bycot's page

Alchemist: Preservationist
Letting Alchemists do summons in combat really changes up their combat options and gives a great "pokemon" feel to the class.

Inquisitor: Monster Tactician
I consider this a better version of the Summoner because this archetype is actually designed to "summon" rather than just be a glorified pet class.

Bard: Arcane Healer
Gives a fairly decent arcane option for a healer. Not the best archetype, but I like the idea and it could be expanded/improved.

Warpriest: Sacred Fist
I absolutely LOVE how this archetype works. Best of the cleric, best of the monk, and everything just works so well together without being overpowered. This is really a great archetype and it'd be a shame to lose it in the change over to 2E.

Summoner: Studied Summoner
Okay, this is a shameless plug for my own Archetype for the Summoner. Basically I've always loved the "concept" of the Summoner but hated it's implementation. A classing about Summoning that, if played correctly, doesn't actually Summon much. A Spell-Like Ability that, again if played correctly, can't actually be used. Hence why I designed the Studied Summoner. It patches the more annoying features of summoning while introducing new options for it that makes the option of summoning more 'tactical.'

sigh

Please don't do this thing. :(

Now this, this is a fair point. I sincerely apologize for drudging up the thread. It was legitimately not my intention to ruffle any feathers and I'm sorry for any trouble I caused. May everyone have a good day/night and may we all roll 20's.

Am I the only one reading the Campaign Clarified piece as intended for actual physical weapons only?

Any mention of "Two-Weapon Fighting" uses that same verbiage, same way they refer to "using Flurry of Blows."

In the case of the campaign clarification here's how it reads.

"You do not gain this benefit while fighting with two weapons or using flurry of blows, or any time another hand is otherwise occupied."

So they refer to "Fighting with two weapons" rather that using "Two-Weapon Fighting" as it is usually referred to everywhere else.

Now lets read the Magus section.

"This functions much like two-weapon fighting, but the off-hand weapon is a spell that is being cast."

So it functions like two-weapon fighting, but never states that it is two-weapon fighting. This is further clarified with the Mind-Blade Archetype.

"When using two-weapon fighting with two psychic weapons or a psychic double weapon, the mindblade can use her spell combat ability as though she had a hand free."

So normally Magus can't use TWF with Spell Combat because their hand is occupied, but this archetype specifically allows Spell Combat to be used with TWF and both hands occupied. So obviously while it functions like TWF, it's obviously not the same as the class feature can stack with TWF with the right archetype.

Honestly if GMs are ruling that Spell Combat can't be used with Fencing Grace I think they're being a bit overly strict as based on the rule readings I think it's obvious that the feat and class feature were intended to stack.

Who do I need to contact to get my Pathfinder Society Accounts combined? A long time ago I played 1 module under the PFS number 28863 -1 and I've recently got back into playing under PFS number 72911-1 (It's the same character for both numbers).