tortiekat's page

Has there ever been a definite ruling on whether or not Spellstrike can be a) used with combat maneuvers and b) if so, can you use the spell damage in a sunder attempt?

I'm putting together a big bad wordcasting magus for my campaign and today I had the chilling thought that using a force effect with a spellstriking sunder attempt would mean he could basically cut the PCs weapons to shreds...

Awesome, I might look at the SKR thing. I use a modified version of his Step-based experience in my game, so there's precedent.

Right after I posted, I grabbed my PDF of Savage Species and that led me the same place you went, Snow. But thanks for sparing me the need to OCR it!

So one of the PCs in my game got bitten by a weretiger. The player is really excited about trying out lycanthrope, and I was willing to go there. We've had some time off since last session (in-game and in 3D) and have begun haggling over how he can learn to have more control over the curse.

The problem being, of course, that there doesn't seem to be any RAW in Pathfinder for such a project. I proffered a "wild shape like" stage leading up to full control, but that didn't seem to fly. I'm a bit leery of giving a full caster what turns out to be a pretty sweet set of buffs, but I'm unsure how to move from pure curse to something he can reasonably control. My original idea was a feat or spell, but he suggested some kind of level progression which I'm actually leaning towards.

Does anyone have any thoughts on how we can proceed? Or can point me towards some source material for ideas?

Witch + Cauldron Hex would also allow you to brew potions if you wanted. Also, IIRC your levels would stack if you had a familiar for your arcane bond, so there's that.

Though I'm inclined to agree that if you only want a dip, then Oracle makes more sense. Cha 14 will give you the bonus spell, you don't even have to take a healing spell so you can chose some more useful cleric spells, and you can probably find a curse that won't be horrible. (Tongues is a decent non-curse curse.) Multiclassing between full casting classes is generally not so awesome, so if you're going to take a dip, get the most bang for your buck. Taking one level of Oracle just makes you a sorcerer with less restrictions and a more useful stat, painful as it is for this lover of sorcerers to admit ;-)

Thanks, cartmanbeck!

I looked at Spectral Hand again tonight and damn, it's good enough to make my build almost pointless. Almost, I say, almost--the ranged touch at lower levels still rocks, and it's good to be able to throw down if you don't have the SH going.

That said, Spectral Hand + Shocking Grasp is good fun, and stacks with this build, since it allows you more flexibility with metamagic once you take away the need to use Reach. Plus, I had forgotten that Spectral Hand tacks on another +2 to hit. Damn, that's a much better spell than it was in 2nd ed...huh. Just checked my 2e Player's Handbook (yup, on the shelf with the 1st ed revised covers) and it was +2 then. I really didn't know what I was doing 20 years ago...

Hrm, you make excellent points, both of you. I concede Spectral Hand should be a part of this build fer sure.

I still support at least part of this concept of this build since it gives you three levels of blasting that you won't get with SH (and also, too, at 4th level SH would be your only 2nd level spell, which may or may not be optimal.) Spectral Hand for sure is the better go for Wizards; you get it quicker, and it supports your strengths (large number of known spells but no spontaneous metamagic) better.

Again, the advantage I see with stacking up on Shocking Grasp this way is that you get a reliable damage dealer as a ranged touch starting at first level, and even if you don't go for spell specialization/perfection, with Reach and Intensify you'll have this combo available to fill in any gaps at later levels (it will outpoint Scorching Ray in levels 5 and 6 unless you go spell specialization on Scorching Ray; but then, if you specialize in Shocking Grasp, you'll outpoint Scorching Ray until 11th level.) Also, it frees up spell slots by essentially trading feats (that can do double duty) for spells. The +3 to hit is also a major feature, keeping the damage output competitive even at mid levels.

I really appreciate all your comments--thanks, everyone!

Harley,

My main issue with Chill Touch is that it requires a save and doesn't have scaling damage, so you won't be using it at higher levels. Part of the idea with this build was to concentrate on a single first level spell that would have utility at all levels. Also, too, to avoid saves which are feat-intensive to improve. (Yeah, I know: this is a feat-intensive build. But except for Spontaneous Metafocus and Spell Specialization, the feats you pick up are useful for many of your spells, so you do get a bit more bang for your buck.)

Spectral Hand is a very nifty spell, agreed, but as you say it has duration and level issues. I wanted to give you a spell you could start blasting away with right at first level. I hate the full-round cast for metamagiced spells too, so that's why I put Spontaneous Metafocus (Shocking Grasp) in as one of the first level feats; now you have a ranged shocking grasp that is only a standard action to cast (and with the Magical Lineage trait, only a 1st level spell.) Given that the bloodlines I've focused on all have an energy ray as their initial power, you can count on making a bunch of ranged touch rolls at 1st level.

This build probably would do very well in PFS play, since the power level is capped and you tend to face a LOT of humanoids with metal on them.

Abraham: Chill Touch is good as well; I wanted to focus on energy damage for this build, though, which lead me to Shocking Grasp. Plus, the +3 to hit :)

Edgar: Yeah, you've got a point. After I posted this, I realized that Spell Specialization should switch to Scorching Ray at 10th level, and it might be a better choice for Spell Perfection. However, it's not too hard to "switch hit" at the upper levels and use fireball to soften up your targets before sniping them with ranged touch--damage will be about the same if you put Spell Perfection on fireball...both fireball and scorching ray suffer from my pyro-blindness (I usually play fire-based blasters; SR and FB work better if you can swap out the energy type, though a rod helps here.)

SmiloDan: This is one of the few builds that could make sense with a dip into other classes, although the Efreeti 20th level power is pretty cool (a wish a day keeps the big bads away, and also lets you build your demiplane/mansion with convenient access to the City of Brass.) Combining Magical Knack and Magical Lineage is gonna be a hard sell, though. You could look at Eastern Mysteries, an Osiron faction feat, although that just gives you +1 CL once a day. Spell Specialization can help here...or maybe go Vivisectionist? That gives you the ability to take the spellcaster feats, the sneak damage, and a natural buff to Dex :)

OK, this is my first venture into on-board optimization...so please let me know if I've gone really wrong :-)

I like sorcerers; my favorite PC is a pyromaniac con artist who blasts what she can't fool. But blasting is hard work--even with a four feat investment (Greater Elemental and Spell Focus) plus the cheese of an Ifrit fire elementalist, it's hard to keep DCs scaling when the average good save of critters is their CR.

So I looked into ranged touch, inspired by posters here who sing the praise of Scorching Ray. This is my attempt to squeeze as much as possible out of a single 1st level spell, freeing up spell slots for utility/buff/save or suck spells while keeping utility through the high levels.

Some remarks:

Bloodline: Elementalist or Genie, any but Air/Djinni. Being able to change energy type is key to increasing flexibility.

Goals: Use a single spell as your offensive centerpiece, so that you can conserve spell slots for other uses. Be able to do damage with any spell level you can cast. Be able to spam your main damage dealer. Have as few "dead" feats as possible.

Race: You're pretty much locked into Human, as the initial load out is feat intensive.

The Build

1st Level:

Trait: Magical Lineage (Shocking Grasp)
Feat: Reach Spell
Feat: Spontaneous Metafocus (Shocking Grasp)

At first level, you've basically defined your character concept--you'll do energy damage (electricity or your chosen energy type) out to close range with no cost in spell levels or extra casting time.

Shocking Grasp is the key here, because against the majority of targets you'll face, you get +3 to hit. This makes up for the lack of room for any ranged combat feats.

3rd Level:

Feat: Spell Focus (Evocation)

Not useful for your centerpiece spell, but fills a prerequisite. If you get Burning Hands as your bloodline spell, this at least helps.

5th Level:

Feat: Intensify Spell

Also not immediately useful, but you'll need it to make the build relevant going forward.

7th Level:

Feat: Spell Specialization (Shocking Grasp)
Bloodline Feat

Although it's a bit late, you do pick up the extra damage--a 9d6 ranged touch 2nd level spell (you can move the range up to Medium by making it a 3rd level spell.) This narrowly outpoints Scorching Ray at this level, although the multitarget and ray features of that spell make it an excellent secondary choice. For some bloodlines, you'll have Scorching Ray as well.

The best bloodline feat to take is a metamagic feat if available; I like the Efreeti bloodline, so Empower Spell slots here.

9th, 11th, 13th level: You'll probably want to pick up either Quicken Spell, Maximize Spell, or both during these levels. You have some flexibility here to grab other useful feats.

The Efreeti bloodline picks up Fireball at 7th level; you'll want it no matter what as it will be the key to carrying you forward in the higher levels.

15th Level:

Feat: Spell Perfection (Shocking Grasp or Fireball)

Either is a good choice, although you're likely to do more consistent damage with Shocking Grasp (Quickened Maximized Intensified Reach Shocking Grasp, 60 hp on average as a 5th level spell followed by Maximized Empowered Intensified Reach Shocking grasp, 77.5 hp on average as a 4th level spell; higher slots for both can increase the range.)

Notes:

Dex is key here. You may end up taking your ability increases in Dex, as you only need Charisma to give you extra spells.

You can tinker with the feat order somewhat--if you don't want Reach right away, you can go straight to Spell Specialization at 1st level; if you don't mind the full round cast, you can hold off (or ignore) Spontaneous Metafocus. Myself, I like to be able to move and cast, so that's why I went with the feats like this.

Spell Specialization is nice, but not crucial to the build, so you can ignore that chain in favor of other feats.

One point is that this is definitely a build that needs decent initiative. If it fits your concept, grab an initiative increasing trait at first level. One interesting idea is to delay the Spontaneous Metafocus and take Noble Scion of War at first level (the only level you can take it, as a matter of fact.) This makes your initiative Charisma based, which is nice enough, but gets sweeter when you can buy a Circlet of Persuasion; near as I can tell, it should stack with your initiative, putting you in double digits by 5th level.

The build works well with metamagic rods; it's cost-effective, since you can get away with the lesser rods. An Elemental Spell rod here is useful to add an energy type to your repertoire; Quicken or Maximize rods can remove the need to take one of those as a feat. (You've already picked up three metamagic feats, so you satisfy the prerequisites for Spell Perfection.)

And you'll always have an attack spell, even if you're down to first level spells :-)

That's what I thought, thank you guys!

In any case, I'm siccing some monks on them next session and there's no way that he was getting out of that :D

One of my players has access to the Deception Domain and likes to use the Sudden Shift power:

Sudden Shift (Sp): In the blink of an eye, you can appear somewhere else. As an immediate action, after you are missed by a melee attack, you can teleport up to 10 feet to a space that you can see. This space must be inside the reach of the creature that attacked you. You can use this power a number of times each day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier.

At lower levels, this doesn't present any issues. But now they're facing things with multiple attacks, and he's been interpreting this as the Sudden Shift ends the attack, even if the attacker still has attacks remaining.

Given that you have to teleport within the attacker's reach, am I off base to assume that the attacker can just resume his attacks on his PC? Pathfinder doesn't have any penalties for changing targets, although I can see something like giving concealment on the first attack after the Sudden Shift.

Anyone have a strong opinion on this?

Shocking Grasp + Magical Lineage (Shocking Grasp) + Reach + Spontaneous Metafocus (Shocking Grasp) + Spell Focus (Evocation) + Intensify + Spell Specialization (Shocking Grasp)=9d6 ranged touch damage for close range as a level 2 spell at 7th level (bump it up to 3rd level and you get it out to medium). And no increase of casting time. Nice work for a sorcerer, if you can get it.

Oh, and +3 to hit if they're wearing metal or carrying metal weapons :D

*Headsmack* Of course, I somehow managed to mentally conflate the two descriptions.

My goodness, that's some weak tea there. WoP could be a really useful system but the designers seem to have gone out of their way to nerf it. Ranged Touch + Save is where I get off the train, and the (still unmended, even though I think the RAI clearly wanted you to be able to do it) inability to combine instantaneous effects with effects with a longer duration...I dunno. (Shakes head sadly.)

Apologies if this has been answered elsewhere--my search-fu didn't turn up a direct answer, but it may be weak...

I'm thinking of converting my favorite blasty fire sorceress concept to Words of Power, as the flexibility of targeting options could make up for the loss of utility spells. (Plus, the Efreeti bloodline arcana lets me grab things like Icy Blast to make fire spells that stagger the target, nice!) However, I'm getting pretty confused about the Selected target word.

To wit, the text says:

Target A wordspell with this target word affects a single target within range. If the wordspell deals energy damage, this word creates a ray that requires a ranged touch attack to hit, or it can be used as a melee touch attack with no range (decided by the wordcaster when the wordspell is cast). If it is used as a melee touch attack and the attack misses, the wordcaster can hold the charge and try again with subsequent attacks.

...which says to me, that if the spell does energy damage, it requires a ranged touch and grants no save. (And would be eligible for Weapon Focus, etc.) But this does not seem to be consistently followed in the text, including the example spell they gave (the Selected Icy Blast Life Leech--but that spell seems to be illegal anyway, so there you are.)

So does selected + energy damage remove the save in favor of ranged touch? Or does the Effect Word description of a saving throw override that? RAW written seems to me to say so, but the Effect word descriptions seem at variance to this.

It's enough to make me shelve the idea and go back to my traditional combination of rules exploits and spell hacks :D

I'm a little surprised to see Pyrotechnics on the never take list. While it's not as good as I somehow misremembered it being, the smoke cloud effect is pretty nifty for battlefield control, and the open fire requirement isn't that hard to satisfy. (I have a fire-based sorceress who plans to light folks on fire with one spell--say, spontaneous immolation--and then use them as the source for Pyrotechnics.) The blinding effect's main drawback is its ridiculous area of effect, which might limit it somewhat; while you can probably get the rest of your party to get out of line of sight by ducking behind something, RAW says the caster has to have it in order to cast the spell. This may be mitigated depending on your GM, i.e. should a caster get a bonus to her will save vs her own effect? Blindness is an encounter-ending condition, though, so the spell may well reward the extra prep time it requires.

When I started my current campaign, one of my requirements for my players was to give me a short statement of what their character's alignment was, and how they interpreted that alignment. Because the way alignment is set up in PF (and its antecedents), pretty much any act can be justified as fitting into a stated alignment. (There was a famous 3rd ed homebrew system that made this argument convincingly, but I can't remember the name and my google-fu is weak tonight.)

Part of the problem is that alignment tries to enforce objective standards on some things that are...well, traditionally subjective, or sometimes subjective, or have been subjectively viewed one way at one point in history and another at a different point.

Case in point, Captain Jack Aubrey in the O'Brian novels. There's no question that he's good, and probably Lawful Good (although I'm more than willing to allow for Neutral or Chaotic. See how hard this is?) Yet, as much as he abhors flogging, he sometimes orders it. In the eyes of his contemporaries, this isn't seen as harsh or evil; if anything, he is considered absurdly lenient on the subject. But by modern standards, he is committing a cruel act and engaging in forbidden methods of discipline.

Or again. One of the few good things about the graphic violence in George R. R. Martin's books is that it brings home quite convincingly just how filled with graphic violence justice in the Middle Ages was. For example, Stannis routinely castrates any soldier who commits rape under his command. This is looked on as somewhat harsh, but neither unusual or evil by the other characters. (I'm not saying he's good; Stannis pretty much is the textbook case of Lawful Neutral walking the tightrope to Lawful Evil.)

I've played a character who was Chaotic Neutral: Chaotic because she absolutely hated anyone trying to impose their will on her (and authority in general, on principle), and Neutral because she still considered the effects her actions would have on others. (It didn't mean she'd do the right thing, just that she was aware of what the right thing was.) Later iterations of that character have become Chaotic Evil as her lust for power have overridden any earlier restraints.

But there are other ways of being Chaotic Neutral--the happy go-lucky character who does whatever whim strikes him at the moment, the committed anarchist who doesn't care what system he's wrecking, just as long as it goes down (you can make a case for Alan Moore's V as Chaotic Neutral, although myself I'd peg him as closer to CE). I'm currently playing a paladin who keeps himself as close to CG as possible--he doesn't care about what the LAW says, he cares about JUSTICE, and taking care of the powerless and downtrodden. On the other hand, he doesn't lie, he's everyone's friend, and he only uses violence when diplomacy fails.

We should take into account that the punishment these guys might have expected to receive would have been...mutilation and execution, and probably in that order. (In which case, the OP did them a mercy!) It depends on the society involved. (And in re the idea of going up the chain of command...leave us not to forget that the whole point of feudalism is to *decentralize* power; I'm not saying justice couldn't be had, just that it would have been uncertain.)

So is she Lawful Good? The only answer I can give is...I don't know. It depends on what kind of a character she plays. Is she the holy avenger, righting wrongs and bringing justice when everything else fails? Then maybe. Is she the "follow your vows, obey your superiors" kind of Lawful Good? Maybe not. And I should note, a lot of people seem to only view this from the angle of what happened to the guards. Let us not forget what they did to the REAL victim here. Let us not forget that she never got justice, and apparently lived in a place where no one like her could hope to receive justice.

Really, this is between the player and the GM. She should try to come up with some kind of statement of her alignment, and let the GM adjudicate it. Maybe she's playing a different alignment; I can see a good case for LG, but personally I think she's on the outer bounds of that alignment. There's a lot to be said for her PC even being evil. But I don't think we can make a categorical statement about it without having some better idea of what the GM expects, what she expects, and what is typical of the game world.

Actually, this is kinda cool, and could still be a lot of fun...depending on the group. After all, the "hidden adversary who you thought was an ally all along" is one of the great tropes of fiction. If the group can handle it, then let things go along as they would have...but with some caveats.

First, don't forget that it's only a DC 15 check to Sense Motive to detect mind control on a dominated person. Given this was a scheme to create unlimited wealth, the chances are that your ex-BBEG moves among folks with SM ranks that are, shall we say, extremely optimal. Any of them figuring out that their chief is being mind-controlled could endanger the entire scheme.

Second, dominate doesn't make someone an automaton. Sure, you can instruct someone to "take no actions against me and raise no defenses." But you can't stop the guy from scheming. It occurs to me that one of the best schemes is...to create a ready-made bunch of patsies. Look at it this way: you will now have a group of player characters working on this scheme, with all the usual inventiveness, amorality, and disregard of consequences that normally indicates. If anything, this could bring about the BBEG's plans even quicker. And if he plays his cards right--alters his plans just subtly enough, always to "make things happen faster/better"--at the end he might be left in command of the prize and can reveal to the authorities/crime syndicate/evil beings from Beyond that he was mind-controlled all along. Just a pawn. Of that guy over there! He'll have the perfect fall guys, and can pick up the pieces at his leisure.

Dominate Person gives no ability to read minds or detect truth. Your enchanter undoubtedly will have access to those abilities, but will he use them on a dominated subject? After the first ten times when everything was hunky-dory? (Not to mention that there are ways to fool both of those even without magic, if you think fast on your feet.)

Also, while the spell doesn't have the [evil] descriptor, long-term use of dominate person to further a scheme that was nefarious enough to earn the "E" in the BBEG's title is going to push the enchanter's alignment towards evil. This could have some obvious consequences.

Finally...you could just let it play out. I'd be up for something like that (especially because I've played characters for whom this would have been like an ice cream sundae on a pile of a million dollars), but the big reveal could be a Defining Moment of Awesome for Everyone. It probably means conversion to NPC status (if he survives), but wow, it would be so cool...and there's always the possibility of sequels--you know, those movies where the crusty band of veteran heroes have to go and convince their now-evil former buddy to join up for one last Quest...

I mean, the guy's an Enchanter. This shouldn't end with a TPK. If you know Watchmen, think of that as a possible campaign-ender template...

--Cat

I've played both Sorcerers and Wizards. I like both, and think that wizards are the more powerful class (at least potentially), but I think I like sorcerers better. Bloodlines are cool (and at low levels, the granted powers are nifty), and I like the whole "you have to study dusty tomes to grasp the simplest of spells, while I...AM...Magic!" aspect. Quite a few of my sorcerers are disdainful of wizards and their grubbing around for spells, feeling that their natural power comes closer to really understanding magic.

Plus a high Cha lends itself to playing haughty ladies who expect others to obey their whims :-)

It's odd, though--in real life I'm much more of a wizard, the hopeless know-it-all who remembers everything she's ever read (or so other people seem to feel.) Maybe that's part of the appeal of sorcerers to me, that and a weakness for clever characters who can use their wits to escape any situation. (I love clever con men like Jim Rockford or the Stainless Steel Rat, the show Leverage, etc.)

====

As to the whole Cha for witches thing, LT has a point--but only if you think of the witches' pact as a negotiation. I guess you could, but that does tend to fly in the face of, oh, let's call it about 2,000 years of folklore and tradition.

The hallmarks of pacts with powerful beings has always been to find a way to manipulate the contract--or to force the other being to accept your offer whatever it would care to do. Summoning a demon to obey your wishes requires knowing the proper ritual, preparing the correct responses, knowing what spells will bind it, etc. These are all Intelligence-based tasks, at least in a Pathfinder game system.

Take the quintessential pact with a powerful being: selling your soul to the Devil. In just about every story about doing that, the trick for the seller is to find a way to weasel out of the contract without giving the Devil her soul. Again, that's not Charsima; that's having the Intelligence to find a loophole in the deal, or avoid the ones the Devil puts in. (Or in the bitter end, knowing where to hire the best lawyer in New England.)

You don't have to convince the Devil to buy your soul. He's always in the market, it seems. But you do have to know how to find him, and be smart enough to deal with the consequences.

Anyway, YMMV. I would have preferred to see witches use Wisdom because a Wis-based arcane caster would be KEWL and it fits the fluff a bit better.

I started my current campaign using the Unearthed Arcana system because I wanted a spell point system and didn't have time to make my own. (Actually, I wanted to turn the playtest version of Words of Power into a spell point system, but Ultimate Magic was still two months from publication when we kicked off.)

I was originally going to use the "more dice means more points" system, but we never did that in actual play, so I dropped it.

I soon got disenchanted with the UA system, in large part because it was too difficult for me to constantly have to look up the total spell points available (I hadn't figured out the formula posted above), so I recently switched to a new system that I think is a bit easier to use.

To calculate the total spell points available to you, you simply add up the total spell levels your class and ability would normally give you. (Not including domain and specialist bonus spells; see below.)

So a 5th level wizard with an Int of 16 would have 16 spell points: (4 x 1) + (3 x 2) + (2 x 3). A 5th level sorcerer with a 16 Cha would have 20.

Domain spells and specialist spells are simply prepared as spell slots without a point cost, like a free reusable scroll.

Where I tried to rein this in was in the spell point cost, which uses the same progression as the old 3.5 XP chart: 1-2-4-7-11-16-22-29-37. This does limit rather drastically the number of high-level spells a caster can throw around, but in my campaign that's a feature, not a bug. (I also use a fatiguing system, so casting a lot of spells will make the caster fatigued or exhausted--but then it's my feeling that I can hit casters with the nerf stick all day long and they'll still dominate the game past 5th level.)

I don't know if that's what the OP (or anyone else, for that matter!) was looking for, but so far it's working in our game.

Wisdom for Con is only for hit points, although my girlfriend and I were kicking around the idea of allowing Wisdom to substitute for the base ability of all the saves. That's probably too powerful :D

I don't mind doing Wis for HP for the monk because his major issues are MAD and being ill-suited to his combat role. Basing everything on Wisdom *is* pretty powerful, but it gives him some flavor that the other classes don't get...and I'm keeping monks as a 3/4 BAB class. So they have to pay for that.

And even with those changes, cleric/druid still kick his ass. ;-)

Wow! That's a fantastic rewrite.

I'm torn, though--I play in one incredibly houseruled campaign (to the point where I now assume that I have to ask about every. single. rule. in *Core*), so I'm trying to keep close to Core for this campaign--less my somewhat arbitrary exclusion of half the Core races, clerics *and* druids (in favor of a Pathfinderized shaman from OA class), and, oh yeah, spell points.*

Nertz. Maybe I *should* use this rewrite. :O

TOZ's rewrite is definitely something to ponder, though it might be a bit too Tome-of-Battle-y for my personal tastes. I might offer it to the player of the monk to see what he thinks...

--Cat

*To be fair, most of my work has been *excluding* things or reworking races--it's surprising how much kender look like halflings, *ahem*--than rewriting the rules. Except for spell points, but even there I'm just using the UA rules. Which I know suck. And I don't care. Because I can hit casters with the nerf hammer all day and they'll still run the game.

I just kicked off a campaign that, because of the fluff (I'm drawing inspiration but not necessarily actual details from various Indian and Asian sources) needs to have monks be at least...somewhat viable. I know. I thought about crying too. But I dove in and came up with a few ideas.

My first fix that I've pondered (and luckily I still have time to change my mind, since the only monk in the party is 2nd level) is simple: a monk *always* gets to take his bonus movement. Even if making a full-round attack. Even if there's impediments magical or physical. I'm not sure yet if I'll go all the way to make it a freebie "ring of free action" ability, but that's the general gist.

Next, I had the same idea everyone has: let the Wisdom modifier stack with Strength (or Dexterity, for Weapons Finesse/Ranged combat builds) for combat. That seems relatively benign to me; it still leaves the monk behind in the arms race vis-a-vis a martial character going two-handed with a weapon with qualities attached to it, but it does mean that the monk can actually contemplate trying to hurt people.

But then I thought, Wisdom stacks with Dex for AC already; I'm going to stack it with Strength for To Hit and probably damage; what if I stack it with Constitution for hit points?

At that point I balked somewhat--I'm guesstimating that it would give a monk around 80 more HP at 20th than a full-BAB PC with equivalent stats (i.e., primary Strength and secondary Con vs the monk's primary Wisdom and secondary Strength). That seems like a lot. It *is* a lot. But then I thought about Treantmonk's summary of the monk as a fighter--"You should see the other guy"--and I wondered if it wouldn't be too unbalancing.

I'm also thinking about a milder version: the Wisdom mod is a bonus to your attack, and also gives bonus *non-lethal damage* (the rationale is that this damage comes from pins and holds--also, I don't mind the extra paperwork), and you can *substitute* Wisdom for Con instead of stacking them.

So I dunno. I have a few weeks before next session to tinker with this stuff...and I was wondering if any of the (more experienced) game-tinkerers here had some thoughts on those ideas.

Wow, all this over my little question to Seldriss! Amazing!

I asked about the Orb spells because I have a blasty build and we had just met some Nagas that nerfed almost everything I threw at them with SR. Now, some of this is on me--I've gotten away from doing the battlefield control stuff I do with my casters in other games, mostly because of Seldriss' homebrew system, which makes blasting actually possible. (As a fire sorceress I get plusses to each die of damage, the spell point cost is less for fire spells but the DC is higher, etc.) So I wanted to find something to bypass SR because I suspect we'll be seeing it more and more; I've already noticed that every creature we've faced except (ironically) some flaming skeletons have had fire resistance, although tactically I already have the means to combat that a bit: more and more damage (the way that Seldriss' system works, I got the empower feat with a -1 level cost reduction, making it free. Like I said, the system supports blastiness :) )

My own feeling is that perhaps the best compromise is to allow the spells that can reasonably be called conjuration (acid, fire, cold==ice...maybe, just maybe electricity) while making sound and force evocation (and therefore SR=yes.) The low damage potential (only 3d8 at 5th level, and 5d8 at 10th) balances the SR=no IMHO, and the ranged touch is also a headache (not so much for me, the character has a couple of levels of rogue and a Dex of 16, but for mages in general.) Sound and force would have to go anyway--bypasses SR and almost all resistances, OR hits incorporeal? Too much! The resistances remaining are all relatively common (have I mentioned that Seldriss' world seems wrapped in asbestos?) and so the SR is balanced somewhat in that regard as well.

I never did get a ruling from Seldriss, but OTOH I haven't had time to learn my new spells, so it's not a question yet :D

Anyway, you think this was bad, I'm just waiting until I try and take the Searing Spell Metamagic feat from Sandstorm. +1 level adjustment doesn't hurt someone who already gets a -1 level spell point cost in fire, and all that asbestos goes poof! :D