theobject314's page

Okay, that makes sense. Thank you both for the quick answers (it wasn't really a pressing need because I'm not playing a synthesist, and I probably never will, it was more of a curiosity question, but still).

I searched the forums but I didn't see much on this topic. While the eidolon class feature for summoners says

In addition, due to its tie to its summoner, an eidolon can touch and attack creatures warded by protection from evil and similar effects that prevent contact with summoned creatures.

But for synthesists it says

He counts as both his original type and as an outsider for any effect related to type, whichever is worse for the synthesist.

Would an evil human synthesist fused with his eidolon be unable to use natural attacks to hit a creature warded with Protection from Evil, for example? In this case the synthesist would, as far as types go, count as outsider and human, I believe. Does this mean that because he's an outsider on the material plane, the outsider/eidolon counts as a summoned creature "type" and is therefore subject to the effects from protection from evil? Is "summoned" even a "type" of creature?

I kind of want some clarification on this, too. The "although often" seems like it's saying it's up to the GM's discretion, which is a pretty vague statement.

Also, does the situation change if the character is wielding a one handed sword two-handed, removes a hand as a free action, and then claws? Switching hands might be more than a free action, but I can't really see removing a hand being very taxing.

I'm guessing this is coming up as a result of Lesser Beast Totem or something similar? I ran into this problem with a barbarian I ran for two or three sessions and my GM just said I could make the attacks anyway, but I do want to know what the official stance on this is.

I would guess that it is because BAB Is the fighting stat and feinting is used in combat, but hit dice is used for the characters power level and people with power aren't as easily intimidated by someone just because they can fight well. I would imagine Mike Tyson would have a hard time intimidating Barack Obama, but I am sure he could fake a left hook and knock him out with an uppercut.

Ah, I guess that makes sense. I kind of meant it in the sense that the DC for Feints seemed much easier than Intimidate checks, but this seems logical.

Just swapping from Snakebite to Bounty Hunter, aside from the first level in SBS (you can take the TWF feats with the fighting styles the Slayer gives) could be cool. Then you can grab a few Dirty Trick feats, Surprise maneuvers, and you are on your way to be really irritating for your enemies.

For now, I've retooled a bit to dip 2 levels into Bounty Hunter, and based my character around Dirty Trick maneuvers, at least for now. Talked to my GM and he said he'd even consider giving me slightly accelerated sneak attack dice, if necessary. If all that doesn't work, I'll probably just go back to being a more standard brawler.

Thanks for all the ideas.

As the title says. Just wondering, because it seems weirdly inconsistent, both are charisma based checks, but one uses 10 + hit die + WIS modifier and the other uses 10 + BAB + WIS modifier. Is there maybe some sort of in-game justification or some sort of realism justification, or just a rules quirk?

Snakebite is Bad, unless you only take it as a dip. You give up your best/most unique class feature for piddly SA damage. You get like, 10,5 damage out of it on your level; that is, IF you can SA. I think 3 combat feats are woth a lot more than that. Unblinking flame fist can nab you a similar benefit to your move-feint as well.

Now that I have made an ass out of myself, you may consider ninja, or rogue to make some use out of your SA (Offensive defense talent for example), although my favourite would be 2 levels of Bounty Hunter Slayer, so you can get free dirty tricks instead of your, frankly, piddly SAs.

I was actually a normal brawler before, but I died, and had resurrection cast on me and became an elf. I agree that Snakebite Striker is...not a very viable build, especially with only getting 6d6 sneak attack die at level 20 (I feel like for how good martial flexibility is, I should be getting a lot more :( )but I figured I should at least try to play something that's not a "I five foot step and flurry" before trying something else. My GM is pretty nice about being able to retool on the fly if it's pretty clear that a character's not very effective, so that's always an option.

I'm playing through Rise of the Runelords right now, part 4. My party consists of a zen archer/cleric archer, a druid (mostly wild shape), an archer/switch hitter ranger (conveniently hates giants), and a sorceror. My character is a level 11 Snakebite Striker, who uses Dazzling Display, Shatter Defenses, Improved Feint, and Violent Display to get a lot of sneak attack opportunities. In addition, I've picked up Deadly Stroke, which seems like a cool additional feat.

However, I'm not certain if I want to keep continuing down into the Brawler class for the next 5-6 levels until the end of the campaign or try something new. I don't see much that's convincing me to stay other than possibly two points of AC Bonus and brawler's strike, to bypass DR. At level 12, I get another sneak attack die and alignment on my fists, after that there doesn't seem to be much left in the class for me.

So, I'm looking into multiclassing with some other classes, but this is my first campaign so I'm not very well-versed in what might make for some good later-game multiclassing options. I don't have a great attack bonus anyway, so I think I want to stick to full BAB classes but I'm pretty open to anything, although I will have to make some restrictions flavor-wise. Skald for example is probably something I won't multiclass in.

Any thoughts?