keyed items in the Asmodean knot, they used a rope of climbing and a levitate spell to retreat to the beginning after securing the main treasure.

During their withdrawal, two shadows came out to play and they hit the paladin for 6, 5, and 6 points of strength damage, bringing my wife's 17 Str paladin to an untimely demise. The party had to kill her raised shadow as well, which was entirely humorous at the time.

Airhead wrote:

If a shadow scores a critical hit (confirmed) does it do double drain?

yes

Airhead wrote:

or is the drain dice considered 'extra' damage and not doubled?

no

We just had a party member die to a shadow...but in reading the description it says that the member dies and becomes a shadow under the party's control.

What exactly happens? Is there a physical body left? I know that the equipment is there. It appears that she can only be brought back by resurrection.

I am excited about this one as well, although I'm disappointed that (again) the adventure paths start at 1st level and end at something very short of 20th level.

Since this path is "Kingmaker" it would have made a lot more sense to start it at 13th level and get them to 20th level by the end of the campaign.

That way people who started campaigns in other adventure paths such as "The Council of Thieves" would be able to end that campaign and get in to something like this.

The Kingmaker series harkens back to some original D&D Companion modules for levels 14-25, which opened up the area of Norwald (Northern coasts)--a large area of mostly uncivilized land, for conquering.

I know in the Buckler details it says you can wield a Bow or crossbow without penalty. but what does that mean?

Is it just ignoring the -1 to hit?

Can you use a Buckler and maintain the AC bonus when using a Bow/Crossbow?

If so how would this work (mechanicaly speaking?)

or is it penalized for using both hands as it says later on in the description? and therefore losing the AC bonus.

All the comments regarding WoTC rules clarifications in earlier 3.5 splatbooks are funny. They aren't relevant. This is Pathfinder 1st edition.

You do not have the -1 to hit penalty if using a crossbow or bow.

However, if you are using a weapon that requires two hands to fire (check the description of the weapon in use), you would not have the AC bonus after firing.

If you take an action to reload that uses both hands, you do not get the AC bonus from the buckler that round.

So, I am currently in the Council of Thieves AdPath playing a Rogue. I opted to be a traveler from a Nadal family and trained in the use of poisons.

We have a druid in our group who is doing craft alchemy as well as herbalism.

Our current conundrum is that I am having him make poisons for me and we wanted to try to gain some of the raw materials for them using his herbalism skill but there is no place in the core rule book or anything else we can find that shows what exactly the base materials are for each poison and where to find them or if we can find them.

So in short:

1. How can we tell what the raw materials are for each poisons?

2. How can we know if these will be available to buy in Cheliax or find in the area around it? (Using Herbalism)

3. Should we just house rule it?

Thank you in advance.

I think the question becomes does your DM require you to make checks to find the raw materials to make magic items? Does your GM require you to find unguents and rare ingredients to make alchemical items with Craft (Alchemy)?

The rulebook states that poisons can be made using Craft (alchemy) where the DC tomake a poison is equal to its Fortitude save DC.

Other than the fact that you can poison yourself while crafting the poison, under normal rules there are no specific requirements to find the Black Lotus to make Black Lotus extract, for example. Of course, your DM can rule otherwise to restrict or otherwise curtail poison use in his or her campaign.

From a flavor perspective, Cheliax is a dark place where many things can be bought and sold on the black market. I would imagine that a simple check to find information would be good enough. If you were required to find it out in the open then Survival to forage would be an acceptable substitute. I do not believe you need Knowledge (herbalism) to identify the raw materials you know you need for items you already know how to make, and if you have Craft (alchemy) it should generally be accepted that you know how to make an item whose DC you can achieve.

In any case, you should have to pay out the normal 1/3rd cost required by the Craft skill in order to obtain those components. However you roleplay that is up to you and your GM, be that in bribes, payments, or expenses to forage for components.

First off, well done on the Bestiary. I could write 3 pages on its highlights.

However, a friend of mine asked me about the Beholder and the Illithid (Mind Flayer) as he noted an early episode of Order of the Stick had a running gag that those couldn't be mentioned due to not being in the SRD (and then came the lawyers lol).

Is there any truth to this? Are these two iconics protected by copyright and/or trademark?

It would be really nice to add an official BeholderTM monster in the game.

This is a difficult encounter, and I'm pretty sure I know where it is from, because this is the exact scenario I ran into the first Pathfinder Society adventure Thorgrym was on.

The previous group that fought that at Gencon was a TPK. We were a bit more clever, 2 characters at range, a raging barbarian in her face, and the, um, off-tank ended up bull rushing her off the dock into the water.

Do you know how hard it is for a cleric to swim in full plate armor and cast spells? It was literally like shooting fish in a barrel. She drowned.

This is only particularly dangerous at low levels IMO, a little balanced towards the dark, evil clerics fighting low level PCs, not worried about hitting anyone else (unlike the PC cleric who does not want to constantly heal the enemies too).

mdt wrote:

I disagree on the Cha based warmage edge. I like it being Int, it encourages INT to not be a dump stat. I really like that. A warmage spent time in a college, he should have a high int.

I played like 3 warmages over various campaigns, the problems I ran across was this was a 3 stat class: CHA, INT and DEX.

They are a CHA based caster, the edge was INT based and they threw a lot of ranged touch spells using DEX plus DEX for AC. That's a lot of stats to try and fill up over time for various reasons. Especially at start up.

I always thought when it was released that the spell basing stat and the edge stat should be the same.

Thank you for reminding me--that's right, it really was a 3 stat class, not mentioning that you'd actually like some CON too. Even the other person that commented said 16 Dex was his sweet spot.

I don't like when they try to balance classes by making it difficult to build a good character without rolling (e.g. using point buy).

It is an interesting concept to me, but a little hard to remember (massive chart lookup), and I do not think it is game-balanced very well given the changes in flying encounters.

In addition, such a scientific approach to model impact energy completely ignores other factors such as wind resistance and landing ability of certain types of creatures. Remember, this model would cause a feather to be completely disintegrated as it comes off of a bird flying by at 40' overhead.

Unfortunately, I think that this warmage conversion is way too underpowered. It is weaker than the current evoker specialist wizard, who can actually do everything this guy can do and do more damage, have more utility, equal AC, etc at a cost of 4 feats by 7th level. In my opinion, this class needs a serious overhaul because there is too much overlap with the wizard, and the flavor of this class is probably best suited for a prestige class anyway.

You have to remember that Pathfinder characters are actually more powerful than their 3.5 counterparts, and are better balanced. There are some weird problems with this class.

For instance, did you know this about the 3.5 warmage?

He can wear Mithral Full Plate, but can't use a heavy mithral shield?

He is a Charisma character but only gets one class skill using Charisma (Intimidate) which is effectively useless for this character in 3.5 rules?

He is a graduate of a war college but he apparently failed his class on setting DCs because his Charisma sets DCs. In return he gets Int bonus as a damage bonus. Why do you split two ability scores for spellcasting when you need strength to wear armor, you want Con to be a combat character etc. It waters down the character as an unnecessary balancing factor.

I DMed a campaign where my wife played a warmage. Don't get me wrong, she loved it for its simplicity, but the character had some decided weaknesses. Oddly, in the party, the Sorceror had more utility and practically the same offensive output. The class basically turned into an evoker Sorceror but most of the spells were already picked out for you.

I have some interesting ideas about how to reinvent the Warmage as a Pathfinder character or prestige class. I'd be willing to take a serious shot at either if someone wants me to put together a package.

Hello all,

I want to make sure I understand the number of spell that a wizard can add to his spell book as he gains levels. The book states...

"At each new wizard level, he gains two new spells of any spell level or levels that he can cast (based on his new wizard level) for his spellbook."

This means that at 2nd level he adds two 1st level spells, at 3rd level he adds two 1st level and two 2nd level, ... , at 5th level he adds two 1st level, two 2nd level, two 3rd level, etc. Am I correct?

Also, if a wizard that prepares a spell from his opposition school with a metamagic feat, then it takes up two of the higher slots, right? For example, if necromancy was one of my opposition schools, then preparing a Maximized Ray of Enfeeblement would take up two 4th level slots. Is this correct too?

Thanks.

LOL, I thought I was the first responder, but it took me about 30 minutes to write this since I'm at work and actually working haha!

A leveling wizard gets TWO (only 2) new spells that she can write in her spellbook for free. The spells take up space in the spellbook as normal, but the wizard is presumed to have been working on those spells slowly and they are ready as soon as she levels.

Example: Jeria, a 4th level Wizard with a spellbook of 7 1st level spells and 4 2nd level spells, just made 5th level. She can add 2 spells to her spellbook, and she chooses to add 2 3rd level spells, Fireball and Haste, into her spellbook, giving her a total of 7 1st level spells, 4 2nd level spells, and 2 3rd level spells.

A wizard does not get two free spells per spell level when taking another level of wizard.

Although the wording in the Wizard description is very odd, the rule is clarified in chapter 9, page 219 where it clearly states only 2 spells are added (see the Spells Gained at a New Level section).

The question I have is does point blank shot work with the transmuter wizard's Telekenetic Fist ability? The feat says "You get a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls with ranged weapons at ranges of up to 30 feet."

Does this mean that spells no longer benefit from this feat, or are spells and spell-like abilities with ranged attack rolls counted as ranged weapons?

The only mention I've found in the rulebook pg. 63 uses the formula (level / 3) to determine effective spell level for an ability. Now this was just for the paladin's power, and not a pervasive statement, but that seems like a much better rule of thumb to me than (level / 2).

We've been running them as level acquired / 2 = equivalent spell level (minimum 1).

It really should be clarified, though.

The only mention I've found in the rulebook pg. 63 uses the formula (level / 3) to determine effective spell level for an ability. Now this was just for the paladin's power, and not a pervasive statement, but that seems like a much better rule of thumb to me than (level / 2).

Bracers of Armor would also block it, IMO.

I completely disagree, as Bracers of Armor merely provide an enchantment bonus to armor. I argue that Bracers of Armor in fact provides NO PROTECTION from Phase Arrow. Although the description mentions a tangible field of force, it expresses does NOT give the wearer deflection bonuses (which remain in play, I'll describe later) but gives merely armor bonuses "just as though he were wearing armor."

Barriers are mentioned throughout the core rulebook, strongly referencing solid barriers (i.e. physical walls, some things providing full cover, large things made of plaster, wood, and stone are all mentioned), and then there are other mentions of barriers regarding spells. These are:

Antilife Shell (abjuration)--also note the forcing a barrier description in the Abjuration section of the Wizard class.
Antimagic Field (abjuration)
Antiplant Shell (abjuration)
Blade Barrier (evocation [force]) This effect is a wall, but in the description it mentions that this is also a barrier.
Dimensional Lock (abjuration)
Protection from Evil/etc. (abjuration)
Repel Vermin (abjuration)
Wall of Force (evocation[force])
Wall of Thorns (conjuration[creation]) I argue that this is a solid barrier and a magic barrier and thus is in scope for this discussion.
Wind Wall (evocation[air])

Note that other spells, notably Shield, do not indicate that the spell is a barrier, but merely "an invisible shield of force." Shield of Faith mentions "magical field," but does not mention barrier, as does Mage Armor.

Phase Arrow (pg. 376) indicates that it passes through any nonmagical barrier, but any magical barrier stops the arrow.

Thus, it appears to me that the following is true:

Phase Arrows are blocked by any of the above spells, but can travel through items created by instantaneous spells, such as Walls of Stone.

Armor, Shield, cover, and concealment modifiers do not apply, which also seems to indicate magical bonuses as well.

Full Plate +5 should not work.
Ordinary Full Plate should not work.
Bracers of Armor should not work.
Shield spell should not work.
Mage Armor spell should not work.

**NOTE** Please do not confuse the concept of incorporeal touch attacks with Phase Arrow..incorporeal touch attacks do not ignore bonuses from force effects like mage armor and bracers of armor. Phase Arrow is NOT an incorporeal touch attack!!

Just my 2 cents :)

A wizard can 'enchant' their arcane bond object as if they had the requisite item creation feats. So I was wondering if a wizard could inscribe a spell on their bonded object as if it was a scroll. With scrolls, it is only the writing that disappears, so the bonded object would remain after the spell had been cast from it. So you could have a spell inscribed upon the back of your amulet, for instance.

Is that the intention of the rules? Is there anything that would rule against this interpretation? I don't think it would be overpowering to have a wizard doing this. Though you might need to set a limit of how many spells the object could hold.

RAW, this is not allowed in the rules. Scribe Scroll (pg. 132) allows you to create a scroll of any type that you know. It mentions referring to pg. 490 for scrolls, and scroll types are fine vellum about 8 1/2 by 11 inches, reinforced with leather bindings top and bottom. There are no options listed for using other materials, such as carving into stone (a rune), or on a person (a tattoo). In other games based on 3.5, these are all accomplished by different feats, so there are no precedents supporting your case.

**NOTE**The core rulebook says that scrolls are APPROXIMATELY 8.5 by 11 inches. That is because Wizards strictly adhere to the ISO A4 paper standard of 210 × 297 mm.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_size

I have a quick question. I know that the rules for critical hits, sneak attacks, and precision damage have changed. Instead of vital parts of the anatomy it is a vital area. From what I understand now undead and constructs are vulnerable to this damage. The only things that are not vulnerable are oozes, and elementals and incorporeal undead unless it says so in the bestiary entry, like the gibbering mouther. Where does it state this change in the pathfinder rulebook? Or is it elsewhere? I am just curious because I would like to have a page reference handy. Thanks.

The critical point is that there is no sentence directly mentioning "now undead are vulnerable to critical hits." Instead, each creature type description specifically mentions their immunities, and immunity to sneak attacks and critical hits are notably absent from these descriptions. Reference the undead creature type description on pg. 309 of the core rulebook, and you will notice that the line such as in the Ooze creature type description listing immunity to all sneak attack and precision-based attacks such as critical hits is not there.

This thread confuses me. It seems as if most posters come to this discussion with a preconceived notion of what a Bard is or should be with out reference to the functional mechanics of the class as provided by PfRPG.

I will do my best to address the major themes I have identified, if I miss one that is important to you please don't hesitate to bring it to my attention.

1) There is always another class more capable of filling a specific niche than the bard.

2) The bard is not the best at anything.

3) There is no place for a bard in the classic four player group.

4) The bard is only a support character, which gets old pretty fast for most players.

1) Specialized Niches - The problem with this argument is that it looks at the class from only one facet and does not view the class holistically. For example, the bard is not as good at dealing out physical damage as the full BAB classes. This is true. However, that argument ignores that fact that the bard is almost as good as the full BAB classes and is simultaneously able to heal, use crowd control magic, and has enough skill points to fill social/stealth/knowledge roles. Can the bard deal as much physical damage as a fighter? No. But it can get very close to the fighter's output while retaining all of the other options its magical and skill based abilities provide at no additional experience or gold cost. In fact, the bard is more likely than the fighter to succeed at any given task because the bard employs a greater diversity viable of tactics.

2) The bard has no niche - The bard is hands down the best buffer in the game. The Inspire bardic music abilities are unmatched. Additionally, thanks to the changes in PfRPG, the bard can provide the best in game buffs while also attacking with an effective BAB equal to that of a full BAB class minus the final iterative attack or while casting crowd control or healing spells.

3) No place in the classic group - With the changes to the rules for traps the bard can easily fill in for a rogue in any group...

Excellent post. Although I now believe the OP's intent was really flame-bait, I do recognize that historically, the bard has been seen as the 'challenging' class because it's power is not entirely overt. Interesting again is the fact that over the months and years of 3rd edition D&D/3.5 D&D/PRPG playtesting, the bard has basically been cut from the same cloth with minor tweaks here and there. My point is, if the argument was that the class was underpowered, why has it 'always' been around this same power level?

The answer is this: the bard offers unparalleled diversity and flexibility in a balanced campaign. If all you do is run combat simulations door-to-door until you get to the BBEG and Pwn his mad Tr3asur3z, then the bard isn't exactly the strongest character.

Note that the two presented builds are iconically NOT how bards are typically built, either as handout characters in tournament play, sample characters found in adventures, or in my own experience, how bards are built in real life. I've never seen an 18 STR bard nor a 10 CHA bard. It just doesn't happen that way. It was a poor attempt to make a crunchy stat statement that the bard can be effective in combat. The effectiveness is that the bard ALWAYS has something to do, whereas other classes, in some situations, feel left out.

Bards are typically sought after not for their tremendous power, but their flair and flexibility. It is possibly the perfect hybrid class, but with that level of flexibility comes a slightly higher penchant for having under-developed characters because a bard can be spread too thinly for novice and average players.

Skilled and expert players, however, can make the bard sing. (Pun intended). I won't go into the various mechanics as many of them have already been discussed, but the bard can be generally what they want to be...and for those who actually use persuasion/diplomacy etc. skills (depending on the game system) there are some really broken possibilities that I know some DMs ban because the bard IS TOO GOOD. There are ways in 3rd edition and 3.5 D&D to build a bard that can literally talk the BBEG to join the party and put down his weapon unless the DM just says "that's not possible." However, from a pure game mechanics perspective and all the splat books, it isn't only possible, the Bard may be able to do it in round 1 and effectively choose whom and when the party (if ever) fights using the rules as written with no weird interpretations involved.

But besides being an active conversationalist (bard players tend to be communicative), bards can of course flex their might in various ways, whether it be defensive, utility, knowledge, social, and in some cases, combat. The bard does tend to lag a little in combat ability, but that's a small price to pay for a character, that if played well, should have some swagger, if only in a RP sense.

DAUMN!!! ~spoken in a thick Southern drawl~

I always wondered how to spell that. And now I know! And knowing is half the battle!

Seriously, can't wait for this book.