I don't think Marks comments on a deliquiscent glove actually do anything (for or against) your point of view on where a held charge is stored. Mark still has not said whether a "no effect" touch attack is allowed to be made or not. Nor do the rules comment on whether a game of "tag" is allowed or not for the reasons I noted above.
Wait, my point of view? You mean Mark Seifter's statement. In which he was incredibly explicit about where a held charge is stored.
To be honest, I thought your previous reply was just an attempt to save some face when you were directly disproved and I weren't gonna press you on that. I didn't think you were actually gonna keep arguing about where the charge is held. That argument is done and dealt with. I'd be happy to answer your questions to the best of my understanding but I'm afraid you'd just see it as me conceding where the charge is held isn't 100% explicit and then direct the conversation towards minor disagreements.
Oh and yes, Mark did not say whether or not a "no effect" touch attack is allowed to be made or not. That's the important part. He didn't say it wasn't allowed, but instead assigned the decision to individual GMs. What I have tried to explain is how this alternative way of attacking can then be used for different purposes. You wouldn't actually have to "accidentally" discharge the spell if your GM is okay with you targeting touch AC with normal attacks in the first place.
And I choose to disregard your reply to the "tag" question as I considered it an obvious misdirection so that you are not forced to make a commitment in the argumentation. Which I consider cowardly.
I'm still trying to fully wrap my head around this response from Mark.
Explanation:
The issue is that the gloves doesn't actually give you a "Touch Attack" which you could use to deal the 1d6 acid dmg. But it seems intended that you can now touch enemies for dmg. Mark recognizes this and says (paraphrased):
'
'Well technically you are not granted a touch attack. So unless you (the GM) would allow someone to poke an enemy (i.e. target touch AC with a normal attack) the gloves can't be used by themselves to touch enemies for dmg.'
bbangerter wrote:
That appears to me to be in conflict. No effect IMO, would be no discharge of the spell, no damage delivered, no mirror images popped, etc. No effect, in my mind, would mean no accidental discharge.
That is not what is meant by "for no effect". From context we can deduce that Mark Seifter is saying that the "touch attack for no effect" (poking) would get the 1d6 Acid dmg rider effect from the gloves. That's the question he is answering.
What it is referring to is the choice to make a touch attack out of a normal attack, which is an attack that by itself has "no effect". But since rider effects such as the Deliquescent Gloves would apply it is clear that a spell would be discharged.
***
===
Diego Rossi wrote:
I am reasonably sure that there is a reply to that, a fairly angry one, probably by SKR, stating that you can't mook attacks by doing them "accidentally".
I'm not sure what you're saying. "Mook attacks by doing them 'accidentally'"?
===
bbangerter wrote:
I would definately consider getting a non-attack attack to deal extra damage to an enemy an abuse of the accidental discharge rules.
I am fairly certain that you would have been adamant that opening a door with a held charge was rules lawyering until 6 hours ago, so forgive me for not putting much value to this opinion.
All is possible, but I am surprised at never having encountered a post directing me to an SKR replies thread.
Facepalm
Augh, you are entirely correct Diego! I had mistaken SKR with Mark Seifter and that's why I couldn't find it. The Mark Seifter thread is alive and well, I'm glad to say.
====
@bbangerter
Found this, now that I have the actual thread to peruse: The charge is stored in a particular hand, or weapon with spellstrike.
Spoiler:
Mark Seifter wrote:
In general, held charges "live" in a particular hand (or weapon with spellstrike). From chill touch "A touch from your hand..."
The generic option to deliver a touch spell by touching is a standard action (from the Magic chapter). However, you could use the option to deliver touch spells through a natural attack or unarmed strike to deliver multiple of them, as long as you get multiple attacks with that limb. So for instance, a monk could deliver tons of chill touch spells in the same round with flurry. They would be against full AC though, of course.
I'm well aware that the last sentence goes against my actual point of contention, but hang on
A couple more touch attack questions: do the Deliquescent Gloves allow you to make melee touch attacks whenever you like (doing 1d6 acid damage,) or does it only add 1d6 acid damage to touch attacks that you are granted from other sources (like touch spells)?
If they allow you to make "independent" touch attacks, can you TWF with a weapon in one hand and the gloves in the other?
(bonus question: when you buy the Deliquescent Gloves, do they come in a pair or is there only a single glove?)
The item appears to be poorly written. In one place it claims to be a pair of gloves, and in another it claims to only cover one hand. It's also ambiguous as to the touch attack part. I guess it depends on whether you would allow someone to poke someone else as a touch attack for no effect.
I had hoped for a more conclusive statement but it is the last sentence that is of interest. If you allow someone to poke someone else as a touch attack for no effect. That is, is it physically impossible to play tag or not? This is the assumption that makes the Deliquescent Gloves work, and I thought was very commonplace. I've seen it used against Mirror Image.
If you do allow someone to target touch AC "for no effect", then it is possible to choose to target Touch AC with the attacks made as part of Spell Combat to discharge the spell as it is stored in the weapon.
While there is a FAQ that states that a Spell Touch Attack is a standard action, that is not what is happening here. Even a non-magus could try to deliberately "accidentally" discharge the spell with a touch attack, as part of a full-attack or an AoO, as long as they understand it does not count as a Spell Touch Attack.
So a Wizard doing this would not be considered armed (by the spell charge) and would not benefit from any extra stipulations in the spell description, such as Shocking Grasp's +3 vs metal armor.
Ugh, yeah. Zero motivation to return to a thread and start bickering when there's been 10+ posts.
MrCharisma wrote:
@Wonderstell If you really think your interpretation of Spellstrike is correct I recommend you make a thread about it. Yes we're already on the rules forum but you would get input from everyone in the know by posting it in a thread with a more relevant title. I feel like this thread has been a fairly accurate preview of how that will go though, so whether that would be a useful exercise or not is entirely up to you to decide.
Nah, I realized far too late that the point of contention didn't lie with Spellstrike but with far more basic interactions of the rules. Making an additional thread would be pointless as its only purpose would be to convince people that do not want to be convinced. It would be like arguing with he-who-shall-not-be-named about teamwork feats and the "own ally" FAQ.
===
Diego Rossi wrote:
Do you have some reference to this elusive SKR thread?
Because, in years of reading this forum I have never seen it.
Okay, assuming you're not taking me for a ride I'll give you some circumstantial evidence.
Sean K Reynolds in 2016 telling us how many post he has made on the paizo forums: "11,072 posts (11,086 including aliases)"
Sean K Reynold's posts right now: "7,563 posts (7,577 including aliases)"
As you can see, that's a huge discrepancy. I'm extremely surprised they choose to delete it when they could have just locked it.
Uh. You weren't aware that holding the charge is done with a hand?
The FAQ you linked literally says that the disarmed Magus is holding the charge in their hand. You can absolutely hold the charge in your right hand and open a door with your left. This is one of those things that are so obvious that the rules aren't explicit.
I can disprove the other thing you said but it's important that you understand that why yes, you are actually holding the charge in one hand.
Oh no no no, not that one. The official one had several thousands of posts it it. Tens of thousands. I'm surprised you weren't aware of that thread as it has been a source of many rules clarifications.
As for the rest of your post, it will be a complete waste of time to engage with you if you refuse to answer my question.
Either you concede that those hypothetical kids aren't bludgeoning each other to death, or if you are of the opposite opinion, you've ceased to be someone worth arguing with. Simple as that.
1) You can use Spellstike, you are not forced to use it, but if you use Spellstrike you make a melee attack, not a touch attack.
A melee attack, yes. And "melee touch attack" is a subcategory of "melee attacks". You are still performing a melee attack when you choose to target touch AC.
If a couple of kids are playing tag, are you of the opinion that they can't roll to hit touch AC and must instead beat each other into unconsciousness? That's the crux of the issue, really. If you don't share my view that you can choose to target touch AC in place of a normal attack, then I have no way to convince you.
I would have linked some posts to back me up but it appears as if Paizo has deleted the entirety of the "Ask Sean k Reynolds" thread. Which, if I express myself modestly, was a very rash move.
Au contraire, you are the one who is mistaken about Spellstrike.
"At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack (1). Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell (2). If successful, this melee attack deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell."
Spellstrike has two immediate benefits.
1: You can now deliver touch spells through your weapon rather than requiring an empty hand.
2: In place of the free melee touch attack as part of casting a spell, you may make a weapon attack.
Spellstrike does not, in any way, force you to make attacks targeting normal AC if you deliver touch spells through your weapon. It is entirely within your ability to target touch AC with the charge held in your weapon. Just as if you held the charge in your hand.
If you are successful, the melee attack deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell. And what is the "normal damage" of a touch attack? Nada.
I repeat, absolutely nowhere is it stated that you must target normal AC.
Deciding that the Magus is unable to target touch AC with Spellstrike is definitely trying to make it more difficult for the magus to use touch spells.
"Limited actions on my turn: If an AOO or other interrupting effect reduces what actions I can take on my turn, does this reduction apply immediately?
Yes, even if it interrupts or limits your in-progress. /.../"
===
It being natural attacks does not change this. While you can thematically describe that a tiger pounces into its foe with its bite and both claws simultaneously, the attacks are mechanically speaking happening subsequently.
It is also possible to just target Touch AC with your Spellstrike if you give up dealing normal damage in addition to your Spell damage. It doesn't sound like that happened here, though.
It is possible to target Touch AC with your SPELL, but "Spellstrike" always targets regular AC (unless you have a specific ability that says otherwise, like the Accurate Strike Arcana).
Spellstrike has no such stipulation. If you want to deal weapon damage in addition to the spell you target regular AC. But if you just want to land the spell charge then you are free to forgo the weapon damage and target touch AC.
MrCharisma wrote:
Wonderstell wrote:
If they had attacks left they could choose to make those as Touch attacks to make sure their spell lands. That might be what happened here?
This is not.
See the above. If your first attack targeting normal AC misses on a 15 on the d20, the smartest move is to try your luck on the Touch AC with your second attack. (Assuming they're using Spell Combat as well)
Do touch attacks automatically break through stone shield.
No. It is a Cover bonus to AC and would apply to your Touch AC. And even if struck, it is not in contact with your body and would not transfer any damage.
Anonimagus wrote:
Is there a feat that makes it so you can just roll against touch ac with melee weapons?
There are ways, yes.
It is also possible to just target Touch AC with your Spellstrike if you give up dealing normal damage in addition to your Spell damage. It doesn't sound like that happened here, though.
Anonimagus wrote:
I might have it wrong, but I thought that with spell strike you had to hit with the weapon to cast a touch spell.
Yes. If you decide to make your Spellstrike as a normal attack and it misses their normal AC, it does not connect with their Touch AC. The attack misses, but the spell is not discharged. If they had attacks left they could choose to make those as Touch attacks to make sure their spell lands. That might be what happened here?
Anonimagus wrote:
He said that he stabbed into the rock and cast a shocking grasp through the stone, into me(He was gratuitous enough to let the stone shield eat 15 damage of the damage) shattering the stone shield and knocking me "down"(I'm a sacred fist, orc warpreist.).
Unless that was purely a flavorful description of the events that shouldn't have happened. It is a separate structure and would discharge the spell on itself, leaving you unharmed. Additionally, as it has Hardness 8 (and energy attacks deal half damage to objects) it would have soaked 46 points of damage.
Anonimagus wrote:
My friend rolled a 2+8 with a +1 from blessed for the attack..... I let out a sigh of relief...... before the dm told him to roll for his touch attack.
If the Magus had attacks left (as part of their Spell Combat), used one those, and specifically said they targeted Touch AC, this would be legal. Otherwise your GM needs to read up on how the Magus works.
But I dunno, they must have missed the Cha requirement as very few familiars have enough Cha. Personally I haven't seen many recommendations of the Basic Magic evolution. Seems pretty awful. Usually better to Sage/Figment with some Skilled evolutions.
I will however mention that at one time I thought the familiar could take Shared Evolution which would allow you to get pounce and other goodies from it, making figment extremely good. But that was a misunderstanding because the SRD threw every evolution, even archetype-locked, on the same page.
Generally speaking, it should be assumed that any effect affecting you also affects your gear. Otherwise we'd get a lot of naked adventurers when they use class abilities that doesn't explicitly specify that the gear follows their teleport.
So yes, the Phantom can bring items.
It would not be able to bring a creature. But it could stuff a creature in a Bag of Holding and carry that through the barrier.
I'm in agreement with Melkiador that "Ultimate pirate" is a broad concept.
If I made one myself I'd focus on the sailing/smuggling aspect as a Transporter Ranger.
Or the rum/sea shanty aspect as a Skald with the Good for what Ails You rage power.
Or someone that dabbles in necromancy for the real "skeleton crew" gimmick.
Plenty of ways to make a pirate. It's almost easier to limit the options by listing what isn't part of the pirate theme. Heavy armor and bigger weapons feels like a no-no. As does archery builds (but not thrown or firearms).
I get your idea here, but all the items and abilities you listed specifically say they activate "when the character is resting." The Heal Skill Unlock is "the target recovers hit points and ability damage as if it had rested for a full day" NOT "the target is treated as if it had rested for a full day." It's not actually resting (or receiving long-term care, etc.).
:/
What you're missing is that "as if it had rested for a full day" is interchangeable with "complete/full/total bed rest". They're referring to an actual game term. And it is this game term that the abilities trigger off.
You are entirely correct in that you are not actually treated as if you had rested for a full day (which would recharge Rage and other abilities). But you have also completely missed that the abilities interact with the "complete bed rest/rested for a full day" term in addition to simply resting. So even the strictest interpretation allows the abilities to function.
"You recover twice as many hit points and points of ability damage as normal when you rest, or three times as many when you take total bed rest."
and how can u use passing grace when its a teamwork feat ??
I didn't say it was the easiest way. I said it was the optimal way. You'd have to either convince the rest of your party to take it, or rely on class features/spells to share it. A lot of spellcasters get Shared Training on their spell list.
There is the alternate route of Incredible Healer instead of Signature Skill, which you'd pump up by boosting your Heal skill check.
But with Signature Skill "the target recovers hit points and ability damage as if it had rested for a full day." Which means you can combo it with a lot of effects that interact with the bed rest mechanic.
Multipliers (Remember that multipliers are additive, not multiplicative)
Resilient Martyr: Triples the amount of HP and Ability Damage you recover.
Bone Reed (consumable): Triples it as well.
Vivacious Gnome ART: +50%
HD increases Bandages of Rapid Recovery: +4 HD. The destruction rule can be circumvented.
Spiny Starfish Familiar: +4 HD.
Inspire Greatness Bardic Performance: +2 HD.
That's about what I can remember at the moment. A level 10 character that has Resilient Martyr, the Spiny Starfish Familiar, and Bandages of Rapid Recovery would heal 216 HP with each use of Healer's Hands. Or 360 HP if they used up a Bone Reed.
They would however heal a party member just 40 HP. Which is why the optimal way to use Healer's Hands is to target yourself, and use Passing Grace to redirect the healing to your allies.
Yes, but Archives doesn't include it because they need to keep it to Golarion stuff only, I think. The SRD has most of it.
The greatest additions imo was the Spirit Fuse spiritualist archetype, and the carbuncle feat path which was "scavenged" into the Possessed Hand feat path in the Haunted Heroes book. There's also a new base class, the Vampire Hunter.
There they go. The bravest player I've ever seen, playing the most cowardly bloodrager I've ever seen.
Well, you were likely gonna take Iron Will either way so you're still -4 behind
Just fyi, but bonus spells is not a major concern. Or even a middling concern. You are a 4th level caster so you should mainly be on the lookout for 1st level spells (supplemented with Runestones of Power) that you can spam with Greater Bloodrage, or long-lasting higher level buffs.
When choosing a Bloodline this is generally the way you want to look at it:
Bloodline Powers>Bloodline Feats>>>Bonus Spells
I was looking at this, but I think I'm going to take cross-blooded instead.
I would strongly advise against that. It's effectively a -4 will save penalty on a class with a weak will save progression. The "only" time it's worthwhile is if you're using Destined to boost up your saves. And technically Bloodrider is incompatible with Crossblooded as they both affect the bonus feats. (And incompatible with Primalist because bonus feats are part of the bloodline)
I'd keep it simple and go with just Bloodrider. Mounted Combat feats are for schmucks so ignore them. If you're worried about will saves, then considered the Deathtouched character trait for a +2 vs mind-affecting. And keep in mind that you can replace the 1st level bloodline power with a Bloodline Familiar, of which there are a bunch of good options. Hedgehog is a common choice for its +2 will bonus.
If you think your GM would be okay with you healing through everything then I'd take the starfish familiar and combo it with the Vivacious gnome ART + the Signature Skill/Healer's Hand combo.
If you had a dex bonus I'd have proposed a quality build, but might as well go with STR as a gnome.
Something like 15, 14, 16, 10, 10, 14 after racials is good enough.
Take the Master Tinker ART and ask your GM if you can have crafted a Fauchard before the first session, which takes less than a week of downtime. Better to go for crit range than dmg dice in your case.
Are you gonna be the (sole) frontliner? Gnomes can become very good heal-tanks.
Martial Versatility is the only way to circumvent fighter weapon groups in PFS afaik. Unfortunately it doesn't help you with the scythe since no weapon in the "Blades, Heavy" group has a second weapon group of the three you need.
The Switchscythe has rules for treating it as a hidden weapon and grants you a +5 on such checks.
If you simply want it to be inconspicuous, any weapon will be if you have the Power of Suggestion trait and can make a DC 20 bluff check. If a glaive can be confused for a quarterstaff, it can certainly be confused for a walking staff.
What do people think? Is this a crazy idea or does it have some merit?
By using your Charisma mod for the Mind Arsenal ability, you get an untyped bonus to Attack equal to your charisma twice when you smite. So when you're smiting your ranged attacks will have lower accuracy than the melee attacks. And the range of the ability is quite low (30 ft before lv 12) and it costs two uses to full-attack the same foe (which you always want to do). You'll bleed uses per day rapidly if you try to rely on it.
If you're serious about it then I'd dip a level into Swashbuckler and take Artful Dodge so that you can qualify for TWF feats with charisma. Then grab a double weapon so that you can TWF-shred at range with the Mind Arsenal ability (which is limited to one weapon).
Divine Favor should help you with the accuracy. Add in Eldritch Heritage (Orc) with that +2 rounds morale trait and you're good to go.
====
Minigiant wrote:
Now whenever I have looked into playing a Switch Hitting character, it has never worked; it always feels clunky. One side or another is significantly weaker.
If Mind Sword fulfills your criteria for a switch hitter, then any ranged build that can fire/reload without AoO is also a switch hitter, no? If switch hitting doesn't involve switching weapon then that seems pretty easy to manage.
Give out Improved Feint Partner as part of your Inspired Rage with Duplicitous Rhetoric (or simply rely on the Shared Training spell) and AoE feint all enemies that can see you with Equipment Trick. Every enemy successfully feinted against provokes an AoO from your allies and grants you a +1 Dodge bonus to AC.
Jeez, that's way worse than I thought. Thanks, I hate it.
The chart I linked actually took the penalty into account (as a bonus to the enemy DC), so I'm actually a bit surprised at your high values. If that's a 32 before the -4 penalty that's about 8 higher than I expected.
Could the values have been mixed up to add both Sense Motive and BAB+WIS instead of using the higher of the two, +10?
Yes, it is based on the monsters in the Bestiaries (which includes a minority of humanoids). Both Mark Hoover and I specified monsters so that is indeed what we focused on.
If you will face off against primarily humanoids then that changes a lot of the core assumptions not just about feint but also about other statistics such as nonexistent touch AC, wildly scaling CMD, and inflated ability scores.
Belafon wrote:
Analysis: Even using the chart's median, a DC 28 for a level 8 character isn't actually that hard for a character built to feint.
I agree with that. But I do not think that spending one third of your entire wealth on a skill-boosting item is a fair assumption to make. And spending an additional feat on Skill Focus is a much bigger investment than picking a character/racial trait.
From personal experience, at lv 8 I would expect the following.
11 (class+ranks) + 2 (Cracked Magenta Prism) +2 (Trait) +2 (racial trait) +2 (misc) +0-4 (Cha)
= 19+Cha
The issue isn't that the DC is insurmountable. The issue is that you generally have just one attempt per round, must invest a lot of resources to get good at feinting, in addition to spending a lot of resources to make the action economy not awful. There are ways around this, ofc
The reality is the other way around. Here's a chart over feint DCs (provided by willuwontu) which showcases a big issue with feint builds. The DC.
The median CR8 monster has a feint DC of 28.
The DC for demoralize is much more easily overcome because there's a steady supply of demoralize-specific items, class features, feats, and racial traits so that you can boost your skill bonus way beyond what the feint build is capable of.
If you look at bluff-related spells, items, or even class features they usually restrict it to just social aspects of bluff.
as you said. feint isn't a maneuver, so why do you need the improved feint feat? no aoo or whatever are provoked. yes. it takes a standard action without it, but im talking about an enemy you would most likely miss if you don't feint to drop his ac by 17~ points. so you use a round to get a major debuff for his ac. so what? i find it better then flailing at the air for 2 rounds.
you waste no feat. and the dc will tend to be a lot lower then the mob's high dex + dodge ac mode.
the question was 'is it still useful even without sneak attack?'. my answer -sometimes it is. like a lot of things in pathfinder it's an option. and keeping options open leave your arsenal of tricks ready for surprises.
Oh. I guess we have different definitions of "don't suck at feinting", then. My definition definitely includes not spending a standard action to have less of a 50% shot at success, which is something that is "too much of a problem" for most characters.
now im not saying building a 'no sneak attack feint master' just in case you meet a 'dodge master' is worth it. but making sure you don't suck at feinting shouldn't be too much of a problem and it's a good thing to consider in case you do meet such a problematic enemy.
I'd say it is too much of a problem.
If you want the bare minimum you need Combat Expertise (feinting isn't a maneuver so can't use Dirty Fighting) and then Improved Feint, so even a martial that is already built for a maneuver like Dirty Tricks may not find it easy to pick up Improved Feint.
And if you're not, that's two entire feats for a backup tactic. I'm not wasting two feats for that on a class without bonus feats, and even with bonus feats I presumably have much better options.
If you build for feint, you specialize hard.
====
Non-SA feint builds exist. But you generally need something in addition to just the accuracy increase to make it worthwhile. Building around Improved Feint Partner to hand out AoOs to your party is very effective, and a solo combatant can build for Feint and Bash (Weapon Trick) while also dabbling in Betraying Blow. Vigilante is pretty good at the latter.
The issue is of course that some enemies are immune and others have highly inflated Sense Motive scores relative to their CR because the skill is not treated as a combat aspect like AC is. So you want to be able to contribute (meaningfully) even if this, your main tactic, isn't effective.
Using retraining to take a feat you didn't qualify for originally is 'cheating' (at least in my opinion: The actual rules are kinda vague on this point): If you couldn't possibly get your specific build without retraining, it's wrong.
There is an FAQ on this that very clearly states that this is allowed.
Wow, that might be the worst ruling I have ever seen, but I guess that's another conversation entirely...
Welp, the feat is "balanced" around being taken at level 4 and that's when I take it. It doesn't feel like cheating to me. It even costs extra money and time.
Consider a lv 12 cMonk with Abundant Step. The feat Dimensional Dervish is restricted to BAB +6, which you fulfilled four levels earlier, but thanks to getting late access to Abundant Step you'd be able to take Dimensional Dervish first at lv 17.
That's nine entire levels after you fulfilled the BAB requirement the creator of the feat though was a fair restriction.
Feat paths so long they can't come online when they ought to, is a fault of the system. Retraining is simply a band-aid.
I think the OP is referring to using feats instead of a class feature to get an Animal Companion, which takes 3 feats over 7 levels to bring up to full power
Ah, that makes sense.
===
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Java Man wrote:
Other than being charisma based with a fuzzy friend, what are you trying to do?
Synergy with Beastmaster style.
So someone that can make use of 13+ Cha and isn't reliant on swift actions. How about Battle Scion skald?
At lv 7, choose a Versatile Performance that allows you to use perform in place of Handle Animal. Then when you want to trigger the advanced benefit of Beastmaster Ire you can use the much lower bonus of the perform skill you don't put ranks in.
You may want to replace the 3rd and 9th rage powers with Power Attack and Step Up.
Something similar can be done as a Bloodrider Bloodrager, I suppose.
Unfortunately with animal ally and charisma classes i noticed a similar issue, none of them have the feat slots needed to get the animal companion at fighting capacity at a reasonable time 1.E before level 6
Could you elaborate on that. The majority of companions are by design pretty awful before they get their 4th, 7th, or 9th level advancement and their master having extra feats won't solve that issue.
You gain the effect of Total Cover against attacks targeting you through one edge of your space. That's it. It doesn't block vision. Not yours, not theirs.
And you've got it backwards. If you are considered to have Total Cover then the enemy is the one unable to see you. Or are you implying that the enemy also is benefiting from Total Cover?
About 2 rounds after this turtle action, some enemy should realize they can throw stuff over the shields and hurt this bozo.
Or that simply breaking the shields is an option. A guy behind total cover can't make attacks of opportunity in that direction, so the shields are easy targets.
Not quite. The tower shield's Total Cover is a one-way street. Just as an ally behind you won't benefit from the Total Cover, the enemy in front of you won't benefit either. You, and you alone, have Total Cover against attacks.
A player wants to create a character with four arms, fighter with tower prof and some rogue to get greater evasion.....this is awesome buuuuut, he argues this would give him 100% concealment.....which is fine, buuuuuut, he says that the concealment would negate AoE damage and I need another perspective to explain it would not.
How would you put it to him?
Can you elaborate on the exact argument? If I understand you correctly the player has simply equipped their character with four tower shields, and they're not using the special ability of the tower shield to gain Total Cover. If so, none of their four shields are perfectly aligned to block incoming attacks. The shields are swinging about during combat which creates gaps that an opponent can take advantage of.
They've accomplished exactly nothing except stacking the ACP and attack penalty. Concealment doesn't come into play here at all.
And even with a tower shield's Total Cover you're still susceptible to AoE damage. It is first when you have Mobile Stronghold that your Tower Shield grants partial cover against AoE spells.
Currently in a progression campaign and want to be a war priest but hybrid classes are not allowed. For my actions and party needs I was given paladin. Still researching but looking at ways to make a lower tier war priest without losing too much. Any ideas welcome.
Going for a two-handed build is probably for the best to save on feats. Fey Foundling, as mentioned, is very good for a pally. Cleave is okayish, maybe not the best for someone feat-starved.
If you're going with Aasimar I'd take the Immortal Spark ART for the ability to cast Lesser Age Resistance. Assuming a 20 PB you'd have the following stat spread at level 4 as long as your 24H SLA is up.
The lower Con is offset by the boosted Lay on Hands.
STR -> 18
DEX -> 12
CON -> 12
INT -> 14
WIS -> 10
CHA -> 18
(ABI accounted for)
I'd refrain from trading away your spellcasting. The other party members may be spellcasters but they aren't paladins. And they can't (usually) cast Divine Favor on you. Shining Knight is a solid archetype for any pally wanting to dabble in mounted combat. You don't really need the mounted feats so I'd just pass on that.
Remember to buy Meditation Crystals and Pearls of Power to make your limited uses of 1st levels spells and LoH last that much longer.
That seems like a reasonable idea, Wonderstell. The biggest problem with this build is that Sleuth is a really terrible archetype. Awful. Taking one level in it for the pool and abilities is reasonable, but it should not be an investigator build.
In that case I propose you skip Sleuth. It is the only source of a Luck Pool which is why I used it as an example, but it doesn't provide you with anything worth the level investment.
A build with actual synergy would be the following:
Disrupting Counter (Ex): At 3rd level, when an opponent makes a melee attack against her, she can spend 1 panache point to make an attack of opportunity against the attacking foe. This attack of opportunity can be made with either a dagger or a starknife. If the attack hits, the opponent takes a –4 penalty on all attack rolls until the end of its turn. This deed replaces kip-up.
Gulch Gunner wrote:
Daring Adjacent Shot: The first time each round the gulch gunner makes a ranged firearm attack against an adjacent foe and provokes an attack of opportunity, she regains 1 grit point. Making an adjacent firearm attack against a helpless or unaware creature or on a creature that has fewer Hit Dice than half the gulch gunner’s character level does not restore grit, nor do ranged attacks using some ability that prevents the gulch gunner from provoking an attack of opportunity. This ability replaces the ability to regain grit from a critical hit with a firearm.
Gulch Gunner wrote:
Flash and Shock (Ex): At 1st level, the gulch gunner can take advantage of the flash and sound of a firearm to throw off an attacker’s aim at close range. When she makes an attack against a foe within her firearm’s first range increment, she may spend 1 grit point to gain a +4 circumstance bonus to AC against that opponent until the beginning of her next turn. She can only perform this deed while wearing medium, light, or no armor, and while carrying no more than a light load. This deed replaces the deadeye deed.
*****
Flying Blade gets the very good Disruptive Counter deed at lv 3, but their inherently worse crit range (must use a dagger or starknife) makes Panache sustain harder. Do note that you actually want enemies to attack you so that you can trigger the free AoO (which imposes a -4 attack penalty on the enemy).
With a level in Gulch Gunner you can safely dump Charisma in favor of Wisdom, have an additional way to regain Panache every round with a Buckler Pistol (which you can use to trigger Disruptive Counter), and have an additional deed to further boost your AC by +4. Later on you'd want to buy a Shadowshooting Buckler Gun.
So use your last iterative to trigger Daring Adjacent Shot and get panache, spend panache on Disrupting Counter and/or Flash and Shock, and get way high AC in addition to all your AoOs.
(Those who use panache and luck do not gain twice their Charisma bonus in their pool.)
Since you can't triple stack one ability mod to your pool I wouldn't dip for a larger pool. What stacks is the way to regain points, and is actually more valuable than just a larger pool.
A Sleuth gets Luck back through nat 20s on (some) Knowledge/Sense Motive and 6+ on Inspiration checks.
A Sleuth with one level in Guiding Blade Swash gets back Luck through the usual ways, and through crits and whenever an ally drops a foe. You should be able to spam Sleuth deeds at least with double the rate as a single-classed Sleuth.
In Pathfinder magic item creation feels transactional, the consequence being that there is no sense of wonder, or lore, or danger, or adventure, or mystique, or anything else about magic items that makes them the slightest bit interesting. On top of that, it’s ruined the discovery part of the game. When our table finds magic items and other treasure all anyone thinks about is: how much can we sell it for to fund creation of the items we actually planned our builds around?
To be fair, that's an issue with the system and not magic item creation specifically. You are expected have certain magic items by certain levels, and wealth is another resource to be spent. This might not have been such an issue if more than half of all magic items weren't some combination of overpriced, lackluster, too specific, and just not usable with certain playstyles.
Imagine if feats were treated the same way.
"And after the grueling fight with the razordemons you... *rolls on table* are now able to spend feats to learn Prone Shooter, Mobility, Widen Spell, and Deceitful.
Oh, Clustered Shots? Yeah you'll have to find a trainer in a large town and spend two of your feat slots to learn it."
Decent skills
Able to make use of intelligence
Medium armor, martial proficiency
Not a Dex/finesse fighter
"leader" or "commander"-y type powers would be good, but not required
If you're not averse to spellcasting, an Occultist with the Trappings of the Warrior panoply gains full BAB (starting at 2nd or 6th level) and Int is their primary stat.
Half-Elf works very well for the Elf FCB and would net you a free Skill Focus you can use to qualify for Orator to become very proficient in social situations.
No, the extra damage from Boar Style is not precision damage. This means that you can deal this extra damage to foes with concealment. It would however still not be multiplied on a critical hit because of the rules for Multiplying Damage:
Quote:
Sometimes you multiply damage by some factor, such as on a critical hit. Roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results.
Note: When you multiply damage more than once, each multiplier works off the original, unmultiplied damage. So if you are asked to double the damage twice, the end result is three times the normal damage.
Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage are never multiplied.
And the ability doesn't work like Rend. Boar Style simply gives you an extra 2d6 dmg on top of your normal attack damage.
A composite bow (or an orc hornbow) with a STR rating does in fact require more effort to load. If you lack the required STR you take a penalty to hit and do not add the extra damage from STR.
Follow the conversation. A longbow does not require more effort to load than a shortbow, as per the game system. It is not a good analogy to call Heavy Crossbows the [composite crossbows of Light Crossbows] when they mechanically doesn't function in any way like the composite bows.
Just as a Longbow isn't the composite version of a Shortbow, a Heavy crossbow is not the composite version of a Light crossbow.
A composite crossbow, as per the game system, would entail adding an ability mod to damage with no increase in reload time. This does not exist.
Mysterious Stranger wrote:
A Crossbow function more like firearms than bows.
What?
The mechanism of a crossbow isn't automatic. It may be easier than drawing it "by hand" but it's not easy work. Give an arbalest to a ten year old and they won't be able to use it. Crossbows definitely had a requisite strength needed by its wielder, and it would be perfectly logical to introduce crossbows with higher requirements for greater gains.
Well that's not a fair comparison. The Heavy Crossbow doesn't rely on your stats in any way, requires another reload feat to use effectively, and doesn't even follow the normal dmg dice progression.
right, the REASON it has more damage dice and is harder to reload is that it takes more effort (strength) to load it. basically the STR bonus is built into the damage dice, instead of an extra bonus.
But the Longbow doesn't require more effort to reload. Neither does the Orc Hornbow. Realistically they would both require more effort than a shortbow to pull, but that's ignored because they're bows. And they have composite versions.
