joeyfixit's page

1,230 posts. Alias of Peter Heleva.


1 to 50 of 1,230 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Dot for more feedback

Cevah wrote:

First off, all witch familiars can share with each other anyway. It is one of the ways to learn new spells.

What I meant was that I wasn't going to make them go through the motions and that it would be taken for granted that the spells are pooled by the trio and I wanted to encourage them to work as a team as of creation.

Color Spray isn't a Witch Spell. Even with Patrons. Good suggestion though.

Cevah wrote:

My recommendation is to have Green #1 be the party face. That way, not being the center of attention in combat won't be so important. For Green #2, party leader is a good choice. Having them choose what path the party chooses gives them a near exclusive role that gives them center stage for a time. The experienced players will shine in combat, and will often have good ideas for the party.

This is an excellent suggestion, and it fits with the progress made; Green 2 was the first to have solid, non-Pathfinder related ideas about who her character is and where she lives, so essentially called dibs on where the campaign starts, which is in her home. The other two witches live with her like. Ya know, like the Golden Girls.

I'm running a homebrew campaign (1st Edition) for my wife and some friends, mostly ladies. 3/4 of the group are playing Witches, the remaining player is playing an Occultist. Half of the group is very green when it comes to Pathfinder and gaming in general. One of the ladies has played PF once but is a regular gamer and seems to know her stuff, and the gentleman is a regular PF player.


Green 1 is a half-elf, has a Bat familiar, took Disguise Hex and EH: Murksight (with the intention of leaning on Obscuring Mist). Initially wanted to be all about potions but couldn't be persuaded to play an alchemist once the Coven theme started catching steam. Picked Obscuring Mist and Ear Piercing Scream. Seems like the face.

Green 2 (totally new to any gaming) is a gnome, took a Fox familiar, Improved Initiative (option overload happened when picking a feat and I recommended it) and the Flight Hex. Picked Bungle and Hypnotism. Wants to be very nature-themed but couldn't be persuaded to play a Druid once the Coven theme started catching on. I talked her out of picking Nature's Path in favor of the Child of Nature trait. Seems like the heart of the group.

Experienced Gamer New to Pathfinder is a Half-Orc, has a Pig Familiar, picked Evil Eye and the Tusk Feat (for flavor). Relatively high Strength/Con for a Witch, picked CLW and Mage Armor. She def built her character like the witch version of a Tank, but Player 4 was still on the fence during final character creation sesh (which Player 4 did not attend).

Player 4 has indicated to me that he's playing an Occultist with a Tanky/Martial build, possibly a half-orc, flavoring the character as a the child of a witch who wants to distance herself from the magic world and develops magic powers despite herself. It's possible that before we begin EGN may relax some of the tankiness of her build as a result.

Training Wheels: The two greenest players have now had two character building sessions with me(and one is married to the DM). During session 2 my wife asked "how much stuff can I buy?" I shrugged, reminded her she had a hundred gold and pointed to Ultimate Equipment. When she said, "Oh, just as much as I can afford and carry?" I gave her a kiss because I felt she had leveled up in taking agency over her character. Some downtime at work this week, so I'm currently in the process of printing up descriptions for all their spells and stats for Familiars, as well as descriptions of stuff like Fascinated and the Scent ability. Also, since the group is going to be traveling and acting as an informal coven, I ruled that all the familiars will pretty much share all the spells of the group (Excluding Occultist, who P4 wants to start rping as if she's not aware she's doing magic). I may also rule that Coven members can swap Familiar bonuses to give the face the Diplo bonus and the Flyer the flying bonus.

Question 1

Has anybody ever ran or played a (mostly) all-witch campaign? Can you tell me about unanticipated problems that crop up with a caster-heavy groups?

Question 2

I require advice running a group with mixed experience levels. I easily foresee a situation where everybody is digging social encounters/roleplay, and then when an encounter starts my experience gamers take over, start making "suggestions", and my green players fall asleep. Alternatively I could scale back the amount of combat for the sake of the green players, at which point players 4 and maybe 3 potentially get frustrated. And at some point every campaign hits a session that slogs, like a boss battle that takes a few sessions to get through. If my green players are on the bench or being puppeteered for one or two sessions the group will almost certainly dissolve.

I should mention that this is total homebrew sandbox, so I therefore have a lot of flexibility to provide as enjoyable an experience as possible. This campaign got started when Green 2 casually mentioned that she had never participated in a TRPG and really wanted to. Certainly it helps that we're workshopping the party dynamic and shared backstory before play actually begins.



1) A large creature wielding a medium Greataxe takes no penalty to attack rolls, correct? He simply applies the medium weapon damage. And he can use the thing one handed.

2) A half orc Brute Vigilante, while Hulked up, and who possess the Sizing Equipment talent, swings his Medium sized +1 Greataxe. He takes a -1 to his attack roll, like it says in the talent, and the Greataxe hits like a Large Greataxe (3d6). Does he need both hands on the medium Greataxe to accomplish this?

Nothing in the talent says anything about actually wielding it like it were sized for the Brute in his large form. It says, "wielding a magic weapon properly sized for his social identity deals damage as if it were a magic weapon properly sized for his vigilante identity, but it imposes a –1 penalty on attack rolls." Now, at 6th level the "weapons and armor work in all ways (including damage dice) as if they were of the vigilante's new size", implying that the weapons have actually biggified, as per Enlarge Person, further implying that the Greataxe now requires two hands.

What about level 2-5? As I read it you have the potential for a Ranger/Brute swinging double Greataxes with TWF.

Picture a Ranger 2/Brute 2. This character can almost certainly well afford two +1 Greataxes. If he's swinging with both, and manages to hit with two attacks (not unreasonable considering his BAB is effectively 4), he's pumping out 6d6+2 plus 2xStrength in a round where he hasn't scored a crit, and without the benefit of Enlarge Person.

Is this right? Has this been errata'd?

Goddity wrote:
Change the name from reflex saves to reaction checks or something. "Saves" makes it sound like you're trying to protect yourself from something.

Pretty sure the OP's intent was to cut down on paperwork. Renaming initiative as "Reaction" doesn't seem to accomplish that.

Wyrd_Wik wrote:

Things that I've found mostly GMing over twenty years in no particular order:

1. Soundtracks - music can be a great tool not only for combat but to help build scenes (e.g. royal feast, holy temple etc.)

2. I certainly use voices and posture, gesture quite a bit for NPCs of note. My groups seem to enjoy it but I am also mindful of not going that route for every single NPC and still mostly focusing on what the players want out of the interaction rather than just me taking up all the time being a bit silly.

3. Narrative, description - avoid detailing combats as you take 30 hp or deal 10 damage. Embellish with some narrative touches (e.g. you deliver a reeling blow to the ogre, the thief's scimiatar cuts deeply into your flank for 10 hp)

4. Depends on your group but any campaign really depends on motivating the PCs and giving them something to care about (e.g. their hometown, building a pirate fleet). If the players are just grinding their way through a dungeon with no real reason to save for gaining XP any drama is likely to fall flat because there are no stakes.

I'm sure there's others but have to get going.

I find soundtracks to be very distracting overall. First of all there's the issue of setting them up, which detracts from gameplay; at their best they have a tendency to distance you emotionally from whatever's happening in the game. Life doesn't have a soundtrack, after all.

Life does, however, have sound effects. Soundscapes of, say, crickets and frogs and occasional nightbird noises can add to a "you-are-there" feel of a night encounter in a forest or swamp. Same for drippy cave noises for an underground/underdark campaign. Ocean waves help as well, if your encounter takes place near a beach or at sea. Background noises of human civilization are more likely to distract, though.

The Mesmerist is pushing pretty heavy to be interpreted as the go-to build for a turn-of-the-century stage magician/Harry Houdini/stage hypnotist type.

So, what's the status of Stage Magic in Golarion, given that actual magic is fairly common? First and second level wands, potions, oils, etc are available at Ye Olde Magick Shoppe at seemingly every major city, capable of performing wonders that would have absolutely floored audiences of 19th century Europe/America. Heck, a working wand of CLW (nearly every low-level group of Pathfinders has one) would probably net James Randi's One Million Dollar Paranormal challenge.

So, if I build an actual stage magician Mesmerist/Escapist, complete with top hat, tux, and pigeons... would anyone care? Would such a person get famous? Would it even be interesting for a guy to dangle in a public square and slip free of his straight jacket or chains, when sorcerers are walking around leveling villages with fireballs and straight-up teleporting?

Bluff Skill wrote:

You can also use Bluff to feint in combat, causing your opponent to be denied his Dexterity bonus to his AC against your next attack. The DC of this check is equal to 10 + your opponent’s base attack bonus + your opponent’s Wisdom modifier. If your opponent is trained in Sense Motive, the DC is instead equal to 10 + your opponent’s Sense Motive bonus, if higher.


Feinting in Combat wrote:

Feinting is a standard action. To feint, make a Bluff skill check. The DC of this check is equal to 10 + your opponent's base attack bonus + your opponent's Wisdom modifier. If your opponent is trained in Sense Motive, the DC is instead equal to 10 + your opponent's Sense Motive bonus, if higher. If successful, the next melee attack you make against the target does not allow him to use his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). This attack must be made on or before your next turn.

So, at what range can you do this? Currently I'm working on a build with a Mesmerist that feints with a whip, which would typically be at a range of about ten feet. But there's nothing in the rules that says that you can't feint with a ranged weapon; indeed, I haven't found anything that says that your opponent even has to see you (while common sense dictates that feinting wouldn't be required, advanced uses of feint lose the opponent's Dex bonus for a whole turn).

Is there any reason why the crack of a whip could't spook somebody at a pace of fifteen or thirty or even fifty feet? A gunslinger with a whip and improved feint could be a deadly combo.

Is there an FAQ on this?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aido_Hwedo wrote:
By the way why is my mount only level 2 when my cavalier's effective druid level is equal to his class level and the paladin's divine bond says its effective druid level is equal to its class level wouldn't my mount be level 6 with 5 levels of paladin and 1 of cavalier?

I would say that the mount gets leveled up to your full levels - as soon as you reach 5 levels of Paladin. Until then you're stuck with a mount that's effectively first level, unless you take the Boon Companion feat. The feat explicitly says Animal Companions, but I'd allow it. Check with your GM.

Later, when that feat is useless, you have the option of retraining that feat, if you want.

Certain animals have "Special Qualities" and abilities that never get listed on the Beast Shape series. Some examples include Swallow Whole, an Ostrich's Crouch ability, and a Wolverine's rage.

Does the Druid never get access to these? Common sense goes both ways on this: a Wolverine's rage seems like a temperamental quality totally inherent to being a Wolverine, and it would be OP to give a druid access to Barbarian's Rage, even in a limited way.

On the other hand the Ostrich's ability to hide seems to rely more on what it looks like - why couldn't a druid do this in an Ostrich body? Likewise, a Tiger Fish's Interlocking Bite has to do with the shape of its mouth, which the druid has presumably inherited.

Is there an FAQ on this?



An Emu's kicks are secondary attacks. A Battle Emu's kicks are not.

Is an Emu Wildshaped Druid (with a BAB +3) considered combat-trained?

Matthew Downie wrote:

Page 212:

"If a polymorph spell is cast on a creature that is smaller than Small or larger than Medium, first adjust its ability scores to one of these two sizes using the following table before applying the bonuses granted by the polymorph spell."
It looks like if you're Small, then you just apply the ability score changes from Beast Shape.

Emphasis mine.

This thread was generated by me misreading that rule. Thanks for the clarification.

I'm about to write up wild shape statblocks for my Gnome Druid 4.

Obviously if I shift into Medium size I will no longer benefit from +1 size bonus on attacks and AC. Do I also need to recalculate Dex? Like, take a -2 dex bonus to size as if I used Enlarge Person?

Does a medium Druid get the bonus to AC and attacks when shaping into a small critter?

Renegadeshepherd wrote:
I like druid as well but prior to shape shifting it can be hard on newer players

How so? Remember, we're talking about solo campaigning. Obviously the GM is going to have some kid gloves on until he's sure that the player has his sea legs. Druid gives a built-in tank with an AC and a lot of options for melee. Little lighter on ranged, but you don't really want that with a solo adventure, I think.


Mesmerists have good skills and all the face skills and magician skills (Escape Artist, Sleight of Hand), and lots of great face/spy spells, such as Disguise Self, Hypnotism, Undetectable Alignment.

Hypnotic Stare - drops opponent Will save as a swift action. No save, and opponent won't remember that it happened.

Hypnotism - out of combat creatures suffer a -2 to their will save. If they fail they don't remember being hypnotized. The drawback is that it's low-level only.

I'm currently working on a Mesmerist build with Improved Feint at level one. Mesmerists are proficient with whips, so I'm using the whip to feint at range, and then shoot them with a hand crossbow.

joeyfixit wrote:

Question: will a mind thrust (and other psychic attack spells) work through walls? GM ruled that since there was nothing in the spell to indicate otherwise, I'd need line of effect to hit a goblin with a mind thrust. This is irritating when you're Detecting Thoughts through a wooden door and you're unable to zap one with a Mind Thrust once you detect "I'm going to blow them up with a bomb".

I think if you can detect the thoughts of a creature you should be able to target them with Psychic attack spells. My suggestion would be to list the material qualities that psychic spells can penetrate based on detect thoughts/ detect evil. Lead and thick stone etc would block psychic attack spells. To my mind this fits the flavor and could potentially become on of the neat little draws to the magic system. "Snipe through walls with the power of your mind!"


Davor wrote:

More interesting stuff.

Your Caiman familiar is actually Small sized, so it can serve as a dedicated flanking buddy, even if he is a little squishy. A suit of armor should fix that problem for a long time, though.

Also, this druid is only a little MAD. You could easily survive on:

Str 16
Dex 12
Con 13
Int 10
Wis 14
Cha 10

If you get a race that gives a bonus to either Strength or Wisdom, then things get even better. If you want to be more Casty, and less focused on dealing direct damage, you could opt for better Dexterity and Wisdom. If you go for my FAVORITE race choice atm (Tiefling for the Bite Attack and PERFECT stats), you get +2 Strength, +2 Wisdom, -2 Charisma, which lets you go 14s across the board in Str, Dex, Con, and Wis. Sure, Charisma is dumped, but w/e. You're the blade of the forest, not the tree-hugger.

Oread gets the same stat spread and Acid Resistance 5. Which you can trade in for Nat Armor +1, and nat armor bonuses tend to stack. Also, you can trade in their sorcerer buff for 2 extra rounds on summoned monsters (more flanking buddies).

On the minus side, 20 foot movement speed, and without the dwarf clause.

Why drop your AC when you have a dedicated flanking buddy?

Instead I would have the AC take Precise Strike; you - and your AC - can have sneak attack while flanking at third level. By the way, that's to every attack by the AC. At level 4 a large Ape with reach is hitting at about a +8 with two claws and a bite. If he's flanking that's a +10 and he's doing 2d6+6 (or +9/ 2d6+8 if Power Attacking) on one hit, while you're probably hitting at a +8 for 2d4+3+2d6 with a Scythe.

VRMH wrote:
Considering you can already get cover from your mount by using the Ride skill, I don't think the feat would work.

Why? The mount would never be holding a shield. We're talking about the rider giving cover to the mount.

Duck and Cover wrote:

Benefit: Whenever you are adjacent to an ally who also has this feat, and both of you are required to make a reflex saving throw against a spell or effect, you may take the result of your die roll or that of your ally (your modifiers still apply to the roll, regardless of which result you take). If you take your ally’s result, you are knocked prone (or staggered on your next turn, if you are already prone or cannot be knocked prone). In addition, you receive a +2 cover bonus to your AC against ranged attacks as long as your ally is wielding a shield.

This feat might make sense for a PC that rides a mount, for example a Hunter.

Is a PC considered adjacent to a creature that he has mounted?

Can you be "knocked prone" from being mounted? How does this work? Does the rider choose between being knocked off the mount (and falling prone) or being staggered?

The last line mentions a cover bonus to AC against ranged attacks "as long as ally is wielding a shield". That "while wielding a shield" bit is the only condition given. Does this only take effect upon using the reflex save or while ally is adjacent? The latter does kind of make sense, but also seems like a separate feat.

If it's melee you're interested in, Magus.

If it's archery you're interested in, Occultist. Technically a "Psychic" caster, but most of their spells are from the Sorcerer/Wizard list, and their items correspond to a wizard's schools of magic. Also, Psychic caster means no Arcane Spell failure. Also, I would wait until they work the bugs out.

U want full BAB? Bloodrager is probably the closest you're going to get.


Tarantula wrote:
If your mount charges, you also take the AC penalty associated with a charge. If you make an attack at the end of the charge, you receive the bonus gained from the charge. When charging on horseback, you deal double damage with a lance (see Charge).

Mounts use the charge action, and the mounted character gets the bonus/penalty for having done so.

If the mount and PC both have this feat, if the mount charges and hits, that completes the trigger for the PC to get the +2 on top of the +2 for being on the charging mount.

If you mount doesn't hit, then the requirements of the feat aren't met, so the PC only gets the normal +2 from the charge.

The PC can't ever give the mount the benefit of the feat because the PC does not take a charge action.

So, in your example: Your mount charges, and the mount doesn't hit. PC doesn't get benefit of the feat. PC does hit, but PC did not make a charge action, he merely used a standard action to attack after his mount charged. This does not trigger the bonus for the mount, so the mounts attacks still miss also.

I would say all attacks have to be declared which order they are happening. Whether mount then PC, or PC then mount, there is an order to the attacks, and that must be followed. I would tend to say that without reach, the attacks go Mount then PC, and if the PC has a reach weapon, they go PC then Mount.

A PC doesn't take the Charge action while mounted? This doesn't sound right to me.

This feat makes total sense for a Cavalier to have, since they're going to do a lot of charges. Heck, they get a double bonus to charges at third level - but only while mounted. You're saying that using his standard action to grant the teamwork feat to a buddy (while the Cav is mounted) is useless because the Cavalier isn't doing the charge, but the mount is?

Citation needed.

Also, in your own quote:

Charging Rule wrote:
When charging on horseback, you deal double damage with a lance (see Charge).

Emphasis mine. It says right there that YOU can make a charge while on horseback (and by extension, other mounts).

It does not say, "When you are riding on the back of a horse that is charging."

I vote Druid. Summoners are boring, and a solo campaign with one will be doubly so.

A druid can take a whole new spread of spells every day, can heal better than a Summoner, and can do a whole lot more stuff over the course of his career.

If you and your mount have distracting charge as a feat, how does this play out?

Mounted Combat wrote:

Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it. You move at its speed, but the mount uses its action to move.

Distracting Charge wrote:

When your ally with this feat uses the charge action and hits, you gain a +2 bonus on your next attack roll against the target of that charge. This bonus must be used before your ally's next turn, or it is lost.

No prereqs, meaning a mounted Cavalier or Druid or Hunter can have his mount select this at level one, as well as himself. (or a Hunter selects it as his bonus teamwork feat, or the Cavalier magically grants it to the mount, etc)

So, let's say you charge a bad guy and your mount doesn't hit, but you do. But you missed by two. And you rolled both attacks simultaneously (as I believe is suggested by the CRB or GM guide, and as often happens at tables to save time). Does the mounts hit now resolve as a hit?

Or, must a mounted PC's player make this decision beforehand, and declare it at the beginning of a session? Like, "As a rule, the (character with better to-hit numbers) will always attack first."

Furthermore, when does "your ally's next turn" happen in the case of mounted combat? Like, say you've made a declaration like the one above, and the mount has better numbers but missed, while the rider hit. Assuming no opportunities for free attacks present themselves, can the mount benefit from the bonus at the start of the next turn? Or does the PC always count as "going" first, since he's giving the mount orders, either through Handle Animal or Ride checks? What if the mount has already been ordered to "Attack that Bunyan" on a previous turn, and is simply continuing in the absence of a "Down" order? Can the rider take a soft delay (not really delaying, but waiting to see if mount hits) as his mount takes a full attack?

Do Earth Mastery bonuses and penalties apply to a PC in elemental form via Druid or Elemental Body?

Reynard_the_fox wrote:

If you're going mounted, I'd go Hunter. One of the main sources of Druid's strength is wildshaping into large and huge creatures for big strength bonuses and alternate movement speeds; if you're going mounted, there's no great way to use wildshape in combat. (Though, depending on the GM, you might be able to take Undersized Mount, transform into an Ape, and use a club of some sort...)

Hunters have a more powerful animal companion, get proficiency with the lance for free, and get a bevy of teamwork feats like Distracting Charge that will help you land hits in combat. Their Animal Focus also works perfectly well from the back of a mount, or you can go Primal Companion hunter and get an Evolution Pool for your cat. Want extra natural attacks? Reach? Fiery claws? Go for it!

Distracting charge is pretty great. I may just take this anyway.

... except a mount and the PC riding it sort of take the same action, right? How would this work in action?

DocShock wrote:

To answer your other question, I think if you were using elemental body, the earth elemental wouldn't suffer any penalties, but would lose the benefits of Earth Mastery while riding a tiger.

This doesn't make sense to me. The druid can't get the bonus for touching earth and not get the huge penalty when seperated from it.

To the Rules!

Chess Pwn wrote:
I say raise your str, it's kinda low for a fighting type. And I'd also drop your wisdom a bit. You don't need it that high if you're focusing on fighting and not spells.

... and now that I'm recalculating, those numbers aren't adding up. That Wisdom should only be a 16.

Note that the Grippli is fighting a -2 racial strength penalty. This is one of the reasons I want to charge with a lance, starting at first level. Charge bonus to attack rolls combined with double damage weapon bonus is supposed to close the gap at low level.

I guess I'm leaning toward straight druid. While Hunter is probably the best way to go for a pure melee build, I don't just want to focus on melee. I have yet to find a class that's as good at switch-hitting between massive amounts of damage and utility work (via wildshape, for example).

lemeres wrote:

....darn it, from the thread title, my mind went racing on the idea of how to make the most effective mounted druid.

The answer I came up with was to turn into an earth elemental (elementals can use weapons if they are humanoid-shaped, and earth elementals give the straightest melee bonuses with good strength and natural armor). Thus, combined with the fact that they have a language (which means they can talk), you could in fact go around all day as an elemental, and even buy and wear equipment for your hours/level elemental form.

Medium earth elemental suffices (and they are easy to work with; fairly close to default rage, but with armor bonus too), I guess, but I like large better for stats and battlefield presence (your large lance hits like a greatsword- that and the +6 str and natural armor means a lot, plus more reach). But actually riding as a large earth elemental seems difficult.

There are thus two ways of doing that: the new undersized mount feat (which is kind of bad for your feat starved druid), or Mammoth rider to grab a huge mount.

Not sure if any of this would actually help you. Just going on about cool ideas I had.

The Earth Elemental shape was kind of my thought, too, except I don't know if the Earth Mastery penalty/bonuses apply to elementally shaped druids. Does anyone know the answer to this before I take it to the rules board?

This is for a homebrew campaign that I'm starting this weekend. Not confirmed yet, but I'm assuming 20 point buy, funky races allowed.

I'm going to play a Grippli Druid. Stats are probably going to be this:

Str 14
Dex 14
Con 13
Int 10
Wis 17
Cha 10

I'm considering dropping Charisma to boost something; maybe Dex.

The build is going to be mount-based. What I'd like, ideally, is for the character to be able to make charges from the back of the mount. With a lance, for double damage.

I see basically three options:

1) Straight Druid, big cat AC. Since a druid isn't normally proficient in any reach weapon, probably the first level feat would be Weapon Proficiency: Lance.

Pro: Won't nerf Druid class abilities like Wildshape, spells.
Con: Druid is feat starved. Gaining proficiency in a lance seems like a waste of a feat.

2) One level dip in Hunter, big cat AC.
Pro: Martial Weapon Proficiencies, a bunch of skill points, Animal Focus, which will effectively bump the AC's strength up to 15. Also, AC levels will stack. First feat might be WF: Lance. Also, boost to Reflex save.
Con: Bad BAB, and hurts Druid levels. Also, AF will be limited for Druid character throughout Druid's career.

On the plus side first wildshape level and level five feat (natural spell) will coincide, as well as Elemental Body and Cat's upgrade to Large size (does an Earth Elemental'd druid suffer from not touching the ground?)

3) One level dip in Cavalier, Wolf AC.
Pro: Good BAB, weapon proficiencies.
Con: Bad Reflex save, Wolf is subpar to Big Cat (I'm not taking two ACs and nerfing the Cat's advancement) and hurts Druid advancement. Probably not going to do this, despite BAB boost.

I guess three is off the table. I'm completely evenly split between options one and two.

LessPopMoreFizz wrote:
In some ways, the Alchemist already fills this niche.

What way would that be?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have to disagree. The volume of material gives a lot of options. Kineticist pages basically amount to spells known for a Sorcerer, except there's much less to choose from and a much narrower range of how to shape your build. They're actually much lighter than, say, a fighter, if you factor in all the combat feats you should be perusing when you're building one.

Psychic class is extremely light, moreso than wizards or sorcerers. Their spell list is everything, which is why I think (as written), they ought to have a full wizard/witch progression.

Medium is the exception, except that you're probably only keeping track of three or four different for the first few levels. On the other hand, the amount of spirits to choose from (especially at first) will make your head explode if you can't handle option overload.

So... don't play that class?

My most paperwork-heavy class so far has been Alchemist, and that includes a shapeshifting, summon-happy Druid with an AC. The amount of flux that a fifth-level bomb chucker with a familiar undergoes to practically all of his stats on a constant basis will probably outweigh the stuff you have to keep track of with a Medium; time will tell.

IICorinthianII wrote:
Friendlyfish wrote:

My general comment:

The psychic doesn't have many options for, well, actually hurting things in combat. Inconveniencing them mightily? Yes. Controlling them? Yes. Confusing them? Of course.

But beyond magic missile and a few save-or-die spells scattered throughout, you've got the mind-affecting only mind thrust and psychic crush lines of spells with which to actually put hurt on an opponent, and these are limited to single target and look a bit weaksauce to boot.

This is probably intended as part of the class design (otherwise why not just play a sorcerer). However, my opinion is that it'd be good to have some sort of general self-defense setup for this class.

Put this guy and a skeleton in a room by themselves together, and the psychic is going to have to bust out his belt knife and go chipping away to survive.

Another point of opinion:

This guy looks way too much like the sorcerer to be a distinct base class. Make a "psychic" bloodline, slap int-attribute casting on it, and what's really so very different here?

Basically this.

I haven't read the whole thread so excuse me if I've missed something.

What the Psychic looks and feels like to me is an overly complicated rehash of a Sorcerer. Maybe instead of just tacking on a bunch of things arcane classes can already do, give them some new, scalable spells. I'd rather see a bunch of lower level spells that can be "Overcast" at a higher spell slot so they retain playability at higher levels. The higher level spells shouldn't need to scale, you should get an effect that is appropriate for a spell of that level.

For example: Ego whip I is not a 3rd level spell by any means. Especially when compared to what an arcane caster can do with a 3rd level spell slot normally. In addition the whole Undercast mechanic just seems confusing and unnecessary, not to mention most of the spells that do it are lackluster at best.

tldr; I would rather see a completely new spell list with scalable spells....

I would also like to see more distinction between Psychic magic and divine/arcane, apart from "wear whatever armor you want". Which is shares with divine magic anyway.

As the spells have no verbal or somatic components, it seems like there ought to be something special involved to

a) know that a Psychic is casting a spell
b) therefore identify said spell using Spellcraft.

This isn't a tough fix, and it doesn't have to change the game very much. Number one, a fellow Psychic caster should be able to do both a and b without extra effort. Call it passive psi detection or something. A fellow psychic is able to sense a disturbance in the force, as it were.

For non-psychics, I can think of a few options. Make a new stat called "passive psychic perception" or something, and base it on Will. Say, Wisdom modifier (since this is the perception mod stat) plus HD. DM can roll for you and tell you "that guy's casting a spell. A psychic spell. Roll spellcraft." This psychic score could be boosted by feats, traits, items, alternate racial traits, or favored class bonus.

I also notice that Psychic spells and abilities have yet to be assigned to a particular knowledge skill. We already have Knowledge: Arcana for arcane casters and Knowledge: Religion for divine. May I suggest Knowledge: Occult? Goes without saying that all the classes in this book would have this as a class skill, as well as the "Knowledge: All" classes. It should also be added to occult/spooky classes like Witch, Oracle, Inquisitor, and Shaman.

Game Master wrote:

As far as hiding spells, I'm pretty sure there's a feat or skill usage which lets you make a check to hide or disguise the casting, but I'm not sure.

The only one I've ever heard of was a feat where bards could make the spell seem like just part of their performance. Saved my bacon a few times.

Third Mind wrote:

I finally got to read through the class in detail (probably the first of many) and it seems like transmutation is the go-to for the class. Overall the class looks pretty solid. Enchantment seems sort of weak, but I'll need to test it out to see if that's actually the case. That being said, I learn best by way of example. Any chance someone has a somewhat detailed example of how the class is played and to a lesser extent how it's built?

Check the playtest thread. Here's a report with two first level Occultist builds. One melee, one ranged.

This still doesn't really answer my question.

I'm asking if you can put surplus mental focus points in your implements that are only there for the purpose of activating focus abilities, and don't (through virtue of not being enough) add up to a bonus.

In fact, couldn't you put in less than a minimum for resonant ability if you wanted to do that? And would this give you enough of a bonus to cast spells in that implement's school?

So I got two conflicting answers. This is as clear as mud to me.


I could use a little clarification on how Mental Focus points work.

If I understand it right, you put points in your implements during daily one hour spell time. Can you save some points and place them later, as the situation arises? Something like a non-spontaneous caster's ability to leave slots open and fill them in only fifteen minutes (depending on percentage left open).

So you can only use points that are in your implements to use focus powers, right? Or rather, if you leave mental focus in yourself you can spend them at, like, double cost. Okay, what if you have leftover points after preparing your equipment? Can you put extra points in your implements that wont' activate the resonant bonus but are only there for focus powers?

When you burn points from your implements, but some are left in the implement, does the resonant bonus disappear or does it just reduce based on how many points are in it now?

What if you sleep for eight hours without having spent any points the day before? Can you just leave them in your gear or do they poof while you're sleeping?

Will Extra Mental Focus be a feat?

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
roll4initiative wrote:
In PFS, what feats are allowed for a phantom? Anything on the AR page as long as it qualifies?
They have restrictions to feats similar to eidolons in PFS.

This came up yesterday just before we were playtesting. I was tinkering with a build that gave my Phantom Sow Terror at first level. Sow Terror is not legal (for PC characters) in PFS. I might recycle that one for a home game.

kestral287 wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
Umbranus wrote:

With full BAB it would be too strong as a dip.

- At will ranged attack with damage greater than a sling
- a wild power, some of which are strong

For 1d6 + Con? With CL 1? That can't be used with magical weapons?

That really not worth delaying you class progression... You're better off grabbing a crossbow. Or, if you really, really want a ranged attack, a level of a class that gives you proficiency with longbows.

I could honestly see it for lower level campaigns (E6 or some such). Have a Fighter dip Hydrokineticist, he picks up an emergency blast that targets Touch and an emergency pseudo Grease that, while the caster level won't scale, works off one of his better stats.

And for that he's coughed up a feat (and his fighter level for fighter-only feats) and hurt his will save. I don't think it's necessary to burn his BAB, too.

That same fighter can dip in gunslinger for a free gun and grit, but people aren't (usually) calling for that to become a 3/4 BAB class.

Lemmy wrote:
Umbranus wrote:

With full BAB it would be too strong as a dip.

- At will ranged attack with damage greater than a sling
- a wild power, some of which are strong

For 1d6 + Con? With CL 1? That can't be used with magical weapons?

That really not worth delaying you class progression... You're better off grabbing a crossbow. Or, if you really, really want a ranged attack, a level of a class that gives you proficiency with longbows.

Yeah, I'm trying to think of the potential for abuse at a one level dip, and not coming up with much. Barbarian? Bloodrager? These are the only magical/Supernatural Constitution-based classes I can think of. You'd be trading in a class level for a d6 ranged weapon, which no well-built Barb is going to do.

You still need dex to aim it. Gunslingers target touch AC without worrying about energy resistance or SR, and I don't see a whole lot of one level gunslinger dips at the tables.

graystone wrote:
joeyfixit wrote:
They're attack rolls with feet! Obviously they should be full BAB, and we should get rid of this nonsense where a kinetic blast is a standard non-weapon action.
That almost made some kind sense. Did you have a point?

What wasn't clear?

Joe Lai wrote:

wohh. wohh. wohh... Sir, just because the Druid was first time playing.

does not mean he is a noob, in fact he was quite good. He prepared good spells, he had good stats, and he had a clear build and know what hes character was going to be like at level 7.
I was the archer player.

As I indicated, the Druid player did just fine. "Noob" was meant only to indicate his relative lack of experience, not any pejorative connotation.

Improved Feint + whip + ranged weapon (one handed)=

Assume you start out at ten foot reach of opponent. Snap the whip in opponent's face, roll bluff check, shoot opponent who is now denied dex bonus.

My thought was hand crossbow (Mesmerist), but it would work even better with a Gunslinger, to put Touch AC in toilet. Also, daggers. Quick Draw or rapid reload to keep it going every round.

Assuming Medium opponent with no reach weapon, you should be safe.

Does this work? Legal? Rules are a bit light when it comes to the logistics of a feint.

They're attack rolls with feet! Obviously they should be full BAB, and we should get rid of this nonsense where a kinetic blast is a standard non-weapon action.

We were:

Occultist 1: Melee Build
Occultist 1: Archer Build
Spiritualist 1: Fear Phantom
Druid 1: Noob (1st PFS Session)

This went pretty swimmingly, all things considered. Noob Druid had done a lot of homework and indicated that he'd played a few home games, so he didn't slow us down.

Phantom never solidified into a corporeal form once. The Phantom was, however, incredibly useful as a rogue stand-in: scouting ahead. The Phantom doesn't technically have a fly speed, so PC had her "five-foot step" down into pits and such incorporeally - not sure of the legality of this. Certainly incorporeal and climb checks is an odd grey area that could use some clarification.

Phantom kept my tank from getting gobbled by an ooze. BTW, here's my build:


Str 18
Dex 12
Con 13
Int 14
Wis 10
Cha 10

Resistance, Purify Food and Drink
Hold Portal, Enlarge Person

Combat Expertise, Improved Disarm

Ranseur 10
Heavy Flail 15
Greatsword 50
Scale Mail 50
Flail 8
Heavy Wooden Shield 7

Apparently everybody at the table was familiar with Harry Dresden but me. I latched onto the martial weapon proficiency of the class and built my character around expertly disarming people at reach.

This guy hits at a +4 melee without bonuses and disarms at a +8. His spells are Hold Portal and Enlarge Person. There was some discussion about whether or not the +2 Strength belt would work at first level. We ultimately decided it couldn't, so I put the points into getting Keen on my Greatsword instead. I have to say that if it's not available at low levels, the Belt feature loses a lot of its luster.

Character-wise, Oswald is a pretty vanilla Lawful Good fighter type who has a keen interest in history and spooky Occult stuff, as well as machines (knowledge ranks in Engineering, History, Religion). Kind of a noble Ghostbuster. Next time I plan on giving one of my weapons the Ghost Touch quality. Real shocked at the way Spiritualist PC RP'd his character.

Phantom was skinned as Spiritualist's dead wife and had no face, held up a drama symbol happy/sad mask for mood. Very fun roleplay, especially for the Occult playtest. In combat, Spiritualist only used Summon Monster, always Bloody Skeletons. Thematically appropriate.

Spoilers for Boss Battle:


We took down the Minotaur without too much trouble. My first round was spent Enlarging. Round two I traded Keen Bonus on my greatsword for Quicksteps as a swift action (extra 30' of movement) and then charged the Minotaur and deaxed him immediately thanks to a fairly high roll, Ranseur disarm bonus, feat bonus, bard bonus, charge bonus (ended up being a 30). Bloody skeleton and archer softened him up, large Ranseur finished him off. Done in three rounds!

Occultist is a fun class to play; martial weapon proficiency goes a long way to making this a fun alternative to magus, and pretty customizable. Spiritualist has some great roleplay potential; can't really say that I've seen a Phantom in combat yet because he kept it incorporeal the entire time. Playing another session with my Psychic Lobster seems like a chore, but I can happily envision playing Oswald up to tenth level.

Note: an incorporeal sneak companion is the death knell for rogues. Most of what the Phantom did in our session was traditional rogue stuff, but fearlessly and with darkvision.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd actually stop griping about the lack of options at levels one and two if they upgraded the spell progression to full wizard level. Keeping them Spontaneous/Spells known is fine, but the spells are limited enough (no rays, very little battlefield control, no healing or summoning) that I think having 2nd level spells at level three is called for.

1 to 50 of 1,230 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>