Knee-jerk reactions from the Advanced Class Guide


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

201 to 250 of 905 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

I'm guessing it's because oracles are popular and with that feat they dont need to buy cloaks of protection


Maybe they don't like the idea of giving some of the Paladin's most iconic class features to every divine caster.


multiple people keep talking about using SLA's to qualify for the divine feat to get CHA as bonus to saves but that won't work in most cases. Aasimar for example get daylight. A cleric spell, yes, but also a wizard/sorcerer spell. That means that it defaults to a wizard/sorcerer. It's not a divine spell in this case so it's not a SLA that can be used to qualify for the feat. See the FAQ about it below

How do I know whether a spell-like ability is arcane or divine?

The universal monster rules for spell-like abilities states: "Some spell-like abilities duplicate spells that work differently when cast by characters of different classes. A monster's spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions. If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/wizard spell, then default to cleric, druid, bard, paladin, and ranger, in that order."

The same rule should apply for all creatures with spell-like abilities, including PC races: the creature's spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions. If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/wizard spell, then default to cleric, druid, bard, paladin, and ranger, in that order. Use the spell type (arcane or divine) of that class to determine whether the spell-like ability is arcane or divine.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lemmy wrote:
Maybe they don't like the idea of giving some of the Paladin's most iconic class features to every divine caster.

then eldrich heritage would also be banned.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Lemmy wrote:
Maybe they don't like the idea of giving some of the Paladin's most iconic class features to every divine caster.

Then why print it?

Shadow Lodge

I agree. I think the best solution would be to specify in PFS that it requires the ability to prepare Divine Spells, (or actually just errata it).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
Maybe they don't like the idea of giving some of the Paladin's most iconic class features to every divine caster.
Then why print it?

I don't think it was the PFS people who printed that feat...


Bob of Westgate wrote:

multiple people keep talking about using SLA's to qualify for the divine feat to get CHA as bonus to saves but that won't work in most cases. Aasimar for example get daylight. A cleric spell, yes, but also a wizard/sorcerer spell. That means that it defaults to a wizard/sorcerer. It's not a divine spell in this case so it's not a SLA that can be used to qualify for the feat. See the FAQ about it below

How do I know whether a spell-like ability is arcane or divine?

The universal monster rules for spell-like abilities states: "Some spell-like abilities duplicate spells that work differently when cast by characters of different classes. A monster's spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions. If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/wizard spell, then default to cleric, druid, bard, paladin, and ranger, in that order."

The same rule should apply for all creatures with spell-like abilities, including PC races: the creature's spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions. If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/wizard spell, then default to cleric, druid, bard, paladin, and ranger, in that order. Use the spell type (arcane or divine) of that class to determine whether the spell-like ability is arcane or divine.

Daylight doesnt work anyway as it is level 3. You either use a variant with a level 2 divine spell such as the one with summon natures ally II or you pick a domain or mystery revelation which grants one.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can see most people have brought up the same things I've been looking over in the book. There is some good, some bad and some "What were they thinking?" throughout the book.

I have a friend who is already looking at retraining out paladin levels for that cha to saves feat using the SLA stuff. It really does seem like a no brainer for almost any oracle.

I can see they are setting some things up for future because some stuff does nothing at the moment but is likely for stuff down the line.

Example:
Hunter levels count as druid/ranger but only for animal companion feats but all the feats to effect animal companions generally just require the animal companion class feature

There is one feat I can see that will get some use for animal companion classes:

Feat details:

Spirit’s Gift
Requires: Animal companion or familiar class feature (considering other stuff specifically mentions the Mount class feature I wonder if Samurai and Cavaliers qualify)
At the start of the day, you can choose to commune with a single shaman spirit. For the next 24 hours, that shaman spirit augments your animal companion or familiar, as its spirit animal ability.

Some options available are: Fast healing 1, immunity to fire (though weak to cold), dr 5/adamantine and more

Those are some pretty strong options that you can switch each day giving your animal companion a nice boost


DM Beckett wrote:
I agree. I think the best solution would be to specify in PFS that it requires the ability to prepare Divine Spells, (or actually just errata it).

I dunno. It's not actually balanced if you play it straight and get it as a 9 level divine caster, no dips or SLAs, either.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:
Trying to build a 9th-level brawler and it is increasingly reminding me of the rogue, in that it's supposed to be a combat class, but it seems to be failing to do anything better than other combat classes out there.

That's unfortunate, I had high hopes for the class. Still, I'm not sure if the appeal of the Brawler lies in it's ability to outshine any particular class at any one thing, but the ability to do a lot more.

I mean, there are just a ton of feats that are only useful in certain circumstances. The Brawler is basically a chance to feel like a badass deflecting arrows, blinding people with dirty trick, using Enforcer to intimidate people, mulching casters with Grapple and Step Up, shoving people off cliffs, boost a nearby ally's AC, do all sorts of silly stuff with styles... All on the same character, when the moment arises.

Basically, it's a not a class that will look awesome during the build. It's the actual play where it will (hopefully) shine.


Captain Morgan wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Trying to build a 9th-level brawler and it is increasingly reminding me of the rogue, in that it's supposed to be a combat class, but it seems to be failing to do anything better than other combat classes out there.

That's unfortunate, I had high hopes for the class. Still, I'm not sure if the appeal of the Brawler lies in it's ability to outshine any particular class at any one thing, but the ability to do a lot more.

I mean, there are just a ton of feats that are only useful in certain circumstances. The Brawler is basically a chance to feel like a badass deflecting arrows, blinding people with dirty trick, using Enforcer to intimidate people, mulching casters with Grapple and Step Up, shoving people off cliffs, boost a nearby ally's AC, do all sorts of silly stuff with styles... All on the same character, when the moment arises.

Basically, it's a not a class that will look awesome during the build. It's the actual play where it will (hopefully) shine.

That's what I would wish for as well, and I think I'd have to observe or play one - or at least build one - to find out if it succeeds at that. I certainly haven't figured it out from looking at the class; it doesn't seem to lend itself to eyeballing.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I am eagerly awaiting a chance to eye ball it, though.


Pathfinder Pawns, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Here's the brawler I was working on. Mind you, it was my first one, and I was going more for concept than DPR optimization. So it may not be an accurate reflection of the class' true strengths.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:
Here's the brawler I was working on. Mind you, it was my first one, and I was going more for concept than DPR optimization. So it may not be an accurate reflection of the class' true strengths.

Thanks for posting. It's good to see what the final product looks like.

That said, I don't feel like you approached this right. (No offense meant.) You invested your feats really really heavy into combat maneuvers, which won't necessarily always have a use. That's the sort of stuff I would reserve martial flexibility for. There are all sorts of generic good to have feats, like Power Attack (which you did pick.) Heck, I would probably favor modest stuff like Dodge over entire combat maneuver lines. At most, I would invest in one or two feats in the line so I can easily use Martial Flexibility to hit the top end ones when I need it.

Honestly, I feel like there should be a listing of cool stuff you can do with Martial Flexibility but that probably deserves its own thread.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Pawns, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I was thinking that myself already. He would have much more mileage out of Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Power Attack, and Weapon Focus, since they open up numerous feat chain possibilities with his Martial Flexibility. (Getting Spring Attack only when needed would be pretty awesome, or being able to access all of the improved/greater combat maneuver feats, for example.)


For those of you that have the pdf already, why are the specific archetypes, equipment, and feats banned in pfs, banned in pfs?

PFS banned stuff page wrote:


Archetypes: all archetypes on pages 75–133 are legal for play, except forgepriest, hex channeler, musketeer, mutation warrior, packmaster, primal companion hunter, primalist, spirit summoner, and steel hound.

Equipment: all equipment and magic items on pages 202–237 are legal for play, except dust knuckles, false face, rod of abrupt hexes, and rod of voracious hexes

Feats: all feats on pages 137–159 are legal for play, except Animal Soul, Divine Protection, Evolved Companion, and Spirited Gift.

Orders: The Order of the Beast is not legal for play.


I'm guessing the Musketeer is actually the picaroon (that's the gunslinger-swash archetype, right?).


Yeah, it'd be a weird archetype for the gunslinger considering their is already the musket master.

Silver Crusade

Nope, Musketeer is its own archetype, for the Swashbuckler.


Eldritch Scrapper, as far as I can tell you won't be doing any scrapping with this archetype. Not calling it useless just misleading, and gaining arcane strike through martial flexibility just adds to the absurdity of it all! Are they really expecting to use melee attacks with your joke of a BAB. This should have been a bloodrager or magus archetype as far as I concerned.


Wolfgang Rolf wrote:
Eldritch Scrapper, as far as I can tell you won't be doing any scrapping with this archetype. Not calling it useless just misleading, and gaining arcane strike through martial flexibility just adds to the absurdity of it all! Are they really expecting to use melee attacks with your joke of a BAB. This should have been a bloodrager or magus archetype as far as I concerned.

I heard someone mention that is a specific archetype to support people going into dragon disciple.


Torbyne wrote:
Wolfgang Rolf wrote:
Eldritch Scrapper, as far as I can tell you won't be doing any scrapping with this archetype. Not calling it useless just misleading, and gaining arcane strike through martial flexibility just adds to the absurdity of it all! Are they really expecting to use melee attacks with your joke of a BAB. This should have been a bloodrager or magus archetype as far as I concerned.
I heard someone mention that is a specific archetype to support people going into dragon disciple.

If thats really true, then that is by far the most niche archetype ever.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Pawns, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Mirror Polish, ACG p. 188:

Mirror Polish
School transmutation; Level sorcerer/wizard 1, witch 1
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (a soft cloth)
Range touch
Target one metal item of up to 1 sq. ft.
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw yes (object); Spell Resistance yes (object)

You polish a metal item until it is reflective enough to be
used as a mirror. This does not prevent the item from later
damage or corrosion that would ruin the mirrored surface.
The spell can be cast only on a metal item with a fairly
smooth and contiguous surface, such as a breastplate, a
helm, a shield, or a sword, but not a mace, chainmail, or
scale mail.

Just...why???


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

Just...why???

Just because I'm crawling through an orc infested hell hole, that doesn't mean I don't want to look my best.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wolfgang Rolf wrote:
Torbyne wrote:
Wolfgang Rolf wrote:
Eldritch Scrapper, as far as I can tell you won't be doing any scrapping with this archetype. Not calling it useless just misleading, and gaining arcane strike through martial flexibility just adds to the absurdity of it all! Are they really expecting to use melee attacks with your joke of a BAB. This should have been a bloodrager or magus archetype as far as I concerned.
I heard someone mention that is a specific archetype to support people going into dragon disciple.
If thats really true, then that is by far the most niche archetype ever.

Yeah that was my impression when I was told. I still don't have the book but from the spoilers I read, here's my knee jerk reaction: Why play a Sorcerer?

Arcanists can spontaneously cast and has a day to day versatility the Sorcerer will never achieve. They also get vastly more tricks than a Sorcerer does with bloodlines. It also seems most of the Sorcerer's stuff can be gained with either the Eldritch Heritage feat line or the new bloodline amulets. Its stuff is out there for anyone to take to a level beyond even the Fighter has endured.

They can't get a decent bloodline or archetype that significantly adds new and powerful options as a spellcaster. Compare that to the Wizard who in this book alone can play with Arcanist's exploits, the Shaman's stuff, or flat out go cast from completely different spell lists. You'd think that they'd get a bloodline/archetype to play with Exploits like the Wizard but no, instead you get a option to hit things....that works well with a 1/2 BAB class. Any archetype requires multiclassing to work should be questionable.

Right now it seems the only reason to play a Sorc is it gets +1 spell slots max over a specialist Wizard. (Other than RPing of course). That's sad.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

<sarcasm> Well, it's good to see that Paizo finally did something about the problem of spellcasters being so massively underpowered compared to martial characters.</sarcasm>


There are some very interesting action economy feats I noticed that haven't been mentioned.

First: an Improved Spell Sharing (Teamwork Feat) that doesn't suck. Cast spells when you and companion are adjacent and split duration, no longer expires when animal companion moves away. Animal Companion Inquisitors rejoice.

Bloodied Arcane Strike: Arcane Strike is always on while bloodraging, don't have to spend swift actions on it. I wonder if this would apply to an Eldritch Scion while they are focusing, I dont think so, but its a question. I know they would have to dip bloodrager for the class feature, but think the mystic focus only counts for bloodline power language precludes it.


JoeJ wrote:

<sarcasm> Well, it's good to see that Paizo finally did something about the problem of spellcasters being so massively underpowered compared to martial characters.</sarcasm>

ROFLMAO HAHAHA


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Maps Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

Just...why???

Unanticipated medusa.


Oh, and the pearls of power equivalent for spontaneous casters is a pretty big deal too and the cheaper page of spell knowledge that has to be wielded.


Calth wrote:
Oh, and the pearls of power equivalent for spontaneous casters is a pretty big deal too and the cheaper page of spell knowledge that has to be wielded.

How does one 'wield' a page of spell knowledge? Per the Defending Weapon FAQ in order to 'wield' the weapon, you must attack with it.

So how do you attack with a Page of Spell Knowledge? Or is the cheaper version limited to only attack spells?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JoeJ wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

Just...why???

Just because I'm crawling through an orc infested hell hole, that doesn't mean I don't want to look my best.

Prestidigitation can clean all of you, not just your armor and sword. Kind of defeats the purpose if you went through that Orc Hell Hole and your armor is spotlessly clean, but your hair is matted in blood, you've got filth on your face and you smell worse than a sewer.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:
JoeJ wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

Just...why???

Just because I'm crawling through an orc infested hell hole, that doesn't mean I don't want to look my best.

Prestidigitation can clean all of you, not just your armor and sword. Kind of defeats the purpose if you went through that Orc Hell Hole and your armor is spotlessly clean, but your hair is matted in blood, you've got filth on your face and you smell worse than a sewer.

They're not mutually exclusive. I'll use Prestidigitation to clean up, and then Mirror Polish to put that extra little touch on my armor and shield.


JoeJ wrote:
Tels wrote:
JoeJ wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

Just...why???

Just because I'm crawling through an orc infested hell hole, that doesn't mean I don't want to look my best.

Prestidigitation can clean all of you, not just your armor and sword. Kind of defeats the purpose if you went through that Orc Hell Hole and your armor is spotlessly clean, but your hair is matted in blood, you've got filth on your face and you smell worse than a sewer.

They're not mutually exclusive. I'll use Prestidigitation to clean up, and then Mirror Polish to put that extra little touch on my armor and shield.

Waste of a spell slot.


Joe M. wrote:

Bardiche with enlarge person, Abnormal Reach, longarm, Lunge.

= 173 squares threatened on your turn
= 126 squares threatened when not your turn

Combine this with the fantastically fun fortuitous weapon property, courtesy of the ACG ...

*bwahahahahahaha!*

Calculations:

05 ft. large space
10 ft. large reach
10 ft. large reach weapon
05 ft. Abnormal Reach
05 ft. longarm
05 ft. Lunge
-----------------------
Covered: 40 ft. radius
Threatened: that minus 15 ft. radius (your own space plus large reach weapon "donut hole")

Reaching back to high school geometry, that's going to be:
40 x 40 x 3.14 covered
- 15 x 15 x 3.14 not threatened
---------------------------
4,317.5 square feet threatened

4,317.5 square feet
÷ 25 square feet (= 5x5) to approximate grid
---------------------------
= 173 squares threatened on your turn (approximately, since the grid probably does a few things to this around the edges)

Since Lunge disappears when your turn ends, that drops us down to [...]
= 126 squares threatened when not your turn (approximately, since the grid probably does a few things to this around the edges)


Better calculations:

Made a spreadsheet:
Column: A2=40, A3=35, ..., A9=5, A10=0, A11=5, ..., A18=40
Row: B1=40, C1=35, ..., I1=5, J1=0, K1=5, ..., R1=40
Field: B2=5*INT(IF($A2<B$1,INT($A2/2)+B$1,$A2+INT(B$1/2))/5)
copy B2 down to B18 and over to R18

Copy A1:R18 to T1:AK18
Field: U2=IF(B2>$T$20,0,IF(B2<$T$21,0,1))
copy U2 down to U18 and over to AK18
T20=40, U20=Max Reach
T21=15, U21=Min Reach
T22=SUM(U2:AK18), U22=Squares

Copy A1:R18 to AM1:BD18
Field: AN2=IF(B2>$AM$20,0,IF(B2<$AM$21,0,1))
copy AN2 down to AN18 and over to BD18
AM20=35, AN20=Max Reach
AM21=15, AN21=Min Reach
AM22=SUM(U2:AK18), AN22=Squares


Results:
40 Max reach . . 35 Max reach
15 Min Reach . . 15 Min Reach
184 Squares . . 140 Squares

/cevah


Steve Geddes wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

Just...why???

Unanticipated medusa.

I hope the caster had it on a scroll and not memorized.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:
Waste of a spell slot.

Looking sharp is never a waste.


Tels wrote:
Calth wrote:
Oh, and the pearls of power equivalent for spontaneous casters is a pretty big deal too and the cheaper page of spell knowledge that has to be wielded.

How does one 'wield' a page of spell knowledge? Per the Defending Weapon FAQ in order to 'wield' the weapon, you must attack with it.

So how do you attack with a Page of Spell Knowledge? Or is the cheaper version limited to only attack spells?

The item has to be held to be used not just owned. Wielded was the them used. Costs half as much as a page of spell knowledge cause it is effectively slotted not slot less.


DrDeth wrote:
Doomed Hero wrote:
All those previously awful paladin archetypes that lose Divine Favor are suddenly a lot more appealing with the Divine Protection feat...
True.

I'm sorry if I am missing something but when did Paladins get Domains, Blessings, or Mysteries?

The way I read it you have to have 2nd lvl divine spell(s) or SLA(s) and one of those three things.

Am I wrong about that?


A paladin would have to dip another divine class to qualify for the feat.

Liberty's Edge

Calth wrote:
A paladin would have to dip another divine class to qualify for the feat.

Or take an Archetype. There's one that grants a Domain and another that grants Blessings (though the latter does sacrifice spell casting...though that's fixable with an SLA).


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Calth wrote:
A paladin would have to dip another divine class to qualify for the feat.
Or take an Archetype. There's one that grants a Domain and another that grants Blessings (though the latter does sacrifice spell casting...though that's fixable with an SLA).

The only combination of archetypes that lose divine grace and gain back the requirement is Sacred Servant and Sword of Valor, all others have archetype conflicts. And who would ever pick up Sword of Valor.

The Exchange

Ravingdork wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

Just...why???

To reflect gaze attacks back at opponents, forcing them to fight blind too?

To create a large enough reflective surface for light signalling across distance?

To create a surface to assist in preparing a disguise for yourself, since no one else is trained in the art of disguise?

To rapidly polish up an item so that guards think your mate is more noble or ranks higher than he is to assist in bluffs? ( this one is possible when charm is to obvious to be used in public and bluff or disguise is neede instead)

To create a mirrored lense telescope like Hubble?

To make light effects blinding against your mates opponent? (Daylight spell above your friend is now reflecting into your opponents eyes).

To fool someone into thinking its a magic item (residual magic aura and shiny object equals phat loots)

They could be reasons why.


Wrath wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

Just...why???

To reflect gaze attacks back at opponents, forcing them to fight blind too?

To create a large enough reflective surface for light signalling across distance?

To create a surface to assist in preparing a disguise for yourself, since no one else is trained in the art of disguise?

To rapidly polish up an item so that guards think your mate is more noble or ranks higher than he is to assist in bluffs? ( this one is possible when charm is to obvious to be used in public and bluff or disguise is neede instead)

To create a mirrored lense telescope like Hubble?

To make light effects blinding against your mates opponent? (Daylight spell above your friend is now reflecting into your opponents eyes).

To fool someone into thinking its a magic item (residual magic aura and shiny object equals phat loots)

They could be reasons why.

All of those are cool and good effects... for a 0-level spell. Not a 1st level spell.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

Just...why???

Because...shiny?

Or perhaps the answer will become clear upon reflection. ;-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

Just...why???

So you can use your shield and weapon while fighting a gaze-attack creature while still trying to reflect its gaze, rather than having to hold a mirror in one hand?

Grand Lodge

Zhayne wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

Just...why???

So you can use your shield and weapon while fighting a gaze-attack creature while still trying to reflect its gaze, rather than having to hold a mirror in one hand?

Yeah, seems that way. This seems entirely reasonable for a level 1 spell. Not sure why RD thought it was "just...why???" Hardly anyone will ever prepare this, but it won't hurt to have a scroll of it or spont it up with a class ability.

The odd aspect of this spell is that it implies that a breastplate is 1 square foot.


I'd probably see that spell as closer to a cantrip than a 1st level question, but the real question is why the polish armor-spell is not available for paladins? ;)


Insain Dragoon wrote:
Cerberus Seven wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Trying to build a 9th-level brawler and it is increasingly reminding me of the rogue, in that it's supposed to be a combat class, but it seems to be failing to do anything better than other combat classes out there.

Speaking of which, I started reading the 'Designing your own class' area of the ACG. Stumbled across this fun little tidbit:

Skills wrote:
In terms of skill points, most classes get only 2 per level (plus the character’s Intelligence modifier). A few classes get 4 or even 6, but this is a bonus that should be kept in mind when designing other elements of the class. Only the rogue gets 8 per level, and you should have a very good reason for giving a class a similar number (as this infringes on the rogue’s role as the most skilled class).

C'mon Paizo, the rogue hasn't been the most skilled of the base classes since, what, 2007? Or did you guys forget about Bardic Knowledge, Lore Master, Versatile Performance, and Jack of All Trades all in the same CRB package?

Wait... Don't most classes get 4 skill points per level? Even then a lot of the ones that are stuck with 2+ have reason to stack int.

lemme tally (not using alt classes or advanced classes)

-2+
8 (3 of which use int as a casting stat)
-4+
7
-6+
3
-8+
1

So in reality the majority of classes have more than 2+ skill points per level even though 2+ is the largest category. 2 of the 2+ classes actually end up with more skill points than Rogues..... and 1 of them (the Magus) ends up with more like 5ish skill points per level.

In the 2+ category Paladins, Fighters, Summoners, and Sorcerors are the only ones who don't have class reasons to bump int for more skill points. Of those Paladins and Fighters are the only ones who don't have full casting or highly mutable class features to make up for their lack of skill points.

TL;DR 2+ skill points per level is not a good balance point for classes.

Funny thing is also, Sorcerers, Summoners, Magi, Wizards, and Clerics don't even need a huge amount of skill because they have spells to make up for their dificiency in skills (Don't have Diplomacy? Charm Person!).

201 to 250 of 905 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Knee-jerk reactions from the Advanced Class Guide All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.