proftobe's page

Nidal the land of eternal light ruled by the insane priests of Sheylin devoted to endless pursuit of "beautiful art" that slowly drives you insane. While her brother attempts to bring the balm of night back to the land

Atarlost wrote:

N. Jolly wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Most Bards I run into, swap out Versatile Performance through the Arcane Duellist archetype.

Most (good) Rogue archetypes trade out trapfinding and you still find people clamoring that it's one of the Rogue's main niches.

A ranger and a bard have more skills, combat, and magic than a fighter and a rogue even if the bard is an arcane duelist.

I have discussed this topic at length and have had my fill of rogue vs. everyone else in threads like this. I'm not going through that song and dance routine again.

You don't like playing rogues.. I've got a radical idea... don't play them.

I've got an idea if you don't like rogue threads don't post in them or even read them.

BigDTBone wrote:

Actually, that would be great. And the next step would be that before they print the book to go back in and remove all those options and replace them with ones that don't require that tag.

Sure, because it's BADWRONGFUN to take any option that isn't optimized. Look at the Op's reaction to my taking a level of Aristocrat- it wasn't optimum! Oh noes!

And if you listen to the optimizers the PHB is gonna be a little thin as it will only have one class in it. But you WILL have FUN playing The Wizard. We have told you it is the best. Thus it is the most fun. You WILL comply with our concept of FUN otherwise you are having BADWRONGFUN.

That wasn't what he was saying about your aristocrat level. He was asking why you would feel it necessary to change class. It wasn't because you needed a level in aristocrat. Bards are perfectly capable of being aristocrats. Because another class had the name of the concept and since that class had the name you needed it written on the top of the character sheet. Also there is nothing in the game that makes mechanically inferior choices better role playing. Please stop acting like it does.

Terminus est. It means the end

wraithstrike wrote:

Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:

you do realize this trait is a campaign trait for the Mummy's Mask AP coming out next month, right?

Most AP campaign traits have a few things in common (barring a couple of the campaigns)

1) They are in many cases better than a standard trait
2) They are almost always not allowed in PFS.

1. There are campaign traits in the APG so it is possible to see them outside of campaigns.

2. PFS is not the standard. It has houserules so that those parcitipating wont deal with too much table variance. If MM had come out before the APG, it would likely be in there also. Ultimate Campaign also has campaign traits, so being a campaign trait does not automatically make it "too good". Reactionary is not a campaign trait, but it seems to be one of the more popular ones. Following that any trait granting perception as a class skill would probably be at the top also, and that the one in Ultimate Campaign that does that is also not a campaign trait.

But in a home campaign, any GM could easily say no to whatever they want to say no to.

So I don't understand your point.

EDIT: To be more clear... If you are playing Skulls and Shackles, it wouldn't make much sense to take the Carrion Crown campaign traits. So the GM could easily say no for RP reasons as well as power reasons.

Its not a campaign trait. Despite what people seem to believe people of the sands(the book that contains the trait) isn't the Mummy Mask players guide.

The thing that everyone seems to forget is that Pre 3 there were different advancements of experience. The rogue was balanced in those games by damn near leveling twice as fast as everyone else. The fighter was balanced by having political power and awesome saves baked into the game. The issue really came to a head following 3e's making everyone the same advancement table(that doesn't work. You'll never convince me that a 9th level rogue is the same power level as a 9th level cleric) Add in the PF collapse of the skill system that destroyed rogue niche protection. People can have fun playing a rogue, but one of the main issues is that when people are defending the rogue they use things that literally ANY class can use(role play, out of the box tactics, etc as the reason to play a rogue. I agree with Kirth(and wish he would put out a book of kirthfinder martial fixes that were balanced against regular PF I'd buy it in a heart beat). You want to know what martials should be able to do: look up Kirthfinder and read the feats, skills, and martial classes(he also fixed multi class but thats for antoher thread)

or at least to no longer have any impact on the core game. PFS is just another set of house rules set around particular parameters
1. relatively low level
2. humanoid opponenets
3. doesnt allow the GM to change scenario based upon player build/skill
These conditions having any impact on "regular" pathfinder is beyond ridiculous, especially given that PFS has a method by which certain rules are banned that don't change the core game. All in all this PFS problem could have been handled the same way the Viv Alchemist was handled(which wasn't difficult to implement it just didnt fit the style of play and ban crane wing in PFS play.) SO given these facts I would like start a petition to disband PFS play if its going to have this kind of affect of the rules.

I blame the swashbuckler. During the playtest its signature parry caught a LOT of heat for not being as good as Crane Wing. So instead of making the parry better they made Crane Wing worse. There's no way this was properly play tested given that it basically negates riposte. Its simply another knee jerk reaction like nerfing investigator because the rogue sucks that seem to be happening more and more.

I blame the swashbuckler. During the playtest its signature parry caught a LOT of heat for not being as good as Crane Wing. So instead of making the parry better they made Crane Wing worse. There's no way this was properly play tested given that it basically negates riposte. Its simply another knee jerk reaction like nerfing investigator because the rogue sucks that seem to be happening more and more.

How to get SLAs:
(mostly before level 6)

Racial:
Elf - Dreamspeaker: 5th level arcane
Elf - Lightbringer: 0th Arcane
Elf - Envoy: 0th and 1. level arcane
Gnome - standard: 0th level arcane, 1. level divine
Gnome - Fell magic: 0th and 1. level arcane
Gnome - Magical Linguist: 0. and 1. arcane
Gnome - Pyromaniac: 0th level arcane, 2nd level divine
Half-Elf: Drow Magic gives you 0th and 2. level arcane, 1. level divine.
Aasimar: Daylight is a 3. level arcana SLA. SNA II and Corruption Resistance are 2. level divine, Lesser Age Resistance is level 4 arcane, the other options are level 2 arcane.
Tiefling: Darkness is 2. level arcane. They can get 1. level divine with deathwatch, lvl 2 divine with death Knell, and the other options are arcane 2.

Other races have SLAs as well, most notably Drow, Fetchlings, Kitsune and the elemental outsiders.

Feats:
Heavenly Radiance (Aasimar): lvl 2 divine at level 3, level 3 divine at level 5, level 4 arcane at level 7, and level 7(!) divine at level 9
Eldritch Heritage - you can snag a lvl 1 SLA
drow nobility - 1. level arcane
improved drow nobility - level 3 divine
Spider step - level 2 arcane

all of these as well as the feat alluring allow you to qualify

Try the APG under I in the new classes

Erastil's entry isn't as specific, it says all of his followers are proficient in bows. But his holy symbol is a bow made out of antlers so...you know....kind of central.

For Gorum

"Given that his favored weapon is the greatsword, the use of shields is less common than in other martial faiths"

Also, if anyone could cite where I or anyone said the only weapon that could be used is the favored one, that would be great.

Because what I believe I've said, consistently, is that the favored weapon should be favored.

But maybe that is a harder position to argue against, so you know, just make up stuff I said I guess...

so as long as the weapon is made of antler its ok. Kind of a weird mandate but small flavor decisions made long before the class was written should define this class.

Ok since you literally cherry picked the one weapon with good backstory hows about you tell us the story of phasmara dagger abadars crossbow erastils bow or gorums. Greatsword. Ill wait

Give them cha to damage and as a bonus on saves for a panache. The developers cant argue that cha is an overpowered Stat since its the most popular dump Stat in the game. Allow parry and reposte to work exactly like crane style with the ability to parry multiple attacks as you level. Add the following and lose the ability to take fighter only feats and it should be fixed IMO.

Gunslingers. They start out underpowered but as touch AC falls behind as you level. Its more of an issue with firearms than the class but with proper feats its like archery but better.

The thing that all of you that are saying that things would be more advanced are missing is that things are amazingly advanced. Its just personally advanced instead of societal advancement. PC types have access to the ability to teleport be raised from the dead instant healing wands/staffs that alter reality in a thousand ways personal flight in potion form cloning planar travel swords and arrows that could literally cut through battle ship steel like its butter. Magic in the context of PF makes the individual more powerful not society. Think of it as the differeance between real world tech and the technology that superheroes have access too. The stuff the fantastic four and iron man have access to is ridiculously more advanced but its personal because they don't want to/don't trust everyone to have access to it.

So how are the other monks doing against the lich? If I remember Bruno basically had a coin flip chance at winning. How about we see how dabble and the other fighter and monk do.

In JustinRocket's defense, by disallowing certain archetypes it sounds like you're saying "Monks suck unless you're a Monk".

If you're going to allow the non-Core stuff, you have to allow the non-Core stuff...

The problem is that the two camps are using the same word, but have completely different definitions from camp to camp. The monk is fine camp are referring to the class as it exists in the game. The archetypes of that class work and work well so what's the problem. Those in the monk needs help/monks suck(its unfortunate that such a large group is unfortunately in only one camp) use the word monk to mean either a shaolin monk or a mobile wushish skirmisher who's best weapon is his unarmed body. The fluff suggests that monk class should be what the second camp expects, but its not. All of those concepts are better served by another class. The problem seems to be that those in the first camp always seem to miss it when those of us in the second camp say monk's suck, but they have good archetypes. Then get confused when the thread reaches the inevitable building phase and they produce a tiefling/aasimar(if a build doesn't work with mutiple races then the race is cool not the class) archetype monk and we say that's not what we were talking about. We mean that the class doesn't fit its fluff/expectation. While the other side says the archetypes(which aren't that mobile skirmisher mystic in a robe) work just fine.

Also if you create a sensei it should be compared to support classes like full casters and bard. while it has some unique abilities the others is often much better and offer better long term assistance as well as offering either more damage or more control.

Not to try to be a jerk, but without the SLA ability the prestige class is pretty gimped add into it that you're pulling just spell casting from 2 classes chock full of awesome class features that don't work or wont scale. My question is what exactly do you want this character to do because in my opinion the Witch is already a pretty kick ass mystic theurge all on its own without picking up prestige classes that'll end up gimping your character. I say just play a witch or druid and flavor them as if they had the other classes fluff(if that's what you're after) if on the other hand you are bound and determined pick up magical knack, beg your GM to allow esoteric training from the guild rules(which I'm thinking will be a no go given the SLA comment) or just recognize that you chose to be underpowered. You wont even be able to do the only thing that the traditional cleric/wiz theurge had going for it and excel at buff/support. The witch spells are mainly debuff with control and druid spells are mainly control(especially at low level). Control is going to be difficult with 2 casting stats. Maybe play a half orc scarred witch doctor so that con does all the witch heavy lifting. All I can say is good luck.

Try this one more time. Just because you think you've won the argument doesn't mean that you have. In this instance a GM can read the rule another way ruling that a damage increase isn't an augmentation within the dukes of the game but rather a class feature instead and without an official ruling they will be just as correct as you are no matter how you see it. It doesnt matter that you think the definition of augment wins you the argument it can still be cinsidered a class feature rather than an aument as defined by the parameters of the feat. It still seems like DESPITE your /increasingly vehement arguments that either just as many or more people on this thread disagree with your interpretation including many PFS judges. So until a FAQ comes down or you get a venture captain to post his opinion the non augment interpretation is just as valid a reading.

Ok in order as far as I can tell
1 the eidelon math is easy to screw up. A lot of the issues come from this
2 the class is easily the most complicated with a lot of pain in the ass rules that only apply to that class.
3 its not a class with 6 spell casting levels. They get the best of a 9 level list squished into 6 levels. Allowing lots of crafting issues since they get these spells earlier.
4 if you follow the RAW design encounters for a day then they can use their SLA's to Nova boss encounters while still edilonning through other encounters
5 conjuration is a pretty kick ass spec all.its.own without giving it light armor and standard action summons.
6 its almost as ridiculously SAD as the wizard.
I apologize if I missed anything from the dozens of Summoner threads.

Here's a basic fact about high end play. Martial and skill monkeys are limited by the rules while full casters are limited by social contract. If the caster player possess any significant degree of system mastery its relatively easy to "break" the game. That doesn't mean that there aren't DM's who cant compensate and keep things under control. Its just a LOT harder. My personal favorite being a character trying to create unlimited wealth through mercantile application of spells and then sulking when the DM would tell him that there wasnt that much money. It finally lead to the DM saying sure you can do that and I can make your character have a heart attack. SO lets just tone it down.

Personal aside as to the Markthus issue. What he isnt understanding is that even though the spell would allow you to create the sno cone wish factory no sane DM would allow it. In this case the DM uses his fiat to stop the abuse that the spell allows. Situations like this are the reason that rule zero and fiat exist. The designers can't anticipate every broken rule. That's why we have RAW(which allows this manipulation) Vs. RAI(which stops it) debate.

OK thanks to Lormyr I would like to revise my opinion of both monks and rules bloat. The monk class is fine as long as you can completely handpick every magic item slot that you need AND a PHD in system mastery. In the base campaigns though you don't have that ability to hand pick your items. The best you'll ever get is a 75% chance of items under 16k in a metropolis and Varisia the place where the majority of AP's take place doesn't even have one of those. So in games where magic items aren't miraculously available the monk lags behind.

Then on to my next point I didn't think that rules bloat had gotten to this point, but seeing what Lormyr was able to do using the overpowered race books, the cheesirific empyreal book, and quite frankly ridiculous seeker of secrets has convinced me that PF has already reached critical mass. To the me it seems like Race and magic items now do the majority of the heavy lifting and class has little to do with it. Don't believe me take any of Lormyr's builds and change the class and watch how little it changes. My personal fav is to take his defensive monk build and rebuild as a fighter. The ridiculous AC stays the same (within 2-3 points) with better damage and slightly worse saves. Most of the magic items easily switch with only a few changes for different classes. IE the amulet of mighty fists changing into a +4 agile weapon, amulet of nat armor, and gloves of dueling while the bracers turn into +5 mithril armor and a decent bow. After you've done that change the race on those builds and see how much they depend on specific racial feats or even batter chose a different god instead of an empyreal lord and watch
them fall behind.

It may seem like I'm angry at Lormyr or moving goalposts, even though I never established any,(rant for another day), but I'm not. He's merely shown me exactly how out of control the game has gotten when the magic item lists stay the same from character to character when the best races and feats depend on the last book to come out. So thanks to Lormyr I'm firmly in the PF 2.0 camp and probably wont allow anything outside of the core and ultimate books(ultimate race and equipment excepted). It may have even pushed me back into the arms of D&D next because of the inherent flaws in this system that wont be addressed.

proftobe wrote:

Actually its greater dispel cast at 20th level so he gets to target 5 of your items.

Nope. He can dispel 5 spells, he can only suppress 1 item for 1d4 rounds.

Also bracers have a CL of twice their bonus...

1. Since the ability to target items and objects is under the description of targeted dispel I'd say that you were wrong and he would stop 5 items

Does Proftrobe think I won't post a build one of these times? :)

Just keeping you honest :)

In earlier editions they leveled a lot faster than other classes and in earlier editions they were the only ones with "skills" add in the fact that in those editions if you missed a trap everyone had to make a new character.

proftobe wrote:

Marthkus wrote:

I find that the more interesting out of combat situations require neither spells nor skills to solve. Even the more boring ones like a locked door can be kicked down most of the time.

you've also stated that your group roleplays social encounters without using social skills rolls. So of course you don't see an issue with the fighters out of combat abilities.

You're using your groups interpretation to make a broad statement that isn't RAW true.

False. You need skills for persuasion. You don't need it for talking your way out of situations.

According to the rules, yes you do. You need skills to make people believe what you are saying(bluff or diplomacy). I'm not saying your group is doing it wrong and I've activated the game police. What I'm saying is that the way you play marginalizes any social skills on the sheet.

I really like the idea of narrative power being based on level while at the same time allowing the fighter to reap the most reward. Things to remember most of the other classes possess magic powers, but the most important thing to remember in most campaigns is that magic is not science. It does not empower "equally" anyone holding a gun is hilding a gun, but hand a peasant a scroll. Most people in a kingdom have no understanding of the ability. They know it exists and may even know what it can do, but they dont understand it.

While they may react positively to someone with inhuman power they probably wont(see any xman comic or barker's nightbreed) they'd fear the power and become jealous of those using it. Every other class would fall into this category in one way or another, except the fighter. A man using his inhuman(but understandable) skills to compete at the level of people with powers. Look at how much narrative power Batman has because he's a just a human. He actually intimidates an entire city into behaving better. Superhumans(both good and evil) are terrified because they know he's competing at their level through sheer will(and a LOT of expensive equipment. Sound familiar). That's a reason why fighters(and other martials to a lesser extent) would wield more narrative power from their levels.

The main problem with stuff being "fresh" on either side, is that until something changes, there's nothing new to discuss.

I just post in the hopes of A.) Convincing other people, B.) Venting frustration, and C.) In the slim hope that Paizo will take some of these complaints to heart one day.

The problem is that from several employee comments they don't think there's an issue. IMO they're still playing 2nd edition with PF rules. The problem is that they are still using their old assumptions about how and why the game works while carrying 3rd edtions flaws forward. Don't get me wrong they fixed a LOT of the game, but several things show thay they still have an older edition mindset. I recognize it because I was the same way until several different gamers pointed small things out to me and it changed how I saw the game. Here's a small list

1.The rogue is a great class as long as you hold onto the old idea that traps are TPK's. Its also a great class because it can still do everything it used to do back in the day(use rogue type skills). BUT both of those ideas are no longer true. Traps are an encounter like any other just as easily beaten with no rogue or even the ability to find magic traps. It also ignores the fact that the(Collapsed from 3) skill list now allows an incredible number of classes to fill most of those roguish roles. Then there's the ever expanding list of spells that perform every(almost)thing that these skills can do with almost no resources lost. It all swims into focus

2.Fighters are a great class because they can still do more damage than everyone else just like in previous editions. Never mind that previous editions weren't based on hex grid combat, that a fighter did significantly more damage(as a percent of things HD) in one shot than in 3rd or PF. PLus fighters used to have some of the best saves in the games, but the fact that they only got one good save plus the "arms race" of pushing DC's that didn't exist in earlier editions. Add in the fact that fighters are the only class without supernatural powers to get 2 skill points because he doesn't need skills he has feats(unless he can't qualify for them because of stats needed) I think point buy has hurt the fighter as well, but I'll save my point buy argument for another rant.

Now having said all these things I'd like to add that I love this game, the company, and I've never seen a company that was this proactive or open with their fans(hell I worked in gaming distribution and couldn't get the kind of answers from the people making the games at some companies that Paizo employees just post to the net and Zocchi was trying to buy literal palettes of their products). I just think they fall into the same trap that others do. They assume that everyone is playing a very similar game to their game and that's not true.

Depending on point buy and build they can have a difficult first couple of levels(Str based have AC problems Dex based lack their defining feat) but after that their burst potential and survivability(but generally being a round behind most fron liners they don't want to melee without some form of short term buff although spell dancer helps that out a lot) they do extremely well from about 5-11(12) and then bow out to the pure casters(like most classes) with one exception. The hexcrafter magus can use his hexes to keep him in the game moving from burst damage to battlefield control/save or suck mage in armor pretty easily.

Ashiel wrote:

Steve Geddes wrote:

The audience for RPG rules are people who play RPGs, not the hardcore ones who post on a forum. (Presuming your 9/10 statistic was accurate).

.
"Lots of people on the internet agree with me" is not actually substantiation or we'd be outlawing vaccinations.

The idea that sales records are an indication of the quality of a product is an extremely faulty premise and is often more reliant on marketing and financial backing than the actual quality of the product.

Uh...no it isn't.

People pay money for products that they believe are worth paying money for.

If people aren't willing to buy your product, the fact that a group of people on a messageboard forum thread you choose to frequent like it means pretty much nothing in the broad scheme of things.

To quote you toward someone else in the thread.

Ashiel wrote:

Stop being foolish.

Since I've actually worked in distribution(I was a salesperson for a major game distributor when 3e hit.) I've seen a LOT of great games get little to no sales traction because of a lot of that had nothing to do with how great their games were. They didn't make a lot of money because the distributors didn't believe in them so they under ordered, they lacked for money themselves so while their ideas were great their products looked like crap so no one bought it. Hell Major RPG companies with proven track records made big risk gambles that when they didn't take off hurt them immeasurabley. When WEG went under we received every single TORG item they had for free, we literally just paid shipping, they just wanted it out of the warehouse. Remember the white wolf aberrant scion skirmish game that WW bought the machines to produce the mini's for before they didn't sell. On the other hand the head of sales for the star wars CCG was an awesome salesperson, even if he knew nothing about the game, so he managed to push it to a level it wouldn't have had especially in non RPG/book store sales. SO yes as a matter of fact sales, while a factor, isn't the be all and end all of how good a product is.

Just like core they range from really powerful(full casters) to badly designed(monk rogue) or a good idea, but bad execution(I'm gonna catch flack for this, but the base fighter).

cavalier at best kinda meh. the challenge mechanic is cool, but that damn animal companion sucks(unless your character is small) and it got saddled with teamwork feats for no reason other than someone though teamwork feats were a good idea.

Alchemist suffers from really weird execution. They're kind of all over the place what with mutagen, bombs, and extracts that take a standard action. IMO the mutagen should be more of a class feature, sort of like rage, that the alchemist can invoke at anytime for a certain number of times/day. To me it feels like they took 2 1/2 classes and jammed them together.

inquisitor if alchemists are weirdly executed then inquisitors are just strange. Its a divine skill monkey with class features that feel like thy were literally pulled out of a hat AND they suffer from teamwork feat although a much lighter case.

witch great class, but more needs to be done with the patrons and the hexes need a serious overhaul. If you want to play debuff or save or suck they're great(maybe even to great) but the rest blow

oracle amazing class with great execution, except for curses. It honestly feels like the curse design teams were in seperate rooms when they were developed and no one could decide how much of a drawback and benefit each should give. As it stands there are a couple of no brainers and a list of things to avoid like the plague.

Gunslinger. extemely poorly designed. A full BAB class that shoots a weapon that targets touch AC sucks until about 5th level then quickly steals the show especially if you allow alchemical cartridges. But then again this class could suffer because I hate the PF firearm rules. Touch AC why?

Magus great class, but kinda locked into a couple of builds that revolve around either shocking grasp or that natural attack frost spell that escapes me right now. Needs a little more breadth in its attack spells(something that isnt elemental) and has 3 amazing archtypes that make it even stronger: black blade, kensai, and hexcrafter

Samurai. Another class that's kind of all over the place the best thing I can say about it is that its better than a base cavalier, but what does that mean.Primarily its not stuck with teamwork feats You're still stuck with a suck animal companion(once again its a great class for the horizontally challenged)

Ninja. close to what a rogue should be. If you gave them evasion and trap sense itd almost fix the rogue class. Almost

Summoner The worst of the bunch. Great idea horrible exectuion. A class that needs a character audit every level and you have to really familiar with its incredible fiddely and unique rules or it turns into godzilla. No just no

Dragon78 wrote:

Wasn't Distant worlds the only softcover campaign setting book they reprinted?

I would love a Distant Worlds hardcover book on the planets, moons, etc. of Golarion's solar system. But I would also want hardcover books for the other continents of Golarion as well. I don't see reason that this may happen one day, I would give up any hardcover book(or groups of softcover) in a year for any of these except a Bestiary(and maybe psionics book).

One of the few we reprinted, but hardly the only one.

And again... sales isn't the only factor. Capacity to actually MAKE a hardcover is a huge factor.

I apologize for the misunderstanding. I could have sworn someone said something to that affect. Maybe I misunderstood something that was said about capacity and translated it into sales. Anyway sorry to add tot he confusion.

You had me at Dinosaur riding lizard men empire any else just makes it even better.

Plus stop giving every class/archetype access to fighter only abilities. Weapon training and treat as x level fighter seems to be the go to move.

Classes with comparable power level to PF base classes
no weird mechanics
Cybernetics
Psionics
power armor
Build your own aliens races
Transhuman genetics
Basic comparability with vanilla PF
Great starship rules from dogfighting to capital ships

The issue isn't the Summoner its people not reading all the rules that limit the eideolon. Although ti be honest they're kind of all over the place. Its a badly designed class with a completely unique ruleset that even some people at paizo dislike-wing allow

Look man you post a variation of this argument with slightly different class or phrasing close to once a week. Lets break it down
1. Mechanically the rogue and fighter are probably the weakest class.
2 this doesn't mean they have no flair-people.don't like to play them-or that someone with a high degree of system mastery cant make one that works.
That's it no matter how many threads about this you post. You're not going to convince anyone they're not going to convince you. Agree to disagree with people who think that mechanical advantage isn't a bard word and while other people accept that optimization isn't the way to go in every game

My issue is that every other class has a mechanical advantage over the fighter. What I mean is that if you had to buy the individual abilities of a class the fighter comes out the worst of all the martials. Everyone else that gets 2 Skill points/level has significant supernatural powers. Everyone except for the fighter(and rogue) who only gets 1 good save has significant supernatural abilitites. Fighters do win DPR, but not by much. Having said that I love the fighter class I like the fluff behind the class,but I think that it should receive a small power bump in keeping with the general buffs that the other legacy classes received. Something as small as 4 skill points, another good save, and if fighters are the king of feats let them be the king of feats. Allow them to ignore certain prerequisites like the monk and Ranger or make fighter only feats scalable abilities from other feats. Weapon spec is built into weapon focus if a fighter takes it that feat that lets you pierce DR built into PA for fighters ETC ETC. While we're at it make armor training a dodge bonus so that it helps every fighter not just the ones with high DEX.

Because every variation of the Summoner should be banned.
1. The base class is a rickety collection of rules that require concentrated work that is easily made too powerful by misreading the rules or "accidentally' having to many evolution points
2. Because if you allow Summoners every wizard specialist should have its own base class that breaks action economy without using resources.
3. I'm pretty sure one of the developers said the Summoner should never have seen print.
4. Your DM hates Pokemon
end rant against Summoners now for specifics against this archetype
1. It effectively doubles point buy
2. It requires 15 pages of FAQ to play correctly(I exaggerate, but not by much)
3. Its banned in PFS play(Don't personally care, but its a reason)
4. Its flavor doesn't fit into a number of campaign worlds(including almost all published worlds.)
5. Watch the guyver on you own time
6. There is no number 6
7. Because its hard for mishapen Outsiders with a human body contained inside them to operate in most towns
8. Wouldn't really work for most AP's for reasons contained above

The dinosaur riding lizard man empire hinted at in southern garund begins to move into the mwangi expanse conquering territory. The whole episode starts when the displaced Gorilla King moves his army into Osirion fleeing the rapidly expanding lizard empire.

My personal ideas about fighter fixes

1. fighters should be able to ignore preq on bonus feats just like rangers and monks.
2 4 skill/level everyone else with 2 skill point is ridiculously loaded with supernatural powers and abilities
3 perception as a class skill
4 I like the bravery bonus applying against enchantment and compulsion
5 pounce as a 10-12th level fighter only feat

The issue is that EVERY other martial class is basically a fighter tricked out mechanically better. Yes a fighter has more feats and wins DPR, but he doesn't win it by that much compared to the other martials.

to me the issue with rogues isn't that they aren't hitting, but that their talents aren't very good this coupled with archetypes of other classes being able to do everything a rogue can do while still having other class powers(vivesectionist SA, Archeologist traps, rangers scout, and the in general bard/ranger ability to skill monkey almost as well)

to me the main rogue nerfs are the collapse of the skill list from 3.x to PF combined with the way that traps aren't TPK's anymore. I think that the ninja was a move in the right direction(and they make awesome roguish characters) My opinion is that rogues only really need slightly better talents and a mechanic similar to the ninja's ki(I can't remember where I read it first but someone called them panache points) and talents that fit these new panache abilities.

1. neutral evil
2. daemon
3. gambling spite revenge
4. Mizer

Mizer is said to be a mortal who won his power in a game of chance with a fallen horseman, but later lost his name & identity trying to sneak into the temple of the oinodemon. He appears mostly as a stereotypical gambler always from some far away land. He might appear Ulfen in the dragon empires or Arcadian in Cheliax, but he's always winning. He quickly zeroes in on those with something unique to wager; he game starts simple enough with gold changing hands quickly then its your magic items finally its your attributes, memories, or even years off your life. The thing is that's when he's at his least dangerous. Its when he starts to lose and begins to offer you unique advantages that the trap is sprung. He can grant anything that he's won(which is almost anything) but its always with a catch. Win physical attributes and your appearance slowly changes into that of the person Mizer won it from. Win skills and he'll grant you the memories of the person he won it off of until you're no longer sure who you were when the game started. He's also always up for a trade offering those about to engage in revenge just the right tool for the job, but like all his boons there's always a horrific twist. His favorite targets are the friends and family of virtuous heroes twisting them slowly until they have nothing left but their faith in Mizer. He then usually has them attack their more famous family member leading to their death and a tarnishing of the heroes legend

I love this guide, but are you going to change it to reflect the new prestige class abilities? Like the new dex fighter love etc etc

they aren't afraid of bows storing spells. But RAW if spell storing could be put on a bow then it could be placed in ammunition and that's the nightmare they're preventing.

yes, RAW you can use any spell you can cast through your gun. Sor, cleric, or my fave magus. a spellslinger 1/magus x is a strong build

what are you taking for 5 & 7 th level