Keep in mind if your enemy is adjacent to you when you start your turn you can just attack them, and move away.
Basically you're looking for something that will allow you to move away from your enemy when they move up to you/attack you.
You don't need to use Spring Attack when the enemy is adjacent because you can accomplish the same by just attacking and moving afterwards.
Spring attack is nice because you can move, attack, move. But you don't need to move when the enemy is already adjacent.
Well, I want to avoid provoking the AoO when I move away (I think I've seen a feat that gives a 5-foot step as an immediate but I can't find it). Combine this with a reach weapon to get my own AoO when the enemy closes again. With enough base movement, the enemy may need to spend two move actions (or a charge) to reach me. Basically seeing if it's possible to do a build like this in pathfinder (although not with spiked chain):
Are there any feats / class abilities / magic items that allow movement (even a 5-foot step) as an immediate action? Thinking about making a monk or barbarian with fast movement and spring attack. Spring attack requires you to start your turn non-adjacent to your enemy, so looking for something that would let me move outside of my normal turn to facilitate this.
He has an extra arm from the Alchemist class Mathwei... while it doesn't get an extra attack on its own, it can be used as the 2nd arm of a two-handed weapon, leaving his other (main) arm free for spell casting.
Extra hands are irrelevant for spell combat.
Spell Combat wrote:
To use this ability, the magus must have one hand free (even if the spell being cast does not have somatic components), while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand.
Yup, doesn't matter how many hands he has all 2-hd weapons are invalid options to use with spellcombat.
Found my old post from a google search and wanted to close the thread out for posterity. I eventually went with a Skirnir magus (gives up spell combat until 8th level for sorcerous shield). When I wanted to spell combat, I would use a 1-handed sword in one of the four arms (also ended up getting the alchemist tentacle too :-D ) and the shield arm as the primary and secondary hands of spell combat.
I'm playing a low level Razmiran priest one and he's working out pretty well so far. At 18th level you should have access to 9th level wizard and 8th level cleric spells. Wiz 5 / Cleric 3 / MT 10 only has access to 8th Wizard and 7th Cleric. High level mystic theurge is probably never casting anywhere close to all his spells per day anyways.
You know I had read that to mean that spells with a range of "you" that would not normally affect magical beasts could be used on your familiar, but the way it is written it looks like you may be right. That seems a bit strange though, that you could cast any spell on your familiar.
It is fairly controversial. But the note at the bottom of this faq seems to indicate that enlarge person can generally be cast upon an Eidolon via Share Spells (it just notes a discrepancy based on the rule that a synthesist's eidolon must be the same size as the synthesist).
If a witch were to cast reduce person on the bat familiar (which has a size of diminutive) using the "Share Spells" feature, would the familiar gain +4 to it's AC / to hit (the effect of reducing a creature's size from diminutive to fine) or would it only be +1 as detailed in the spell (which probably assumes it's only being cast on a small / medium humanoid)?
I'm running a Skirnir magus with two level dip into Vivisectionist alchemist for two extra arms and tentacle (via Extra Discovery feat). You can wield your fauchard in two hands, shield in the 3rd arm, keep a metamagic rod in the tentacle, and still have a free hand. You have the option of shield bashing if the enemy gets too close (or if you need to get in the enemy's face) and once high enough level you can use the shield bash with spell combat as well. When enlarged you threaten every square within 20ft so make sure you include combat reflexes in the build as well.
I am in the process of creating my first paladin character. I see that the paladin's mount is analogous to the druid's animal companion. The druid's animal companion entry makes no mention of alignment, so I suppose that it defaults to that of a normal animal, i.e. neutral.
Is this also supposed to be the case for a paladin's mount?
Given the 6 int, the fact that the mount eventually gains the celestial template, and the fact that the paladin code of conduct requires that: A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good. I think it's pretty reasonable to say the mount is lawful good.
How does it wirk if a Magus casts Chill Touch or Elemental Touch and uses it with Spell Strike.
There are two possibilities with Spell Combat:
a) The Magus gets to make all his Attacks with Spellstrike
b) The Magus gets only one Spellstrike per Full Attack
I´m assuming you can make as many Spellstrike as you have Charges ,right?
If you are using spell combat and casting the spell before taking your full BAB worth of attacks, you would get a free attack with spellstrike (i.e., the free touch attack that comes with casting the spell) plus you can make all your regular attacks with the benefits of the spell (up to the number of touch attacks the spell grants).
Q: In Chapter 4: Feats (pg. 112), the DC to craft a magic item is 10 + the item's caster level. In Chapter 15: Magic Items (pg. 548), the DC is listed as 5 + the item's caster level. Which is correct?
A: (Jason Bulmahn) I believe the Magic Items chapter is correct and the DC should be 5 + caster level, but I am still looking into the issue. Either way, this will be corrected. [Source]
I have a character that has advanced past level 9 with a wolf animal companion, giving the wolf the multiattack ability and thus a second attack at a -5 penalty.
Spoiler:
Multiattack
An animal companion gains Multiattack as a bonus feat if it has three or more natural attacks and does not already have that feat. If it does not have the requisite three or more natural attacks, the animal companion instead gains a second attack with its primary natural weapon, albeit at a –5 penalty.
The wolf has the trip ability on its bite which works like the following according to the universal monster rules.
Spoiler:
Trip (Ex) A creature with the trip special attack can attempt to trip its opponent as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity if it hits with the specified attack. If the attempt fails, the creature is not tripped in return.
1) If the wolf takes a full-attack action and hits with his second bite attack does he take a -5 penalty to CMB on the trip attempt? (I would guess no, as the trip is a free action that seems to be made "outside" of the iterative attacks).
2) If the wolf had a permanent greater magic fang +5 cast upon his bite, could he add the +5 to the trip attempt? (I would guess yes, as the wolf can make the free action trip attempt with any weapon, including his bite).
Besides the obvious improved and greater reposition, any feat that improves his to hit with a trip weapon will improve his reposition maneuver as well.
If you’re using a weapon with the trip special feature, and you’re attempting a drag or reposition combat maneuver (Advanced Player’s Guide 321–322), you may apply the weapon’s bonuses to the roll because trip weapons are also suitable for dragging and repositioning (this also means we don’t have to add “drag” and “reposition” weapon properties to existing weapons).
Any bonuses you get to hit while wielding a trip weapon (including things like weapon focus, fighter weapon training, weapon finesse, etc.) can be used to increase your CMB to drag or reposition.
One of the players in my group is doing a Reposition Fighter. He was wondering if there was any feats to help improve his CMB in general or more specifically to Reposition.
Besides the obvious improved and greater reposition, any feat that improves his to hit with a trip weapon will improve his reposition maneuver as well.
Allowing you combat expertise without a 13 int, is great, allowing me to redistribute my stats.
Unfortunately almost all of the feats the have combat expertise as a prerequisite still require a 13 INT (it may not show up in the abbreviated view on the prd site or the d20pfsrd site, but when you look at the detailed description of these feats, the 13 INT is required along with combat expertise).
I think it's a great option for multiclassing with a fighter. You aren't restricted on what weapons you can use while flurrying (like a regular flurry of blows) and can wear armor. Dump int down to 7 points, and you can still take the greater maneuver (and maneuver strike) feats as bonus feats -- all without having to take the largely worthless combat expertise feat.
It's not about a nerf bat, it's abut the ability making sense. It is obviously designed to be detrimental to opponents by wishing misfortune upon them. Wishing misfortune on your friends (or yourself) to help them is nonsensical. Especially when exactly that is available as another ability, and at a later level only, because it is deemed more powerful.
Having your fighter friend reroll the 1 he just rolled on his attack is pretty unfortunate for the enemy...
It's a free action that's directly tied to another action the casting of the spell that produced it. You want to cast it and move, that's fine, but by my books you forfeit the free action to for the touch or spellstrike attack and have to wait until next round to strike.
Taking your touch attack after the move is explicitly allowed by the PRD (and the entire basis of the recent faq entry regarding magus spellstrike and moving).
---------------------
From the PRD:
Touch Spells in Combat: Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.
------------------------
From the recent faq entry allowing a magus to cast, move, and spellstrike with a weapon.
Magus: Can a magus use spellstrike (page 10) to cast a touch spell, move, and make a melee attack with a weapon to deliver the touch spell, all in the same round?
Yes. Other than deploying the spell with a melee weapon attack instead of a melee touch attack, the magus spellstrike ability doesn’t change the normal rules for using touch spells in combat (Core Rulebook page 185). So, just like casting a touch spell, a magus could use spellstrike to cast a touch spell, take a move toward an enemy, then (as a free action) make a melee attack with his weapon to deliver the spell.
On a related topic, the magus touching his held weapon doesn’t count as “touching anything or anyone” when determining if he discharges the spell. A magus could even use the spellstrike ability, miss with his melee attack to deliver the spell, be disarmed by an opponent (or drop the weapon voluntarily, for whatever reason), and still be holding the charge in his hand, just like a normal spellcaster. Furthermore, the weaponless magus could pick up a weapon (even that same weapon) with that hand without automatically discharging the spell, and then attempt to use the weapon to deliver the spell. However, if the magus touches anything other than a weapon with that hand (such as retrieving a potion), that discharges the spell as normal.
Basically, the spellstrike gives the magus more options when it comes to delivering touch spells; it’s not supposed to make it more difficult for the magus to use touch spells.
And with some feats the magus could be TWFing as well (say kicking with unarmed strikes) and with natural weapons using them as well in a full attack action.
I'm not sure how that would be legal... To get TWF attacks you need to be taking a full-attack action. Spell combat is a special full-round action (not a full-attack action), that allows you to get all your attacks with a single one-handed weapon in addition to casting a spell.
You are fiddling with the wording and intent of the rules to try to eek out extra damage. The free attack from casting the spell is part of casting the spell, even if you wait to use the attack at the end of your turn. It's not "after spell combat" because the attack is part of casting the spell whenever you make the attack during your turn, and since the attack is part of the spell you used Spell Combat to cast, you still need a free hand. Sure, if you then cast a quickened spell it would not be part of your full-round action. But the free attack from your Spell Combat spell is definitely part of the full-round action, not a "separate" free action.
It is definitely its own action.
From the prd:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/combat.html
Touch Spells in Combat: Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action.
--------------------
The touch being it's own free action is what allows you to do things like cast a spell (standard action), move (move action), and finally make a touch attack with the spell (free action).
That is incorrect. Spell Combat is a full-round action which includes all attacks you make on your turn, including the non-spell attacks and the free attack from the spell you cast.
I would have to disagree that it encompasses all attacks for your turn. If you cast a quickened spell as a swift action, I'm pretty sure most GMs would allow you to make a spell strike attack with it at no penalty; even if your next action is to initiate spell combat (and potentially another spell strike).
I just think that by RAW, spell combat allows you to cast a spell and get all your iterative attacks with a one-handed weapon as a full round action. If the spell you cast during spell combat gives a free action touch attack (as stated in my rules quote above), you can use that free action anytime before the round is over (including after your full-round spell combat is over). Furthermore, Spell strike gives one the option to make an attack with a weapon to deliver the spell as this free action instead of the standard touch attack.
1) Declare spell combat with longsword as your main weapon, other hand casts spell.
...
4) Grip longsword with both hands as free action
So, despite Spell Combat stating you must have a hand free to use it, you're using it while not having a hand free.
Spell Combat is the whole full-round action. If you stop having a hand free, you can't continue the action, because you no longer qualify for Spell Combat.
Sorry, I edited my last post while you were replying. But I think at step 4 you can say spell combat is over, and then deliver your free action touch attack "after."
Touch Spells in Combat: Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action.
----
Spell strike simply allows you to do this free action touch with a weapon.
----
Therefore I would think you could work it as follows:
1) Declare spell combat with longsword as your main weapon, other hand casts spell.
2) Make your regular attack with longsword with one handed damage.
3) Cast shocking grasp with other hand
4) Full round spell combat action is now over
5) Grip longsword with both hands as free action
6) Use the free action touch attack to deliver shocking grasp with your longsword at two-handed damage.
If skirnir magus had a shield that was enhanced as a weapon and given the spell storing property, could he use his spellshield ability to store a second spell in the shield?
Spellshield:
Spoiler:
Spellshield (Su)
At 7th level, as a standard action, a skirnir may store a magus spell in his shield by spending 1 point from his arcane pool per level of the spell. This functions as the spell storing weapon special ability, but activates only on a successful shield bash by the skirnir and is not limited to spells of 3rd level or less.
This ability replaces knowledge pool.
Spell storing weapon property:
Spoiler:
A spell storing weapon allows a spellcaster to store a single targeted spell of up to 3rd level in the weapon. (The spell must have a casting time of 1 standard action.) Anytime the weapon strikes a creature and the creature takes damage from it, the weapon can immediately cast the spell on that creature as a free action if the wielder desires. (This special ability is an exception to the general rule that casting a spell from an item takes at least as long as casting that spell normally.) Once the spell has been cast from the weapon, a spellcaster can cast any other targeted spell of up to 3rd level into it. The weapon magically imparts to the wielder the name of the spell currently stored within it. A randomly rolled spell storing weapon has a 50% chance to have a spell stored in it already.
Can you spell combat with the fauchard (i.e., get my full bab attacks and cast a spell)? Can you spell combat with the scimitar?
I think the intent is that when Spell Combat says "attacks with his melee weapon" it's referring to the "light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand."
Following that (supposed) intent, I would not allow SC with the fauchard. The scimitar is fine.
So just to be clear, you believe (and I agree with this...) that by RAW the four handed magus (two hands on fauchard, one on scimitar, one free), can spell combat using the scimitar as his main hand and the free hand as his (light) spell casting hand?
Let's say he makes his scimitar attacks, and casts shocking grasp with his free hand. Can he spell strike with his fauchard?
In other words, if the magus had a bab of +6/+1, can he make an attack with his scimitar at +6, an attack with his scimitar at +1, cast shocking grasp, deliver the spell via the fauchard at +6 (all attacks have the -2 spell combat penalty applying). From my reading of RAW, this seems legal...
Is either class trained in shield use? I like the extra arm to hold a shield for me but I get it from multiclassing with Ftr or Bbn for the full bab.
Mithral is only +1000 gp for the shield and makes it so a shield has no armor check penalty -- easily obtainable after a level or two and relieves the need for proficiency (in the example above, it's actually intended for the magus to be wearing a buckler on the scimitar arm, or wield a light shield instead of scimitar...). You can always go Skirnir magus I guess if you want proficiency in order to take the shield feats.
Raymond Lambert wrote:
Anyone try the scizore d10 weapon with the magus? Since they need a free hand for the spell casting, it might not be as bad with a pf that also uses a shield.
Perhaps a good option for the first few levels (before you can purchase a mithral buckler +1), but I would think buckler + weapon is ultimately superior (scizore can only ever grant +1 shield bonus, buckler can be further enchanted and allows you to do other things than just wield a weapon in your hand).
Sure. I was assuming you were talking about using two weapon fighting and spell combat in the same round. If you are alternating rounds, I don't get the point of getting the extra arms. Just use your one handed weapon with two hands in the rounds you don't cast.
The idea is to be wielding a two-handed polearm (fauchard) in two hands, a one handed weapon in the third (scimitar) and have the fourth hand free. Can you spell combat with the fauchard (i.e., get my full bab attacks and cast a spell)? Can you spell combat with the scimitar? I don't think my DM will subscribe to the idea that you can start spell combat with your hand off the weapon, cast your spell, and the add it back to the weapon... I subscribe to the idea that the intent of spell combat is that the spell casting hand is free during the entire full round action.
A couple things. I'm pretty sure the penalties for two weapon fighting and spell combat would stack. Also, the penalty for fighting with an off hand weapon that isn't light are pretty steep. I think you'd be at -6 on all attacks by then, -4 if your off hand/ spell combat weapon is light.
Even if you are wielding multiple weapons, you are only taking the two weapon penalties if you are trying to get an extra attack per round.
From the core rulebook faq:
Spoiler:
Multiple Weapons, Iterative Attacks, and Two-Weapon Fighting (page 202): If I have iterative attacks from a high BAB, can I make attacks with different weapons and not incur a two-weapon fighting penalty?
Yes. Basically, you only incur TWF penalties if you trying to get an extra attack per round.
Let's assume you're a 6th-level fighter (BAB +6/+1) holding a longsword in one hand and a light mace in the other. Your possible full attack combinations without using two-weapon fighting are:
(A) longsword at +6, longsword +1
(B) mace +6, mace +1
(C) longsword +6, mace +1
(D) mace +6, longsword +1
All of these combinations result in you making exactly two attacks, one at +6 and one at +1. You're not getting any extra attacks, therefore you're not using the two-weapon fighting rule, and therefore you're not taking any two-weapon fighting penalties.
If you have Quick Draw, you could even start the round wielding only one weapon, make your main attack with it, draw the second weapon as a free action after your first attack, and use that second weapon to make your iterative attack. As long as you're properly using the BAB values for your iterative attacks, and as long as you're not exceeding the number of attacks per round granted by your BAB, you are not considered to be using two-weapon fighting, and therefore do not take any of the penalties for two-weapon fighting.
The two-weapon fighting option in the Core Rulebook specifically refers to getting an extra attack for using a second weapon in your offhand. In the above four examples, there is no extra attack, therefore you're not using two-weapon fighting.
Using the longsword/mace example, if you use two-weapon fighting you actually have fewer options than if you aren't. Your options are (ignoring the primary/off hand penalties):
(A') primary longsword at +6, primary longsword at +1, off hand mace at +6
(B') primary mace at +6, primary mace at +1, off hand longsword at +6
In other words, once you decide you're using two-weapon fighting to get that extra attack on your turn (which you have to decide before you take any attacks on your turn), that decision locks you in to the format of "my primary weapon gets my main attack and my iterative attack, and my off hand weapon only gets the extra attack, and I apply two-weapon fighting penalties."
—Sean K Reynolds, 11/04/11
Reading spell combat description in the OP I think it's pretty clear you can wield a normal one-handed weapon without additional penalties (except the -2 spell combat penalty). In other words, a magus with just two arms, who is wielding a scimitar and nothing else can spell combat and get his normal scimitar attack at just a -2 penalty. If this magus had armor spikes, he could attack with either at a -2 penalty (just no extra attacks from TWF).
Consider a magus wielding a two-handed weapon with some levels in alchemist giving him Vestigial arm.
By RAW, he cannot use spell combat with the two-handed weapon despite the free vestigial arm.
Spoiler:
Spell Combat (Ex)
At 1st level, a magus learns to cast spells and wield his weapons at the same time. This functions much like two-weapon fighting, but the off-hand weapon is a spell that is being cast. To use this ability, the magus must have one hand free (even if the spell being cast does not have somatic components), while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand. As a full-round action, he can make all of his attacks with his melee weapon at a –2 penalty and can also cast any spell from the magus spell list with a casting time of 1 standard action (any attack roll made as part of this spell also takes this penalty). If he casts this spell defensively, he can decide to take an additional penalty on his attack rolls, up to his Intelligence bonus, and add the same amount as a circumstance bonus on his concentration check. If the check fails, the spell is wasted, but the attacks still take the penalty. A magus can choose to cast the spell first or make the weapon attacks first, but if he has more than one attack, he cannot cast the spell between weapon attacks.
1) Are people of the opinion this is RAI with a vestigial arm?
Now imagine a magus with two vestigial arms. Let's say he's wielding a two handed weapon in two of his arms, a one-handed weapon in the third, and his fourth is free.
2) Is the magus allowed to spell combat using his one-handed weapon and his free hand?
After a TPK in Serpent's Skull, I'm working on bringing in a new fourth level character to continue the adventure. Our DM was generous and is allowing us a 25-point buy. I've decided to go with a fauchard wielding Alchemist/Magus with four arms.
Race Half-Elf
Level 2 Alchemist (Vivisectionist) / Level 2 Magus (No archetype)
Stats
Str 20 (17 base +2 racial +1 4th level)
Dex 16
Con 14
Int 14
Wis 7
Cha 7
Level 2 Alchemist discovery was Vestigial arm as well.
Traits:
Magical Knack [Magus]
Accelerated Drinker
All future levels in magus.
Future stat boosts: 1 point into wisdom, 2 points into intelligence (don't think we'll reach level 20 so no last point).
Ideal battle conditions will have the magus start with fauchard in 2 hands, mithral light shield + metamagic rod in the 3rd, potion of enlarge person in the fourth.
1st round's actions will be to consume the potion (move action w/ accelerated drinker). With his 20 foot reach, he can hopefully cast and spell strike something within range (or just cast if the enemy is farther off). If the enemy approaches he gets an AoO at 20 feet and 15 feet with the fauchard and 10 feet with a shield bash (I know armor spikes would be better, but I feel that's a little too cheesy :-) ).
So the question is how to plan the remaining feats to best take advantage of his capabilities...
I have 2 builds in mind, one trip based and the other power attack based.
The ? feats will likely be magus power enhancing feats: Extra Arcane Pool, Extra Arcana. Maybe Arcane Strike or Weapon Specialization if I want more damage. I could throw in power attack, but that doesn't seem to synergize well with the trip build (just gives you a minus to your trip attempts, and if you power attacked during your main turn any trip attempts made as AoO will get the penalty as well).
Power Attack based:
5) Weapon Focus (Fauchard)
7) Power Attack, Pushing Assault
9) ??
....
19) Critical Focus, Staggering Critical
This leaves a lot more feats free for fun misc. things (maybe even lunge for the 25 foot reach lol!). I'm just not really convinced that power attack is worthwhile with 3/4 bab. He doesn't have a high intelligence so I don't think arcane accuracy will be much use to compensate (Arcane Pool will be scarce and probably not worth it to blow one point for +2 to hit for just one round). I figure this build can cast true strike if he really wants to trip something at higher levels.
Does anybody have any thoughts on which feat selections will make for the more effective character?
1) First attack: guantlet or Quick Draw 5' weapon, Power Attack and forfeit PA damage to "Pushing Assault" foe back 5'.
There is a problem with this first step. Pushing assault requires a two-handed weapon. You can't pushing assault with gauntlet and you would need to drop your polearm to draw a two-handed weapon.
Spoiler:
Pushing Assault (Combat)
A strike made with a two-handed weapon can push a similar sized opponent backward.
Prerequisites: Str 15, Power Attack, base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: When you hit a creature your size or smaller with a two-handed weapon attack modified by the Power Attack feat, you can choose to push the target 5 feet directly away from you instead of dealing the extra damage from Power Attack. If you score a critical hit, you can instead push the target 10 feet directly away from you. This movement does not provoke attacks of opportunities, and the target must end this move in a safe space it can stand in. You choose which effect to apply after the attack roll has been made, but before the damage is rolled.
Am I correct in my reading that temporary bonuses / penalties / damage to dex will not affect the number of attacks of opportunity granted by combat reflexes?
Say my character has combat reflexes and a dex of 14. If he drinks a potion of enlarge person (temporary penalty to dex of -2), he would still have 3 AoO granted by the feat, correct?
Ability penalties are treated like damage
Spoiler:
Some spells and abilities cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time. While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die. In essence, penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1.
Dexterity Damage Rules
Spoiler:
Ability Damage: Damage to your Dexterity score causes you to take penalties on Dexterity-based skill checks, ranged attack rolls, initiative checks, and Reflex saving throws. The penalty also applies to your Armor Class, your Combat Maneuver Bonus (if you are Tiny or smaller), and to your Combat Maneuver Defense.
Combat Reflexes text
Spoiler:
Benefit: You may make a number of additional attacks of opportunity per round equal to your Dexterity bonus. With this feat, you may also make attacks of opportunity while flat-footed.
Even with the dexterity damage penalties it seems that with a 14 dex naturally and a 2 dex penalty, the dexterity bonus referenced in the feat is still +2.
Current Traits:
Birthmark - +2 Save vs Charm & Compulsion (which I believe should work to help save vs his Wild Rage confusion, but correct me if you think I'm wrong here and what would be a better alternative trait)....
I don't think birthmark helps with wild rage confusion as the effect is not called out as charm/compulsion, just as a straight will save.
Spoiler:
Uncontrolled Rage (Ex)
A wild rager’s rage functions as normal, except that when she reduces a creature to 0 or fewer hit points, she must attempt a Will save (DC 10 + the barbarian’s level + the barbarian’s Charisma modifier) or become confused. For the remainder of her current turn, she attacks the nearest creature other than herself. On the following round, refer to the confusion spell to determine her actions. At the end of this round, and each round thereafter, she can attempt a new saving throw to end the confusion effect. The rounds during which she is confused do not count against the rounds she has spent raging that day, but she cannot end her rage voluntarily, nor can she use rage powers while confused.
Probably should take a trait specific to will saves (i.e. Indomitable Faith).
My (2-armed) character normally wears a mithral chain shirt + 1. I'm planning on giving him the vestigial arm alchemist discovery. Is my only choice to sell the armor and buy a new one with three arm holes? Can I simply cut a new hole in the existing armor? Any other ideas?
Spoiler:
Vestigial Arm (Ex)
Benefit: The alchemist gains a new arm (left or right) on his torso. The arm is fully under his control and cannot be concealed except with magic or bulky clothing. The arm does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round, though the arm can wield a weapon and make attacks as part of the alchemist’s attack routine (using two-weapon fighting). The arm can manipulate or hold items as well as the alchemist’s original arms (for example, allowing the alchemist to use one hand to wield a weapon, another hand to hold a potion, and the third hand to throw a bomb). The arm has its own “hand” and “ring” magic item slots (though the alchemist can still only wear two rings and two hand magic items at a time).
As someone who's first experience with Las Vegas Game Day was this month, I'd just like to thank you and voice my support the changes you made. The more convenient location and time of the event persuaded me to attend and participate in PFS there for the first time; I had a lot of fun! Glad to hear you are actively trying to improve the Vegas experience and I hope to become a regular in the future. Thanks for all the hard work.
You are adept at attacking from upon a swift moving steed.
Prerequisites: Ride rank 14, Mounted Combat, Trick Riding.
Benefit: If your mount moves its speed or less, you can still take a full-attack action.
TWF fighters absolutely adore enlarge person if they have enough dex that it doesn't deny them their highest TWF feat.
Actually, I don't think enlarge person would deny them use of a TWF feat. The spell gives you a size penalty to dex. Penalties are treated like ability damage and ability damage wouldn't prevent you from meeting the dex requirement of the feat.
Some spells and abilities cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time. While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die. In essence, penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1.
Technically even if the enlarge person is permanent, I believe you would still qualify for the feat.
