Writer's page

You always know a working joe : )

I prefer the ever-simple explination of "I give x the finger and Reality agrees"

I rage cycle them in. Free action end rage, they cast spell or buff, free action resume raging. Helps that I'm an urban barbarian in an urban campaign though.

You don't get Inquisitors. Inquisitors get You.

I blame this problem on strength being such a weak stat.

Pure Irony in action.

I currently play a barbarian. Invulnerable Rager + Urban Barbarian, with a dip in Unbreakable Fighter. I took Threatening defender (it's basically a +1 to attack) and another trait netting me Stealth as a class skill (Our entire party has stealth, it helps a lot). Heart of the fields, Focused Study . . . Actually I'll just throw up my build. Assumes Headband of Charisma +2 by level 9, +4 by level 13.

Huh, maybe not. We rolled stats, and I got an extra feat at first level above what's traditionally allowed. But even watered down it's still tough to chew through.

Also, channel positive energy and cure spells. Easiest way to stop an army of shadows is with an army of healbots.

Make hime a Brawler who focuses on using a shield and a fist. Take the shield line of feats, and get a Throwing Adamantine Shield. Enchant with returning when you can, and grab that feat that lets you deal nonlethal damage without penalty whenever you deal bludgeoning damage.

Pretty simple really.

EDIT: Found that feat

What's more amazing, somebody created a popular thread that only lasted two pages, or somebody put up a thread on the Paizo forums and walked away with a completely logical, humane, and overall happy solution?

Go Archeologist Bard. It trades up the singing and dancing for evasion, uncanny dodge, trapfinding plus, and rogue talents (and you still get the gimped Archeologist's Luck if you need that boost).

Rumpelstiltskin

1.) Why is this in Conversions?

2.) Fighter. It's been proven to me that Fighter can do anything. All you need is the right traits, a good amount of Feats and ranks in UMD and you can fight better than any martial and cast spells better than a caster.

Here we go . . .

Good spellcasters go to Heaven and live happily ever after.

Evil spellcasters become Liches to avoid going to Hell and burning for all eternity.

Alright, looks like your characters need some structure. THe answer is simple: play a mercenary campaign.

Make them mercenaries for hire with their captain (an npc) who accepts missions and leads them into battle. Make them part of an advanced unit or something if you don't want them to be accompanied by NPC mercenaries. Their orders are given out by the captain in detail, and they go carry them out, wash rinse repeat.

What they needed was a Shotgun Master Archaetype. Because who wouldn't want to fight evil in the world of magic and elves with a shotgun?

I second this question. I'm playing a 3rd level archeologist and I currently am using a longspear in melee. First session I did great, but second session I didn't get hardly any AoO. Is there a trick to using a reach weapon Bard? Or am i better off playing an archer?

I second the Zen Archer idea. Nobody beats the monk when it comes to mobility, and nobody says you HAVE to flurry as a monk. Just focus on that vital strike chain and you'll be doing great, nailing people for x2 your base unarmed damage + STR + DA + Enhancement bonus, more when you get improved vital strike and/or greater vital strike.

yea, Sorcerers are great for blasts. Personally i like DD because it adds some survivability to a fragile class. The one thing a new player doesn't understand is how quickly those hit points can come down, and how fast not wearing armor sucks. Dragon Disciple will mitigate this by A LOT. It's almost ideal.

Yes paladin is good for charisma stacking, but that's at second level and let's face it, it's better to let the new guy be free in his roleplaying descisions before we introduce him to classes who tend to be hammered on their roleplay options. Not saying you can't RP a pally and enjoy it, just that noobs can't really RP a pally and enjoy it.

Alright since nobody's posted on this I think i'll go ahead and do my best to help you out: yes, it appears this is some form of "wanna be arcane archer." There's nothing this prestige class really offers that you can't almsot get from another class. A Divine equivilant of Arcane Strike would be nice, but that's the job of a feat and not a prestige class. Other things, like the imbue arrow, don't work well with divine casting as there isn't a good selection of divine blasting spells to choose from. No hard feelings, but I never learned how to beat around the bush T_T

Though I think it is worth mentioning the list of archer classes, from pure martial to least martial/most divine, would be as follows.

Fighter - the archer archaetype is the most obvious, but the straight archer or weaponmaster archer have some mettle to them as well.

Ranger - Trapsmith ranger for the "no magic" feel, but as a primarily martial class with a splattering of divine spells this is it.

Inquisitor - This could almsot be equal to the Paladin, but in the end I decided some of the Inquisitor's abilities are pure martial, therefore putting him closer than the Pally in that regard. Still, he makes a devestatingly efficient Archer.

Paladin - I know he has the spellcasting of a Ranger, but every single special ability about this guy is a result of his faith and divine nature. The only thing martial about him is his BAB. That said, he still makes a great archer. He's also the most efficient you can be with "divine" before you start sacrificing some martial ability for pure divine castyness.

Cleric - The default divine spellcaster. Wasn't even a consideration in 3rd or 3.5, but with the buffs to archery in Pathfinder this guy does pretty well. Just don't expect him to outshine any of those above with his arrows.

Oracle - If you take some of the mysteries better suited to combat they become quite effective. More effective than the cleric in certian instances, but those are few. He's below the cleric due to the idea of clerc = divinity through devoution whereas oracle = divinity incarnate.

With so many classes with different splashes of divine casting and archery I'm not seeing how they are lacking, except for the ability to imbue your spells into your arrows. Which would be neat, if divine casters could blast to begin with.

Sadly, there's no way to blend full casting with full martial apart from Eldritch knight. The only class that comes close would be the Cleric (if you take one of the more martial archetypes) and, to be frank, it comes close enough imho.

Edit: A Divine Hunter Paladin also fits this concept very well. Only thing it doesn't have is the spell list.

So a man dies and finds his soul detached from his body. After a few seconds an Angel appears, and tells the guy he's dead. "Normally we'd just send you to heaven to be judged," the Angel says. "But this time we've been studying the preferances of mortals and have decided to give you a list of suggested options instead."

"Okay," the man says. "what are my options?"

The angel shrugs. "Well, you can a)go to heaven to be judged; b) fade into nothingness and cease to exist; or c)burst into a spectacular array of rainbows and confetti. What is your choice?"

the man thinks for a moment. "Well most everyone who gets judged is sent to hell, so that's out. And i certianly don't want to cease to exist, so I'll go with option c."

"Okay," the Angel states.

"So how does this work, exactly? Does my body vanish or do I-" The man never finishes his sentence as his soul explodes into a colourful shower of rainbows and confetti and he is never heard from again.

The End

Why are we not using a "Wand of Cure Light Wounds"?

AH HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you!

Browsing an internet forums on Role-play gaming: $0

Writer wrote:

stuff

Rereading my posts, I don't think I've had enough caffeine this morning. I'm sorry, I was pretty rude.

Lol it's alright. We all end up there sooner or later. To be fair I was under the impression they faq'd the Extra Evolutions feat to work with the synthesist (shows what i know XD). My apologies if i was a bit trite on my end. No hard feelings, right?

Alright, now to the duel! How I would play this out would be to go Zen Archer. It's a fun class that i've been looking at for a long time and i personally wouldn't enjoy going against a kid with a fully optimized character (personal taste). It you were going against a munchkin it'd be different, but from all appearances you're not.

Now how to play the Monk: I would be passive aggressive. Simply ready an action to stop spellcasting if he tries to cast wind-wall and shoot him if he does. Eventually he'll get the idea and either a) stop trying to cast spells (since you can lose spells this way last i checked) or b) run out of spells to cast.

If this fails, i would have an artifact of antimagic or a wand of dispel or something of the like, just in case he does get an arrow-nerf ability off. Afterwards you can grapple him (monk beats casty in grapples typically) and just slowly punch his senses back into him.

if he ends up playing a non-caster or something just utilize your superior movement and arrows to bring him down. If he's a charger get somewhere he can't charge. If he's AM BARBARIAN then I'd question the diabolic focus of the kid you're up against.

EDIT'd for relevance

Because the Katana isn't finessable.

gnomersy wrote:

You can hardly call these guys kobolds any more given that they're all apparently int 18 strategists with multiple class levels in rogue/ranger and group telepathy to manage pulling off elaborate ambushes constantly in a labyrinth.

If you tried this with actual humans unless you were leading a special ops team chances are it would fail miserably and blow up in your face as your forces were destroyed in seperate chunks.

Nope,

there's just a LOT of kobolds. It's not that they didn't get killed, it's just that while you were killing 3 of them, 9 others were chopping up your mule and putting it on the barbeque pit.

Stratagy like this was standard for anyone familiar with defending any artificial structure back in those times. While we worry about tax breaks and bills in the modern world, people of the middle ages worried about getting overrun by bandits or raiders. This was standard issue if you know your history. Murder holes, arrow slits, pitfalls and everything in between.

You don't want to incorporate Jedi into a medival setting.
You want to go home and rethink your life.

Luminiere Solas wrote:

i don't get why people see D&D or it's derivatives as medieval european.

you have medieval knights wearing rennaiscane era armor, wielding roman era falcatas, worshipping greek gods, traveling with native american shamans wearing the hides of saharan beasts, who transform into prehistoric dinosaurs who are accompanied by modern japanese schoolgirls wielding Tokugawa Era Daisho and Wearing black pajamas, and old men wearing robes and pointed hats who chant mathematical equations to control reality, on a journey to kill brain eating space aliens, giant sentient firebreathing spellcasting reptiles and sentient jello.

I love this post so much.

Agreed

I've lived in the military my entire life, so I can say im a gun fanatic. That said, I like Paizo's approach to guns as "emerging". It's not something everyone has, and (like in real life in those 'times') there isn't a clear advantage of a gun over a bow. Guns, for those who DO have them, will often be things like a Scattergun or Blunderbuss: guns that usually hit regardless of how good you are with them.

The gunslinger is a nice try at bringing the wild west into Pathfinder, but it doesn't impress me. Wizards, Rangers, and Paladins will still be doing most of the butt-kicking. I personally think guns fit in more as back-up weapons for wizards (intircate weapon for an intricate man) or rogues (intricate weapon for a cunning rogue).

Are they nice to have in Pathfinder? yes
Are they meant to be your main weapon? no

Edit: Or for Inquisitors (intricate weapon for kick-ass monster hunters) ^_^ Think Solomon Kane

alright, i'll come out and say it. 4e was easy to learn and easy to pick up (for the most part). 3.5 and Therefore pathfinder is richer and more rewarding then 4e. Hence why i like both but prefer pathfinder over 4e.