|
So, theorycrafters, what do you think of using Summoner/Oracle for a support class? You don't get as many spells, of course, but the Summoner spell list is pretty disgusting--Haste is SL2, for instance, which can then be cast using SL3 Divine slots after CL6, basically making you a buffing machine. Or are you trading way too much?
I don't think summoner is worth it at all for mystic theurge. The spell list you have is pretty much overpowered by a sorcerer or wizard, and you have far less spells per day, so less PoP index. (I love that term!)
But I think the point is that they not only lower spell level equivalents, they actually get early class level access to some spells. Since Pearls of Power are the metric here, that means it's much cheaper for them to get even more castings of those spells. ...I think you need to have a very solid plan on how you will take advantage of that at every spell level though, not just Haste.
|
But I think the point is that they not only lower spell level equivalents, they actually get early class level access to some spells. Since Pearls of Power are the metric here, that means it's much cheaper for them to get even more castings of those spells. ...I think you need to have a very solid plan on how you will take advantage of that at every spell level though, not just Haste.
Summoners are spontaneous casters so pearls of power don't work for them. Right?
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
But I think the point is that they not only lower spell level equivalents, they actually get early class level access to some spells. Since Pearls of Power are the metric here, that means it's much cheaper for them to get even more castings of those spells. ...I think you need to have a very solid plan on how you will take advantage of that at every spell level though, not just Haste.Summoners are spontaneous casters so pearls of power don't work for them. Right?
Right. Runestones of power, on the other hand...
|
|
I used the PoP index instead of charging double for RoP when I designed the comparison because I wanted to be clear that the index wasn't intended to favor the Theurge, and at the time, the theurge had a mix of spontaneous and prepared and the comparison build was all prepared. If we want to include runestones in there, we can double the value of all the spontaneous slots (I personally feel that runestones are a bit overly expensive though, and might have worked better with 1500 as a base, so I'm fine either way).
|
|
Well, as far as PFS goes, I would support a ruling finding that this worked. I have yet to see an Eldritch Knight or Mystic Theurge in Society play, and I think it would be good for there to be some diversity.
Many of us who played 3.0 and 3.5 probably remember character creation vividly: many times a person planned out the character: what skills they'd take at what level, what feats, what classes, and eventually what prestige class(es) they'd head into. In the end, the base/core classes were the stepping stones to something greater, and the prestige classes offered more power and were the ultimate destination of classes.
Pathfinder came along and redid that. The core and base classes became competent in their own right, though you still have a noticeable difference between true Tier 1 classes and the others. In fact, they are so competent that PrCs became close to obsolete. With PFS you're not looking to plan out to level 20: you're looking out to level 12, maybe more depending. So with something like this, it feels like a half-assed attempt to make PrCs something to be used.
As far as "table variation", a literal reading over the FAQ says that it works. As such (and I'm not arguing semantics on plurality, since that has never been an issue before), I would have no problem--and in fact would be expected to--with seating someone who brought this character. Until such time as this is cleared, I will do as instructed and GM as expected: RAW.
|
|
I like to surpise people with my builds. I do not like the standard cookie cutter build other poeple have pulled off the internet for a bow fighter or whatever. I also do not enjoy classes with like all 13s(I always max some dump others negative stats I think define you more than high stats). I want something that has different type of abilities and acts different. If I get something radically different, awesome for me.
I take pride in when people ask how I get a level 1 spell's DC to 25. I can quote off the top of my head the reasons why. If they doubt it I can pull out the books.
Although if it was about ways to interrept rules. I leave that for the DM. I have had DMs make obviously incorrect rulings. I object once with the rules that support me, and then silently accept the ruling they present. That is their job at the table to intrept rules and not everyone is good at their job. So if you bring this contreversial rule, expect DMs to reject the build. That is their right as a DM if you think you can do better you take his spot. He is not getting paid to do it, and usually it costs them money to DM the game for you. If you really feel like a DM is give you a poor time you can also always leave the table. As kyle baird once told me if you are not having fun you should not be there.
|
Expect table variation. Expect to waste time at the table discussing your build instead of playing the game. Expect others to roll their eyes as you waste their time. Expect the GM to label you as a munchkin whether or not you actually are.This is an excellent point. I hope that players who read these threads recognize that this is something they should talk through with the GM before the game starts. (Of course, that applies to pretty much anything from an errata or FAQ that is a central part of your build.)
In any of the "PFS survival guides", do we have a list of "problematic configurations" or "current controversies" to alert players to potential issues with their characters and flag things that should probably be resolved with the GM in advance?
This. So this. I treat the 4 to 5 hour slot as the 'play' in which all the preperation and rehearsal of combat effectiveness, skill selection, and RP ideas are put on display (hopefully for the enjoyment of everyone at the table). The time away from the table is when you think up your character builds, discuss them with others, and clear it with potential/actual GM's. I don't want the 'play' I'm part of to be interrupted by someone going on and on about how 'effective' their particular 'acting technique' is, nor by squabbles with the 'stage manager' (GM) over what the playwrite's intent is/was (clarification of a game rule when it's very possible to interpret it at least two different ways).
|
|
I like to surpise people with my builds. I do not like the standard cookie cutter build other poeple have pulled off the internet for a bow fighter or whatever. I also do not enjoy classes with like all 13s(I always max some dump others negative stats I think define you more than high stats). I want something that has different type of abilities and acts different. If I get something radically different, awesome for me.
I take pride in when people ask how I get a level 1 spell's DC to 25. I can quote off the top of my head the reasons why. If they doubt it I can pull out the books.
Although if it was about ways to interrept rules. I leave that for the DM. I have had DMs make obviously incorrect rulings. I object once with the rules that support me, and then silently accept the ruling they present. That is their job at the table to intrept rules and not everyone is good at their job. So if you bring this contreversial rule, expect DMs to reject the build. That is their right as a DM if you think you can do better you take his spot. He is not getting paid to do it, and usually it costs them money to DM the game for you. If you really feel like a DM is give you a poor time you can also always leave the table. As kyle baird once told me if you are not having fun you should not be there.
This is a level 1 spell cast as a 1st level PC at DC 25? What the heck is doing that? I can see having almost that much with a kitsune fey sorceress, but not quite 25.
|
So my personal pick would be a cleric of Nethys 1/wizard 2, with the Fate and Magic (divine) domains. Focusing on cleric spells for defence and wizard for offence, you can have a high intelligence and an average wisdom and tons of spell slots. You also buff everyone up when you cast a divine spell on yourself.
You can make yourself less MAD by going cleric of Nethys 2/empyreal sorcerer 1, but be prepared to be a lot less offensively potent. Nice will save though.
|
Ok, so if I'm going to go the Cha-based MT with 2 levels of sorcerer and a level of wood oracle, is there a specific sorcerer bloodline that compliments it the best?
That is TOTALLY up to you and what you want to do with the class. Wood mystery actually doesn't contribute much to anything, so its going to be all about your sorcerer bloodline. My guess is the best would be any that gives a good level 1 ability that doesn't need too much scaling. Arcane for a familiar is nice... or take the Tatooed Sorcerer archetype... Many possibilities.
|
|
Ok, so if I'm going to go the Cha-based MT with 2 levels of sorcerer and a level of wood oracle, is there a specific sorcerer bloodline that compliments it the best?Fey gives bonuses to compulsion spells and fits the Wood theme quite nicely. There are quite a few cleric compulsions.
I'd go with this one as it makes the most in-game sense. You could make them an elf, half-elf, or kitsune (if you have the boon) and have a nicely themed character
MAXIMAL early entry does, but you can rely on SLA to allow early entry on one side only, using normal pre-reqs for the other.
Wood Mystery can grant a 2nd Level SLA at 1st level, regardless of your race.
If you don't like that one (Wood Shape/Warp Wood), you can get 1 level early entry advantage by taking the Tree Shape SLA Revelation at Oracle 3.
(That pretty much just makes Oracle on par with a Cleric for 'normally' qualifying for MT)
|
|
Early entry on the arcane side requires aasimar or tiefling, but early entry on the divine side is best provided by the Fate inquisition. This means that any race can pull off cleric 1/empyreal sorcerer 4/mystic theurge x, or cleric 1/wizard 3/mystic theurge.
Still advantage to the aasimar, but not nearly so bad that we won't see any other races. I've got my eye on a marid cleric/sorcerer right now. There's a neat touch spell I'd like to try. :)
|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I feel like I read this answer somewhere, but there have been so many threads on this topic running in the last couple days that I can't find it.
"Incorruptible" is an alternate racial trait for Aasimars listed in the ARG. It switches out daylight for corruption resistance, which is: antipaladin 2, inquisitor 2, paladin 2.
Arcane or Divine? I take it that it's arcane, reading the FAQ very strictly: "Most spell-like abilities should be considered arcane, unless the spell in question only appears on the standard cleric or druid spell list (such as holy smite) or something about the creature strongly indicates its spell-like abilities should be considered divine (such as a solar's spell-like abilities, as a solar usually directly serves a deity)."
This comes up in other cases too. E.g., one of the Aasimar heritages gets summon nature's ally II for its SLA, and SNA is on druid and ranger–so, arcane.
Thoughts?
|
|
I was under the impression that there was a progression. If a spell is only on divine lists, shouldn't it default to divine?
On the other hand, the problem with that is if a new class comes out that is arcane and has corruption resistance. Suddenly the SLA switches back.
The same issue is with the druid and ranger summon nature's ally. Sure that is two divine lists. However, if it's on two lists, it's more likely to bridge to a third. Cleric and druid exclusives, on the other hand, are more likely to stay so.
The progression is for determining spell level (although it's not explained spelling out that fact).
There is a separate ruling (not in the rules, only the FAQ) that lays out how you determine arcane/divine,
which amounts to: default is arcane, sorc/wiz+cleric/druid list = arcane, only cleric/druid = divine.
But then there is a amorpheous allowance for classing it as divine when "clearly appropriate" or something.
Whether being solely on (non-cleric/druid) divine lists qualifies for that isn't clear.
I think they should get that guideline up to snuff to cover all the classes they publish.
They have ruled that spells on the spelllist of a class by deign of archetype or class option, e.g. bloodline, do not count, only the base spell lists. i would think that anti-paladins are considered a class, or alt-class, and not an archetype for that purpose.
Spell-Like Abilities: How do I know whether a spell-like ability is arcane or divine?
Most spell-like abilities should be considered arcane, unless the spell in question only appears on the standard cleric or druid spell list (such as holy smite) or something about the creature strongly indicates its spell-like abilities should be considered divine (such as a solar's spell-like abilities, as a solar usually directly serves a deity).
("Standard spell list" meaning "not altered in some way by an archetype, prestige class, racial ability, and so on.")
If it's only on divine casters' lists, it's clearly a divine spell.
Well, I would say so, but it's not that clear. The RAW of the FAQ actually only references "something about the creature" giving a strong indication of divine source being able to over-ride that, NOT something about the spell.
SNA is on the druid spell list so it's divine.
So by the RAW of the FAQ, the SNA spells that are also on the Ranger list would be arcane since they are also on the Ranger list. Dumb, yes. But recognizing dumbness if the first step to fixing dumbness.
The FAQ only considers factors of the creature (in a totally nebulous way without guidelines) as enabling Divine SLA categorization outside of purely Cleric/Druid spells. The guideline strongly needs to be written to consider ALL Paizo classes, if not at least giving some more hints re: factors of creatures which could change things.
|
|
I was under the impression that there was a progression. If a spell is only on divine lists, shouldn't it default to divine?
On the other hand, the problem with that is if a new class comes out that is arcane and has corruption resistance. Suddenly the SLA switches back.
The same issue is with the druid and ranger summon nature's ally. Sure that is two divine lists. However, if it's on two lists, it's more likely to bridge to a third. Cleric and druid exclusives, on the other hand, are more likely to stay so.
Yeah, so at first I thought it would follow a progression like for determining spell level: Wizard/Sorcerer, Cleric, Druid, and so on.
But (i) the FAQ explicitly says that if it's on ANY list that's not Cleric or Druid, it counts as arcane. And (ii) I could have sworn I read a post by one of the Paizo staff from some time in the last couple days basically saying, yeah, none of those racial SLAs that look like they should be divine actually are divine. And (iii) the devs have been consistent in saying that SLAs ought to be considered arcane by default (and [iv] look at how high the bar is in the FAQ for switching to arcane! – a solar, "as a solar usually directly serves a deity").
So I think that these cases are probably meant to be considered arcane, but I can't find that post I thought I'd read, and it might have been a non-Paizo poster ...
|
|
And here is the exchange I was thinking of. Unfortunately it doesn't really answer the question of summon nature's ally or corruption resistance–the exchange is focused on the question of whether Aasimars' racial SLAs are automatically divine because of Aasimar's divine-ish natures. Answer: they aren't automatically divine.
But they could still be divine in the SNA or CR cases. Next FAQ: a clearer explanation of the arcane / divine determination! A priority list would probably be the easiest.
(For the record, I want to note that Rogue Eidolon brought up the SNA question just below in the link provided. His post is what put the problem on my mind, but I couldn't find the exchange when I looked, hence the duplicate here.)
I agree that determining arcane/divine using the same priority list as used for spell level would probably work out best,
both in covering any case that could come up, and in simplicity by not re-inventing the wheel when a very closely related rule exists.
Even though both rules themselves are fairly simple, it's confusing to have them both in effect,
especially when they result in conflicting results, i.e. "an Arcane SLA of a 4th level Inquisitor Spell!"
By the "RAW" of the current FAQ, a Cure Light Wounds SLA defaults to Arcane because it is also a Bard spell.
By the priority list, it would be a Cleric spell. Maybe I'm nuts, but Divine sounds more reasonable there.
The priority list does need to be updated to include the newer classes.
The CRB itself would not be Errata'd to mention non-CRB classes, but it could be put into the FAQ,
and conveniently located right next to the very related issue of determining arcane/divine.
(if they end up using the same rule, it makes it even simpler, the FAQ just has to explain that arcane/divine typing is determined the same way, and update the list for non-Core spell lists)
|
|
By the "RAW" of the current FAQ, a Cure Light Wounds SLA defaults to Arcane because it is also a Bard spell.
By the priority list, it would be a Cleric spell. Maybe I'm nuts, but Divine sounds more reasonable there.
Yep. Bless weapon (paladin only) would also be an arcane SLA.
The priority list does need to be updated to include the newer classes.
The CRB itself would not be Errata'd to mention non-CRB classes, but it could be put into the FAQ, and conveniently located right next to the very related issue of determining arcane/divine.
(if they end up using the same rule, it makes it even simpler, the FAQ just has to explain that arcane/divine typing is determined the same way, and update the list for non-Core spell lists)
Yep. That would be easiest.
Yeah, the discrete issue of arcane/divine typing was itself missing from the CRB where it logically should at least be present alongside the spell list priority list, just because the relation of SLAs to spells was not given first class treatment. The arcane/divine typing really only exists as a distinct issue due to the non-comprehensive approach there. When dealing with it comprehensively (as FAQs have aimed to do recently) there really is no need to separate the issues: SLAs ARE spells, and if they are on multiple lists, you use the priority list to determine which spell list they are on. That itself tells you the arcane/divine type (based on class) and the spell level, in one go. Why make it more complicated than that?
Since this didn't really change from 3.5 RAW, I will quote Skip Williams:
Sometimes a creature's description will specify a kind of caster for the creature's spell-like abilities. If this is so, use the appropriate level for the spell-like ability.
SLAs with specific class reference would also match the arcane/divine type of that class.
Re: the issue of new classes with new spell lists disrupting things, I think the solution is for new classes to be placed AFTER all pre-existing classes of the same casting tier (full caster, 3/4, 1/2).
Although I can't really say how that will hold up whenever they get around to doing Psychic Magic.
But I don't see how it would be so horrible if some amount of SLAs end up being 'Psychic' SLAs,
Paizo has already said that existing monsters themselves are intended to have 'Psychic' connotations,
even if the system doesn't have any detailing at this point...
Try the Empyreal Sorc/Sohei Monk build (entering EK at lvl 3), it would be nice to get playtest response on that one...
|
|
Am I incorrect in thinking that bloodline and mystery bonus spells would still be acquired?
I believe you are incorrect. Both bloodline and oracle mystery spells are granted by advancing a class feature, which will never improve over time.
Compare that to specialized wizard bonus spell slots and cleric domain slots, which are granted as part of their level 1 class feature and progress based on your spellcasting level and not class level.
So, oracles and sorceres never get their bonus spells (past level 2 if you are going arcane 1/divine 2) while clerics and wizards DO get the bonus slots.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Am I incorrect in thinking that bloodline and mystery bonus spells would still be acquired?
I could be wrong, but it looks to me like "Spells" and "Bloodline"/"Mystery" are two separate class features, and the bonus spells you refer to are in one while the PrC advances the other.
But that's just my first thought. I'll look more into it later (unless someone else provides the answer first).