anarchitect's page

If you want to do a Swashbuckler with a side of Medic, I'd look at a support build utilizing All for One and Guardian's deflection. Eventually revitalizing finish would be nice. You stand next to your allies protecting them with Guardian's deflection and healing them when that doesn't help.

I would like to see one or more additional ways to spend panache. One possibility is:

If you have Panache when you take a reaction, you can expend your panache, and you retain your ability to use your reaction, but can not immediately use another reaction for the same triggering action.

Given that additional types of finishers are added as feats, I think it makes sense to add other uses of panache as feats as well. So this could be a feat.

I'd probably put it at level 4, the level after you get opportune riposte. there are higher level class feats that just give you an extra reaction, so this would clearly need to be lower level. But until you have access to opportune riposte, you don't really need it, and if you are going for a reaction heavy build, you are probably picking up attack of opportunity, I mean reactive strike, at 6th level

As a Swashbuckler player, I'm really excited about the changes.

I've been playing an All for One build. And the problem was, to do everything I needed to do in a turn, I needed 4 actions. 1 Action spent tumbling through to gain Panache, One action on a Finisher, 1 action to use All for One, and 1 action to use Dueling Parry. So unless one of the spellcasters chose to Haste me, I had to chose between protecting myself or helping someone else succeed. And it always felt silly to Tumble through each turn - that's some swashbuckler's style but I wanted to be a classic fencer.

With the changes, two things have improved my ability to gain Panache. The first is that the fiddly rules about gaining panache from All-for-one have gone away. Now you get panache if you succeed on the aid check, just flat. Combined with the remaster lowering the DC of aid checks, it basically means I cannot fail to gain panache off all-for-one. The other one is extravagant parry providing Panache if an opponent misses me. Not only is this another reliable source of Panache, but it makes parrying feel like it matters even if you don't get an opportune riposte out of it.

Together, this means I'm going to reliably gain panache during the space between turns. Either I use my reaction on All-for-one, which gives me panache, or I use my reaction on Opportune Riposte, which also gives me panache because if opportune riposte is triggered, so is Extravangant Parry.

This eliminates the need to spend my first action on each turn gaining Panache. So I can use a Finisher, followed by all-for-one, followed by Extravagant Parry, and I can reliably count on having panache again by my next turn. I no longer have to choose between helping my allies, protecting myself, and doing damage. I can do everything.

My only complaint is that since Extravagant Parry is not Dueling Parry, it doesn't count for feats that have dueling parry as a prereq like Dueling Dance. But all that did was save me an action a turn, which the changed rules already do, and I had to wait until mid to high levels to get it.

I think *America* can be Captain's God for the purpose of being a champion. Or "Lady Liberty" if one insists on Anthropomorphizing the divine.

Something I'd like to note about the Aldori Duelist dedication as a fighter:
You get proficiency with the Aldori Blade equal to your highest weapon proficiency. So you don't *need* to make swords your specialty. I'd advise going Brawling so your off hand punches are as good as your sword strikes.

So "Personal Standing and Honor" here isn't the sort a champion professes. Rather than being bound to a specific moral code, it's mostly about being able to say you are better than other people. I have always played it kinds like the honor professed by the 3 Musketeers or Cyrano de Bergerac, a kind of Bravo honor. Primarily for yourself but secondarily for the honor of the Aldori school.

Once you've taken the Sword Scion background you can go with any Dexterity-based one-handed martial weapon using build. Fighter and swashbuckler are obvious. Ranger, Magus, and Rogue are all decent. A champion could be made to work, but as there is no deity that has the aldori sword as a favored weapon I don't think warpriest does.

Personally I think the best builds are an athletics focused fighter or an intimidation focused swashbuckler. Those are the ones that can make specific use of an Aldori blade in a way that isn't just better done as a rapier or longsword.

If you are going free archetype, I suggest taking Aldori Duelist at 2nd level to get the early bump to athletics or acrobatics. Then take *either* the parry and repost feats if your base class doesn't offer them, or Duelist Edge and Unnerving prowess otherwise. Then I'd go into a different archetype after that, probably Duelist even though it's a bit redundant because it has some really nice feats.

Illusion spells always need GM clarification, and if their take on illusions is sufficiently limiting, you just don't play an illusionist for that GM. If my GM ruled that I couldn't make an illusion of a wall with illusory object, then I just wouldn't bother with the spell.

Now I'd rule that if someone sees you cast the spell, they could make a disbelieve check based solely on that (it would still take an action). I mean people summon real walls, but just the fact that it's from a spell is reason enough to doubt it. On the other hand, I'd likely have the NPC's that would do that also take an action to disbelieve when you summon *anything*, because the existence of illusion spells makes that a reasonable action.

Someone who succeeded on an Arcana check to identify the spell as you cast it, I'd make them still take the action to disbelieve, but I'd either give them a bonus or let them auto-succeed.

Narratively disbelieving is taking a moment to narrow your eyes and really *look* at the illusion, and that's what makes it transparent to you. You can still know it's an illusion and not successfully see through it. In those cases you'd walk through or shoot through blind. If it's a visual illusion only, it doesn't actually *stop* anything except your sight. Anything done by someone who hasn't disbelieved it still passes through it. Fireball and lightning bolt don't have their area of effect blocked.

Like a lot of spells, illusion spells have an effect even if the enemy succeeds on their save. Since their save requires them to take an action, even an illusion that's immediately disbelieves costs the enemy an action on their turn. Failed saves cost additional actions as they retry, and inflict the blind condition on specific actions. That's the mechanical effect, which exists regardless of the tables interpretation of how people react to your specific illusion. So for balance purposes compare it to other area spells who's primary purpose is to cost the enemy actions and/or inflict concealment or blindness.

Starting at High level? Play a full caster class.

Frankly, we've all got our favorite OP builds. I think in this case I'd want to try out a half-elf sorcerer.

You're starting at 21st level. Are you using the old epic rules fro 3.5? Are you going to have to multiclass?

I have. It will probably be a decent way to enter into the prestige class, should you want to do that. When the book actually comes out, I'll revise the guide to include any new options. Eventually.

I also made a couple of small changes to the guide. I've revised my opinion about Lunge, placing it as Improved Disarm's equal if you have sufficient mastery of abusing 5' steps. This is because I've gained sufficient experience doing just that with a Magus since then. I've revised a few builds to account. I may add a build using the prestige class later.

NECROMANCY!

However, I thought it worthwhile, as I've finally updated the guide to include the Swordlord prestige class.

My friends and I were discussing what we wanted out of the swashbuckler, and hit on what we think is an interesting mechanical option. Replace Bravery with:

Dashing strike: When you use the attack action, you increase the critical threat range of your weapon by +1 per 4 levels of swashbuckler. This increased threat range is not multiplied by Improved critical or effects such as Keen.

What this means, is when you take a standard action attack, your critical range goes up, which refuels your panache more reliable, as well as adding damage. Combined with the Vital strike line, it will encourage players to use their move actions to set up an attack, either by actually moving (in awesome swaashbuckling style), or using improved feint to set up their attack against a highly agile opponent.

Something I want to see played up flavor-wise is the idea that Arcanists aren't something new, they're something OLD, being the missing link between the natural spellcasting of the sorcerer and the learned spellcasting of the wizard. First came the sorcerer, then some potential sorcerers studied instead of going by instinct, becoming arcanists. And the arcanists learned how to do magic without natural talent at all, and taught wizards.

A second, simpler option, would be to have its casting work /mostly/ like a wizard, but give it "Spontaneous Spells" like a Cleric or Druid have, but instead of spontaneously casting Cure/Inflict/Summon, you get to choose what spells you can spontaneously cast as you level up, creating a character who can prepare all sorts of utility spells and then when combat happens say "Screw it, fireball" because they were secretly a sorcerer the whole time.

THIS SOUNDS GREAT.

Seriously. Having a memorized spell list, but being able to drop them for a spontaneous spell of your choice at each level is awesome, keeps the versatility, but is less powerful than full spontaneous. I like it.

Another idea, if you want to nerf it slightly farther, is to have your spontaneous spells be your bloodline spells.

Dex-Optimal doesn't mean Dex-only.

The swashbuckler should be a class where Dex-fighting is the optimal Build. Why? Because non-magical Dex-based melee is a design space that isn't currently occupied in Pathfinder. For every other non-magical melee fighter, Str is a superior choice.

Furthermore, the design goal for each of these hybrid classes is to take something from one class, something from another class, and something unique to the new class. Class features that make Dex > Str would be that something.

Yes, it should be totally viable to build a Str-based swashbuckler. Just as Dexterity is a viable route for the fighter. It just shouldn't be the Optimal build.

To Lemmy and Others. I've played this exact style of casting in game. I'm not armchair theorizing. This is actual play experience.

It is only a SLIGHT increase in versatility.

You know who else gets to change their spell list daily? Wizards. So the daily changing spell list isn't a new or overpowered thing. What letting you spontaneously cast from that list does, is let memorize spells that you think you might want, but aren't sure. It means if that memorization of Touch of the Sea never becomes useful, you can use that slot to cast a magic missile instead. It means you never waste a spell slot of a useless spell. THAT'S IT.

In play, my standard wizard hasn't used every spell he's memorized in a day since about third level. And at the higher levels that matter, he's always memorized exactly what he's going to use, and used them. Increasing his efficiency at using his spell slots would have had practically no effect.

In play, my players using arcanist-style casting used it to do something a wizard can't do only a handful of times. The players who would have memorized multiples of the same spell simply cast multiples of the same spell, and rarely used their alternates. The kind of players who would memorize a bunch of different spells simply cast a bunch of different spells, and rarely doubled up.

Basically, I'm telling you all that while this seems like HUGE increase in versatility on paper, in play my experience is that it's only a slight increase. You will occasionally get in an extra fireball, or have the opportunity to use that cool 5th level spell you've never memorized before because you could never be sure enough it'd be useful. The option to do that came up about as often as bloodline powers or school powers do. Psychologically the effect is huge. In Play the effect is minor.

Part of what lets me know they've hit the mark, is that there is absolutely NO consensus on which classes are boring. Everyone says that at least half the classes are boring, flavorless, or superfluous. But when listing which classes fit that description, well, pretty much every class has been labeled "Stupid and pointless" by at least one person, and "Best class ever" by another. None of them are standing out as getting more or less flak than any of the others.

In any set of 10 classes, at least half are going to bore any given player. The fact that it's not the same half for everyone means that the list is about where it should be.

So, I think I can give a little insight into how this plays, because in one of my home games we played with this style of casting for wizards. The whole "memorize your spell list, then have spells per day like a sorcerer" thing.

What happens is, your players prepare more of the funky niche spells. They'll pick a few "surefire useful" spells, like they normally do. But where they used to prepare multiple copies of those, now they prepare one copy, and fill the rest of their spell list with a few weird spells that might be useful. All the ones that Treantmonk rates at orange or red, for being useful only in exactly the right situation. And that's cool, because it means these marginal spells see use. To use someone else's metaphor, it raises the floor and not the ceiling.

Is it more versatile than existing casters? Yes, but in ways that increase fun and usefulness. Is it more powerful? Not really, because you still have similar numbers of spells known and cast. You just have slightly more flexibility with them.

So This style of casting is "better", but it's better in a way that doesn't lead to power creep, and can be balanced against other spellcasters class features. Fudge around the numbers per day (My home game used the wizard spells per day for both spell list and spells cast), and make the class abilities somewhat weaker than the wizard's school powers + arcane bond+ feats, and you're good.

Now let's talk flavor. The Arcanist, to me, is actually really interesting from a "History of Magic" Perspective. It's the missing link between the natural spellcasting of the sorceror, and the studied spellcasting of the Wizard. As I see it, Back in the day there were only sorcerers. Either you were born with magic, or you weren't. Then some sorcerers decided that they wanted to know How magic worked. They studied the magic in their blood, and learned how to do magic as a science instead of an art. These early researchers were Arcanists. They had magic in their blood like a sorceror, but they unlocked it through study instead of instinct. Later on, as they researched the nature of the arcane more, they learned how Anyone could be taught to cast spells. And that's how we eventually got wizards.

I'd like to see some of that flavor come through to the finished class. The suggestion I'd make is to make the class more MAD. Have bonus spells per day based on INT, but base save DC on CHA. Or some mix like that. Make it so the class needs BOTH a high INT and CHA to work. This really gives the class a "straddling both worlds" flavor, and it helps balance it against the more traditional casters who only need to pump one stat.

The thing is, if we're going to playtest with this restriction in place, we need to know WHY it's there. What specific balance doom or rules interaction morass are we trying to avoid? Because then I, as a playtester, can playtest characters that ignore the restriction, and see if these problems actually happen in game. The best case scenario is that the Devs tell us what to look for. The current alternative is to try to figure out what problems it might cause.

Here's one way it might cause a problem: 1st level cherry picking. Lets say I'm a fighter, and I'm in it for the bonus feats. One every other level is decent. But I can multiclass into monk to pick up another bonus feat, plus some other goodies. This isn't too bad in and of itself, but lets say I also pick up a level of brawler for the floating bonus feat. Now I'm well ahead of a single-classed fighter in terms of bonus feats, as well as saves, and I'm only behind by 1 BAB, 1 HP, and a 2 level delay in things like Weapon and Armor training.

Saves are another one: Once you have a sufficient number of classes within a role, you can multiclass between them to abuse that initial +2 to saves. If there's only 3 or so martial classes, you can't do that without diluting your primary function. But if there's 6 or 7, you might be able to.

Again, I'm not saying that these are actual problems that need addressing. I'm pointing them out as potential problems that need playtesting to see if they really exist.

OK, so maybe the single class monk is dead, but as long as the silly rule that you can't multiclass with one of your merged classes stands, the Monk still has a place.

There's interesting things you can do with a fighter with one or two levels in monk, build-wise. It's basically trading your fighter capstone, a hit point, and 1 point of BAB, for improved unarmed combat, stunning fist, a damage boost to your unarmed damage, a bonus feat, +2 to all saves, and some backup AC and flurry if you're ever caught unarmed and unarmored. That's a pretty good 1 level dip. It gets better if you archetype.

If you could dip brawler as a fighter, you could get a floating bonus feat, improved unarmed strike and damage, and +2 to 2 saves. You don't get flurry, Wis to AC, a bonus to Will saves, or stunning fist, but you also don't lose any HP or BAB. For some builds, you'd want monk, for others, brawler. But you can't dip brawler at all, so it's moot.

Not to say that reducing the monk to a one or two level dip for martial characters looking to round out their options is great. But I can say that none of the character concepts I have that revolve around the monk are getting replaced by the brawler.

So here's my challenge, then. I'd like some examples of characters who multiclass ignoring the restrictions, that are broken. Not just overpowered, any kind of broken. I want to see what kind of things are so bad that we have to add this kludgy restriction to avoid them.

I'll be trying to figure some out myself.

Yeah, but that's solvable. Simply put a line in the Blood rage Power that states that any other class that grants the rage ability has that rage converted to a bloodrage, and stacks levels with Bloodrager to determine how many rounds per day you get. So your Barbarian 5/ Bloodrager 5 only has as many rounds per day as a Bloodrager 10.

It seems weird to me, though, because the Magus is a total fighter/Wizard, and doesn't have this restriction at all.

Basically, the magus was designed well enough that it wasn't an issue. A Magus dipping into fighter or wizard was neither overpowered or stupid, and there was sufficient reason to stay 20 levels of Magus. There's also nothing overpowering about either of those classes dipping Magus. If all the new advanced classes are as well done as the Magus was, I don't think there'd be an issue.

They aren't all that well done currently, but there's time to fix that.

It also matters for the Brawler and feats that require "BAB +X, or monk level Y"

First impressions from an initial read-through here, but for a class in a support role, they really don't seem to play well with others.

Raging song is a morale bonus, as is a regular rage. While this is appropriate enough in a vacuum, it means a barbarian really does not get any from being in a party with a skald, which thematically just seems like the biggest misstep you could possibly make. Not sure what the fix is for that one in particular, but I think there's something to be said for specifically addressing the point. "Treat this bonus as competence instead of morale for characters already under a rage effect" maybe?

Probably better to just state that any character with the Rage ability from another source activates that ability for the duration of the Skald's song. So a barbarian under the effect of the Skald's song gets their full raging bonus, but isn't using their own pool of rage rounds.

Question: The text for Bonus Feats states that you gain a bonus feat at 4th level and every even numbered level after that. The Table, however, shows a bonus feat only at every forth level. Which is correct?

( I assume it's the table.)

Yeah, you can make a serious debuff fighter out of that PrC. Stack it with a rimed frostbite/enforcer Magus, and you can seriously screw over someone. However, it's such a narrow focus that it's not worth putting in the levels. The class has some serious front-end load, a decent ability in the middle, a decent capstone, and nothing else you can't get better elsewhere. You might build an NPC around that concept, but a PC? Never.

As to the Magus-as-Deulist:

The shocking grasp trick isn't what we're gonna focus on here. While we're use shocking grasp, we don't need to intensify it because of our low caster level. An extra attack with +4D6 damage is nothing to sneeze at. That said, If really you want 10d6 shocking crazyness, you can go Magus 10/Deulist 10.

The tricks we can pull off with just 4 level in magus are:
-Psuedo-flurry with our weapon of choice, using spellstrike + Arcana.
-4 touch attacks with either frostbite or chill touch.
-Truestrike + Attack in one round. Combine with a combat maneuver for best effect.
-2nd level spells for defense buffs, such as blur or mirror image.
-Our very own casting of shield and mage armor, for AC goodness. Being able to do this and still attack in the same round.
-1 Magus Arcana, plus access to more through the extra Arcana feat. The one that adds +int to attack is a good one.
-A +1 stacking enhancement bonus for your sword.

Compared to just going fighter, you're primarily losing 1 BAB, 3 HP, and 2 bonus feats. That's a fair trade, really.

That's with no traits or other feats, just what the class gets you.

OK, ignoring dips into spellcasting classes for cheese:

Maneuver master monk replaces flurry, which you can't normally use with a Katana, with "Flurry of Maneuvers, which you can.

Lore warden gives you bonuses to those dirty tricks and other maneuvers.

Dip a few levels in monk and go the rest Lore Warden. They're two great tastes that taste great together, and the combo totally plays as a washed up swordsman without having to RP justify weird 1-level dips. You were a monk, but you washed out of the abbey at some point, and have been a wandering swordsman ever since.

I once had a Homunculous familiar invalidate an entire adventure. The thing didn't sleep, had a huge bonus to stealth, a decent disable device, and was smart enough to make maps. The party took a nap to refresh while it explored the dungeon for us. When we woke up, it gave us a nice map with all the good loot marked. We breezed through the many-branched mine strait to the important stuff. Had the GM grumbling for weeks.

Interesting. Some couldn't do that, in that they'd have no desire to role-play knowing they'd already been preordained to fail by a previous roll. Now if the DM told them they just might be able to recoup the situation with a great role-play, sure ... but simply to showcase ineptitude? Many would just say, "I failed. What happens?"

You're on the right track. The thing is, players like Agency. The more say you give them in what happens, the better. So the dice say you failed. But they don't say HOW you failed. The typical novice GM assumes that filling in that "How" is their job. After all, they're telling a story, and the player is the audience, right? The Veteran GM, on the other hand, lets the PLAYER say how they failed. That gives the player the ability to have some fun with it. They can describe how they failed in a way that they find entertaining, which takes the sting off failure. It also lets them fail in a way that reinforces their character's personality. Basically, you say "You failed... What happened?"

Now letting the player's RP have some measure of damage control is also a great idea. Don't let go of that one. Tell your players that and they'll really put the effort in.

By way of example, let's say each party member is given an audience with the queen, with the opportunity to charm her and gain her favor. And let's say, they all fail their diplomacy checks.

The barbarian says "Well I'm an uncouth northman. I just go in, sit my dirty but in a nice chair and throw a leg over the arm, eating as we talk. The conversation consists of 'Me like smash enemies. Me smash enemies for you.'"

The Gnome Bard says "I tell jokes and riddles, many of them gently ribbing her station, her dress, etc. This is perfectly acceptable manners in a Gnomish court, but I guess humans are touchy."

The Chaotic Good Fighter says "In my country we have no nobles, and everyone is equal. I have trouble treating her with the kind of deference she expects from her station.

The Haughty elf says "Funny little human, putting on airs. Doesn't she know that the lowest of elves outranks the highest of humans?"

The Thief says "I never expected to ever speak to a noble, at least, outside of a courtroom. I try my best, but I have no idea how to speak. I also may have been caught trying to nick the silver."

The wizard says "I attempt to impress her with how smart and well-educated I am. I use a lot of big words and make references to all the most important philisophical and arcane texts. I think most of it went over her head."

In each case, each player got to use what could have just been a loss, as an opportunity to further define and flesh out their character. From a storytelling perspective, failure can be as interesting as success. Honestly, a good rule is not to roll the dice unless failure has the potential to be as interesting as success.

here are a few Ideas I haven't seen talked about yet.

1: Magus. You want a high INT for your spell selection, and a free hand for your spell combat. 4 levels of Magus gets you spell combat, spell strike, and spell Recall, which will let you spam those excellent 1st level spells even after you multi-class out for Duelist. Going the Kensai route has great synergy with Duelist, and gives you shit tons of free feats. Don't forget True Strike + Disarm Maneuver in one round. You can dip the rest of your pre-duelist levels in another class for more cherry-picking.

2: The Swordlord PRC is "Dip this for one level to get get Dex to Damage, then go into the real Duelist class." That's it. Of course, if you really want to play a Swordlord, I have a Guide.

3: Maneuver Master Monk + Lore Warden. You trade away a normal flurry for a free maneuver at the end of your full attack, and you get significant bonuses to the check.

That covers it.

Watch some "Who's line" together as a group. Watch a good movie in the genre of the game you're running. Get people into the idea of acting out scenes.

Then, when they make their rolls, they succeed or fail. Ask them to act it out AFTER then roll, so they know what the end result is. One of the major issues I've had as a gamer is trying to act out a scene before I know if my character is suavely seducing the queen or making a royal fool of himself. If I know the result, I can act appropriately. So go ahead and make the social rolls up front, but then ask the player to act out the result afterwards.

Your evil wizard should cast Create Pit first, followed by black tentacles. My wizard calls this "Plan Sarlac."

I never really got around to updating my swordlord guide to include the prestige class. I mean, I have a rough draft written up for it, but considering that it's super-dex focused, and my guide is all about why dex is wrong for swordlords, I never really got into it enough to finish. Frankly I can sum up the prestige class as "Dip one level, then go duelist"

But you may want to check out my guide to swordlords. http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2o5ky?Secrets-of-the-Swordlords-How-to-build-an

Rather specifically, I'd recommend Osyluth's Guile. Now you're adding CHA to your AC when fighting defensively, which you're doing anyway thanks to crane style and steel net. Next, skip the higher levels of the swordlord prestige class for levels in duelist and more in the swordlord fighter archetype. With duelist, monk, and Osyluth's guile, you're adding Dex, Wis, Int, and Cha to your AC. Recall that a +2/+2/+2 headband is cheaper than a single +6 headband.

I'm planning on going this route with my Magus. At 11th level, I'll get 2 feats and have both dimension door and Paragon Surge. I'll take the first two feats in the tree, cast paragon surge from a wand or scroll to get the third, and then use my 3 fourth level spells for dimension door purposes. I'm looking forward to it.

Offler the Crocodile god from discworld.

As to "holding iterative charges", here would be my argument that it must be allowed. Chill Touch is a level 1 spell that gives you one charge per level. A level 2 caster with the spell is not going to have the BAB to be able to do more than one touch per round, and is unlikely to gain an extra touch attack through other means.

Yes and no. At level 2, the Magus will be able to cast the spell using spell combat, and use spellstrike to deliver the first charge with their weapon. Then they get their normal attack, and may deliver the second charge with that.

At 3rd level, the Magus may do that trick, then spell combat the next round as well, making their weapon attack first (delivering the 3rd charge) and then following up with another touch spell like shocking grasp.

It's not until 4th level that you have more charges than you can deliver effectively.

Downsides:
1 less BAB
1 level delay getting higher level spells.
1 level delay on your class features. This includes the Black Blade's progression.

Scribe scroll doesn't jive as well with the magus because you can't spell combat with one.

It's not Bad, per se, but magus has a lot of abilities that progress with level. This makes dipping less attractive. Black Blade makes it worse. I'm playing a Black Blade Hexcrafter, which absolutely kills "dipping" as a viable idea.

This is a good build if, and only if, your GM rules that you can enchant your own Black Blade, but cannot pay others to enchant it. Even then, you could just take the crafts magic arms and armor feat yourself.

On the other hand... dropping a level in wizard for a staff magus to get an arcane bonded staff... Better. Enchant your staff as both a weapon and a staff saves you two feats instead of one.

Other, even less ideal ways to get Arcane Bond:
Sorceror with arcane bloodline
Eldritch heritage for arcane bloodline
Half elf Bonded witch

Dazing ball lightning is pretty sweet: 4 round dazing effect targeting reflex save, on two lightning balls that you can direct each round as a move action, is bad-ass battlefield control. One casting of that per combat first round of combat, and you can keep casting other standard action spells while playing with them. With spell perfection it's a pretty sweet use of a 4th level spell slot.

I still say that crane style is worth it without steel net. Steel net makes it AWESOME, but it works nicely without it. The duelist also gets an ability, elaborate duelist, that makes fighting defensively better. But the ability to just say NO to one melee attack per round is hella good. It shuts down True strike maneuver cheese, it shuts down Rend, it shuts down critical hits, and at worst it stops one attack per round cold. The trade off is that you don't get to two hand a weapon. Assuming you get the full feat tree, you're only taking a -1 to hit penalty for all that bonus AC and the hit negation. That's awesome.

Have you considered being an orc or half-orc? Scarred witch doesn't have the HP problems you seem to be worried about, being a CON-based caster.

Consider the charm hex, for making friends where you need them when you need them.

And definately look at the spell "Skeleton Crew." If you don't use this spell as a witch in this campaign, you're patron will disown you.

Something I realized while optimizing my current Hexcrafter is that with the chill touch and frostbite spells, you won't always be using spell combat each round. You can't both hold the charge and cast a spell for spell combat. This means at the mid-level, you've got several charges to hold and no extra attacks available.

My plan is to get evil Eye at 4th level, and cackle at 6th. So the plan is to use the evil Eye hex on round one, then cackle. Round two casts frostbite (and gets the free sword attack that comes with that thanks to spellstrike), followed by cackle. Rounds 3-7 involve continued cackling and attacking. I can even hold the charge while using hexes, since using a hex doesn't dissipate the charge.

It just really amazes me how well Hexes synergize with held touch charges. I'm really looking forward to taking my hexcrafter out for a spin.

IDIOOOOOT!

Yeah, yeah, I know. I need to update my guide to take the prestige class into account. Except honestly, there's nothing in the prestige class that modifies my guide in any way. It's a totally different class that just happens to share the same name.

And honestly, you're doing it "right" here: dipping the prestige class and then going into duelist. You've essentially used the prestige class to get dex to damage, and change the requirements for aldori dueling mastery from "pure feat tax" to "feat tax, but with decent feats." My only question is where is your crane style? There is no excuse for anyone going singleton not having crane style. At all. None. Nada. Zip. Make getting that a priority.

Also, You have combat expertise, dodge, and mobility. If you aren't picking up spring attack and whirlwind strike, you're missing out.

But yeah, even with these modifications you've fallen into every trap and you know it. The aldori aren't damage dealers, they're maneuver fighters, defensive walls, and with the new prestige class, debuffers. If you're trying to catch up on damage, you're gonna have a bad time.

OK. So it's been pointed out previously that a staff Magus doesn't really need TWF to get an extra attack, thanks to spellstrike and 0th level touch spells. So there's no real point to using TWF on your staff magus.

Naw, I'm joking. The quarterstaff is a double weapon, for pete's sake, and so damn flexible. What I love about the staff is that with quarterstaff master, you can use it as a one handed weapon, a two handed weapon, or a double weapon at will. All we need is a reason to do so.

Here it is: Chill touch and Frostbite. These spells give you a number of touch attack charges equal to your caster level. When you cast this spell the next (CL) in successful hits will be modified. Except that you can't use it with spellstrike and spell combat, because casting another spell will disperse all remaining charges. It will, however, work with TWF. Round one, use the staff one handed and toss down frostbite with spell combat. The following rounds, shift to a double weapon and TWF to get the extra attack. At the end of your round, take a free action to shift to a Two handed stance: That way any attacks of opportunity you make deal 1.5 times your strength bonus.

Really, you can milk a lot out of abusing different grips in different situations. Remember that shifting from a one hand to a two hand grip is a free action.

A thought for another thread perhaps, but why the hell does the sword lord archetype not get auto proficiency with the algorithm dueling sword, when the blasted Kensai Mage gets EWP AND Wep Foc., were the designers bullied by people who played fighter back in 1st and 2nd edition?

Because you don't actually need proficiency to use the Aldori sword. If you are proficient with a longsword, you are proficient with the Aldori sword. The E.W.P. lets you use it with finesse, that's all. It's basically a feat tax on being a dex fighter. Despite all the fluff, effective Aldori fighters are going to be strength fighters. Check out the guide.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2o5ky?Secrets-of-the-Swordlords-How-to-build-an

Helaman: True strike. No somatic component, can be spell-combated to go off the same round, adds +20 to an attack roll or combat maneuver check. Pretty much an instant disarm, unless the opponent has the fighter capstone or Crane wing. A locking Gauntlet levels the playing field slightly but it's still in your favor. No worries about armor check problems, and you still do damage thanks to your Aldoriness. This is your go-to spell for an Aldori Magus.

What it really costs you is you get your Aldori abilities a level later. They're already not coming online until 5th level: do you really want to wait that long to get your key class features? It already sucks waiting that long to get them.

Yeah, nothing about the aldori sword requires that you get the exotic proficiency, except trying to weapon finesse it.

Just take the sword scion trait, and have this guy use an Aldori sword as a longsword. Bam, instant Aldori Swordlord.

But as an elf, yeah, fluff says no way. You've got to be human, or adopted by humans, to be an Aldori.

I might throw in some interesting subplot where your elf came this way to see if there was anything to this Aldori nonsense. After all, he's obviously a curious sort if he has breadth of experience, and since dueling is his thing it makes sense he'd want to learn about similar fighting styles. So maybe he learns to fight like an Aldori duelist as part of his character growth.

Where are you an elf from? Consider the Mordant Spire Magus archetype. Doesn't go well with lore warden, though, because they both provide the same bonus feat. Still, A 1 level dip into any version Magus is pretty sweet if you are a high-int fighter already.

This also depends a lot on what you intend to be fighting, and what kind of situations you find yourself in.

Are you facing a lot of enemy spellcasters or gunslingers who make ranged touch attacks? Your Dex bonus is added to your touch attack AC, Armor is not. You might want to go with the lighter armor and the higher Dex bonus to AC.

Are you going to be ambushed, flat footed, or otherwise denied you dex bonus to AC frequently? Consider the Heavier armor then.

I've often considered house-ruling that the Maximum dex allowed by your armor applied to everything you do with dex, from making ranged attacks to your reflex save. But then, I'm a fan of lightly armored fighters.

Well, don't forget to add Osyluth's guile. As a halfling you've got a bonus to charisma, so you'll get good use out of it.

I'd like to point out, though, that your halfling would be almost as effective at this trick by picking up the feats and skipping being an Aldori. Consider this trick as a pure monk, or a rogue, or a magus. I think the most important thing about making an opimized Aldori is to focus on the things that ONLY an Aldori swordlord can do.

I checked out wander monk. You're replacing a bonus feat with an EWP. That's not really a decent trade: you could have just spent a bonus feat on the EWP without multiclassing, or kept your standard monk archetype and taken a useful bonus feat. None of Wander Monk's other abilities really synch with the build.