Search Posts
Well it's 3k more than mithril full plate, and has the same Dex/ACP advantages. On the other hand, it also gives you +2 to saves, so it would free up your cloak slot for a little while. I guess the question is whether your Dex is high enough that you'd benefit from the higher max Dex bonus. BUT, if cool is the rule, then yeah, get the new armor and to hell with whether or not it's the best purchase for the cost. Killing dragons inside dungeons is way more fun than playing Mathfinder =)
Why not go Swashbuckler? You get several free feats right off the bat, and with 1 or 2 feat investments you also get Dex to damage instead of Str (i think the feat is called Slashing Grace). Would still have a fair number of skill points, too. If you really want to stick with TWF, I'd say avoid Piranha Strike.... it's locked in at -1hit/+2 damage ratio, with only half the damage bonus (-1hit/+1dmg) for your offhand. That extra penalty adds up fast since you're already at -2 for all attacks from TWF.
"At 1st level, a white mage can expend 1 point from her arcane reservoir to use one of her spell slots to cast a cure spell" Arcanist casts from spell slots like a sorcerer, so you actually do spend an arcane reservoir point AND one of your spell slots for the day. That said, it's still a real nice ability.
Hard to say yes or no without knowing what items you already have and what feats you took.
As a DM, I wouldn't want the headache of that argument, and I'd say that since sound doesn't penetrate the area of a Silence spell, the magnifying chime spell wouldn't work. I'd also let you change what you want to do based on that ruling. As theory-talk, though, it's interesting. I'd argue that if you smack a 4' gong in an area of silence, the gong would still vibrate, you just can't hear it in an area of silence. The air is still transmitting that vibration to the area outside of the radius of the Silence spell, but b/c of the description of the Silence spell, those vibrations can't be heard or detected by anyone in any way anywhere (even outside the area of Silence). So is the magnifying chime doing sonic damage based strictly on sound, or strictly on the force of the vibrations it's emitting? I dunno, especially since the spell description refers alternately to both "sonic energy" and "sound". Is the sonic energy really potential energy within the area of the Silence spell, and then kinetic energy after it leaves the area of Silence? Or does it not exist since sound does not exist in an area of Silence? All I know is that Golarion arcane universities graduate wizards, lawyers and engineers at a 1:1:1 ratio
Steadfast Personality alone is nice for Sorcerers. I'd never want to multiclass for 3 levels as a sorcerer to meet the Divine Protection requirement, and at least 50% of the Will saves I roll against are for mind-affecting effects.
Yeah, when an immediate action interrupts an immediate action, the most recently declared immediate action occurs first. Another way to look at it is with Feather Fall. 1 - Gravity readies an action to accelerate any free-floating object at a rate of 500'/round towards the ground. 2- Hill Giant #5 bullrushes you off a 150' ledge. The DM smiles eagerly, gathering up a fistful of dice. 3 - You say "oh, wait, I cast Feather Fall as an immediate action!", thereby interrupting gravity's readied action. 4 - Feather Fall is resolved, gravity's readied action resumes, only now it pulls you towards the ground much slower and gentler. 5 - DM frowns, knowing that gravity won't get XP and will complain about his class not being able to defeat CR 1 wizards.
If you have the Charisma to qualify for Eldritch Heritage, maybe you'd want to take a look at some of the sorcerer bloodlines? You could stay a single-classed fighter, so you won't miss a couple of feats in order to get a few spell-like abilities. Some of those SLA's are straight debuffs (like making targets shaken as a touch attack), but even just having different options for dealing damage or getting to the bad guys can really make a difference for a pure melee class.
1 level dip in swashbuckler "At 1st level, a swashbuckler gains the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat with light or one-handed piercing melee weapons, and she can use her Charisma score in place of Intelligence as a prerequisite for combat feats. This ability counts as having the Weapon Finesse feat for purposes of meeting feat prerequisites."
+1 for Hospitaler Paladin, and consider the Greater Mercy feat at level 3 for the extra 1d6 lay on hands for when your mercy doesn't apply. Also, the White Mage archetype for arcanist lets you spontaneously switch out prepared arcane spells to cast cure spells 3+level times per day..... bedazzle your friends as the healing sorcerer!
Yeah, you get a lot more bang for your buck with animate dead if you animate corpses of outsiders, magical beasts, giants, etc. Basically anything that has a lot of racial HD is great for raising as undead b/c skeletons and zombies base their stats on the racial HD of the creatures they used to be. The corpse of an 8HD ogre is waaaaay better for animate dead than the corpse of any 20th level PC.
No material component cost when casting off a staff, its part of the reason that one is so expensive.
Hospitaler Paladin
Slumber hex has the same issue as any SoD spell: if the monsters make the save, it does nothing, if they fail the safe, then it makes combat way easier. Slumber hex if an NPC makes the save, the witch's player can't try to slumber hex that same NPC again unless they have the Accursed Hex feat. However a 6th level enchanter can fill their 3rd level spells with Hold Person and just spam it repeatedly instead. Slumber hex comes down to the fact that it might work on one monster per round per encounter; if the party faces 5 npc's, that's a minimum of 5 rounds to effect all of them, and during that time the rest of the party will be engaging those monsters with melee/bows/spells. In the case of single monster encounters and/or BBEG fights, how is slumber hex any more boring than a barbarian opening combat with a crit on a x4 weapon and ending the encounter in the first round? Because a natural 20 on the first round of combat happens less often? Is it better because the player rolled a natural 20 and everyone knows it happened, as opposed to the DM making a concealed roll behind the screen and saying "the BBEG is falls to the ground in sleep, very nicely done!" ?
@Thomas: It may seem that way to you because of the experience you have with the system, but how is a beginner to know?Word. I don't think I've ever seen a group who didn't have a forum-goer as a member actually use UMD regularly unless they were playing a Bard or trying to be like Jarlaxle from the Salvatore novels. Neither of those ideas was using the wands for CLW. Then re-flavor the wand of CLW to be a ring that does CLW when passed over someone's injury? Give it charges per day instead of 50 charges=all used up to make it feel more Salvatore-ey? I think most people enter the game with an assumption that someone in the party is going to be the healer, and that person has class abilities specifically to cover that role. Because the classic iconic party from the dawn of D&D time was fighter/thief/wizard/cleric. People who haven't played D&D in a while and then come back to the game after a 10-15 year hiatus tend to think of that as normal party composition. They'll also probably get any wands of CLW that drop by virtue of the fact that their the ones who can use them naturally. Any class with CLW on their class list can simply use it. Witches, oracles, druids, rangers, paladins, inquisitors.... Rangers aren't a party's typical healing battery, but with an item that reliably provides CLW, then rangers/paladins/inquisitors/alchemists can become the post-fight healing battery.
What is it you're actually asking? If your goal is to completely rewrite the 3.x/Pathfinder system, then good luck, cuz there are a TON of rules and a TON of ways to "break the game" with perfectly RAW & RAI options. If you want the simplicity of 2nd edition, then just flip how THAC0 & AC works so you don't have to subtract numbers from a d20, b/c THAC0 was a HUGE pain. You also go back to not having any save DCs are higher than 20, b/c each character/npc has their own saves that were set in stone; it's all just roll d20 and compare the result to your character sheet. None of the things you listed in 1-11 are or ever were iconic. Iconic to D&D are things like: 1) PCs roll a d20 to hit attack monsters with a weapon, and the monsters have an AC you have to hit in order to deal damage. 2) Spellcasters get so many spells per day, and have to rest to replenish their spells for the next day (aka Vancian magic system). 3) Magic items exist, and many magic items can be found in the lairs of monsters, add story flavor for effect. Also overlook the stupidity of PCs who assume they will kill the monster who's already killed countless adventurers (who themselves were way better equipped than the PCs to kill the monster). 4) Alignments. Villains are evil, PCs are good (or at least neutral). 5) PCs are able to do things other than just deal damage, cast spells, get hurt, and adventure. These extra things they are good at were expressed as non-weapon proficiencies in 2nd edition, and skills in 3.x. 6) Taverns are the gateway to information. If none of the yocals in the tavern knows the answer to a question, at least one of those yocals knows of someone who can. 7) There are 4 basic character archetypes: thief (rogue), fighter, cleric, wizard. 8) Players can chose to be one of several goodly races; humans, elves, dwarves, halflings, gnomes, half-elves. 9) Different weapons deal different amounts of damage, expressed in different kinds of dice (i.e. d4 for daggers, d8 for longswords). 10) Monsters exist in lots of forms, and can be randomly encountered just by traveling from one town to the next. Undead are super scary. Dragons are super super scary, may be reasoned or negotiated with, and definitely are not to be angered (more true in 2nd edition than in 3.x). If what you really want is to turn the focus of the game away from mechanics and more towards the story, the setting, and/or the characters (both PC and NPC), then all the rules changes in the world won't help you. Changing the focus of a game away from combat & mechanics is a narrative task that you have to undertake as the GM. If your players are used to combat being the focus of the game, and you want to change that, then you need to put more emphasis on character backgrounds and character motivation. It's up the the GM as the storyteller to challenge players by asking them why their characters are doing what they do, and to make the other aspects of the game become as important to the players as swinging swords at monsters is.
The 5' step thing I get how he could have been confused. Telling you that you don't get class features when you're supposed to is inexcusable though. If he doesn't renege, ask him to rewrite every class the way he'd like them to work so you can pick a class without worrying whether its features will change each time you level.
just to be clear- a 15th level Rogue & a 16th level Rogue meet on opposite sides of a fight, the 16th level Rogue sneaks up behind the 15 & stabs him (no sneak attack), meanwhile the 20th level Rogue who is 4+ levels above either of the other Rogues would get his Sneak attack against both. Actually, the 20th level Rogue would still have to flank the other two rogues in order to get Sneak Attack. The other two rogues still have Uncanny Dodge and do not lose their Dex to AC when flatfooted or when attacked by unseen/invisible assailants. The 20th level Rogue would have to flank one of the other rogues to get Sneak Attack. Any of the rogues could get sneak attack against any of the other rogues in this scenario by successfully feinting or by rendering their target stunned, helpless, pinned, or cowering.
"Creating magic double-headed weapons is treated as creating two weapons when determining cost, time, and special abilities." "A masterwork weapon is a finely crafted version of a normal weapon. Wielding it provides a +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls. You can't add the masterwork quality to a weapon after it is created; it must be crafted as a masterwork weapon (see the Craft skill). The masterwork quality adds 300 gp to the cost of a normal weapon (or 6 gp to the cost of a single unit of ammunition). Adding the masterwork quality to a double weapon costs twice the normal increase (+600 gp)." "You can choose to wield one end of a double weapon two-handed, but it cannot be used as a double weapon when wielded in this way—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round." You're allowed to choose to only use one end of a doubleweapon, but for purposes of making it masterwork and then enchanting it, you have spend double what it would cost to do the same to a non-doubleweapon. I agree that you SHOULD be able to enchant each end separately, but RAW doesn't allow it. I'm actually pointing to it as a super stupid rule, and an example as to why some things should be hand-waved by the DM (like if the OP wants to pay extra for a super cool mithral/adamantine 2-headed greataxe, then he should be allowed to. I hear there's even magic in Golarion, maybe 2 metals could magically alloy in the process of creating and magicking said greataxe).
This is also the same game system that requires you to melt 600 gold coins in a cooking pot, pour the Viserys Bane Soup on a 6' long piece of wood that you found in the forest, and then enchant both ends of that piece of wood with 4k worth of "enchantment dust" to get a +1 quarterstaff. In the meantime the guy who found another, identical 6' piece of wood in that same forest. The second guy only had to melt 300 gold coins into a cooking pot, pour it on the stick, and then only had to spend 2k of enchantment dust because he said "hey look, I'm making a large size +1 club!" Then the first guy flips out because he didn't even want to use the quarterstaff as a doubleweapon, but the magic simply would not work if he only enchanted one end of his 6' stick. And the second guy just laughs and laughs. I love pathfinder but some of the rules make zero sense. If you want to do something cool or unique, just ask your DM and stress that you're willing to pay whatever he thinks it would take.
The fly spell would prevent you from falling until it gets dispelled or the duration expires. Once fly ends, everything but your hair will be bound to the constraints of Aspect of Kirin.
!!!! By RAW I think it would, but might want to argue defensively as a standard action for when the DM throws a bag of dice at you.
There's an ioun stone that increases your actual caster level by 1, I believe that's 30k.
hence my use of the word "though", followed by two feat suggestions that would complement a reach cleric build.
Xill's aren't humanoids though, they are outsiders. Also, the xill stat block seems to include both sword/sword/claw/shield and claw/claw/claw/claw options for attacks. The +4 CMB to grapple may only be applicable to the 4-claws attack routine. The DM could also argue that because xills aren't humanoids, the -4 penalty doesn't apply even if they only have 1 free claw.
I'd think that falls more into the purview of the Restore Corpse spell.
Normally I would recommend dropping your Dex a bit, and take Heavy Armor Proficiency so you can wear plate armor and put some of your Dex points into Cha. I saw that you want Combat Reflexes though, so maybe Martial Weapon Proficiency to use a reach weapon other than a longspear? Or Improved Initiative, so you can act earlier to get into a position where you'll be able to take better advantage of your reach and get some early AoOs when the enemies first start moving around?
Monsters would still have to be able to narrow you down to a square and pick that square to attack. A monster could probably narrow you down to a square if it is within ten-fifteen feet of you, but further away than that I think you should be fine. That's how we handle it at my table anyway.
correct on all accounts, slacker.
Because as soon as you grapple your target it's grappled. Just because you have two abilities that let you make free grapple checks doesn't mean you get two free grapple checks as a result of one hit. Just like combat reflexes doesn't let you make multiple AoO's off one opportunity.
as long as all the treasure they find isn't in straight gold pieces you'll be fine. Magic items the party doesn't want will sell at 1/2 value, and crafting costs 1/2 market value. It's a straight 1-to-1 ratio of selling magic items then converting that cash into new magic items. Honestly, I have the hardest time reaching wealth-by-level in every campaign I play. The party doesn't always find all the treasure or all the encounters, and then when the party sells items it doesn't want, everything sells at 1/2 value, and then the proceeds get divided 5 ways. In the meantime, our DM is like "well you're all level 5 and you've found 25k of treasure so far, that's alot!!" But really, the party kept 4 items worth 3k each, and each item went to a different character. So the other 13k worth of treasure got sold for 6.5k gold, which then got divided 5 ways so we each got 1.3k gold. So the party now consists of: 4 PCs who kept an item worth 3k gold. Those PCs also have 1.3k cash. PC wealth = 4.3k total. 1 PC who couldn't use any items. That PC got 1.3k cash. PC wealth = 1.3k total. Level 5 wealth by level is supposed to be 10.5k gold. Our self-proclaimed "generous" DM is actually keeping most of the party under-itemized by 59%, and one of the players (ME!!) under-itemized by 88%.
"If a card has more than one alignment—such as a lawful evil or chaotic good card—the summoner can choose which template to apply to the summoned creature." Normally, when you summon monsters that have a Neutral alignment, you add the fiendish or celestial template (depending on if your character is evil or good, or your choice if your character is neutral). If the monster you summon already has an alignment, then it does not gain the celestial or fiendish template. It seems to me as though this ability would allow you to add the celestial template to a good-aligned monster that you summon (assuming you drew a card that says "good alignment), or add the fiendish template to an evil-aligned monster. I could be wrong though, the wording of that ability seems a bit wonky.. it's also after midnight though, so......
You still just get 1 free grapple attempt, and the NPC you hit is grappled if your free grapple CMB roll beats the NPC's CMD. The grab special ability does give you +4 to grapple checks though: "Creatures with the grab special attack receive a +4 bonus on combat maneuver checks made to start and maintain a grapple." It's a Monster Rule, and i don't know if any options exist that a PC could gain a "grab" ability. If that option(s) do exist for PCs and work like the Monster Rule "grab" ability, then yeah, +4 to grapple maneuvers. Constrict special attacks have an associated damage that is dealt whenever the person with a constrict ability succeeds on a grapple check (whether it's to begin a grapple, maintain a pin, whatever).
I don't think the status of the original weapon matters. Your currently treating it as a light hammer. So finesse applies. +1
You can apply any contact poison or injury poison to any weapon. Having the "poison use" class feature or ability means you do not suffer a 5% chance of poisoning yourself when applying poison to weapons. Poisons are created with the Craft (alchemy) skill, but as far as a poison being in liquid or powder form.... /shrug idk. Some poisons you can infer the form based on the name (like Lich Dust sure sounds like a powder form to me). You could also look up some of the real-life poisons online. For instance, coniine is the poisonus compound found in hemlock, and is a liquid at room temperature, whereas elemental arsenic is a solid at room temperature (but is highly soluble in water). Also keep in mind some classes have abilities that let them change the delivery method of poisons (such as the poison conversion "alchemy trick" that alchemists get). A character with that ability can effectively change a contact poison into an inhaled poison, or a consumed poison into an injury poison, etc.
Only racial HD are counted when using animate dead and figuring out skeleton & zombie stats. So a Level 5 Human Fighter only counts as a 1HD skeleton because skeletons lose all hit dice from classes, and humans do not normally have racial hit dice. So a human bloody skeleton would count as 2HD worth of undead per the Animate Dead spell, due to the "bloody skeleton" template wording in that spell. Racial HD are *always* counted when doing Animate Dead. If the creature you want to animate had 6 racial hit dice, two of those hit dice don't just disappear because you can only create 4 HD worth of undead. If you can't make enough HD worth of undead to animate a creature, then you simply cannot animate that creature. You don't get to ignore some of its hit dice just because it isn't convenient.
Yeah 100 hp at level 10 isn't crazy or anything. Figure this: If a level 10 Fighter has a 10 Con (+0), rolls below average each level (5 on a d10), and puts favored class bonus into hitpoints each level, he's still going to have 65 hitpoints (max hp at first level + 45hp rolled each level +10 hp from fav class bonus). And again, that 65 hitpoints is assuming the Fighter has rolled below average hps each level and has no Con bonus at all. Just average rolls (5.5 on a d10) and a +2 Con bonus is going to increase that number to 89 hitpoints. Toughness brings that number up to 99.
Asca made good suggestions. One thing that's worked really well at one of my games is when it's not "adventure time", the DM will go around the table and give each player a minute or two to say what they want to do. If a PC wants to do a particular thing in town on his own, the DM gives him a few minutes, resolves that character's "turn", and moves to the next player. Alot of times 2 or 3 players will end up wanting to do the same thing, like going to an inn, but they didn't realize it until after they stopped talking over each other while competing for the DM's attention. In this case, the DM can resolve the actions of the people who didn't want to go to the inn first, then handle the PCs who went to the inn. That way everyone gets a chance to do what they want, and since they know they'll have that opportunity, they are faster & more cooperative with yielding the floor when it's time to do so. That also makes "downtime" go faster, since it's more focused, everyone gets a turn, and instead of taking a half hour to determine what everyone is doing, it only takes 2-3 minutes per player. Alot of times too a player will just want a chance to buy a particular item, check up on a particular NPC, or add a newly found scroll to their spellbook. Those are all pretty fast things to resolve, but can take FOREVER when everyone is trying to talk at once. Also, in the case where everyone decides "let's go to the inn", they need to realize that the forthcoming conversation is going to all be in-character. The DM should make that disclaimer before IC conversation/events start, and just like a real conversation, there has to be give & take in the dialogue. If Player XZ says "I get up and get a drink at the bar", then he needs to let the PCs who stayed at the table resolve the rest of their conversation. Leaving an IC conversation is a way to show your character spoke his peace and is ready to move on; it shouldn't be used as a way to demand extra attention from the DM. edit: also, it can help for players to keep a "personality" reference card in front of them for roleplaying. it can just be short and say "my character is shy and polite. my character is uncomfortable around elves. my character is interested in arcane magic". that way the PC can refer back to the personality they want to portray for their character, and remember to actually speak & act that way IC. A reference card can also be more complex and include idioms the character likes to use, phrases he finds offensive, and minor habits he has (like kicking his shoes off whenever he sits down, or keeping a small store of expensive brandy to share everyday after dinner).
I find the Viking Fighter archetype to be very underwhelming. You give up heavy armor proficiency, which is what barbarians don't get either. Since you lose Armor Training and Weapon Training, you basically get bonus feats at even numbered levels instead of rage powers. In addition, your effective barbarian level for rage and rage powers is 3 lower than your fighter level. At level 6 you can take rage powers in place of bonus feats. Why not just go straight barbarian then? Straight barbarian would also mean you qualify for the cooler level 8 rage powers at level 8, instead of having to wait until level 11. Sure, you get an extra +2 AC bonus when using a shield at level 7, but if you're raging you're also taking a -2 penalty to AC. As a Fighter archetype, it still keeps armor mastery for DR 5/- at level 19 when you wear armor. But as an Invulnerable Rager barbarian, you would have gotten DR 5/- at level 10, all the time, even while sleeping naked in bed. As a Fighter you still get weapon mastery at level 20, but how many campaigns honestly go to level 20? Assuming you do reach level 20, you would probably only get to use that ability for a few game sessions before the campaign ends. I could see doing a 2 level dip in fighter for the bonus feats, or a 3 level dip to also get armor training and move full speed in medium armor. But the archetype strikes me as really meh. Especially since nothing prevents you from roleplaying a viking while taking a different class.
Correct.
No, CR is "challenge rating", a term that is reserved for how difficult monsters and encounters are (and therefore how much XP players get for overcoming the challenge). You would already get a free Perception check vs. the stealthy person's Stealth check as per the stealth rules: The result of their Stealth check determines the difficulty (DC) of your Perception check. You can also choose to roll Perception as an action during your turn, but I can't remember at the moment if that is a standard or move action. Also, as Blahpers pointed out, the spell would reveal that someone within the cone of the spell is present cuz you can hear their thoughts, but you do not automatically pinpoint their square or see the person who is hiding. The spell does not even give you a free Perception check. It would simply alert you to the fact that a sentient creature with discernable thoughts is within the area of the cone. You would have to find out any other information about that creature (what the creature is, who the creature is, how big the creature is, where it is, etc) through other means.
1) Line of effect for AOEs is blocked by things like Wall of Force, an actual 50' high brick wall, a dungeon wall, etc, something that literally prevents movement through it. If large creatures blocked line of effect for medium creatures, then AoEs of "60' line" would be blocked by the first person the line crosses, and cone effects would end if someone is right in front of the caster of a 60' Cone of Cold. And then it would be just as silly if the entire party just hid behind the enlarged rogue when the massive dragon unleashes it's breath weapon and be perfectly safe. 2) No. Creatures already get plenty of built in bonuses for size categories (AC, Str, Dex, stealth modifiers, reach, increased weapon damage dice, etc). Since Dex penalties are already built into the game for most large-size creatures, it means those creatures will have correspondingly lower Reflex saves. When a Fireball goes off, the creature makes the save and protects itself well enough to take less damage, or is completely unable to avoid the damage and takes all of it. Since larger creatures are more likely to fail Reflex saves due to their size penalties to Dex, the likelihood of them taking more damage from AoEs is already built into the game. I wouldn't say you're over thinking things, but your thoughts go along lines that are already covered in the rules. I think house-ruling "basic" mechanics like Saving Throws would create alot more work and headache than you realize.
Keeping it in a stoneshaped chamber 300 ft underground is a great idea. Lining that chamber with 3 feet of lead on all surfaces makes it even better. Then cast Teleport Trap such that it encompasses the entire chamber, with a password bypass known only by the lich. Permancy the teleport trap, and have the teleport trap send anyone who doesn't use the password to the middle of a desert. Preferably that location in the middle of the desert also coincides with a powerful creature's lair (like just inside the entrance to an ancient blue dragon's cave). Also, keep one (preferably two) iron golems (or whatever kind of golems you can afford) as guardians in that chamber with instructions to kill anyone other than the lich who enters the chamber.
I can say that it would guarantee a fair number of currently pointless feats actually see play at the mid-high levels. That I'll agree with. I also think you can achieve the above with fewer extra bonus fighter feats, too. I think bonus combat feat gain at the OP's rate is too extreme. First, it would upset every non-fighter martial at your table, since the fighter is getting far more than it needs to match the power of the "better" martial classes. Any monks or rogues may feel especially feel slighted under that model. Second, it is literally feat inundation for the fighter's player. As someone mentioned earlier, feats can interact with one another in some strange ways when you have the ability to utilize 7 or 8 feats simultaneously. That can make for some pretty heavy math at the table, or at least alot of work on the player's part away from the table so he can prepare and be ready for game day without slowing combat to a crawl. Third, people can (and do) already take a 2-level dip in fighter to get 2 fighter bonus feats, which isn't bad. The tiered method you propose would allow any character to take a 3-level dip in fighter for 6 bonus feats, which is so good that almost every martial build would do it. I also think you can negate the "feat tax" of feat chains by eliminating the Str / Int / Dex prerequisites for alot of the existing combat feats. Additionally, you could give the fighter the next feat in the chain for all combat feats he's spent bonus fighter feats on. The "free feat" would only come at levels that fighters get bonus combat feats (i.e. 2, 4, 6, 8, etc). In other words, if a fighter takes Combat Expertise and Step Up at level 1, at level 2 he would get Following Step for free. If he takes Improved Trip at level 2, then at level 4 he would receive Step Up & Strike for free. If he takes Improved Disarm at level 4, then once he hits level 6 he would get Greater Trip and Greater Disarm both for free (since level 6 is when his BAB is +6, meeting the prereq for the "Greater" feats). Since wall-o'-text is hard to read, it would look like this (normal feats at 3 & 5 not counted for): level 1 - Combat Expertise (normal feat), Step up (ftr bonus)
I hate feat chains, and I would love the above. It means that you could get used to your new combat options on an ongoing basis, as opposed to reaching level 8, getting 8 new feats and needing to immediately learn the mechanics of those 8 new feats and how they interact.
Disguise self hands down. Also, vanish could be pretty awesome if it's at CL 5, if you're stuck to CL 1 then nevermind. Obscuring mist, to really screw over the d-bag who just cut you off on the highway. Actually, I lied, obscuring mist HAS to be it. Never have to pay for movie tickets ever again, just walk in while everyone else is wondering "wtf is going on and why can't i see?". Let alone the implications of completely bypassing security cameras. Want a more glamorous gig? Contract with the government as a consultant for hostage rescue teams. Want a more glamorous gig and more money? Assistant coach for any NHL team and wreak havoc for special teams.
I'm not, but Fire Mountain Games recently published the 2nd installment of their "underdark" AP. If it's even half as good as Way of the Wicked, it will be awesome.
Pretty sure a WIS/STR/CHA/INT all of at least 16 is pretty much the opposite of SAD... unless i've misunderstood you? Seems like it. That eldritch godling class is also 3rd party, which many DMs won't allow because it isn't Paizo. After reading some of the class's abilities, I can see why. 3 level dip to have one ability score to duplicate every benefit of a single other ability score of your choice? That's better than the benefits of almost any given prestige class taken through to level 10.
There are a few cleric builds that make for better necromancers than actual necromancers, at least as far as animating and controlling undead is concerned.
Issue 1 - Maybe. The mount actually makes the charge, but you get the benefits of the charge. I'd argue that getting the benefit of the charge means you could use Hurling Charge (since it's an extra benefit that the ability gives you when charging). RAW I'm not 100% sure, but as a player/DM I'm inclined to say it would work. Issue 2 - Unsure if it's possible. I know it's not possible with Spring Attack, since Spring Attack is its own full-round action, and charge is a separate and distinct type of full-round action. As far as whether it's possible through another method, I'd have to look into the wording of the overrun manuever and what Improved & Greater Overrun say. My guess is the Overrun feat chain could be the way to open that up, but I'm not sure without reading those rules further. edit: #2 might be possible with Flyby Attack, but again, you'd have to qualify for Flyby Attack and without looking up the wording of the feat, I'm not sure if Flyby attack allows you to charge & continue movement after finishing the "charge attack".
Agreed, there are a number of abilities that we treat as death effects at my games that don't actually say "death effect" in their descriptions. They read like they should be death effects, but the actual term isn't there.
|
