RAW a 'weapon' means a manufactured weapon. For a spell which does work on natural weapons, compare versatile weapon.
Sorry, can't agree. "manufactured weapons" means "manufactured weapons".
Manufactured weapon is a weapon.
See Sean K. Reynolds' answer here :
Target : one weapon per level
RAW, a weapon is a weapon, natural or manufactured.
In the magic rules :
A claw is not a creature neither an object.
I still think that, RAW, you can cast the spell on a natural weapon, but a friend doesn't agree and I think his point seems valid too.
What do you think about ?
Just for fun, let's try to replace classes with the "better 3pp version of class and archetypes".
Fighter --> Legendary Fighter
Any Ideas ?
Hello, first sorry for my poor english, it's not my native language, I hope I'll be understandable !
In PF2, there's 3 actions per turn. My player liked it a lot.
WHAT IF, in PF1, we play with : free actions + 1 Swift Action + 3 standard or move actions ?
It'll change some things that seems to be balanced for me (as adversaries also have 3 actions) even if everyone has more power than with 2 actions (because of action economy).
Rocket tag may be worst, maybe a boost in HP for PC and foes should be necessary. I'm not even sure as, 3 attacks at level 1 with 0/-5/-10 for example, 2 attacks are almost guarantee to fail (except critical..).
What do you think about ?
Actually, having one or more trying to build a minmaxed Linnorm killer is the goal, and setting up a plan is another. You'll have to either kill another Linnorm and convince (or trap) Estrid to fight solo,or set up these fight not just coming to Estrid's castle and as for a duel and fight both in a row.
Moreover it'll be a short campaign, player would know their final goal (one of them beat a Linnorm and Estrid), and that they could fail. They'll have the right to know linnorms stats and build their characters accordingly and moreover, there's a +3 dragon-bane longsword somewhere on these isles...
Hello, I may start a small campaign in the Lands of the Linnorm Kings as an E8 campaign but... is it realistic, taking into account that a character, in order to become a king, as to defeat a linnorm alone ?
It's a great accomplishment and isn't doable by everyone, sure, but it is possible at 8th level ?
Tell me your strategy to defeat an ice linnorm (CR 17) at level 8, solo :p
Hello, I like a lot multiclass archetypes ( Here ), but I'd like to know which ones you'll recommend ?
I had 2 players using Shadow Fury and Beast Hunter, shadow fury was nice but the "silent rage" was never used and Beast Hunter was good but "replaced" by Paizo's Hunter...
I want to find the best MCA to suggest it to my players :)
Thanks for your answer but please review it from a mechanical point of view, not the intent.As if it was "alternate creation rules".
The players that play with me only play with me, there is nom other PF gm here, and they are very casual and we only play once in a while, one shots with pregen, but I'd like them being able to create characters quickly and easily.
Java Man wrote:
Would this mean a first level character cannot take a rank in a nonclass skill?
Either the answer is "yes" or it is "Int ranks to choose in nonclass skills", or it is " if you choose +1 rank fav. class bonus, or any trait that add ranks, you can add nonclass skills ranks".What should be better ?
One critical can kill you... Hard when you discover rpg and are a beginner.
Inspired by PF2 playtest.
Add a "racial hp bonus" to your character at level 1 :
Base is 8
What do you think about ?
Inspired by pf2 playtest
1) Start with all abilities at 10
Elf Ranger :
1) STR 10, DEX 10, CON 10, INT 10, WIS 10, CHA 10
It's quicker to explain than how to calculate point-buy, for a beginner, it limits minmaxing (as minimal score is 8 and maximum is 18, but only one).
What do you think about ?
Hello, I think character creation is slow and long to explain to beginners.
This post is about skills.
What if, at level 1 you gain 1 rank in all your class skills and then, after that, you gain X+int at each level ?
Would something be broken ?
What do you think about ?
Hello, I have a question...
The barrage sphere give you this :
Barrage: As a special attack action, you may make two ranged attacks at your full base attack bonus -2. Associated Feat: Rapid Shot.
But Rapid Shot is :
When making a full-attack action with a ranged weapon, you can fire one additional time this round at your highest bonus. All of your attack rolls take a –2 penalty when using Rapid Shot.
1st question. Do you gain the associated feat and can do both ?
2nd question. If "Barrage" replaces Rapid Shot, isn't it more limited ?
Is Barrage a nerfed and simplified Rapid Shot ?
Thanks I get it, in fact the flavor is great, the alchemist is doing alchemy while in combat and not just throwing extracts !
I don't get the Archaic Alchemist from Geomancer's Handbook...
Does it replace Alchemy (extracts..) with normal Sphere Casting, losing all the "alchemist" flavor (extracts, again...) ?
And I can't understand the casting tradition...
So, please, explain it to me :)
First, thanks to Omnious to have taken the time to develop his answer and not keeping me with a "poor plan, poor logic, goodbye" answer :)
I think I'm sold on giving up on DEX as default stat to hit and armor as DR but...I'll do the devil's advocate one last time in order to learn and understand...
About the other things...
About abilities we have :
Stupid idea (maybe), why not letting the choice for the ability for the "to-hit" ? or adding it to class features (rogue : dex, fighter : str, and so on...).
doomman47 : thanks for the suggestion but I want to do a simpler houseruled pathfinder but compatible with most material without conversion.
@Bardarok, thanks, I plan to use pop corn initiative with PC always attacking first except when surprised.
@Omnius, "realism" was not a very good term to explain, maybe verisimilitude and also just to test new thing. Anyway, the question is more on the result than the intent. Thanks for pointing out power attack and feats for others abilities to damage (that should be removed). What about Cha to will and armor as DR un E6 ?
I plan to run an E6 game, what would imply these changes :
STR will still be used for Damage, but DEX would be used for attack rolls instead of STR, to emulate precision needed to hit.
In order to counter the point that "attack roll is not only precision but also strength to pass through armor", Armor as DR rules are used.
Also, CHA is used to calculate Will Save, instead of WIS, so, it cannot be a dump stat.
These changes seems "realistic" to me, and can allow archetypal characters clumsy and brutish for example, that don't hit often (low dex) but hit hard (high str), or nimble but weak characters hitting a lot but doing low damage.
It'll remove Finesse feat, and some other things like that, maybe invalidate many builds..
Didn't I see something else, and important things could be broken ?
Hello, I'm DMing a campaign since 2013 and characters died and were replaced, or were redone because players wanted to try something else.
Now we have a wizard, a medic (path of war), and two characters with spheres of power magic and they are all level 10.
The medic can heal a lot during combat, the two spheres of power characters have unlimited at will "a-lot-of-d6" damage from destruction sphere...
And the wizard... now is bored in combat. He delays his turns almost every time because he can avoid to waste his spells by letting the spheres of power characters playing before him...
Nobody is afraid of dying because of the almost unlimited healing of the medic...
This is no more a game of attrition, sphere PCs have good things to do every round, even with 0 spell points, and health is full every other round...
That's good in a way, because no 15 minute adventuring day, and the rythm of the game is more based on the story than the resource management game but... there is almost no challenge (even fights with CR a lot higher than theirs) and the wizard is still playing the attrition game and he's bored...
I've always seen people saying you could play sphere characters alongside vancian characters and never saw a problem until my player with the wizard PC told me he feel useless in combat and he's saying to himself each round "why waste a spell if they'll kill it without wasting resources if I delay my turn ?"...
Now with the medic it's worst !
Is there a solution that is not : "play with all sphere characters" or "redo all characters in the same system" ?
First, low-magic, for me, is LOTR magic, in opposition to Dragon Ball Z gods 9th lvl spellcasters, not "no magic".
Here are my design goals :
Here I go :)
5 : Automatic Bonus Progression.
As it's a home game in a homebrewed world, I'm not concerned about balance against AP, for example. So if a 20th level wizard is less powerful and cannot handle the same challenges than a 20th level wizard, this is by design and not a problem.
What I want is more speed, more simplicity, more "classical fantasy" (I like high level play too, but not in this world), and less superpowers and magical "+2"s, and maybe more balance between spellcasters and martials.
What do you think about ?
Rory, I'm almost convinced...
Halek, as the first time, your objections are right and interesting, but your solution is not appropriate. I don't want a few archetypes or feats mandatory to resolve the "problem", I want a solution for everyone.
So, let's say we keep iterative attacks, monster damage are average and no dice rolled. Players roll first attack and average the others.
Now, what about to renounce to your first iterative attack (or your first primary natural attack if you have only natural attacks) to gain a move at 1/3 speed, PROVOKING as normal ?
Rory, interesting idea, don't like the loss of randomness tough :)
Wultram, some issues you evoke are really important.
1) Overkill, I saw it the other side, with only one foe in melee, your attacks are wasted, but by giving up on the multiplier, you can move a little and attack someone else with a off-hand attack. So, not sure which case is prevalent.. but...
2) Totally right. I didn't think about it. Full attack could kill easily a player.
3) Archery, 1 arrow at x4 damage, same rules as it's an iterative attack.
2) et 5) are killing my system !
The raider (human barbarian 6 from gamemastery guide) doing a critical and using his anima fury rage power, can hit on average for 48,5 dmg, and max 64 dmg.
Applying all hits as one, but still as a full attack. So, compared to iterative, it's the same damage as all iterative hitting.
It's more damage each round (because not sure you'll land all 4 blows each rounds with normal iterative attacks), sure, but less chance to crit.
Haste give only one standard attack, not a full attack. So you have 1 attack 4x damage and 1 attack standard damage.
You hit once, you make 4x damage but 1 chance to crit only.
Mythic Vital Strike with improved vital strike at level 11 is damage x3 and 1 move action on a round.
Sorry can't understand, what is doMt ?
You don't really cut damage 95% of the time.
You do the 4x damage each time is very important to the balance.
The problem is with criticals.
It's a choice, I think on average, it's not such a big loss, considering you can, for example, attack with triple damage and kill a foe, move 2 squares without provoking and be ready to full-attack another enemy next round, as a full attack, instead of having to move and attack once next round.
New options open to martials, for example with an off-hand weapon and haste and zero feat investment, you have 3 attacks doing respectively x4 damage, x3 damage and 1x damage with a possibility to reduce the multiplier of one attack to move without provoking. Imagine the number of times you full attack an enemy to death and waste your last attacks without being able to hit someone else because the enemies are set up to make you use a move action to reach them next round. Here you can even kill one foe with double damage, moving 4 squares without provoking and hitting another foe twice, once at triple damage and once normally.
I don't really see it as an obvious buff to casters !
It's not a "problem" it's a preference, an alternative to "go into melee, full attack, full attack again".Path of War and Spheres of Might are solution to this problem that doesn't exist, too, it's just a matter of preference, I'm not writing "Pathfinder 2.0" and forcing it to everyone, I said what are my design goal and needed advice to attain them, replying "don't do houserules and play by the rules, it's better" is not a satisfying reply for me !
But as your reply give arguments, it's a welcome reply and I'll try to say where I agree and I disagree.
For playing faster you can use digital dice rollers. I know of several that let you put in preset dice sets.
Not a satisfying solution to enforce it, we all know it's more fun to roll the dice :)Imagine if in Pathfinder Unchained the rule for "removing iterative attacks" was "just use a dice roller and dont remove anything, lol"...
I don't touch to natural attack damage, so this is as it has always been...
Also any half orc or various other races can give up garbage natural attacks to shift 10 feet for free. Our second level example can five foot step and give up our natural attacks to effectivly teloport 45 feet. And then full attack with our actual manufactured weapons.
Interesting case, manufactured weapons + bad natural attacks to trade against a move, for full damage to weapon hit...You're right, maybe allowing to trade a natural attack against a move is going too far, and moreover, it's touching something else than iterative attack... I should remove it, you're right.
I dont intend to be hostile. Its just that this would actively make mobile fighting harder and martials in general weaker.
I don't understand why... Martials can do damage almost worth of 4 attacks damage with a full BAB roll.. Or have the choice to move and still do worth of 2 ou 3 attacks without investing in a feat...Why is mobile fighter harder or martials weaker ?
Ok, so the dervish dancer hit once with 4x damage + 1 attack from hastewith 2 chances to do a crit.
Instead of hitting 5 times with 1x damage, with 5 chances to do a crit.
You're right, it's less. Can't say anything more. :)
But out of the 4 iterative attacks are you sure 4 will hit ? No.
So damage wise, I think it's not a big loss, but "crit fishing" wise, you are right, it's a loss.
That's why I said that I didn't care about it in the definition of the system. Crit fishing and crit fishing builds are losing a lot here, by design. It's incompatible with "not a lot of rolls per turn" and it's ok for me or likely-minded people. Again, I'm not forcing anyone to use this "not even final" houserule, our tastes may differ !
Instead of houseruling why not show your players the more mobile options avaible to them that...
Because I want any martial with an alternative to "go into melee, full attack full attack full attack" without investing in feats, and I want to reduce the number of dices rolled at higher levels !
OK, let's redo it from scratch, after this interesting conversation.
Here's the solution I plan to actually playstest :
We can replace iterative attacks (and only iterative attacks, not natural or everything else) with this :
BAB +6 : damage x2
The damage are not rolled twice, or thrice or four times, the total damage is multiplied per 2, 3 or 4 (you don't roll 8d6+80, you roll 2d6+20 and then multiply per 4).
Note : Not multiplying all damage (sneak attack,...) and only dice + STR bonus makes some class useless (around 30 dmg vs 100 dmg for the rogue 18 on npc codex, with one dagger). Moreover, this way, there's a smaller gap in damage (for paladin 11, 31.5 vs 29, for barbarian 18, 92 vs 83) comparing with what we discussed earlier
Critical hits: You add [crit multiplier -1] to the damage multiplier for all damage except precision damage (such as from a rogue’s sneak attack class feature) and additional damage dice from special weapon qualities (such as flaming).
Example : With a x3 critical, and BAB +6, your damage modifier becomes x4 (2+2) for damage dice and STR bonus and magic weapon bonus, but still x2 for your 4d6 sneak attack and your 1d6 flaming dagger (doing already 8d6 and 2d6 damage respectively).
Any feature that would remove an iterative attack decrease these multipliers by one. (for example, Rapid Attack from Mobile Fighter)
You can decrease the multipliers by one or more, in exchange for a move at 1/3 your speed per point substracted. This movement doesn't provoke an AoO. The move can be done before, after the attack or between attacks (if you have an off-hand weapon for example) but must be done at once.
This enable more mobility, without invalidating Mobile Fighter archetype (for example) and without giving pounce to everyone.
An off-hand attack cannot be traded for moving at 1/3 speed.
You can still take vital strike in order to do more damage as a standard action.
In short :
The only modified thing is the full-attack, so if there was a problem with natural attacks or crazy minmaxing, it's still there.
Comments and critics welcome :)
So, the remaining problem is with "hitting with 1 natural attack once, but with vital strike" ?
Written this way, is the problem resolved ?
- Attack action is a standard action, so it's valid for "natural weapon, 1 hit" but not valid for a "full attack with natural weapons".
- TWF is excluded, but I'm not sure my way of saying it "without using an off-hand weapon at the same time" is elegant.
Comparing NPCs from NPC codex :
Elf Paladin 11
Gnome Ranger (TWF) 11
Half-Orc Barbarian (TWF+bite) 11
It seems to be roughly equivalent (less than 10 dmg each time, a lot more damage using a standard action -first attack after moving to an enemy still useful, less crit chances, but less fumble chances too). In fact, you do more damage during the first rounds (example paladin : 10,5+31,5+31,5 = 73,5 dmg on 3 rounds vs 26,5*3 = 79,5 on 3 rounds).
Until higher levels....
With a superpowerful blow (STR x3) it's better, 68 dmg.
And let's not forget it's 23 vs. 68 each time you move !
I think it's fair, you won't full attack an immobile dragon at 18th level...
Lot more mobile, lot less dice rolled, damage similar until mid-levels, loss of damage compensated by the possibility to move more and still doing "full attack" damage when going into melee.
J4RH34D I don't understand the example with the druid... It's natural attack right ? So, not affected by me revision of vital strike.
Lady-J it's not nerfing, it's "freeing" you from "going into melee, full attack full attack full attack" and launching 1d20+dmg per turn instead of 4, with no useless roll because BAB-15 is too low, and "almost" full attack damage on 1 standard action.
The goal is not nerfing but doing almost as damage, considering you can still have a move action and only 1 full-bab roll and not 0/-5/-10/-15 rolls with a possibility to miss and lose 1/4 dmg each time you miss.
EDIT : Oh, and the mythic part of vital strike is done via a new feat, in order to balance with TWF that need the modified Improved TWF feat to stay balanced.
Powerful Blow, good :)
As we have seen, the problem is with non-natural, non-TWF damage, so limiting the feat to "single attack" and "not natural attacks" is logical.
If the hippo cannot use the feat (because natural attack), do you see something that could break ?
Thanks for the time taken to do this !
Let's add that a normal barbarian with a greatsword does on average 69 with 3 iterative attacks at lvl 11.
So, right, 37 is a lot less than 69 !
A TWF has Improved Two-Weapon Fighting to take in order to "vital strike" his second attack.
total = 6d6 + 27 +3 = 61
61 vs 69... damage are more in line with the iterative barbarian.
vs the buffed druid octopus :
This system don't change anything else except, 1d20 thrown, 8 dmg less but 1 move action more.
so, for example, for killing alone a monster with 100hp.
seems balanced with this new feat (how to name it ? :p)
That's the type of reply I appreciate, thanks.
Let's try to adjust before renouncing...
You lose a lot of damage, but enemies too, the reduced effectiveness is the same for enemies..
Vital strike can be used with ranged attacks as far as I know... I just rechecked in forum questions and in the "Practical Guide to Vital Strike, http://rpgbot.net/pathfinder/characters/vital_strike.php ).
For TWF, let's stay at lvl 11 :
Invalidating iterative based fighting style is not a problem, it's normal if we remove iterative attacks so, it's not a problem for me.
Reach builds and natural attack builds ? As natural attacks don't benefit from vital strike (my modified version), I think it's not so terrible for natural attacks builds... As always it'll be good at first levels then decrease in power... right ?
You're right also about "to do more damage than your single attack, the more viable thing is to do a lot of AoO", but I'm not sure "AoO is king in damage output" is worst than "iterative melee is king in damage output"... The problem I see here is for ranged builds that cannot AoO. Still a problem needed to balance.
In short, and thanks to your comments, my conclusion is (sorry it will not be "bad idea let's forged it", I want to try :) )
Hello, here's a little system I'm thinking about...
Removing iterative attacks
These 3 feats are modified to exclude natural attacks and off-hand weapons.
For example, at BAB+17, with Greater TWF, you have a primary weapon attack at full BAB that deals (4x damage dice)+str+misc and an off-hand attack at full BAB-2 that deals (3x damage dice)+str+misc
You lose a little damage you can do, but as you can do Vital Strike and TWF as a standard action, you are more free to do something else with your move action, you are not locked to "go into melee, full attack full attack full attack".
These modifications can be done quickly while playing for monsters, so monsters and PCs will be equal, so no balance problems about it.
What do you think about it ?
Hello, I'm looking for small races, 1st or 3rd party.
Earth, Fire, Air and Water themed small races (like Oread, Ifrit, Sylph and Undine). Don't have to be as thematically charged... For example if Dwarves were small, it would be ok for a "small earth-themed race).
Evil, Good, Shadow, Chaos and Lawful small races (Gnome is already a fey-themed small race, don't need another).
Hello, I'm GMing a game with 1 player in Belkzen.
Now, before she get a tribal token and continue her travel to Urgir, I want something happening with Marotis.
I have no idea.. who could be Marotis' adversaries with wich the PC could take a side.
Some ideas ? :D (and sorry for my bad english.. it's not my native language)
I've started a game for my girlfriend with these rules :
- PC is a gestalt character and important characters could be too.
She made a spell-less ranger//sphere sorcerer (draconic bloodline).
Here's her statblock, tell me what you think about her power. I'm afraid bigger CR encounters would be equal to "too much damage".