iZOMBIE's page

42 posts. Alias of Tim Gowan.


I got my beautiful book yesterday, and regretfully it was not of the quality i had hoped. the metal clasp on the outside was broken at the hinge and disconnected, and on the actual book the last 100 pages or so had a white paste at the bottom effectively gluing the pages together. The book itself, the case, the handouts in the book and the prints are all beautifully done. While i understand in any given run there are bound to be a few fumbles that slip through the cracks (natural 1's happen), it was quite disappointing that my copy was one of those.

While i have been waiting for bases for some time, and thank you for releasing them, is there any chance these will be offered in bulk? i would prefer to base out all of my pawns so i don't have to swap bases on and off them (hopefully this will increase the longevity of my pawns), but at their listed prices, basing my Bestiary box and RotRL Pawns, it's looking to cost around $180 in bases alone (three times what i paid for the pawn collections).

First i would like to say, i look forward to paizo minis, and the ones previewed thus far look pretty sweet. The problem that i really see with these is not necessarily the randomization (not wild about it though) but the very small pack size. I've read and understand wizkids position on randomization, and think that if you really wanted to sell an abundance of "common" mini's along with the "Rare" mini's a more expensive but larger pack size is what would be in order. Place one rare, a few of the uncommon, and a load of the commons in there. I think this would be more desirable for people who want to practically use the minis rather than simply collect them IF the rarity went something like this:

Common: things you always need a lot of. peasants, goblins, kobolds, skeletons, zombies etc.
Uncommon: things that you usually dont need more than one of, but could use a couple once in a while. also mini's suitable for PCs should fall into this rarity.
Rare: things you will only ever need one of. these are your Dragons, your Retrievers etc.

The problem i ALWAYS had with the wotc minis was that yea you got some cool looking rares, but i always ended up having to trade them away for loads of the common things that i always needed more of. i couldn't tell you how many times i've had to sit down at the table and explain to my players "Ok guys, the orcs and the humans' those are all peasant townsfolk. and i dont have enough goblin minis either, so the goblins, kobolds, will o' wisps, and small fire elementals are all actually goblins. got it?"

I think i speak for most DM's out there that the minis are less for collection and more for practical use. If i knew in the pack, regardless of the value of the rare or how nice the uncommons are, i was getting say 8 random commons all of which i will get alot of use out of then i would be far more inclined to purchase this minis line, even at a much higher price per pack. but as is, this line is one i cannot justify the cost of, and will simply wait to see you selection of singles and order exactly what i want.

I would like to preorder this now, as a player banned from playing goblins (because i did infact set fires, eat babies, kill dogs, steal things of great sentimental importance to other players and turn them into crude killing implements among other wonderful exploits) i would take no greater joy than seeing the "innocent accident charts." Also, goblin babysitter may well be the greatest class ever. I implore Paizo to actually make these hollow promises come true, and expedite them. Samurai and Ninjas are neat, but goblins are GOBLINS, and should be moved to the front of the list. Would absolutely LOVE to read the "meet the iconics" for the goblin babysitter.

James Sutter wrote:
A few years ago I actually wrote a heavy metal song that tells the entire story of the 47 ronin from start to finish

That was pretty bad ass.

you could not use a returning weapon and instead pick up a ring of TK which you can use to retrieve your weapon

u shuld srsly look @ tome of secrets It haz a random quest generator and evrything

http://paizo.com/store/byCompany/c/cubicle7/pathfinderRPG/v5748btpy89n5& ;source=search

(written in this strange dialect specially for the OP.)


Being a big fan of Ptolus i might have a few suggestions for you.

first, try the Brotherhood of Redemption. Not only will they take your bad guys off your hands, they will reward you for your efforts and turn the bad guys into good guys.

second, Find Igor Urnst. He's the commissar of Ptolus and request some kind of jurisdiction (such as someone in the party being deputized).

Third, go directly to the prison and talk to the warden and see if he will take the prisoners off your hands.

Forth, go to one of the Lothian based orders (the knights of the pale are probably your best bet) and turn them over to them.

Fifth, if your LG party cleric happens to be a cleric of Lothian you have the law on your side. The church IS law in Ptolus, and a paladin or priest of Lothian who asks something of a city guard should be able to expect it to get done (provided it's within reason. If you ask a guard to stand at the door of a building and not let anyone in because it's a crime scene and your investigating for the church, he probably would, but if you ask him to go buy you groceries he would not). So if you come tromping out of a crawl through the necropolis or the sewers or some such and take your prisoners to the local guardhouse and your cleric says "I am a cleric of Lothian, book 'em Dano" and gives a statement of the events, your prisoners should be kept there in a holding cell until they can be tried.

All of these might help you with your dilemma. Remember that while the city gaurds are some of the best trained and funded you can find, they are there to maintain order and peace, and protect the common folk. If there isn't an immediate threat, expect a slow response. That being said the city guard is not corrupt' incompetent or evil, and they do not just let evil people go like they are running Arkham, but the wheels of justice are slow. That's put in there because your not playing a neighborhood watch who observe and report then let the guards handle it, you are HEROES and often the situations you find yourselves in is one that requires a heroes measure.

Zalco wrote:

I just bought the Pathfinder core rulebook. I couldn't find any rules about reading and wrinting other than the Linguistics skill.

On what page can I find the rules for reading and writing?

... or do you need the Linguistics skill for you character to be able to read and write?

Page 17 of the core rulebook under intelligence it specifies even with a penalty to int you can still read and speak (and since you can read i think it's safe to assume you can write as well) your racial languages and common unless your int is lower than a 3.

Page 101 under learn a new language it states that when you put a point in linguistics you learn to speak and read a new language. (again safe to assume write it as well)

given these i think it's pretty safe to assume that you can read and write any language you speak, provided your int is 3 or higher.

While not full monk archetypes, there are animal based "stances" taught by the Kusari-Gama faction in the faction guide. Things like Wing of the Crane stance, Pearching Raptor stance and Glsring Basilisk stance. These might be close to what your looking for.

Hobbun wrote:

Well, it does say at the beginning of the Magic Weapons description (3rd paragraph) that the max you can have for any weapon is a +10 bonus, and since +10 is 200,000 GP, I think it’s safe to assume that is the max amount, at least for weapons. Now for wonderous items, the most expensive item is the Mirror of Life Trapping, at 200,000 GP as well. Although there is no specific line for wonderous items that states 200,000 must be the max.

Here is the line from the SRD for weapons:

SRD wrote:

A single weapon cannot have a modified bonus enhancement bonus plus special ability bonus equivalents, including those from character abilities and spells) higher than +10.

While i am not inclined to throw fuel on this fire, Staff of Power exceeds the 200,000g "limit" (being priced at 235,000g). I see no reason why if a player really has that much gold weighing them down why they would not be able to use it to craft the most expensive item they can afford. Typically this is a hindrance to the character as it would be far more cost effective and better at rounding out the character to spread their wealth around over many powerful items instead of one SUPERPOWERED item. While stated Paizo clearly does not intend on stat bonuses to exceed +6 on standard items, it is up to each DM to decide what kind of magic items are and are not present in the campaign.

Personally I am a big fan of customized magic items. Playing for as long as i have finding a +2 flaming longsword just isn't all that interesting anymore unless there is some lore reason or character reason as to why THIS sword would be anything other than some place holder for the next sword i find. Look at how your PCs play and tailor something "special" to them. You say your going on a long break and want to do a big finisher and leave them wanting more with a cliffhanger, no reason you cant entice them with some magic items as well. Finish off the arc by giving them something neat and interesting and unique they are gonna think about during the time off and be excited to come back and use.

Here's an encounter that is both troubling and difficult:

The setup: people have been kidnapped from town and off the nearby roads, the PC's are sent to investigate. They find out that they people are being kidnapped for some bizarre ritual (you choice) and the location where they are being help. populate the dungeon as you see fit. the BBEG is the meat of this

an LE Hungry Ghost Monk who is at least 7th level or higher, in a room which is filled with prisoners shackled to the wall. The monk will even bargain with the PC's offering them SOME of the villagers if they leave, but he gets to keep the rest for whatever cruel intention you give him (in my scenario he's using them as sacrifices to attain the half fiend template). When the PC's engage him in combat, he sticks close to the walls, and will dump his last attack or two of his flurry of blows into the helpless chained prisoners, healing him as they die so he can continue to punish the party, then five foot step into range of more prisoners. The longer the PC's fight with the monk the more villagers he kills while still smashing on the melee in the group. If the party doesn't have great damage and high bonuses to hit (the monk should have a pretty good AC, he is a monk after all) then the party may very well end up losing more villagers than if they had simply taken the ones offered to them and left.

Andro wrote:

So, short story shorter, is there a feat or a Rogue talent that'd allow multiclass Rogue character to count at least some of his non-Rogue levels towards sneak attack?

(Example: Rogue3/Fighter2 with 3D6 sneak damage)

My search's been futile so far :)

There are a number of feats that allow rogue and other class abilities to stack in complete adventurer, however they 3.5 and not pathfinder.

Bertious wrote:

I've been playing around with druid builds and came up with this somewhat ammusing monster of a druid. As far as i can tell it's allowed by the rules but there are people here that understand these things far better than me.

I've not bothered with skills and such as those are fine (apart from one on my companion which may or may not be allowed)

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

Some of my choices may seem odd like the...

A few points to note.

first, druids are not proficient with great axes and you would either have to take the penalty or burn the feat to be so.

Second. you could not be in possession of anything you wanted to use in form at the time you wild shape. (page 212, when you polymorph everything in your possession is melded into your body)

Third, the rules are not clear on the subject of armor and weapons in wild shape forms. i would consult your DM to see if he would allow your armor and weapon proficiencies to carry over into wild shape. If not your armor and weapon would incur a penalties.

If a DM would allow you this, and you took another feat to be proficient with the weapon. yes you could do this, but it take a solid 4 rounds before you can enter combat.

first round: move action retrieve an item (armor)
free action to drop armor
move action to retrieve an item (weapon)
free action to drop the weapon

round 2, standard action wild shape
move action pick up armor

round 3, move action to put on armor
move action to pick up weapon

round 4 begin actually doing combat

I too am supremely disappointed in the playtest material. From what i initially heard about the Words of Power system was it would allow you to bend reality to your whim by creating your own spells on the fly in an easy to use highly customizable system. unfortunately this is not what we got. i would prefer the system to work something like this.

target words: as is, but as Ravenot suggested, on a sliding scale. just line, cone, burst, personal, touch, ranged touch, spread, cylinder

Duration words: point cost for instantaneous, round per level, minutes per level, hours per level, concentration, etc.

effect words: to be simplified. base words for things like energy types and effects, with a sliding cost scale to increase things like dice codes and dice caps, instead of 5 words for the same effect at different levels.

Condition words: take the secondary effects away from the words themselves and make them words of their own so that can be tacked on or left out as desired

then have most of the words be unbiased for levels. most words obtainable at level one (though this would of course be limited by words known) with the exception of powerful words that would be unavailable because they cost more than your level would allow (like resurrecting the dead or similar powerful effects) and have them slide in cost to be more or less powerful. so you could easily memorize their costs and make spells up as you go, giving possibilities for very creative and interesting spells.

"i could rain down a storm of meteors to deal a wide spread fire damage to lots of opponents, or instead i could fire a ray that does less damage to one enemy and explodes on contact into summoned fire elementals"

"My party is in trouble, time to get creative, i burn my highest level spell to heal the party in a spread around me, and erect a wall between us and our aggressors to give a small reprieve from our enemies"

"OH NO! the enemy necromancer just used a huge burst to raise all the villagers corpses into undead, AND BUFFED THEM! RUN AWAY!"

I would really like to see a family of words that effect or modify other words.

example: (Persistent) all effects of the spell remain in effect for 1 round per level

creating the ability for spells like:
Large Blast {persistent} fire blast
this would allow the creation of a field of dangerous area (like a pool of lava, an electrical field, a blizzard or acid rain) rather than all the spells simply being clones of currently existing spells.

this would make word choice in higher level spells more of a decision rather than simply picking the word combination that crams in the most damage, as it takes up one of the limited word slots available in the spell.

Scott_UAT wrote:

The Advanced Players Guide doesn't specify the damage type Touch of Corruption does. However, it says "an antipaladin surrounds his hand with a fiendish flame, causing terrible wounds to open on those he touches".

Does that mean it's fire damage or just strait damage? (It just says he deals 1d6 points of damage)

It does not specify the damage type, but being as it damages living creatures and heals undead it seems safe to assume it is negative energy.

The Oriental Adventures (3rd edition) book has black eggs as a mundane item.

I actually liked the summoner class as it was. The Eidolon change cleared some things up, and it didn't change the class too much. The SLA nerf on the other hand robs me of all desire to play this class. I would be happy with the ability to only use one of them at a time to maintain balance, but taking away the longer duration means at lower levels my summoner will have to chain summon just to keep some monsters on the field of battle most of the time and slowing them down to a full round action means the summoner has to just stand there and summon instead of at least being able move with the party. also it makes the SLA inferior to simply casting the spell since those can be affected by metamagic rods, and makes the summoner less likely to use the spells which enhance the party, and only use the SLA when they are burnt out of spells.

while familiar death is not a good thing for witches, it is also not an unavoidable occurrence. just keep your familiar hidden safely in your backpack. comparing it to the summoners Eidolon is unfair as they have different roles. The Eidolon is the primary offensive ability of the summoner, the witches familiar is more like a spellbook.

Malagfein wrote:

Well, Jason clarified the Summoner's Summon Monster Ability here.

Looks like as long as you use it as a Summon Monster I, you can take the feat, and a Summoner with a Cha. of 16 could burn through all his Summon Monster uses in 3 rounds (1 quickened Summon Monster I + 1 higher level Summon Monster/round).
Potential to field up to 18 creatures (15 potentially from Summon Monster III, 3 from Summon Monster I) in the span of 18 seconds, now that is impressive.

It seems it would indeed be POSSIBLE, though i wouldn't suggest it. If you have a daily number of uses of your SLA is getting that extra dire rat or fire beetle out on the field worth burning one of your uses when you have access to summon monster V, and could summon something much more powerful with the daily uses? Also, what exactly will a summoned monster from the rank 1 do in a level 10 encounter? I guess it would be novel if you wanted to see how many tokens you can put on the board as fast as possible, but aside from creating a small zoo in under 20 seconds i don't see it being a worthwhile feat or use of the summon monster SLA.

Velderan wrote:
Itsgottabeodin wrote:

Here is my heretical proposition for the Summoner:

Why not consider CON as the casting stat?
A little bit of fluff change and your power comes from the bond that you share with your Eidolon. You are using your very body & soul to call it from the beyond, etc. etc.

And add to the end of Life Link (Su): Due to the link that you share with your Eidolon, you gain only 1/2 your CON bonus in extra hitpoints for each level in Summoner that you posses.

This has the added benefit of keeping the iconic as a suitable race for the summoner (I'm assuming he is a gnome based on the picture).
I know it has never been done before. But why not?

This is definitely a cool idea. I'm afraid it could make con too powerful a stat, but it also makes a lot of sense.

While it would make con the be all end all stat for summoners, Con is also the most likely stat to be drained from bleeds, poisons and spells. so while it would be REALLY good, it would also be a stat prone to being attacked, which could be balanced. cool concept, but i like int more.

Velderan wrote:

Overall, I have to say, I've really liked the new classes thus far. This thread shouldn't read as an indictment of the new classes, and I'm aware it's easier to make a gripe thread than it is to make a congratulatory thread.

That being said, I don't think the right ability scores are being used for either the summoner or the Witch.

In the summoner's case, I don't think Charisma makes sense. If a summoner is shaping his eidolon out of the raw soup of creation, or even if he's simply altering an existing creature, it seems that he would be more about comprehending the creature's anatomy than he would be about using force of personality to meet his ends. More importantly, it's very mechanically boring. The game already has 2 partial casters and 1 full caster using charisma, and one of them has the exact same progression of spells/day and spells/known as the summoner. It feels a bit repetitive. Out of the published 11 classes, only 1 uses int mod for casting, and, unlike wisdom or charisma, int doesn't yet have a partial caster (and if you were going to make one, this'd probably be it).

The witch actually seems worse off. Her source of power is supposed to be a 'pact with an otherworldly power'. That bargaining sounds like charisma far more than it does int. The character is bargaining, which deals with force of personality. On the other hand, the character communes with her familiar, which sounds like it deals with focus and meditation more than it does memorization or knowledge (after all, it's the familiar's knowledge, not the witch's, that determines her spells). This could mean wisdom. It seems like int is the only not-viable casting stat for the witch. Mechanically, this isn't as boring as the summoner, since int isn't overused, but it's worth thinking about. Hell, I wouldnt' even mind seeing a spontaneous wisdom caster.

In my own game, I'm already going to be houseruling that my summoner can play int, as cha makes no sense with his concept. Has anyone else seen this problem? Does...

I would agree that int is a more suitable stat as your supposed to be progressing by learning about and understanding you Eidolon. It isn't a slave, it isn't a thrall, it is a sentient WILLING being that is binding to the summoner as the summoner continues to learn about it.

as per ability... Aasimar are the children of angels (which are outsiders) and mortals. I would assume it's POSSIBLE.

That being said, this thread is so wrong in oh so many ways...

delabarre wrote:

Jason, can you verify that it is your intention that, by making offensive hexes "supernatural abilities", they are supposed to bypass Spell Resistance, per the rule on p. 220?

I'm not arguing the point, I just wonder whether it was a minor error not making these spell-like abilities.

I believe since the target gets a save, and if a touch they get an attack of op, it was intended to bypass spell resistance.

Mad Alchemist wrote:

I saw that Transmogrify is being worked on as a way of restatting your eidolon. I think a spell like the one below could also be usefull. This could let you temporally add gills and swim for an aquatic scout. Or add immunity vs an element when it is needed most. I think the drawbacks in casting I gave would still leave it as not too powerfull while still giving a bit more noncombat utility. Visually I see the summoner touching the eidolons rune duringthe casting time while the new wings or tentacles grow. This shifting also lets the enhenced difficukty with casting make sense. Tell me what you think.

Enhance Eidolon

School transmutation; Level summoner 2
Casting Time 1 round
Components V, S
Range touch
Target summoner’s eidolon
Duration 1 min/Lvl
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no

The summoner may temporarily add evolutions costing up to 1 evolution point plus 1 for every 4 caster levels to his eidolon. Any evolutions chosen must be legal.

Special: Any damage taken by the eidolon during the casting time of this spell also adds forces a concentration check.

No thanks. The Eidolon is powerful enough as is, it doesn't need more evolution points. Now perhaps a temporary reconfiguring of 1 point/4 levels might be alright (i.e. my Eidolon has the Flight evolution, but we come to a lake that has some monstrous unhappy thing in it's depths. so i use the spell to temporarily drop it's wings and have it gain the swim and gills evolution) but i think even that could cause balance issues.

personally i like the subtle differences in the classes. they add flavor and that little extra bit of uniqueness.

Sean FitzSimon wrote:
Seraphimpunk wrote:
they get no starting armor proficiency, while the summoner can cast spells in light armor. if the witch got the same allowance, maybe an armored build would be an option. but facing spell failure chances for the rest of the witch's spells... it seems like as poor a choice as an armored wizard.

No, dude, I don't mean that you should just equip armor as a witch- that's a very poor choice. What I mean is that you should take the Arcane Armor Training feat, which requires the proficiency feat. Taking the normal route, leather armor has 10% spell failure, which is negated by the feat (and your swift action). A mithril chain shirt has 10% as well, which is your best option. Grabbing a mithril light shield is a great boon for any witch, since there's no armor check penalty and thus doesn't require proficiency to use effectively.

On the same note, Witches with owl familiars can cast magic vestment on their armor/shield for added protection.

if you progress to the second arcane armor training feat, elven chain begins to look quite nice. also (albeit for more gold) celestial armor is an awesome armor for witches.

Nerioth wrote:
Share Spells wrote:

Share Spells (Ex): The summoner may cast a spell

with a target of “You” on his eidolon (as a spell with
a range of touch) instead of on himself. A summoner
may cast spells on his eidolon even if the spells
normally do not affect creatures of the eidolon’s type
(outsider). Spells cast in this way must come from the
summoner spell list. This ability does not allow the
eidolon to share abilities that are not spells, even if
they function like spells.

The question i find myself asking on this, are there ANY spells that have a target of "YOU" that are dependent on your creature type? I can't find any which leads me to believe it gives you two different abilities in one. the ability to cast self only spells on it, and the ability to cast spells on it which could not normally effect an outsider. If it is not meant to be such, the second sentence would be superfluous as there are no spells which have a target of "YOU" which require you to be of a specific creature type.

Kolokotroni wrote:

You know, that might be a way to finally have a successful reoccuring villian. My big bads always get caught with a dimensional anchor or some such thing, but if the villian runs away the first round but still leaves a piece of himself to fight... interesting. Maybe have an illusionist minion make it look like he polymorphed instead of teleporting away? I like this idea.

As well as minions, people have said a player character with time to prep can burn many of his summon monster daily uses to be devastating... well your BBEG summoner could be given the same opportunity, provided he's set up an early warning system for himself in case would be do-gooders come after him, 2 or 3 of his summons at highest rank means the party faces not only your Eidolon which wont pose a significant threat to a whole party by himself, but a small horde of summoned monsters to back it up. making for a dangerous and difficult encounter for your PC's. And if your BBEG is smart and hides his Eidolon in a hidden room that can only be opened from the inside near the entrance or just outside the entrance, he can not only buff up his Eidolon until it dies before leaving, but can burn out the rest of his summon monster uses for the day in the entry room to leave the party a nice surprise when they go to leave. >=)

Kolokotroni wrote:

You know, that might be a way to finally have a successful reoccuring villian. My big bads always get caught with a dimensional anchor or some such thing, but if the villian runs away the first round but still leaves a piece of himself to fight... interesting. Maybe have an illusionist minion make it look like he polymorphed instead of teleporting away? I like this idea.

As well as minions, people have said a player character with time to prep can burn many of his summon monster dailies to be devastating... well your BBEG summoner could be given the same opportunity, provided he's set up an early warning system for himself in case would be do-gooders come after him, 2 or 3 of his summons at highest rank means the party faces not only your Eidolon which wont pose a significant threat to a whole party by himself, but a small horde of summoned monsters to back it up. making for a dangerous and difficult encounter for your PC's. And if your BBEG is smart and hides his Eidolon in a hidden room that can only be opened from the inside near the entrance or just outside the entrance, he can not only buff up his Eidolon until it dies before leaving, but can burn out the rest of his summon monster uses for the day in the entry room to leave the party a nice surprise when they go to leave. >=)

Draeke Raefel wrote:
Except your summon would be dead. A lot of people are missing the distance penalties for your Eidolon. Starting at 100 ft. If your Eidolon is greater than 100ft from you it's max hp are reduced to 50%. It gets worse from there to the point where it is auto dismissed.

At 8th level the farthest you could get is 720 feet, which would indeed half your Eidolon's health, but health isn't really the issue if you expect it to be dismissed or die. It *should* be able to kill a surprised king before dieing assuming the king doesn't have awesome stats, wearing full arms and armor with a cadre of guards right outside the door. While not all kings will grant a private meeting with an unarmed, unarmored, reagentless cleric... one or two might. just an interesting character concept i've been thinking about. Might put my party up against a similar summoner, who will simply disappear to leave behind his Eidolon when the party shows up. If the party kills it... oh well. the summoner runs off and continues to be nefarious elsewhere and can be a reoccurring villain in my story.

A summoner who is willing to do dirty deeds for money and isn't above murder for hire could make a VERY interesting assassin.

lets say for example:

A disgruntled prince decides it's time to retire the king, so he can come to power, and puts out a hit to his less than reputable contacts. A summoner accepts the job.
the level 8 ne'er-do-good summoner finds a shed/barn/vacanthouse etc. near the castle and summons his oh so unfriendly beast. puts on a peasants hat or clerics hood to cover his rune (unless he's a flamboyant assassin and wants to bear his crest to the guards) then goes to the castle by himself with no armor, weapons, or spell components with urgent news for the king stating he has information on an attempt on his life, and also knows the name of the assassin to boot! and ask for compensation for such knowledge from the king beforehand (making a little extra profit is always a plus. if he gives it awesome, if not all the same). When the king asks the identity of the assassin the crafty summoner smiles and simply says "I am the assassin." Then uses his transposition ability to transport safely out, and transports in his big mean pet who shreds the king then the summoner dismisses it. The summoner walks calmly out of the barn as if nothing happened and goes to find the prince for payment.

I think the ability to switch places with your hidden meanie might make for very interesting role playing opportunities. A la "actually this isnt a pepsi, it's a pepsi TWIST! and I'm not really a squichy caster... im a mass of angry teeth and claws and horrible horrible death."

eerongal wrote:

...I wanna play the eidolon!

Anyone else with me?

This "build your own monster" concept of the thing is just so awesome, and the abilities available for "purchase" are so cool, i'd rather just play the eidolon and not even worry about the summoner!

I mean, heck, my first impression looking at it, the eidolon on its own merits could create a fairly solid character/monster, let alone with a magic user to back it up.

While it's a big beefy monster, you don't want you actual PC subject to BANISH. also at low levels the summoner is, IMHO anyhow, what balances the class, because he's gonna be the target. Your summoned beast might be big and mean, but when the BBEG wizard throws a scorching ray right past your buddy and nails you in the face you lose.

Kolokotroni wrote:

I wouldnt have a problem with not being able to use magic armor, but magic weapons is a different story. Against some enemies you need either magic weapons or alignment/special material weapons or you are basically doing nothing. Everyone runs this risk in a surprise encounter, but if you are expecting it (going werewolf hunting or something) there should be a way for you to equip your eidolon for it.

I agree that magic gear can be a serious concern here, and i would rather see it limited or eliminated in favor of keeping the eidolon as it is. Its hard to eliminate the coolness factor of allowing it armor and weapons, but from a balance standpoint i would rather see it get only a single magic item slot of either neck, head, cloak or belt, and everything else has to come from physical evolutions (natural armor, or attack enhancements).

If you take the magic attacks evolution you can sheath your sword and go to natural weapons to overcome DR.

That being said while i could min-max out an Eidelon to go toe to toe with a fighter, i could also take a druid into wizard, then prestige class into mystic thurge and my animal companion will wreck the same Eidelon at level 10. I feel the class is fairly weak without the Eidelon, and needs it.

I would agree that the Eidolons seem at least comparable to a fighter in many regards, and being able to build them instead of an offensive tool into a defensive tool, making a brick similar to a fighter gives the party a returning cannonfauder tank that could go shoulder to shoulder with your parties fighter. While it gives the party another option to bringing a big burly fighter to stand in the front and take punishment for them, it also steals more than a little of the fighter class's thunder.

that being said, i believe (though i could be wrong) that your Eidolon's AC is too high. Natural armor gives an armor bonus, as does it's armor. armor bonuses do not stack (see page 149 of the core rulebook)

[EDIT]: i am indeed wrong (see page 292 of the Beastiary) in that natural armor AND armor worn give Independent bonuses to AC and do stack.

A question on Eidolons, if an Eidolon is carrying any gear (weapons, armor etc.) when it is returned to it's home plane (dismissed or otherwise) does the gear go with it, and reappear with it on summoning, or does it fall to the ground?

Edit: i see a similar question has already been asked, but not answered.

Well my sincerest apologies to Charles Evans 25, and the other posters in this thread. My original post was out of context and misinformed.

Paul Watson wrote:

The Campaign Setting was written for 3.5. It predates the PFRPG by a year or more.

Was it really? my book has a publication date on it of 2009. That would explain the presence of the superfluous proficiency. So in an indirect way, i guess i've found the answer to my question. thank you.

Charles Evans 25 wrote:

Hello iZOMBIE, welcome to the Paizo boards.

Just to point out that in September 2008, when I first posted on this thread, the Campaign Setting book was operating in conjunction with the 3.5 D&D rules, under which clerics were not automatically proficient with their deity's favourite weapon, and the cleric domains were considerably weaker (especially with regard to the granted abilities of many of them).
The 3.5 Paladin class wasn't much to be excited about, either.

I assume that at some point the Holy Warrior alternate class will be updated to PFRPG rules, not least due to the partial redundancy of some of the features of it now...

My mistake, i did not look closely enough on the post date and misread the post date as September 2009.

As per the holy warrior alternate build it has been added to PFRPG in the Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting book, and indeed does still contain the redundant proficiency (Which was the reason i came to the boards in the first place, to see if there was a reason for the superfluous proficiency).

Charles Evans 25 wrote:

The Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting introduces a number of alternate class abilities, spells, feats, equipment, and prestige classes. I have already noticed some discussion of the alternate Cleric class ability 'Holy Warrior' on another thread. As a fire starter, here it is:

Holy Warrior (Ex) wrote:

A cleric with this ability is proficient with her deity's favored weapon. In addition, her base attack bonus as a cleric equals her cleric level, and her cleric Hit Die becomes a d10.

Taking the above ability requires a cleric to give up both her domains, including her domain powers.

I would like to point out this:

Pathfinder Core Rulebook wrote:
Weapon And Armor Proficiency: Clerics are proficient with all simple weapons, light armor, medium armor and shields (Except tower shields). Clerics are also proficient with the favored weapon of their deity.

The proficiency is ENTIRELY redundant since a cleric is automatically proficient with his or her deity's favored weapon as a basic feature of the class...

I think people are too up in arms about this variant rule. What it breaks down to is:
1) a weapon proficiency already granted by your class
2) an average of +1 hit point/level
3) a better BAB
at the cost of 1 spell/day, 2 domain abilities and 2 level 8 domain abilities (4 domain abilities total)

Seems a fairly balanced trade to me comparing the variant cleric to other similar clerics.

a side by side of paladins to "Holy Warrior" clerics
identical BAB
identical saves (although paladins gain divine grace at level 2 which pushes their saves much higher than the cleric)
paladins gain the ability to lay on hands and spontaneously heal (although less than the clerics ability to heal) but can also remove a number of ailments while healing with appropriate mercies, ailments a cleric must memorized spells to remove and to use must sacrifice a healing spell to remove.
Clerics can channel energy to area of effect healing (or damage undead)
Paladins have divine bond, putting the paladin at the head of the party in terms of weapon power. when the party has +1 weapons, his will be +2, when the party has +2 weapons, his will be +4 etc.
paladins get smiting which deals a fair amount of damage in a pinch
paladins also get auras giving them things such as immunity to charm, the ability to impart smite evil on everyone in the party etc.

I would not say this variant rule diminishes paladins at all. The variant is a good option for players who want to heal but be on the front lines, and are in parties where the majority of the damage will be contained to the martial players of the party, but it is certainly NOT the end-all be-all rule that every cleric and their mom must take that people are making it out to be. As an avid player of both the cleric and paladin classes, i find while this makes the classes similar (but still very different), One does not trump the other, and one does not make the other any less desirable in the party.