Balance...


Pathfinder Society

1 to 50 of 375 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge 4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Okay...so snowball, a conjuration DD spell that out does pretty much all the evocation spell of the level is allowed in PFS because it's not unbalancing...despite the fact that previous version of the game have said otherwise about conjuration spells that out did evocation at what evocation is suppose to do.

And magical knack is STILL banned because it's overpowered?!? A trait that honestly only help pretty fringe character builds. Yes these fringe builds take this trait hands down...but that isn't because the feat is so strong...it's because the build is so WEAK that it doesn't really work without it.

Seriously...there is a disconnect here. Either snowball has no business in PFS or magical knack does belong in PFS...or both those statements are true.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Cold Napalm wrote:
it's because the build is so WEAK that it doesn't really work without it.

I'm doing just fine as an Eldritch Knight, thank you very much. Perhaps you pathetic westerners need the extra help, but a mighty son of Tian Xia certainly does not.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

What's a "DD" spell?

Snowball does 1d6 per level, up to 5d6 and requires a ranged touch attack.

No SR, and requires a Fort Save or be staggered.

Magic Missile automatically hits, no save, and is essentially ghost touch, and does up to 5d4+5 damage. Does allow SR.

Both do the exact same amount of average damage. 17.5 per hit.

Magical Knack is banned, and this is not a good example of why it shouldn't be.


Direct Damage spell.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Andrew Christian wrote:

Snowball does 1d6 per level, up to 5d6 and requires a ranged touch attack.

No SR, and requires a Fort Save or be staggered.

That's what the spell does? Is it a 1st-level spell? If so, it does seem like a step up from, say, shocking grasp. Same damage scale, better range, no SR, and a possible debuff.

What book is that in? I might have to go get it for my new kitsune sorcerer...


Magical knack is banned and will probably stay banned.

As far as the spell goes:
If you are going conjuration you are not going to be trying to deal damage. Most people would still take grease or SM1.

As Andrew said, Magic missile is slightly better (same damage but no chance of miss and longer range, SR is meaningless at the levels you use the spell). As far as damage goes the best comparison is Ear-piercing scream (damage and a condition). However, Ear-piercing scream's condition is Daze, which is much better than staggered. Also Ear-piercing scream won't be resisted. Taking this into consideration, I think that 1d6 damage per lvl is fair.

Besides...nothing is preventing an evocationist from taking the spell.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew Christian wrote:


Snowball does 1d6 per level, up to 5d6 and requires a ranged touch attack.

No SR, and requires a Fort Save or be staggered.

Magic Missile automatically hits, no save, and is essentially ghost touch, and does up to 5d4+5 damage. Does allow SR.

Both do the exact same amount of average damage. 17.5 per hit.

They may do the same damage when cast at 9th level, but a 5th level caster gets 5d6 from snowball and only 3d4+3 from magic missile. Snowball would already be the best single target 1st level direct damage spell in the game just from that. Add in the possibility of staggering people, that it ignores SR, and that it works well with metamagic feats (unlike magic missile), and it's a pretty clear case of power creep.


Jiggy wrote:
What book is that in?

Snowball: Pathfinder Player Companion: People of the North

I don't know what page it is, but assuming it's page 26, it's PFS legal.

Note that it's a ranged touch attack, so shooting into combat and cover are doing their thing, and it's not a ray, so it won't gain weapon damage bonuses from things like inspire courage or prayer.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

You are all missing the obvious answer: Snilloc has the ear of the higher ups at Paizo. ;)

Lantern Lodge 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Maryland—Frederick aka Azarius2010

As conjurer at 5thlevel I am more inclined to cast Aqueous Orb or Create Spiked Pit.

Silver Crusade

Grick wrote:

Note that it's a ranged touch attack, so shooting into combat and cover are doing their thing, and it's not a ray, so it won't gain weapon damage bonuses from things like inspire courage or prayer.

That part is debatable. There have been several threads about this in the past, and as far as I know, there's still been no official answer from Paizo, despite numerous FAQ requests. General consensus seems to be that any time you have to make an attack roll to hit, it counts as a weapon for the purposes of anything that can buff a weapon's hit and/or damage. So by that standard this would get the bonuses from inspire courage, prayer, bless, etc.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Fromper wrote:
So by that standard this would get the bonuses from inspire courage, prayer, bless, etc.

I believe he's only talking about the damage bonuses, not the attack bonuses. For instance, Inspire Courage gives you +1 to attack rolls (so any time you make an attack roll, it applies), but then also gives you +1 to "weapon damage rolls", which only applies to weapons or "weapon-like" spells.

Lemme go check the FAQ about that...

EDIT: FAQ
Uses the same Inspire Courage example I mentioned, and says that rays are treated as weapons and therefore benefit from boosts to "weapon damage rolls".

However, not every ranged touch attack is a ray (though I personally think that's kind of silly).

Grand Lodge 5/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I was wondering when this argument would come back around. It has been months. Feel free to offer your reasonings why you think Magical Knack should be made legal if it is a new argument. If it is one of the numerous other arguments against having it made legal, I'm aware and have already read those. No need to rehash what has already been said. And before I'm asked, no I'm not giving some lengthy reasoning behind why it is banned. Convince me it shouldn't be and I will take a look at it. Thus far, I haven't seen any reasoning to convince me to not maintain the ban put in place before I arrived on the job, and one snowball isn't enough to change my mind.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cold Napalm wrote:
Seriously...there is a disconnect here. Either snowball has no business in PFS or magical knack does belong in PFS...or both those statements are true.

Flag on the play! False equivalence. Five yard penalty.

The Exchange

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'll toss this out.

I think Magical Knack should be legal.
I think it helps create more interesting options in character creation.

It currently does something no feat can do which is a bit of an awkward place for it, however I don't think it creates more power then anything else.

I hate to use the term "viable" because I don't think it really fits in PFS, but It's a nice bonus for things like eldritch knight (which you already have to kinda fight with the idea of NOT just being a magus).

The other major use is people dipping for playing a blaster of some sort, but that doesn't really matter since if they are giving up magical lineage and not metamagicing....they are sacrificing more power than one caster level.

Magical Knack simply creates opportunities for classes that "shouldn't" multi-class to do so. It doesn't grant ANYTHING to the already "overpowered" things.

I think it opens up more options for things like arcane trickster, arcane archer, and eldritch knight. I don't think making "fringe" builds more powerful is a problem.

It doesn't grant spellcasting levels, it just makes PRCs that lose casting levels and multi-classing for concepts hurt a bit less.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

17 people marked this as a favorite.
Michael Brock wrote:
Feel free to offer your reasonings why you think Magical Knack should be made legal if it is a new argument.

Well, just to take a stab at this, my argument would be this:

Spoil'd wall of text:
Premise: An option is banned only if it conflicts with the nature or goals of the campaign.
Premise: Magical Knack does not conflict with the nature or goals of the campaign.
Conclusion: Magical Knack should not be banned.

-------------------------------

Reasoning:
Premise #1:
As I see it, there are two ways of looking at content legality in PFS.

One method is that nothing outside the Core Assumption is allowed, unless it appears to specifically benefit the campaign. That is, when a new book comes out, we "start" with everything banned, and then Mike looks through it and sees something and says "Hey, X would make the campaign better" and makes an exception for it (i.e., legalize it).

The other method is that new content is generally legal, unless it appears to specifically hurt the campaign. That is, when a new book comes out, we "start" with an assumption that its content will be legal, and then Mike looks through it and sees something and says "Hey, X would cause problems with the campaign" and makes an exception for it (i.e., ban it).

It is my understanding that the latter is the stance of PFS leadership, hence Premise #1.

Premise #2:
I am not aware of any aspect of the campaign with which Magical Knack conflicts.
It does not affect wealth.
It does not invite unregulated customization.
It does not skirt alignment restrictions.
It does not slow down gameplay.
It does not have canon issues.
It does not skirt PvP rules.
The above list should all be pretty self-evident. The only claim I've ever heard about it (well, that I can remember) that's even debatable is that it "removes creativity" by being an "auto-include" for any multiclassed spellcaster.

I contend that this is not the case.

Remembering that a PC can have only 1 trait from any given category, Magical Knack is competing with both Dangerously Curious and Magical Lineage, which are both extremely strong and popular options. If you want to be a caster/melee hybrid (for instance), do you make an Eldritch Knight and use Magical Knack to deal normal damage with his fireball? Or does he play a Magus and gain a +4 to UMD? Or does he play either of the above but with a metamagic feat that doesn't increase the level of the spell? There is most definitely a decision still to be made.

Thus, I contend that Magical Knack does not conflict with any aspect of the campaign.

-----------------------------------

Based on the two premises above, I believe it follows logically that Magical Knack should not be banned.


Michael Brock wrote:
I was wondering when this argument would come back around. It has been months.

It was about time....we just had a bout of evil actions, followed by re-skinning, and then a nasty case of not at my table.

Is there really more than one argument for allowing Magical Knack? It seems to all boil down to "My ____ character build deserves more caster levels."

Sovereign Court Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Lab_Rat wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
I was wondering when this argument would come back around. It has been months.

It was about time....we just had a bout of evil actions, followed by re-skinning, and then a nasty case of not at my table.

Next in line is "Why can't I replay everything all the time?" d-:

Silver Crusade

Jiggy wrote:
Fromper wrote:
So by that standard this would get the bonuses from inspire courage, prayer, bless, etc.

I believe he's only talking about the damage bonuses, not the attack bonuses. For instance, Inspire Courage gives you +1 to attack rolls (so any time you make an attack roll, it applies), but then also gives you +1 to "weapon damage rolls", which only applies to weapons or "weapon-like" spells.

Lemme go check the FAQ about that...

EDIT: FAQ
Uses the same Inspire Courage example I mentioned, and says that rays are treated as weapons and therefore benefit from boosts to "weapon damage rolls".

However, not every ranged touch attack is a ray (though I personally think that's kind of silly).

I agree that not all ranged touch attack is a ray, but the consensus in previous threads was that anything with an attack roll gets treated the same way. So Weapon Focus (Ray) wouldn't affect Snowball, but Weapon Focus (Snowball) would be a legal option, and they're both affected by Inspire Courage.

The Exchange

Kurt Schaecher wrote:

As conjurer at 5thlevel I am more inclined to cast Aqueous Orb or Create Spiked Pit.

In fairness, those aren't first level spells. :-p

5d6, no SR is a very solid spell. It can hurt golems which is pretty sweet.

I'll certainly cast it, but it's not really that exciting. Besides this is the thing you cast on the guys trying to climb out of your spiked pit :)

I don't know why players always ignore the range line. There is a big difference between 100+10/level and 25+2.5/level


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hmm.

Arguments for its inclusion have generally revolved around how it makes Mystic Theurges easier to swallow, or in general how it makes multiclassing casters and, well, anything, easier. These generally haven't been convincing enough to any of the campaign leadership, so assuming it's actually balanced, there must be something that's missing from that argument.

Caster level is one of the most important things for a caster, definitely up there with the importance of BAB to a martial character, but obviously more important. The price for a slot-less +1 to your caster level has been set at 30k. This means the trait is worth, to the only people who would be taking it, 30-60k gp. So perhaps one argument for it would be to find a trait (in the APG) that offers an ability within the same order of magnitude of this.

Going back to its importance to the caster and how that relates to martial characters, another thing would be to look for a trait that gives up to +2 to your BAB that's capped at your hit dice. But I'm pretty sure this doesn't exist. So that's not a good avenue for an argument on its balance, especially since caster level is comparatively more important in part due to how rare it is to raise your caster level.

For one trait, you can take away most of the sting from taking two non-main-caster-class levels. Or alternatively, you could dip into a magic class and get some decent buffs with a much better CL than you would without the trait. Your spells as a 1st level sorcerer are now as strong as that 3rd level sorcerer! And you can hit people really well too.

I'm guessing those are the main arguments against Magical Knack, and they are good ones. It's in a class of its own. I do not expect for my hunch to be confirmed or denied.

I'll just ignore the gold-equivalency one, because I don't think there's any trait even remotely near that. Further, it might also follow from this argument that the human favored class bonus for spontaneous casters would also be banned. (not that I would find such a thing to be bad.)

I guess I'm seeing more reasons to ban it than not, so I'll just sit back and watch the other arguments. It was a fun little thought exercise though, up until I hit the wall.

Lantern Lodge 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, South Dakota—Rapid City aka Black Powder Chocobo

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mr. Jiggy, what you've just said is one of the most logical and well written things I have ever read. At no point in your concise, coherent response did you ever deviate to something that could be considered an irrational thought. Everyone in this thread is now smarter for having read it. I award you eleventy internets, and you do not need Pharasma to have mercy on your soul.

Back to topic: Snowball seems to be a minor powercreep over Shocking Grasp, but not so much that I would call it OP. The oddity to me would be to compare it to Corrosive Touch, another conjuration spell that only deals up to 5d4 damage, no saving through but allows Spell Resistance, and has no other secondary effects. Snowball is vastly superior to Corrosive Touch, with its only benefit over Shocking Grasp or Snowball would be the ability to halt most forms of regeneration, which doesn't come up much in lower level play anyway.


Fromper wrote:
the consensus in previous threads was that anything with an attack roll gets treated the same way.

Fireball uses a ranged touch attack when you try to direct it through a narrow passage. By the "consensus" that would mean fireball is a weapon, yet it's called out specifically in the FAQ as not benefiting from things that boost weapon damage rolls.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Fromper wrote:
I agree that not all ranged touch attack is a ray, but the consensus in previous threads was that anything with an attack roll gets treated the same way.

For bonuses to "attack rolls", yes. For bonuses to "weapon damage rolls", no. I'm not sure what threads you're thinking of, but the FAQ specifies that bonuses which apply to "weapons" only apply to spells if the spell is a ray or a "weapon-like" spell. That makes it pretty clear.

Quote:
So Weapon Focus (Ray) wouldn't affect Snowball, but Weapon Focus (Snowball) would be a legal option,

No, you can't select Weapon Focus (name of an individual spell). The feat must select a weapon, or one of the specific exceptions listed in the feat ('ray' or 'grapple'). "Snowball" is not a legal choice for Weapon Focus.

Quote:
and they're both affected by Inspire Courage.

Snowball and (for instance) ray of frost are indeed both affected by Inspire Courage. Just not to the same degree.

Inspire Courage grants a +1 bonus to attack rolls. Both snowball and ray of frost use attack rolls, so they both receive that bonus.

Inspire Courage also grants a +1 bonus to weapon damage rolls. Ray of frost is a ray, which counts as a weapon, so it gets the damage bonus. Snowball is not a weapon in any way, and therefore does not get that bonus.

Under the effects of Inspire Courage, snowball is at +1 to hit while ray of frost is at +1 to hit AND +1 damage.

Lantern Lodge 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, South Dakota—Rapid City aka Black Powder Chocobo

Cheapy wrote:

Hmm.

Arguments for its inclusion have generally revolved around how it makes Mystic Theurges easier to swallow, or in general how it makes multiclassing casters and, well, anything, easier. These generally haven't been convincing enough to any of the campaign leadership, so assuming it's actually balanced, there must be something that's missing from that argument.

Caster level is one of the most important things for a caster, definitely up there with the importance of BAB to a martial character, but obviously more important. The price for a slot-less +1 to your caster level has been set at 30k. This means the trait is worth, to the only people who would be taking it, 30-60k gp. So perhaps one argument for it would be to find a trait (in the APG) that offers an ability within the same order of magnitude of this.

I'm honestly surprised that there isn't a feat to do something like that, even if it's only a +1 caster level boost with the same restriction of not using that to exceed the hit die/character level.

Another option would be then to even have the trait for PFS nerfed to a +1 CL instead of +2. While that doesn't absolve the issues you noted, it does keep the 'value' of the trait to a more respectable level, if that is one of the concerns.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Alaska—Anchorage aka Dragnmoon

Fromper wrote:
I agree that not all ranged touch attack is a ray, but the consensus in previous threads was that anything with an attack roll gets treated the same way.

That is the way I run it...

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Grick wrote:


Fireball uses a ranged touch attack when you try to direct it through a narrow passage.

No it doesn't.


The feat idea Black Powder Chocobo was something else I considered. If such a feat were to be added at a later date, the feat would probably stack with this, as there's currently no real concept of feats explicitly not stacking with traits. I suppose they could have something that says it doesn't stack with anything else that increases your caster level to a level below your hit dice, but that's a bit awkward...

And having a CL 7 for just a dip, a feat, and a trait would be exceedingly awesome. Imagine a wizard dipping into fighter and suddenly having the BAB of a level 7 fighter added to his own BAB...


It actually does...

Quote:
If you attempt to send the bead through a narrow passage, such as through an arrow slit, you must “hit” the opening with a ranged touch attack, or else the bead strikes the barrier and detonates prematurely.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Andrew Christian wrote:
Grick wrote:


Fireball uses a ranged touch attack when you try to direct it through a narrow passage.

No it doesn't.

Fireball: "If you attempt to send the bead through a narrow passage, such as through an arrow slit, you must “hit” the opening with a ranged touch attack, or else the bead strikes the barrier and detonates prematurely."

The Exchange

Cheapy wrote:

The feat idea Black Powder Chocobo was something else I considered. If such a feat were to be added at a later date, the feat would probably stack with this, as there's currently no real concept of feats explicitly not stacking with traits. I suppose they could have something that says it doesn't stack with anything else that increases your caster level to a level below your hit dice, but that's a bit awkward...

And having a CL 7 for just a dip, a feat, and a trait would be exceedingly awesome. Imagine a wizard dipping into fighter and suddenly having the BAB of a level 7 fighter added to his own BAB...

Except higher BAB is more powerful than higher caster level. It's not better than SPELLCASTING levels, but just increasing the CL dependent effects of your first level spells... at the cost of a trait and a feat... seems... meh. best one is clearly summon monster 1 for a flanking buddy :).

It's actually probably something like divine favor or shield of faith, since they work in armor. ooh or liberating command that one's actually legit.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

huh, I stand corrected.

But since the attack roll has nothing to do with hitting your target, but rather navigating a narrow passage or arrow slit, then regardless how you rule "weapon-like spells" for damage from Bards and what not, it wouldn't add the damage to this particular spell.

It would add to-hit to make it through the passage, and that's it.


I agree with the OP, Snowball is spell that doesn't follow normal conventions and is therefor powerful.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Cheapy wrote:

The feat idea Black Powder Chocobo was something else I considered. If such a feat were to be added at a later date, the feat would probably stack with this, as there's currently no real concept of feats explicitly not stacking with traits. I suppose they could have something that says it doesn't stack with anything else that increases your caster level to a level below your hit dice, but that's a bit awkward...

And having a CL 7 for just a dip, a feat, and a trait would be exceedingly awesome. Imagine a wizard dipping into fighter and suddenly having the BAB of a level 7 fighter added to his own BAB...

The comparison of CL to BAB is misleading. Having a high BAB doesn't just at to your attack rolls, it also gives you more attacks. Adding to your CL simply increases your variables, it doesn't give you access to more spell slots or higher level spells.

If anything, a better comparison would be to Weapon Focus. Or rather, a version of Weapon Focus where it grants +2 but the sum of it and your BAB cannot exceed your hit dice.

Also, there's precedent for specific anti-stacking language. How many things specify they don't stack with haste or Keen?

And finally, regarding the price, what's the cost of Armor Expert, especially for light-armor-only classes using it to wear a mithral breastplate without penalty? What's the value of Magical Lineage, essentially functioning as a metamagic rod for one spell but for an assortment of different metamagic feats, without having to spend an action pulling it out?

5/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Looking only at snowball--

Snowball is the best single-target damage dealing spell at level 1 from level 1 to 5 for certain. In fact, it's strictly superior to the second level spell scorching ray from levels 4 to 6 (cold is less resisted than fire and also has more ways to build off it, like the Rime Spell feat). On top of that, it ignores SR. On top of that, it has a staggered kicker (and staggered is a very nice condition). On top of all that, it's conjuration, which is already the strongest school, and it's impinging on evocation's main shtick (damage-dealing spells).

Now, due to snowball's extreme power for its level, there's going to be a lot of builds that capitalize on this with Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage. But even if you don't take those traits, Intensified Snowball is the undisputed most powerful single-target damage-dealing spell up to level 10, even without ignoring SR or the staggered kicker. In fact, the only other contender (scorching ray), is saddled with the fact that it loses out big-time to energy resistance of any sort, so snowball is honestly a better choice even at level 11+ against many monsters. Take a demon, for instance, which has resist 10 to both fire and cold. Scorching ray with three rays does 12d6-30 (around 12), and intensified snowball does 10d6-10 (around 25). And it also ignores SR and has a staggered kicker. And of course, with magical lineage or wayang spellhunter, this intensified version is actually a 1st level spell (more a fault of those two traits being overpowered though).

Anyway, I recommend banning snowball so that choosing evocation as an opposition school means more (if conjuration has the best blasts, then why fret evocation?).

Shadow Lodge

Well, personally I'd love to see Magical Knack legalized. I love builds that can cast as well as get into melee(or sneak attack or shoot arrows or whatever), and I also have a great weakness for prestige classes. But I understand that there are ways Magical Knack is unbalanced. Personally, I would like to see a new (feat/trait/item) that fills the same role in a more balanced way. Maybe a feat that grants an increase in caster level, but only to a maximum of your HD-2.


The comparison is not misleading, it's just imperfect. A better example would be BAB that doesn't actually grant more attacks if just by that the iterative cap is pierced. Which might be one of the reasons why this feat is banned. We know that part of the reasoning for the synth going byebye was the complicated rules. I can pretty easily see people think Magical Knack would give you extra spell levels, and that'll have issues.

The issue with such language (I definitely thought about it!) is that suddenly we have one thing that does stack and then another added at a later date that doesn't, which would be a bit error prone. Although this is admittedly minor.

And since you asked...

Armor Expert: 300 gp.
Magical Lineage: With some fun equivalency work, the upper bound of this is 20k. Since the highest metamagic spell level increase is +4, and magical lineage only lowers it by 1, then it's reasonable to lower this upper bound to be more realistic, thus placing it around 5k. Admittedly higher than I thought, although the 30-60 still counts. General rule is that each feat an item gives adds 5k + 5k per feat prereq to the price, according to Sean at least, and this is not taking into consideration that traits are meant to be half feats.


Drogon wrote:
Lab_Rat wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
I was wondering when this argument would come back around. It has been months.

It was about time....we just had a bout of evil actions, followed by re-skinning, and then a nasty case of not at my table.

Next in line is "Why can't I replay everything all the time?" d-:

Hides behind Drogon and gets out her "He said it not me" sign

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Drogon wrote:
Lab_Rat wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
I was wondering when this argument would come back around. It has been months.

It was about time....we just had a bout of evil actions, followed by re-skinning, and then a nasty case of not at my table.

Next in line is "Why can't I replay everything all the time?" d-:
Hides behind Drogon and gets out her "He said it not me" sign

haha, in fairness I do kinda wish you could get GM credit more times :). I think it would encourage GMs to run the same scenario more often, and thus provide a better experience to players since they know it better, but I'm certainly not on the side of allowing players to play the same thing a bunch of times.


faceplants and waps Drogon with the sign

Silver Crusade 5/5

why doesn't anyone point out Boon Companion?
.
Magical Knack is really just half of the old feat Practiced Spellcaster (spelling?), and Boon Companion was just P.S. for animal companions...

And Boon Companion is legal, and infact almost required for any class with ACs that want to take a dip into fighter (or any other class). (yeah, I have a Cav/Ftr with Boon Companion).

Liberty's Edge 5/5

nosig wrote:

why doesn't anyone point out Boon Companion?

.
Magical Knack is really just half of the old feat Practiced Spellcaster (spelling?), and Boon Companion was just P.S. for animal companions...

And Boon Companion is legal, and infact almost required for any class with ACs that want to take a dip into fighter (or any other class). (yeah, I have a Cav/Ftr with Boon Companion).

Why would you take Boon Companion for a Cavalier, when after 4th level you can take Horse Master?

Sovereign Court Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
faceplants and waps Drogon with the sign

Gah! I just got hit in the head!

must be a sign...


Andrew Christian wrote:
Why would you take Boon Companion for a Cavalier, when after 4th level you can take Horse Master?

Horse Master (Combat): "Prerequisites: Expert trainer class feature (Advanced Player's Guide 33), Ride 6 ranks."

6th level, not 4th. And the Beast Rider, Fell Rider, and Strategist archetypes all trade out Expert Trainer.

Silver Crusade 5/5

Grick wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Why would you take Boon Companion for a Cavalier, when after 4th level you can take Horse Master?

Horse Master (Combat): "Prerequisites: Expert trainer class feature (Advanced Player's Guide 33), Ride 6 ranks."

6th level, not 4th. And the Beast Rider, Fell Rider, and Strategist archetypes all trade out Expert Trainer.

and you don't get Expert Trainer until 4th level Cavalier... which my guy is not yet.

With Boon Companion he gets a 4th level AC when he's 2nd/2nd...

Silver Crusade

Greasitty wrote:
You are all missing the obvious answer: Snilloc has the ear of the higher ups at Paizo. ;)

I'll believe that when snowball swarm and cream pie appear as legal spells.


Jiao-long wrote:
Cold Napalm wrote:
it's because the build is so WEAK that it doesn't really work without it.
I'm doing just fine as an Eldritch Knight, thank you very much. Perhaps you pathetic westerners need the extra help, but a mighty son of Tian Xia certainly does not.

Sheesh, what a diva.

Too sooon?


Drogon wrote:
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
faceplants and waps Drogon with the sign

Gah! I just got hit in the head!

must be a sign...

I think you're the only one that saw it lol

5/5

sowhereaminow wrote:
Greasitty wrote:
You are all missing the obvious answer: Snilloc has the ear of the higher ups at Paizo. ;)
I'll believe that when snowball swarm and cream pie appear as legal spells.

Flurry of snowballs close enough? It has a huge area of effect, but its damage doesn't scale. Because it ignores SR and targets Reflex, if you combine with Dazing Spell and maybe Havoc of the Society (just to ensure that your opponent takes at least 1 damage if they have resists or immunities), you can take out most any dragon for 2 rounds with it, though otherwise it isn't as flashy for its level as the original snowball

The Exchange 5/5

I think this thread has become "Un-Balanced...."

1 to 50 of 375 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Balance... All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.