awbattles's page

Laprof wrote:

Actually DC32 is pretty high. Once you fail the first ST your Con and Fortitude Bonuses go down and passing the following ST is even harder.

He had +15 at Fort ST but rolled a 6, losing 5 Con points....

The ranger's failed 3 TS in 3 consecutive rounds, lowering his Con from 19 to 7 (also good rolls by DM - me).

Are you sure you applied the rules correctly?

Unlike the more powerful "Ability Drain" power, the lesser "Ability Damage" does not actually "lower" your ability score.

Ability Damage merely adds a penalty to all statistics linked to the ability, i.e. as if your ability modifier was lowered by 1; the ability penalty is -1 for every full 2 points of Ability Damage, so the first roll of 5 points CON Damage only applied a -2 penalty [from the 4 points Ability Damage, the 5th point did nothing yet]. Ability Drain would have given a -3 penalty in this case, because it would have lowered the 19 CON to 14 CON, but Ability Damage ignores your actual ability score.

This means he probably had a +1 more CON during the fight.

And unless the Ability Damage to Constitution is greater than the Constitution score itself, you do not die from Constitution damage.

The Constitution damage also has no effect on the maximum negative hit points a character can have before he is dead. So the Ranger wouldn't die from hit point damage unless he is at or below -19 HP.

Rules: Ability Score Damage, Penalty, and Drain

p.s.: Delay Poison is a 2nd-level spell, that is super powerful!

All true, but I can't imagine a +1 to his saves would have made a difference in this example; -3 or -4, either way he needs a Nat20. And the poison is definitely going to damage his Con below the Con score at 10 saves, since he has 7 saves to go and only 7 Con remaining. People do frequently miss that the penalties only apply for every 2 damage though, regardless of whether the score is odd or even.

I saw a good aligned cleric with Cure Spells prepared in Pathfinder. A lot of them.

This is my favorite so far. Don't have to have terrible stats or multi-classing to have a terrible build.

I GM a game for my younger brothers (26, 23, 20, and 15). First time playing for half of them, so I offered to help anyone with character building if they'd like; no one took the offer. One of them decided to play a middle-aged elf wizard with dumped Con (4), so he gains an average of 1hp per level. Still technically alive at level 3, but has gone unconscious several times, and enemies are scaling in damage much faster than he scales in hp, so he'll be killed by a single hit one of these days. I'm considering it a learning experience.

Ryan Freire wrote:

Things that are red for an adventurer, can be bright blue for an npc.

Stopping a monster from healing while the other 3-4 members of your party blitz it dead in a round and a half is less useful/scary than the hag turning off healing on your most wounded party member halfway through an ugly fight.

But then some player will think that is "*extra* mean", as someone already said in this thread.

Personally, I can think of several fights where that hex, if used successfully, would have killed or forced to flee one of the PCs.

I recognize that some might look at it that way, but it's pretty short sighted to do so, because:

1. The implication is that it's unfair for opponents to use things that the PCs themselves wouldn't find useful. In this case specifically, they wouldn't take the hex because they know it's more efficient to just blow the enemy up quickly rather than tactically debuff it. They want the enemy to use the same tactics they do, but worse, so they can still win.

2. The opponent could just use an ACTUAL save-or-die effect, and that's always going to be more dangerous than denying someone in-combat healing (which is the only relevant use for a round-per-level debuff). It could be the nail in the coffin that causes a PC to die, but there are many more common effects that would cause that death more quickly/directly with a failed save.

Whenever someone complains about something being OP/mean/unreasonable using RAI, I have to question their motivations or understanding.

There are some alternate abilities printed in later books that make this idea less desirable.

Take the Shadowhunter racial ability printed in Blood of Shadows.

Shadowhunter wrote:

Dwarves, elves, gnomes, half-orcs, and halflings can take this trait in place of weapon familiarity. Half-elves can take this trait in place of elven immunities. Humans can take this trait in place of their bonus feat, also gaining Iron Will as a bonus feat.

Now every core race can trade their racial weapon familiarity for a free trait. 90% of characters don't use their racial familiarity anyways and the extra feat would just be better.

The same applies to Skilled. If you have min/maxers in your campaign, you'll have a party full of non-humans with all the good human traits, because those races with +2/+2/-2 stats can also give up marginal racial traits to get the good ones from human.

Well, going by OP's initial idea, I'd say that it doesn't work that way, because the human version is trading an open feat for this trait plus a specific feat. Going in reverse, it's the classic "you don't have this, so you can't trade it away". However, if they had Iron Will as a free feat from a racial, they could trade that and this trait (or weapon familiarity) for an open feat. Just my two cents. It would be a houserule, so choosing to apply it in that way wouldn't be any less true-to-rules.

Balance-wise, I think it’s going to be fine most of the time, although there’s probably some weird combination that can make things slightly more powerful than other combinations. But it would be minor. The bigger issue, I agree, is that it does perhaps blur the lines that make existing races unique. From a very balanced perspective, you could also just allow players to use the benefits of whatever race they like, and then just call it a Dwarf or Tiefling or whatever. But other than that little thing, seems fine. There aren’t that many alternate racial traits with overlap like that in the first place, so probably only looking at a dozen different traits that could be gained this way; no one is suddenly getting Drow Noble abilities or anything.

The concept of "viable" builds is pretty tenuous, because it will depend dramatically on who you play with. I can certainly make a dex-based or switch-hitter build that will perform just fine in Paizo APs, and don't need EitR accommodations to do so (assuming most first-party material is available). For the matter, I can build a natural attack Kobold or a Mystic Theurge that will keep relevant. In my circle of players, three others could build the dex/switch hitter just fine, but only one of them could pull off the Kobold/Theurge. The other three players need to stick with fairly traditional builds. Some of those builds are "viable" for a few of us, but not "viable" for the others.

The point is that, with good system mastery, there are very few concepts that can't be made viable, especially if playing in games that aren't particularly optimized. If you're playing in a campaign where everyone min-maxes, and the GM ruthlessly plays every enemy as if they have 20 Int and exploits meta-knowledge about the PCs, then the more exotic builds may be unable to keep pace. What you've described above sounds more like:

1. Players with bad attitudes; most builds will have strengths and weaknesses, and pouting because they did poorly in an encounter is a player problem, not a character problem.

2. Players with very low system mastery, and who may need help building their first PCs if they're newer to the game.

3. People having other, personal issues with the group, and using a bad build as an excuse to avoid addressing the actual frustrations.

I would personally consider Switch-hitters and Dex builds to be fairly vanilla and the opposite of gimmicky, so banning them seems pretty restrictive, especially when that isn't really the root of the problem.

I have to agree with the general consensus that this is a fabricated problem, created solely so that there would be a need for the argument, and maybe a chance to slip in facts about timelines. In reality, reality has very little impact on what I would or would not allow in a game. If guns don't feel right for the setting, they're out, same with alien-esque options, and maybe even Lovecraftian lore. Same reason a peasant railgun doesn't work, because facts and real-world rules have little influence on my fantasy games.

I’ve played several campaigns into mid-levels, and one AP to completion, and it seems to depend substantially on the GM. The completed AP, I never died, but my party had about 7 deaths total. Current AP (Kingmaker) we’ve had about 6 deaths so far, and we’re level 3 (different GM, we voted early on to have a “no punches pulled” game). So it varies wildly. Personally, I don’t enjoy my games as much when there isn’t a real threat of death, so this current campaign is excellent in my mind. Yeah, we lost several characters, but that was largely due to poorly optimized builds (like, below average, not “failing to power game”) and getting a feel for what kinds of things you can pull. I now know that the GM will absolutely allow us to attempt fights that we have no chance of winning and it’s up to us to recognize when we’ve skipped too far ahead and just retreat, something we’ve never done in the past. By level 10, save-or-dies are definitely a thing, so players have to ensure they’re keeping saves high and positioning tactically (a lot of those spells are devastating, but only if the player fails AND is left in an exposed position).

A regular backpack weighs 2 pounds. It's always somewhat of an increase to wear a masterwork backpack, as between STR 1 and 10, every point of strength is 3.3lb/weight category/STR, meaning if you have to be in light weight, you gain 1.3lb of space but that doesn't mean it's worth the extra 48gp over a regular backpack either.

Ah, from that perspective I suppose. I was assuming going from no backpack to MW backpack. If you will have one regardless, then it is an improvement, but if all you own is two daggers and some armor, you won't need a pack since there's nothing else to carry.

As has already been covered, yeah, super low strength characters will struggle to remain under a medium load. I've been there, done that, and you definitely have to finagle every last pound to make things work. Darkleaf armor is pretty much a necessity. Wakizashis are pretty light-weight already, but if you make them out of Obsidian you can shave off another pound of weight in exchange for the fragile quality at low levels (make sure a party member has the mending cantrip), and mithril for an even lighter and more durable option at higher levels.

Don't fall for the Masterwork Backpack trap. It's a good option for staying under a HEAVY load or for mid-strength characters, but for low strength PCs...the backpack weighs 4 pounds, and your light load will only increase by 3-4 pounds, so it's a spendy mistake.

Dokkens10 wrote:

That is what I thought too. But when I am on herolab, Ironbeard does not show on the oracle spell list.

Something I would check is to make sure you have the advanced race guide active in herolab. Newly purchased books have to be individually activated in setup (or at least that's the case for their offline version, I haven't used their online one so it may be different). If you do and it's not showing up for oracle and it is showing up for other classes I would reach out to the folks at herolab and report it as a bug. Either they'll get it fixed or they will explain why they don't have it flagged as an oracle spell. They've been generally responsive and helpful when I've reached out before.

If it is a bug that needs to be fixed, you can force herolab to recognize the spell as being on your class list. I had to to that for the Pathfinder Savant class before it was fully implemented.

Yeah, I got all of the existing books for Herolab during some big sale, because I didn't want to run into issues with using a specific spell or feat that wasn't available because it's only in a splatbook. Pretty incredible software, but there are a lot of little things you have to double-check for everything to work properly, like activating rules/special books, or taking animal companion archetypes on the PC first and then going to the AC and adding it after. One issue I found is with deity specific spells. Milani grants "Imbue with Spell Ability" to rangers, and Herolab will have it show up on their spell list when worshipping her...but it's also grayed out and not a valid option, because only worshipers of Nethys get that spell ;). Pathfinder is a complex game, with a ton of little exceptions, and having a program try to account for all of them means that there will be a lot of little oversights as well.

Seems to me that there is a needlessly high amount of antagonism toward the OP, rather than answering the question. It’s incredibly obvious what type of thing he’s looking for, based on his given example. A comment or two about how it might be a double-edged sword is fine, but that’s been the vast majority of posts so far. We get it, y’all disapprove, move on.

Hey y'all, what's goin' on in this thread?

Somehow I always just imagined that you were one of those mythical creatures who wrote guides back in the day, but no one has seen in years. I wish I had prepared for this day better, written down thoughts and questions. Curse my lack of foresight!

Yeah, while polymorphing causes you to lose access to supernatural abilities that rely on your form, I'd argue that Lay on Hands doesn't fall into that category (despite the flavor use of the word "hands" in the ability). In support of this, Unchained Eidolons can pick the Agathion subtype which grants them Lay on Hands as a Paladin, but several (most) of the forms they can take do not have hands, but tentacles/legs/etc.

awbattles wrote:

Feral Champion Warpriest with the Fate's Favored trait.

I love this, thanks for your little errata about the impact of the kobolds small size, still super awesome.

awbattles wrote:

-Two hoof attacks from casting Monstrous Extremities on yourself in the morning (has hours/level duration). This starts at level 7.

Worship Apsu (thematic for a Kobold anyway). Deity's favored weapon is bite, and the archetype grants claws that automatically scale with Sacred Weapon, so use your free Weapon Focus on whichever natural attack you prefer (Tail for earliest use, hoof for earliest use on two weapons probably the best choice, wings for earliest use on two permanent weapons).

Oh hell yes, excellent additions.

awbattles wrote:

Regular martials will probably be closer to +25/+20/+15 at 1d8+15, but you are making literally triple their number of attack rolls, and you started with a small Kobold.

awbattles wrote:

and you started with a small Kobold.

Quoted for emphasis

awbattles wrote:

Honestly, I found the most irritating thing was keeping track of all the little differences between natural attacks when making my rolls (some have +1 to hit from Weapon Focus, some don't, few different die sizes), so make a cheat sheet.

Appreciate the tip. Did you play this little monster? Between what levels? Was it as good a time as it looks?

Glad you found some interesting stuff in there. Monstrous Extremities is a huge boon to any natural attack build that isn't just polymorphing

I played a less-effective variant of this using an Oracle that transitioned into Dragon Disciple; Lunar mystery has a revelation that grants some temporary natural attacks, either claws or gore. It was actually a lot of fun, especially around level 7 when I had my highest number of attacks compared to others (The bite/tail/hoof/hoof/claw combo). The biggest issue was deciding how much to buff (spending two rounds at the beginning of battle is a real detriment), which the Warpriest should get around more easily, and tracking the dice as mentioned above (I had limited use claws from a couple of different sources, and an improved 1.5str-to-damage bite that only worked with the DD claws, etc), but ultimately he was very capable, and played well from level 2 on (because I only had bite at level 1, should be much more devastating earlier this route). Ended up going to level 13, and never felt a real drop in effectiveness, and the roleplay of being a miniature champion for the weak didn't get old XD.

That’s a much more playable build. Touch attacks would still be vastly preferable, since 16 isn’t that crazy high and you’re 3/4 BAB, but if you keep your burn up you should at least have a fair chance of hitting if you always put your size bonus into strength.

As for earth...yeah, it’s better. I don’t absolutely hate the wood option though, unlike most here. You need to transition to heavy armor as soon as possible, and keep it and your heavy shield enhanced as high as you can for wealth at any given level, but it should be pretty effective against most physical attacks. The new ability score layout makes a huge difference, and while it won’t be STRONG, I’d argue it could keep up with a low-ish balanced party.

Unfortunately, the general consensus here seems right. In mathematical terms, you have too many knowns and not enough (any) unknowns. If you know your age/race/class/ability scores/class/class choices/class archetype, that just doesn't leave anything left. And as others pointed out, Kineticist is a high-floor/low-ceiling class, and the entire reason they're low-ceiling is because they basically can't be improved through equipment or feats. Certainly nothing can be done with 30gp and a single utility talent. I guess Kinetic Cover and just throw up barriers at a range to force enemies to use move actions to get past? You can't be a tank, because you won't have the AC or health for it. I'd say take the Wood Healer talent, but that requires positive energy blasts, and you've already chosen wood blast. Think this is just one of those classic economics choices where something has to give: you can't have something cheaper than usual, and better-made than usual, and get it delivered more quickly than usual; there's always a trade-off.

You are starting the game with 3 attacks that each have 1d6 and are all primary, and fervor at level 2 means you can swift-buff with Divine Favor (boosted by Fate's Favored) for a total of +5 to hit at 1d6+4 damage on all your attacks. By the time martials are getting a single iterative, you're just one level away from making 4 attacks each round (5 if you can cast monstrous extremities twice with bonus spells from Wis), and Divine Favor has increased by an additional 1 to-hit and damage. Usually I like to use Fervor for frequent swift casting, but you only need one buff to stay relevant, so extra uses of fervor will be used to swift heal yourself when needed, without breaking up your full attack rhythm (you are a d8 with only 13-14 Con after all). Using the above, you have a free feat at levels 1, 5, 7,...

Realized an error after. Small warpriest only gets 1d4 at level 1 for Sacred weapons, and by level 11 it would be 1d8. Still not bad, and only losing 1 average damage per hit, but it does mean that a single size increase won't be all that impressive, so don't beg for Enlarge Person.

Feral Champion Warpriest with the Fate's Favored trait.

With 20 point buy:
14 Str
13 Dex
13 Con
7 Int
13 Wis
7 Cha

Yeah, you're dumping stats hard and have to wear heavy armor, but there are trade-offs to make when using the worst statted race in the game. One ability increase goes to Con, remainder to Str, use a headband to increase Wis high enough to cast your highest level spells. Can even take Eldritch Claws at level 6 if you like, since WP bonus feats count as full BAB.

-Bite from Dragonmaw level 1
-Two claws from Feral archetype at level 1
-Tail Slap from Tail Terror at level 3 (and you already qualify for Multiattack if you want)
-Two hoof attacks from casting Monstrous Extremities on yourself in the morning (has hours/level duration). This starts at level 7.
-Two wing attacks from Powerful Wings and Gliding trait. level 11

Worship Apsu (thematic for a Kobold anyway). Deity's favored weapon is bite, and the archetype grants claws that automatically scale with Sacred Weapon, so use your free Weapon Focus on whichever natural attack you prefer (Tail for earliest use, hoof for earliest use on two weapons probably the best choice, wings for earliest use on two permanent weapons).

You are starting the game with 3 attacks that each have 1d6 and are all primary, and fervor at level 2 means you can swift-buff with Divine Favor (boosted by Fate's Favored) for a total of +5 to hit at 1d6+4 damage on all your attacks. By the time martials are getting a single iterative, you're just one level away from making 4 attacks each round (5 if you can cast monstrous extremities twice with bonus spells from Wis), and Divine Favor has increased by an additional 1 to-hit and damage. Usually I like to use Fervor for frequent swift casting, but you only need one buff to stay relevant, so extra uses of fervor will be used to swift heal yourself when needed, without breaking up your full attack rhythm (you are a d8 with only 13-14 Con after all). Using the above, you have a free feat at levels 1, 5, 7, and a bonus combat feat at 9, so you can pick whatever your favorite feats are for a front liner (toughness, power attack, more weapon focuses, etc). At level 11....

Amulet of Mighty Fists +3 (36k)
Belt of Giant Str +4 (16k)
Headband of Wis +2 (4k)
Full Plate + 2 (5.5k)
Still have 25% your wealth to spend.

3 primary attacks +19 for 1d10+10 damage.
2 secondary attacks +18 for 1d10+8 damage.
3 secondary attacks +17 for 1d4+8 (or take Weapon Focus additional times to move them into the 1d10 category and get that extra +1 to hit).
1 more primary attack with a swift-buff Divine Power (+19, 1d10+10).
You can also summon a Woolly Rhino with a blessing to get a flanking partner.

Regular martials will probably be closer to +25/+20/+15 at 1d8+15, but you are making literally triple their number of attack rolls, and you started with a small Kobold. Your AC will be abysmal though (around 23), so you'll probably need to throw Shield of Faith on yourself whenever possible just to have a chance of not taking hits.

If someone in your party can cast Enlarge Person, you're a natural choice since the damage dice will increase to 2d8 for sacred weapons. Otherwise at level 13 you can buff with Righteous Might and get the size increase all by yourself.

Honestly, I found the most irritating thing was keeping track of all the little differences between natural attacks when making my rolls (some have +1 to hit from Weapon Focus, some don't, few different die sizes), so make a cheat sheet.

Well, considering this feat: https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/counterpoint-to-inspiration-te amwork/ it's safe to say that the Inspire features aren't allowed to stack normally.
However, I think the pre-reqs for this feat are nothing shy of egregious; two people each having to take THREE teamwork feats, plus wait until level 10, and each expend rounds, all to add a +1? It may be the single worst feat-chain/tax I've ever seen. So...ask the GM if he'd handwave the pre-reqs of the feat I linked. Or pick difference performances when both playing at once.

Ryan Freire wrote:

Reksew_Trebla wrote:

Ryan Freire wrote:

Reksew_Trebla wrote:

MrCharisma wrote:

Oh Em Gee!

Also don't they know only the worthy can wield Mjolnir? So you should have to be Good aligned to even lift it!

And the only way to destroy it is to throw it at Cate Blanchett, it's obvious really!

Nice try troll, but I’m talking about the Norse Mythology, not the comic book franchise. Which was blatantly obvious if you had actually read my post.

And the hammer of thunderbolts is pathfinder/dungeons and dragons and not norse mythology.

And as has already been stated, it is clearly based off of Mjölnir. So your point is pointless.

Except its not...based off of is not the same as an exact clone of. They wanted a higher damage warhammer, impact wasn't created yet, and they wanted it to be a warhammer for synergy with feats and the like. Hence large warhammer. In 2nd ed i know, and 1st ed im pretty sure you had to have a girdle of giant strength and gauntlets of ogre power just to use a hammer of thunderbolts, so heavy and awkward is pretty par for the course. Large is a way to do heavy and awkward without making an artifact require two other magic items one of which i dont even think exists in pathfinder.

Look, I’m not saying exact copy of, but imagine this: Imagine Pathfinder devils did not try to trick people into signing their souls away for a favor. Imagine they didn’t even have the power to take souls. Would you not say then that Pathfinder devils are badly designed, since they are based off of the christian devil?

That’s the point I’m making here. Maybe the large size is excusable, but the fact that it can be two-handed is not. That is literally the defining feature of Mjölnir, so for being based off of Mjölnir and going against this, the Hammer of Thunderbolts is thus badly designed.

In all fairness, the Christian devil is not lawful, bound by contracts, or in any way a ruler of hell/the abyss, and technically he is a demon as well. Unless "Devil Went Down to Georgia" is the defining source for the mythology, pathfinder devils don't match well at all, but games had a certain niche to fill, and popular novels and art used the above portrayals, so it fit well enough for their purposes.

There's a lot to unpack here, and I'm not entirely clear on what you're asking, so I'll just give my take in a couple statements.

I doubt they will errata the 1E Druidic Herbalism.

The Druid is hands-down THE best potion maker in the game, using herbalism, so it's certainly not pointless.

The "broken" part of herbalism comes from trying to sell the free potions for a profit. No GM in their right mind will let you sell them for full price, but if they do, it's broken. The broken aspect can also come in to play if there is too much downtime in a game. A potion-focused druid can make multiple free potions a day, with max caster level and no cap. Give that druid a few months of downtime, and he'll have hundreds of potions that are better than anything sold in shops. Again, it's up to the GM to limit downtime in most campaigns. In something with a lot of downtime built in...it's somewhat overpowered, but ultimately is still kept somewhat in check by the fact that potion drinking is a standard action, so while you would effectively have unlimited 1-3 level spells, you also have to have a chance to pre-buff before fights or it's substantially less useful.

No part of the druidic herbalism will have any direct bearing on bolstering crops or improving an area. As GeneticDrift said, the obvious spell for that would be Plant Growth, and that isn't going to reasonably function as a potion or oil. Filling the gap between your envisioned character and the mechanical benefit of casting that spell is something you'll have to resort to roleplaying and flavorful descriptions for.

I'd say the problem is that prepared spells have metamagic applied to them WHEN they are prepared. So you would actually be preparing a 2nd level divine spell, which would require a 3rd level slot and therefore gains you nothing. If this were a spontaneous caster, then I'd be inclined to agree it technically works, since you'd have a 1st level spell known, which casts from a second level slot, and could be increased to a 2nd level spell cast from a third level slot.

I thought this was pretty much "Yes, you are considered your own ally" and then I was directed to this trait by a friend...

Community Minded (Regional)
Benefit(s): Any morale bonuses you confer upon your allies through your own abilities or spells last 2 additional rounds.

If you are your own ally, then this would apply to any Morale bonuses you confer to yourself.

What about Rage? If you have this, you could Rage for 1 round, turn it off...but still get all the bonuses of Rage for 2 more rounds...without the penalties to AC or actions. I know you'd be Fatigued but that seems like a small price to pay for adding extra rounds to every Rage.

Most combat don't take but 3-5 rounds, so this is quite the game changer...for a Trait at that!

Thoughts? Am I unaware of something else going on here?

I would say "yes", by RAW. It would be important to note exactly what the morale bonuses are though. The strength, constitution, and will save would all carry over those extra rounds, but rage powers would not, and you are not actually raging any longer. Definitely too powerful for a trait, but probably not enough so that I'd ban it as a GM. Honestly, I've never seen barbarians in my games run into problems with a lack of rage rounds. If anything, the biggest advantage here would arguably be that you maintain those bonuses but are also able to concentrate and do all skill checks again, but that's also not exactly a wild advantage.

Xavram5 wrote:

If you are your own ally, then this would apply to any Morale bonuses you confer to yourself.

No. If I take a potion of Cure Light Wounds, I don't heal everyone because I count as one of my own allies.

"'Your allies' means 'you and your allies'" means that things you do for your allies you also do for yourself. It does not at all mean that things you do for yourself automatically affect all your allies.

So, no:

If you go into a Rage, you don't automatically put all your allies into a Rage

If you cast Bull Strength on yourself, you don't qutomatically cast it on everyone else.

if you use Combat Expertise, you don't automatically give everyone in your party an AC Bonus nor Attack Penalty.

If you fall into a pit, you and only you take 1d6 points of damage.

Does this really need clarification?

I...re-read both the OP and your response multiple times, and I think you misunderstood the question. No one is implying that any effect one applies to themselves is also applied to other allies.

Actually, the highest DC would be for using a scroll not on your spell list, which is 20+Spell CL, or 37 for a 9th level spell. Not much higher than the 34 you mentioned, but a little bit anyway.

It's a matter of how much you feel like hand-waving the process.

I'd say the most straightforward approach is to partake in an activity that Pharasma approves of, namely protecting the sanctity of the "souls should be brought for swift judgement" concept. The Ahmuuth Psychopomp is one that specifically teams up with mortals to destroy undead. Even better, the PC may help by preventing the creation of more undead. "Alas, I am restricted in my actions to merely dispatching of the undead, but the necromancer who raises them is outside my jurisdiction". PC kills the necromancer or breaks his staff, and the Psychopomp is grateful for that intervention that he himself was not allowed to take. That's the more intricate option. The hand-wave one is just to have the players encounter some undead in the campaign, and when they go to battle them, an Ahmuuth is also there in his quest to slay them. They find themselves allies for the fight, and the psychopomp expresses his appreciation with "you have proven yourself an ally and friend to Pharasma. Thanks, bye." and the requirement is met. But that general concept is what I'd go with. If you want to avoid throwing in more combat, maybe there was a fight with a demon years back, and he unhallowed a graveyard in the process. Demon is long gone, as are the heros who vanquished him, but now over the years of subtle unholy energy permeating the graves, some of the bodies have begun to rise as completely mindless zombies, and the PCs need to hunt down a priest who can provide a scroll of Permanent Consecrate that needs to be placed on the central tombstone. Just some various ideas.

There's been some disagreement in the past about whether or not this type of thing would work. Some point to the word "tail" rather than "tails", and claim it would only wok for one. I'd side with you and say, "it means my tail, and this is also my tail, and this is also my tail". Plus, you're dropping literally every feat you have into the idea. I'd say that the answer to all your above points is "yes".

The shifter has no bonus feats so you're going to spend all of yours on grappling probably. At a minimum you need improved unarmed strike or dirty fighting, improved grapple and greater grapple. You can also get into one of the styles which aids grappling; Snapping Turtle or Kraken are styles you could have started by this point. If human/if you take a dip in another class (like master of many styles monk or unarmed fighter) you could have two or even all three feats in your chosen style.

You can become immune to grapple combat maneuvers by taking your swarm form which I think means enemies can't try to reverse control of the grapple. Probably not an intended effect, it occurs because the writers were too conservative in handing out the swarm abilities and restrictions.

There are some magic items which help, notably anaconda's coils is a belt which gives the constrict ability.

Honestly, the ability to not have your grapples broken? Insane. There are lots of ways to boost grapple CMB, but CMD is a much harder one to raise up. Without looking closely into a build, the idea is intriguing, although as you pointed out, pretty feat intensive for a Shifter.

Aaron Tysen wrote:

I get grumpy when players try to use OOC chatter as free telepathy among their characters. If they haven't worked out their plan before they walk up to the guards and start bluffing, it's too late. The guards are right there. They can hear you. "But we're talking OOC" doesn't cut it. Ditto if you have limited rounds before the next bad thing happens. Your planning is in real time. Of course, I'll stop the clock for actual OOC stuff. We can pause while you talk sportsball scores. But you can't use OOC as a way to magically share information between characters.

I understand this, but you have to remember, sometimes dumb people play the game, or even just average intelligence people. The fact is, the 18 INT Wizard being played by an average intelligence person SHOULD get free advice, because their character is a lot more intelligent than the player.

I would agree with this. While I like the idea of "act quickly, this is happening in 6 second rounds", a high-int character would conceivably come up with much more tactical plans than I might in the same period of time. Kind of like how it's OK to allow a little bit of "my high-cha character begins wooing the barmaid" without actually forcing the player to come up with excellent pick-up lines or fail.

Adamantine armor DR does not stack with Stonelord DR, so adamantine armor is basically worthless for them. I would look to eventually upgrade to magical full plate and not worry about special materials for it.

As Syries mentioned, if you are going for a weapon/shield build on a Paladin, go with a light shield so you can still use that hand for lay on hands without having to drop either your weapon or shield.

With a 7 Int, you get 0 skill points per level unless you use your favored class bonus for skill points. 2 for the class, -2 for your Int = 0.

Defender of the Society is indeed a Fighter only trait, you cannot use that on a Paladin in PFS play. Glory of Old is a solid option, +1 on saves -vs- spells is always nice.

You may want to consider switching from the Dwarven Maulaxe to the Dwarven Waraxe...better damage, x3 crit multiplier, still 1 handed, and you don't need a light weapon since you aren't going for 2-weapon fighting style.

The one magic item that always comes to mind when I think of Stonelords is Boots of the Earth, thematically perfect, and essentially free healing between combats is amazing for a front line character.

Actually, you always get a minimum of 1 skill point per level, so going from 8 Int to 7 effectively doesn't do anything to his character, other than lower his Int skill checks.

Here are my thoughts, as I was just looking in to wind spells yesterday (what are the odds?!).

First: Without intentionally building around wind effects for synergy/defense/etc, others are probably right in that the uses will be primarily utilitarian, especially for something with such a limited affected area as Alter Winds. However...

Second: My reading of the spell is that, at CL 4 you can affect winds that are already Moderate or weaker, up to one step either direction. Worthless for reducing wind effects at this level (because there are no penalty differences between light and moderate), BUT if there is already a moderate wind, you can affect it by one level to make it Strong. Still of situational usefulness, but if there are any fights against tiny creatures, you can force them to make somewhat constant checks just to be able to move. Also, and this may have more table variation, but any ranged attacks that pass through that windy area may take a -2 to-hit, giving you a crude bonus against archers and the like. Other than that, it's kind of a poor spell, mechanically.

One of my older groups used to put their hand on top of their head when they were speaking OOC, I still find myself doing that sometimes - but now as a Player I actually try to just have my Character Voice be different enough from my ACTUAL voice that I can just use that to denote in/out of character stuff.

Yeah, I prefer to use a character voice for in-game speech, and my normal voice for the OOC, and it hasn't presented any problems so far. It's also not a hassle, since the ratio of IC talking at our tables to OOC is probably 1:8. Not sure how that would match up at other tables, but we do a lot of conversation/rule discussion/joking "to avoid the argument I activate Treeform and let them rant away at my stoic barkiness". We find that letting people "be themselves" most of the time means that they stay truer to their character persona the rest of the time, but I'm suddenly suspicious that everyone else here is thinking "they just TALK and break IMMERSION frequently? Glad I don't play with THAT guy!".

No. Wildshape is a supernatural ability, not a spell. It's magical, so it won't work in an antimagic field, but it isn't a spell, so it can't be dispelled.

This doesn't solve your problem really, but I'd allow it with the Versatile Summon Monster feat. At first I assumed it must be included in those options, but apparently not. Similar concept though.

Left hand, meet right.

There we go. Now I am satisfied. If only there were more of these that I could see and compare in some of these types of posts.

I usually try pretty hard to find a picture (never have much luck with miniatures) that matches my character, but I haven't yet for this one (game hasn't actually started yet), so I feel like I'm to most receptive to ideas for him right now.

Ok, so, He's an Elven Investigator who eventually prestiges into Student of War.
Str: 6
Dex: 16
Con: 12
Int: 20
Wis: 8
Cha: 8

Definitely past his prime, he spent his whole life reading fictional adventures and murder-mysteries, and some historical fiction. Was planning to write a book of his own, but saw a human motivational speaker who challenged attendees to "go out and seize life by the lapels, because it's too short". He took it to heart, and decided to stop living adventures vicariously through stories and experience them himself. Whenever he uses inspiration to succeed at something, he says something along the lines of, "I read a book, once, on some of the advanced lock-making techniques" or "The trick is to pretend to stab at the eyes; people have a deep-seated psychological paranoia about protecting their eyes". May occasionally correct people with, "Well, acktchually" after knowledge checks. Uses a rapier, because he thinks it makes him look dashing, and also because he already had one hanging above the fireplace from his late-father's estate. Didn't have the patience or discipline to practice nuanced magical theory, but why bother when you can just follow a written recipe and accomplish the same thing?!

Welcome to the Pathfinder Advice forum. Some here are more interested in chest-beating tribally for their style of play than offering advice for yours. You already seem aware of this.

That said, your question is subjective: "Is this sort of thing normal?".

"Normal" requires qualification to meaningfully discuss. As a baseline I offer Paizo's Monster Creation rules. Scrolling down to locate the table, these give the following relevant averages for a CR12 monster:

HP: 160
AC: 27
High Attack: 22
High Damage (average value if everything hits): 60

These statistics, however, are a little simplified and dated, though easy to get into. If you want a deeper dive, the later-published, ironically-named Simple Monster Creation rules offer a more detailed statistical breakdown. Extracting from the Combat creature arrays on a sub-page gets the below relevant averages for a CR12 monster:

HP: 176
AC: 29
Touch AC: 17
Flat-Footed AC: 21

High Weapon Attacks: +21/+16/+11
Damage (average value, per successful hit): 35

Low Weapon Attacks: +15/+10/+5
Damage (average value, per successful hit): 26

Two Natural Attacks: +21/+21
Damage (average value, per successful hit): 31

Three Natural Attacks: +21/+16/+16
Damage (average value, per successful hit): 41/21/21

You may notice these values tend to be higher than those found in the earlier Monster Creation rules/guidelines.

Nominally, a PC with "normal" wealth by level is of a CR equal to their class levels, notwithstanding a powerful race or mythic tiers. While you haven't provided the typical damage values or other statistics of this character, if you presented a clone of them as a CR12 enemy, by either of the above references they would not be normal. Discounting the bonus owed to flanking, which is conditional, the character's leading strike is a +32 to...

I think this is a good way to compare the relative attack bonus, but I also think you're not evaluating them in a comparable way. The actual attack of the Inquisitor is right on par with these CR12 options. The flanking is positioning, as you said, so remove that +4. +7 is coming from buff spells, which aren't going to be part of a bestiary entry, so subtract that. +27 AB. Remove the bonus that literally only works for 12 rounds a day, and you have +25 AB. Arguably, that is a value which could be used for comparison purposes; it requires activating a class feature, but one that lasts all of combat, so could be considered nearly always up. A little high, but averages assume some "normal" values will be a bit higher. I maintain that the player is pretty normal, just maybe oddly concerned with boosting attack bonus over AC or saves.

Lyoto Machida wrote:

Does he spend the first couple rounds buffing?

Literally just Divine Power in terms of spells that "need" to be cast in combat. Heroism is long term.

Technically Judgement and Greater Bane as well but those are swift actions, one on turn one and one on turn two.

Wonderstell wrote:

It's not normal that a PC should ever need +38 AB at level 12, since the average AC of a CR-equivalent opponent is supposed to be 27. But you aren't holding a normal game for your players, so I'm gonna guess our opinions on what is normal aren't that important for your table.

Check the attitude, please. Here's the roster for the main combat last night (first fight of level 12, mainly meant to let them play around with new abilities and feel awesome...especially the sorcerer who just got Chain Lightning):

10 CR6 creatures (AC 23 each)
20 CR6 creatures (AC 23 each)
1 CR10 creature (AC 31)
1 CR10 creature (AC 31)
1 CR10 creature (AC 36)

Wonderstell wrote:

If you're wondering how they reached +38, you should probably just ask your player instead of us. But considering that the Inquisitor is pretty good at stacking buffs, I don't doubt it's possible.

I know how they reached it, I went over the math once I saw the number. That's why this is in Advice rather than Rules.

Wonderstell wrote:

Inflated gold per level and just picking up Outflank should definitely make 38 AB possible.

Quick character sheet audit shows 111kish, with 8k of it in a back-up Ghost Touch weapon. That's also with no crafting, so full price for everything.

Name Violation wrote:

Anything is possible.

But until you say more than "OMG +38AB WTF" we don't have enough information to give any advice.

That was pretty much my initial reaction, yes. But it all seems possible within the rules, that doesn't stop my reaction as you so aptly put it.

Name Violation wrote:

Do you have a breakdown of how this is happening? Can you post the characters stats

...

Looking at the breakdown, I'd say "Yes, pretty normal". My current character has 11BAB at level 13 (so slightly more than a straight 3/4 class, from multiclassing), and a static AB of 20, which is basically exactly on par with your player. Throw in flanking, a couple buff spells, and two rounds worth of swift actions, and it seems entirely reasonable. Plus he can only maintain that level of BAB for limited number of rounds per day, and he's essentially using resources to massively over-inflate his bonus higher than he needs it to be. Odds are some other aspect of his character is suffering adequately to make it up.

I have a different question: how are you supposed to know when you should use this ability without metagaming it? Particularly if your DM rolls behind a screen?

You can't. Ideally, you get to see the roll itself, but without any knowledge of the bonuses attached to it. E.g. "The enemy attempts to trip you..." rolls a 19, and you decide THAT is something you want re-rolled, because it's a good roll. If he rolled a 12, that would be a much more difficult call, because it's entirely possible that a 12 is already a miss, and the reroll would give him a chance to succeed instead.

As an alternative, if the GM really doesn't want to share the results of the dice, I feel like it could be reasonable to just say that the enemy gets "disadvantage" (aka, rolls twice and takes the worse option). On the one hand, that's technically a better effect for the player than "takes the second, regardless of what it is", but on the other, it's used blindly; normally you would never use the ability if the enemy rolled a 5 or lower, but with this method it's entirely possible that the first roll is very low and you forced a re-roll unnecessarily.

Some interpret "the results of the roll" to mean the end result (succeeding or not) and some as the actual die number. If your GM is one of the latter...well, that's unfortunate, and almost certainly not RAI since it would make both Fortune and Misfortune virtually worthless, but I've had a GM who ruled things that way.

Joynt Jezebel wrote:

Perhaps, but unless done very carefully the character will suck in most other respects.

Nevertheless, I am very flattered by your comment that you find my idea so powerful that you think it should be illegal.

I definitely missed part of the comment somewhere.

You're definitely correct that a druid's extracts, by RAW, have to be 4th level or higher. The bigger question is probably "why do you want to make lower extracts"? Potions are pretty much superior in every way, except price, which herbalism bypasses nicely. Worst case scenario, you make the potions, minimum caster level probably, at 1/4th the normal cost, so 12.5gp for a first level spell, 75gp for a second, and 187.5gp for a third level. If you use your free concoctions on 3rd and 2nd level spells, and pay for all your first level spells, you're still getting everything you want (and have sufficient slots for) at incredibly affordable prices.

I guess I don't think Herbalism is lacking enough to warrant over-riding the RAW in this case. It's like asking for the ability to put an SLA into a potion: it isn't so much that I'm AGAINST the idea as I am just finding it too niche and lacking the value to justify intentionally ruling against RAW.

As has been pointed out, you can't take two social traits.

Instead, you could potentially consider Well-Provisioned Adventurer, which is an equipment trait. Holy Warrior would get you a MW sword, and Questing Knight gets a heavy horse and half-plate. Then use Signature Moves to fill in whatever item from the package isn't as good.

Although, as others have pointed out, this is generally considered a strong starting option...but one which scales incredibly poorly. And no one should ever be allowed to retrain their traits, especially for this very reason (or the extra traits feat. Period). It's supposed to be a trade-off.

I mean, I understand that it was too powerful/versatile in the spell's original form. I think a big part of the spell's value though was that it's on several lists besides the wizard/sorcerer, and it's pretty much the only energy damage available to those lists at low level (and was pretty much the only way of bypassing SR for some of them).
It has also been a matter of some contention as to whether or not the spell effectively requires two rounds or one to use (e.g. first round just CREATES the snowball and second attacks with it, or all in one round). Doesn't seem that overpowered if it was the first, kind of was if it was the second. Now that it's evocation, the latter makes sense, but as a conjuration the former made sense. At least, that's my two sense (heehee).

I think this is very simple. Female Minotaurs of course exist. The product of a human male and female cow. It has the body of a cow with the head of a woman. They just get less publicity, because they’re so much more horrific to look at. When male and female Minotaurs have children together, it’s a toss up as to whether you get a human with cow-like intelligence or a cow with human intelligence.

To clarify, it is an evil compatible campaign following something similiar to Golarion standard lore - as such, Drow is an option... lawful good Drow however are cheese and snowflake, and thus not allowed (even as a background stepping stone to allow one to become a fallen paladin).

As a mostly evil party, we will be fighting almost exclusively evil forces, which makes standard antipaladin less than desirable. Insulator MIGHT work, but I preferred the mechanics of the Vindictive Bastard for the purpose of a Drow that didn't so much care what their opponents morality was, just that they had (at least by the Drow's definition) been wronged by them.

To clarify, I am looking for a way to go straight to Vindictive Bastard, not stop at standard Paladin at any point in mechanics or lore. Feats, traits, optional rules to do it would be ideal, I care not which one I use.

Alternatively, if one MUST be a paladin first I am seeking some rule that allows one to level as the class without gaining any of the features that class normally provides (except weapon proficiency as per the Ex-Paladin entry).

You must be a paladin first. It does seem like the Gray Paladin is what you’re looking for. A LN Drow seems plausible. Pact Servant trait would let you serve Asmodeous.

From the rules specific to each school of magic (and some subschools) "While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision), as well as any natural attacks and movement types possessed by your original form. You also lose any class features that depend upon form, but those that allow you to add features (such as sorcerers that can grow claws) still function."

So, since fly is a movement type, you lose it when using Alter Self.
The sorcerer bloodline abilities that let you grow wings as an action would still work, similar to the claws mentioned in the text above.

They can, IF they take the Diefic Obedience feat designed for exactly that.

Ninja'd :(

Nice. I think this is edging up to the boundary of lawful evil, but an urge to dominate "for your own good" can still fit under LN.

Brine dragon plot seeds anyone? Here's one offhand: a brine dragon guards a portal to the Elemental Plane of Water. It allows passage -- for a toll. For a larger toll, it may warn you about hazards on the other side.

Doug M.

Yeah, "little patience for kindness and philanthropy" sounds perfect for running an authoritarian government. "No, you cannot be a baker. You're a woodcutter. It better suits your strengths, and provides the most good to the community."

That's dumb but the ape shaman gets other changes and they're mostly positive if sometimes minor. Totem transformation is more useful than woodland stride. I can't imagine why you'd want to summon primates from a mechanics perspective rather than a thematic one, but a standard action summoned ape is often going to be more useful than a better summon which takes 1 round to cast and act. The different domains open up options, notably rage.

It's not great, but there are worse archetypes out there. Brace yourself AWBattles.

Yeah. Having taken a second to calm down, it’s less offensive than I initially felt. I first looked at these archetypes when I wanted to play a octopus/squid type Druid. Saw Kraken Caller, likes it, but it wasn’t what I had in mind. Still wanted aquatic though, so I looked at Shark Shaman. Saw that wild shape came on board late, but figured “well, for a +2 to my favored creatures...oh. That’s an entirely irrelevant ‘bonus’ after level 7.” Then I looked at the other shamans and saw that was a common theme. It just felt like lazy design, where someone was told that had to make 10 archetypes in 2 hours :-P. It would be a pretty cool bonus if wild shaping into animals could benefit past level 8, but it doesn’t. And the totem transformations are really just weak wild shapes that become obsolete as soon as wildshape is available, so I agree they replace a meh ability, but by level 8 I’d rather just have woodland stride again. Standard summons are nothing to sneeze at, although the options are pretty poor, since there are only two summonable ape options, and they’re at SNA 3 and 4, so the ability to add templates doesn’t really fill in many gaps. I mostly get upset because it feels like, even as an Ape Shaman, I’d spend a lot of my time not in Ape form. The biggest actual gain from the archetype would be the bonus feats at 9, 13, and 17, which become options very late, still require prereqs, etc.

Personally, I think the archetype would be better done as:
Domains (roughly stay the same)
Wildshape At level 4, standard progression of beast shapes, with no elemental/plant/magical beast options. At level 8 you can add the giant template to any wildshaped primate. At level 10 you gain the benefits of improved grapple when wildshaped as an ape. At 12, improved bull rush when wildshaped as an ape. At 14 you get greater grapple, 16 greater bull rush. At 18 you get awesome blow. It encourages you to use apeshape, but still gives the option to use a weaker form when needed for versatility (which is what I assume the original intention was for the archetype).

Lose timeless body, poison immunity, and thousand faces, wildshape uses are reduced to one use every four levels, further highlighting that balance of “I want to choose something that has a fly speed to get past this obstacle, but I also want to be able to hulk out in a fight and I can’t easily do both all the time”. Standard action summons for primates and adding templates for increased spell level is probably fine, but no temporary hp bonus.

I’m pretty tired, so maybe this all isn’t as balanced as I’m imagining, but an archetype like this should be trading away versatility (which is a mechanical advantage of the vanilla Druid) for specializing in one flavorful choice. In my mind, this would maybe compete in a similar slot as Goliath Druid for effectiveness and function, but with the gorilla loving flavor. As it is, you trade function for flavor, and then gain a couple feats that are somewhat primate related, but mostly are just from the blander side of the feat list.