Pathfinder General /pfg/

>>43835736
What's Unbreakable Chains about?

>>43818666
>>43821352
>>simple fix: reduce all maneuver bonus damage dice by 2 until the initiator reaches IL 5, offer replacements for Broken Blade and Primal Fury.

-

Okay. Part 1 seems straightforward. If it says to add 1d6, 1d4 instead, right?

What about part two? What should I replace broken blade and primal fury with?

Would starting at level four bypass this problem entirely? I often have them start at 4, and never less than 3, so that wouldn't be an issue.

File: crystalshards.png (3MB, 3079x4000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3079x4000px

>>43835762
No donut steel, just Kyria to go with an announcement.

Remember when I said Endeca's party was going to be an ongoing series? Finally formalized it; their stories are going under the series title 'Orion's Belt'. On the off chance that anons are present that have not yet seen it GIVE ME FEEDBACK PLEASE THE ONE TIME YOU FUCKERS ACTUALLY OFFERED ME CRITIQUE IT WAS INSIGHTFUL AND HELPFUL AND NOW I AM STARVED FOR IT YOU SICK, SADISTIC BASTARDS, here are the links:

Master Archive -> http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?432004-Cool-Dreamscarred-Press-fiction!

Part One: http://dreamscarred.com/psionics-augmented-starlight-star-bright/
Part Two: http://dreamscarred.com/psionics-augmented-the-lichs-apprentice/
Part Three: http://dreamscarred.com/psionics-augmented-common-language/

>>43835946
no, reduce the number of dice, so most strikes don't have the damage bonus at all, and if it had 3d6 before, it has 1d6 after.
come to think of it, it would be better to actually return it to normal dice at IL 6.

as for the replacements, I suggest allowing more character customization by just letting any other discipline work in its stead.

>>43835946
Having run the math, I'd say about IL 6 is when it evens out fully. Starting at level 4 helps it a lot, but I'd consider starting at 5 or 6, if you don't want to touch it at all.

Primal Fury can be replaced with Piercing Thunder (similar charge themes) or Thrashing Dragon (also overtuned but not nearly as much; the multi-weapon disc). Broken Blade could be swapped nicely for Mithral Current to do its speedy strike stuff, or just anything else.

Honestly I'd just allow people to switch for whatever disciplines they want if thye have those on their lists.

File: VICTORY.gif (967KB, 250x188px) Image search: [Google]

967KB, 250x188px

>>43835762
a rotund, stuttering bald guy in PFS playing a netdecked crossblooded kitsune enchantment sorceress with [sic] Profession(Courtesean)

he got crit with a cutlass and bled out at level 1 because he tried to cast Bungle in melee with some pirate

>>43835762
Plenty of cringe I've seen. Cringiest I've done? Played a character intentionally incorporating some mary sue traits, the most important of which was a halo of vented magic energy that changed colors based on her emotions.

She was fun as hell to play, though. Everyone else was ludicrously stealthy, so her negative-stealth ass got to be bait 100% of the time.

>>43836011
Would you remove them completely, or just before level 6?

>>43836073
I would remove Primal Fury and Broken Blade completely. I personally would consider removing Thrashing Dragon as well, because it's just... Eh. It actively rewards avoiding using all of its maneuvers but the stances, then just power attack full attacking at THF damage levels thanks to its attached PrC.

>>43834317
>>43834295

How can a succubus be this cute? That DM really knew how to make a character come to life.

>>43835762
Joining my first Pathfinder game with a group of complete strangers IRL. It's core only, any advice on what to avoid to not look like a complete fool? They're apparently open to anything, but are hoping for a party leader type.

File: howhorrifying.png (365KB, 736x718px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 736x718px

>>43835980
>Endeca's party

>>43836091
Okay,

so:
1.)ban/drop primal fury and broken blade and thrashing dragon. If a class would have them it gets something else instead.
2.)if a Maneuver gives bonus damage, subtract two dice until l4, and then 1 die until l6.

That about right?

If a character wants a discipline last that's not part of their class, but it makes sense, would it break anything for me to allow it as a replacement for something they do get?

File: 3DFH1Nb.gif (424KB, 441x423px) Image search: [Google]

424KB, 441x423px

>>43836174
OH, WE HAVE ONLY BEGUN, ANON. WE HAVE ONLY BEGUN.

>>43836163
Build a Sorcerer. Max Charisma. Avoid evocation and use more conjuration. Take leadership at 6. Make your Cohort a cleric with a spear(for reach), who specializes in attacks of opportunity, and also conjuration.

Enjoy.

>>43835907
Seconded

>>43836177
1 and 2 are about right.

For adding a discipline, it doesn't actually really need to make sense. Most of the other disciplines are balanced against each other, and the devs have stated that one "free" swap for anything is intended (through Traditions or just a fluffless thing if the GM doesn't want to deal with them), and there's also a trait for it.

It'd be a QoL buff for people with primal fury/broken blade/thrashing dragon to get new discs without needing to tradition into things, sure. It should be almost everyone that's getting swaps though, iirc.

Good luck with the game.

>>43836231
>Take leadership at 6
7.

>>43836177
What do I do for the damage of something like shadow feather strike, where the damage is not additional, but just the total damage? Same thing?

>>43836294

Shadow Feather Strike is in a weird place. I wouldn't touch it; note that it's not bonus damage, it's a flat 4d6+IM /ray/. Maybe drop it to 3d6+IM, because it's profane damage.

That's decent as a 2nd-level blast maneuver. It's the ones that stack with weapon damage that become problems.

>>43836218
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FMI_tbEJHXtejBNgdDtsA09CJHskHnZQZ2N33L2HZ6A/edit

Warpaths, right? Clerics can apparently still trade out for them. Unless this document is old.

File: 1448415384333.png (365KB, 658x639px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 658x639px

>>43836360
Old as hell, anon. You want this one.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hHsiSKoL2nR4oWgzPKQwXfqYENuNkDmBiX323SlTPfc/edit

Kindly burn that other one and all traces of it.

>>43836360
It's old.

So apparently I am playing a Kineticist for the new campaign. Which sounds most fun /tg/: Wood Void or Water (favouring Cold/Snow stuff)?

>>43836334
Hmm. Okay.

And when it comes to the published pow:E stuff, is that stuff good to go, as is, or does it need adjusting as well?

>>43836406
sn... ow... y

So aside from having an animal companion and a bit of crappy magic, is there anything that keeps Rangers from just being inferior Fighters?

My group kinda needs me to play a ranged-combatant in an upcomming game, but I don't have alot of experience with Pathfinder. Looking at the wiki though, it seems like Rangers sorta suck. (Yes, I already know martial classes suck in general, but nobody in the group is playing a dedicated caster so that part doesn't really matter).

File: 1423103317215.jpg (308KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 600x800px

>>43836382
Thanks for making us lose a cleric, jerk.

>>43836406
Wood is pretty awful. Water is at least okay.

>>43836406

Wood and Void are fairly bleh elements. I'd say stick to water, it got much better talents.

Be sure to expand your element, though, there's a ton of cold-immune shit out there.

>>43836407
>
Most of the published PoW E stuff is good to go as far as I can tell, but Riven Hourglass was said to be getting slight nerfs between the release of it and now. A couple other disciplines have been presumably getting tweaks. Most of it's pretty good though.

File: 1432172751126.jpg (192KB, 855x644px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 855x644px

>>43836432
Cleric's in the full caster club. They don't get maneuvers and never will.

Also since I pushed for the change in the first place I will now throw my head back and laugh.

G'night /pfg/, see you in six hours.

What are the fun things /pfg/ has done with wondrous items?

1) The party wizard hammered a Ring Gate on the Warder's Shield. Now the wizard can cast bad touch spells through the Warder's shield bashes.

2) The party druid gave his eagle a high intelligence score and instructed it to drop Feather Token: Trees over enemies to do 30d6 (falling damage) + 8d6 (huge falling object damage) halved by reflex

3) My Alchemist used an Instant Fortress + Immovable Rods + Universal Glue to jettison a Minotaur 30ft backwards for 10d10 + 30d6

>>43836428
>So aside from having an animal companion and a bit of crappy magic, is there anything that keeps Rangers from just being inferior Fighters?

>crappy magic
>instant enemy
>gets his favored feats free of pre-reqs

Rangers are fighter ++ if you are not optimizing out your ass for fighter/using the weapon masters handbook.

>>43836428
Ditch Ranger. Go Hunter.
Trust me on this one - the Ranger went obsolete compared to the Hunter for many reasons
1) Your animal companion is equal to your level
2) You gain teamwork feats and autoshare them with your companion
3) The poorly situational favored enemy is replaced by the more flexible animal focus.
4) Hunter spellcasting is better than Ranger's (Though not as good as Druid)
5) One of the lucky classes that can quickly access pounce using the stick together + ring of ferocious action trick

>>43836428
Do archer paladin instead. Surprise everyone.
Wear shades, talk about how great the sun is, keep orange health potions around, and constantly refer to your deity with appellations, like Two Scoops.

>>43836270
Right. Memory. Still. The basic outline is solid.

I'm looking at making a Shoanti character. Any idea how they look?

File: hat dug.jpg (15KB, 248x255px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 248x255px

>>43836428
>4-level casting with excellent spell list
>early access to key archery feats
>two times the actions

yes, clearly this is the equivalent of Bravery.

>>43836263
Thanks. :)

Going to try a mostly non - paizo classes game.

>>43836590
How does bravery even exist in this game

>>43836602
by having not existed in 3.5, so clearly fighters are coming out ahead!

>>43836590
It was less about Bravery and more that Fighters got more feats and better free feats when it comes to wearing armor.

>>43836590
>rolling vanilla fighter. ever.

If nothing else - go Lore Warden, beg DM to allow access to Eldritch Guardian with a Sage familiar and be the party's walking encyclopedia.

>>43836608
Bravery should just be a flat will save bonus desu.

But at least you can actually get that now with AAADVVAANCED W-WEAPON T-TRAINING TRAINING TRAINING

>>43836626
Wow, that echo in here is really weird, isn't it? It just comes and goes at the oddest times.

>>43836612
>wearing armor
>relevant

Look at this pleb.

>>43836632
bizzare really.

>>43836632
Shill some more.

Real Talk: AWT isn't even that good. You get a grab bag to make martials a whole lot better and fun to play, but it still doesn't fix them.

File: FUCK ARCHERS.gif (709KB, 742x540px)

709KB, 742x540px

>>43836602
>>43836608
the SKR moves in mysterious ways, but at least after 7 years you can finally apply Bravery to all will saves
>>43836612
why do you care about armor heavier than a chain shirt at most when you are an archer and you're going to pump Dex? you're going to cap out your max dex AC. also
>AC
>>43836614
sure

>>43836656
nothing can really FIX martials in a game that is fundamentally broken

>>43836626
Is Advanced Weapon Training compatible with Path of War?

>>43836656
I notice you say 'martials' as if all martials are bad and need fixing, which they aren't.

On to an actual point of contention, it may not make Fighters 'good' per se, but it makes them decent. And honestly, that's enough.

>>43836683
Yes. Stick it on the myrmidon and have fun with a lore warden myrmidon tier 3 fighter.

>>43836683
i don't see why not

>>43836680
It's not, really.

It has some issues, but it's not fundamentally broken.

>>43836708
Slap Martial Master on there too. While you'd have to get Weapon Training back as a feat, you can then get some feats on-the-fly, including Advanced Study.

File: mysterious.gif (2MB, 441x207px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 441x207px

>>43836720
>wizard flies through the sky like a bird
>at level 5

no, it's pretty broken, but you can glue it back together with a gentleman's agreement to not be a shitter unless shat upon.

Thoughts on giving Martial Flexibility to Fighters just for free, same progression as Brawler?
Even in lieu of new information from Weapon Master's Handbook?
It's fine, right? Doesn't hurt the game at all and helps Fighters out?

File: Jackiesaysgood.gif (2MB, 389x185px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 389x185px

>>43836759
>gentleman's agreement to not be a shitter unless shat upon

The most important patch in Pathfinder, really. I wish everyone could understand this.

>>43836767
Sure. There was also that guy's archetype that made them into prepared featers (?) where they had a featbook (???) and memorized feats each day with their class feats.

they both address one of the key flaws with feats; that they're locked in and not always useful. it doesn't address the fact that they're usually narrow as fuck and that you usually take the best ones first so that the remainder are really underwhelming, but i would personally be fine with it if someone wanted to be a fighter in a mid-op or high-op game and didn't mind doing the homework that Martial Flexibility usually requires

File: 1447630059838.jpg (123KB, 958x553px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 958x553px

>>43836767
The only thing that might actually cause trouble with fighters is 6th level spellcasting or better. Roll with it.
Better yet, just use PoW, or consult your neighborhood tier list and have everyone play halfcasters.

>>43836802
honestly Paizo just needs to make more feats that are appealing for later game, and have them include crazy shit like being able to cut boulders in half

In that respect, the weapon master's handbook is a big success, but they need to bring more lategame feats that require like high BAB to access

>>43836447
>>43836460

Should note that the campaign is largely Urban and humanoid.

File: 1439966411971.png (118KB, 764x1080px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 764x1080px

Between human, elf, and samsaran, what's the best race for a psychic?

>>43836838
Elf, probably, for the spell penetration and spell focus. Samsaran's best gimmick is Mystic Past Lives, but psychics already get all the best psychic spells.

>>43836838
Always human. Doesn't matter the class.

>>43836838
Samsarans can add a few spells from other psychic caster lists to their psychic class list with a racial ability.
Humans can add further Psychic spells to their list of spells known with their racial favored class bonus.
I'm not sure which of those two is really better, but both of them are far and away better than what an Elf can provide.

File: distant caster weeping.png (689KB, 556x623px) Image search: [Google]

689KB, 556x623px

>>43836812
>bab to access
Then clerics are still getting them, unless you're thinking 18+.
The Martial Training bit is a good start, but all it takes is some casterfag at Paizo to make a warwizard archetype and the whole thing crumbles.
I also think they could easily make feats that build with each other and cut a lot of crap. So you grab Improved Unarmed Strike, then Gorgon Style, and your unarmed damage goes up a step, for example.

Only other option I can think of is start dropping bundles of kind of mediocre feats past level 7, or getting three or four feats a level and building insane feat trees that you need an understanding of lovecraftian geometry to navigate.

>>43836881

I honestly don't see why Improved Unarmed Strike and all of the Improved <Combat Maneuver> feats aren't built into martials anyway.

>>43836881
What's that "spell" from?

>>43836940
that'd make prison escapes too convenient

What's the best level one familiar for a Wizard/Witch?

>>43836986
People are gonna tell you anything that gives you the +4 Initiative bonus because going before the bad guy gets a turn is technically the best thing you can do with a Familiar.

>>43836986
Wizards are better off with a bonded item.

Witches... eh, anything that can fly, as it can deliver touch-attacks to flying foes. Otherwise see >>43836997 .

Familiars aren't really supposed to grant huge combat bonuses either way though. They're not meant to be used in combat, they're meant to be flavor things. Last time I played a witch, we literally didn't stat out my familiar or use it in combat ever. It was there to be a mouthpiece for my witch's patron and rely it's "demands" to the character.

>>43836997
Yeah. I know that the +4 Init bonus is incredibly strong, but having a familiar that can scout, fly and sneak can be stronger in certain situations.

>>43837055
>Wizards are better off with a bonded item.

u wot m8

Having an extra spell per day is really nice, but not as nice as having a second roll on skill checks and an extra pair of hands to use a wand.

>>43836952
Anima: Beyond Fantasy, even more number crunchy than dnderivatives and where the casters fear the fuck out of the martials.
>>43836940
That... that actually makes a huge amount of sense.
>Fightmans trains hard to not provoke AoOs for tripping, disarming, dickpunching, etc.
>Squishy wizmans has to pay through the nose for feats
>Clerics might grab one thing the whole way through
An amazingly simple solution for the low end stuff, but it'll be a bitch figuring out how to distribute it, and it probably makes halfcasters a lot worse.

>>43837075
Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure I have an awful old ratty notebook with a halfassed subsystem for style training from the early days of 3.5
BAB got you a certain number of points, and you used your rank on the table for your attack rolls, and couldn't go over your level. As the table went up, you got more and better options for using thing, in that weapon group.
So 3 points into Big Ass Heavy Weapons got you free power attack, 6 points in got you +5 damage vs. things with DR, etc.

>>43836881
Clerics get them only at high levels, but if we're talking like 12-15-18 bab for some really powerful feats that should be done

>>43836163
>>43836231
>Leadership
If your DM allows it, of course. It tends to be banned without explanation.

>>43837138
>with explanation

shockingly allowing a player 2 PCs is pretty broken, tends to break the game, aaaannd generally makes shit less fun for everyone else

>>43837138

It's either worthless or by far the most powerful feat in the game, depending on how the GM runs it. There's not a tremendous amount of explanation needed.

>>43837155
My general rule if player wants a cohort: NPC classes only. PC classes for PCs only. A cohort is NOT a PC.

>>43836505
>1)
Brilliant, simply brilliant.

We mounted an Instant Fortress atop an adamantine-clad land carriage powered by a shit-ton of alchemical engines, Mortal Engines-style. It's a pity we never got to use it.

>>43837180
Seems legit to me.

>>43837180
so every NPC is an NPC class in your game? antagonists can't be wizards?

>>43837180
But some cohort rules specifically apply to getting magical beasts as a cohort

Note: i love these feats. All I want to do is ride cool animals into battle.

>>43836577
Basically tribals, covered in tattoos related to clan. For flavor, pick Thunder and Fang feat and related stuff.

>>43836577
Dude, google.
https://www.google.com/search?q=shaonti&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwim1b3A2a3JAhUG4iYKHc0kD8EQ_AUICCgC&biw=1920&bih=947#tbm=isch&q=shoanti

>>43837196
I'm assuming he means only in regard to leadership.

>>43837196
The antagonist I roll is my PC. I am the DM after all.

>>43837064

Pretty sure Familiars don't give you double skill checks on everything, and having the familiar use a wand is pretty cheesy and might not fly with every GM.

That being said, I will acknowledge that having an extra spell slot does tend to lose most of it's value later on... but early-game it's amazing.

>>43836759
What's wrong with flight at level 5? It's not that useful unless your DM is stupid.

>>43837180
>NPC classes only. PC classes for PCs only. A cohort is NOT a PC.

This is already a fair rule actually.
NPC Classes are pretty good enough as a cohort without being game-breaking.
If you want a caster, use adepts. If you want a martial, use a warrior.

>>43837259
Translation: It's not that useful unless your DM doesn't actively take it into account.

>>43837251
>Pretty sure Familiars don't give you double skill checks on everything

Depends on what type of familiar archetype and what type of skill.
A Sage familiar is gonna be a boon to knowledge rolls and a Valet does allow rerolls for failed craft rolls as well as doubling the amount of crafting you can do per day.

>>43837259
Literally WAT

So, it basically renders terrain pointless, prevents enemies from using melee combat against you at all including Attacks of Opportunity, gives you a way to safely bypass any ground-based traps, completely replaces the Climb and Acrobatics skills (and maybe Swim if you GM allows it), and makes stealth, scouting, and fleeing/chases almost trivially easy unless the enemy is ass-pulling counter-measures.

Flight is one of the most broken things in the game, to the point where I've been in several games where it was outright banned for the players.

>>43837251
Familiars can use skills, too, because, y'know, they have skill ranks.

Giving wands to familiars is perfectly legal, because familiars can Use Magic Device and have the necessary appendages for it.

>>43837298
My DM allows flight, and pretty much every spell in the spellbook.

But the catch: The players must always show the DM what spells they've prepped. Its only fair that the DM provides a sufficient challenge for the players after all.

>>43837138
>>43837155
>>43837172
Speaking of which. How it is possible to use Leadership followers without it looking retarded (such as a horde of L1 commoners following your every step)? The only thing that springs into my head is scatter them all over the adventure area (if it's civilized enough, in other case leadership is useless) as innkeepers, valets, thieves, spies, and such, to call favors if needed.

>>43837298
congratulations, anything that doesn't have a ranged weapon is out of luck for 5 minutes per (relatively) high-level slot you spend per party member; same with gap crossing. better have pumped int, made scrolls (takes time), etc.

>>43837317
I always assumed this was sorta standard. Last time I played a caster, I had my Laptop hooked up to the TV with my spell-list open and all the spells I had prepped marked off.

Are there GMs who DON'T ask what spells a player has prepped? Because that sounds like it has all sorts of potential for abuse. It would be like a fighter not showing the GM what weapons he has or a Ranger keeping his animal companion secret.

>>43837327
Congratulations, flying enemies are supposed to be hard...

Except for all those counter-measures like buying a bow, hitting them with a tanglefoot bag so the fall, readying a melee action until the swoop down and smacking them, hiding in smoke/mist cover, ect.

Holy shit, a certain enemy type takes a little bit of strategy to fight. I guess we're just out of luck if the GM throws one at us.

>>43837326

That's pretty much exactly what they're for. Essentially, followers are fluffy laborers. They can increase your earning power if you're using the Downtime rules. Otherwise, a GM might allow them to do all sorts of inconsequential shit that gives you some kind of non-mechanical benefit. Maybe you look more important around town, even if they can't assist you on Diplomacy checks. Maybe it's easier to find magic items because you chose to make all of your followers Wizard Apprentices. They're never going to be all that mechanically useful, but they're choc full of flavor.

>>43837326
Depends on what you rolled, I guess.

If you're a paladin or cleric, they'll rally to you if you speak about holy crusades or something.

If you're a mesemerist, maybe a cult congregation

If you're a fighter or cavalier, they could be volunteer militiamen waiting for your orders.

If you're a wizard or alchemist. They're apprentices or fellow researchers.

If you're a gunslinger or swashbuckler, your posse of like-minded vigilantes

>>43837352
no I'm talking to the bitch who thinks a fly spell is overpowered.

>>43837298
like holy shit. animals are not a good whole adventuring day.

>>43837343
>Are there GMs who DON'T ask what spells a player has prepped?
Its between the lazy and the inexperienced. They're the ones who get mad when the wizard one-shots an encounter, partly theirs to blame.

General rule is, when you're making an encounter with a wizard in the table, learn what spell he uses the most, whats the highest DC of his spell as well as what save it targets, and list down all the utilities he can and cannot do.

>>43837298
How exactly is that a problem? The wizard can do all that even without flight. He isn't engaged in melee or can easily prevent it (Invisibility, accessed at level 3), can climb and swim without checks (Monkey Fish, level 1, or Dimension Door or any teleportation spell), stealth/scouting is effortless (Invisibility), and fleeing/chases are already trivial even without spells. Flight is just an overkill way to do it.

>>43837326
>>43837355
I'm that DM that had a houserule of NPC classes only for cohorts.

My player cleric got creative actually and became mayor of a town of cohorts. They pretty much were responsible for 20% of the party's earnings through mercantilism and taxes.

>>43837384
Most of those have drawbacks. Invisibility, for example, breaks as soon as the Wizard does anything damaging and can be somewhat or fully negated with things like Scent or Blindsense.

Monkeyfish gives crap movement speed of 10. Flight is like 60 by default.

Dimension Door and Teleporation are not spells you have level 5 and provoke Attacks of Opportunity with every use unless defensively casting.

You listed 3 spells to do things Flight is capable of doing with one.

>>43837352
>Congratulations, flying enemies are supposed to be hard...

The problem isn't that flying enemies are hard. The problem is that flying enemies are particularly hard on low-tier classes, and that flight poses comparatively little challenge for higher-tier ones.

Flying is a symptom more than a problem. Flying enemies are perhaps the most high-profile example of the gap between casters and (most) martials in Pathfinder. It's not a problem in and of itself. It's a problem in that its presence in an encounter invalidates a whole bunch of characters and builds, either by requiring them to behave sub-optimally (put a bow in the hands of your two-weapon Fighter and literally all of his feats are useless for the duration. Have him ready an action to attack when the creature swoops down, he's given up his full-round action for the turn), or by requiring a tremendous expenditure of resources compared to classes to which flight makes minimal difference.

A Wizard doesn't care if an enemy flies, for the most part. A Fighter is going to need to drastically change his playstyle to deal with it (or rely on a friendly Wizard). This is just a singular example of the larger problem, which is that casters have tons of flexibility when dealing with problems and martials typically need to be built focused on one. If your guy is Hit-Stuff-With-A-Hammer McGee, any situation where he's not able to do that is a terrible round for him. Compare this to a Wizard, who has a variety of options available for both ranged and melee oponents, and likely just has the catch-all of a few "Summon A Thing" spells. He's got plenty of shit to handle flyers just by doing what he does, not to mention he can fly himself. The same can't be said for our Fighter. Sure, he carries a bow with him, but his usefulness has been drastically reduced while using it.

>>43837317
>>43837374
I used to do the following: the wizard showed me his spellbook and I used the spell card generator (http://www.thegm.org/perramsSpellbook.php) to make a "spell deck". When the wizard prepped spells, I just gave him the spell cards he needed, and when he used them, he gave them back. When he learned new spells, I just printed new cards.

>>43837417
Speaking as a martial, in the event of flying enemies, I just find lower ground, cover or a heavily wooded area and hide in it.

The DM usually gets frustrated and grounds his units to give chase, thus giving me the opportunity to strike back. Once they're grounded, taking flight again gets difficult due to AoOs.

It just seemed like common sense, I guess?

>>43837408
Greater Invisibility is level 3, exactly as Fly, regular is level 2. If you need to climb or swim, you can just use the run action and have 40 ft worth of movement. Name a situation when a distance of 20 ft makes a difference for a competent caster.

>>43837445

That's totally cool, but compare that to not having to do any of that. That's the difference.

>>43837352
Tanglefoot bags only work on things that fly using wings you goddamn pleb.

And they have a range increment of 10 fucking feet, so good luck hitting even with it being a touch attack.

>>43837445
It absolutely is. The problem is, a lot of people don't have it and bitch when their 5-ft-step-full-attack tactic doesn't work.

>>43837417
To be honest, whenever I play with Wizards/Sorcerors in my games, I restrict them to picking only a single Magic School, and that's all they can do. I simply tell them that their body adapts to one type of spell casting and the others become more difficult. Someone who does alot of weight-lifting has a strong body, but sprinting becomes alot more difficult than when they were slim, as a more mundane example.

It solves about 60% of the problems with Caster Overpowered'ness... unless they choose summoning.

>>43837448
Be creative, tie one to the end of an arrow. Have a GM who's not a sack of dicks and rewards creative thinking.

>>43837448
It's only a -2 for every range increment beyond first. A full-BAB fighter can hit something even at -10, because, y'know, full-BAB and touch attack.

>>43837465
>mfw I tried that
>mfw the DM says I still need to meet the necessary craft DC because a tanglefoot arrrow is indeed in the PHB.
>mfw no craft

If only things were always that easy.

>>43837465
That'd fuck up the arrow's flight so damn hard.

>>43837455
This is ridiculous. Do you restrict fighters from having more then one weapon group for weapon training? You should, following that logic.

>>43837064
Depends on your bonded item. If it's something that's normally stupid-expensive like a gun, you get it for free and can enchant it magically without the feats; that's a pretty great deal. If it's something dumb like an amulet then yes, a familiar is miles better.

>>43837484
>one-seventh of an entire chapter's worth of ways to skullfuck reality
>a different kind of stabbybit in a system where stabbybits are differentiated by all of 2 meaningful traits

Yes these are totally comparable things, you absolute fucking idiot.

>>43837484
Thank you anon who beat me to my own reply >>43837497

>>43837446
It's easier to trap a wall or a pool of water than it is to trap the air, for one.

>>43837497
Do you think that fighting with a polearm and fighting with a dagger is the same thing?

>>43837479
Who cares, it's a game, have fun. Nobody gives a shit about "MUH REALISM" in a game with wizards and dragons.

>>43837484
Fighters wouldn't give a shit. Specializing in one, maybe 2 weapons is already the way to go. It's a no-restriction.

>>43837510
>what are sentries
>what are ranged weapons
>what are roofs

>>43837513

In D&D? They're absolutely identical except for how many hands the Fighter has filled and how big his damage number is.

D&D chose to represent weapons with a low degree of gradience (and competence) and spells with a high degree of gradience (and competence). This is just matching the trend.

>>43837513
Do you think they are meaningfully different mechanically enough for a fighter to care?

"Oh no, I can't get my training with weapons I wouldn't use with my char, because I'm not a dumb sack of shit who went TWF!"

File: Realism only applies to martials.png (45KB, 489x301px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 489x301px

>>43837515

>>43837513
Of course not, the Polearm can be used with both hands for a strength bonus, the dagger can't. Weapon classes exist for a reason, and if you specialize in wither one, the feats aren't always going to carry over to another.

It's still not nearly as big of a jump though to say "I can swing a polearm well, so I can swing a dagger well" as it is to say "I can make fireballs well, so I can also hack people's minds pretty well and also summon demons well." There's alot more changing with the latter than the shape of the metal slab.

>>43837513
What kind of fighter specializes in dagger fighting.

In fact, most fighters I've seen specialize in TWO weapons at most.

>>43837546
Maybe he wanted to play a warpriest of pharasma but the DM didn't let him?

DESU fighters make pretty OK TWF guys, and daggers have the advantage of also being thrown, so if you got a blinkback belt they can be OK.

>>43837546
Most fighters are useful in combat until the first succesful sunder maneuver applied to their weapon. If you don't have a spare (and your Uber-Machine-of-Destruction of a sword is heavily enchanted, you most likely don't), you are screwed.

>>43837546
Blinkback Belts?

PSHAW.

Ricochet Toss, m8.

And Focused Weapon to make those 1d4s into something a bit nicer.

I'm noticing something odd in this little debate.

Why is the martial assumed to be equipped with mundane gear only?

Considering that the martial is 5th level, and fighting flying enemies - an experienced, player savvy fighter, even if they're specc'd for melee, would have a bow as well as an arrow tipped with stun spore, tanglefoot or choking powder for exactly these situations. (note all those arrows use ranged touch attacks)

Just because the stereotyped fighter is expected to be dumb muscle, doesn't mean the player has to be as well.

>>43836100
I rather liked it. Of course, that should have been obvious, since my character put a ring on it and they went walking the multiverse together.

No greentext for the others, S&S was years ago and I only half-remember it. Greta was kind of different, mostly savage Techno-Barbarian fucking that proceeded to turn into a two-person pack.

She did, however, have a few animal traits, like enjoying bumping noses and having her hair stroked/combed.

>>43837574
Don't forget them fancy-ass new Magic Weapon Mastery feats. Just wrangle your sword into making YOU fly.

>>43837572
Of course, a heavily enchanted sword is also harder to sunder unless the DM is a dick and throws rust monster riding troll sunder-barbarians at you.

>>43837546
If i was gonna make a dagger fighter they'd totally be focused on throwing, it can probably become a pretty deadly build

At the end of the day, damage dice are absolutely worthless and its all about the flat damage

>>43837574
>>43837572
Also, just an observation: fighter players tend to be either autistic or too casual to actually pay attention and think tactically.

>>43837326
my DM once gave my paladin the option of being given a squire if I took the leadership feat

sounded pretty ok and so I went for it.
not really sure if it turned out broken or imbalanced but that was mostly because I had never actually used the feat before and had no idea what to do with it or my squire

>>43837591
Its a huge extreme actually.

On one hand, are newbies who roll the easy class.

On the other hand, are experienced players who roll the hard-mode class.

>>43837583
It's only 10 hp for each +1 enhancement bonus. The maximum your weapon can have is hardness 20 and 70 hp, if it's a +5 one-handed metal-hafted weapon. At levels when you can actually get a +5 weapon the amounts of damage are already 2-3 times more then that.

>>43837592
There is a feat for that. It's called Squire and accessible at level 3.

>>43837602
>Playing the fighter for Hard-Mode
>Not the Monk or Vanilla Rogue (OK, that one is heavy personal bias)

>>43837602
I ran a game for a party of newbies once. They all picked martials. I pitted a custom monster, slow-moving Huge troll with a huge amount of vulnerabilities to being flanked and backstabbed, and he had to spend a move action to rotate.

They didn't even think of positioning. They just lined up at his front and full-attacked him until he killed one of them. Then they ran away.

>>43837659
i'm glad my party has slowly become more competent over time, though i'm easily the one with the most system mastery the rest are at least solid

>>43837659
>party of newbies
>huge amount of vulnerabilities to being flanked and backstabbed
>They didn't even think of positioning

By any chance, do they even know about, or have you taught them the important nuances of flanking rules?

>>43837591
>>43837602
>>43837659

Do these threads always turn into baseless anecdotal shit-flinging?

>>43837674
"How come you guys didn't use all these advantages you don't know are in the game?"

>>43837674
I ran an entire session dedicated to character generation, explaining mechanics and a sample combat with pregenerated characters. And yes, I showed flanking and explained how it benefits, and who can benefit more.

>>43837679
They do.

>>43837616
oh thats actually really cool

I will have to make a character that uses that sometime if my GM will let me

I have always wanted to play the Paladin/Knight character and gain some little kid to follow me around and learn from me

the other one I didn't get until like level 9 or 10 so it seemd kinda pontless to have him following me around when no matter where we went it was very likely he would die so I couldn't teach him much. but level 3 sounds way more fun

>>43837697
There's a Cavalier archetype for it too.

They get an ability called Avenge Me, where if you go down, they get your Challenge bonus against the one who took you down.

>>43837697
It automatically upgrades to Leadership at level 7, so yeah, it's awesome. Have fun with it.

>>43837616
>It's only 10 hp for each +1 enhancement bonus. The maximum your weapon can have is hardness 20 and 70 hp, if it's a +5 one-handed metal-hafted weapon. At levels when you can actually get a +5 weapon the amounts of damage are already 2-3 times more then that.

On a full attack, in total, sure. But not/hit, and without the opponent coming in with a sunder build, he's also looking at an AoO to boot (tho, admittedly, at that point you are looking at creatures which have way more reach than your average fighter, so that's probably moot).

I mean, a Great wyrm's full attack damage is like:
Melee bite +37 (4d8+24 ~ 42), 2 claws +37 (4d6+16 ~ 30), 2 wings +35 (2d8+8 ~ 17), tail slap +35 (4d6+24 ~ 38)

Reduce for hardness and it only deals ~60 damage to the weapon on average, assuming everything hits, unless I'm missing something.

>>43837583
I just realized my current group does not have any weapons to sunder.

>Dragon Disciple with Claws
>Support caster Hunter with Animal Companion
>Arcanist
>PsyArm

>>43837723
60 damage is more then enough to give the weapon a broken condition, and it still has 10 hp left. A bit more luck on damage and it's gone. Also, there is another pair of maneuvers called disarm (if the fighter in question is wielding the weapon) and steal (if he's not).

>>43837772
Well... you COULD sunder the Psyarm's weapons... it just wouldn't do a whole lot.

And I'd wager people DO have weapons, even if they don't use them that often.

>>43837772
You can still sunder the spell component pouch of the Arcanist (and DD, if he's not a sorcerer), thus rendering them unable to cast anything with material (and possibly focus) components.

Speaking of countering casters in such a way, you can also use called shot rules to try and stab them in their throats to at least issue a 20% spell failure chance for spells with vocal components, at most - kill them in a couple of rounds.

>>43837801
Also, you can sunder or steal the arcanist's spellbook and fuck him over totally, because restoring a spellbook is hard and expensive as fuck even in the middle of a metropolis.

>>43837801
Burrowing Shot is also a good one. Automatic spell failure chance if you hit them, and the other penalties are pretty nasty too. Plus they've gotta waste a standard to pull it out, which does MORE damage, and then you can just shoot them again.

>>43837785

If a dragon has just wasted an entire round trying to break my weapon and not even succeeded, I have probably just won the encounter for my party. In that round he could have simply full attack killed the fighter.

So, not sure what the point of this is. Combat maneuvers are rather infamously a terrible waste of time even (especially) for big monsters unless they get them for free, like grab or wolf trip.

>>43837813
Making a backup spellbook ahead of time isn't expensive tho, once you got blessed books.

>>43837840
>unless they get them for free, like grab or wolf trip.

I am always under the opinion that combat maneuvers can only be fixed if it should automatically take effect during an attack rather than waste an entire turn for it.

>>43837856
If that were the case, would there ever be a reason to NOT use them? What would you add in as a penalty to balance them out?

>>43837868
Nothing, that's the point.

Damage is boring and inflexible, the only strategy is in dealing more of it/enough that it kills. Damage+effect is a bit less boring, and depending on the effect can be a bit more strategic in application.

>>43837840
That's why big monsters are terrible boss choice, because action economy. Even if the dragon in question is not a great wyrm and just and adult one, if he has a support of 4 fighter-level 6 kobold (dragon worshippers) archers with +1 bows and an array of (mundane) special arrows (because dragon hoard) behind cover (because cave), each full-attacking for 3 shots, possibly using ranged maneuvers (archer archetype L3 ability), the dragon and them gonna decimate a careless party, and even if the party is smart and well-prepared, they will provide a much stronger opposition then a single great wyrm dragon.
>>43837849
It's still possible to steal both. And the next one. All of them. It's only a single attack/standard action, after all.

That's why half my players hate my combat encounters.

Reminder there are lots of ways to implement Leadership that are reasonable and satisfactory for all parties involved

>>43837932
Not if one of the parties refuses to see Leadership in a way different from the one that they want.

>>43837618
>playing X class is hardmode
>implying playing a party of martials without a caster of any kind isn't true hardmode
>implying that isn't my S&S game in a sentence

git gud

So I'm going to try my hand at GMing a PF game for a bunch of 3.5 players. I've played PF and GMed 3.5 before, but this will be my first time running a PF game.

Would Rise of the Runelords be a good way to start?

>>43838035
RotR is the shittiest AP of them all. Run Reign of Winter, Carrion Crown or Iron Gods.

>>43838057
Shittier than Kingmaker? And Trumpets?

>>43838057
Rise of the Runelords is actually decent - if you had a bad experience with it, I'd chock that up to a bad GM.

>>43838066
Speaking of Kingmaker, I've heard the Kingdom building rules from it are shit, and looking at them (and the thread on the Paizo forums) I can see some of why

This is concerning, because my game is going to involve kingdom building at some point, and if the rules are shit I'd rather use something else. Are there any good alternatives?

>>43838057
I'm a PC in a separate Carrion Crown game, so I can't run that since I'll spoil myself. But I'll take a look at the others too.

I'd like to find one that allows a decent amount of player agency. These players have a habit of fucking up attempts to railroad them, so if I can easily improv stuff and still follow the basic path it'd be nice.

>>43838071
The plot is stuffed into notes that players are supposed to find. Literally all of it. Every plot point is a fucking note.

>>43838066
>>43838086
Kingmaker is nice if you throw out the kingdom building rules and use those from Ultimate Campaign.

>>43838086
You could start off by trimming extraneous shit from the existing ones. There's a ton of useless shit in there that mostly just serves to bog it down.

>>43838071
>>43838057
>>43838035
RotR is... standard, is the best I can really say about it. And there is a lot of plot you need to keep track of, so keeping notes is essential.

>>43838035
Try Reign of Winter.

It's damn fun. Make sure you woo the awoo.

>>43838097
I didn't say it was good, just decent. Doesn't really deserve to be called bad.

Speaking of APs, is Hell's Rebels any good so far?

>>43838092
Are the rules from Ultimate Campaign that different? A quick thumb through both makes them look the same, though I presume there must be some subtle differences.

>>43838118
It's more interesting for how easily you could turn it completely on its head than it is for its relentless wanking of CG characters.

>>43838118
>tfw having a full CN Grey Gardener and Milani Demagogue character ready to go, but no group to play it with

If I ever do, though. I'll show these prissy flower children how you run a REAL fucking revolution.

>>43838118
Its mundane and a bit cliche.
>Oooh, look, the BBEG is being turbo smug and has been forced to invite you to meet him, but you can't do anything to him in public but you're forced to reveal yourselves!
>Opera house time!
It doesn't play like a revolution against a really, straight up evil oppressive government, it plays like plucky rebels first teen novella.
Less Les Miserables, more shitty teen fiction.


Oh, by the way how viable is this

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=2290716&postcount=3

As a prestige class for PF?
I'm looking for Fey related material, how would I convert it to Pathfinder, apart from the obvious Spot to Perception, et al?

>>43838118
It's +5 will save.

>>43838066
Kingmaker is the ball mother fucker.

Just use the legendary games subsystem instead of the vanilla one and you got some magic going on. But its a lovely little sandbox with a lot of room to fuck about and go poke about in other places.

>>43838156
>legendary games subsystem

What is this, and where can I find it?

>>43838136
Wow. As in "betray the chaotic retarded rebels to the glorious Hellknights and stomp down the revolution"?

>>43838159
http://cporter.net/rpgs/books/Dungeons%20&%20Dragons/3E/Books/3rd%20Party/Pathfinder/Legendary%20Games/Ultimate%20Rulership.pdf

>>43838164
Well, in our version I'm playing a guy that's gonna go full Galt by way of Calistria, once he realizes what happened to his pappy in Deepmar.
Which is gonna be fun.

>>43838135
There are, and UC rules are much more varied, because they are getting expanded (for example, Heroes of the Wild has rules for treehouses and druid-style grove refuges, and Champions of Corruption contains rules for torture chambers and literal blood baths - they let you negate age penalties).

>>43838174
>druid-style grove refuges
Oh man, it does? I'm gonna have to look that shit up. Been meaning to get one for my druid character for a while now.

Hey, I heard Vestigial Arm got nerfed hard by some errata that I can't seem to find. Can you still wield two two-handed weapons and have it count as Two-Weapon Fighting when you've bought two Vestigial Arms?

>>43838186
It's on d20pfsrd.com, in Downtime section, if memory serves.

>>43838168
Many thanks.

>>43838145
Killing someone in public in front of everyone is the best way to send a message. It's an opera house, escaping afterwards wouldn't be THAT hard.

Anyway to scale down the PCs and the whole game? I really like the diversity and options as well as the availabilty of Pathfinder. However I want to play a campaign in a unexplored world and I assume in higher levels the PCs would have almost no exposing force and the theme would really move far away from the fun of exploring with limited resources.

>>43838328
E6 or E8.

>>43838333
Thanks a lot!

on a different note, are there some rules for playing a game over multiple generations of characters similar to pendragon? Just kind of interested in the concept.

File: 92eee4b22adc20cee4fff02768286dde.jpg (2MB, 2109x1456px)

2MB, 2109x1456px

Gareth, Elric, Forrest, is there any reason in particular why the Collective Defenses tactician strategy grants the tactician's Intelligence bonus as an insight bonus to AC for the entire party for Charisma modifier rounds, when every other strategy's bonus is +1 scaling upwards?

A 1st-level peri-blooded tactician can have Intelligence 18 and Charisma 18, thereby granting the whole party +4 AC (including touch and flat-footed) for essentially an entire battle.

Seeing you guys talk about Leadership has me thinking.

Im currently playing a synthesist summoner who is rather... paladin like ( it actually feels very.. kamen rider/power ranger -y really.), justice focused son of a noble who may or may not be dead.

I am going to get Leadership when able, as the DM is okay with it, though I wanted to use the followers for combat ( its a 2 player campaign ) as a sort of small squad... but now im wondering if they wouldnt just die like nothing to even a breeze and do nothing at all.

How would you make them useful in combat? Is that even doable or should I just scrap that idea?

>>43838254
That's the thing, he doesn't even try to have you assassinated and pin it on the canadians or anything like that.
He just lets you walk on up, gives you a reward, says something ominous and fucks off if you try to talk to him.

Its a cut scene basically.

>>43837298
Literally do your job as the DM and account for that with proper countermeasures. How can you be so shitty at not accounting for the capability of your player characters so they can't win the game with the same trick over and over.

>>43838518
>Someone who has clearly never GM'd before
>Someone who thinks "proper counter measures" min-maxing actually make the game better than the GM just telling the players not to be dicks and abuse something everyone in the group agrees kinda exploits the game
>Someone who's butthurt because they probably exploit every game they play and then whine about it's "in the rules".

Thank you for your completely irrelevant input.

>>43837417
Hit-Stuff-With-A-Hammer McGee can't just use a potion to fly or have his buddy cast it on him?

Sounds like his own problem for putting all his eggs in one basket to me. Not every encounter will or should play to his strengths.

>>43837447
>Every encounter is just melee combat.
>Fun game

>>43837447
But doing those things is fun and makes you feel like you're actually winning through smarts and tactics? Doing those things is what actual roleplaying is about and gets the game more interesting than "I swing my greatsword again"?

>>43838542
>I actually have.

>Flight is somehow an exploit to you and your group and not a clear sign of your incompetence as a GM. Glad I don't have that problem lol.

>I'm the type of player who plays what he likes, regardless of how optimized the build is.

Funny how my input is just about the same as all the other responses to your post?

>>43837478
Just buy a tangleshot arrow...

>>43838419
Consider what you don't have to get the most out of them. Try to avoid having them face your foes directly.

For example a Fighter who buys his wizard cohort a wand of dimension door and a potion of invisibility to effectively pounce his enemies.

Or a Barbarian with a Life Mystery Orcale who just heals itself while soaking up some damage with shield other and life link so he can be as reckless a little bit longer.

A rogue or monk with a bard to help them get some help hitting consistently.

You're a summoner you could probably do a decent job at buffing an archer cohort with a mount. Or a spellcaster with mounted spellcasting or something.

>>43838720
Ah its not about the cohort, rather the followers, the little lvl 1 (or maybe lvl2 when im 7?) folks with bows or so.

>>43838746
Ah, well that's a little harder.
I've never actually used followers before but unless it's a school of your student summoners who can summon some flank/aidanother squads for you I'd avoid having them in combat.

Did Kamen Rider/Power Rangers have any notable followers? Have'em do that lol.

>>43837893
You don't NEED to have your book on you. You only need it for an hour every morning and maybe if you need to fill some slots you left open out of combat.

>>43838542
How the hell is flight an "exploit"? It's one of the easiest things to obtain for any character and is a necessity if you want to survive high level encounters where practically all the enemies have it as a natural ability.

Is giving the Fighter a magical great sword also an exploit?

>>43836484
DESU I think I prefer how the old Warpaths were handled, so that paladins, rangers, and hell even order of the Godclaw hell knights could trade out a domain or blessings and get some 6/9 initiation loving.

File: Ancient Donut Steel.jpg (95KB, 691x800px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 691x800px

>>43838846
They had a lot of problems that needed solving. Going far beyond the intended scope was one of those problems. I kinda went to bed freaking out for other reasons, hence the, ah, pitiless mockery earlier, but the fact remains that druids, clerics, 9/9 casters in general, they ain't meant to have maneuver archetypes.

New version stands and will stand.

>>43838890
I liked going beyond their intended scope, I felt like giving cleric and especially a druid 6/9 initiating was sort of a dick move to my DM, but ending up with what was basically 5/9 initiating on a ranger was an amusing side effect that more than likely wouldn't break any games.

I suppose I could always ask my DM to use the old initiating system, despite it being ded so long as I'm not a dick about it.

>>43837251
>If you or the familiar has ranks in a skill use the higher of the two

I have 1 point in Knowledge (Arcana), so does my Familiar and we can both roll.

>>43835907
>>43836263
Sorrry, crashed. Unbreakable Chain is my Grapple discipline. Here's the first rough draft, and my first google document, let's see if this works:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DwJ2WkV-Lcq910vaA9ag6-Dlo6mw6r4TFjJ22pIBCYw/edit?usp=sharing

I'm pretty sure the damage dices will need a ot of tweaking. The final version will also accompany a replacement maneuver for Broken Blade since I stole Meteoric Throw.

Now to catch up on the rest of the thread.

>>43838890
It's alright we have prestige classes to boost our powers to 9/9 casting and 9/9 initiating.

Super gish mission a go.

Would ability to cast SLA Dimension Door from Item Mastery count as a prereq for Dimensional Dervish?

>>43839003
As long as you can be reasonably expected to be able to meet the prerequisites every day, you qualify.

Just like a Wizard with Fly in his spellbook qualifies for Flyby Attack. Because he has the ability to fly every day.

>>43836428
They get feat with +11 BAB requirement at level 6. Also ranger at least got skill points so they are more relevant outside of combat compare to fighter.

File: tg - How to follow someone in frozen time.png (60KB, 1000x409px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 1000x409px

>>43838977
One day, I hope to run a game long enough for a PC to be able to cast Time Stop as a Wizard.

Then, I want to see his face when the cleric he was fighting earlier starts to keep up with him.

File: What.jpg (19KB, 282x341px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 282x341px

I have 2 (two) questions:
1) If i have three arms, can I wield a two handed weapon, with two-hands damage benefit, and a shield without penalties? - asking this for an Alchemist with the Shoanti Tattoo trait
2) How does fare the Arcane Duelist bard as a gish, is it a decent choice?

>>43839043
>If i have three arms, can I wield a two handed weapon, with two-hands damage benefit, and a shield without penalties? - asking this for an Alchemist with the Shoanti Tattoo trait
Depends on how you got that arm, some options allow it some wouldn't. I guessing it's the Vestigial Arm discovery? That one allows it, no problem.

>>43839116
What if I use Tentacle discovery to held the shield?
Shame there's no warforged, I would make a totally-not-a-techpriest with this combo

>>43839137
It can hold a shield, not so sure it can be used to hold a weapon. Use the tentacle with the shield and two hand the weapon. You may not be able to shield bash.

>>43838846
The LAST thing full casters deserve is getting even L6 initiating at the cost of a mere fucking domain.

"Oh but it's just a few stri~" BULLSHIT. What they'd be after are the various boosts, counters and debilitative effects that they can capitalize on with their 30 <Casting Stat> while wielding a discipline weapon with discipline focus, putting the guys who have to spread things out a little bit more to actually land attacks with the rest of their repertoire to shame.

Not that the wizards and clerics begging for this won't pretend they just wanna toss a few d6s instead of capitalize on teleports and shattered mirror and the like.

>>43837445
That'll do it.

Or an item that gives you flight.

My preferred means of continuous flight:

Baseline Intelligent armor with a 30ft fly speed (+10500gp) - affordable by 6 or 7. Add your enhancements on top of that, no worries.

It uses a move action or double move to move you, and you keep your full attack.

At lower levels:
Some boots of flying, 1/day are only 6k, easily affordable at 5.

>>43839369
I would really like to see an initiating Magus, but I get that it would be a pain to design.

>>43839529
It's called Mage Hunter.
Although it lacks spellstrike.

>>43839369
As I'd mentioned, I prefer those corner cases and doing stuff the designer didn't intend, but not in a game breaking way, more of 'This is kind of cheeky' and amusing. The hell knight that gains 3 levels of initiating, the divine ranger getting a few spells and a few maneuvers.

Wizards and clerics probably shouldn't get full maneuver progression.

File: dorf.png (497KB, 619x594px) Image search: [Google]

497KB, 619x594px

>>43839546
>Wizards and Clerics probably shouldn't get any maneuver progression.
ftfy

>>43839546
>Full casters shouldn't get any maneuvers
FTFY

>>43839711
Except they can, quite easily, 4 levels in wizard, 1 in harbinger qualifies them for bladecaster. You can do something similar for psions.

It's actually somewhat harder for clerics as they have a feat in the way, but they can still easily do it. Hell, with the obscene amounts of healing a cleric can do with battle templar.

If they can spare the feat it's well worth the price of admission

If I were to get a Shield bonus to AC from Scarlet Einhander stance, can I then use my free hand as a shield for Iron Tortoise?

>>43839909
A shield bonus does not a shield make

>>43839768
Sure, but that's still doing something with multiclassing, losing some CLs, and not flat-out giving them maneuvers.

>>43839924
But muh free hand tho

>>43839540
Mage hunter with Magus VMC is actually pretty damn cool.

>>43839932
You can use it to jack off on all the bitches you're smacking with your 1h weapon

>>43839768
>1 in harbinger qualifies
>FULL CASTERS CAN GET MANEUVERS IF THEY TAKE INITIATOR LEVELS
How are you this fucking stupid? Do you not understand the difference between multiclassing/prestige classes and native initiating?

In the rules it says sheathing a weapon provokes an attack of opportunity.
How do you use Mithral Current, then?
Is there a feat you take?

>>43839043
Here's another silly one.
>Alchemist
>Vestigial Arm
>Some silly shit to get Scarlet Einhander and Iron Tortoise
>Leave vestigial arm free
>One handed weapon, shield, AND a free hand

What are the most delicious creatures in the Monster Manual for the purposes of deep-frying?

Need to know in case my PC's ever encounter a traveling chef.

>>43840237
Most of the stances allow you to 1/round sheathe as a free action. There's also the Mixed Combat feat which allows for unlimited free sheathing that doesn't provoke.

>>43840243
>Alchemist + Synthesist Summoner
I AM BECOME DURGA
GOD OF ARMS

>>43840276
Aegis also works.
>Extra Arms 1: A free hand
>Extra Arms II: Shield and a free hand
>Extra Arms III: Equip weapons instead, but kinda pointless for our free-hand purposes as a result!

>>43840275
Oh, I didn't think to check in psionic feats.
I was gonna go for some kind of AoO build with improved quick draw, but now I just need to hold out until level 6.
Thanks!

>>43840332
Fuck, you're right, Aegis also gets arms.
How many fuckin' arms can you have, total, then?
Like 20?
Fuckin' hell.

Can a warder use Acrobatics to tumble through threatened area while in Defensive Focus?

I was looking at the 3.5 PrC called Rage Mage and thought it looked pretty cool (playing an arcanist).
Do you guys think I could run it pretty much as is? I've seen some people on forums try to convert it to a 10 level PrC but I don't really see the point.

Also, any other possible ways to do caster pseudo rage mechanics? Could be as simple as a buff that never use for fluff reasons unless my character is angered

>>43840428
I know next to nothing about the class but isn't Bloodrager literally "barbarian but shits magic while in rage"

>>43840445
Ragemage was pretty shit because it got 1/2 spell casting progression, like 2 more uses of rage, had a d8 HD and 3/4 BAB, making you kind of shit at everything you tried to be.

Bloodrager is several steps up from it.

>>43840445
I'm going for a more pure magic character idea though. I'll probably end up keeping a couple spell slots with meta'd out evocations for 'rage' occasions, tho normally I'm a dispeller type.
If anyone knows any decent temp caster level boosts, that would also be a great help. I know arcanist can do that shit a little bit.
Also were already a few sessions in so the class is kind of locked in

>>43840355
Not sure.
Depending on the wording for the abilities though, if all you need is a weapon and a free hand, you could enjoy a 2h and a shield while still having your free hand, using Extra Arms II.

That's three customization points, leaving you plenty if you, say, Aegis 3 with SotAS.

>>43840425

Yes, you have all move-action movement options available to you to get to your enemy to hit with an AoO.

>>43840343
Bushi gets mixed combat as a bonus feat at 6th. The feat will be reprinted in PoW:E when the time comes.

Does this combo work, /pfg/?

>Ofuda (Su): A kami medium uses ofudas—psychically charged prayer scrolls—to focus his spells. [...] A kami medium's spells can't be dispelled by dispel magic or greater dispel magic, but removing or destroying the ofuda ends the duration immediately. An ofuda must be displayed prominently and can't be hidden (though a creature bearing an ofuda can hide normally). A successful steal or grapple combat maneuver check to remove an item is sufficient to remove an ofuda from an unwilling target, and a standard action automatically removes it from a willing target. An ofuda counts as an object made of paper with 5 hit points per medium level. The target of the spell can't see, harm, or remove the ofuda attached to her, though her allies can do so. If the spell is harmless, the target can see her ofuda.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/occult-adventures/occult-classes/medium/archetypes/paizo-llc---medium-archetypes/kami-medium-medium-archetype

>Burrowing Shot (Weapon Mastery)
>You lodge your ranged weapons within your target’s body.
>Prerequisites: Dex 13, Deadly Aim, base attack bonus +9, weapon training class feature with a ranged weapon.
>Benefit: When you successfully hit a creature with a ranged attack, as a swift action, you can have the weapon (or its ammunition, for projectile weapons) lodge itself within the creature’s body, causing the creature to take a –2 penalty on ability checks, attack rolls, saving throws, and skill checks as a result of the intense pain. Penalties from multiple lodged weapons do not stack. If the creature is a spellcaster, it gains a 25% spell failure chance with all spells it casts that include somatic components. This penalty can be removed with the treat deadly wounds use of the Heal skill or by removing the lodged weapon as a standard action, which ends the penalties and causes the creature to take an amount of damage equal to the weapon’s base damage (without any bonuses).

How do people end up with crit threat ranges of like 14-20 when Improved Critical doesn't stack with anything?

>>43840591
>must be displayed prominently and can't be hidden
>within the creature’s body
I'd say no personally

>>43840591
If it doesn't, it should, that's hilarious.

>>43840276
>>43840355
>>43840544
Nah, I just meant for qualifying for both scarlet throne one-handing and iron tortoise.
Though that is pretty hilarious. I believe synthesist summoner, at least, has a limit on the number of attacks you're allowed to make using all your extra jibblies.

File: Gersdorff_p21v.jpg (362KB, 1200x1599px) Image search: [Google]

362KB, 1200x1599px

>>43840591
What would the build be? Medium (kami medium) 1/Magus (myrmidarch) 19?

>>43840645
When someone gets shot by an arrow, that does not mean the whole arrow disappears into their body and goes unnoticed. You can clearly see it sticking out.

>>43840621
18-20 crit range plus improved critical becomes 15-20, then that one stalker art to expand critical range by 1 and explicitly stacks after improved critical.

>>43840355
Synthesist Summoner 20 gstalted with Alchemist10/Aegis10. 56 arms. Any other classes that can get extra arm? We can shrink the other side of the getalt to Alchemist 2/ Aegis 3 if we find any other classes that offer extra arms.

>You can't stack all of the critical hit debuffs onto one crit to completely fuck someone's shit up
>When a wizard can do the same in one or two spells that'll basically always hit and in an aoe too
Man, martials, I feel for you.

So if fighter is so good now, is someone going to write a guide on what exactly makes the new fighter less shitty? I always liked the idea of fighter but didn't want to bring everyone around me down. Also, Eldritch guardian and DSP's Myrmidon don't look like they stack, and this pains me.

File: tg - Tier 3 Fighter.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>43840786
I haven't seen any new optimization guides, but tg has a few suggestions.

What are some MUST HAVE feats for dexterity-focused melee characters?
I've already figured out the basic Weapon Finesse + Deadly Agility.
What else should I aim for?
This is my first martial, so I have no idea what I'm doing.

>>43840967
In the pastebin there is a link to class guides. In there if you scroll down there is a guide on weapon finesse

>>43841105
I actually looked in there and I missed it, thanks!

>>43835762
Can I get current links to the PoW:E stuff?

Looking for the classes, templates, archetypes, and feats, in their most up-to-date playtest form.

>>43841268
And this is why putting everything in the pastebin is a bad idea

>>43841296
Is the pastebin up to date?

File: DoTAMagicSucks.png (126KB, 375x360px)

126KB, 375x360px

>>43840895
So I heard that it is now possible to basically just be pic related with fighter.

On a scale of one to absolutely radical, how good is a TWF deadly agility mage hunter?

>>43840741
Improved critical and keen both double the crit range right? I always thought 18-20 crit range with one of those improved it to 16-20, as the crit range is originally 2 then goes to 4

File: 618% rad.gif (105KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 450x450px

>>43841309

>>43841369
They don't stack with each other.

>>43841296
It just links to the GitP thread, which has all kinds of links, many of which seem to be old.

Hence my request for just the CURRENT links.

>>43841369
An 18-20 critical upgrades to 15-20, as it would normally crit on an 18, 19, or 20. This is a "crit range of 3". Improved critical and keen specifically say that they do not stack.

If they did, the magus would be having one hell of a time with 12-20 crit range.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/fighter/archetypes/paizo---fighter-archetypes/drill-sergeant-fighter-archetype

>Weapon Trainer (Ex): At 13th level, when a drill sergeant wields a weapon he has weapon training in, all allies within 30 feet who can see and hear the drill sergeant gain half his weapon training bonus when they wield any weapon from the same weapon group. This bonus doesn't stack with any weapon training bonus an ally already possesses.

If you pick up Advanced Weapon Training through the feat (Drill Sergeant trades out everything after the first) then you can share half the bonus. Given the halving, I'm not sure how actually useful this is (your choices are limited to +2 Ref, Will, initiative, CMD or daily uses of combat feats), but it's a thing you can do. Maybe if you wear those duelling gloves that increase Weapon Training bonuses by +2?

I'm a little confused.
So, if your crit range is 19-20, and you roll 19, you don't actually guarantee a hit unlike if you rolled 20.
But what if you roll another 19? It's still not enough to actually hit, but you rolled within your crit range twice in a row. Does that, then, hit and/or crit?

>>43841461
Weapon Specialization should be changed to
>You gain the benefits of Weapon Training +1 for the chosen weapon. If you already have Weapon Training for weapons from that group, the bonuses stack.
with Greater Weapon Specialization increasing that to +2.

>>43841489
You still miss. The question is why your attack bonus so low that your attacks only hit on a natural 20, however.

>>43841489
Regardless of crit range, only a natural 20 is guaranteed to hit and/or confirm. So technically if your hit chance is bad enough, expanded crit range stops being helpful.

>>43841539
It's a crossbow on my Wizard, don't bully me.

Critique my Unchained Rogue.

http://charactersheet.co.uk/pathfinder/#/statblock/565536e9ed685c03001e1344

Going for a spy kinda concept but I feel like I could do better. 20pb Core races only 2 traits + 1 w/ drawback. Considering just swapping to a STR based Arcane Duelist.

>>43837535
The part that bugs me the most about this post is that, not only are they bringing realism to a game with wizards, but the fact they're comparing what can be assumed as a super highly trained martial warrior's skills with a weapon cord to some office worker trying it for the first time. By that logic, I decree all wizards are a bunch of D&D nerds going out into public and throwing things at the office workers at the front lines.

A dagger sized for a huge creature is also a greatsword sized for a medium creature, right?

So can I use a set of mithral greatswords for the Wreath of Blades spell?

>>43841773
Nope a huge dagger is a huge dagger.

>>43841773
you could theoretically use a set of huge mithral daggers, but the damage would be the same so

>>43836505
>1) The party wizard hammered a Ring Gate on the Warder's Shield. Now the wizard can cast bad touch spells through the Warder's shield bashes.

DM: "The archers shoot a hail of arrows at the Warder, who easily blocks them all with his shield..."
Wizard: "Fuck."

>>43841793
Fair enough.

>>43841821
Actually, now that I think about it, the huge-sized daggers (or even gargantuan or colossal daggers) are a tiny bit cheaper than greatswords, so it works out better that way.

>>43841847
Gargantuan dagger hits as hard as a greatsword. Huge is just 1d8.

Then there's the accuracy penalties..

>>43836505
We created a custom ballista bolt with a tree token that could trigger on hit and blow up an enemy airship with he exposove, devastating growth of its root system (which would be about twice the width of the crown of the tree).

We used it to shoot down the BBEG's airship. A month later in-game, a copy was used against our own airship. No one used an airship for warfare for the rest of the campaign.

the fantasy Geneva conventions banned both tree tokens and snow from use in war in the campaign's epilogue

>>43841938
feather token: anchor is funny to throw/launch/stuff into pillows and swing at people.

Is it possible to combine the magus' Spell combat ability with Path of War maneuvers?

>>43836505
So far the greatest item-related accomplishment in my campaigns was when a Rogue stuck a bunch of glass into a bag, smashed the bag a whole shitload, and then later tossed the powdered glass into the big bad's face. The big bad then immediately when AUGH FUCK and rubbed his eyes, blinding himself for like 8 months.
It was fucking ingenious, really.

>>43840517
That's almost entirely incorrect

>>43841935
Wreath of Blades doesn't involve attack rolls, foes just take damage if they start their turn adjacent to you. On the other hand, it also doesn't deal damage as the weapon would- it deals 1d4 per two caster levels, plus damage from enhancement bonus and weapon properties if all the weapons share the same ones. So even if you can use gargantuan or colossal daggers, it won't change the damage since the damage is explicitly spelled out.

Now, you might be able to convince your DM it should increase the range to match the reach of the big daggers, but allies beware, and good luck manipulating those daggers by hand since you have to use them as foci for your spell.

>>43842081
You're right, they do get 1 more rage per day than I had said.

>>43842080
ah, thats an old spoony dirty fighting trick

>>43842115
Heh, I figured he didn't come up with that on his own.

>>43842080
I once bought a pound of overpriced pepper as part of convincing a local merchant to give me some information. Come the next fight, I throw it at an invisible enemy who just had stolen a plot-related item.

>>43842101
D10 hd, rage per level as barb, except the first level which counts twice.
2/3 are caster levels, and iirc 2/3 bump your bab.

>>43842128
I means Spoony may have totally lost it in recent times, but he did share some of his brilliant dirty fighting d&d tricks

which include the bag of glass dust (Really, carrying a bag of sand, or any sufficiently fine material works for a dirty trick like that)

My personal favorite he shared is the 'bardic knock spell'

Which is when, to break into a place you might think is hostile, you knock on the door, and sucker punch the person who answers.

>>43842157
Wouldn't Bardic knock be seduce the person who answers?

>>43842172
not every bard is a slut.

>>43842156
I don't think we're looking at the same class. Complete Warrior Ragemage, page 72

Warder (Fiendbound Marauder) 20, Wizard VMC

>Familiar: At 3rd level, he gains a familiar, treating his character level as his effective wizard level.
Pick something with the http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/familiar/familiar-archetypes/protector-familiar-archetype archetype and keep it in your square at all times. You already have a d12 Hit Die, and now you can also divert damage to your familiar or have it block attacks.

Take Evolved Familiar and Improved Familiar to give your familiar Skilled (Intimidate) and two feats, then have your familiar take http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/damnation-feats/soulless-gaze-damnation and one other damnation feat.

>School: At 1st level, he chooses a school of magic in which to specialize. For all powers of that school, he treats his character level as his effective wizard level. At 7th level, he gains the 1st-level powers of his chosen school. If any of those powers grant an extra effect at 20th level, the character does not gain that extra effect. At 19th level, he gains the 8th-level power of his chosen school.
Take http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/arcane-schools/paizo---arcane-schools/classic-arcane-schools/illusion/phantasm

>Cantrip: At 11th level, if he has an Intelligence score of 10 or higher, he chooses a wizard cantrip from his chosen school and can cast that cantrip as a spell-like ability at will. He uses his character level as the caster level and Intelligence as the cantrip's key ability score.
Ghost Sound, I guess.

>Discovery: At 15th level, he gains an arcane discovery or wizard bonus feat, treating his character level as his effective wizard level.
Take http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/arcane-discoveries/arcane-discoveries-paizo/knowledge-is-power-ex to add Int to CMB twice. Or just take it as a feat at lv1, and use this to pick up Beyond Morality/Time Stutter.

Decent?

>>43842184
That's what acting is for. Don't actually have to sleep with them.

>>43842055
Nope. DSP devs have explicitly said they don't want to give casters more toys when people asked about that in the past.

>>43842317
dont want to give FULL casters more toys. warpriests/inquisitors/etc are fine so far as i can tell.

not to mention the magus/bard/bloodrager seems pretty well-suited fro them as well

>>43842361
Just play a bladecaster or magehunter anon

>>43842248
>add Int to CMB twice
If you care, Paizo has specifically prohibited getting X to Y twice. I'm not sure how much any PoW GM would care, but it might come up.

Beyond Morality is thematically cool, but generally not all that useful. Having your familiar eat damage is generally a bad idea, given how damage scales faster than HP, especially half your HP. It's more useful alive than dead. Phantasm gets shit on by anything that's immune to mind-affecting, teleportation is more generally useful. Cantrip is pretty much ignorable, too, although detect magic and create water are also useful.

>Decent?
Not really. A bunch of the stuff takes a long while to come online. The rest isn't that great at lower levels. At high level, most of the stuff like ghost sound, phantasms, or familiar blocking gets fucked by shitloads of immunities and damage. I'd say it's okay at most.

>>43842361
Tell the devs, not me. They've explicitly shot down spell combat with maneuvers.

>>43842374
no i meanthere's an existing archetype for casters to get initiator stuff--namely, the warpath archetype for warpriests and inquisitors, i'm unsure if there's one for magus and bards (which are the arcane counterparts of those two, respectively), but they seem suited for it.

File: 16908a7807ef4dac7f2f4d29ae96821a.png (3MB, 1377x1949px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1377x1949px

>>43838363

I would like to reiterate this for Gareth, Elric, and company: Collective Defenses is an unusual standout amongst tactician strategies:

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/classes/tactician#TOC-Strategy-Su-

>Collective Defenses:The tactician is able to harness the sensory information available through his collective to bolster the defenses of members of his collective. For a number of rounds equal to the tactician's Charisma modifier (minimum 1), the tactician and all members of his collective within line of sight of the tactician gain an insight bonus to Armor Class equal to the tactician's Intelligence modifier (minimum 1).

I was mistaken; strategies cannot be used at 1st level because they are first acquired at 4th level, but a 4th-level tactician granting a +4 insight bonus to AC for the whole party for an encounter still seems like a bit much for a swift action ability multiple times per day.

>>43842407
Bard has 2 abilities that are core to it, bardic performance and casting, strip the bard of its performance and it isn't really a bard anymore so they stripped casting and made the Rubatto.

The Magus can already do what PoW classes do with its spells, except a limited number of times per day. It's not ideal, but it works.

>>43842407
Magus proved too problematic to design for; so much of its identity and power is tied to mechanics that would be too strong with maneuvers. Bard has an archetype, in the Expanded doc. Name is Rubato.

>>43842437
warpath inquisitor trades judgment for the arguably better (at least in the full-day usage and flexibility fronts) initiator stuff while keeping casting, i'm surprised they couldnt finagle somethign like that.

>>43842476
i see.

>>43842476
Magus works pretty darn well with Bladecaster, though.

>>43842523
Yeah, but the design and build paradigm is b different there.

>>43842492
Inquisitors are first and foremost skill monkeys that can dole out babby smites that get progressively more powerful exponentially even. once you get to your 2nd and 3rd judgements, but it doesn't get those until much later in its charcter progression It's still a skill monkey once you remove babby smites.

File: a67bbca9417ce092ce3a72dbc6b10b0c.png (1MB, 1530x1530px)

1MB, 1530x1530px

>>43842428

>+4 insight bonus to AC

Also, this is before enhancement bonuses to Intelligence, so a tactician is looking at an even higher insight bonus to AC for the entire party.

>>43842476
looking it over, i'm surprised you didn't do away with a combination between jack of all trades/lore master/versatile performance/well-versed along with the performance modifications and been done with it (much like the other 'battle-bard' archetypes), instead of removing their entire repertoire of useful enchantment--and otherwise--magics.

i mean theres trading utility for combat prowess but that seems a little one-sided, especially since while they keep their pokedex status, skills are kiiinda still shit compared to spells (especially the bard list)

though i suppose my complaint (and comparison to the inquisitor's comparitively loss-free version) is probably useless to voice this late into the proverbial game.

Has anyone ever worked with the Book of 1,000 Whispers?

Honestly I should play a bard next game i play, the Arcane Duelist seems like a really cool archetype too

>>43842696
Aside from feeling that performance is more important to bardic identity than the spells - and also fucking despising those archetypes - the bard list was a bit too sexy for me to be comfy with it coexisting with maneuvers.

>>43842767
i dunno, the dawnflower dervish AT seems pretty great--dance for yourself for double bonuses, or use the rest per normal bard for the party as needed, on top of free stat streamlining and maintaining skillmonkey status (although losing pokedex status until 4th level, because versatile performance act+pageant of the peacock is better anyway).

its like a more combat-leaning archaeologist (which is a gr8 archetype as well, though not for the usual spoony lutestrummer feel)

>>43842915
If you want a combat leaning Archaeologist you take the sandman one

>>43842767
Question, as per Ultimate Magic, when an archetype replaces the base version of a class ability but not the Improved/Greater version of it, the character gains the base version of said ability when the Improved version would be gained, and the Improved one when the Greater version would be obtained. Does this mean that Fiendbound Marauder gets access to Aegis/Improved Aegis at levels 6/12? If so, the scaling of the bonus starts at level 6, scaling at 10-14-18, or do they start counting their bonuses at level 1, scaling normally?

File: 8c1f9857b548a615d8554743826ac1c5.png (2MB, 1173x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1173x1500px

>>43842767

Why is acceptable for an alchemist (polymath/vivisectionist) to have 6/9 initiating, 6/9 self-buffing with one less slot per day, full sneak attack progression (better than a stalker [vigilante]'s!), an Intelligence focus, and mutagen, yet completely out of the question for an initiating bard to have even staggered spellcasting?

>>43843070
Their spell lists are different, you autist. Bard's is better.

>>43843083
i'll note that the anon youre replying to there isnt me (i'm the one going on about warpath vs etc etc etc)

more that he shouldnt get called an autist for adding to the same topic

>>43842476
>problematic
IT'S OVER

>>43843147
Oh. Fair enough, then. My bad.

>>43843161
The word is still legitimate you troglodyte!

>>43838145
the fuck? It's a casting prestige class that doesn't have a prerequisite of spellcasting, it's not up front about what it even does. and the bonus spells are from the druid list???

take it away.