bitter lily's page

Thanks, everyone! I'll present the thread to my GM and see what she says. Worst come to worst, a cool feat doesn't exist in her game and the party (not to mention my character) has to do without.

You don't even need to change the wording. The part of the line before the comma, "When you Treat a Disease or a Poison," doesn't specify a target so it works when you perform those actions no matter who the target is

I agree! But the GM saw it differently.

As a fellow player has pointed out, but I omitted earlier, the name of the feat (Robust Recovery) seems to imply that it applies only to the character taking the feat.

Waldham wrote:

are there an advantage to be in the same square as an ally ? [snip]

You can normally only share an ally's space very briefly.

Moving Through a Creature's Space wrote:

You can’t end your turn in a square occupied by another creature, though you can end a move action in its square provided that you immediately use another move action to leave that square. If two creatures end up in the same square by accident, the GM determines which one is forced out of the square (or whether one falls prone).

So you can't end your turn there, and you have to immediately move if you end a move action there.

So maybe there is some edge case where Attack of Opportunity could hit someone during the brief time that two allies share a space.

There is also the scenario of creatures of unusual size. Allies of very different size can share a space, but I don't think they can both fight effectively. I'm not entirely clear on the rules of that.

But unless there is something that actually lists special rules to use in this scenario, I would go with Daredevil's Gambit being an exception rather than a normal thing that combatants do. So no bonuses or penalties or risk of mis-targeting for reactions used to attack two allies sharing a space. Or combatants sharing a space during Tumble Through or something like that.

There are some other times I'd say that two allies can share a space and fight, but the only advantage would be a positional one, like sharing a flanking bonus with a third ally.

* Tiny creatures must end their move actions in a square with an enemy if they wish to do a melee strike next. They can even ride a larger ally, at the cost of one action apiece. So a tiny PC should be able share a square with a small- or medium-sized PC, but maybe at that one-action penalty apiece for dodging each other.

* A flying PC at least 5 feet up can share a horizontal square with an ally. (Maybe higher, but I think in terms of 5-feet cubes.)

I bet the OP is thinking of "back-to-back fighting," a staple of literature & movies. In first ed, there was a Teamwork feat called "Back to Back," but it required an adjacent ally, not one in your square, and only applied if you were flanked. (And of course, both of you had to burn a feat slot for a very niche situation.) Given that Pathfinder has no facing, back-to-back fighting is not as important for us as it would be in a game where enemies could get a bonus to hit from the side or rear.

Note to the devs: I hope that if you create teamwork feats, each will permit the PC that takes it to get the benefits with regular allies (not chance-met new friends), even if the ally hasn't burned a feat-slot too.

Yes, Robust Recovery applies its effect in both directions. [skip]

The only time it doesn't work is when you are simply present. If one of your allies use Treat Disease or Treat Poison on a different ally, Robust Recovery won't do anything because you weren't involved in the process.

As for the first sentence, this is how I interpret it:

"You learned folk medicine to help other people recover from diseases and poison, and using it diligently on yourself has made you especially resilient."

But with that said, might not be the best idea to argue with your GM about it too much. If the feat isn't doing what you hoped it would, you can retrain out of it.

Thanks for the endorsement. I'll present the wording you provided me to the GM for her consideration. As for your advice, I get it. I actually had to decide (at 3rd) what skill to upgrade to Expert, and was looking at skill feats for 4th when the discussion came up. So no, I won't argue too much (I hope). As it was, I picked a different skill.

The flavor text in the first sentence for the Robust Recovery feat (Core p. 266) implies that only you can be the patient affected, and that's how my GM is ruling the feat works. But I think the intent is that anytime I Treat Disease or Poison on anyone, that patient gets the benefit. I believe that if they'd meant it only applied to me, they'd say "you," not "the patient." (In addition, of course, if someone else does so on me, I still get the benefit.)

Can anyone help? Here's the wording:

Robust Recovery -- Feat 2
You learned folk medicine to help recover from diseases and poison, and using it diligently has made you especially resilient. When you Treat a Disease or a Poison, or someone else uses one of these actions on you, increase the circumstance bonus granted on a success to +4, and if the result of the patient’s saving throw is a success, the patient gets a critical success.

And thank you all. My player's Summoner is starting at 2nd level, so I think (*hope*) it will be a bit before we have to figure out the rest.

I find it easier to simplify it to this:

You and your eidolon get a total of 4 actions between yourselves.

Rules:
1) Each has to use at least 1 action.
2) Only 1 two-action activity can be done. If a two-action activity is done, the other two actions can only be one-action activities.

This is a GREAT simplification. *sigh* I wish they'd said just this.

Oh, also either of the Summoner or Eidolon can take any of the standard three actions given at the start of the turn. Summoner gets priority in the case of contention between the two, but generally (especially since they are both being played by the same player) they work together seamlessly to decide who uses which actions.

Hmm... Let's see here. Practical examples
[deleted for space -- but thank you very much!]

bitter lily wrote:

I further believe that you cannot get something like this, since the action pool starts out with the summoner:

Summoner: 2 (AT); Eidolon: 1 (AT) + 1

Summoner: 2-action spell; Eidolon: Move + Strike

This one works since you can choose a different number of actions for Act Together to take. One of the two gets to use an activity that takes that many actions. It doesn't always have to be the Summoner of the pair that gets the larger number of actions either.

bitter lily wrote:

You certainly cannot get this anyway possible:

Summoner: 2 (AT); Eidolon: 2 (????)

I don't think that this one works....

Thank you so much!

Quote:

I further believe that you cannot get something like this, since the action pool starts out with the summoner:

Summoner: 2 (AT); Eidolon: 1 (AT) + 1

Why do you think you can't do this? A Summoner who spends two actions on Act together has one action left over afterwards and they share actions with the eidolon.

Okay, I found where it said that! Thank you.

It's clear that someone with a minion gets effectively 2 actions/turn, while the minion gets 2. If the familiar is independent, the "master" can get 3 actions/turn, while the familiar takes 1. Total in each case: 4. (I don't know about animal companions, but I believe it's the same.)

So what about Summoners & Eidolons? I think that you can do any of the following forms of action economy, but my players(!) think the pair can get only 2 or 3, potentially. (Act Together (AT), in short, is very poorly worded.) I'm sorry to write all this out, but it's gotten contentious.

Summoner: 1 (AT) + 1 + 1; Eidolon: 1 (AT)
Summoner: 1 (AT) + 2; Eidolon: 1 (AT)
Summoner: 2 (AT) + 1; Eidolon: 1 (AT)
Summoner: 3 (AT); Eidolon: 1 (AT)
Summoner: 1 (AT) + 1; Eidolon: 2 (AT)
Summoner: 1 (AT); Eidolon: 3 (AT)

I further believe that you cannot get something like this, since the action pool starts out with the summoner:
Summoner: 2 (AT); Eidolon: 1 (AT) + 1

You certainly cannot get this anyway possible:
Summoner: 2 (AT); Eidolon: 2 (????)

Is there something wrong or missing with my understanding?

Note from the trenches: The GM has approved Second Sight as a custom alternate racial trait, and is adding a custom twist of his own to the Haunted drawback. Small items may disappear for a time, eventually reappearing where they had been without explanation. I can accept that.

I'm excited; I think I'm narrowing in on a final build. Hmm, do you have any other cts? Sorry, I didn't look!

Hmm, I hear your caution. The optimizer in me agrees, wholeheartedly. But I simply cannot pull off having her leave her home with an ordinary weapon, wearing scruffy studded leather, with a scholar's outfit as the alternative, and maybe a tiny silver brooch for jewelry. I cannot.

This PC is about the RP as much as about the utility for the party. And I am hoping to make playing a tank work for her career, spells or no, if only because I've never tried it.

Now if I can just pick a name!

Thinking of Heavens, Lore, & Wind as all associated with the deity sending her these spirits, or at least neutral to him, does make sense. <runs off to see what is left and what she loses by this>

<> Bones will also be with her; we're talking about the "Ill Wind." OTOH, my PC will likely try to dodge this one.
<> Battle looks like it's with her, based on the bonus spells.
<> Flame looks aligned or neutral, since fire is largely gaseous.
<> Life is sadly open to question; the "Ill Wind" would obviously never send Life Spirits, but yes, the Goddess of fertility and childbirth would -- I'd strongly wanted access to this one -- I think I can pull it off with good RP. "How nice to see you!"

<> That leaves Nature, Stone, & Waves as antithetical. Looking them over, I can see that. There's some good hexes there, but nothing that sings out to me for this character. The themes are all so, so gravity-bound, even the Waves. That's 30% of the spirits provided, which surely should suffice.

Thank you!

A little late to the party. But here are some thoughts on the future of the character. A keen fauchard would be better for you if your burning a feat on a weapon.

Consider additional traits magical linage divine favor level 7ish and quicken at level 9 this really powers up your melee.

Welcome! Sadly, the fauchard fits in the realm of great suggestions I can't make use of -- it's not in Ultimate Equipment. I can use PRD material only, remember.

OTOH, your other suggestion looks unmitigatedly great! I can take Magical Lineage for Divine Favor now at character creation. And put Divine Favor into my spell list as well, of course. That would let me go for Extend Spell at 3rd, although my blasters haven't been fond of that metamagic in the past. Still, while I've seen fights go to 10 rounds, none have even neared 20, so it would be helpful. An Extended Divine Favor might even be castable before combat begins. The real plan, as you say, is to get Quicken Spell at 9th level, when Divine Favor is adding +3 to attack and damage.

This is a solid plan for a tank oracle: thank you!

My problem is partly that myself and my group are very much the "deeply detail oriented" types and the issue I'm having with the AP partly stems from knowing how what is left up for me to 'customize' will require almost as much work as a full on game creation it seems. I'll need to write up motivations and linked plots between NPCs, record major story breaks the party diverges on to be able to pull them back into the plot somehow, note down treasure differences, etc. I was really just hoping to open the book, read it, and run it for the night because I don't have a LOT of prep time available that much anymore. Something as simple as a 1 page bit of annotations about NPCs and locations would be a fantastic time saver.

I'm in the same boat with you. And like an idiot, I plunged into Jade Regent without looking to see if the boat would float. I've ended up using the AP as a skeleton, but I'm creating all of the encounters pretty much custom, anyway -- even though I bought the AP so I wouldn't have all of that work. Right now, I admit, it's because I've insisted on actually playing out scenes over the hundreds of miles that the AP takes you from Sandpoint to Brinewall. The AP pretty much just says, "and they get there," which didn't seem right to me. I found out later about the Legendary Games module you can buy to fix that, but it was too late.

But in doing the initial encounters in Sandpoint and Brinestump Marsh, I discovered that AP encounters are written for a standard party of 4 PCs of the level specified, meaning a 4-person action economy, none especially optimized, using a 15-pt build and WBL. We have a larger party, plus one PC has a tiger companion; one of the PCs is extremely well optimized; I allowed essentially a 20-pt build; I'm giving high fantasy double-WBL. Needless to say, in the first- and second-level encounters in Brinestump Marsh, the party was running rings around the printed material. I'm planning on rewriting everything even when we finally get to Brinewall and I can go back to AP material!

I highly recommend, more than words can say, the GM's Guide to Creating Challenging Encounters for a guideline to what monsters you need to supply your party with. You'll find that the author does not like the AP norm of single-foe encounters, and I believe he's got good reason. I've been following his guidelines as I've written the encounters my party has faced on their trip, and it's worked very well -- to kudos from the experienced GM among the players. Sad to say, Jade Regent is apparently like other APs in NOT following his guidelines. Even if you ensure a party of 4 with a 15-pt build and WBL, you'll likely find that the preponderance of solitary encounters are troubling.

I'm also concerned that the plot of Jade Regent is rather bound to following a railroad track. OK, a caravan route, but that's just as limited in terms of deviations. And I suspect all of the APs are, as well. If the players do something odd, after all, they'll never get to the end of six books. And my players are used to sandbox GMs, where they are perfectly free to do something creative and odd! I can foresee a lot of scrambling on my part to find a route from where they went back to the main line so we can get on to the next book.

All in all, my conclusion is that I'm a sandbox GM like you, and an AP doesn't really fit my style. I doubt it would fit yours, either. Why fight it? Stick to sandbox.

In that respect, Sandpoint is a well documented locale, and getting Rise of the Runelords 1 for the town and using Jade Regent 1 for its environs, including the Brinestump Marsh, is a good idea. I believe the nearby major city, Magnimar, is also detailed somewhere. Your party can make short trips out of town for published modules you want to slip in.

I just wish I hadn't boarded this train to the far east...

Rolling a one and then having to confirm a fumble and then having to make a reflex save seems like a really good way to slow down combat (an already laborious process) in order that you might apply a anti heroic slapstick debuff. sounds annoying.

also.

Matthew Downie wrote:

I tend to think of Pathfinder in heroic-fiction terms more than in terms of realism or basketball. How often would it be acceptable for Legolas to drop his bow, or shoot himself in the foot, or put an arrow in Aragorn's backside? Once for every ten orcs he kills? It still sounds wrong to me..

This

The thing is, the entire table turns to the potential fumbler to watch the confirmation roll. It grips them in a way that a normal turn would not. I'll think about it.

As for what Matthew said, there definitely are different styles of fiction. I should also think about what kind of story I'm telling, yes.

[...]BARBARIAN POINT OUT THAT RULE SUCH AS THIS AM MAKING BARBARIAN NERFED SO CASTYS ABLE KEEP UP, BARBARIAN LITERALLY NOT CAPABLE OF NOT HITTING BARBARIAN, AM ALSO GENERALLY UNABLE NOT KILL BARBARIAN BECAUSE BARBARIAN AM HITTING THAT HARD, NOT TO MENTION QUESTIONABLE INTERACTION WITH STUNNING STRIKE, SPELL SUNDER, AND KNOCKBACK AM MEANING BARBARIAN MAYBE NEED MAKE FORT SAVE UNDER THIS WHILE HAVING SHOVED SELF AWAY FROM ENEMY BY HITTING WEIRD. BARBARIAN MAKE SAVE ON LIKE TWO SO WHAT AM EVEN THE PROBLEM HERE BESIDES GROSS VIOLATION OF PHYSICS, BUT HEY. THAT AM HOW BARBARIAN ROLL.

[...]

P.S. MAYBE HAVE GM READ THAT ONE SHORT STORY ABOUT THAT LOTTERY. AM ALWAYS BEING A LOTTERY, SO AM STONING ONE PERSON EVERY YEAR BECAUSE WHY CHANGING IT? THAT AM GREAT STORY ABOUT WHY LAWFUL ALIGNMENT AM TERRIBLE PLAN, AND HONEST EXAMINATION WITH EVALUATION AM IMPORTANT.

Wow, you got worked up about this! I've never seen you use so many wordy things before! And looong ones, too. We certainly shouldn't have tables in which you reliably off yourself 5% of the time!

I am curious: what would happen with a rule that gave you a Reflex save to negate the damage?

Bringing up The Lottery by Shirley Jackson was an interesting tactic for the OP, and it does seem like the thread lost sight of the OP's request for tactics. I have to admit I skipped a number of pages in the middle of all of the conflagration. (Bad poster, I know. No donut.) Has the OP been responding? Have they addressed the fumble rule with their GM?

This system produces a 1.25% chance to fail spectacularly per attack. 110 free-throws over MJ's career. Of course, that's in the fog of war, which I'm fairly certain pro-basketball free-throws are not. (My Profession (basketball-fan) skill is untrained, so I couldn't roll on that one.) But I can check wiki with the best of them, and apparently Air Jordan's pro career (counting the years after he left OUR team) lasted 14 years. With 80 to 90 games per season, if I have that right. An average of 8 spectacular fails per season does sound harsh, but 1 out of 10 games doesn't sound that hideous... provided the opponents are allowed to move the basket while he's aiming! But I could make that "you fumble on a confirmation roll of a (second) nat-1," for a 0.25% chance to fumble per attack. That would amount to 22 fumbles over Jordan's entire career; 1 or 2 per season, or rather 2% of his games. Given perhaps literal fog of war, is this a horrible rule??

And is "you hit yourself" or "you hit an ally" actually worse than "you drop your weapon?" (It's certainly better than "you break your weapon!") I've been assuming that damage is kinder, since it doesn't take you out of the action for a round or more. Perhaps I should permit a Reflex save to negate the damage? Would some of you still be howling at "you lose your dex bonus to AC for the round" (as you scramble to recover from leaving yourself wide open for a second)?

I'm asking these questions in good faith, as a new GM looking to evaluate the toolbox I got handed.

Hmm, the suggestions on styles for spirit guide are fascinating! And I'm with Louise, the Canny Mystic and Recipient of Mysterious Envoys styles look good for this character. And thanks for the link to your doc on spirit abilities. I'll add one thing to a copy for myself: descriptions of the spirits being bonded with.

Louise, which spirits are antithetical to Lore? Or to "the Ill Wind, the Gatherer of Spirits, the Whisperer of Secrets"? (The deity she got dedicated to at birth, if you recall.) Her alignment is soooo complicated; I wish I could just assign some as "evil."

~~~

Who is in the party? LOL, I've got to remember!
<> My aasimar loracle, who has a lot of secrets to keep
<> Halfling bard
<> Dwarven ranger
<> Tiefling slayer, also with a mysterious past
<> Mysterious wizard (with a player peeved that his secret got out before he even started play): illusionist. (Ah well, our PCs don't know!)
<> Somebody as yet undecided, which makes them the most mysterious of all at the moment.

~~~

Hmm, I have suggested but not yet heard back on my custom Second Sight. If the GM grants it, then getting Perception as a class skill becomes less important. Which would be good, because Seeker is in the same category as Rich Parents. I had originally thought of it as another dual choice, like Armor Expert vs. Reactionary, and Focused Mind vs. Magical Lineage. But the more I considered how poor she'd be without Rich Parents, and how bad that would be for RP, Seeker sank lower and lower. By the time I submitted my OP, I had dropped Seeker from consideration. This may be grounds for an expensive (+ 800 gp) retraining request later, however.

~~~

Tyophelis, as for not using a spear, the main reason I went for a Weapon Proficiency is that I want to tank. I figure I'll be in melee a lot, as a result. Even if I'm not doing DPR-style damage, I want to be able to do something worthwhile! If I can get Keen on my falchion somehow, I should have a reasonable chance of nasty damage from critting. (We use crit cards.)

As for not using a falcata or other exotic blade, I actually went over all of the cool exotic weapons carefully... and THEN looked at the Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat. OOOPS! Prereq of BAB +1, my violet eyeballs!!! (You'd think they saw me coming or something.) This is supposed to be a proficiency she picked up in her childhood training, and for a 3/4-BAB caster, it won't work.

Have I persuaded you all on the falchion?

My PC is not named Ariel any longer; I had had no idea what Disney had done with a perfectly thematic name! Suggestions as to her name would be great icing for the cake!

My apologizes for the double post, but I have some images that I feel could work involving character concepts. Sadly, only about five found that I felt could really fit.

A dalmatian warrior, perhaps either a Barbarian or Fighter, possibly a Ranger as well. You can find it here.

A more savage looking pitbull, though perhaps even more gladiatorial, maybe as a Hunter or Barbarian. Admittedly, he isn't wearing much more then a loincloth and leggings but you can find him here.

An english bull dog, perhaps a bit more open to different classes then those offered above. Maybe even a Cleric, Bard, or perhaps especially an Investigator given the style of clothes can be found here.

Perhaps a husky, not as sure on the breed, but I could see her as a Ranger or maybe even a Cleric here and here.

Finally we have this fellow, a sheepdog perhaps, a gunslinger or an archetype which provides a gun found here.

This one could work well for either a Cavalier or a Paladin though the art style is less like that seen for Pathfinder. Found here.

Also another, one of the smaller breeds, good as either a Cavalier, or a Paladin though more the former given the banner, here.

Jonathan, thanks for your work! I'm marking the husky as a potential Icelandic Sheepdog (except that the fur would be all white) for a campaign of mine that's using an advanced Dog-kin instead of these dog-folk. She's a Loracle.

Alternatively, the same player is bringing an Old English Sheepdog into a different campaign as an Empiricist Investigator, to test the Multiple-Breed Dogfolk. Again, the waist pictured is a bit tooooo shapely for an OES, but...

(At least both are female, and without bulbous human breasts, so they fit on that score very well!)

Thank you!

avr, thanks for explaining. What about my See Invisibility, then? I'd stubbornly like to be able to see my existence-less spirits. I'm considering requesting that I be allowed the following Alternate Racial Trait:

Sixth Sight Some aasimar are highly perceptive, often beyond the bounds of normal vision. They gain a +2 racial bonus on Perception checks. In addition, they may use See Invisibility once per day as a spell-like ability (caster level is equal to the aasimar's character level). This racial trait replaces skilled.

Basically, I'm replacing the +2 on Diplomacy in the base trait with the 1/day See Invisibility. (Both are 2 RP.) Yes, I have to give up the 2 languages per rank in Linguistics I'd liked, but the point is that a new feature should cost something. What do you think?

Yay!!! I gave the GM my character write-up, and it passed muster, except for the fluff on falchion. "Why a falchion?" he asked.

"Because it's a really cool two-handed sword?" I asked back, wondering what he was getting at. Apparently they're not at all typical for the region. So I'll have to change the fluff, and that was good enough. (Apparently there's a spirit who follows the PC around and really, really likes playing with falchions -- and is sooo helpful when the PC wields one, compared to whenever she tries to wield whatever are the easy to find swords lying around.

I wrote Reactionary into her stats, and I do think I'll go with it.

Of course, I also wrote Focused Mind in, but now I'm waffling. I've looked at Spirit Sense, and it's ineligible for me in that it cancels out my drawback. Way too cheesy! But in addition to canceling the penalty on surprise that my drawback provides, it gives an underwhelming +2 to see invisible or incorporeal creatures. Creatures that add +20 to the DC because they're invisible! Gee, thanks.

I need a trait that will let my PC see spirits. Spirits that are invisible to others. (Of course, for a trait she won't get any boost to see material beings who have become invisible.) For this purpose only, I'm open to recs from Paizo non-PRD or even 3rd party sources. Assuming that I'll be requesting something homebrew, I need to settle an essential question before I can start writing:

Are these spirits incorporeal or ethereal?

The latter seems scratched out in that apparently ethereal creatures cannot affect the material plane. And these spirits certainly do! According to her curse, they can cause "unexpected breezes, small objects moving on their own, and faint noises." I want to further fluff them as actually aiding her defense in combat (purely as justification for her sidestep secret revelation).

So I started investigating incorporeal, but didn't find anything clear-cut on whether incorporeal creatures are invisible or not. And then I looked in the Bestiary (getting frustrated with how the sub-type filters work), and got the following:

• Allip (CR 3) "This malignant cloud of shadows boils in the air, its skeletal maw eerily babbling as the creature's claws manifest from the darkness."
  
• Banshee (CR 13) "This beautiful, ghostly elven woman glides through the air, her long hair flowing around a face knotted into a mask of rage."
  
• Bhuta (CR 11) "This ghostly apparition floats in the air on backward-facing feet. Its hands end in sharp talons, and its eyes glow with blue fire."
  
• Dybbuk (CR 15) "This grinning spectre has mad eyes and blood-red hands that twitch and jerk like a puppeteer's."
  
• Duppy (CR 7) "This floating, ghostly humanoid's face is a blend of human and beast. Canine shapes twine around the creature's legs."

While I stopped with "D," so far, it sure looks like incorporeal creatures are all, in fact, visible!

So what are my invisible but prankster or helpful spirits?

~~~~

avr, I love Fate's Favored for Varitsa, my half-orc sorceress, even though I haven't yet managed consistent sources of luck bonuses besides her tattoos. I hadn't been aware of the Luckstone until recently, nor had I thought of getting a cheap wand of Divine Favor for my UMD. If the campaign does continue, she'll be getting them soon! And it will mean +2 on Init for her, along with the +2 on attacks/damage with DF.

Hmmmm. No, I think I'll do something different, all the same. For one thing, it will be a loooonnng haul before Ariel can afford a Luckstone. And the GM is hinting it will be a low-magic campaign, in the sense of there not being a lot of magic items lying about. He wants a fairy-tale atmosphere. (I don't know if he'll restrict crafting.)

Louise, I do want to mention that I found a typo in the Ultimate Equipment text. I couldn't understand your suggestion of a cheap hireling at first, since I thought they made 1 gp per day! Oh, yes, the Hireling description (even still on the PRD) says Hirelings have "Price 1 gp – 3 gp per day," but then I noticed that the table at the top gives it as 1 sp/day untrained & 3 sp/day trained. UC under Downtime backs the table, as does common sense, given what hoity-toity folks make. So how do I flag the typo? And might the powers that be know about it, and NOT have fixed the PRD?

{EtA: Hah! The maid fixes the problem Ariel had with a common, scruffy backpack that marred her image. The MAID is carrying the backpack!}

So much for trying to head off great suggestions I can't make use of. Defensive Strategist, Transmuter, & Accelerated Drinker -- none of them are PRD. I may have been unclear in talking about "splatbooks," since Gods of the Inner Sea is hardcover. It's still not in the PRD, so I'm not going to try to argue for material out of it. We had to work on the very concept of getting to use traits in the first place!

~~~

avr: Thanks so very much for pointing out that Ariel can best use a 2H-weapon. A falchion is certainly superior to the scimitar I went for first. As a note to myself, it will cost 375 gp & weigh 8 lbs (60 gp & 4 lbs more). It will do 2d4+4/18-20 (seriously better than 1d6!).

Thanks for the vote for Focused Mind; seeing as I can't go with Defensive Strategist, are you voting for Reactionary?

~~~

Louise: Well, technically Armor Expert doesn't help with AC, just with her terrible Dex-based skills like Acrobatics & Stealth. So does this swing your vote to Reactionary?

I banned Magical Lineage because of the many cts I've seen that amount to "you can't do an arcane caster without it." I think traits are supposed to add to diversity, not just be another shoehorn. Without Magical Lineage, Spell Perfection isn't all that insane. I hope. I haven't seen it in use, since I always play in games like my current one, that sure looks like it's ending at 11th level. (The GM has good intentions.)

Given that I have no option for the traits you recommended, do you have an opinion on the magic trait?

I'm logging your vote for putting off Deathwatch. I picked it partly because of flavor reasons, since spirits could tell her about health status. But Divine Favor & Entropic Shield are also thematic. Do you have an opinion as to which is better for her? (Weapons Against Evil is again non-PRD.)

As for the hireling, yes, of course Ariel expects a servant! And she did get her father's servants out of the house (after lighting it on fire). Maybe a housemaid is accompanying her. (Her lady's maid wouldn't cook or clean and still looked for 1 gp a day!) Paying the housemaid for a year would cost 37 gp... I don't know. Ariel is going to be looking for a way to pay her over a longer stretch, but for now, the housemaid has been paid for only 10 days (1 gp). (Partly, it will be up to the GM if he wants to deal with an NPC hanger-on.) Thanks for the idea!

The game I play in now is "taking a break" (yeah, right). The GM is starting up a new 1st-level campaign. And this is my first time actually building a character rather than just throwing something together for fun. So I’m nervous. And yeah, I asked about this when he first brought it up last March. I’ve reviewed what people recommended & the "Channeling the Cosmos" guide, and I'm building my PC for real now. Please review what I’ve got, and make cts.

NOTE: The GM severely restricts the material available to us. No material that’s in a splatbook or 3rd-party. Period. Material that’s actually on the PRD is a maybe. So if you make recs, please give me links to Paizo’s site, not the d20SRD. It will save us bandwidth on great ideas I can’t use.

Lore Oracle, Spirit Guide archetype, 1st Level
Ariel’s background is fairly solidified, and I want my build choices to make sense for RP as well as mechanics. I have a varied role in mind for her: tank, healer, and knowledge base.

Ability Scores
We roll stats, and I did incredibly well. I rolled a 16, 16, 15, 14, 14, 10 – equivalent to a 37-pt buy!!! (I admit, I think we use the same rules as Lady-J’s table does. This is still the best array I’ve rolled.) Aasimars get +2 Wis & Cha, and no penalties, so I distributed the results as follows…

Str 16, Dex 10, Con 15, Int 14, Wis 16 (14+2), Cha 18 (16+2). --Who needs Dex? Not a loracle! Her ability pt at 4th will go to Con, for a free Toughness.

Feat
Ariel gets only one at first. Given that I want her in melee and she only gets simple weapon proficiency, I’m going for…
Martial Weapon Proficiency (scimitar)
The 3rd level feat will be Extra Revelation, likely to get Lore Keeper, since Spirit Guides don’t get revelations for a long time after first level.

Traits

Drawback & Character Traits
Spirit-Sighted You often pay such attention to the spirits around you that you are surprised by the material world. You take a –2 penalty on Perception checks to avoid being surprised and on Reflex saving throws to avoid traps or hazards. [drawback, refluffed; the original is Sentimental] I’ve refluffed this, so it looks incredibly apt. Although it is at odds with some other features & trait options.

The alternative would be Meticulous (-2 to untrained skills).

Rich Parents You were born into the minor nobility, and even though you have been forced to turn to a life of adventure, you enjoy a one-time benefit to your initial finances—your starting wealth increases to 900 gp. [social] — At the start of the game, Ariel really needs to look like the pampered daughter of minor nobility. (I'm assuming the courtier’s outfit would cost her only 20 gp net.) My big question is: have I missed anything? I mean, something she’d have actually possessed before fleeing her burning home. OK, she bought a common backpack on the road to hold her clothes while she’s in armor, but that was a clear necessity. She won’t be used to traveling out of town, much less adventuring, when she arrives in the city where the game is beginning! Note: Yes, the obvious hole is a ranged weapon. I’m afraid of the Haunted penalty (from her curse), and given her lacrimose Dex, she’ll stick to her scimitar & her spells.

Now I have to choose one from each of the following pairs of traits. Again, she wants to tank, heal & know things...

Armor Expert You have worn armor as long as you can remember, simply as part of your upbringing as a noble. Your childhood armor encumbered you as much as real armor, and you've grown used to moving in such suits with relative grace. When you wear armor of any sort, reduce that suit's armor check penalty by 1, to a minimum check penalty of 0. [combat, slightly refluffed] —I’d say it was necessary given that tanks wear armor, and she can’t use Cha for Dex-based skills; this would indeed take the penalty to 0 for her masterwork chain shirt, giving her a whopping skill bonus of +0, untrained. This trait is also great for RP. The thing is, she’s not supposed to be the graceful acrobat & slippery sneak of the group. So I’m less excited about this one than the next.
OR
Reactionary You were bullied often as a child because of your odd, violet eyes, but never quite developed an offensive response. Instead, you have learned to let helpful spirits warn you of an impending attack. You gain a +2 trait bonus on initiative checks. [combat, refluffed] —I’d say it was necessary given that she can’t use Cha for Init, but it flies in the face of the drawback I chose. Of course, I’ve fluffed it that some spirits are helpful and others not…

Focused Mind You read voraciously as a child, partly as a retreat from a home life that was subtly horrifying. You learned to block out distractions and focus on the immediate task at hand. You gain a +2 trait bonus on concentration checks. [magic, refluffed] —This fits the RP, and has been called a good buy.
OR
Magical Lineage Angelic blood runs in your veins, and yet you were committed at birth to an evil deity. Pick one spell when you choose this trait. When you apply metamagic feats to this spell that add at least 1 level to the spell, treat its actual level as 1 lower for determining the spell's final adjusted level. [magic, refluffed] —which spell? For a sorcerer/wizard, this trait has been called so essential I ban it from my game. But is it “essential” for a loracle bent on tanking, healing, and knowing things? [/spoiler]

Spells
SLA (CL 1st): 1/day – Daylight

Cantrips Known (4 + 2 from curse)
>> Detect Magic, Ghost Sound, Guidance, Spark, Stabilize, & Mage Hand

1st-Level Spells Known (2 + 1 Cure)
>> Cure Light Wounds, Deathwatch, & Shield of Faith
I’m especially curious if you all have recs on spell choices.

Sooo, whew! How’d I do in general? Which of the traits should I pick? Are there better spells? How would you improve the build?

dot

I think it party comes down to "Group Think." I've got a party now that I'm GMing for where nearly everyone has a Str of 8 or 10. (I didn't allow stats of 7.) Luckily, there's a Str-based magus, so the party has at least SOME hauling capacity. But the low-Str bias keeps having negative effects.

And yes, I'm willing to actually hit PCs with effects that require Will saves, so it's arguable that a bias away from Str and toward Wis is useful for my game. Maybe. I take it you also are not a GM who religiously avoids Will saves, on the grounds that it's no fun for the player if their PC fails one. Do take note that Wisdom is less useful in some games, however.

For me, I might look at making ONE stat cheap, and define that one stat by class. Although... yes, what about dips? I don't generally do dips, but I think a lot of builds start out at 1st level with a class not to be repeated.

A numerical quibble.

bitter lily wrote:

A level 5 PC is worth 1,600 XP; four amount to 6,400 XP & five 8,000. If we come up with that much XP fighting them, we've got a 50-50 chance someone in the party would die in a face-off.

It's not a 50-50 chance of someone in the party. It's a 50/50 chance of the ENTIRE party dying. A CR+4 encounter is equal power on both sides. Equivalent CR to fighting your clones. That's in theory. In practice, players often optimize characters better, get extra stats/gear, have better synergy, have better action economy, etc.

Quibble accepted. It's a higher chance that 1+ PC will die, a lower chance of a TPK, in practice, especially given a guaranteed imbalance of action economy (two vs. four or five).

You may want to wiki related terms like Constable, night watchmen, thief-takers, Bow Street Runners, and the Metropolitan Police -- aka Scotland Yard.

The Bow Street article linked has a list of novels involving Runners, including The Toll Gate by Georgette Heyer. (Why I even knew about them.)

Init checks! Although you're likely to have already made said check by the time my witch gets the chance to hex you. I've wondered if the target's Init is unaffected, as the check isn't be made again, or goes down by -2. (It's worth remembering that Init checks are ability checks, though, because some items affect them.)

Also, I believe a caster's concentration checks are ability checks, even though you also get to add your CL. (Again, useful to keep in mind when perusing items at a Magic Bazaar.)

It might be more accurate to say that they're any d20 rolls that take an ability modifier but are NOT attack rolls, saving throws, or skill checks.

I don't get why you're pre-assigning what "primary" and "dump" stats are. I can play a Cleric or Rogue with a Str of 16 for 5 pts, but if I want to play a Barbarian with a Str of 16 it costs 10????

Okay, if I want to play a Barb starting with a Str of 20 (including racial), now I'll have to pay the price in terms of calling it a primary stat. But what if I don't want any stats higher than 16 before racials? My players would be howling at this system.

What really puzzles me is that so many classes have melee applications, where Str is a primary. And so few reward Wis. I get that everyone benefits from Dex & Con. But I'd have thought that everyone benefited from Str more than Wis, if only for carrying capacity. Your system lets you buy one stat you need cheap, but two (plus your class stat) at high cost. Huh? (It also will penalize any Dex-based build excessively.)

I wish I'd seen this in time. Two-hour encounters in general are hard to write up, though, aren't they? I mean, an evil artifact is going to spawn days of gaming, and require maps & NPCs & all kinds of things you apparently weren't looking to invent. But bar encounters in general are good for groups that like RP. You can quickly have an NPC hit on a PC -- does the PC go for it, or try to dodge it? Someone picks a fight and a brawl breaks out, sure.

I love Mudfoot's idea of obvious pirates walking into a bar simply looking for a drink. You can do something with that fairly easily, if you're willing to grab generic stat-blocks in case a fight breaks out. And the RP can be as memorable as a plot-type encounter.

I do hope my players still remember "Daisy," the HUGE mastiff familiar for a very slight elven wizard that they met in one bar. The pair certainly sparked a golden evening of RP.

Oh, and then there was the innkeeper at another town who wouldn't serve Kellids or Ulfens (Golarian human ethnicities). Problem: one of the PCs has Ulfen genes. Worse problem: I put a very pregnant Kellid woman in the entryway, with two small children, who was getting refused the chance to stay there because she "smelled." The PCs were strangers in town, just passing through; what would they do? (They found a druid who would take the PC, and the woman & her children, in for the night.)

I realize that my stories are a bit late to help you, but maybe they'll help someone else.

So maybe you should run over to homebrew and propose one? The trick is, it's better if domain spells come from other lists, and ARE there flavorful choices from other lists?

Does a Kensai Magus have to pick a "martial or exotic melee weapon" when picking the "weapon of his choice"? If unarmed counts...

I love witch for this, but I didn't see the rules of the game. The witches I've seen are fabulous at buffing & debuffing, but not so great at DPS.

Although... if a familiar passes the threshold, then a shaman's spirit animal should for sure.

And has anyone mentioned Loracle? (Err, Lore Oracle.) Cha to AC instead of Dex for a Cha-caster helps fix the no-armor prob. With a secondary stat of Str, touch-attack spells should hit, and the Inflict Wounds line (Critical 4d8+CL) don't require a focus. I admit, this solution works a lot better if the NO FOCUS requirement gets waived, since otherwise spells will have to be picked very carefully, of course. Buffs will be difficult to find, it looks like.

Someone on these boards passed me a recommendation that I treasure:
The GM's Guide to Creating Challenging Encounters has a lot of the answers to your questions.

Working with the GM's Guide takes a little math. A level 5 PC is worth 1,600 XP; four amount to 6,400 XP & five 8,000. If we come up with that much XP fighting them, we've got a 50-50 chance someone in the party would die in a face-off. If we go with two 9th-level NPCs with NPC WBL (reducing their CR to CR-8), they've got 9,600 XP on their side. Less action economy, but still a pretty good chance for a TPK. (One level less, and the rescuees are worth 6,400 XP, standing only a 50% chance against the smaller party of 4, and likely going down against the larger one.)

I'm NOT recommending you do create these NPCs, mind you, even to fight alongside the PCs. The advice you've gotten to not let the PCs stand back and watch you play the game all by yourself is sound. (Been there on both sides of the table. Not fun for real.)

Or set the bar this high, and then find a way to weaken the NPCs before play starts. For one thing, they're presumably near-naked (reducing their CR by a further step). Perhaps they've taken negative levels from torture! If they're being held in a professionally-designed dungeon, you could easily hit them with the fatigued condition, fixable only with a day of bed rest. There may be other Conditions you could give them. (Flavor reasons for negative levels, fatigue, or other conditions evident to the PCs in the dungeon.) Certainly, the NPCs should start out seriously wounded, as well, and depending on the party's resources, might well refuse "unnecessary" levels of healing.

If you can get them down to CR-5 with all of these adjustments to CR, and here they are as good as the PCs when this bad off, it will probably impress the players more than if they simply one-shot opponents. And adding two NPCs the same effective-level as the PCs isn't bad.

I'm currently running Jade Regent, and what to do with the AP-provided NPCs, all significantly more competent than the PCs in the first book, is a definite issue. I've taken to getting them out of the way in a blatant fashion if I have to.

I only have the description from the Inner Sea World Guide, so you may well be aware of details that I am not. But I'd have jumped on Calistria, eh, well, picked her. Why would the PC be an outcast?

To Irontruth: I'm curious what the OP thinks of your idea. And I'm grateful there's more than just one definition here of a "Lovecraftian slide into madness" for the OP to consider.

But as long as you & I are conversing here, let me try explaining my take again. I play a blaster who reads something I knew I shouldn't. I don't cast summon spells, I just don't. So after the GM springs your idea on me, I'm not horrified by the mad things I summon, I'm simply frustrated that I lost spells/day. I still spend my day blasting, reliably and sanely. (I equip myself with a bow for when I run out of spells.) If the GM had found a way to twist my blast spells, though, now that would have given me a sense of descending into madness! Same thing if I'm a battlefield controller; the GM would have to twist my control spells to properly play with my sense of reality.

Given that you already get 2 more skill pts than the cleric, I'd be reluctant to add further skill pts. Absolutely no extra spells/day! A second domain, a firm maybe. IF you took the lower hit die and re-rolled your HP... Maybe.

My big concern is that this archetype is from a Player Companion, which makes me look at anything carefully three times over, right there. The staff who vet the archetypes that make it onto the PRD don't even see this stuff before it goes to print. And I don't think they bother reading it afterwards, either, to see if they need to FAQ (read: nerf) anything. So that leaves it up to the GM.

And I'm looking at Mighty Heralds, with two bonus feats and no apparent trade-off, with dark suspicion. Personally, I think that should be your benefit right there. Or to put it another way: I think you should be giggling hysterically at all that you got, and not trying for more.

But I might still allow a second domain, in exchange for the lower BAB & hit die.

Um, no one seems to have blinked at the Dex to damage. Why?

I didn't think that something like Bleeding Attack belonged here.

Another minor note: I couldn't read the capstone ability, because of the hideous word wrap. I'd put the cool graphic on the far left or right, and wrap the text on one side only.

However, for my main reaction: I liked the idea of an Arcane Trickster as a full (hybrid) class, but was disappointed by not seeing the Arcane Trickster's best features:

<> Ranged Legerdemain
<> Impromptu Sneak Attack
<> Invisible Thief
<> Surprise Spells

<> You do have Tricky Spells (as Sneaky Mage), but not well-worded. It's not clear, for instance, what happens if I pick the ability at 8th or later. Wouldn't it be better to copy Tricky Spells, and specify a minimum of 6th level?

Right now, I'd consider taking this class as my platform for reaching Arcane Trickster, but not as the alternative I'd hoped for.

Well, no, I wasn't, because I still had to add in all those human FCB's and in fact comb through them again.

So let's try this trick again.

Thanks, Ciaran. Ok, folks: Hopefully I'm now ready for a flood of readers for the new race of dogfolk.

Hey, this is my first PEACH (for the rare few unfamiliar with the term, it means "Please Examine And Critique Harshly"), so I might have to hold back my posts. If I seem too reactionary, let me know.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

The following is a class I developed with the help of the Persona 5 video game. The Shadow should technically be named the Trickster (as in the Arcane Trickster), but that's already taken by a certain Mythic Path, so I came up with a name that was lamer but still semi-thematic.

So with that, here's the class in all its almost-finished glory. (I haven't done the level 3-6 spells yet; I'll try to do that for the next rendition, but I want to know if I'm barking up any wrong trees first.)

I'm dotting for a good looksee later, when I have the time. Right now, my attention is riveted on the doc I saw when I clicked on the link -- a DropBox doc, open, no extra clicks needed. I'm new to DropBox: how did you do it?

You said this is a "genuinely good person" who is apparently influential enough to count as a BBEG, but "under mind-affecting magic." So I have some questions I think you need answers to:

<> What will this NPC do after being saved that will be good for the locale/world? (Depending on how influential he is.)

<> Is there a way to sketch this good out as foreshadowing right at the moment of a social victory?

<> Will the PCs see it later?

(In short: I believe the key is to help the players feel great about NOT combating this guy, and contributing in this fashion to the good of their community/world.)

{<> Added: I was posting while you were, Palidian. Can you set up a big payoff for the subjects?}

<> Who affected his mind? Is this a BIGGER-BEG? Can you use the convo with the immediate BBEG to turn the PCs' attention to someone else?

I don't know your players, but mine would not feel cheated if they had to work hard to convince someone to turn from a path of evil -- and succeeded. Especially if they could then blame someone else for the path.

Of course, SheepishEidolon's solution is a classic one. I recall it from Knights of the Old Republic, but I'm sure there's other games out there that feature it. The key is to let the BBEG transport to & from a spot that permits conversation but not attacks in either direction. Since he's setting up a ritual, can you write such a place into his lair by fiat? Alternatively, the BBEG could periodically turn ethereal, but have the means to converse with the Material Plane. Then he'd periodically become enraged -- and have to turn material to make an attack.

The module looks cool! I hope you have an actual Harrow Deck.

Using the website, open the file in question. There is a blue button that says "share". A new window should open up. Click on "create a link".

If you want to use a bunch of human FCB's, then just write them in. Don't make some go look at another document.

Okay, this is a test of the link system.

Now I'm in that folder, looking at my docs. I checked "Dogfolk July 12" and... shoot, I did that before, but now I have to create a link. All right, let's try this again. I've clicked again on "Share," and copied this link.

Now I've opened the doc, and I no longer can click on a "Share" button, but I did copy the url. (I'm pretty sure this doesn't work.)

This is just a test. Had there been a real need to link... Oh wait, there is. But in any case, I hope someone without a Dropbox account lets me know which of the above works. (The frustrating part is that they all work for ME.)

bitter lily wrote:

Sorcerers don't get enough spell slots for this punishment!

Sorcerers get the most spell slots. I'm not replacing a known spell, in a way, I'm adding one for them.

Also, I'm under no illusions that my idea is beneficial. It's meant to show the character descending into madness, until all he can do is think about what sort of being is trapped inside the statue in that void. Of course he'll never now since he has to rip out his own heart and die to free it.

There is no shiny toy for the protagonist at the end of Lovecraft's stories.

I get the non-beneficial part. But if they can't use their last slot or two EXCEPT for a spell they don't want to cast (because they have no interest in the spell that's been reserved), they've lost spell slots. I'd look at what kinds of spells the sorc had to begin with and corrupt those.

I'm just against people being told as a group, "you are not allowed to play this and this" yet one guy asked nicely so he can play this character type the rest of the group were not allowed to play."(add to that the Paladin is one of the strongest martial classes if not the strongest)

You raise a good point. And if others were as restive with their characters, I'd have to talk it over with them. But they've got strong characters they're enjoying. So I don't think it's a prob in this case.

I would agree that Multhune should work, especially with a Chelish connection.

Cheliax first claimed the area that is now Multhune and Nirmathis in 4311 AR. They threw off Chelish rule in 4632 AR and later split in two. One of the few things that Multhune and Nirmathas can agree on is their hatred of Cheliax.

Multhune is focused on building itself into a mighty militarily led imperial state. They are very lawful and that sort of betrayal could certainly work there.

You might want to consider picking up Lands of Conflict given the link to Multhune.

I hope the treatment for your vertigo goes well!

Thanks for the background! (And rec.)

An idea twisted from Arcanum (I believe) for Evocation: you have a series of doorways each in back of a deep, impassable pit. There are three torches, not lit, next to each doorway. The party is to light ONE torch from a distance (using Spark, for instance), and then a drawbridge slides out. The real puzzle is that the doorway leads to a different room in a maze, depending on which torch is lit.

Maybe the link workd for me because I'm logged into my dropbox account.

Do you have the Dropbox app? You can use that to generate a link to the document of your choice. Thats what I do with my homebrew. There could be a way using the website too.

I've got to learn the software, yeah. And I'm not good at learning new software; I kick and scream and cry and whine and look terribly pitiful. In fact, I'll tell you how bad I am at it: I actually have a cell phone, I do, but not the kind that does "apps." I've assumed that you have to have one of them kind in order to use an app! I'll go through the website more thoroughly.