Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Ultimate Combat (OGL)

3.50/5 (based on 41 ratings)
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Ultimate Combat (OGL)
Show Description For:
Non-Mint

Add Hardcover $44.99

Add PDF $9.99

Add Non-Mint $39.99 $29.99

Facebook Twitter Email

Seize the initiative and chop your foes to pieces with this exhaustive guide to the art of martial combat in this exciting new rulebook for the smash-hit Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, suitable for players and Game Masters alike!

This comprehensive 256-page hardcover reference reveals the martial secrets of the Pathfinder RPG rules like never before! Tons of new tricks and techniques for combat-oriented character classes put a sharp edge on your weapons and a sure step in your tactics, ranging from new barbarian rage powers, new cavalier orders, tons of new rogue talents, and more than 60 new archetypes for nearly every Pathfinder RPG character class, including spellcasters like wizards and clerics.

Ultimate Combat also introduces three new Pathfinder RPG classes: the ninja, samurai, and gunslinger! The ninja blends the subterfuge of the rogue with high-flying martial arts and assassination techniques. The samurai is an unstoppable armored warrior who lives by a strong code of honor—with or without a master. The gunslinger combines the fighter's martial prowess with a new grit mechanic that allows her to pull off fantastic acts with a pistol or rifle. All this plus tons of new armor and weapons, a complete treatment of firearms in the Pathfinder RPG, a vast array of martial arts, finishing moves, vehicle combat, duels, and new combat-oriented spells for every spellcasting class in the game!

Ultimate Combat includes:

  • New player character options for 14 Pathfinder RPG base classes, including alchemist discoveries, barbarian rage powers, cavalier orders, combat-cleric archetypes, animal shaman druids, new fighter archetypes like gladiator and armor master, inquisitor archetypes like witch-hunter or spellbreaker, combat-themed magus arcana, monk archetypes based on mastery of martial arts, new paladin archetypes like angelic warrior, ranger archetypes like big game hunter and trapper, new rogue tricks, and wizard archetypes like the gunmage
  • The ninja, samurai, and gunslinger, brand-new 20-level alternate classes specially designed to get the most out of combat
  • Hundreds of new combat-oriented feats including martial arts feat trees, finishing moves, and combination feats
  • In-depth overviews on a variety of combat-related topics, such as armor, Asian weapons, duels, fighting schools, guns, siege weapons, and more
  • A complete system covering vehicle combat, including wagons, boats, airships, and more
  • Tons of optional combat rules like called shots, armor as damage reduction, and new ways to track character health
  • ... and much, much more!

ISBN-13: 978-1-60125-359-0

Errata
Last Updated - 8/20/2015

Note: This product is part of the Pathfinder Rulebook Subscription.

Product Availability

Hardcover:

Available now

Ships from our warehouse in 1 to 5 business days.

PDF:

Fulfilled immediately.

Non-Mint:

Available now

Ships from our warehouse in 1 to 5 business days.

This product is non-mint. Refunds are not available for non-mint products. The standard version of this product can be found here.

Are there errors or omissions in this product information? Got corrections? Let us know at store@paizo.com.

PZO1118


See Also:

1 to 5 of 42 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

Average product rating:

3.50/5 (based on 41 ratings)

Sign in to create or edit a product review.

Ultimate eastern and guns

2/5

I had wrote a quite lengthy review but the system ate it so here are the highlights:
1) The book is all about asian stuff and guns.
2) Don't buy it if you don't like either stuff.
3) The book has a lot good spells.
4) Most of the asian stuff mechanics work.
5) Gun rules don't work most of the times in APs and modules (they can't handle guns at mid+ levels).
6) The book had quite a few editing issues when it first came out, second printing corrected most of them but not all.
7) The art is superb.
8) Even if you don't like guns and eastern stuff you should buy the pdf since the price of the pdf is very good and you should get some use out it.


More Options ! more fighting, ... MORE !

5/5

flavorful options, powerful options
classes, archetypes, feats...

while 100% of the boook might not please you, you want this book.

having the choice to build flavorful PC with the right options is priceless (and for this book, you have...)


great reference book

4/5

Great reference book that helps further explain combat rules but it is not without its flaws.


Helping to close the caster/everyone else gap

4/5

Raise your hand if you play or run melee classes. Barbarians, Fighters, Monks, Rogues, Paladins, pretty much anything without 9 levels of spells. Is your hand raised?

Now look around. Does the person next to you NOT have their hand raised? No they don't? Quickly! Use your raised hand to smack them in the face! Ha! Now you've shown the pansy finger wigglers the power of combat characters. Now make them go away so you can read your reviews in peace.

Ultimate Combat serves some great functions in the scope of the PF:RPG.

It helps bring non-casters a little more in line with the potential power of casters in the metagame by adding a slew of new feats and archtypes directly relevant to them. How much milage you get from these may vary, but lest you think they're all just blow off concepts, I know for certainty at least 1 Magus, 1 Monk, and 1 Inquistor archtype from this book that are definitely considered competative for 'best build to get the most out of this class' in the guides and discussions I've read on the Paizo forums, and they added some Bard ones that are just interestingly different (Try the archeologist bard if you want to play a bard/rogue cross. Try to resist the temptation to use a whip... or don't. ;) )

The spells section brings about some new toys for all casters but it did try and keep a combat focus, that was nice for the 4 and 6 spell level casters. If you're a Paladin or Inquisitor look into the new Litany line you'll probably find something you like, as will most other classes.

The Gunslinger is an interesting addition to the core classes and I think a positive one because it adds a new dynamic to how combat can work, and does a good job putting firearms in a magical setting that could allow them. If they're not your cup of tea it's easy to just dissallow them in your campaign or keep their rarity higher, but if you're playing in PFS/Golarion it's good to have in case you want to travel to regions they're thematic for.

The Asian inspired new classes, the Samurai and Ninja, are also positive additions. Some debate arises with the Ninja, it truly does do what the Rogue does only some solid arguements can be made it does it better, I know several players who now build "Rogues" using the Ninja class. However looking at the current metagame of Pathfinder Rogues were often much malagined as one of the least powerful classes, I'm not going to fault Paizo for offering a potential alterantive that rocks!

Rounding out the book it offers some rules and stats on siege weapons and warfare, and expanded vehicle rules and vehicle combat rules, along with dozens of new weapons and armor. The first two can really assist a GM, and the last gives you options from different places (asian themed) and times (stone age, bronze age, for example).

I can't give this book 5 stars, Ultimate Magic was a bit better, and it's not on par with what the APG did, but in the end what is it? It's a solid 4. Unless you play just casters and only casters you probably won't be dissappointed, because it's a solid book that does what you want it to do, and you'll feel like the money was worth it 9 times out of 10.


1/5

Ultimate? Combat?

Neither of the words in the title really apply to this book. Ultimate Monk or Piecemail Combat fit much better. Overall, this book is about as good as Ultimate Magic. A lot of material that is useless (or unfinished/untested) that only applies to a class or two, and there is a lot of material that seems artificially injected to fill space, but really only further highlights the Ultimate Combat material that is not present.

All Classes will find something in this book, mostly poor, but there are a few gems. Sadly, I think that the writers forgot that this was suppossed to be a Combat themed book. Monk gets about 500% more than everyone else (combined?) Many of the Archtypes are pretty good, solid options, but still some classes get a lot and some get a few, and it tends to be the same Classes that get few and the same Classes that get many.

A lot of good spells, (that makes Ultimate Magic even more worthless), but I' starting to really question Paizo's ideas of balance and understanding the lines between Arcane/Divine, amongst other things. A lot of Magus and Paladin love, as well as Monks (yes Monks), but not too much for Combat focused Clerics, Wizards, Sorcerers, and Oracles.

If there where a 0 Stars option, I would pick that, simply because this is the absolute wrong way to go with a Hardcover "core" book. If they would drop the Asian themed stuff, and maybe the Monk-Onlyish Feats, this would have been a nice little softcover book, and maybe worth the price.


1 to 5 of 42 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
801 to 850 of 967 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

Kaiyanwang wrote:
Slashing and keen weapons have greater threat. Piercing, devastating blow weapons high multipliers. Heavier weapons TEND to have greater damage dice (which is useless after level 6 and it's one of the things I hoped the book could try to address, but anyway).

What is useless after 6th? <confused>


Mike Schneider wrote:
Kaiyanwang wrote:
Slashing and keen weapons have greater threat. Piercing, devastating blow weapons high multipliers. Heavier weapons TEND to have greater damage dice (which is useless after level 6 and it's one of the things I hoped the book could try to address, but anyway).
What is useless after 6th? <confused>

The weapon damage dice compared to multipliers and threat, due the inflation of flat bonuses to damage.

Senior Designer

Razz wrote:
Guess the designers are too busy with GenCon to answer my important question. It's funny, too, how all the gunslinger pics have two guns but no means of reloading without dropping one...

She has double-barreled pistols and holsters. No need to drop unless she wants to. She may want to. That's her choice.

Senior Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
raydash wrote:
I'm curious to see if there is a Character sheet with the new "Defense", "Wound Points" and the other optional rules. Anyone knows?

There is not an official one, no. I'm sure someone will make one in the future. I don't think we have plans to...but plans change. How bad do people really want one?

Owner - House of Books and Games LLC

Matthew Morris wrote:
Mike Schneider wrote:

Falling damage is stupidly undercalculated because there's no appreciation for acceleration due to gravity.

I vaugely remember, like a decade or two ago, a guy at OSU posting a paper on how falling damage is accurate on r.g.f.d. Can't find it right now.

It was in the Dragon, way, way back. Can't recall the issue number offhand, but it was in the 1e days. And it concluded that the current method of 1d6 per 10 ft., max 20d6 was pretty darn accurate, way more accurate than the stuff people try to replace it with.

Search my old posts if you're really interested; I dug out the article last time it came up.


Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
raydash wrote:
I'm curious to see if there is a Character sheet with the new "Defense", "Wound Points" and the other optional rules. Anyone knows?
There is not an official one, no. I'm sure someone will make one in the future. I don't think we have plans to...but plans change. How bad do people really want one?

Want. Want bad. :)

Liberty's Edge

Kaiyanwang wrote:
Mike Schneider wrote:
Kaiyanwang wrote:
Slashing and keen weapons have greater threat. Piercing, devastating blow weapons high multipliers. Heavier weapons TEND to have greater damage dice (which is useless after level 6 and it's one of the things I hoped the book could try to address, but anyway).
What is useless after 6th? <confused>
The weapon damage dice compared to multipliers and threat, due the inflation of flat bonuses to damage.

As far as I know, the only characters who'll be getting automatic numerical bonus inflation are those who sacrifice their attack bonus and/or armor class via Power Attack. Everyone else has to work for it, continually allocating more money, feats, and class abilities (e.g. devoting all Weapon Training to a single category) or relying on situational or limited use features (Smite, Challenge, Sneak-Attack, etc).

Similarly, a fighter optimizing weapon dice takes the Vital Strike chain and will frequently be able to make overwhelming single attacks that one-shot his opponents.


Serisan wrote:
Eric Hinkle wrote:
Pardon me for asking, but could someone give a heads-up as to the names of the new Cavalier Orders? To me the various orders are among the best features of that class (I love what Super Genius Games did with their two PDFs of new cavalier orders) and I'm curious as to what we got in Ultimate Combat about them.

Order of the Blue Rose - based on peaceful resolutions

Order of the Seal - defending an item, place, or secret
Order of the Tome - defending knowledge or seeking out and destroying dangerous knowledge, particularly of written works.

Abilities are pretty solid on all of them, particularly the Blue Rose.

Thank you, Serisan, this is vastly appreciated.

And that Order of the Tome sounds like it'd go great with a Hellknight PC cavalier from their Order of the Rack.


Has it ever been established what those creatures Valeros and Hayato are fighting?

Yetis??

New Jade Regent monster???

BD

Scarab Sages

Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Just wondering why the communal version of protection from chaos/evil/good/law was split in to 4 different spells. You could have added more spells or artwork to the book if you had left it as one spell.

Shadow Lodge

Jason Nelson wrote:
Lobolusk wrote:
Jason Nelson wrote:
Lobolusk wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:

I'm 90% sure that Crushing Embrace = Crushing Blow.

As for the Twin Lock, no idea...

i am guessing the back breaker feat is really the neck breaker feat

Crushing Embrace was for extra damage on grapples and pins.

Twin Lock was, as someone guessed, for grappling two targets at once.

Backbreaker was... well, it was exactly what it says on the tin. :) A way to break something's back (i.e., permanent paralysis) if it all works, or at least to mess them up even if you don't get the full meal deal of spine-snappage.

We'll see if they turn up again someday... :)

so.....are they going to be out in the errata? or do the feats listed just not exist? at all if they are no longer valid feats can we get some substution feats? like strangle

Until and unless otherwise stated by the Paizo staff, they simply do not exist. As to what substitution there may be, that must wait for official errata from Jason, Sean, Stephen, or whomever else on the Paizo crew.

My unofficial suggestion is to simply replace them with bonus monk feat slots while you wait for the official answer to the question.

Gotta say, I'm really kinda pissed about this. Just got my copy, read over the Tetori, got frikkin excited and went to start working on the build for DragonCon PFS and..WTF!?!?!?

If this ever gets worked out Tetori will be my absolute favorite anything in Pathfinder of all time, if not , gotta say i might be a liiittle upset.

Can always homebrew some substitutes but I was really looking foward to usinng it for PFS.

Anyways thanks for the awesome archetype, even if it is only half finished.

The Exchange Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6

gbonehead wrote:

It was in the Dragon, way, way back. Can't recall the issue number offhand, but it was in the 1e days. And it concluded that the current method of 1d6 per 10 ft., max 20d6 was pretty darn accurate, way more accurate than the stuff people try to replace it with.

Search my old posts if you're really interested; I dug out the article last time it came up.

His whole premise was that momentum matters more than kinetic energy. Which anyone who's seen how vehicle collisions work out knows to be utter nonsense (Mythbusters demonstrated this to great effect in the two-car collision show). Ah well, poorly applied math/physics can prove anything, that's why you take it to real-world experimentation :)

Owner - House of Books and Games LLC

Russ Taylor wrote:
gbonehead wrote:

It was in the Dragon, way, way back. Can't recall the issue number offhand, but it was in the 1e days. And it concluded that the current method of 1d6 per 10 ft., max 20d6 was pretty darn accurate, way more accurate than the stuff people try to replace it with.

Search my old posts if you're really interested; I dug out the article last time it came up.

His whole premise was that momentum matters more than kinetic energy. Which anyone who's seen how vehicle collisions work out knows to be utter nonsense (Mythbusters demonstrated this to great effect in the two-car collision show). Ah well, poorly applied math/physics can prove anything, that's why you take it to real-world experimentation :)

Rasterfragit!

That's the Mythbusters I had to take off in the middle of!!

What was the conclusion, anyways? Because it was pretty counterintuitive around the time I had to leave.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

My initial reaction is that the book is a maddening mix of gold and garbage (as opposed to UM which is mainly just garbage). Will give it some time, but as a DM, I'm really not looking forward to painstakingly looking at everything on every page and deciding which third to alter, which third to keep, and which third to toss out, and then having to frustrate my players when I decide the awesome new class they bought the book for isn't allowed in my game. Plus I don't trust myself to not overlook something like a broken combo, and I'm now far passed the point where I trust Paizo to do it for me.

Gold:

Katanas and Waks. There was a lot of thoughtful debate on these forums on how these should be rendered, and I think they got it just right. For the historically accurate cult of the western knight, the katana now does equal damage to its western counterpart, and less than the bastard sword. For the historically accurate cult of the samurai, the weapon does more criticals like its curved edge should, and using them with 2 hands like you're supposed to is still a valid option, the extra damage synergizes with the giant crit range. For the "ZOMG katanas are teh ultimatez ... gimme one fer each hand" 14-year-old-anime-crowd, you are still able to wield them 1 handed, and they have the mechanically negligible but flufftastically awesome "Deadly" special ability. And its all tucked nicely under the exotic proficiency for game balance and fluff. Plus, finally it is physically possible to make a cheap, lower quality katana. It always bothered me that all katanas always had to be masterwork, always.

Gladiators: Net feats are cool. Performance stuff looks cool at first glance, but I haven't looked through it too much.

Primitive weapons: Haven't thoroughly examined it, but it looks cool, and a little bit less gimped than 2nd edition's attempt at primitive weapons.

Martial Arts: Some of it looks, cool. Mainly the stances. Of course half the book seems to be taken up by martial arts so I haven't fully absorbed it all.

Dragoon: Good compromise allowing a lot of the Final Fantasy flavor, without the anime, keeping the suspension of disbelief more or less in tact.

Archaeologist: Indi! This should be renamed "adventurer" and it should take the bard's place as a base class (I say this as someone who loves bards before all other character classes). Bards are such a specifically flavored class, filling such a generally generic role that they'd make a great archetype off of something more flavor-neutral like this. Though not sure why this is in the combat book, and they should really have tweaked the spell selection and class skills a little. Why is Indiana Jones throwing around Sound Burst like Guile from street fighter instead of getting disable device as a class skill?

Feats: First glance through the feats looks like they did a good job. For instance, I just read the whip feats and they're pretty golden.

Garbage:

Sloppiness: There are already threads up with tons of typos and other mistakes. I can live with OBVIOUS typos (begrudgingly), but what I can't handle is having to second guess the intent of every rule and mechanic. The wording is frequently vague, mistake ridden, and lazy. Further, they continue the fine pathfinder tradition of pretending that complicated rules collisions are sufficiently cleared up in previous books, so they can just refer you back and it will be clear how the new rule should be resolved. This saves the space they could have used to explicitly reiterate relevant rules and errata when they introduce something new.

Eastern Weapons: Aside from historical quibbling which others are doing far better than I ever could, I'm immediately annoyed with the game balance of the Nodachi. It is an Elven Curve Blade, that you don't have to burn a feat on. Clear and simple power creep. Because the first new martial weapon I looked at was clearly broken, I'm forced to rule them all as exotic weapons, for the time being, which of course makes me look like a miserly GM to my players, because the book spells out a separate group that is exotic.

Butterfly Swords: A d4... seriously? A gunslinger can wallop me with a rusty blunderbuss for 1d10, but if Kano hits me with his 5 inch WIDE razor-sharp buttefly sword, I'm no worse off than if a drunk stabs me with a broken bottle. I know its petty to quibble with a single weapon, but how do these do the same damage as daggers. Have they ever seen these things? They're short, but massive. They're basically Knife-Shaped Axes. If the Falcata gets the coveted 18-20x3, these guys should certainly get it. Or give them a +1 when attacking with 2 of them. Or something better, than the only special thing they get- you can draw them together. In real life, they actually aren't even especially easy to draw together, because the handguards require specific placing of your hands, where as a pair of short swords could be grabbed from any angle. This is just a sore spot for me because I played Kano a lot in Mortal Kombat Deadly Alliance, and grew fond of these weapons.

Ninjas: Aside from the CHA based problem I and other have, which has been amply voiced in other threads, these guys are hella broken. Why would anyone play a rogue when they could be a ninja:

-WEAPONS:
Rogue-I've got a rapier, prepare to eat d6
Ninja-Prepare to eat d8 and groovy special maneuvers... I've got a Katana, and a nunchaku, and a kusarigama, and...

-EVASION/KI POOL-
Rogue- I can survive a fireball!
Ninja-I can move 20 additional feet when I need to!
Rogue-I can survive a fireball!
Ninja:I can jump like a monk!
Rogue-I can survive a fireball!
Ninja- I can get a +4 to stealth when I need I it.
Rogue-I can survive a fireball!
Ninja-I can make extra attacks at no penalty!
10 levels Later...
Ninja- Dang, I can do all of this crazy stuff almost as often as I want, this is the ability that keeps on giving!
Rouge-I can survive a fireball! And my reflex save is invincible... oh no, I rolled a 1 and didn't survive the fireball...
1 level and a resurrection spell later...
Rogue-I can survive a fireball!!!
Ninja-Enough already! I'm going to take the damn evasion ninja trick just to shut you up... now with my equal reflex bonus, I can survive a fireball just as good as you.
Rogue-Fine, then I'll take the Ki Pool Rogue talent and I'll be just as good as... hey how come my Ki Pool is so much smaller than yours... and why can't I use it to make extra attacks...

-TALENTS/TRICKS- Ninja- I can pick any of your rogue talents as a ninja trick! Rogue- I can pick any of your ninja tricks as a rogue talent... except that I won't have the Ki necessary to use it, unless I spend an additional rogue talent to get the lame version of your Ki Pool...

-POISON USE/TRAP FINDING-
Rogue- Yay... I finally came out infinitesimally ahead on one of these matchups! I'm good at traps, I'm good at traps!
Ninja- Poison Use is nice, but fine I'll let you have this one.

-TRAP SENSE/NO TRACE-
Rogue- I'm trap proof, and I'm going to keep getting more and more trap proof as I level... except for magic traps that target my will/fort... they'll completely destroy me.
Ninja- So, what else is new? We both already have a good dex and good reflex saves... besides I thought you were good at traps... how often are you going to benefit from TRAP SENSE if you're using TRAP FINDING.
Oh look what I got... I'm untrackable, so that's cool. Oh, and I'm a master of disguise. Oh, and I'm king of opposed stealth checks whatever the hell those are... But go ahead and keep pluggin away at those traps... you're good at traps.

-LEVEL 6-
Rogue-Wow, Santa left a rogue talent and +2 Trap sense in my stocking!
Ninja-Awesome dude, yeah he put a Ninja Talent and +2 No Trace in my stocking, then I looked under the tree and found Light Steps- its a super versatile and useful ability that I'll benefit from until I'm level 20- it let's me get passed difficult terrain, which as you know is starting to become a major pain because all of those mid-level battlefield control spells the casters are starting to use. Plus, whenever you're not around to do the traps, I can just walk through them like they're not there. And I can walk on water like Jesus. And I can walk on lava like... well I'm pretty sure I'm the only one who can do that. And I can walk on pretty much anything else. Anyway... what did he leave for you under the tree?
Rogue-... ... ... new socks and undies...
Ninja- Aw that sucks dude.

Well I'm getting tired of complaining about the bad parts of this book and I haven't even mentioned the gunslinger yet so I'll wrap it up. I really don't want to be pessimistic about the future of Pathfinder, but this is the 3rd splatbook in a row that I've given a perfectly fair and optimistic shake to, and I'm starting to lose faith. If another good fantasy RPG popped up, attempting to carry-on the mantle of 3.5, I'd jump on it in a second.

The Exchange Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6

gbonehead wrote:


That's the Mythbusters I had to take off in the middle of!!

What was the conclusion, anyways? Because it was pretty counterintuitive around the time I had to leave.

The conclusion matches the physics expectation: if you want to simulate a car hitting another car at 60 mph, drive it into a sturdy wall at 60 mph. That is to say, when two cars each going at 60 mph hit each other, it is NOT like hitting a wall at 120 mph.

It's one of those math things that it's hard to convince someone of if they don't follow it, but the Mythbusters demonstration was pretty conclusive (the car into a wall at 120 mph was annihilated by it, much worse than the two cars each going at 60 were).

Oh, how this connects to falling damage: the collision at 120 mph being so much nastier than the 60 mph one, because it was more energetic. Momentum would suggest a more linear scaling.


edross wrote:

My initial reaction is that the book is a maddening mix of gold and garbage (as opposed to UM which is mainly just garbage). Will give it some time, but as a DM, I'm really not looking forward to painstakingly looking at everything on every page and deciding which third to alter, which third to keep, and which third to toss out, and then having to frustrate my players when I decide the awesome new class they bought the book for isn't allowed in my game. Plus I don't trust myself to not overlook something like a broken combo, and I'm now far passed the point where I trust Paizo to do it for me.

** spoiler omitted **...

I don't have my APG in front of me, but if the Falcata was seriously one handed exotic 1d8 18-20/X3 I would have one on any character that thought about melee, EVER. :P

Beyond that you have alot of good assessments. In alot of ways Ninjas are too good, on that I agree. I also hate when a weapon or amor comes out that is identically statted to another but proficiency is different (a martial a simple, an exotic becomes martial) it just breaks continuity when they are statistically identical, except somehow one requires more training. Also as far as things that chaps my hide so to speak, I dislike the lack of reach on spike chains and Bladed scarfs. I think they were fine as is being exotic. Thats just me...


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber
Stewart Perkins wrote:
edross wrote:

My initial reaction is that the book is a maddening mix of gold and garbage (as opposed to UM which is mainly just garbage). Will give it some time, but as a DM, I'm really not looking forward to painstakingly looking at everything on every page and deciding which third to alter, which third to keep, and which third to toss out, and then having to frustrate my players when I decide the awesome new class they bought the book for isn't allowed in my game. Plus I don't trust myself to not overlook something like a broken combo, and I'm now far passed the point where I trust Paizo to do it for me.

** spoiler omitted **...

I don't have my APG in front of me, but if the Falcata was seriously one handed exotic 1d8 18-20/X3 I would have one on any character that thought about melee, EVER. :P

Beyond that you have alot of good assessments. In alot of ways Ninjas are too good, on that I agree. I also hate when a weapon or amor comes out that is identically statted to another but proficiency is different (a martial a simple, an exotic becomes martial) it just breaks continuity when they are statistically identical, except somehow one requires more training. Also as far as things that chaps my hide so to speak, I dislike the lack of reach on spike chains and Bladed scarfs. I think they were fine as is being exotic. Thats just me...

I don't agree that Ninja are better then Rogues. The Rogue and Ninja have access to the same tricks/talents (although the Rogue does have to take the Ki Pool), but the Rogue has Evasion, and can take the Extra Talent feat to get the Ki Pool.


EDIT to Stewart P: Your are correct, I mispoke, I meant to say that the falcata has 19-20/x3 crit. Still a little broken, but I'm okay with it because I'm more "exotic weapons cost a feat so they should be really good" than "crit range and multipliers are the only thing that matter with weapons".

To Justin F:
I don't understand why you don't agree with me, it seems like there is no room for difference of opinion (I wish there was then it would be a good class). A warrior is unarguably better than a commoner, a wizard is unarguably better than an adept, and a ninja is unarguably better than a rogue. That was the point of my match-up above, to show point for point the only ways in which ninjas and rouges materially differ, and pray that I've miscalculated something crucial and someone would come along and show me where I was wrong. The only things I left out of my matchup were knowledge(nobility vs. dungeoneering(who cares)) and the Capstone abilities, because they were both good, and who cares about 20th level abilities anyway.

Its clearly and simply a superiority of ninjas to have unfettered access to the rogue's talent's while the rogue has to spend extra character development to get the equivalent access. You can shrug it off, but you can't say it isn't there.

Regarding evasion, as I mentioned above, ninjas were already compensated for the lack of evasion with a Ki Pool, which is far superior. You can't go around and use evasion to justify the Ki Pool AND unfettered access to all rogue talents, anymore than I can use a 20 dollar bill to buy 2 things that are $20.

I can see someone disagreeing with me on the degree to which ninjas are superior to rogues, and I'm sure lots of people will use the ninja class without their games imploding. But if one of those games has a player playing a rogue, and another playing a ninja, I'd say the rogue's player is well within his rights to hold the GM responsible when he notices the game isn't balanced, which he will by level 6.


edross wrote:
Regarding evasion, as I mentioned above, ninjas were already compensated for the lack of evasion with a Ki Pool, which is far superior. You can't go around and use evasion to justify the Ki Pool AND unfettered access to all rogue talents, anymore than I can use a 20 dollar bill to buy 2 things that are $20.

To be fair, you did neglect one advantage which Rogues have that Ninja do not: access to Rogue Archetypes. If you want to play a Cutpurse or a Pirate or an Investigator, you can't do it as a Ninja. Of course, the value of that advantage is quite subjective...

That said, I agree that Ninja just seem naturally better than Rogues, but I doubt they're going to be completely replacing our classic fantasy brethren any time soon.


Fair enough, about the archetypes, and at this point I'd say that introducing some over-powered new archetypes for the core classes is going to be the only way they can reign in the new base classes. But I'd also say each variant class and archetype should separately be balanced to the base vanilla-flavored class it replaces, if for no other reason than modularity of archetypyes. Plus old-fashioned players shouldn't be punished for not wanting to fiddle with archetypes. If a player comes to the table wanting to just play a classic fighter or rogue, he shouldn't feel sub-optimal.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber
edross wrote:

EDIT to Stewart P: Your are correct, I mispoke, I meant to say that the falcata has 19-20/x3 crit. Still a little broken, but I'm okay with it because I'm more "exotic weapons cost a feat so they should be really good" than "crit range and multipliers are the only thing that matter with weapons".

To Justin F:
I don't understand why you don't agree with me, it seems like there is no room for difference of opinion (I wish there was then it would be a good class). A warrior is unarguably better than a commoner, a wizard is unarguably better than an adept, and a ninja is unarguably better than a rogue. That was the point of my match-up above, to show point for point the only ways in which ninjas and rouges materially differ, and pray that I've miscalculated something crucial and someone would come along and show me where I was wrong. The only things I left out of my matchup were knowledge(nobility vs. dungeoneering(who cares)) and the Capstone abilities, because they were both good, and who cares about 20th level abilities anyway.

Its clearly and simply a superiority of ninjas to have unfettered access to the rogue's talent's while the rogue has to spend extra character development to get the equivalent access. You can shrug it off, but you can't say it isn't there.

Regarding evasion, as I mentioned above, ninjas were already compensated for the lack of evasion with a Ki Pool, which is far superior. You can't go around and use evasion to justify the Ki Pool AND unfettered access to all rogue talents, anymore than I can use a 20 dollar bill to buy 2 things that are $20.

I can see someone disagreeing with me on the degree to which ninjas are superior to rogues, and I'm sure lots of people will use the ninja class without their games imploding. But if one of those games has a player playing a rogue, and another playing a ninja, I'd say the rogue's player is well within his rights to hold the GM responsible when he notices the game isn't balanced, which he will by level 6.

I appreciate your opinion, I just disagree with it.


I'm not saying that I don't like pepsi, I'm saying that a 100 dollar bill is more generally useful than a blank sheet of paper. There is a point at which 'everyone has their own opinion' isn't a relevant statement. I want you to tell what about my assessment of the ninja's superiority to the rogue is incorrect, or to accede that my assessment is correct, and therefore acknowledge there is a problem with the new class.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber
edross wrote:
I'm not saying that I don't like pepsi, I'm saying that a 100 dollar bill is more generally useful than a blank sheet of paper. There is a point at which 'everyone has their own opinion' isn't a relevant statement. I want you to tell what about my assessment of the ninja's superiority to the rogue is incorrect, or to accede that my assessment is correct, and therefore acknowledge there is a problem with the new class.

Wow you should really get over yourself...

Liberty's Edge

Eric Hinkle wrote:
Pardon me for asking, but could someone give a heads-up as to the names of the new Cavalier Orders? To me the various orders are among the best features of that class (I love what Super Genius Games did with their two PDFs of new cavalier orders) and I'm curious as to what we got in Ultimate Combat about them.

The new orders in Ultimate Combat are pretty interesting - I just got the book in the mail the other day and I'm busily going through it. Overall impression ... it's pretty great!

By the way, thanks so much for the shout out to those two Super Genius Games releases (Advanced Options: More Cavalier Orders and Advanced Options: Cavaliers' Orders)

I'm really pleased with how they both came out and it's always great to see that people dig your work :)

OK, back to reading Ultimate Combat!


Come on man, I'm not trying to make this personal. I'm concerned about a new product that they put out, so I posted my reactions to it in the relevant thread, hoping people who knew the system better than me would help me make up my mind on rather or not to impose my initial reactions on my players.

Then you commented on my reactions, and when I asked you to back up your comments you insulted me. If you're unwilling to contribute meaningfully to the issues I raised in my post, its kinda trollish to respond to it.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber
edross wrote:

Come on man, I'm not trying to make this personal. I'm concerned about a new product that they put out, so I posted my reactions to it in the relevant thread, hoping people who knew the system better than me would help me make up my mind on rather or not to impose my initial reactions on my players.

Then you commented on my reactions, and when I asked you to back up your comments you insulted me. If you're unwilling to contribute meaningfully to the issues I raised in my post, its kinda trollish to respond to it.

I have seen both in play and seen the rogue often outshine the ninja, especially since you run into way more traps and fireballs in most adventures then the ninja being tracked. Is the Ki Pool nice, of course it is and it is useful, but so is Evasion. If either class is in the right situation it can outshine the other, which to me seems like a nice balance. Also there is an awesome cleric spell that is better then what you get out of the Ki Pool (Blessing of Fervor). It is one of my groups new pre-battle spells. Also don't forget that the Rogue Ki Pool is Wisdom based, and the Ninjas is Charisma based.

Sczarni

Regarding the ninja, at first glance it would certainly seem that it is superior to the rogue, however the more you think about the way both rogues and ninjas are played it becomes less important. First of all, as someone mentioned before, the access to archetypes blows the ninja out of the water (specially loving the Knife Master) in terms of combat for example. The Poisoner is better than the ninja when dealing with poisons. The Scout is a better mobile warrior than the ninja as well. Even better is the fact that a lot of these archetypes can be combined.

Now, when it comes to the "vanilla" rogue. Now, if there is a scenario on which a player has to choose between playing a ninja and a rogue, it means that UC is being used (and all the archetypes that come with it. If the player decides to play vanilla rogue, it means that he either just wants to or feels that, in the specific campaign, traps will play a strong roll. In that case, choosing the vanilla rogue would be the better choice.
If, however, there are no traps in the game and it just focuses on combat (and the players knows it),and UC is available, then it is still most likely that the player would choose an archetypes rogue before a ninja.

In general the ninja is better than the vanilla rogue in combat, because the vanilla rogue should be considered to be a "base archetype" that focuses on traps and avoiding area damage and not combat.

PS: I apologize for any spelling mystakes as english is not my first language.


Any idea or more official info on a faq? update for this bad boy?


The problem isn't that the Ninja is more focused on combat than the Rogue, although making a more combat capable version of a core class IS risky business in a combat-centric rules-system. The problem is that the Ninja doesn't have to give up a significant amount of non-combat functionality to be a lot better than the rouge in combat and better than the rogue in a number of non-combat situations as well. When you evaluate the specific differences between the two, by sheer quantity as well as quality, the rogue is getting a lot less stuff to compensate for all the stuff the ninja gets, a lot of which aren't even confined to combat perks. Normally this is harder to measure for new classes, but when a hyper-power-inflated class is built off of a core class and can do 90% of the things the core class can do, it creates an incentive to not ever play the core class, even if you want to.

Based on my match up, above... even if we pretend that evasion + trapfinding + trapsense is roughly equal to a Ki Pool + Use Poison + No Trace (pretty big if), we still have to contend with the fact that ninjas get free Katana proficiency and Light Steps, and the fact that they do not have equivalent access to each other's trick/talent lists. I might be willing to concede that the finessability of the rogue's rapier synergizes with the class's dex dependency almost enough to make up for the ninja's katana(one of the best exotic weapons in the game), but then you look at the other cool exotic weapon proficiencies they get for free, and the ninja still comes out way on top. Then if we pretend that the ninja having to spend 2 talents to get improved evasion, while rouges only have to spend 1 is equal to the ninja having half a dozen super-talents that the rogue has to spend an extra talent to use, we still have to contend with the fact that a ninja's improved evasion is as good as a rogues once he purchases it, but the Ki Supply behind a rogues's vanishing trick will always be way smaller than a ninja's. Then we look back at that glaring 6th level ninja ability that the rogue doesn't get compensated for and just shake our heads...

Sczarni

You are still considering the fact that the rogue only should consider trapfinding + evasion + trap sense as it's greatest asset, when that is not the case. That combination of abilities is only the "base archetype" of the rogue. One that is extremely good when dealing with trap ridde scenarios. One that, in the right circumstance, would be muc more usefull than the ninja. However, since that scenario is unlikely, the rogue is given other ability packages to choose from. Now, when those packages are compared to the abilities the ninja gets; ki pool (the extra attack being the best by far), poison use (negligible in most games and worse than the poisoner rogue), and no trace (another one of those things that is unlikely to come up in most games), then the comparison is less one sided.

The main principle of comparison I'm using of course depends on 2 ideas; first, the fact that the basic rogue should be considered just one more "basic" archetype useful in some scenarios. Second, he fact that the ninja will not be getting archetypes and will stay the way it is. Of course is that is not the case and Paizo comes up with ninja archetypes then I'll swallow my words.


Okay.... samurais, ninjas and magic gunslingers.... ORGASMIC!

Shadow Lodge Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8

Charles Scholz wrote:
Just wondering why the communal version of protection from chaos/evil/good/law was split in to 4 different spells. You could have added more spells or artwork to the book if you had left it as one spell.

That's actually the way they're presented in the Core Rulebook.

Despite being listed as "Protection from Chaos/Evil/Good/Law", if you check page 327 you'll see each version has its own entry.

Liberty's Edge

I'm at work and don't have my book with me (and Ultimate Combat material is not up on the PFSRD yet) or I'd check on this myself ...

I read something somewhere recently about Ultimate Combat having something about thrown shields? Is that true????

Thanks!!!


Frerezar wrote:

You are still considering the fact that the rogue only should consider trapfinding + evasion + trap sense as it's greatest asset, when that is not the case. That combination of abilities is only the "base archetype" of the rogue. One that is extremely good when dealing with trap ridde scenarios. One that, in the right circumstance, would be muc more usefull than the ninja. However, since that scenario is unlikely, the rogue is given other ability packages to choose from. Now, when those packages are compared to the abilities the ninja gets; ki pool (the extra attack being the best by far), poison use (negligible in most games and worse than the poisoner rogue), and no trace (another one of those things that is unlikely to come up in most games), then the comparison is less one sided.

The main principle of comparison I'm using of course depends on 2 ideas; first, the fact that the basic rogue should be considered just one more "basic" archetype useful in some scenarios. Second, he fact that the ninja will not be getting archetypes and will stay the way it is. Of course is that is not the case and Paizo comes up with ninja archetypes then I'll swallow my words.

It may be opening a separate issue, but I maintain that ideally Paizo would balance all new classes against the core classes rather than expect all DM's to use their non-core archetypes or gimp certain core classes. Its called modularity. Archetypes shouldn't be considered the same as feats, as they are non-core options that fundamentally change what the character class is. If they are required to play a non-gimped rogue, then a vanilla rogue is not a viable option. Plus if access to archetypes is truly and intentionally to serve as a balancing factor, then that would necessitate Paizo restricting themselves from significantly expanding the ninja's list of archetypes in future supplements, which sounds kind of lame.

Anyway, I've decided for the time being to allow Ninjas in my game with the following alterations:
-Ki Pool is Wis based
-6 Skill Points per level instead of 8

Sczarni

You should just remember that the Ninja itself is a variant class, not a base class. So if a GM is actually using the ninja, it can be assumed that rogue archetypes are also available. You can't just compare an "only core" assumption with an alternate class, that is just inconsistent.

In the end there is nothing wrong with disagreeing on a non conclusive topic (and as I said before, if ninja archetypes appear I will swallow my words). Regardless, the best of luck with your local games.

One more thing, if you decide to change wisdom for charisma when measuring the ninjas ki pool, remember that usually wisdom is an slightly more useful stat than charisma (perception and will saves come to mind). Not allowing the combat oriented ninja to dump cha always seemed like a balancing factor to me.


Frerezar wrote:

You should just remember that the Ninja itself is a variant class, not a base class. So if a GM is actually using the ninja, it can be assumed that rogue archetypes are also available. You can't just compare an "only core" assumption with an alternate class, that is just inconsistent.

In the end there is nothing wrong with disagreeing on a non conclusive topic (and as I said before, if ninja archetypes appear I will swallow my words). Regardless, the best of luck with your local games.

One more thing, if you decide to change wisdom for charisma when measuring the ninjas ki pool, remember that usually wisdom is an slightly more useful stat than charisma (perception and will saves come to mind). Not allowing the combat oriented ninja to dump cha always seemed like a balancing factor to me.

I would agree that typically, wisdom is a little better than charisma, due to will saves and perception checks, and the change does infinitesimally turn up the power level (atleast for the standard, skill-use-lite game). I don't think that it is a substantial advantage, however, because in a pinch they are both kind of dump stats for rogue-types anyway, and Ninjas get twice as many CHA class skills as WIS class skills, including bluff which they can use to feint.

I do differ with you on the assertion that if the GM allows the Ninja, he is allowing the entire book. I think its been a pretty common convention of gaming groups to use splat book material on a modular basis, and the introduction of the class chapter of UC specifies that its up to the GM to determine which of the new class options to allow in his game. Further its just basic game design to ensure that each new non-core option is balanced to the core rules without relying on the inclusion or exclusion of additional non-core rules. And not to beat a dead horse, but a vanilla rogue with an archetype isn't a vanilla rogue anymore, so it doesn't make sense to specifically compensate a new class for its relative lack of archetypes in any way besides giving them more archetypes. Its like prestige classes, they are not a part of the package, but an alternative to the package. We wouldn't give a class an extra feat because there is a scarcity of useful prestige classes for that class to move into, so we shouldn't pump up the ninja's power level to compensate for the lack of archetypes.

Dark Archive

Is it me or is there general description of the Feat "Destructive Dispel"?


When i first got this book i thought " All right! lets see what combat oriented prestige classes they put in!" Searching, Searching, Um, ok no prestige classes ... and a whole lot of spells ... Ultimate Combat?

Not sure why soo much was put in the spells section, especially after just releasing Ultimate Magic and Inner Sea Magic, i thought more effort in the Combat area would be called for ... enough with the spells already!

This one is almost as much of a let down as Ultimate Magic was. For books that have the word Ultimate in the title they both fall far flat.

About the only part of this book i really cared for was the called shots section.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Alephtau wrote:

When i first got this book i thought " All right! lets see what combat oriented prestige classes they put in!" Searching, Searching, Um, ok no prestige classes ... and a whole lot of spells ... Ultimate Combat?

Not sure why soo much was put in the spells section, especially after just releasing Ultimate Magic and Inner Sea Magic, i thought more effort in the Combat area would be called for ... enough with the spells already!

This one is almost as much of a let down as Ultimate Magic was. For books that have the word Ultimate in the title they both fall far flat.

About the only part of this book i really cared for was the called shots section.

Two words: Spells Sell.

You might want to wonder why there was a zillion magic-related books in the 3.5 cycle (Dragon Magic, Magic of Incarnum, Tome of Magic, each Complete with spells, Spell Compendium) and each and every WotC splatbook had spells in it.

Compare to non-caster classes and there's emm Bo9S which many argue is actually about spells that go by a different name.

Dark Archive

William Bryan wrote:
Is it me or is there general description of the Feat "Destructive Dispel"?

OMG...I've gotta learn how to spell. Destructive....D-I-S-T....wait!!

;/

Shadow Lodge Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alephtau wrote:

When i first got this book i thought " All right! lets see what combat oriented prestige classes they put in!" Searching, Searching, Um, ok no prestige classes ... and a whole lot of spells ... Ultimate Combat?

Not sure why soo much was put in the spells section, especially after just releasing Ultimate Magic and Inner Sea Magic, i thought more effort in the Combat area would be called for ... enough with the spells already!

This one is almost as much of a let down as Ultimate Magic was. For books that have the word Ultimate in the title they both fall far flat.

About the only part of this book i really cared for was the called shots section.

Spells aren't part of combat?


Alephtau wrote:

When i first got this book i thought " All right! lets see what combat oriented prestige classes they put in!" Searching, Searching, Um, ok no prestige classes ... and a whole lot of spells ... Ultimate Combat?

Not sure why soo much was put in the spells section, especially after just releasing Ultimate Magic and Inner Sea Magic, i thought more effort in the Combat area would be called for ... enough with the spells already!

This one is almost as much of a let down as Ultimate Magic was. For books that have the word Ultimate in the title they both fall far flat.

About the only part of this book i really cared for was the called shots section.

As many reservations as I have about this book, lack of prestige classes ain't one of them. I don't think "spells sell", I think "PrCs sell" and Wizards of the Coast sold and sold and sold, so that the average player had books and books and books of redundant, overly specific prestige classes, which he'd only ever play a fraction of. I respect that instead of just selling a book full of character concepts to play, they are actually selling the tools you need to build the character you want to play. Archetypes have replaced Prestige classes, and that doesn't have to be a bad thing.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Razz wrote:
Guess the designers are too busy with GenCon to answer my important question. It's funny, too, how all the gunslinger pics have two guns but no means of reloading without dropping one...

The idea is that you drop your foe on your first two shots. the problem is that unless you have more than two hands, such a feat isn't possible. They did however provide a spell for doing just that. (along with an illustration to show how it works.)

Unless you're playing in a settign with advanced firearms that allows for revolvers (Golarian isnt' one of them) you're going to have problems being a two fisted gunner.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

OK after reading the rules in the book i have a question some of you may be able to better answer on crafting bullets for firearms
it seems that if you want to make a bullet you have to craft powder and the bullet for old fashion guns but if you want the newer ones you need to make a metal cartridge ,powder, and bullet now making them at 8 gold 6 silver per shot that is kinda expensive even crafted. vendor its 26 gold what my question is am i right here or have i made a error with my math or the mats if i make a cartridge dose that include the bullet and powder . some one help me or ill be a poor beggar gunslinger praying to have enough cash to make one bullet for the next encounter.

Grand Lodge

Razz wrote:
LittleRedNekra wrote:
Razz wrote:


No need for unnecessary sarcasm. I'm simply speaking on behalf of those here that had asked if they'll provide a means for 2 gun wielders to reload. They promised yes, there'll be a feat. I have yet to find it, or anything like it, so far. So I'm simply asking since I am sure many people, including me, need a means to do so.

It was likewise with Ultimate Magic. James quoted saying he was 99 percent sure there'll be a set of guidelines on how to expand the new spellcasting classes spell list with spells not from PF products, and they failed to put it in that book. Which may of us find important, too, since we do use Spell Compendium and other 3PP for spells

You don't get to speak against sarcasm when you're making thin vieled digs, mate.

Maybe the answer is to use a gun that holds more than one bullet in both hands?

And his answer to adding spells from non-PF products might just have been to add them in the book. I guess the idea is to remember that it's not the other game... That and 99 isn't 100

What you're saying is quite different than what they said. See, they practically guaranteed both elements I mentioned to be added to said products, but they were overlooked, strangely. I was merely pointing it out and pointing out, also, it's best for them not to make promises they can't keep.

His answer to UM was practically certain, so we customers have a right to show disappointment and ask for what we were told to be given as so. We do pay for this, after all.

Just curious can you provide a link to where JJ said he would include information from 3PP products into Pathfinder Rules? That just sounds a bit hokey to me.


Krome wrote:
Razz wrote:
LittleRedNekra wrote:
Razz wrote:


No need for unnecessary sarcasm. I'm simply speaking on behalf of those here that had asked if they'll provide a means for 2 gun wielders to reload. They promised yes, there'll be a feat. I have yet to find it, or anything like it, so far. So I'm simply asking since I am sure many people, including me, need a means to do so.

It was likewise with Ultimate Magic. James quoted saying he was 99 percent sure there'll be a set of guidelines on how to expand the new spellcasting classes spell list with spells not from PF products, and they failed to put it in that book. Which may of us find important, too, since we do use Spell Compendium and other 3PP for spells

You don't get to speak against sarcasm when you're making thin vieled digs, mate.

Maybe the answer is to use a gun that holds more than one bullet in both hands?

And his answer to adding spells from non-PF products might just have been to add them in the book. I guess the idea is to remember that it's not the other game... That and 99 isn't 100

What you're saying is quite different than what they said. See, they practically guaranteed both elements I mentioned to be added to said products, but they were overlooked, strangely. I was merely pointing it out and pointing out, also, it's best for them not to make promises they can't keep.

His answer to UM was practically certain, so we customers have a right to show disappointment and ask for what we were told to be given as so. We do pay for this, after all.

Just curious can you provide a link to where JJ said he would include information from 3PP products into Pathfinder Rules? That just sounds a bit hokey to me.

I don't know the post mentioned, but what he might be referencing would be (If I know Paizo well enough) a section in UM that would give advice on how to integrate non-PF spells into the system. I'm sure it would mostly be advice on strength of spell design and the like for homebrew spells and 3pp Spells alike but if said content was talked about it may have been badly written or cut for space, happens all the time. As for the dual wielder reloading, again it could have been a bad design that needed cut, a potentially broken mechanic when used improperly, badly written or deemed needed space. One important thing that people tend to never remember, is that even the "Word of God" as I've heard people refer to the designer's thoughts on things here in the forums, even that is unofficial unless it appears in a blog article or in a product or such. James Jacobs, Erik Mona, and even Jason Buhlman's posts on forums in threads like this are unofficial unless directly in a mangement capacity. So when they make rulings (as James has many times) on alignment and things of that nature it is not official rules clarifications unless put into a FAQ or Errata. So you cannot hold them to things they want to do and say they plan on doing that somewhere along the way someone higher (and there is ALWAYS someone higher, except maybe Lisa) says otherwise. I'm sure they didn't offer new toys just to snatch them away and laugh at you, it was more than likely an ommission based upon one of the aforementioned issues, which is likely when you have a handful of people on a tight schedule turning in mechanics and fluff at a rapid rate. Mistakes and bad writing happen even when we are fresh and rested and not rushed and they just further increase as deadlines approach...

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Bheld wrote:
OK after reading the rules in the book i have a question some of you may be able to better answer on crafting bullets for firearms ...

You'll want to post your question in the Rules Questions fourm.


Krome wrote:


Just curious can you provide a link to where JJ said he would include information from 3PP products into Pathfinder Rules? That just sounds a bit hokey to me.

That is not what he claims JJ said. He is saying JJ was going to have a method by which to add balanced spells into the game. The poster wanted to use this method to judge 3PP spells to know if they were balanced.


This book is worth the money. Despite products arrive later here in Italy, when translated the errors are corrected. This time they made a really combat oriented book. Maybe, they should try to introduce some variants for non casting classes when they make "books of magic". Some stuff like a demonic rager, or similar :) btw, anti caster feats wuold be enough to balance the options introduced.


Now i have a question about the rules. Let's take the Titan Mauler. At 2nd level, he has the ability to use 2h weapon in one hand, but only if of appropriate size (like a greataxe for medium characters in one hand, but not a large longsword).
Ok, that's clear. At 3rd level he can reduce the penalty for using inappropriate sized weapons by 1/3 barbarian levels. Nice. Now, the general rule states that a medium creature can use a large longsword like a 2h sword but with a -2 for his size. There's nothing that says that you can use a large greataxe with 2h at -2 penalty, doing 3d6 damage per hit at -2 attack bonus, so no extra damage :)
If we follow the general rule, this barbarian archetype sucks. A lot. The malus reduction doesn't work with the 2nd level ability, and can't give you extra damage. It just let you use some magic weapons that giants could have, but... are this two options powerful like uncanny dodge and trap sense? Seems that the only way to use this archetype is for small sized characters, that could have problem with damage dice, but this could help if you play a barbarian with 1h weapons, or maybe if u never find nor buy magic weapons of your size (and your GM is an idiot).

Maybe this archetype is not limited to this choice, and can use a large greataxe with 2h. Would be nice, but we have to make some count.

At 18th level you can use weapons 3 size bigger than yours without penalties. That means your greatsword do 6d6 damage per hit. With the vital strike talent tree, this became 24d6. With the 14th level ability, Titanic Rage, 36d6, that a barbarian can maximize with furious finish (being immune to fatigue is not so hard). I will not consider now mounted charge.

Now, with a build 1 oracle level / barbarian you can use limited power rage once a round during rage, since you need only a free action to end and start rage(like energy absorption), and every round you can do 36d6 maximized plus all your bonus.

As GM, now i will let use this archetype only with a level based limitation to weapon size (4d6 is acceptable i think), or using general rules but allowing the 2nd and 3rd level ability to work togheter.

801 to 850 of 967 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Product Discussion / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Ultimate Combat (OGL) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.