The test is at level 10 because I picked a random level (after lowbie levels and before melee falls off the map completely) and that happened to be it. 1/1 BAB classes only get an additional iterative attack over 3/4 BAB classes for seven out of 20 levels, so I really don't have a problem with it. If someone wants to redo all of the builds and math for level 7 or 11 or whatever, they're free to, but that's another entire thread's worth of work.
The rules are just there to have some kind of arbitrary benchmark. It's like we spend more time complaining about the rules than actually crunching the math. Maybe we could start a complain thread for me to ignore. ;)
A significant amount of the pet's damage comes from Vicious weapon, when it's no great shakes survivability-wise. 66 HP is not going to last long when it's doing 15 damage to itself per turn, even with the DR.
Ok, that isn't even CLOSE to true. Vicious does 1d6 back to the wielder. so even if all 5 attacks roll a 6 for backlash, it's FIVE damage. On the average, it should take one damage.
Now I grant you, it isn't brimming with hitpoints, but a minimum HP wasn't a requirement for the build, and 8d10+24 HP is still respectable.
Here is a character I'm considering for actual play. The theory is to take advantage of the vivisectionist alchemists ability to get a large number of primary natural attacks via feral mutagen, or more impressively polymorphing, and then layer on sneak attack with crippling strike.
Vivisectionist Vincent
Material Used: APG, Ultimate Magic, Adventure Path #29 (for the Calikang)
Human Alchemist 10 (Vivisectionst, Preservationist, Internal Alchemist)
Str 22 (15 + 2 Bonus +1 Level +4 belt), 26 with Mutagen
Dex 14
Con 14 (13 +1 Level)
Int 14, (12 +2 hat) 12 with Mutagen
Wis 10
Cha 8
HP 89 (10d8 + 40)
Saving Throws:
Fort: +12 Ref: +11 Will: +8
AC: 20 - Touch 12, Flatfooted 18 (+7 +3 chain shirt, +2 dex, +1 Ring of Protection), 22 with mutagen
AC is below par but can be raised to 26 with a barkskin extract and 30 with a shield extract, so in actual play its viable
Feats:
Planar Preservationist
Toughness
Iron Will
Weapon Focus (Claw)
Weapon Focus (Bite)
Extra Discovery
Skills:
Acrobatics
Various others
Gear:
+2 amulet of might fists (20000)
Belt of +4 str (16000)
+3 chain shirt (9300)
Cloak of Resistance +3 (9000)
Handy Haversack (2000)
Ring of Protection +1 (2000)
Headband of +2 int (4000)
Extracts Prepared
1 (6): Shield x6
2 (5): Barkskin, Summon Monster II x4
3 (3): Monstrous Physique I x3
4 (1): Monstrous Physique II
Full-attack DPR with feral mutagen but without sneak attack: 32.68, not very good
However, he can hand SMII extracts to his tumor familiar monkey who can then use them via his infusion discovery to gain on-demand disposable flank buddies with no loss to his action economy, so he should be able to sneak attack almost all the time.
Full-attack DPR with feral mutagen and sneak attack: 72.06 much better (doesn't include flank to-hit bonus), also has strength DPR of 4.5 from crippling strike
If he wants to kick it up a notch he can use his monstrous physique I extracts to transform into a Charda (bestiary 2) for 10 min 3x per day. In this form he gains two additional claw attacks for five total and his equipment doesn't merge, allowing him to retain access to most of his class abilities and items. He also gains +1 to hit from small size and +2 to AC from size and dex bonus, but his base damage for all attacks decreases by one die.
DPR as Charda (w/sneak): 123.34 hit point, 8 strength
If he wants to turn it up to 11, once per day he can also transform into a Calikang (from AP #29) using monstrous physique II. This is a large size form with 6 slam attacks. When you stack feral mutagen on that I believe that changes to 1 bite, 2 claw, and 4 slams for 7 primary attacks total. He also gains +4 strength and claw/bite base damage increases.
DPR as Calikang: 185.75 hit point, 10.8 strength
He's no summoner but still quite nasty for a character that's also a pretty solid skill monkey.
Here is a character I'm considering for actual play. The theory is to take advantage of the vivisectionist alchemists ability to get a large number of primary natural attacks via feral mutagen, or more impressively polymorphing, and then layer on sneak attack with crippling strike.
Vivisectionist Vincent
Material Used: APG, Ultimate Magic, Adventure Path #29 (for the Calikang)
Human Alchemist 10 (Vivisectionst, Preservationist, Internal Alchemist)
Str 22 (15 + 2 Bonus +1 Level +4 belt), 26 with Mutagen
Dex 14
Con 14 (13 +1 Level)
Int 14, (12 +2 hat) 12 with Mutagen
Wis 10
Cha 8
HP 89 (10d8 + 40)
Saving Throws:
Fort: +12 Ref: +11 Will: +8
Since you're generally not going to get more than one bite attack per round (if any), you may want to consider Quickdraw or Improved Initiative rather than WF:bite.
Hey, Omelite - that Synthesist build is freaking beastly.
But I have to ask - What's the point of picking synthesist? It seems like you get the majority of your damage from your eidolon and a gigantic animal companion (Clever use of half-elf skill focus, by the way).
Why not...have those two things, and also have an action to take with your summoner? Why Synthesist?
-Cross
1. Will saves. Pouncing quadruped get dominated, party get sad.
2. Wealth. With this build, the "eidolon" gets all your magic items. To pull this off with a summoner, you'd have to run around naked. Even if you had the extra wealth, the eidolon and summoner share magic item slots, so you can't both wear cloaks of resist. Being fragile can be rather risky, even if you make yourself invisible every battle.
There are certainly DPR and action economy upsides to taking normal summoner, but you're taking more risk than you are with the synthesist.
I would like to have some more defined numbers so that, as per this thread, we can have a realistic comparison of this to the other builds. That is, how does this fare against a single target CR 10 monster with no combat rounds spent setting up.
Against a medium sized creature, only 3 of your lions will be able to charge. The rest will have to move around to reposition to charge (that's a wasted round of combat spent setting up), or move around in order to get off a single attack... and if they do that, only 5 more lions could technically get in a single attack. That's 3 charges and 5 single attacks. Not 13.
Against a Large sized creature, that's a potential 4 charging lions and 8 single attacks (assuming you have the mobility to completely surround it), which still leaves 1 lion doing nothing.
As the OP calls for a single target CR 10 DPR with NO combat rounds setting up, could we see those numbers as well?
Thanks. ^_^
~P
Yar! pirate
I agree that the 13 dire lions is a bit to much, and i guess i will make a proper army that can actually function tomorrow. Will probably also expand it to the lvl 12 thread.
Its pretty hard to see what this build does with just 1 round to setup, as he relies on the entire army to take out people. But as im sure you will see tomorrow, then his minions should be able to oneshot any encounter, barring extreme conditions. But with a slightly less DPR. (as a teaser i will say that he even has ranged minions to join on the fun, so more of them can reasonably attack)
A significant amount of the pet's damage comes from Vicious weapon, when it's no great shakes survivability-wise. 66 HP is not going to last long when it's doing 15 damage to itself per turn, even with the DR.
Ok, that isn't even CLOSE to true. Vicious does 1d6 back to the wielder. so even if all 5 attacks roll a 6 for backlash, it's FIVE damage. On the average, it should take one damage.
Now I grant you, it isn't brimming with hitpoints, but a minimum HP wasn't a requirement for the build, and 8d10+24 HP is still respectable.
Question for both AMIB and Fenrisnorth, what makes either of you thing that DR applies to vicious damage (and backlash damage),
Vicious wrote:
When a vicious weapon strikes an opponent, it creates a flash of disruptive energy that resonates between the opponent and the wielder. This energy deals an extra 2d6 points of damage to the opponent and 1d6 points of damage to the wielder.
It's untyped energy damage. There is no DR that applies. Just like DR won't help you with the extra damage from a Flaming weapon (although Fire resistance will). Unless the subject has a generic energy resistance, their taking the damage...
I agree that the 13 dire lions is a bit to much, and i guess i will make a proper army that can actually function tomorrow. Will probably also expand it to the lvl 12 thread.
Its pretty hard to see what this build does with just 1 round to setup, as he relies on the entire army to take out people. But as im sure you will see tomorrow, then his minions should be able to oneshot any encounter, barring extreme conditions. But with a slightly less DPR. (as a teaser i will say that he even has ranged minions to join on the fun, so more of them can reasonably attack)
man though on the lvl 12 thread, you could have 13d3+13 dire lions. which would be insane. but yeah, I think there are some ranged summons and some smaller sized summons that could be put to good use.
I haven't read anything about gunslingers so maybe there's an exception, but generally you can't use Deadly Aim on touch attacks.
Name Violation wrote:
you can with firearms. its not a touch attack, its "resolved against touch ac". the call out specifically that it works with guns in the beta test
Goofy.
Fenrisnorth wrote:
Ok, that isn't even CLOSE to true. Vicious does 1d6 back to the wielder. so even if all 5 attacks roll a 6 for backlash, it's FIVE damage. On the average, it should take one damage.
I can give you RAI reasons and a couple (fairly nitpicky) RAW reasons that doesn't work, but I supposed it'd fly in some games. (It mostly comes down to quibbling over what constitutes an attack or energy damage.) Would you mind doing the math with a vanilla amulet, for the cases where those particular shenanigans aren't allowed?
Pawn512 wrote:
Here is a character I'm considering for actual play. The theory is to take advantage of the vivisectionist alchemists ability to get a large number of primary natural attacks via feral mutagen, or more impressively polymorphing, and then layer on sneak attack with crippling strike.
[...]
AC is below par but can be raised to 26 with a barkskin extract and 30 with a shield extract, so in actual play its viable
This character is very neat. Also, barkskin is a kosher buff, since the duration is long enough and he can't share it with anyone.
It's untyped energy damage. There is no DR that applies. Just like DR won't help you with the extra damage from a Flaming weapon (although Fire resistance will). Unless the subject has a generic energy resistance, their taking the damage...
this will be a dervish dancing monk of the empty weapon adept. I think it works but people can let me know if I am off here. I know that a monk treats a normal one handed weapon as a club but he is still in fact wielding a scimitar. Semantically it seems ok. Clearly I wussed out on my ninja b/c getting natural attacks that allow him to qualify for multiattack was becoming a pain( a tusked adopted changeling seemed like such an extreme case).
this goblin doesn't know he is supposed to hold it by the handle:
goblin 10 monk( empty hand/weapon adept )
str 14 -2 racial +1 lvls=13
dex 15 +4 racial +1 lvls +4 belt=24
con 12
int 10
wis 15
cha 8 -2 racial=6
F/R/W=10/15/10
AC=10+7dex+1s+2w+2m+1dodge+1 deflection+1 na=25
Regular feats-Weapon prof(scimitar), Weapon finesse, dervish dance, power attack, desperate battler(+1 morale bonus to hit and damage when alone)
Weapon adept feats- weapon focus(improvised weapons), weapon spec(improvised weapons)
Monk bonus feats- catch off guard, dodge, improvised weapon mastery, improved critical(improvised weapons)
traits-heirloom weapon(scimitar), resilient(+1 fort)
equipment- belt of dex+4(16k), headband of wis+2(4k), ring of prot+1(2k), cloak of resistance+1(1k), +4 scimitar(32k), amulet of nat armor +1(2k)
This is a redo of the 3/4 base attack caster classes using a bow. Now that heroism and such are not to be applied this is a true baseline. All the builds use the same basic feat progression and assume a human race. One of their feats is variable depending on the class which is noted for each entry. All the builds use a +3 composite bow (+2 str) (bards use a shortbow everyone else gets a longbow) with the listed stats. I left out summoners because they would just do the base damage of an inquisitor. The alchemist is in the next post as they have many differences from these builds. It is always assumed that the character is not in range for point blank shot and they always use rapid shot, multishot and deadly aim.
Their basic attack routine without weapon focus or arcane strike is +13/+13/+8, 1d8+9 dmg
Spoiler:
Str 14
Dec 22 (15 + 2 racial + 1 level + 4 belt)
Con 12
casting stat 16 (13 + 1 level + 2 headband)
HP - 68 (10d8 + 20)
Attacks:
+3 longbow +13/+13/+8, 1d8+9 dmg (20/3x)
Saving throws
Fort is +10/+6 if it is good or bad, Ref is +15/+9, Will is always a good save and at a minimum of +8
if an 8 is put in Wis
AC: 24 - Touch 17, Flatfooted 18 (+6 +2 mithral shirt, +6 dex, +1 Amulet of Natural Armor, +1 Ring of
+3 bow
+2 mithral chain shirt
+1 ring of protection
+1 amulet of natural armor
+2 cloak of resistance
+1 mithral buckler
+4 belt of dex
+2 relevant headband
bracers of archery, lesser
handy haversack
~3000 gold left over
A note on the mithral buckler. It has no arcane spell failure penalty or armor check penalty. When the character is using the bow it offers no protection. When casting one can hold the bow one handed in the buckler hand and use the other hand for materials and somatic gestures while maintaining the shield bonus to ac. I am not sure if it works for arcane duelists as they have to hold the bow with both hands to cast as it is their arcane bond.
Bianca the Bard would take arcane strike
Base damage
DPR Average 23.44
Attack +1 2.69
Damage +1 1.88
Extra Attack: 6.88
Arcane strike
DPR Average 29.06
Attack +1 3.33
Damage +1 1.88
Extra Attack: 8.53
Inspire courage
DPR Average 33.42
Attack +1 3.12
Damage +1 2.31
Extra Attack: 9.57
Both
DPR Average 40.34
Attack +1 3.76
Damage +1 2.31
Extra Attack: 11.55
Arial the arcane duelist bard gets arcane strike for free so she would take weapon focus. Arcane duelists use a bonded weapon which means they do not have to spend a feat to upgrade it. So I have given Arial a +4 bow assuming she has enchanted it herself. Obviously, this does not work in PFS but in most home games I imagine it would be ok. Otherwise, Arial is the same as Bianca with weapon focus.
Base
DPR Average 31.12
Attack +1 2.90
Damage +1 2.31
Extra Attack: 8.91
Arcane strike
DPR Average 38.03
Attack +1 3.55
Damage +1 2.31
Extra Attack: 10.89
Inspire courage
DPR Average 42.39
Attack +1 3.33
Damage +1 2.74
Extra Attack: 11.94
Both
DPR Average 50.60
Attack +1 3.98
Damage +1 2.74
Extra Attack: 14.25
Clarice the cleric would take quicken spell
Base Damage
DPR Average 25.31
Attack +1 2.90
Damage +1 1.88
Extra Attack: 7.43
Quickened divine favor
DPR Average 41.58
Attack +1 3.55
Damage +1 2.52
Extra Attack: 11.80
Note that clerics normally are not proficient with longbows. Assume Clarice is a follower of Erastil.
If she wanted better domains she could take martial weapon proficiency and lose deadly aim.
Base Damage
DPR Average 21.16
Attack +1 1.97
Damage +1 2.23
Extra Attack: 5.99
Quickened divine favor
DPR Average 35.63
Attack +1 2.59
Damage +1 2.85
Extra Attack: 9.84
Ingrid the inquisitor would take weapon focus
Base
DPR Average 28.22
Attack +1 2.90
Damage +1 2.09
Extra Attack: 8.17
Judgments - Destruction and Justice
DPR Average 47.86
Attack +1 3.76
Damage +1 2.74
Extra Attack: 13.48
Bane
DPR Average 50.96
Attack +1 4.38
Damage +1 2.52
Extra Attack: 15.63
Both
DPR Average 76.77
Attack +1 5.24
Damage +1 3.17
Extra Attack: 22.76
Belle the battle oracle would take quicken spell, weapon mastery for the free weapon focus and improved critical and skill at arms to gain longbow proficiency.
Base
DPR Average 30.11
Attack +1 3.11
Damage +1 2.23
Extra Attack: 8.91
Quickened divine favor
DPR Average 48.18
Attack +1 3.80
Damage +1 2.92
Extra Attack: 13.86
Nothing really flashy. If anyone found this useful I was thinking of doing it with two handed weapons but there is much more variability in each class when using melee weapons.
Gear:
+3 longbow
+2 mithral chain shirt
+1 ring of protection
+1 amulet of natural armor
+2 cloak of resistance
+1 mithral buckler
+4 belt of Dex
+2 headband of Int
bracers of archery, lesser
~3000 gold
Alexa always uses deadly aim, rapid shot and multishot with her bow and uses point blank and rapid shot with her bombs. Her bombs are sticky so they deal an extra 24.75 damage the next round on average which is not included below. The bombs are against a touch AC of 12. She has taken infusion so she is not selfish with her extracts.
With full BAB against touch AC, he also uses Deadly Aim at short range.
I haven't read anything about gunslingers so maybe there's an exception, but generally you can't use Deadly Aim on touch attacks.
In the playtest PDF it makes an exception for firearms so deadly aim is alright.
However, MIB the gunslinger is no longer a fighter archetype so they do not qualify for weapon specialization. I saw you took it as a bonus feat but there is nothing that says gunslingers may pick bonus feats they do not normally qualify for such as how rangers do. This would also prevent you from taking point blank master. If I may suggest taking two weapon fighting, improved twf and using two +1 reliable pistols one would not have to worry about the guns exploding although more shots does mean more regular misfires. Under the rules in the playtest PDF it does not say that reloading a firearm requires having a hand free so firing and reloading two pistols seems like it could work. For a lore justification Roland the gunslinger from the Dark Tower could reload his pistols when wielding both of them using a "finger trick".
this will be a dervish dancing monk of the empty weapon adept. I think it works but people can let me know if I am off here. I know that a monk treats a normal one handed weapon as a club but he is still in fact wielding a scimitar. Semantically it seems ok. Clearly I wussed out on my ninja b/c getting natural attacks that allow him to qualify for multiattack was becoming a pain( a tusked adopted changeling seemed like such an extreme case).
** spoiler omitted **
used that calculator thingy.
plain flurry dpr= 71.40 and 90.35 if he uses ki to get an extra attack
flurry with power attack=81.78 and 106.75 if he uses ki to get an extra attack
I am not sure how I would calculate perfect strike's impact on dpr.
Sorry about the huge post. A few comments on this build. Its very interesting I like the image of the goblin flailing around. Improved critical does not stack with any other method of expanding a weapon's threat range. Generally monster races are not good for setting a baseline dpr as well as using a conditional feat such as desperate battler and for comparison purposes traits are also being ignored. Anyway, I switched the race to Halfling, removed the traits and took toughness and spring attack instead of desperate battler and improved critical. His DPR drops but it is still very healthy. I am not sure if it is legal or not. Monk of the empty hand has had some developer comments on it that might apply here but I am not sure I would have to find the thread again.
DPR Average 54.40
Attack +1 4.73
Damage +1 2.53
Extra Attack: 16.56
By RAW, I don't think you need to be monk of the empty hand anyway.
Dervish Dance wrote:
When wielding a scimitar with one hand, you can use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on melee attack and damage rolls. You treat the scimitar as a one-handed piercing weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s precise strike ability). The scimitar must be for a creature of your size. You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand.
Note that it doesn't say you only get DEX to attack and damage WITH the scimitar. So a monk can hold a scimitar in one hand and do a flurry of blows with unarmed strikes with DEX to damage.
Obviously not RAI though, and is completely absurd.
In this particular case it means attacking with the scimitar.
Omelite wrote:
By RAW, I don't think you need to be monk of the empty hand anyway.
Dervish Dance wrote:
When wielding a scimitar with one hand, you can use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on melee attack and damage rolls. You treat the scimitar as a one-handed piercing weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s precise strike ability). The scimitar must be for a creature of your size. You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand.
Note that it doesn't say you only get DEX to attack and damage WITH the scimitar. So a monk can hold a scimitar in one hand and do a flurry of blows with unarmed strikes with DEX to damage.
Obviously not RAI though, and is completely absurd.
In this particular case it means attacking with the scimitar.
Omelite wrote:
By RAW, I don't think you need to be monk of the empty hand anyway.
Note that it doesn't say you only get DEX to attack and damage WITH the scimitar. So a monk can hold a scimitar in one hand and do a flurry of blows with unarmed strikes with DEX to damage.
Obviously not RAI though, and is completely absurd.
Unless of course your using a huntsman weapon in which holding and wielding are the same thing, so who knows what is considered wielding for this one, so far paizo doesn't have a hard rule for it.
In this particular case it means attacking with the scimitar.
I thought wielding just meant you had it at combat readiness, i.e. you'd be able to attack with it if you wanted to. For instance, holding a two-handed weapon in one hand would not count as wielding, but holding it in two would.
Not only is there no rules text to support "wielding only occurs during attacks" (to my knowledge - correct me if I'm wrong), but the actual definition of the word wield in the English language clearly doesn't support your ruling.
SKR, in the Defending weapon property FAQ (HERE), clarified that Wielding means "Attacking with".
SKR, in the thread I made about the Huntsman property (HERE), said that the wording of the Hunstman property should be different, to differentiate between Wielder (holding and attacking) and Bearer (holding at the ready).
So unless an errata or FAQ is issued for Dervish Dance, it looks like you have to actually attack with the scimitar to gain its bonus... with a scimitar (which I believe is the RAI as well).
SKR, in the Defending weapon property FAQ (HERE), clarified that Wielding means "Attacking with".
SKR, in the thread I made about the Huntsman property (HERE), said that the wording of the Hunstman property should be different, to differentiate between Wielder (holding and attacking) and Bearer (holding at the ready).
So unless an errata or FAQ is issued for Dervish Dance, it looks like you have to actually attack with the scimitar to gain its bonus... with a scimitar (which I believe is the RAI as well).
~P
So let's consider a PC with a scimitar in hand during the first round of combat. They're not wielding it in your definition as they haven't attacked with it. Do they need to 'draw' it?
Likewise say on their first turn they elect to double move. They've made no attacks, so they are now no longer wielding a weapon and thus don't threaten squares.
SKR's ruling on the FAQ for defending weapons really should have been an errata to change the wording on the entry.. which, let's face it, still needs it.
And a formal definition of wielder would be nice, but would require going through all the places where it uses the term.
All that said, Dervish dance could use with a rewording as well.. as I don't think that dual wielding a scimitar and armor spikes should be giving +DEX to damage on those armor spikes...
SKR, in the Defending weapon property FAQ (HERE), clarified that Wielding means "Attacking with".
SKR, in the thread I made about the Huntsman property (HERE), said that the wording of the Hunstman property should be different, to differentiate between Wielder (holding and attacking) and Bearer (holding at the ready).
So unless an errata or FAQ is issued for Dervish Dance, it looks like you have to actually attack with the scimitar to gain its bonus... with a scimitar (which I believe is the RAI as well).
~P
As much as I don't mind that Defending works that way, the method used forced a distinction my group hasn't bothered with in all our years, and may quite likely forget (the difference between bearing and wielding, as there apparently is one). The Dervish cheese just wouldn't fly at basically any table out there anyway, though it's always better to be clear.
james maissen wrote:
Likewise say on their first turn they elect to double move. They've made no attacks, so they are now no longer wielding a weapon and thus don't threaten squares.
The possible gotcha in this situation is that you can't make AoOs if you're unarmed, not if the weapon you're holding isn't being wielded at the time (Core 180 for reference).
SKR, in the Defending weapon property FAQ (HERE), clarified that Wielding means "Attacking with".
SKR, in the thread I made about the Huntsman property (HERE), said that the wording of the Hunstman property should be different, to differentiate between Wielder (holding and attacking) and Bearer (holding at the ready).
So unless an errata or FAQ is issued for Dervish Dance, it looks like you have to actually attack with the scimitar to gain its bonus... with a scimitar (which I believe is the RAI as well).
~P
The FAQ about defending does NOT mention wielding at all, nor does it define that term. It simply states that unless otherwise stated, you only gain the benefits of a magic weapon if you've attacked with that weapon during that round. "Wield" or "wielder" aren't even mentioned.
I think it's a stupid ruling anyway, and like James said they should have just added language to Defending to require you to swing the weapon to get the benefit.
so a new question, if I try to rebuild. In the hands of a monk of the empty hand, normal weapons function as either a light mace, a club, or a quarterstaff. Does this means that feats which affect maces clubs, or quarterstaves work for a monk of the empty hand? There are feats in the UM that affect a quarterstaff.
Other side note, I was of the understanding that improvised weapon mastery does not "double" the threat range of the improvised weapon but rather changes its actual threat range. I thought it was just changing the weapons base stats.
Note that improved critial clearly states just doubling a threat range.
Improvised weapon mastery on the other hand says this
prd wrote:
The improvised weapon has a critical threat range of 19–20, with a critical multiplier of ×2.
That was why I was thinking they would work together.
k, I'm pretty sure Weapon Adept and Empty Hand do not interact that way, but this thread is not the place to debate it.
Quote:
However, MIB the gunslinger is no longer a fighter archetype so they do not qualify for weapon specialization.
Oh, for crying out loud. Well, whatever. It was a beta build anyway.
I am sorry to have offended you. I have enjoyed these DPR threads and the many builds you have taken the time to build and analyze and in no way am I trying to harass you about a small error. I just thought for the sake of accuracy it should be pointed out. I look forward to future builds and discussion.
I am sorry to have offended you. I have enjoyed these DPR threads and the many builds you have taken the time to build and analyze and in no way am I trying to harass you about a small error. I just thought for the sake of accuracy it should be pointed out. I look forward to future builds and discussion.
Oh, I'm not angry at you or anything. I'm annoyed at how slapdash the beta docs are, but I suppose it's to be expected from beta documentation.
Here's a beta gunslinger. You could probably squeeze out a bit more DPR by fidding with his weapon, but I was sticking to the non-strict rule of favoring straight bonuses. That said, distance, corrosive, or keen is probably more useful than the straight +2 bonus.
Bullet Bill, human gunslinger 10 Material used: APG feats, Ultimate Combat beta (v2) gunslinger
** spoiler omitted **
Bill loads his pistol with paper cartridges, so he reloads as a free action. He also generally benefits from Point Blank Shot, since his first range increment is only 20y to begin with. With full BAB against touch AC, he also uses Deadly Aim at short range. Most of the time, Bill just fires the main barrel of his pistol and...
I have taken MiB's build, swapped weapon spec and point blank master for two weapon fighting and improved twf and then traded in the +2 reliable double pistol for two +1 reliable pistols. Since there is nothing that says pistols are light weapons I gave then the -4 penalty for two weapon fighting. Using point blank shot, deadly aim and rapid shot against a touch ac of 12 yields:
+10/+10/+10/+5/+5, 1d8+14 dmg
DPR Average 90.42
Attack +1 2.13
Damage +1 3.80
Extra Attack: 20.21
If you think pistols should count as light the dpr climbs to 98.93.
Although there is no chance of the pistols exploding there is still the almost 25% chance of misfiring each round. I have not calculated in the chance of misfire. If a pistol does misfire its probably better to keep fighting with just one pistol instead of clearing it. Then when your second pistol misfires you can spend the next turn to use one grit to fix one pistol as a move action and clear the other as a standard action.
I was playing with character concepts trying to create a very sneaky character who could survive ok in close combat, and I came up with this. I wanted to see how it performed.
William the Woodsman Human Ranger 5(Guide, Skirmisher)/Rogue 5(Scout)
Spoiler:
Str 22 (15 + 1 level +2 racial + 4 magic item)
Dex 14
Con 14 (13 +1 level)
Int 10
Wis 12
Chr 8
Feats: Weapon Focus(Kukri), Two Weapon Fighting, Double Slice(Ranger Bonus), Power Attack, Iron Will, Improved Critical(Kukri), Dodge
Skirmisher Trick: Second Chance Strike 3/day <- Note: The only trick that actually increases DPR in this scenario. I would probably pick something like the -2 to their hit rolls, but that is not a DPR increase.
Rogue Talents: Bleeding Attack, Surprise Attack
Mithril Breastplate +2(8350 gp)
Ring of Deflection +2(8000 gp)
Anumet of NA +1(2000 gp)
2 +2 Kurki (16616 gp)
Cloak of Resistance +3(9000 gp)
+4 Belt of Strength(16000 gp)
Base to hit: +16 Melee
Base melee damage: 1d4 + 6 Str +2 Magic = 10.5
Sneak Attack: 3d6 = 10.5
Ranger's Focus, 2/day: +4 to hit, +4 damage
Math Notes:
Spoiler:
Second Chance Strike: If you miss, you get a second chance to hit at -5 to hit, so if you have a 50% chance to hit, you have a 50% chance to miss. If you miss, you have a 25% chance to hit with SCS, so your total chance to hit would be, 50% + 50% * 25% = 62.5%. That is better than a +2 to hit. Unfortunately, this build is making so many attacks, you would burn through all your SCS's very quickly. I will give the effective +to hit with second chance strike to give an idea of how well it performs(IE if the chance to hit with SCS is 94%, that is roughtly equal to a +23 to hit in this scenario)
Also, in the event where there are 2 similar attack scenarios with and without power attack, I only list the better of the two.
Normal Melee: +14/+14/+9, 19.1 DPR, EA 7.5, +1 hit 2.0, +1 Dam 1.82
Melee with Flank and Power Attack: +13/+13/+8, 44.8 DPR, EA 18.0, +1 Hit 5.9, +1 Dam 1.6
Melee with Ranger's Focus and Power Attack: +15/+15/+11, 39.2 DPR, EA 18.3, +1 Hit 15.2, +1 Dam 2.0
Melee with Ranger's Focus, Flank, and Power Attack: +17/+17/+12, 66.3 DPR, EA 25.1, +1 Hit 5.9, +1 Dam 2.4
Melee with Ranger's Focus, Flank, Power Attack, and Second Chance Strike: +20/+20/+14, 80.0 DPR, EA 30.0, +1 hit 5.8, +1 Dam 2.9
Charge with Ranger's Focus, Power Attack, and Second Chance Strike: +20, 30 DPR
If any sneak attack lands, the target takes 3 bleed damage in subsequent rounds. This is not included in any of these calculations.
This build does really well with everything stacked in its favor, and poorly if everything is not. I also did the same build as a falchion wielder, and the overall damage was about 2 DPR lower except on the charge, but it doesn't require the Two-Weapon Fighting Feat.
I was playing with character concepts trying to create a very sneaky character who could survive ok in close combat, and I came up with this. I wanted to see how it performed.
William the Agile Woodsman Human Ranger 5(Guide, Skirmisher)/Rogue 5(Scout)
Spoiler:
Str 14
Dex 22 (15 + 1 level +2 racial + 4 magic item)
Con 14 (13 +1 level)
Int 10
Wis 12
Chr 8
Feats: Weapon Focus(Kukri), Two Weapon Fighting, Weapon Finesse, Power Attack, Iron Will, Improved Critical(Kukri), Improved Two-Weapon Fighting
Skirmisher Trick: Second Chance Strike 3/day <- Note: The only trick that actually increases DPR in this scenario. I would probably pick something like the -2 to their hit rolls, but that is not a DPR increase.
Rogue Talents: Bleeding Attack, Surprise Attack
Mithril Breastplate +2(8350 gp)
2 +2 Kurki (16616 gp)
Cloak of Resistance +3(9000 gp)
+4 Belt of Dexterity(16000 gp)
+2 Composite Longbow for 14 Strength(8600 gp)
About 3k gold left over
HP: 84
AC: 24 +8 armor, +6 dex
Saves: Fort +10, Ref +17, Will +8
Base to hit: +16 Melee
Base melee damage: 1d4 + 2 Str +2 Magic = 6.5 MH, 5.5 OH
Sneak Attack: 3d6 = 10.5
Ranger's Focus, 2/day: +4 to hit, +4 damage
Normal Melee: +14/+14/+9/+9, 13.3 DPR, EA 4.29, +1 hit 1.2, +1 Dam 2.21
Melee with Flank: +16/+16/+10/+10, 38.4 DPR, EA 11.9, +1 Hit 3.3, +1 Dam 2.7
Melee with Ranger's Focus and Power Attack: +15/+15/+11, 37.1 DPR, EA 12.4, +1 Hit 4.2, +1 Dam 2.0
Melee with Ranger's Focus, Flank, and Power Attack: +17/+17/+12, 69.0 DPR, EA 21.0, +1 Hit 5.0, +1 Dam 3.0
Melee with Ranger's Focus, Flank, Power Attack, and Second Chance Strike: +20/+20/+14, 83.7 DPR, EA 25.1, +1 hit 6.2, +1 Dam 3.6
Again, all sneak attacks cause 3 bleed damage.
Charge with PA + RF + SCS: 26.7 DPR
Does better on the high end, and even worse on the low end, but would actually has a decent to hit with the bow.
Just realized something about Fedwyck the Plain and Mr. Bubbles.
The summoner can take Craft Wonderous item, and basically double his amount of items, so... yeah. I could replace vicious with Holy, Frost, and do +3d6 instead of +2d6.
Just realized something about Fedwyck the Plain and Mr. Bubbles.
The summoner can take Craft Wonderous item, and basically double his amount of items, so... yeah. I could replace vicious with Holy, Frost, and do +3d6 instead of +2d6.
You can't use crafting to increase you WBL so crafting is useless in these exercises.
Just realized something about Fedwyck the Plain and Mr. Bubbles.
The summoner can take Craft Wonderous item, and basically double his amount of items, so... yeah. I could replace vicious with Holy, Frost, and do +3d6 instead of +2d6.
You can't use crafting to increase you WBL so crafting is useless in these exercises.
1 of the rules in this thread is that there is no crafting to double up on gear.
as far as raw, it doesn't say much. In the PRD, wealth by lvl guidelines are given. No hard or fast rules are laid out on how crafting should be factored into character wealth though.
In terms of possible intent, well I do not see why they would list a crafting price and a market price if crafting doesn't allow you to expand your wbl to any degree.
Also, why is their a trait that reduces the cost of crafting if crafting doesn't expand your wbl?
but either way, for the purpose of this thread people will want you to atleast do a base case where you didn't craft and then add in a 2nd build with more gear based off of crafting.
revelations- spirit vessels(control 6hd per cl), undead servitude(command undead).
relevant agent of the grave ability- inspired necromancy(adds class lvl to your cl for the purpose of how many undead he can control).
definite spells known- desecrate, death knell, animate dead.
so looking at this oracle, when casting animate dead in a desecrated zone,
his equivalent cl for how many he can make is 19(base caster lvl 10, +1 cl from missionary, +2 cl spell spec, +1 cl varisian tatoo, +4 cl undead master, and +1 cl death knell) and his equivalent cl for how many undead he can control is 23(4 more from inspired necromancy).
Meaning the total number of hd he can animate at once is 76(19x4) and the total number of hd he can control is 138(23x6).
The exact number may be slightly off so if you want to point out which abilities do not stack you can do so here
So if my lvl 10 necromancer can control 138 hd of undead what creatures should I use and how should I go about getting them? I am thinking all the undead will be fast zombies because the zombies animated by juju oracles get full hp.
I am thinking that high hd creatures would be a good idea so there are fewer minions to shepherd around.
Just realized something about Fedwyck the Plain and Mr. Bubbles.
The summoner can take Craft Wonderous item, and basically double his amount of items, so... yeah. I could replace vicious with Holy, Frost, and do +3d6 instead of +2d6.
You can't use crafting to increase you WBL so crafting is useless in these exercises.
1 of the rules in this thread is that there is no crafting to double up on gear.
as far as raw, it doesn't say much. In the PRD, wealth by lvl guidelines are given. No hard or fast rules are laid out on how crafting should be factored into character wealth though.
In terms of possible intent, well I do not see why they would list a crafting price and a market price if crafting doesn't allow you to expand your wbl to any degree.
Also, why is their a trait that reduces the cost of crafting if crafting doesn't expand your wbl?
but either way, for the purpose of this thread people will want you to atleast do a base case where you didn't craft and then add in a 2nd build with more gear based off of crafting.
I only see a rule that says "no custom items" not, "no crafted items". A custom item is an item made using the "new magic items" chart on p 550.
I only see a rule that says "no custom items" not, "no crafted items". A custom item is an item made using the "new magic items" chart on p 550.
The point of the thread is to get a baseline for different classes.
I can take leadership and get a crafting bot cohort and ANY class in this thread can double their equipment for the cost of 1 feat. It is already a known deal that crafting feats gives you access to better equipment which increases your damage dealing. We are trying to keep that variable out of this exercise.
34 HD colossal zombie
HP=442
spd=70
AC=14
F/R/W=11/12/19 (+2 if in desecrate zone)
str/dex/con/int/wis/cha=38/12/-/-/10/10
bab=25 full to hit=31 (33 w/ desecrate)
Full attack
2 +33 slams for 4d6+16 (29.925)
2 +33 claws for 2d8+16 (24.9375)
1 +33 stings for 2d6+16 (22.9425)
dpr against 24 ac= 132.6875
dpr hasted against 24 ac= 162.6125
My earlier necromancer can control 4 of these, so his minions can have a hasted dpr of 650.45
Though you can't really bring colossal undead minions too many places because of size restrictions. I got tired of looking for good monsters and I didn't want to do a bunch of dire tiger zombies.
** spoiler omitted **
dpr against 24 ac= 132.6875
dpr hasted against 24 ac= 162.6125
My earlier necromancer can control 4 of these, so his minions can have a hasted dpr of 650.45
Though you can't really bring colossal undead minions too many places because of size restrictions. I got tired of looking for good monsters and I didn't want to do a bunch of dire tiger zombies.
Dont scorpions have burrow? Seems to me your not restricted at all. Underground they make thier own way and castles... Well... Bring them to the ground!! The city my
May be an issue though.
So how about three scorpions and smaller humanoid ones to be disguised in cities. ;)
I saw this thread and was like, "Oh! Let me make an Enforcer Monk." Then I saw that Pirate already had an excellent build. I noticed the use of two conflicting abilities, however (Dim Mak and the Extra Attack) and was curious about how they impacted the DPR, and how badly monks were hurt by a poor fortitude save. I also wanted to hammer home the exact DPR, without any assumptions.
So, this is only a tangentially on-topic post, but if I don't post the results I'll feel like a good two hours of my life was in vain.
Math Bomb:
I came up with the following formula to calculate the DPR of Pirate's monk. It assumes that the Intimidate roll automatically succeeds. Note that subscript is not supported on this board, so things encased in [] will be used to label the To-Hit chance for different attacks.
([1](d+s)+[1]*a*([1 vs Stun AC]*(d+s+f)+[2 vs Stun AC]*(d+s+f)*2)+[1]*(1-a)*([1 vs FF AC]*(d+s+f)+[2 vs FF AC]*(d+s+f)*2)+(1-[1])*([2]*(d+s)+([2]+(1-[1])*([2 vs FF]-[2])*(d+s+(1-[2])*f)+([2]+(1-(1-[1])*(1-[2])*([2 vs FF]-[2]))*(d+s+(1-(1-[1])*(1-[2])*f))+(1-(1-[1])*(1-[1])*(1-[2])*(1-[2]))*([1 vs Flatfooted]*(d+s+f)*2)*(1+([1]*a)*([1 vs Stun] - [1 vs FF])))
[1] = Attack at Flurry To-Hit
[2] = Attack at Flurry To-Hit -5 (iterative attacks)
d = Damage
s = Damage not multiplied on a critical hit
f = Damage that only applies vs a flatfooted opponent
a = Chance for the enemy to fail their Fortitude Save
This doesn't take into consideration critical hits (largely due to laziness), but incorporating them would only add 2~4 DPR, favoring spending Ki on Extra Attacks.
Here's the actual numbers I crunched, although I used a +2 Guided Iron Knuckles, largely because I was toying around when I did this and I don't feel like adjusting the numbers for the -1 To-Hit and Damage.
[0.65*15+(0.65+0.65*0.1)*(15+0.65*2)+(0.4+(1-0.35*0.35)*0.1)*(15+(1-0.35*0.35)*2)+(0.4+(1-0.35*0.35*0.6)*0.1)*(15+(1-0.35*0.35*0.6)*2)+(1-0.35*0.35*0.6*0.6)*0.65*17*2] => 59.0047717 No Stunning Fist, No Ki
[0.65*15+(0.65+0.65*0.1)*(15+0.65*2)+(0.65+(1-0.35*0.35)*0.1)*(15+2*(1-0.35*0.35))+(0.4+(1-0.35*0.35*0.35)*0.1)*(15+(1-0.35*0.35*0.35)*2)+(0.4+(1-0.35*0.35*0.35*0.6)*0.1)*(15+(1-0.35*0.35*0.35*0.6)*2)+(1-0.35*0.35*0.35*0.6*0.6)*0.65*17*2] => 72.3396677583 No Stunning Fist, Extra Attack
[0.65*15+0.65*0.4*(0.85*17+0.6*17*2)+0.65*0.6*(0.75*17+0.5*17*2)
+0.35*(0.65*15+(0.4+0.65*0.2)*(15+0.65*2)+(0.4+(1-0.35*0.6)*0.2)*(15+(1-0.35*0.6)*2))+(1-0.35*0.35*0.6*0.6)*((0.75+0.65*0.4*0.1)*17+(0.75+0.65*0.4*0.1)*17)] => 65.3081896 vs Strong Fort Save, Stunning Fist, no Ki Spent
[0.65*15+0.65*0.55*(0.85*17+0.6*17*2)+0.65*0.45*(0.75*17+0.5*17*2)+0.35*(0.65*15+(0.4+0.65*0.2)*(15+0.65*2)+(0.4+(1-0.35*0.6)*0.2)*(15+(1-0.35*0.6)*2))+(1-0.35*0.35*0.6*0.6)*((0.75+0.65*0.55*0.1)*17+(0.75+0.65*0.55*0.1)*17)] => 66.12232045 vs Weak Fort Save, Stunning Fist, no Ki Spent
[0.95*15+0.95*0.4*(0.85*17+0.6*17*2)+0.95*0.6*(0.75*17+0.5*17*2)+0.05*(0.65*15+(0.4+0.65*0.2)*(15+0.65*2)+(0.4+(1-0.35*0.6)*0.2)*(15+(1-0.35*0.6)*2))+(1-0.05*0.35*0.6*0.6)*((0.75+0.65*0.4*0.1)*17+(0.75+0.05*0.4*0.1)*17)] => 71.6448832 vs Strong Fort Save, Stunning Fist, Dim Mak
[0.95*15+0.95*0.55*(0.85*17+0.6*17*2)+0.95*0.45*(0.75*17+0.5*17*2)+0.05*(0.65*15+(0.4+0.65*0.2)*(15+0.65*2)+(0.4+(1-0.35*0.6)*0.2)*(15+(1-0.35*0.6)*2))+(1-0.05*0.35*0.6*0.6)*((0.75+0.95*0.55*0.1)*17+(0.75+0.95*0.55*0.1)*17)] => 73.66394005 vs Weak Fort Save, Stunning Fist, Dim Mak
[0.65*15+0.65*0.4*(0.85*17*2+0.6*17*2)+0.65*0.6*(0.75*17*2+0.5*17*2)+0.35*(0.65*15+(0.65+0.65*0.2)*(15+0.65*2)+(0.4+(1-0.35*0.35)*0.2)*(15+(1-0.35*0.35)*2)+(0.4+(1-0.35*0.35*0.6)*0.2)*(15+(1-0.35*0.35*0.6)*2))+(1-0.35*0.35*0.35*0.6*0.6)*((0.75+0.65*0.4*0.1)*17+(0.75+0.65*0.4*0.1)*17)] => 79.80946015 vs Strong Fort Save, Stunning Fist, Extra Attack
[0.65*15+0.65*0.55*(0.85*17*2+0.6*17*2)+0.65*0.45*(0.75*17*2+0.5*17*2)+0.35*(0.65*15+(0.65+0.65*0.2)*(15+0.65*2)+(0.4+(1-0.35*0.35)*0.2)*(15+(1-0.35*0.35)*2)+(0.4+(1-0.35*0.35*0.6)*0.2)*(15+(1-0.35*0.35*0.6)*2))+(1-0.35*0.35*0.35*0.6*0.6)*((0.75+0.65*0.55*0.1)*17+(0.75+0.65*0.55*0.1)*17)] => 80.7988434475 vs Weak Fort Save, Stunning Fist, Extra Attack
So the results are:
59.0047717 No Stunning Fist, no Ki Spent
72.3396677583 No Stunning Fist, Extra Attack
65.3081896 vs Strong Fort Save, Stunning Fist, no Ki Spent
66.12232045 vs Weak Fort Save, Stunning Fist, no Ki Spent
71.6448832 vs Strong Fort Save, Stunning Fist, Dim Mak
73.66394005 vs Weak Fort Save, Stunning Fist, Dim Mak
79.80946015 vs Strong Fort Save, Stunning Fist, Extra Attack
80.7988434475 vs Weak Fort Save, Stunning Fist, Extra Attack
A couple things are pretty interesting. First, Dim Mak simply isn't worth it against that opponent. I would actually be willing to suspect that the number of opponents that Dim Mak is superior against is actually very slim.
The second is how little Stunning Fist adds to this build's DPR. Note that in a normal, non-enforcer+Shattered Defenses combo that the relative DPR it adds would be much higher (which speaks more to how much no-stunning DPR sucks otherwise).
I may do one that includes tripping... but oi. Making the intimidate check non-automatic (which would be required to pull that off) will make the calculation a pain. If the results are interesting I'll post a similar Monk Build that includes tripping.
could I use permanency-shrink item on a scorpion corpse before I animate it? Then on command I could either have a medium 34 HD fast zombie or a colossal one(I have no idea how shrink item would affect their ability scores though it would reduce the size penalty to hit/ac and the damage of natural attacks).
