solarius's page

35 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

"But Wizards are still better" really doesn't help much when discussing class balance.
For example: If I give a martial class, say fighter a new ability called "super strong". What this ability does is increase damage by 1000 points. Even with this ability fighter is still weaker than wizard, because all he can do is just one hit every monster he encounters, while wizard can SoS/SoD multiple monsters a time and create world,command reality, etc.

So by "But wizards are still better!" giving fighter a passive 1000 point damage boost is perfectly balanced and not op.

I think comparing to a wizard shouldn't be the only thing we consider on this matter.

For ways to circle rage power, check out "flawed Scarlet and Green Cabochon Ioun stone" , plus "Internal Fortitude" rage power if needed.

The system works both ways, and torn down the offensive side's power helps pc more than hurts them. There is reason behind why keen and improved critical no longer stack from dnd 3.0 to 3.5. Monsters die too easily doesn't matter at all because DM can bring more or tougher monsters the next time; PC easily get killed/disabled/possessed every session is another story. By the same logic, bring up the DC makes PC suffer, while hardly hurt the monsters (they are supposed to die anyway, just a little quicker now)

Oh, and monsters benefit from your rule more than PCs do, because usually their HD/caster level is much higher.

Offence > defense in PF because
1. No threat system so high def low atk means get ignored.
2. Specialize in 1 way of offense (physical or spell) you can deal with all enemies, specialize in 1 way of defense(AC, Fort, ref, or will save) you are still vulnerable, and specialize in all has too high a cost
3. in the end there are offense just go through all defenses (spells ignore save/SR, or still have effects anyway), so better don’t' bother

By listing out the type of modifiers doesn't tell the whole story.

Let’s look at ability modifier along. As a wizard I could (and most will do) start with 18+2 racial that's 20, upgrade Int booster ASAP and cast wish or eat a book to make my Int to be 20+5+5+6=36, that's a +9 to DC

On the receiving end of course you have your own ability modifier to counter that caster's ability moodier, a simple 36 con, 36 dex and 36 wisdom will do... WAIT, is it possible at all? Most likely you will find an attribute that's only 14 or lower (likely to be dex), that nets the caster 7 points in advantage

That is because offensive full caster is extremely SAD, at the receiving end you will never catch up with them in term of ability score.

and let's take a look at level VS base save. ONLY monk has 3 good saves, so everyone else get at least 1 bad save. By lvl 20 good save means 12 and bad mean 6. Since one DC against 3 saves, caster can always choose a low save so it's 9 vs 6, that's another 3. Yes that's using the highest lvl spell, but if you wish to reliably one shot a lvl 20 opponent using a spell you've been using since lvl 3, the thing that goes wrong is your expectation not the system.

Most races don't have a straight up racial save bonus, except dwarf and Halfling. The ones that only protect from a single school can be bypassed by using spells from another school very easily.

Magical item bonus I give you that, so 5 points back.

7+3-5=5, the competition is still 5 points favorable to casters. Which means a 75% chance of one hit the target. To archive "fail only when they roll a 1 or a 2.",you still need to get a 12-13 increase in ALL saves. Seriously tell me where you can find them...

And we haven’t reached the spells that ignore save or still have effects even if saved yet. I doubt anyone on the board would agree casters need a boost to their power. They are THE most powerful being in the system already.

Not really. Very few monsters got Armor AC that can be ignored by brilliant energy weapon, and by lvl 14 a reasonablely optimized full bab martial would have attack value overflow anyway.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Turgan wrote:

There are fighter archetypes who keep weapon training: Two-handed fighter (weapon training only with two handed weapons), the Lore Warden (just keeping it), Corsair (with a new weapon group), Aldori Swordlord (starts at level 9) or the dragoon (Spear Training: "must take weapon training" with the spear group). Maybe there are even more.

Currently, I would not allow dueling gloves for fighter archetypes without weapon training, because I see nothing in the rules to support that. All the archetypes that have a variant weapon training ability, but where the describing text still clearly says that it is weapon training, are allowed to use the full benefits of the gloves.

I don't think they are a patch, they remind me of the paladins silver smite bracelet, the ranger spell instant enemy and so forth.

Don't forget: the gloves are not only useful if you have the weapon training ability:

"These supple gloves grant the wearer a +4 bonus to her CMD against disarm attacks, attempts to sunder her wielded weapons, and effects that cause her to lose her grip on her weapons (such as grease). The wearer doesn’t drop held weapons when panicked or stunned."

There are several items at the 15000gp to 16000gp price range that grant the "treat one class feature of a class as if 4 levels higher" effect and some more. Namely Robe of Arcane Heritage for sorcerer, Necklace of Ki Serenity for monk, bracelet of mercy/bracers of merciful knight for paladins and maybe some more. So that’s the market price. On the other hand, weapon training’s effect increases by one every 4 levels, so by granting a plus 2 bonus to weapon training, gloves of dueling is effectively granting a "treat one class feature of a class as if 8 levels higher" effect for the same price as others(if not cheaper. the ones for sorcerer and monk are both 16000gp).

So this item is clearly underpriced, to make it price fairly it should only grant a +1 bonus (4 levels higher) instead of +2. Being "the single best hand item option for fighter" only further proves the point.

Neo2151 wrote:
solarius wrote:

If by some means you get 1 additional move actions and 1 standard actions, how many full-round actions you can take in one round? 1 or 2?

If the answer to above question is "1" then quick runner's shirt can't let you make full round after movement because full attack doesn't require a move + standard, but a full-round that consumes all you effort in the round.

The answer is 1, but the shirt works because you're moving as a Swift Action, which is allowed via everything I've linked to already. (Tired of copy/pasting.)

(Unless activating the shirt is the Swift action - In that case, then no, the shirt would not provide a "Pounce" effect. - Probably better to assume this case, as it says you gain a movement action as a swift action rather than being allowed to "move x feet" as a swift action.)

So basically if it is worded "you gain a move action through WOP", then you can't move and full attack. If it is worded "by using a free action you gain a move action through WOP", then you can...

Well, that's kind of lame...

If by some means you get 1 additional move actions and 1 standard actions, how many full-round actions you can take in one round? 1 or 2?

If the answer to above question is "1" then quick runner's shirt can't let you make full round after movement because full attack doesn't require a move + standard, but a full-round that consumes all you effort in the round.

Barbarians and fighters are walking gods while spellcasters are flying gods ^^

Truth be told, since both gods and wizards use imaginary powers (call it arcane magic, divine magic or god's power as you like), and there's no distinctive seperation between them, spellcasters are much more closer to gods than "mundane" class. The better you use your imaginary power (full caster), the closer you are.

Like what Nether wizards used to said:"gods are just wizards that wield magic that we haven't discovered...yet"

If you are talking about the background characters then I believe they will be just fine. In fights they charge up and chop up whatever they need to chop up and leave the complicated matters to their wizard friends. During the time they don't adventure they live a life as if magic never or seldom plays a part.

The background doesn't go with game mechanic. If everything happens according to mechanic, a lvl 20 fighter king could be assassinated every day by evil wizards if not under the protection of similar level spell casters, cause neither him or his royal guards can stand up to a prepared caster, and by no means he can know in advance that a mage assassin is coming without the help of his own mage friends.

But don't worry, his good friend cleric in his adventure days would bring him back every day with a (relatively) acceptable amount of expense from kingdom treasury and a spell slot in both 4th and 7th lvl, so his subjects won't notice their king died (again) this morning.

Currently rogues suffer both in and out of combat. In combat offensively he lacks the opportunity to land his SA frequently enough. Defensively his poor hp and AC makes him a easy target. Out of combat rogue suppose to be the best skill user but in reality he get matched or even surpassed by other classes. Everyone has his skill rank capped at level+3+ability modifier + feats anyway, so a rogue sneaking is no better than a wizard if the wizard max out his sneak and get a sneaking trait.

So I propose following fixes:
1. Make rogue easier to qualify for flanking. Rogue from lvl X onwards can flank a enemy as long as the flanking partner is not adjacent to him, or even remove the restriction at higher level, making rogue show his worth as long as there’s another friendly adjacent to the target.
2. Defensive roll which works like mounted combat, allow rogue using opposing acrobatic check to negate physical attack, X times per round, with X increasing with rogue level
3. Better skill user. Allow rogue to choose one class skill as his favored skill and add half his class level on it, and then allow the rogue to chose more favored skill as he levels.
4. Modify rogue talents to apply various conditions like shatter armor(AC penalty), negate DR on his SA without sacrificing SA dice. Making rogue’s combat role support fighter and condition inflictor.


Atarlost wrote:
The problem with basing AC on BAB is that it's the evasive classes like rogues that should have the highest unarmored AC, not the hulking heavy armor classes like paladins and cavaliers.

By defination AC measures how good you can avoid enemy hitting you effectively, so it includes dodge, thick hide, magical barrier or full plate...and also the ability to parry enemy's attack with your weapon.

It is reasonable to say professional soldiers would parry away more attack than a thief, so rougue (or maybe monk) should have the highest touch ac to represent their nimbleness, but not necessarily highest unarmored ac cause fighters can protect himself with his sword skill as long as he's not empty handed.

kyrt-ryder wrote:

-5 or 1/2 BAB are CRAZY levels of penalty that make the option a non-starter.

-4 is the highest I was willing to consider, and even that's pretty bad. -2 or -3 are actually reasonable.

calm down and make some builds before cry out "crazy!". You will realise the expected dpr falls nicely between full attack and single attack if you optimize reasonablely. If you factor in combat buff and debuff, things can really work out.

I would suggest a weaker pounce for everyone, and the ones who have pounce just get the full version.

My take is using only half your bab for moved full attack. The penalty increases with level yes, but that's to mitigate the faster pace of dpr increase. If we make a static penalty like -5, it hurts the most when you are at the lowest level that benefit from it, then as you level up and gear up the penalty become less and less relevent.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
3.5 Loyalist wrote:
If you can't spell rogue, and you think scouting ahead is a bad move, I don't think you should be talking about rogues, or anyone should listen to what you have to say.

I apologize for my typo on the word “rogue”, because I don’t have English as my first language. On the other hand, “you can’t even spell the word so no one should listen to your opinion” is an argument downright stupid. Counter an argument with something relevant to the topic next time and try not to be so rude.

Back on to the topic on scouting. Scouting with a stealth rogue isn’t a good idea because it’s not reliable, and dangerous.

The unreliable part is because most monsters have good perception and there’s no way you can control your dice so unlucky rolls do appear. Maybe when your level goes higher can auto pass your opposing check, but at that level monsters start to have all kinds of senses and stealth becomes even less useful.

Then the part about dangerous. Scouting ahead means voluntarily separate yourself from the party and when things turn sour your mates aren’t with you. Rogue is weak in combat and doesn’t have many tricks to save his hide other than run. So once get noticed the poor rogue is facing more danger than an invisible fighter, or even invisible wizard.

So my point is the right way to scout is using the invisible spell instead of the skill, bet your life on a roll isn’t wise.

Stealth doesn't make you silenced either.

house rule it whatever you like in your game, by raw an invisible mage IS a better scout than a stealth rouge.(still the same for higher levels, just need the wizard to cast some more spells or just send his pet)

sending a stealth PC ahead is a bad move, as after an unlucky roll you get surrounded by monsters while your party still waiting for you to report back. Stealth has been given more credit than it deserves but since it's off topic so let's just call it...

That's only the comparison on paper, if we factor in combat buff and debuff, eidolon would benefit more.

Eidolon's advantage is pounce and number of attacks (which are all primary)
Fighter's advantage is AB and damage per hit.

Most combat buffs increase AB and damage per hit, which benefit eidolon a lot, but not so for fighters. That's because they have less number of attacks to benefit from damage bonus, and their AB already skyrocket, so only the last few iterative attacks would benefit from an AB increase. On the other hand, it would be very difficult for fighters to get pounce or extra number of attack through buffs, so the difference would be widen in actual play.

Dark Immortal wrote:

I will concede that the eidolon outshining the cleric sounds like a cleric who has NO idea what it's doing. At low level, I argue the fighter is stronger, in general, especially optimized and using the proper weapon(s) and combination(s).

At mid levels, I find the fighters can be more versatile in answering (or posing) combat questions like DR, maneuvers, etc. They can specialize in and master more combat related things than an eidolon could ever hope to.

But in terms of things like raw damage or raw ac, there is a point where I have to disagree with you.

Let's say an 24 str fighter with weapon training x4, +5 greatsword, +6 str enhancement, Weapon Spec and Greater Weapon Spec, power attack (15 dmg). Ok. So let's figure this out?

30 str = 10 dmg(actually 15). Weapon Training adds 4, Weapon Spec and greater add 4, Power Attack adds another 15.

I'm assuming this fighter started with 18 str and put +2 in it, then put 4 of their 5 stat increases into str, too.

15+15+8 +12(greatsword) = 50. The average damage per hit fully power attacked is 50 a hit. That's rather impressive. The fighter is also almost always going to hit, too.


Str 32. +6 str enhancement. Power Attack. Head x2, Extra Bite x5(for 1.5x str dmg). Claws x2, Large, Energy Attacks, Rend, Pounce, Improved Damage x2, Amulet of Mighty BS +5. Improved Natural Attack. (There are still 4-8 more evo points left to spend if half elf and not taking extra evolution feats).

38 Str = 14dmg. 21 on bites. Power attack = +6 (claws) and +9(bites). Energy Attacks = 3.5 dmg (1d6). INA + large +Improved dmg makes claws 2d6 and bites 3d6).

Bites = 21 +9 +3.5 +3d6 +5 = 50 average damage per bite.
Claws = 14 +6 +3.5 +2d6 +5 = 34.5 average damage per claw.
Rend = 21 +9 +3.5 +2d6 +5 = 44 average damage per rend.

This eidolon could have 3 bites, 4 claws and one rend. The fighter can have 4 swings with the greatsword.

50 x 4 = 200. That's ridiculous and more than enough to rock socks.
50 x 3 = 150 (bites).
34.5 x 4...

Fighter's damage wouldn't be that high, since it assumes fighter hit with all 4 attacks, but actually the last attack he has suffers a -15 to hit (further -5 count in power attack), so not that likely.

Eidolon's secondary natural attacks only suffer a static -5, so though its attacks is lower than fighters, they spread out evenly and performs better than iterative attacks. And an optimized fighters’ highest attack bonus is too high for a level appropriate monster's ac anyway.

But I believe fighter at that level would enlarge himself by some means, so the increased strength and weapon dice can even the odds a bit.

Stome wrote:

Yeah low end games greatsword wins hands down on damage with little to no investment and it might even top Lucerne Hammer all around because you need a couple feats to make good use of reach (though being B and P has value)

Though even when feat starved I don't think I would use Falcata. That EWP feat could be used for one crit feat (granted not until later on.) Though I suppose if you have a way to get EWP for free (Race or archetype for example.) then it would pay off.

large falcata does 2d6 base damage, same as greatsword. so EWP falcata is effectively a feat that increase the critical multiplier of greatsword by one.

Not so bad, isn't it?

What I'm thinking is to give PC a third intermediate option other than move + swing once and stand still + full attack.

vital strike buff the single swing, but that's still the same thing just with bigger number.
Let's say for example a lvl 20 fighter can do 50 damage in a single hit, and his highest attack has a 95% chance of hitting the target.

Originally figher can chose to A.move and deal a reliable 50 damage, or B. stand still to reliablely do 150 or more damage.
adding vital strike for free only change option A to move and deal a reliable 80 damage or so, better than original but still the samething, and hurt player with low damage dice weapons.

if we add this third option, the choices becomeA.move and deal a reliable 50 damage, or B. stand still to reliablely do 150 or more damage and C do a full attack with a -10 (1/2 bab round down) penalty after movement, statistically doing damage between A and B but less reliable as you could miss every single swing(even first hit has only 50% probability to land), so choose with caution.

Btw, it will not over buff the martials, as pounce and teleport by teammates are still better options, just more restricted and consume more resources. A fair trade in my opinion. And calculation is not complex either, just add another line on charactor sheet stating the to hit bonus when pseudo pounce can do, like +25/+20/+15, +17/+12/+7 when pounce.

So we all know martials with or without pounce make huge difference, as a standard action attack only deal about 1/3 or less damage than a full attack. Paizo try to use vital strike feat chain to make melee martials' day easier but still seems not enough.

So I created a house rule that every class can make full attack after movement, but at an attack penalty of 1/2 BAB round down. So a lvl 20 fighter can always choose to move and make a single attack with no penalty (most likely a sure hit, but damage potential is low), or move and make a full attack with -10 to attack on each hit (most likely better than single attack, unless target AC super high, and definitely worse than a normal full attack), or deliver the standard full attack without penalty. And any class or ability that originally gives pounce negates the attack penalty.

By doing this I wish to reduce the gap between damage with or without movement, and gives more option to melee charactors.

Any thoughts?

improved critical isn't ideal, so a green is good. The thing is critical focus is more a feat tax to get staggering critical than a good feat on its own. So I thought it would be a better idea to rate it green or lower, but mention it is needed for the future blue feats.

Btw, any thoughts on expand the guide on to some recent suppliment materials like Blood of angels?

Well, improved critical doubles your chance of landing a critical hit, for critical focus to have better result, the 4 points of extra attack to confirm the critical hit need to double the chance of confirming. Since in a d20 system, 4 point of attack equals to 20% increase in probability, your original confirm chance should be 20% or less.( need to roll a 16 to confirm, or your highest attack is 16 points lower than enemy ac)

That's a really rare situation, and makes critical focus inferior in most cases.

With better stats fighter only get the bonus every class get, but nothing more. So points like "I build high int fighter to migitate low skill points" or "I boost wisdom so I don't mind weak will save" isn't very good, unless by raw fighter have a few points of stat more to spend than all other classes.

Quite the contrary, higher stats help paladin more, cause none of fighter's class feature relates to stats, but paladin gains plenty from a boosted char. With good rolling, high point buy or even higher level + stats boost gear, 1 point of char bonus equals 1 point of all save, 1 time more LOH, better attack and deflect AC while smiting, more spell slots and better spell DC.

Aunt Tony wrote:
If you're just gonna advance AC enough to allow your choice of equipped armor to affect how often you're hit... then why scale BAB at all in the first place?

That’s a wired question. If my choice of armor won't affect how often I'm hit, then why do we need all those armor? If you are talking about growing ac cancel the effect of bab and making ONLY armor affect hit chance, then:

1st: it's at a slower rate, for different classes
2nd: it's for classes only, doesn't affect monsters (heck, they can have a natural armor any value you like, from 1 to 100. why bother derive mechanic for they? it's not likely they'll level up by killing PCs anyway.)

Aunt Tony wrote:

This is really a question of "how do we trick the players into feeling more powerful without using math that can't be done in the DM's head?"

The answer is simple: allow the players to hit more often as they gain levels and to deal more damage, but keep combat length roughly the same or shorter (taking into account the lower miss variance). We do this by scaling HP.

Therefore, scaling AC is unnecessary and simply complicates the part where the game already bogs down (combat).

The question and answer just doesn't connect. The whole argument of "bog down combat" thing just amuses me, as well as the too much math thing.

So the only difference between giving a scaling AC and without it, is the PCs are harder to kill and live longer when facing physical attacks.
And yes, it makes the combat long cause PCs are harder to kill. If this is a problem and players want to quicken the pace of game by keeping their characters more fragile thus die faster, then that's beyond my understanding of fun.
It's not like I'm suggesting making the monsters harder to kill thus make players feel less powerful and tedious, but rather make the players tougher and MORE powerful.

Secondly, I thought the only difference this suggestion involves math is when you upgrade your char (how often does that happen?), you put 1 point higher AC on your chart just like your bab does. What's the extra math involved, really? It is the same as you upgrade your ring of protection +1 to ring of protection +2, thus gaining 1 point of AC, just without the price.

AC value does grow in the current system, so higher AC for higher level character is a feature already present. It's just wildly recognized that going defensive consumes too much resource (mostly gold to buy equipments) and become unwelcome. By giving away some AC free of charge I wish this can be balanced.
In short, the whole suggestion is just a tweak of number, to reduce the resource required or improve the effectiveness if PCs want to build char defensively, that’s all.

Besides, a naked lvl 20 epic fighter gets stroked in melee as often as a naked lvl 1 mage, doesn't that sound wired?

right, with unlimited resources the ac can get really high, but unlimited resources isn't the way most games play, and with unlimited resources, an assult oriented build can kill monsters twice over or more, so...

well, it certainly slows down the combat, cause lost of high level martial builds focus on kill the enemy in the first turn they act via lance charge or pounce, making the combat very swift.

is it really a bad thing to slow down the combat pace when casters save or die the enemy more and more often, and damage dealers get a dpr so high that either they or the enemy can stand more than 1 round of combat before one side falls dead?

but i also come to realize AC isn't the only thing martial class needs to remain in combat long enough in order to make the combat interesting.

boosting ac hasn't been a good idea since dnd 3.0 to 3.5 to pathfinder, because "ac doesn't scale with level". that's why most martial builds focus on kill the enemy before they kill you, and dump ac when level goes higher.
now the simple question is: would it be broken if we let ac scale with level like bab does, but at a slower rate?

a rough idea is:

all full bab class gain 1 point of "parry" ac when wielding melee weapon at every even class level. This represents their improved skill of parry incoming physical blow. this nets them a total of 10 points of free ac at level 20.

all 3/4 bab class gain 1 point of parry ac when wielding melee weapon at every 4th class level.

all 1/2 bab class doesn't gain any benefit, cause full casters don't bother trivial stuff like ac.

i imaging the 10 points of free ac for PC who goes close and personal wouldn't really help them become impervious to scary monsters, but could make defensive builds more viable.

what's your thoughts on this suggestion?

maybe improved critical for the 9th level feat is better, cause using bound weapon to make weapon keen cost a standard action and has limited uses.

or exotic weapon profeciency: falcata for the 1d8 one handed 19-20/x3 threat range, makes a bigger difference than 1 point of attack and 2 points of damage vs larger enemy as lvl goes higher.

Agree completely with the other feat suggestions.

oh, and take Dangerously Curious as one of your traits, makes UMD your class skill + 1 extra rank, so that's rank 10 umd at lvl one for you.
and celestial resistance isn't that good, as energy resistance doesn't stack and he doesn't resist fire. can exchange it to Deathless Spirit.

"They gain resistance 5 against negative energy damage. They do not lose hit points when they gain a negative level, and they gain a +2 racial bonus on saving throws against death effects, energy drain, negative energy, and spells or spell-like abilities of the necromancy school"

heck, in this combo, 2 points of cha gives you:

1 point of dodge ac
2 points of reflex and 1 point of fort and will(buy a ring of evasion and make rouge cry...)
1 point of dc for oracle and paladin spells
more oracle and paladin spell slots
1 point of initiative
1 point of cha based skills (like diplomacy/umd)
1 point of attack and deflect ac against the target when you smite evil
1 charge of lay on hand

if you dip lore oracle for the sidestep secret, you can also take noble scion: scion of war as it is a common combo.

This makes you use cha for Initiative and 2 rank of knowledge(noble). That makes you dump your dex almost completely, because it acts like "Improved Initiative" (20 cha gives +5 init instead of +1 from 12 dex) plus 2 skill rank at lvl one. When you level up you are likely to stack up on cha (bet you will, almost everything depend on cha for this build), you init keeps improving to ridiculously high when your are at higher lvl.

If you want to build a paladin whose sole aim is to dish out damage, exotic weapon prof is a good choise. In APG there's this exotic weapon called falcata, a one hand slashing weapon doing 1d8 damage and has a 19-20/x3 critical range. The critical range property makes it the most damaging weapon in the system and certainly worth a feat. (if it has a 2-handed version then even better, but well...)

Well, that's true. Given a second thought, it may not be categorized into optimal builds.

I believe angel kin is a good race for a paladin, that’s for sure.

Regarding the feats, I think critical focus doesn't deserve a blue, at least not as good as improved critical. Improved critical doubles the critical range, so unless +4 to confirm crit can double the chance of landing the critical (that means the opponent's ac should be your attack bonus +16 or more, that's really high) , improved critical is better. Since improved critical can work with bless weapon spell that automatic confirm critical against evil foes (not workable on keen weapon, but fine with normal weapon with feat), I don't think critical focus is such a good feat on its own.

On the other hand, "Critical, Staggering" is a truly awesome feat. It requires bab 13 and critical focus, and upon landing a critical hit the target is staggered no matter it makes a save or not. Staggered means only one action per turn so no full round possible. If paladin wielding a 30% critical chance weapon with enough attacks per round, the opponent is likely to be locked in a "one action per turn" loop till its death. Not to mention the critical, stunning feat follow the line, failing the save stun for 1d4 turns and making the save staggered 1d4 turns, which surely deserver a blue rating.

Among all the paladin archetypes, sacred servant is probably the most powerful. losing some number of smite evil in exchange for cleric domain spell is nothing big, sacred servant can cost planer alley from lvl 8 onward, without casting fee and payment for service. At lvl 16 a sacred servant can summon a plantar and ask him to accompany the adventure group for a week, then summon it again. Thus a sacred servant gains an alley forever that's even more powerful than himself (lvl 16 cleric spell, all the awesome power of an angel) for free. A wizard requesting the same service for 1 week requires 2500gp + 17Hd x 1000gp per day x 7days=121,500 gp. I think this archetype deserves a special note.

just a quick glance.
Angelkin is decend from angels of course. they get +2 str +2 cha, heal and knowledge(plane) as Just a quick glance.
Angel kin descends from angels of course. They get +2 str +2 cha, +2 heal and knowledge (plane) and a spell-like ability of alter self. Not to say dark vision and 5 points of acid, cold and electricity resistance. If you don't like the spell like ability you can roll on a table to trade it into some random goodies. Some of the good ones like +2 additional racial bonuses on one ability score...but it's a d100 table so that really depending on your luck.

Truth be told, the two hander + iron wing build looks nice. Fly with your own wings costs one feat, so 3 feats for 2 additional natural attacks at -5 ab, plus some other trivial benefits.

Compare to TWF with spiked shield. You need a dex 17 and 2 feats to gain 2 off hand attack, at -2 and -7, while 2-handed with wings build gain 2 attacks both at -5 ab. Unless TWF guy take greater TWF (not a good bargain in my book), this build gives two handed guy same number of attacks as the other side.

Since the main hand suffer no ab penalty and wielding a 2 handed weapon with 1.5 str, on the situation of attack after movement, AoO this build get an advantage. When you activate your boots of haste, you get an additional swing of main weapon at 1.5 str instead of the 1 hand weapon in TWF style.

Basically it retains all the benefit of 2 hand castigator build plus the benefit of TWF style, a non-magical dependent at will fly and some save bonus using 4 feats. It’s quite heavily invested but castigator is the least feat hungry build so still possible to spare it. You can still get power attack and other goodies in between. This chain of feats only requires the character to be aasmir and con 13.

Oh, the additional benefit of this build is —— you paladin looks really like an angel.