You could flip the script. Maybe it's not about the dark-adapted races raiding/attacking the Shard Realms. Maybe it's the other way round. If most of the world is Darkened, then that's where most of the resources are. What are the odds that each and every Shard-lit area is completely self-sufficient? Maybe after the former Underdark races moved in to abandoned territory, they understandably didn't feel like sharing their new mines and allowing their rivers and streams to be diverted for Shard-lit agriculture. Maybe any attacks on the lighted areas are simple retribution for what they see as attacks on them.
Moreover, the people living in those lighted areas are probably not going to give up on the idea they still "rightfully" own the dark areas they once lived in, which still contain many or most of the necessities of life. At the very, very least, they'd still need to trade with the Darkworlders, even if they weren't raiding. They couldn't afford to pretend they didn't matter or exist, the way most surface worlders used to pretend about the subterranean races. I would not be surprised if dwarves suddenly became much more prominent, what with their combination of darkvision, combat ability, and business sense (yes, yes, I know #NotAllDwarves). At the same time, with so much new territory opening up to them, races like the drow would have less internal pressures. I'm not saying they'd all turn good or neutral, but when everything you need is simply there for the taking and there's plenty of new room to escape a hostile society, I bet there would be some breakaway groups.
Anyway, interesting premise. It'd be cool to hear what you do with it.
Intimidate builds. PF1Ed has utterly broken intimidate rules. No save, the DC doesn't scale remotely fast enough, and there are easy ways to increase the fear level past shaken. The most frustrating character of this type I ever saw was a PC whose player utterly refused to even roleplay the fact he was scary. He wanted to be able to make the party's enemies run away by hitting them with Cornugon Smash (for generally unimpressive damage), but insisted against the evidence that he was playing a "nice guy" who no one could find at all threatening. If he hit, the only suspense was in finding out how many rounds the enemy was out of commission, not whether they would be (undead and constructs aside, of course).
Use those monster special abilities, and ignore the AP whenever it has the monsters acting really dumb. Maybe 4 PCs need a break now and then. 6 PCs do not. If the monsters have Power Attack and are using a one-handed weapon with nothing in their other hand, have them attack two-handed for the extra damage (or give them a tower shield, at least). Give the bad guys guard beasts with scent so they're not as easily surprised (speaking of which, don't forget the increased sensory range of the few dragons in the AP, who should never be surprised by anything short of mass teleport into attack range). If monsters know the party is near, readied actions can prevent the party winning initiative and DPSing them down before they get off a single attack. Don't let the party get away with the 15 minute adventuring day. If they stop to rest too often, let some of the areas they "cleared" become UNcleared. And, by Desna's bright stars, never EVER let them fight a flying dragon or air-walking rune giant on the ground. Those creatures have ranged attacks and reach for a reason.
At least theoretically, once the Runeforge has been opened and Karzoug has been dealt with the knowledge of the old magics could have re-entered the world in several different ways.
I am currently playing a Thassilonian wizard in a Shattered Star campaign who was one of many people rescued from the Runeforge by the PCs in my gaming group's previous Rise of the Runelords campaign. He had spent millennia as one of several polymorphed goldfish in a fountain in that timeless place.
My GM ruled that the physical transmutation was permanent, both because of the "natural decay or spoilage" language and to avoid drinkers ending up with stomachs full of blood or sewage or acid or whatever at end of spell duration, which is clearly not the spell intent. However, my GM also ruled that the spell effect was so strong and the buff so good (at higher levels) that only the first person drinking of the wine within the spell duration gets the buff effect (for the remainder of the duration), after which the rest of the wine becomes nonmagical. This is obviously a house rule, but it seemed reasonable to me, as a strong buff that could effect hundreds seems overpowered for a spell of this level.
No argument here, but as an aside, if that niche is one you want to roleplay, then Multimorph with Improved Eldritch Heritage (shapechanger bloodline) is a definitely a good way to go, as Multimorph combined with the bloodline power Mutable Flesh is a beautiful thing.
Mutable Flesh (Su) At 3rd level, once per day when you cast a transmutation spell with a duration of 1 minute per level that affects only you, you can increase its duration to 10 minutes per level. At 9th level, you can increase the duration to 1 hour per level.
In mountainous terrain there is the avalanche trap and the "catch the party with flying critters halfway up a cliff face" situation (flat-footed from climbing and no bows or two handed melee weapons) and the "giant(s) trying to bull rush PCs off the trail and over a cliff" situation (I ran that once where the giants jumped from the cliff above and a giant adept cast Feather Fall just before they landed on the trail. Instant brawl from nowhere and fun times.
Named Bullet can be cast well ahead of any encounters on any arrows/bolts/bullets the allies might be using (although it's kinda wasted on bolts). Shared Training is only a 2nd level spell and also can be cast well ahead of time to give multiple allies access to multiple teamwork feats. Blistering Invective requires only an easily pumped skill check and allows no save (if they have a paladin, combine it with Draconic Malice to eliminate immunity to fear). The initial damage is relatively trivial, but mass shaken condition plus catching your enemies on fire is not. Hidden Presence can be super fun if you can overcome their Will saves, as is Shadowmind. Inquisitors can be combat beasts, but if you are going for a spellcaster, make him a buffer/debuffer over a straight damager.
I currently play in a party of three that is on book 6 of Carrion Crown. Aasimar Oracle/Soul Warden (life mystery, blackened curse), half-elf paladin of Sarenrae (undead scourge), and human witch (with a nervous giggle tic that doubles as cackle in combat). My Oracle also carries and frequently talks to the polished and enchanted skull of the witch PC's first character, a Samsaran sorcerer lost early on in Book 2. It has been made into an "Orb" of Golden Heaven.
All of us have maxed ranks in Perform (Sing) because our self identity is that we are a singing troupe that does a little light adventuring on the side. We prefer to draw masses of enemies to us via loud, annoying, and coordinated song than go looking for them one by one. Favorites include "Walking on Sunshine," "Lil Red Riding Hood," and "We are the Champions."
The paladin tanks (with the oracle occasionally stepping up), and the oracle and witch buff/debuff. If it's undead we face, they might be pushed/pulled en masse through Walls of Fire or Walls of Silver via Improved Channel Force. The witch throws Misfortune hexes everywhere.
The GM increases numbers faced and maxes enemy hit points, but as the paladin frequently observes, "Bards exaggerate. This adventuring gig just isn't that hard."
Anyone with the ability to cast Named Bullet or use a wand of same.
Named Bullet wrote:
Hm. Okay, I can see that yours may be the correct interpretation. Just checking, though: would you ALSO say that the Endurance feat and the combat style feats that rangers get outside the normal odd level feat progression (or Scribe Scroll for wizards or Eschew Components for sorcerers) do not count as class abilities? I was under the impression that the extra fighter feats WERE the greater part of a fighter's class abilities.
This question may have been previously addressed, but if so I haven't seen it.
A slayer's studied target bonus increases the DCs of slayer class abilities by one for each point of bonus. I feel safe in assuming that slayer talents with DCs (e.g., Assassinate) count as class abilities, but what about combat feats gained via slayer talents that also have associated save DCs (e.g., Blinding Critical)?
Animate Dreams, created by the tortured subconscious of the by now hopelessly insane dwarf. Also, or alternatively, multiple kastamut inevitables (as a bonus, they look like metallic dwarves) who were bound or showed up on their own to prevent the demon's release and therefore see the party as probable enemies.
It's campaign specific, but in Carrion Crown I'm currently playing an aasimar Oracle of Pharasma (Life mystery) who has the channeling revelation, is taking the aasimar-only channeling feats, and gets the favored class bonus that gives him an extra +1/2 effective channeling level per class level. He also has the Blackened curse, which will soon allow him to create Walls of Fire that his channeling feats will be able to blast or pull undead into. He's pretty fun.
The fact that there is such an insane number of threads on this and the devs have never (to my knowledge) weighed in with any indication that they had any intention of allowing ranged flanking bonuses or ranged flanking sneak attacks seems a fairly decent indication to me that they didn't mean to do so. A pity, I think, but there it is.
That said, the Gang Up feat FAQ really isn't the be-all and end-all of this debate. I belive that particular question was answered before it was even possible to legally threaten with a ranged weapon. The Snap Shot, Improved Snap Shot, and Point Blank Master feats came out after 2010. It's unreasonable to expect a ruling to cover things that aren't possible at the time the ruling is made.
There were not a lot of trees in any part of Vaasa any of my characters ever got to see, so there isn't likely to be a lot of wooden buildings. Theoretically, you could have a city made of yurts, but the players might not want to stick around and building security becomes a serious issue in an evil city. I guess it could be mostly stone, but Vaasa might not have the population base for quarries. So that leaves using ice, maybe with mammoth bone struts/bracing. Actually, you could have carved animal bone and horn in place of lots of things normally fashioned from wood. Two of the largest buildings in town might be a temple to Loviatar (to contrast with the following of Loviatar's rival Ilmater in Damara) fashioned from black ice treated with the Hardening spell and a stone public bath house connected to geothermal springs that is commonly used as a neutral meeting spot to conduct business.
I dunno, just a few thoughts trying to set the place apart visually from other places your PCs have visited.
If wizards were given access to cure spells, it would not be a power-up. What, use their precious spell slots to restore (not buff, but restore) other PCs to factory mint condition AFTER they have taken damage? They've got far better things to do! Or at least they ought to. Any wizard in a party of normal size who wanted the ability to heal others would want it for role-playing reasons, not because healing would represent a pathway to increased power. That's one reason Pathfinder gave clerics the ability to channel healing energy in addition to spells--they were trying to do away with the idea that clerical spellpower was best used as handing out bandaids. Even bards have better things to do with their spell slots in and out of combat than heal, unless no one else is in a position to do so. But as to why they have the ability in the first place, bards started out way back when (before 2nd Ed AD&D) as the first and prototypical prestige class (before the term even existed, in fact), a PrC that required them to work through levels in fighter, thief, and druid before they got any levels in bard, so they always did have the ability to heal and there's never been any game balance reason to take that away from them.
I don't know if his is still a permitted use of the spell, but Rope Trick has been used for several past editions as one slightly awkward way to bypass a door or relatively thin wall. If the spell is cast immediately adjacent to a vertical surface then the opening at the top (which enters the extradimensional hideyhole) can be placed so that it appears on both sides of the barrier.
As an aside, the enchantment has only shown up twice in the game I run, on weapons in the hands of NPCs. When the PCs asked what they knew about it, those with decent rolls in knowledge: arcana were told it was called the hellfire enchantment, a flame that burns only the life force. The nomenclature change did nothing to alter the power of the enchantment, but it did help to avoid the light saber connotations.
Depends. A door or flagstone could easily fit within the 5lbs/caster level of the Magic Aura spell. Same goes for a carpet. And even on a seemingly seamless cavern or tunnel floor who is to say that some sections are not actually thin plates of separate material? Especially if those plates are magicked to blend in?
Oh, and don't forget to occasionally add an illusion masking a real, but invisible danger. They can disbelieve the illusion of the pit, but that won't help much if the illusion covers a true pit trap that hasn't yet revealed itself (optional: mocking laughter from a magic mouth spell when the pit trap is activated).
Geas doesn't remove free will the way Dominate Person does. An affected target of this spell can choose not to obey and take the penalties to stats over time. The penalties cannot directly kill you, and don't kick in quickly, so the spell is useless in combat except against the most selfish of PCs in situations in which a geas is not likely to be removed.
You must live near Sacramento, because that guy is in my gaming group too. You left out the constant inappropriate come-ons to female PCs and NPCs, though.
Regarding 2) and 3) above, I started with a few points of divergence from your conclusions. After thinking it over, I still do, but not the same ones I started with.
Here is the text of the wizard necromancer's Power Over Undead ability:
You receive Command Undead or Turn Undead as a bonus feat. You can channel energy a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Intelligence modifier, but only to use the selected feat. You can take other feats to add to this ability, such as Extra Channel and Improved Channel, but not feats that alter this ability, such as Elemental Channel and Alignment Channel. The DC to save against these feats is equal to 10 + 1/2 your wizard level + your Charisma modifier. At 20th level, undead cannot add their channel resistance to the save against this ability.
Here is the full text of the Soul Warden Channel Damage ability:
Soul Warden wrote:
At 1st level, a soul warden gains the power to harm undead with positive energy. This ability functions exactly like a cleric's ability to channel positive energy to deal damage to undead (but not to heal living creatures), and counts as channel energy for the purposes of qualifying for feats or determining effects that rely on channel energy. A soul warden uses his class level as his effective cleric level when channeling damage. He can channel damage a number of times per day equal to 3 + his Charisma modifier. Soul warden levels stack with levels in any class that grants channel energy for the purpose of determining the number of damage dice his channel energy ability deals to undead (if any).
Now, the necromancer's channeling ability is extremely circumscribed, but there is no denying that he does have it. It's right there in the description. I originally believed that this meant they would count for damage purposes. As far as that goes, I still think they should. There is already a feat, Channeling Scourge, allowing multi-classed cleric/inquisitors to count their inquisitor levels as cleric levels for the purpose of channeling when dealing damage. A necromancer specialist, far more invested in necromantic power than most inquisitors, who has chosen the option of channeling positive energy and thus forgone the ability to Command Undead (vastly more powerful and long-lasting than Turn Undead) really should get something for that sacrifice.
Sadly, I now realize that, by RAW, they do not, even if that was the intent. Wizard necromancer levels stack with Soul Warden levels when channeling for damage, but it nowhere says they count as either Soul Warden levels or as cleric levels, so the only good they get of being necromancers is being able to channel for damage using the channels they receive as a necromancer specialist, counting damage only from the dice they get from Soul Warden. Pretty lame. It's very slightly better than any other wizard who became a Soul Warden, at least when killing skeletons and zombies, but a wizard at mid-to-high levels shouldn't even be thinking about such trivial opponents.
Of course, the primary utility of Channel Damage is not actually using it to damage, but instead to get nifty spells that don't take up a spell slot. That would be true even if necromancer levels did add to channeling damage, but it's the principle of the thing.
I cannot give official answers, but here is what I think:
The most expensive ability in an item is crafted at normal cost and every additional ability at normal cost x 1.5.
If the item is one that occupies a specific place on a character's body, the cost of adding any additional ability to that item increases by 50%. For example, if a character adds the power to confer invisibility to her ring of protection 2, the cost of adding this ability is the same as for creating a ring of invisibility multiplied by 1.5.
Edit: I should have said that the most economical way to craft an item with multiple abilities is to craft the most expensive ability first at normal cost, with other abilities at 150% normal cost. The example given in the CRB shows Invisibility added onto a Ring of Protection +2, which can be done but is more expensive than the reverse, adding Protection +2 to a Ring of Invisibility.
Joex gives good advice above. I don't know that I can add much, except...
You say this PC is rather like Captain America in his outlook and you cannot see how you can make him choose to be a fugitive. Question: have you seen the latest Captain America movie? If you have not, you should. It's very relevant.
Just to be 100% sure I follow your reasoning, Jiggy, I believe you are saying
Is that right?
A truism attributed to William James is
"A difference which makes no difference is no difference at all."
It is a truism because it is inarguable. That being the case, what conceivable reason could there be for saying that certain items grant "temporary" ability bonuses when worn less than 24 hours, but grant "permanent" bonuses if worn 24 hours or longer, if there is in fact supposed to be no difference at all between the two types of bonus? Especially when it is made perfectly clear that any such bonus, of either type, lasts only as long as the item in question is worn. There either must be some difference, or the designers have wasted their time and ours in this. If there is no difference, they might as well have written of "green" bonuses and "red" bonuses and then clarified that of course by "green" and "red" they meant the exact same thing!
I actually play a good necromancer with similar stats. Her path is set now (homebrew PrC), but in the wayback I'd have liked the option of the only recently released Soul Warden PrC. Oddly enough, the Soul Warden is actually extremely similar to what I ended up building myself, although somewhat more elegant. It should be something your character would qualify for. Note that your wizard necromancer levels would stack with your Soul Warden levels for the purpose of channelling positive energy to DAMAGE undead. It also gives you access to spells arcane casters normally don't get.
Just thought you might be interested.
Well, maybe it could have one of two effects, chosen at casting:
1) grant 1 temporary hit point, as per current effect
2) allow caster to select 1, 2, 3, or 4 dice of the next single healing spell, healing channel, or lay on hands effect used in the next minute and roll them twice, taking the better roll.
The second option would allow out of combat healing to work significantly better, but not beyond current maximums and would not generally be possible more than once (at most) if used in any given combat.
Okay, sure, although for me it kinda breaks the "magic is cool" vibe to postulate rods that screw onto both ends of a mop handle (or whatever), I can at least imagine it, but I am still confused by the reference to "wielding" a double weapon in each hand. If you are holding a staff in either hand you're not gonna hit with either hand. Gandalf's battle prowess in the movies notwithstanding, a quarterstaff is a two handed weapon.
True. Per the CRB, though, under Ability Score Bonuses, it says this (emphasis added):
Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours.
The only things the CRB lists as being increased by temporary ability score increases are the epiphenomena of the ability scores, not the scores themselves. There is no need for the word "actually" in the quoted sentence above or, indeed, for ANY distinction between temporary and permanent bonuses if they do exactly the same thing.
So you've got a stat-boosting item that grants, say, +2 to Strength. Your strength is naturally 17 without the item and you only just found it and put it on. Congratulations! Your effective Strength is now 19 for almost all purposes. Almost. Because until you've taken a day to attune the item to you your ACTUAL Strength is still counted as 17 for purposes of ability damage and drain. If you get attacked by undead Shadows and get hit 3 times for max damage (3x6=18 pts of Str damage), you are now an undead thing. Had you found that belt a day earlier, you'd still be alive (at 1 Strength).
I myself have a long-running Wizard/Rogue character, but a few points here are worthy of note. First, Insightful Reflexes is a 3.5 Ed feat. If the game incorporates 3.5 material, any Wizard/Rogue should have it (mine does), but many games don't.
Second, too many games treat the Knock spell as a superior replacement for Disable Device. It is not.
Knock spell wrote:
When you complete the casting of this spell, make a caster level check against the DC of the lock with a +10 bonus.
A wand of Knock is useful primarily for opening simple locks, which have a DC of only 20, and even then will sometimes fail. So any character with maxed ranks in Disable Device is good for a party. Nonetheless, locks and traps should not be any PC's main utility.
If you want a more combat capable character, the previous suggestions of Slayer or Archaeologist Bard or Vivisectionist Alchemist are all good rogue-like Rogue alternatives. The Alchemist is more complicated than the others. Don't forget that Bards have access to the Heroism spell and other self buffs and that Archaeologist Bards don't need to sing or play an instrument to have stirring theme music. They're cinematic action heroes, so it comes installed.
Never take feats or talents that grant extra damage for a minus to hit unless you are playing a class with full BAB progression. For any other class they are a trap. You need to hit to deal any damage.
You might find out if your GM allows firearms. Ammo and shot might be too expensive to just blaze away in combat, but it's nice to target touch AC for sneak attacks when you've got the drop on someone.
I'm sure others can help you more--I haven't played a combat-oriented rogue in PF. But that's what I've got.
A couple of thoughts. First, Lawful in the alignment sense doesn't necessarily imply disciplined, sensible, or neat, EVEN THOUGH those are features of the Outer Planes associated with Law. Similarly, a Chaotic person is not necessarily whimsical or unbalanced or a seeker of immediate gratification, even though those things are associated with the planes of Chaos. Those things are personality traits, that are perhaps more common in people of certain alignments, but are not exclusive to them.
A Lawful alignment denotes a willingness, even an eagerness, to accept obligations and an expectation that others should do likewise. Also, they have an underlying belief that there is or should be a structure to society into which people should fit themselves for the good (small 'g') of all, including themselves. Despite this, a Lawful person could still be a scatterbrained, fun-loving person with a whimsical sense of humor (traits usually thought of as Chaotic).
A Chaotic person could be patient, methodical, and self-disciplined in her daily life (all commonly associated with Law) but her alignment would be reflected in her belief or attitude that many rules simply don't or shouldn't apply to her, either because she thinks she knows better than her society how she personally should act (conceivably true in some instances) or because she believes that society simply has too many rules, laws, and regulations for everybody.
Likewise, Good people are not always pleasant and polite and Evil people the reverse. As C.S. Lewis put it,
"The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" that Dickens loved to paint. It is not done even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried, and minuted) in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices."
On an aside, Ebenezer Scrooge was certainly not a fiend in human form, but if he was not evil he at the least had very strong tendencies that way, for he cared nothing for anyone outside himself. Before his nightly visitation, he was indifferent to bad fortune that might come to others, even others in his immediate orbit. Indeed, he was perfectly willing to exploit others for his own gain, despite the fact that he had no real need to do so to live a comfortable life. He also had what I would consider a fairly high Charisma score, measured in force of personality. Charismatic people aren't always likeable--they just are people who very often are able to get their way, by persuasion of one sort or another.