Everyone talks about the feats in inner sea gods, Somebody have an example? is the book worst in that regad to gnome of golarion?
Hmm... Off the top of my head, the big thing about that book is that every book is overly exclusive. Here's a list of some iffy ones and why.
Blood Sabres is also pretty specific. Have to be dual wielding two specific weapons, already burned two feats on that, and your probably going down the TWF fighting feat line, and you have to hit with both weapons, not just one twice, and you deal... 1 extra point of damage for each of those attacks that hits, bleeding ofc.
Divine Dignity is pretty weak. Casting defensively tends to make the save pretty often, and you already learned how to do it better because you have to take combat casting to get the feat. Abadar is about buffing and not taking AoOs I guess?
Spear dancer was changed to affect any two handed reach weapon, but still isn't great because it only inflicts dazzled for one turn.
Drunken brawler requires endurance to get a bonus from being drunk, that goes away after you lose the temporary hitpoints it grants, and gives you a penalty to reflex that last for a full hour(reflex for half says hi).
Bolster Undead. If you have a 6D6 channel, you can do better than to give your undead a +1 channel resist.
Heroic Interposition is once per day, gives a total -2 to a single attack, and has a load of prerequisites.
Stone Strider is a ridiculously narrow feat.
Master of Knowledge would be great, if it didn't require a skill focus and 17 int and to worship Irori. Oh, and its once per day and your minimum roll when using it will be 26.
Stone Read is only good if you have already taken skill focus perception, and intend to put 10 ranks in knowledge dungeon, or intend to not put 10 ranks in perception and only ever do dungeoning ever.
Reject Poison has 20% chance of helping you if you fail your save, and requires poison use.
Nightmare Scars isn't too awful because it helps intimidate, but it is awful because it gives you a penalty to diplomacy and your diplomacy with your own animal companion if you have one.
Torch Bearer gives you the power to wield a torch as if it were a mace with 1 point of flaming damage attached! The most resisted element! Woo! Or you could've just used a feat to get a better weapon.
Most of those are pretty bad, but I've used Drunken Brawler before in a hypothetical build where I had just given up on Reflex as a lost cause and was going to be drinking heavily ever round anyway; Dwarven Sensei/Drunken Master/Qingong Monk. He was a drunken ex-drill sergeant with a decanter of endless booze in the form of a hip flask and all he did was shout abuse at everyone around him to make them fight better.
Sure he would eventually have -100 to reflex from multiple stacking penalties, but hey a +2 to the other saves and constantly renewing buffer HP ain't bad.
Most of those are pretty bad, but I've used Drunken Brawler before in a hypothetical build where I had just given up on Reflex as a lost cause and was going to be drinking heavily ever round anyway; Dwarven Sensei/Drunken Master/Qingong Monk.
Aye, supposing drinking ale for any other purpose stacks you might have something for it with drunken master or one of the other drinking archetypes. That's pretty narrow though, and monks can't take it if you have to be within one step to worship like in PFS. The drinking archetypes for barbarian both look bleh too, or at least imo, though they might have the hp/DR/Saves buffer to keep that extra hp for a good while. Buccaneer gunslingers enjoy their grog, though they lose nimble and have to wait until 13th for gun training and are banned from PFS and a lot of homegames for being about drinking and using guns. Speaking of which...
Sword and Pistol. Lots of pre-requisites to fire in combat range and nothing to help you reload.
True enough it is narrow, but I would consider it good enough edition to its niche as to not be garbage. That aside, I always forget and/or ignore the restrictions in what alignment you have to be to worship a deity, mostly because those restrictions are stupid (just like any feat that requires a specific deity)... still doesn't stop me from being RAW wrong so good catch on a Monk not being able to access it.
Ah Sword and Pistol. Why must you sound so interesting yet suck so hard?
Ah Sword and Pistol. Why must you sound so interesting yet suck so hard?
Its a tarp! A beautiful and seductive tarp.
Blood sabres, torche bearer and bloodletting are awful. DIvine dignity and master of knowledge are not strong but not horrible.
I wasn't being particularly picky when I went through nor did I look through the whole thing. Master of Knowledge is a once per day ability and only applies to something you have skill focus in, and doesn't give a bonus but instead allows you to skip rolling, so I have a hard time seeing the merit in it.
There were also a few extremely powerful feats in there. Sturgeon's law applies.
Would you happen to know if some of the good ones are strictly new or are they reprints? Curious because some of those are from Faiths of Purity, the book that brought you Glorious Heat, which was hilariously reprinted in its original broken form, atleast according to pfsrd.
Don't mind me just Sparking this match over and over until we're all full healed.
Would you happen to know if some of the good ones are strictly new or are they reprints?
Ahh, many, many of those feats are reprints. Both Archives of Nethys and D20PFSRD should list their source. Usually PFSRD will list the newest source if its updated.
Some feats changed in the transition, like the wording of bloodletting I believe did. Butterfly Sting in particular was made Desna specific, and PFS forced convert or lose it. There a few extremely good new good ones, like potion glutton(which will get an errata).
Whenever you threaten a creature with a critical hit with a piercing or slashing weapon (regardless of whether you confirm the critical hit or not), you cause that creature to bleed, making it take 1 point of bleed damage at the beginning of each round thereafter.
If in some alternate dimension there was a topic like this for best feats ever, I think Potion Glutton may have been listed somewhere.
If in some alternate dimension there was a topic like this for best feats ever, I think Potion Glutton may have been listed somewhere.
Yeah, too bad you have to worship the putrid princess to do it. That's just gross. Its also amazingly good, hard not to want that for my alchemist. 3 potions in one turn? Sounds good to me! Combined extracts, if it lets you use it with extracts that is, will turn that into 6 potions in one turn. That's pretty crazy!
But I disagree with you about it being worth taking under any circumstance, especially because it's not like the ranged attack feat line is short.
I never said it was "worth taking", I said it was "not useless". Suboptimal and useless are two different things. The old version was literally without use, while the new version is merely not the best choice for most people.
It's not worth taking in YOUR circumstances. That doesn't mean it could never be worth taking in any circumstances. +2 AC is at least something, if for some reason you were already planning to be prone a lot (which with the existing AC bonus is not a bad idea for a certain type of archer). There's a feat that does nothing but give 1 AC, though most people only take it as a feat tax. Most PCs don't seem to spend much time shooting at people prone, but an NPC whose sole purpose in life is as a sniper might benefit from +2 AC. If you have an entrenched position to fire from with cover, you may as well be prone, and the total bonus of +6 from prone along with cover bonus is a formidable obstacle. PCs aren't going to be fighting in that situation often enough, but an NPC might be fighting in that position for their brief moment in the sun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Most PCs don't seem to spend much time shooting at people prone, but an NPC whose sole purpose in life is as a sniper might benefit from +2 AC.
Imo, NPC only is one of the worst kinds of feats. Its not just that it is npc only, but that its so situational that it becomes NPC only.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Imo, NPC only is one of the worst kinds of feats.
Yet there are a lot like that and none of them are the most useless ever. This thread isn't about feats that are kind of bad. Most of the feats in the game fit the suboptimal category.
I never said it was "worth taking", I said it was "not useless". Suboptimal and useless are two different things. The old version was literally without use, while the new version is merely not the best choice for most people.
Every time I hear that rational it seems like the other person is saying "hey it's better than literally having nothing in that feat slot." Which is true. Hell, a feat that gave you an additional plus one on your saves versus Sonic spells cast by enemies with at least 1 level of Fighter would technically be better than having nothing at all.
Even if I were an NPC who spent 24 hours a day laying in a trench shooting at people with crossbows, I wouldn't take it over, say, any archery feat or even any of the standard go to feats. Maybe that's just me.
And that's all it takes to be in the worst feat ever thread is it? This thread is going to go very, very long as you mention every single feat in the game that you don't find entirely optimal.
If a feat is so bad even an ultra niche build focused on what it is supposed to do rejects it, then yeah I'd say it deserves to be discussed here. It doesn't mean it will win the coveted "Worst EVAR" award, but it can dream.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even if I were an NPC who spent 24 hours a day laying in a trench shooting at people with crossbows, I wouldn't take it over, say, any archery feat or even any of the standard go to feats. Maybe that's just me.
That may just be you. Granted, it's situational to the point of uselessness for PCs, but if we are positing an NPC soldier stuck in some sort of trench warfare role (or rooftop/box canyon lookout, or whatever) then the untyped +2 to AC is better than they'll get from any other feat, which ought to make a real difference to survivability. Of course, it's obviously still somewhat better for creatures using weapons like firearms or grenade-like missiles than it is for crossbow wielders, as they don't have to worry as much about pumping feats into increasing the chance of hitting.
A PC feat it is not. I could imagine PCs being frustrated by a bunch of cowardly/crafty kobolds using it, though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Even if I were an NPC who spent 24 hours a day laying in a trench shooting at people with crossbows, I wouldn't take it over, say, any archery feat or even any of the standard go to feats. Maybe that's just me.That may just be you. Granted, it's situational to the point of uselessness for PCs, but if we are positing an NPC soldier stuck in some sort of trench warfare role (or rooftop/box canyon lookout, or whatever) then the untyped +2 to AC is better than they'll get from any other feat, which ought to make a real difference to survivability. Of course, it's obviously still somewhat better for creatures using weapons like firearms or grenade-like missiles than it is for crossbow wielders, as they don't have to worry as much about pumping feats into increasing the chance of hitting.
A PC feat it is not. I could imagine PCs being frustrated by a bunch of cowardly/crafty kobolds using it, though.
Makes me want run an encounter with a Kobolds in a cave with a bunch of oddly shaped holes near the floor...
They don't call them the Ankle-Shot tribe for nothing!
|
Would you happen to know if some of the good ones are strictly new or are they reprints? Curious because some of those are from Faiths of Purity, the book that brought you Glorious Heat, which was hilariously reprinted in its original broken form, atleast according to pfsrd.
Don't mind me just Sparking this match over and over until we're all full healed.
The worst part? Inner Sea Gods not only reprinted the feat in its broken form, but it also added "worshipper of a good deity" to the list of prereqs. That means this isn't the result of someone copy-pasting the feat over and forgetting that it was supposed to be fixed, it means at some point, somebody looked this feat over and decided that its original text was fine to reprint... but they weren't okay with evil clerics using it to heal.
The worst part? Inner Sea Gods not only reprinted the feat in its broken form, but it also added "worshipper of a good deity" to the list of prereqs. That means this isn't the result of someone copy-pasting the feat over and forgetting that it was supposed to be fixed, it means at some point, somebody looked this feat over and decided that its original text was fine to reprint... but they weren't okay with evil clerics using it to heal.Would you happen to know if some of the good ones are strictly new or are they reprints? Curious because some of those are from Faiths of Purity, the book that brought you Glorious Heat, which was hilariously reprinted in its original broken form, atleast according to pfsrd.
Don't mind me just Sparking this match over and over until we're all full healed.
Actually, worshipper of a good deity is only for the D20srd version. The actual version is Saranrae, which is much more specific. Butterfly sting has it worse, being a combat feat that isn't magical that requires Desna worship now. I mentioned before PFS decided to force conversion or you lost the feat for these feats that just now had an additional requirement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Glorious Heat (used with orisons like Spark) was never broken. Infinite out of combat healing already exists by level 5, it's called wands of Cure Light Wounds. Someone taking a craft feat (say...wondrous items) instead of GH would have to pay for wands of CLW, but the savings on gear would more than make up for it.
I loved using Glorious Heat with Spark on my Druid. I took out candles and dished out "hippy healing" by lighting them. Way more interesting than poking someone with a wand over and over.
I would be proud of them nerfing a caster thing, except...as is usually the case when they nerf a caster thing, it hurts noncasters more (infinite healing and little to no per day resources means they can actually fight "all day"). The other time they nerf caster stuff is when it's an anti-caster caster thing, like Dispel Magic.
What did they do to dispel magic?
3.5 Dispel and 3.75 Dispel are two different spells.
PF did buff regular dispel to scale all the way up to +20 (in 3.5, dispel magic capped at +10 and greater went to +20....that was basically the only difference between the two spells, in fact), but other than that, it's all nerf.
You can't do area dispel with the regular version, only greater dispel now. Then there's the fact that 3.5 dispel rolled against and potentially dispelled ALL active spells on a target. The PF version checks each effect until you dispel one of them, then ends. Even the Greater version hard caps you to one dispelled effect per 4 CL.
That's a pretty hefty nerf.
Targeted Dispel
One object, creature, or spell is the target of the dispel magic spell. You make a dispel check (1d20 + your caster level, maximum +10) against the spell or against each ongoing spell currently in effect on the object or creature. The DC for this dispel check is 11 + the spell’s caster level. If you succeed on a particular check, that spell is dispelled; if you fail, that spell remains in effect.
Targeted Dispel: One object, creature, or spell is the target of the dispel magic spell. You make one dispel check (1d20 + your caster level) and compare that to the spell with highest caster level (DC = 11 + the spell's caster level). If successful, that spell ends. If not, compare the same result to the spell with the next highest caster level. Repeat this process until you have dispelled one spell affecting the target, or you have failed to dispel every spell.
Targeted Dispel: This functions as a targeted dispel magic, but it can dispel one spell for every four caster levels you possess, starting with the highest level spells and proceeding to lower level spells.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
PF has opened up an "interesting" new tactic of using "buffer buffs." Note how the dispel order goes by CL, not spell level. Most spells will often be from the same source (you?) and thus, same CL. This can be exploited at high levels when you've got a dozen long duration buffs and some short range ones running...
Say you've got some specific, higher level buffs you'd really not like to lose, that are of utmost importance to you. You can use the rules for intentionally casting at a lower CL than you have (as long as it's high enough to cast the spell) to cast them a 1 CL below your max! Why do this? Because then you can put up all your low level buffs (that can be cheaply replaced with pearls of power) at max CL, and bam! Unless the enemy knows which buffs to specifically target, the insignificant buffs act as a buffer for the important ones!
I've done this before in high level PF games; it really is quite effective at lowering your risk to dispels. I throw up completely pointless 1st level or even 0 level spells for no other reason than to act as a buffer, it's hilarious.
It wasn't any help in 3E; dispel can just take a crack at every spell you have to try and get rid of it. Also, Reciprocal Gyre existed to punish mages for being heavily buffed with spells. I highly encourage porting the spell over to PF, btw.
PF has opened up an "interesting" new tactic of using "buffer buffs." Note how the dispel order goes by CL, not spell level. Most spells will often be from the same source (you?) and thus, same CL. This can be exploited at high levels when you've got a dozen long duration buffs and some short range ones running...
Say you've got some specific, higher level buffs you'd really not like to lose, that are of utmost importance to you. You can use the rules for intentionally casting at a lower CL than you have (as long as it's high enough to cast the spell) to cast them a 1 CL below your max! Why do this? Because then you can put up all your low level buffs (that can be cheaply replaced with pearls of power) at max CL, and bam! Unless the enemy knows which buffs to specifically target, the insignificant buffs act as a buffer for the important ones!
I've done this before in high level PF games; it really is quite effective at lowering your risk to dispels. I throw up completely pointless 1st level or even 0 level spells for no other reason than to act as a buffer, it's hilarious.
I don't know, this strategy seems of dubious value to me. It's a DC 20 + spell level Knowledge: Arcana check to identify a spell in place, and it doesn't take an action to make the check. A smart dispeller is just going to determine what buffs you have and Dispel the important ones while ignoring the irrelevant ones. But if I suppose the enemies in your case didn't bother trying to determine what buffs you had, more power to you then.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Worst flavor: Fleet
You are, um... Faster than most?
Never seen a monk with fleet 10 times?
Combine that with fast movement and they can jump 11 feet higher (+44 jump checks)!* By my estimate that's a jump check of +72. They jump 18 feet in the air! (I think vertical jump DCs should be halved.)
*ignore spells like flight
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's a DC 20 + spell level Knowledge: Arcana check to identify a spell in place, and it doesn't take an action to make the check. A smart dispeller is just going to determine what buffs you have and Dispel the important ones while ignoring the irrelevant ones. But if I suppose the enemies in your case didn't bother trying to determine what buffs you had, more power to you then.
Maybe I'm mis-remembering this, but I'm pretty sure that the in-place spell must have a visible manifestation (or other detectable sign); otherwise, what clues do you have that enable you to work it out? Most buffs wouldn't be detectable without detect magic, and then you'd be using Spellcraft, not Knowledge(arcana).
Even a wall of force is detectable if you try to walk through it, and if you try then at least you have some clue so that you can use your knowledge of the arcane to work out what this must be. As you try to staunch your nose-bleed.
This whole copy/paste stuff can get messed up if you miss important stuff out. Spellcraft has this problem: 'Identify a spell as it is being cast' had, in brackets, 'you must be able to see or hear the verbal/somatic components'. Because the reason you can work out what spell they are going to cast, before there is any magic to observe, is because you recognise those magic words and those arcane gestures! If the spell lacked verbal or somatic components (whether the spell lacks that component or from use of Still or Silent Spell feats) then you were s%+@ out of luck.
But the lack of copy/pasting the information in the brackets leads Pathfinder players who never played 3rd ed to believe that there is something to see and hear when a spell is being cast that has nothing to do with verbal and somatic components, even before any magic comes into being. Nobody knows what that could be (even Jason himself!), but it leads people to think that it's impossible to cast a spell (or use a spell-like ability, which by definition requires no such components and is activated by an act of will!) without it being obvious to everyone, even a spell with no components at all!
This is why I refer to my 3.5 books when trying to understand a rule which may seem ambiguous in PF. It's a very useful tool indeed.
It's a DC 20 + spell level Knowledge: Arcana check to identify a spell in place, and it doesn't take an action to make the check. A smart dispeller is just going to determine what buffs you have and Dispel the important ones while ignoring the irrelevant ones. But if I suppose the enemies in your case didn't bother trying to determine what buffs you had, more power to you then.Maybe I'm mis-remembering this, but I'm pretty sure that the in-place spell must have a visible manifestation (or other detectable sign); otherwise, what clues do you have that enable you to work it out? Most buffs wouldn't be detectable without detect magic, and then you'd be using Spellcraft, not Knowledge(arcana).
Even a wall of force is detectable if you try to walk through it, and if you try then at least you have some clue so that you can use your knowledge of the arcane to work out what this must be. As you try to staunch your nose-bleed.
This whole copy/paste stuff can get messed up if you miss important stuff out. Spellcraft has this problem: 'Identify a spell as it is being cast' had, in brackets, 'you must be able to see or hear the verbal/somatic components'. Because the reason you can work out what spell they are going to cast, before there is any magic to observe, is because you recognise those magic words and those arcane gestures! If the spell lacked verbal or somatic components (whether the spell lacks that component or from use of Still or Silent Spell feats) then you were s*#& out of luck.
But the lack of copy/pasting the information in the brackets leads Pathfinder players who never played 3rd ed to believe that there is something to see and hear when a spell is being cast that has nothing to do with verbal and somatic components, even before any magic comes into being. Nobody knows what that could be (even Jason himself!), but it leads people to think that it's impossible to cast a spell (or use a spell-like ability, which by definition requires no...
In the case of some really common and very important to dispel buffs the visual effect is obvious
BlurDisplacement
Fickle Winds
Mirror image
Haste
|
|
In the case of some really common and very important to dispel buffs the visual effect is obvious
Blur
Displacement
Fickle Winds
Mirror image
Haste
I completely agree.
And there are others whose effects are not so obvious:-
Magic Jar, Foresight, Endure Elements, Bull's Strength (and the other five ability-enhancing spells)...I could go on.
You have to judge each on its own merits.
Agreed on Magic Jar being a scary buff, but IMO buffs to ability scores aren't at the top of the food chain for dispels.
Blur clearly has an obvious effect, but one might argue about Displacement. The text of the spell says is that you appear approximately two feet away from your actual position. That can be interpreted to mean you look entirely normal.
Yeah, of course it's not as helpful to visually obvious buffs. But even then, it might not be so easy for the enemy to figure out. My robed dude is flying, for example. Is it Fly? Is it Overland Flight? Is it the Flight hex, and thus not even dispellable? Without detect magic / arcane sight to examine, it might well be hard to tell.
|
|
Obvious worst: Caustic Slur
Stealth worst: Extra Rogue Talent (powerful sneak)
Worst flavor: Fleet
You are, um... Faster than most?
I just looked up what Caustic Slur does, and dear lord that is a bad feat. A standard action to grant your favored enemies Power Attack?!
The worst part is, I can see the logic behind it. It is a -1 on attack rolls. Still, Power Attack is in the Core Rulebook as a feat for YOU to choose-- they can't honestly think having it is a penalty, can they?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, of course it's not as helpful to visually obvious buffs. But even then, it might not be so easy for the enemy to figure out. My robed dude is flying, for example. Is it Fly? Is it Overland Flight? Is it the Flight hex, and thus not even dispellable? Without detect magic / arcane sight to examine, it might well be hard to tell.
Funny you mention this, because this exact scenario more or less happened in my game last week. An enemy spellcaster was using the Fly Hex and one of the PCs tried to dispel it. When he failed despite his really high roll there was momentary panic at the table when the players were afraid I sent a way-higher-than-CR-appropriate spellcaster at them, but then calmed down when the witch used Evil Eye the next turn and the players figured it out.
The worst part is, I can see the logic behind it. It is a -1 on attack rolls. Still, Power Attack is in the Core Rulebook as a feat for YOU to choose-- they can't honestly think having it is a penalty, can they?
If I had to guess the idea was that they were taking a penalty so its a bad thing.
Of course getting hit by someone with a bonus to damage is a bad thing, and power attack can be a really good trade...
The worst part is, I can see the logic behind it. It is a -1 on attack rolls. Still, Power Attack is in the Core Rulebook as a feat for YOU to choose-- they can't honestly think having it is a penalty, can they?If I had to guess the idea was that they were taking a penalty so its a bad thing.
Of course getting hit by someone with a bonus to damage is a bad thing, and power attack can be a really good trade...
Ah, yes, this appears bad, but consider it's use on archers....
|
If I had to guess the idea was that they were taking a penalty so its a bad thing.
Of course getting hit by someone with a bonus to damage is a bad thing, and power attack can be a really good trade...
The funniest thing about the feat is this line:
"If the creature already has the power attack feat, the attack penalty increases by 1 and the damage bonus increases by 2."
So it essentially gives you the next increment of power attack for free. At the higher single digit levels, any CR-appropriate creature is going to hit most player ACs most of the time on its first attack. So it's a straight up buff.
Even sillier is that getting Caustic Slur'd is the only way I know of for a PC to get +14 to damage with power attack (+21 with two-handers!)
You'd normally need BAB +24 to do that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Caustic Slur is a great feat!!!!
...
For a cohort. Get a cohort Ranger to follow you around and use Caustic Slur on you to make your Power Attack better :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Caustic Slur is a great feat!!!!
...
For a cohort. Get a cohort Ranger to follow you around and use Caustic Slur on you to make your Power Attack better.
Against the cohort. Well done? (Though really, who could blame you? Did you hear what he called you?)
There's a discussion on this feat, with replies by SKR here:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2la3l?Caustic-Slur-Feat
Against the cohort. Well done? (Though really, who could blame you? Did you hear what he called you?)Caustic Slur is a great feat!!!!
...
For a cohort. Get a cohort Ranger to follow you around and use Caustic Slur on you to make your Power Attack better.
Sarcasm doesn't translate well. Even if you try and use the feat in ways it wasn;t intended to be used, it still sucks.
I think the only way for it to be useful, is if you have a cohort or ally that is able to redirect attacks into adjacent enemies. So your ally runs up, insults you, you attack him, and he redirects it into the nearest enemy.
If the point of caustic slur was to get a monster to attack you, then it should give a will save or something, with failure meaning the monster must attack you (if possible).
Or, you could do something like give the feat-user an attack of opportunity against its target whenever the target attacks anyone else.
You mean like Antagonize?
Antagonize was one of the most broken feats a martial could get, because, pre-pre-errata, you could force a Wizard to charge you with his quarterstaff and attempt to bonk you on the head. If you made the Intimidate check, he had to try and hit you with a melee attack. It took 3 erratas to get it where it now, which allows archers/casters to either target you with an attack, or include you in the spell area.
The original Antagonize was even worse because the DC of the Intimadate check was simply the CR of the creature, so they errata'd it to 10+CR, but left in forcing wizards/archer to melee attack. Then the third errata added in the rest.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Note that the original source for the Caustic Slur feat is called "Gnomes of Golarion". Anything that gets gnomes killed can only be a good thing. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, Reciprocal Gyre existed to punish mages for being heavily buffed with spells. I highly encourage porting the spell over to PF, btw.
OUCH!! Yes, I think I will be taking that into my arsenal, that could be an interesting spell to toss against my PCs... >:)