What are the cool new PFS legal stuff?

[Chess Pwn]

So three new books went legal last night for PFS. Of the named stuff I can find most of it online, but stuff where it says, "all feats" or "all rage powers" doesn't help me to know how exciting that stuff is.

So what are the cool things that you're excited are legal?
First off, I'm glad the Scar seeker is legal, it was one of the PrC I was interested in.

[Val'bryn2]

Personally, I'm looking forward to making a 9-Tailed Heir kitsune, I've been rather fond of that race. Blood of the Beast was a good book, in general.

[BigNorseWolf]

Very interested in making a courser swashbuckler. I like the movement abilities, but opportune parry and riposte loss HURTS....

[Terminalmancer]

From Blood of the Beast, Kitsune characters were the biggest winners. They got a bunch of really good options. They miss out on the "free fox form feat at level 1" racial trait, but they basically got access to everything else. That includes alternate racial ability scores (+int!) and access to the Skilled racial trait, which as someone who loves skills I probably overvalue. The new Kitsune favored class bonus (1/6 of a tail feat... valid for ANY class) is also available.

I love the new Nagaji cavalier archetype and I'm working on fleshing out my bundle of stats and ideas for a character now. You get to ride around on a snake and it is awesome.

The Warp psychic discipline made it in, and that looks like it has the potential to be pretty cool.

If you happen to have a grippli boon, the Fiend-Keeper archetype for the Medium is really flavorful. I really like it a lot.

There's a Vanara ranger archetype that I really wish was available to non-Vanaras, because it's really pathfinder-appropriate, but if you've got a Vanara you could still take advantage of it. There's also two new options for Advanced Weapon Training that are kind of okay, including one that reduces the penalties for two-weapon fighting with one-handed weapons. That seems pretty okay.

Paths of the Righteous is a weird book in that the power level of a lot of the stuff in there is really high, so a lot of the stuff I really liked was either withheld or banned. (From the grumbling, that seems to be true for more people than just me.) Still, there's some good stuff in there that was sanctioned. Favored Prestige Class is something to be aware of in general, and the Rose Warden might be worth a look too.

[William Ronald]

I hope that we will see some adventures in Vudra and that the vanara can be opened up as a new race

[Ascalaphus]

Just speculating, but I wouldn't be totally surprised if vanara or ratfolk end up as the next race boon. Either one would be awesome really.

[Alex Mack]

New Fighter advanced Weapon training from Races of the beast includes Oversized two weapon Fighting.

The ravener hunter Inquisitor Archetype replaces Domain with 2!!! Oracle Mysteries. While these still work of Charisma there's plenty that don't. I really like wood for archer Inquisitors or the option of going with Life for a single class Oradin.

I love the rage powers from Villain Codex (a dagger pounce power and heavy support for throwing builds) and Planes of Power also has some fairly powerful Rage powers like a once per day Whirlwind attack.

A lot of the stuff in Paths of the Righteous has serious balance issues and was held back for reasons.

Oh and the feybook has an Obedience that grants +4 to all INT based skill checks. Way too good imo especially for Empiricists.

[UndeadMitch]

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

Just speculating, but I wouldn't be totally surprised if vanara or ratfolk end up as the next race boon. Either one would be awesome really.

I'm really hoping that Ratfolk is the next seasonal boon. I really enjoyed playing my ratfolk from GM'ing at Gencon a couple of years ago. I really want to make another.

[Woran]

Mitch Mutrux wrote:

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

Just speculating, but I wouldn't be totally surprised if vanara or ratfolk end up as the next race boon. Either one would be awesome really.

I'm really hoping that Ratfolk is the next seasonal boon. I really enjoyed playing my ratfolk from GM'ing at Gencon a couple of years ago. I really want to make another.

I love ratfolk so much! I have so many fun ideas in my head. I would love it if it becomes the next boon.

[Sebastian Hirsch]

Tineke Bolleman wrote:

Mitch Mutrux wrote:

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

Just speculating, but I wouldn't be totally surprised if vanara or ratfolk end up as the next race boon. Either one would be awesome really.

I'm really hoping that Ratfolk is the next seasonal boon. I really enjoyed playing my ratfolk from GM'ing at Gencon a couple of years ago. I really want to make another.

I love ratfolk so much! I have so many fun ideas in my head. I would love it if it becomes the next boon.

What a shocker Tineke likes rats^^ ;P

To be honest, Ratfolk should be fine, but I expect a lot of sneak attack focused builds ... which just means that I have to reduce the rat population to one per party ^^

[andreww]

The Ravener Inquisitor archetype is legal (it doesn't have a race restriction asterix) and it opens up loads of interesting options for inquisitors.

[Hmm]

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

Just speculating, but I wouldn't be totally surprised if vanara or ratfolk end up as the next race boon. Either one would be awesome really.

I am crossing my fingers that this is so!

Hmm

[Beckman]

I was given a Pathfinder Companion subscription as a gift, which was a good idea, since I play PFS avidly.

However, given the fact that anything remotely interesting in the Paths of the Righteous book was withheld to be a boon, I am having it disabled and will evaluate the books as they are put onto the Additional Resources page.

Basically 50% of that book is banned. Prestigious Spellcaster, to me, was the lowest blow, since they left the prerequisite feat which is basically like worse Toughness / Skill focus. (Suffice it to say I do believe that Prestigious Spellcaster is a balanced feat, but whether it is or isn't is outside the scope of what I'm trying to say).

I bought this book to play it in PFS, and options are being withheld on a whim. Taking pieces of the product away, then doling them back out as a reward for playing certain chronicles doesn't engender positive feelings.

I am of the opinion that the large majority of options which appear in PF content should be legal - the only reason for not doing so being item creation, they're an evil option, too campaign specific, or too laborious to run at a PFS table (Master Summoner), etc. But banning things because of balance shows poor (or no) playtesting.

Not sure what went on with that book, but I'm sorry that it was printed in such a way that you could buy it, then not be able to use anything that you wanted to.

[Kerney]

Beckman wrote:

I am of the opinion that the large majority of options which appear in PF content should be legal - the only reason for not doing so being item creation, they're an evil option, too campaign specific, or too laborious to run at a PFS table (Master Summoner), etc. But banning things because of balance shows poor (or no) playtesting.

Not sure what went on with that book, but I'm sorry that it was printed in such a way that you could buy it, then not be able to use anything that you wanted to.

Well said and disappointing. Using options like this as boon bait seems not like a reward but instead punishing us with an unneeded hurdle.

That said, I can see myself being hoisted on my pitard on this one, because I've always been in favor of limiting races. Fans of lots of races could say what I just did about the "unneeded hurdle".

But underlying this, the options that were banned (in general) did not disrupt the style of campaign, like too many "exotic" races do.

Seriously, if something turns out to be problematic, like the old school summoner, couldn't you react to it when it becomes a problem? Seriously, you've only had to react in this manner, three or so times in nine years?

I want make it clear that, in spite of this criticsm, in general you do a good job and I respect what you do, including your willingness to try experiments like this. But sometimes experiments don't work out. I think this one case.

Spoiler:

And yeah, I had planned out 3 or 4 wonderfully beautiful ways to use bladed brush. And yeah, it was "that feat" I had been fantasizing about for a long while even though it hadn't been invented.

[Eric Clingenpeel]

You guys do realize that the books aren't written solely for PFS, right? If you want to run your own home game you can use any and all rules that you want. That's what the books are written for. I've been a part of the review teams in the past and I can tell you that things are never banned on a whim. There's a lot of time and effort that goes into reviewing and deciding what should and shouldn't be legal.

[leonvios]

These books are Pathfinder player companions not pathfinder society player companions.

[GM Lamplighter]

How many tables were destroyed by synthesist summoners before they were finally banned? I had an entire module and a run of Eyes of the Ten that were a complete loss because of that class. That's too high of a price, frankly.

Sorry, but there are a lot of things in these books that are overpowered or only have downsides that don't come up in the limited campaign of PFS. It's not a matter of insufficient playtesting - it's a matter of "all the balanced stuff has been done, but books still need to come out". You can only do some many new feats and archetypes before power creep is unavoidable. I for one and very glad that the most OP stuff is kept out of PFS, even if I now have only 10,000 options instead of 10,400 for my PCs to play with.

[Belafon]

Beckman wrote:

Basically 50% of that book is banned. Prestigious Spellcaster, to me, was the lowest blow, since they left the prerequisite feat which is basically like worse Toughness / Skill focus. (Suffice it to say I do believe that Prestigious Spellcaster is a balanced feat, but whether it is or isn't is outside the scope of what I'm trying to say).

I'm still going back and forth on Prestigious Spellcaster. I was a very vocal opponent in a thread a while back suggesting the Eclectic Training or Esoteric Training prestige awards from Inner Sea Magic be added to the campaign. I thought (and still feel) the additional spell levels would seriously impact game balance.

Prestigious Spellcaster is significantly more costly than that option, though. Not only do you have to spend one feat per spellcasting level, there's another feat that is a prerequisite. And it only works for the progression levels of a prestige class, so it wouldn't help the cleric/wizard/MT builds at all.

I dunno. On the one hand I was hoping it would be legal so I could finally build a Riftwarden who would be able to counter the enemies you would typically find in PFS (as opposed to on par with only the Blackfire Adepts). On the other... man could I make a pretty powerful Rage Prophet using that feat.

[Belafon]

Kerney wrote:

Seriously, if something turns out to be problematic, like the old school summoner, couldn't you react to it when it becomes a problem? Seriously, you've only had to react in this manner, three or so times in nine years?

Hey Kerney!

I see you've been around since before the synthesist ban (like me) so you remember those days. Do you remember the huge outcry that followed when those classes were banned? People were absolutely furious that they couldn't use their characters any more. There were multitudinous threats of ragequitting PFS, and I personally know of at least one person who followed through with the threat and hasn't come back.

Its far better to *not* allow something initially and then let it in later than to allow it and then remove it from the allowed list. And allowing something that was once banned has happened a few times. Often with a campaign clarification but occasionally calm, rational arguments have led to Campaign Leadership allowing material that had previously been banned with no changes. (See the Magical Knack trait.)

[Woran]

I'm having a lot of fun with the Hellcat archetype for monks from the villain codex.

Building a grippli monk that uses it. Based on the Hairy Frog. Which is a super bad ass species of frogs that breaks its on bones to give itself bone claws.

[Kerney]

Kevin Willis wrote:

Hey Kerney!

I see you've been around since before the synthesist ban (like me) so you remember those days. Do you remember the huge outcry that followed when those classes were banned? People were absolutely furious that they couldn't use their characters any more. There were multitudinous threats of ragequitting PFS, and I personally know of at least one person who followed through with the threat and hasn't come back.

I will say this, that truthfully not how I remember it and not my experience. Do not get me wrong, I believe you, but what I remember at least in my local community, was a little grumbling, some rebuilt characters and mostly people getting on with gaming. (I am on and off the forums and I can truthfully say I don't think I WAS active during that transition, though I was during the transition from classic summoner to the unchained one).

So yes, I remember a very different experience, and that is informing me of my viewpoint. I actually glad you brought your experience to my attention.

That said, I don't see anything, like the master (more broken IMHO) or the synthiest summoner that comes close to that level of brokenness. Truthfully, I think Paizo doesn't do that level of spectacularly broken any more. I think they to have learned their lesson.

Respectfully,

Kerney

[Belafon]

General Suggestion:

I do encourage anyone who feels strongly about making a particular item legal to create a thread dedicated to that one item. Rational and honest discussion is the best (only) way to get the result you desire. Trying to obfuscate isn't going to work: I've met the entire Paizo team and they'll see through such attempts.

Example of Rational Argument:

I've been looking hard at the Bladed Brush feat and I really don't think it's too powerful for a single feat. It does a lot of things but even in combination it doesn't appear that they are above the "power curve." In no particular order:

1. You can treat it as one-handed piercing or slashing melee weapon and as if you were not making attacks with your off-hand for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist's or swashbuckler's precise strike).
-So obviously this is intended to let a swashbuckler use the glaive with her class features. That's good, probably worth at least part of a feat. But the way I read it you still count as holding the weapon in your off hand so you can't use a shield (other than a buckler), or cast a spell with somatic components, or hold a wand. I can't come up with other ways to use this part than with a duelist or swashbuckler, can anyone else?

2. You can change between a reach and non-reach action as a move action.
-This is a neat addition but I don't think it's a big deal. You can almost always just take a 5' step to get at the proper range. Since it's a move action you can't go back and forth every turn to have reach only when it isn't your turn. And you can't make a full attack if you have to switch. And you still use two hands even when you are using it without reach. I see some very limited uses for this, mainly when you can't move or don't want to (for whatever reason) or positioning is awkward. Anyone see other uses?

3. You can use Weapon Finesse with a glaive.
-Probably the most important part of the feat but I don't think it's worth a whole feat. There are two-handed weapons that you can finesse already. You still would do damage based on your strength. And you can't use Piranha Strike with a glaive even with this feat since it's not a light weapon. You'd still need to take Power Attack. The one issue I see is that you might read this as making the glaive eligible for the Agile enchant. So maybe that ought to be cleared up.

Honestly, I could probably see any one of those three powers being printed as an individual feat, but do they need to be? I think if Campaign Clarifications notes that you still are wielding the glaive with both hands so - for example - a magus can't use it with spell combat and also notes that the glaive is not eligible for enchantments that require a weapon that can be used with Weapon Finesse then Bladed Brush is right in line with other feats.

Edit: Hmmm. I seem to have forgotten about Slashing Grace. By my reading Slashing Grace still wouldn't work since it not only requires you to "not be making an attack with your off-hand" but it doesn't work any time "another hand is otherwise occupied." Again, if you clarify that you still count as holding the glaive in both hands it isn't too powerful.

Example of an Attempt to Obfuscate:

Bladed Brush should be legal because it isn't a big deal. It's an entire feat just to use Weapon Finesse with a Glaive. AND you have to take another feat as a prerequisite. This shouldn't even be a whole feat unless you add more to it! It does some extra stuff for a swashbuckler but the shorten grip is useless since it's a move action. You might as well just move or take a 5' step.

So make sure you point out the advantages as well as the disadvantages. And make sure it's civil. Starting out with "WTF isn't this allowed!" isn't helping your cause at all.

[Beckman]

Kevin Willis wrote:

Kerney wrote:

Seriously, if something turns out to be problematic, like the old school summoner, couldn't you react to it when it becomes a problem? Seriously, you've only had to react in this manner, three or so times in nine years?

Hey Kerney!

I see you've been around since before the synthesist ban (like me) so you remember those days. Do you remember the huge outcry that followed when those classes were banned? People were absolutely furious that they couldn't use their characters any more. There were multitudinous threats of ragequitting PFS, and I personally know of at least one person who followed through with the threat and hasn't come back.

Its far better to *not* allow something initially and then let it in later than to allow it and then remove it from the allowed list. And allowing something that was once banned has happened a few times. Often with a campaign clarification but occasionally calm, rational arguments have led to Campaign Leadership allowing material that had previously been banned with no changes. (See the Magical Knack trait.)

I was around for that although I was not affected.. I think more lax rebuild rules would help. If you ban an archetype, just let a player do a full rebuild. Maybe they made an alchemist who can disarm traps and the archetype was too good and it got banned. The guy doesn't want to play an alchemist without that thing, since it's central to the character.

Feats get banned and then the whole character doesn't work

Or, alternately, keep the rules as they are and let a player rebuilt their whole character for 20 Prestige or 10,000 gold or something. Pay 10k gold and you can recreate your character, sell back your equipment at value aside from consumables (then subtract 10k).

If we adjusted the rules to be less draconian when things get banned, we could ban less things because when things are banned people would not feel that they 1/2 a character after something critical to your character is no longer there. If it causes trouble, ban it.

But there's so much power level inconsistency in the game. Look at Druid, then look at the Spiritualist. Wow, that's not even remotely as good. Then look at the Death Druid, hmmm.... it's like Spiritualist, only with 9 levels of spellcasting. Power levels are all over the place in this game. I would advocate for a more even keeled level of power.. In order to achieve that, I would try to normalize for the Core Rulebook Druid, Cleric, Wizard classes and bring things up to their level, rather than try to make new material worse ban or things that approach that level.

The alternative is to ban stuff from the CRB or give it the Unchained Summoner treatment, which, since it's the CRB is hard to do. It would be quite confusing to new players to see that their CRB character functions differently than expected.

[RealAlchemy]

Kevin Willis wrote:

General Suggestion:

I do encourage anyone who feels strongly about making a particular item legal to create a thread dedicated to that one item. Rational and honest discussion is the best (only) way to get the result you desire. Trying to obfuscate isn't going to work: I've met the entire Paizo team and they'll see through such attempts.

** spoiler omitted **...

Another point for your rational argument point 2 is that a dwarven chain flail can also change back and forth between a reach and non-reach weapon.

Full disclosure, I don't care one way or the other about bladed brush, but I think that dwarven chain flail trick is nifty and I don't mind seeing another weapon or two that can do that.

[Belafon]

Beckman wrote:

If we adjusted the rules to be less draconian when things get banned, we could ban less things because when things are banned people would not feel that they 1/2 a character after something critical to your character is no longer there. If it causes trouble, ban it.

It's not just the "draconian" nature of things. Many people - myself included - get very attached to our characters' personalities. I personally had a playtest character that I really enjoyed and played all the way to level 5 during the Advanced Class Guide playtest period. When the playtest ended several class features were changed or removed that I had worked deeply into his personality. I got to rebuild all those features, but I haven't played him since as he isn't the "same" character I started with. And yeah, I knew it was a playtest but I didn't realize how it was going to affect me on an attachment basis.

Similarly one of my PFS friends had a level 10 synthesist when the ban hit. He got to rebuild all those levels. But he didn't. As far as I know the character is still sitting unplayed since then. He just couldn't bear the thought of not having the synergistic roleplaying character he had been using and couldn't come up with a way to transfer it to a new build in a way that preserved the flavor for him.

[Beckman]

Kevin Willis wrote:

Beckman wrote:

If we adjusted the rules to be less draconian when things get banned, we could ban less things because when things are banned people would not feel that they 1/2 a character after something critical to your character is no longer there. If it causes trouble, ban it.

It's not just the "draconian" nature of things. Many people - myself included - get very attached to our characters' personalities. I personally had a playtest character that I really enjoyed and played all the way to level 5 during the Advanced Class Guide playtest period. When the playtest ended several class features were changed or removed that I had worked deeply into his personality. I got to rebuild all those features, but I haven't played him since as he isn't the "same" character I started with. And yeah, I knew it was a playtest but I didn't realize how it was going to affect me on an attachment basis.

Similarly one of my PFS friends had a level 10 synthesist when the ban hit. He got to rebuild all those levels. But he didn't. As far as I know the character is still sitting unplayed since then. He just couldn't bear the thought of not having the synergistic roleplaying character he had been using and couldn't come up with a way to transfer it to a new build in a way that preserved the flavor for him.

I agree. If we made FULL character rebuilds easier to get, or affordable with Prestige or some other mechanic, we would not have as many bad feelings - there would be a mechanism for correcting situations like that in the event that whatever the rebuild rules give you is insufficient.

[SCPRedMage]

I can't believe no one's mentioned that Transformation Sequence, the alternate class feature from Magical Child, got broken out into a social talent that any vigilante (who can cast spells or spell-like abilities, even if they don't come from vigilante) can take.

I'm totally making a Power Ranger.

[MadScientistWorking]

Kerney wrote:

That said, I don't see anything, like the master (more broken IMHO) or the synthiest summoner that comes close to that level of brokenness. Truthfully, I think Paizo doesn't do that level of spectacularly broken any more. I think they to have learned their lesson.

The Wizard got an archetype that is a straight upgrade to the class itself recently so yes they do still do spectacularly broken. Also, from what I remember of the synthesist summoner you can in fact replicate parts of it though that is a pure support build.

[James Risner]

Which wizard arc is straight upgrade?

[Ascalaphus]

I'm excited about First Mother's Fang. A bit surprised it came through all the way because it gains a lot of bonuses.

By the way, is it me or is it actually just about compatible with Emissary?

[CanisDirus]

RealAlchemy wrote:

Another point for your rational argument point 2 is that a dwarven chain flail can also change back and forth between a reach and non-reach weapon.

Just a helpful fyi - the d20pfsrd site lists a lot of third party items side by side with Paizo products, making it easy to accidentally select something that isn't actually a PFS-legal option. I'm not familiar with an item called a chain-flail, for example...

Nearly instant edit/correction: They also rename/reskin things which adds even more confusion. The item is the dorn-dergar, which is PFS-legal, but is another example of why I stick to the official PRD or the Archives of Nethys both in conjunction with the Additional Resources page (also noting that everyone needs to own the resources that they want to use for their PFS characters).

As for the thread itself, I'm a big fan of the gear now legal from the Daughters of Fury module, myself!

[Kalindlara]

James Risner wrote:

Which wizard arc is straight upgrade?

Pact wizard, from Haunted Heroes Handbook.

[Kalindlara]

Mike Bramnik wrote:

Just a helpful fyi - the d20pfsrd site lists a lot of third party items side by side with Paizo products, making it easy to accidentally select something that isn't actually a PFS-legal option. I'm not familiar with an item called a chain-flail, for example...

Nearly instant edit/correction: They also rename/reskin things which adds even more confusion. The item is the dorn-dergar, which is PFS-legal, but is another example of why I stick to the official PRD or the Archives of Nethys both in conjunction with the Additional Resources page (also noting that everyone needs to own the resources that they want to use for their PFS characters).

This.

Love the dorn-dergar, by the way - I know it so well that I didn't even notice the d20pfsrd-speak in the earlier post. ^_^

[Sebastian Hirsch]

Kevin Willis wrote:

General Suggestion:

I do encourage anyone who feels strongly about making a particular item legal to create a thread dedicated to that one item. Rational and honest discussion is the best (only) way to get the result you desire. Trying to obfuscate isn't going to work: I've met the entire Paizo team and they'll see through such attempts.

** spoiler omitted **...

Good argument, but needs a slight correction, buckler doesn't work with that setup, it only counts as having a hand free for several things bucklers not included^^

[Alex Mack]

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

I'm excited about First Mother's Fang. A bit surprised it came through all the way because it gains a lot of bonuses.

Agreed. It seems kinda busted, especially as a two level dip for any build interested in building around Combat Expertise.

[James Risner]

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

I'm excited about First Mother's Fang. A bit surprised it came through all the way because it gains a lot of bonuses.

By the way, is it me or is it actually just about compatible with Emissary?

+1

But not comparable with Emissary as they both change bonus feats.

[Hmm]

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

I'm excited about First Mother's Fang. A bit surprised it came through all the way because it gains a lot of bonuses.

^ For those of you reading along who might want to know, it's a nagaji cavalier archetype from Blood of the Beast. It's interesting enough to make me want to try out a Nagaji, which isn't a race that has called out as much to me previously. I'm glad that Nagajis got some love in this book.

Hmm

[MadScientistWorking]

James Risner wrote:

Which wizard arc is straight upgrade?

Haunted Heroes Handbook Pact Wizard which trades out the parts of the wizard that are so inconsequential I forgot they were even a mechanic. Even the Alchemist archetype from that book is a straight upgrade in terms of what is being exchanged.

[Ascalaphus]

James Risner wrote:

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

I'm excited about First Mother's Fang. A bit surprised it came through all the way because it gains a lot of bonuses.

By the way, is it me or is it actually just about compatible with Emissary?

+1

But not comparable with Emissary as they both change bonus feats.

Are you sure? Emissary modifies the cavalier bonus feats class feature by adding some choices. But FMF doesn't seem to touch that class feature. The Honored Warrior feature replaces Order, it seems to be entirely in addition to your regular bonus feats.

[RealAlchemy]

Mike Bramnik wrote:

RealAlchemy wrote:

Another point for your rational argument point 2 is that a dwarven chain flail can also change back and forth between a reach and non-reach weapon.

Just a helpful fyi - the d20pfsrd site lists a lot of third party items side by side with Paizo products, making it easy to accidentally select something that isn't actually a PFS-legal option. I'm not familiar with an item called a chain-flail, for example...

Nearly instant edit/correction: They also rename/reskin things which adds even more confusion. The item is the dorn-dergar, which is PFS-legal, but is another example of why I stick to the official PRD or the Archives of Nethys both in conjunction with the Additional Resources page (also noting that everyone needs to own the resources that they want to use for their PFS characters).

As for the thread itself, I'm a big fan of the gear now legal from the Daughters of Fury module, myself!

I just didn't remember how to spell dorn-dergar :)

[Alex Mack]

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

James Risner wrote:

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

I'm excited about First Mother's Fang. A bit surprised it came through all the way because it gains a lot of bonuses.

By the way, is it me or is it actually just about compatible with Emissary?

+1

But not comparable with Emissary as they both change bonus feats.

Are you sure? Emissary modifies the cavalier bonus feats class feature by adding some choices. But FMF doesn't seem to touch that class feature. The Honored Warrior feature replaces Order, it seems to be entirely in addition to your regular bonus feats.

I agree.

You can also combine the first mothers fang with the Gendarme Archetype and pick up two EWP, Power Attack, Combat Expertise and a free feat in a two level dip...

Other stackable Archetypes include: Circuit Judge, Daring General, Spellscar Drifter, Honor Guard, Husar, Knight of the Wall, Luring Cavalier and Standard Bearer.

[Davor Firetusk]

Not having read any of Paths of Righteous let me state that I think that as a trade off for effectively removing all the normal role-playing requirements that many Prestige Classes have going back to 3E, like the the having to survive 1-1 combat with a devil to become a Hellknight. Opening some of them up only on boons for an appropriately themed scenario is a cool idea.

[Starglim]

It's a good point.

[Terminalmancer]

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

I'm excited about First Mother's Fang. A bit surprised it came through all the way because it gains a lot of bonuses.

I'm thinking that it may have gotten through because it can be awfully hard to be a medium-sized cavalier in PFS--and by taking the archetype you're guaranteeing yourself a Large-sized mount that can't wear barding. Its AC starts at 14.

It's also giving up Order, which is the source of some of the worst cavalier shenanigans. So there's sort of a cap on how crazy it can get. (Although being a cavalier there's still a certain amount of crazy that you'll have to account for.)

Edit: oh, and with the snake's starting int of 1 (and the archetype being limited to Nagaji), that also means you need to wait a good long while before you can do improved-unarmed-strike->dragon style.

I mean, they get a lot of stuff. A mount with 20 foot swim and climb speeds is pretty awesome. But they also lose access to a bunch of really silly cavalier builds as a result.

[James Risner]

Alex Mack wrote:

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

Are you sure?

I agree.

Folks, never go off memory. I was in fact wrong. They do appear to stack (Emmisary and First Mother Fang).

[Arutema]

I'm looking at the possibilities of combining a 1 level dip in scaled fist monk (flurry of blows, cha to AC) with the ascetic oracle mystery (unarmed damage and movement speed progression, and spellstrike for oracle spells on unarmed strikes).

[Taenia]

I was looking at that myself Kelly.

[Gamerskum]

The New Firearms from Villains Codex are nice even if super expensive.

[Alex Mack]

Gamerskum wrote:

The New Firearms from Villains Codex are nice even if super expensive.

Eww totally missed those...