Venture-Agent, New Zealand—Auckland
|
I'm in the process of creating my first PC for the Society and trying to find a trait that would indicate that the PC is 'fae-touched', probably by having fae somewhere in her ancestory.
Does anyone know of a trait that does that, that is legal? Or does it require a feat?
Thanks.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Hamburg
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can also take the "Magical Knack" trait.
Magical Knack: You were raised, either wholly or in part, by a magical creature, either after it found you abandoned in the woods or because your parents often left you in the care of a magical minion. This constant exposure to magic has made its mysteries easy for you to understand, even when you turn your mind to other devotions and tasks. Pick a class when you gain this trait—your caster level in that class gains a +2 trait bonus as long as this bonus doesn't raise your caster level above your current Hit Dice.
Of course, this trait is rather useless if you don't want to take any levels in spellcasting classes. You could, however, dip into a level of Sorcerer with the Fey bloodline, as The Fox already suggested.
The trait is also useless if you don't plan to multiclass, so just a dip into Sorcerer is a good idea (or level up your Sorcerer class as normal and dip into 2 levels of other classes).If you really want, you can combine all three options, taking both the "Magical Knack" trait and the "Fey Foundling" feat, then dipping into one level of Fey Sorcerer (you can dip into that level of Sorcerer either at first level or any time later).
Magical Knack isn't useless if you don't multiclass - Rangers and Paladins don't start progressing Caster Level until they gain spells. Magical Knack bumps that up to character level-1 instead of -3, and will help for activating scrolls earlier than normal, without UMD. (don't forget many Ranger spells are on the Druid spell list and PFS-legal scrolls will be considered to be crafted by those classes at the SPell Level and the lowest caster level they can cast them at, not that a Ranger could)
And not sure, but it seems plausible that Magical Knack would also boost the CL of Class-based SLAs.
|
Venture-Agent, New Zealand—Auckland
|
Since I was planning the PC to be a pure fighter, I guess I can always leave it as a personality quirk - a halfling who wonders what it would be like to fly - with her own wings or on a flying creature - especially charging into battle with a 'Xena yell' or a Yodoho .....
|
I'm in the process of creating my first PC for the Society and trying to find a trait that would indicate that the PC is 'fae-touched', probably by having fae somewhere in her ancestory.
Does anyone know of a trait that does that, that is legal? Or does it require a feat?
Thanks.
Chillblight Emissary reflects that you escaped a fey outpost and managed to get DR 1/cold iron from it - it is from People of the North (a book with other useful items)
|
|
1 level of fey blooded sorceror isn't a bad level dip. The no save laughing touch they get at level 1 is pretty powerful, especially in the hands of a fighter who will be within touch range of enemies more often. Plus you could pick up spells like "shield", "true stike", or "expedious retreat" which are pretty sweet for melee types. In fact, I think I just talked myself into a level of sorceror for my gnome paladin.
The arcane failure chance for armor gets in the way of a lot of fighters with a sorcerer dip - but if they were light armor combatants not so bad.
Of course if one only plans to cast spells and scrolls of the following why worry about arcane failure from armor and shields.
0: Flare, Light
1: Feather Fall, Hold Portal, True Strike, Ventriloquism
2: Blindness/deafness, Blur, Knock
|
|
A single level dip in sorcerer with Cha 11 (higher charisma if you want to use scrolls), utility spells (feather fall has no arcane spell failure chance and provides the next best thing to flying—controlled falling), and buffing wands (and a wand of [i]infernal healing[/]), plus a diverse set of skills. All that sounds pretty good to me. But multiclassing is my M.O.
|
|
True Strike might be worth it, just on its own. Not to mention that I don't think arcane spell failure would apply to using a wand of Shield, for instance...
Wands do not apply arcane spell failure of armor - but you have to get the wand out (and many GMs do not allow it taken out as part of a move - some do) use it, and then put it away (dropping it has its own issues) - all for a spell that lasts a minute (in the case of shield).
Still it may well be worth it; having true strike at times can make a big difference and feather fall is a great emergency spell, both of which have no somatic. Picking a good 1st level bloodline can also help -taking the orc bloodline will give humans darkvision, for example).
I have a soon to be plate wearing EK character who is going to specialize in somatic free spells (and pick up still spell at 5th- and has magic lineage trait for a spell I want at original level (See invisibility)
|
True Strike might be worth it, just on its own. Not to mention that I don't think arcane spell failure would apply to using a wand of Shield, for instance...Wands do not apply arcane spell failure of armor - but you have to get the wand out (and many GMs do not allow it taken out as part of a move - some do) use it, and then put it away (dropping it has its own issues) - all for a spell that lasts a minute (in the case of shield).
Still it may well be worth it; having true strike at times can make a big difference and feather fall is a great emergency spell, both of which have no somatic. Picking a good 1st level bloodline can also help -taking the orc bloodline will give humans darkvision, for example).
I have a soon to be plate wearing EK character who is going to specialize in somatic free spells (and pick up still spell at 5th- and has magic lineage trait for a spell I want at original level (See invisibility)
Wands are explicitly called out as being usable from a spring-loaded wrist sheathe, so swift action to get out, standard to use, move to put away, 5' step. After the fight, you can put it back into the wrist sheathe.
Can be worthwhile for a squishier combatant, like a Magus or a lower Dex type in light armor...
|
|
Wands are explicitly called out as being usable from a spring-loaded wrist sheathe, so swift action to get out, standard to use, move to put away, 5' step. After the fight, you can put it back into the wrist sheathe.
However, not everyone has the book it is from and I am finding more and more GMs asking to see the player's source on wrist sheath (and for that matter boon companion) - because lots of people are taking stuff from books but don't own the source.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Correct Victor - though I believe a Focus requirement means it still needs a hand free.
but you have to get the wand out (and many GMs do not allow it taken out as part of a move - some do)
Ahem.. FYI:
Draw or Sheathe a WeaponDrawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat, or putting it away so that you have a free hand, requires a move action. This action also applies to weapon-like objects carried in easy reach, such as wands. ...
If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you may draw a weapon as a free action combined with a regular move.
|
|
Correct Victor - though I believe a Focus requirement means it still needs a hand free.
but you have to get the wand out (and many GMs do not allow it taken out as part of a move - some do)Ahem.. FYI:
LINKDraw or Sheathe a WeaponDrawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat, or putting it away so that you have a free hand, requires a move action. This action also applies to weapon-like objects carried in easy reach, such as wands. ...
If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you may draw a weapon as a free action combined with a regular move.
And that quote is why they object, some GMs do not equate weapon-like with weapon. And wands are a weird subject, since some spells are always weapon-like, some are variably weapon-like, and some are never weapon-like.
A wand of Ray of ... would always be weapon-like, IMO.
A wand of CLW might be weapon-like, but may not.
A wand of Shield or Mage Armor? Not weapon-like, wouldn't ya say?
Oh, and the focus for True Strike is, IIRC, typically a marking made on the weapon you are holding, so just needs to be prepared in advance, especially since foci don't get expended.
|
Oh, and the focus for True Strike is, IIRC,typically a marking made on the weapon you are holding, so just needs to be prepared in advance, especially since foci don't get expended.
School divination; Level sorcerer/wizard 1
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, F (small wooden replica of an archery target)
Range personal
Target you
Duration see text
You gain temporary, intuitive insight into the immediate future during your next attack. Your next single attack roll (if it is made before the end of the next round) gains a +20 insight bonus. Additionally, you are not affected by the miss chance that applies to attackers trying to strike a concealed target.
A majority of GM's will say you will need to pull the replica out of the spell component pouch, therefore you'll need a free hand.
Oh, and the focus for True Strike is, IIRC,typically a marking made on the weapon you are holding, so just needs to be prepared in advance, especially since foci don't get expended.** spoiler omitted **
A majority of GM's will say you will need to pull the replica out of the spell component pouch, therefore you'll need a free hand.
I don't believe that you have to keep the replica in your spell component pouch.
I have had a character that kept three or four hanging off if various pieces of equipment (necklace is a good spot, but on the sheath is another).
|
|
Heh. With the proper materials, I could see that actually being built as the armguard that an archer would wear, and would probably look like a vanity item, until the archet casts True Strike.
Hmmm. Do you need the focus for casting a spell from a spell storing item, or just when cast into the spell storing item?
How about a wand of True Strike? Do you need an additional focus to use such a wand?
So, stone lent to caster, along with wand.
Caster sets stone into orbit.
Caster uses wand to cast True Strike into stone.
Caster grabs stone form orbit, returns to original PC.
Original PC sets stone into orbit.
At some point in the future, PC uses stone to cast True Strike.
So far as I can tell, the focus is only needed when creating the wand, yes?
The focus is needed in the creation of the wand (Core, p 553, Creating Wands, 2nd paragraph).
You would not need the focus when using a cracked purple Ioun stone. The caster would need it when casting the spell into the stone, or if a wand was used, when the wand creator made the wand.
|
|
The focus is needed in the creation of the wand (Core, p 553, Creating Wands, 2nd paragraph).
You would not need the focus when using a cracked purple Ioun stone. The caster would need it when casting the spell into the stone, or if a wand was used, when the wand creator made the wand.
Thanks! Makes me feel better that both my PC has been legal, and the advise I made to one of my players yesaterday is legal.
Although it was fun watching her play with all the new toys, and see what other new toys were available, for her Fighter 4/Magus 1 PC... But I suspect that her PC has now seriously diverged from the PC she was attempting to recreate in PFS...
|
|
Oh, and the focus for True Strike is, IIRC,typically a marking made on the weapon you are holding, so just needs to be prepared in advance, especially since foci don't get expended.** spoiler omitted **
A majority of GM's will say you will need to pull the replica out of the spell component pouch, therefore you'll need a free hand.
Horsefeathers. You can wear it around your neck.
|
|
Horsefeathers. You can wear it around your neck.Oh, and the focus for True Strike is, IIRC,typically a marking made on the weapon you are holding, so just needs to be prepared in advance, especially since foci don't get expended.** spoiler omitted **
A majority of GM's will say you will need to pull the replica out of the spell component pouch, therefore you'll need a free hand.
I could see it as a fetish hanging from the hilt of the weapon, or as a fancy non-magical archer's armguard. A target to protect your arm from the string...
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Actually, there is nothing I can find that says you need a hand free to use material components, or focuses.
Grappling or Pinned: Casting a spell while you have the grappled or pinned condition is difficult and it requires a concentration check (DC 10 + the grappler's CMB + the level of the spell you're casting). Pinned creatures can only cast spells that do no have somatic components.
Somatic (S): A somatic component is a measured and precise movement of the hand. You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component.
Material (M): A material component consists of one or more physical substances or objects that are annihilated by the spell energies in the casting process. Unless a cost is given for a material component, the cost is negligible. Don't bother to keep track of material components with negligible cost. Assume you have all you need as long as you have your spell component pouch.
Focus (F): A focus component is a prop of some sort. Unlike a material component, a focus is not consumed when the spell is cast and can be reused. As with material components, the cost for a focus is negligible unless a price is given. Assume that focus components of negligible cost are in your spell component pouch.
As far as I can tell, it can even just hang out in your spell pouch.
Am I missing a rule / clarification?