Pathfinder General /pfg/

Would you happen to know the name of it?

Witches are great as debuffers. Besides the standard caster feats (spell focus/improved spell focus/metamagic/etc) you'll need to look into Extra Hex, Split Hex, Accursed Hex, Split Major Hex

Ability focus

d20pfsrd.com/feats/monster-feats/ability-focus/

Ability Focus.

>d20pfsrd.com/feats/monster-feats/ability-focus/
Unfortunately you have to choose a hex each time for this. Choose Evil Eye or Misfortune as they are your work horses.

Curse of the Crimson Throne has been mysterious absent from the /pfg/ line-up despite being the most /pfg/ AP I can think of.

I bet if you waited for Ironfang Invasion you could get players like mad though.

You don't even need Evil Eye to work, do you?

On a pass it still works for one round, which is enough for Cackle to start working.

That means you have to stand still if they pass the save until you get the blouse that lets you cackle as a swift action.

I don't think I could live up to the hype of a new AP, people shouldn't expect something extraordinaire out of me. Curse of the Crimson throne seems to be what the people want though, and that's something I can probably provide.

Eh, that's not that big of a deal.

I'd use Ability Focus on something that they actually need to fail.

Misfortune should be it then.

That shit saves parties man.

Seconding what said, Misfortune is a lifesaver thanks to how fucking broad of a benefit "enemies roll twice and take the worse result" is.

A properly build witch at level 1 goes for:
>Evil Eye
>Misfortune
>Shaken (via intimidate)
>Sickened (via ray of sickening)

Gives a total -6 to hit, roll twice and take worse.

Witches at low levels are devastating debuffers. Grab Bruising Intellect for Int to Intimidate.

I've been doing a CoCT game for a month or two now, it just didn't have a big public Roll 20 listing.

Further update on Avowed nerfs. This one might also hit some builds hard.
Celestial Pact will be losing its Constitution to saving throw DCs (and the Betrothed and Aspirant versions will be losing their Constitution-to-X, as well). This pushed their DCs far beyond what we'd intended, and was a (less than ideal) fix for what was perceived as a MAD issue as they'd need to focus more on Con than other characters. Instead, it made them premier debuffers, which was not the intended role of the pact. Now that Avowed trend more towards being two to three stat dependent, we're less worried about this concern, especially as Heavenly Body and its equivalents should be enough to push their attack rolls to the point that they can afford a higher Charisma score (or Constitution score, should you take Heart of Aether/Magic).

That said, we're not going to leave you out in the cold, and I've got plans for a debuff-focused subpact of the Celestial pact for people whose playstyle and concept had been tied to that.

Take a look at
No gear + no iteratives makes basic pulse a sad boy

The basic pulse isn't intended to be viable as a primary means of doing damage, so much as an emergency option when your standard operating procedure doesn't work - like a charger barbarian's backup longbow. If you want to focus on them, I suggest the Aether Skirmisher feat.

As an outside perspective on this, I feel the Spirited Swordsmanship removal was too much of a knee jerk reaction to a vocal minority, and it's very sad to see it's not staying in some form.

What do you feel were the main problems that it created?

You're missing the point.
Part of the balancing act's troubles is that you've got massive, massive multipliers due to a problem nearly identical to "single attack strikes" in PoW. This is also why everyone flocks to barrage.

The basic pulse not being a viable source of damage is fine and understandable; but over the course of levelling the base value that everything is built on shrinks to barely 22% of its original effectiveness.

That means every single non-weapon-loaded shape is stuck having to find a way to multiply the base's values by five BEFORE we even consider optimization.

Which is the kind of calculation that in earlier betas caused the immense disparity between "have" and "have not" on overcharge and steel's betrayal.

Everything is based on the basic pulse values. At level 3 they're amazing, but HP grows at an increasing rate with levels/CR, vastly vastly outpacing +3.5 points of damage every other level

My concern with going two-three stat dependent is that it might make DCs on your clauses too low to reasonable affect enemies as you can't use the same stat for actually 'Attacking' as you can using clauses.

It seems like the easiest/best way to build avowed now is just 'Monofocus Str/Dex, ignore Cha' as most of the best attacks use attack rolls rather than saves.

The feat was created because we had concerns about the class being too MAD, and MADness in general. Our viewpoints have shifted, since then, to a rather more moderate position. While there were a number of potential solutions to the problem, the simplest one was just to remove Spirited Swordsmanship, rather than fiddling with feat exclusivity or trying to accommodate for more Noble Scion-alikes.

Damage increases by 7 per level with an AoE shape, and goes up to 7 per level at 8th and 10.5 per level at 15th. Things will be tuned appropriately from there. We're not pretending they're done, but we're going to keep working on it.

As the Inquisitor, Investigator, and Bard manage with 3-stat dependency and are considered to be some of the most well-written of Paizo's classes, as single attribute dependency had become a serious problem, due to the existence of Altered Life/Unnatural Resilience/Heart of Aether/Heart of Magic making it easy to reduce a build to solely two stat dependent, and FINALLY due to the option of making a build that entirely ignores attack rolls... we're not super concerned about that.

elaborating slightly on the third point, yes, a purely DPR focused build doesn't want Charisma as much. However, they will also be less effective as a debuffer as a result. A single character being good at everything isn't the result we want.

Thanks for the Witch help

>due to the existence of Altered Life/Unnatural Resilience/Heart of Aether/Heart of Magic making it easy to reduce a build to solely two stat dependent

I still don't really get why removing Spirited Swordsmanship was the solution here when the initial Altered Life problem came from acknowledging the impact of a feat from DSP, something which you already tried to cut away from by making a conscious decision to not balance with Path of War in mind.

The existence of Altered Life in a game that might allow FFS but not other DSP also heavily alters the SAD of pure caster classes who can now qualify for the feat with Reborn, as well.

It still seems as though the avowed makes for too good a one-level dip. For the price of a single level and a trait (Magical Knack), any weapon-user can add +2d6 damage to all of their attacks (aether channel/aether rounds) and gain hidden knowledge (+6 untyped to all Knowledge skills and use them untrained) or silver tongue (+6 untyped to Bluff, Diplomacy, and Intimidate). That is surprisingly strong compared to Paizo's other one-level dips.

>Our viewpoints have shifted, since then, to a rather more moderate position.

Has it shifted over time or because too many people on pfg complained at once over the past two weeks

Hidden Knowledge should probably scale with level, maybe +3 at first the +6 at level 5 and beyond.

Skill check DCs are too delicate in the early stages of the game.

We have no problem with Silver Tongue or Hidden Knowledge's sizable bonus. They were part of what made 3.5e's Warlock such an appealing class, both as a dip and in full.

That said, we'll look into the aether channel problems at low levels.

3.5 warlock didn't give you +6 to hugely important skills ON TOP OF the big damage boost.

Warlock had shit damage, period. It only seemed high when the Wizard or CoDZilla was pretending that warlocks and psions were overpowered because INSANE DICE and ALL DAY.

I will agree with the others. A large, static bonus makes it a really good dip and also kinda dull (As it doesn't scale at all).

I mean, Hidden Knowledge blows the ever loving hell out of Bardic Knowledge until level 12 when they become equal.

It would likely be better if it scaled, rather than being static.

Heya, I was planning to run a 2-3 session game this Sunday where each player is a different type of avowed/vigilante gestalt:

Do you think I should encourage all the players to apply all the nerfs you've said at the moment, run it as the latest pdf says without nerfs, or potentially delay the game for a week to see what happens?

I mostly want to decide based on how firmly set you think the changes you've announced are.

So eldritch archer is such a step away from the normal magus and its other archetypes. I want to build one. Has anyone posted/made any guides that you would recomend?

The changes are pretty static, but many of them are incomplete and not finalized. I'd personally run it without nerfs until they're released, but be ready to adjust your encounters once the nerfs come in.

Tanuki? What? Is this new stuff that came in the Blood of the Beast book?

Thank you for the advice!

They're one of the Kitsune subraces currently being playtested in Dreamscarred's Bloodforge: Infusions. (And one of my contributions to the book.)

For Eldritch Archer? No. But I imagine all the Magus guides that outline how to make a good Dex Magus apply equally to Eldritch Archers, just replace the feats with Archery staples ala PBS, Rapid and Multishot, etc.

Thanks, sadly my gm prefers 1pp but that sounds interesting

Rapid shot seems to be a waste cause ranges spell strike, ranged spell combat, and a simple acid splash replicates that. I am not sure how Many shot interacts with this combo.

As a side note can you combine many shot and rapid shot? I have yet to play an archer or ranged character so I am not familiar with these feats.

Can you combine spell combat, spell strike, and rapid shot? Normaly spell strike and spell combat gets you a spell and 2 arrows at -2 each and adding rapid fire makes it an additional -2 for -4 for all 3 arrow attacks?

>rapid shot is a waste because spellstrike
You're not always going to be spellstriking. At some point, you're going to run out of spell slots or you're going to want to conserve them, and you'll likely be full-attacking with your bow.

That, and you can still do normal Magus Spell Combat tricks where you can cast a spell in your full attack, although yes your overall penalty would be -4.

>you're not always going to be spellstriking
ray of frost, acid splash

That still doesn't negate the fact that Rapid Shot stacks with Spell Combat.

Rapid shot gets you two arrow damages at -2 for each attack.

Spell combat, spell strike, and cheap 0 spells gets you one spell damage, and 2 arrow damages at -2 for the two attacks.

Spell combat, spell strike, rapid, and cheap 0 spell gets you 1 spell and 3 arrows at -4 for the 3 attacks.

The third combo does not seem worth it to get a 3rd arrow.

>Gm has 0 hrs logged
>Weeks since he made contact
>Applications thread is a ghost town
Taldor ascendant is bamboozle isnt it?

The only way I see rapid shot being usefull is that it is needed for Many shot.

Spellstrike,spell combat, 0 spell, many shot get you spell and 2 arrows with one attack at -2, another arrow at -2 cause spell combat, and iteratives at -2 and stuff.

took you that long to realize?

>being this wrong
A level 3 Tiefling Magus could easily have 12 Strength, 18 Dex and 16~ Int. If they take the Arcane Accuracy Arcana and make their full-attack within 30ft of the opponent they'd be able to make all their attacks at +6, presuming they have a Masterwork Composite Longbow. Even without using arcane accuracy, they'd still be attacking for +3. You can further boost that with things like a Bracer of Falcon's Aim, which is only 4000gp.

Now there's a fluffy tail I'd like to touch.

I am not counting or calculating the overall attack bonus. Just the penalties as the cost of doing such an action. So I am still correct in that regards.

>shifting goalposts
>I'm going to disregard a core class mechanic to make my argument not shit
Looking at it from your point of view, power attack is hot garbage.

Bracers got shit on, they only let you use Aspect of the Falcon for 1 minute 1/day now.

But I never shifted my stance and stayed consistent in my statements?

Also in my mind power attack is is good because for a penalty for that attack you get increased damage and furious focus then negates it. Two handing increases this boon for every attack. The rapid, spell combat, spell strike combo does get you another attack but it does not increase damage for the individual attacks and it decrease their attack bonus.

So in a way if you are to look at the ranged guy with this combo and someone with power attack, I would see that the power attack guy has more damage potential with less attack punishment. So overall doing spellstrike, spell combat combo with out rapid shot might be the better combo.

Tfw fluffy 2 died after i got accepted

Feels pretty bad. It was kinda cancer, but it was a game in a desert

The argument is 'Is rapid shot worth it?'

You said it wasn't because the to-hit cost is too steep for an extra attack.

That's disengenuous when you choose to ignore everything else, because then there's no context by which to compare it to and you therefore create a scenario that's impossible for me to argue against - shifting the goalposts.

Power attack is -1 to-hit for +2 (+3 while two-handing). But that's only going to be one attack, if we go back to my level 3 scenario. An Eldritch Archer is taking -4 for an average gain of about 9.5 damage, so while the Power Attacking character gets a more efficient trade, it's not necessarily the best for raw damage numbers.

Don't think I've ever played one. I played a Catfolk for one session. Honestly, you degenerates disgust me.

Why not?

Why not combine ranged spell combat, ranged spell strike, rapid shot, and deadly aim? lol

Cha/Dex races are a dime a dozen. And they don't really have any decent place in the world to speak of. No cities to call home, no history to look back on, no anything really. They're just an incredibly cheap fanservice race that very little effort was put into both in fluff and crunch.

Does rapid shot actually work with spell combat? Rapid shot specifically mentions a full-attack action, whereas spell combat is a specific type of full-round action. Shouldn't it be incompatible, like charging with vital strike?

I felt bad because I thought the GM was actually looking forwards to it, but then it all just went poof.

Then my hell's vengeance game died.

Maybe I should give up on /pfg/ games?

So lets say we ignore the cantrip spell damage, and we use your example build thingy, can you confidently say that 3 bow attacks at -4 EACH is better than 2 bow attacks at -2 EACH? In my mind I would rather have less attacks at a higher chance to hit than more attacks with less chance to hit. Remember, unlike a normal melee magus who can still hold their charge after a missed hit, a eldritch archer magus will just out right lose the spell if I am correct.

What would you base the next "animal folk" race off of?

Rapid shot states "When making a full..." so it is not a specific attack but a specific modifier?

Mantis?

Which characters were yours?

Process of elimination leads to Nameless Fairy, 2hu's sockpuppet.

>As a full round action
Spell combat is its own action
Full-Attacks are also a specific full-round action
You do one or the other.

Rapid-Shot only activates when making a Full-Attack action. Which spell-combat is not.

2hufag's autistic fixation refuses to let him post normally, it's unlikely to be him.

>let's say we ignore cantrip spell damage
Fine, that's only like 1.5 of the total average damage anyways.
>can you confidently say that 3 bow attacks at -4 each is better than 2 bow attacks at -2 each.
Yeah, actually. Most CR3 threats have an AC between 14-17, with the average being about 15. Making 3 bow attacks at +6 means each of those attacks will hit about 50% of the time on average, 40% of the time at worst. If you sacrifice your extra attack for +2 to-hit, you're only gaining 10% accuracy, but you're losing out on 1d6+1 damage. Then you're also missing the possibility of rolling a Nat20 on the attack roll you threw out, which is even more damage if you succeed the confirmation roll.

>a magus will lose the spell they miss with.
I don't see that written anywhere in the Eldritch Archer rules, but I could be missing something. Even still, it's not especially relevant, if we're using a cantrip, like you had originally suggested, then missing and losing the spell is not overly punishing.

Is there any conceivable benefit to playing a myrimodon or hidden blade instead of the more conventional full initiators?

I cant really compare it to the polymath and the other 6th caster templates because spells. Meanwhile youre a stabby guy that seems to upgrade himself from mook to named npc.

Magus, Spell Combat: Does spell combat count as making a full attack action for the purpose of haste and {{other effects}}?

Yes.

Edit 9/9/13: This is a revised ruling about how haste interacts with effects that are essentially a full attack, even though the creature isn't specifically using the full attack action (as required by haste). The earlier ruling did not allow the extra attack from haste when using spell combat.

>is there any benefit to playing a...hidden blade?
Yes. Hidden Blade can do some disgusting alpha-strike damage with the Underhanded Rogue talent and a pair of khukris.

Pangolins, as an offical statblock

Make it two divergent phenotypes where one develops magic and adopts a human like appearance and another becomes resistant to magic, adopting a more animalistic appearance.

Yes, because with three attacks you're probably doubling your chances of a critical, and a critical with a longbow does a lot.

Jianshi Li and Fleur-de-Lys respectively. I was really looking forward to the fluffy game, but ah well.

I did actually ask a couple of questions on behalf of 2hu, it's true. It was part of some advice on phrasing questions better so DMs have less aggravation on dealing with a delightful if sometimes overbearing person.

Except you wouldn't be missing either way, because bows have the most available bonuses and are second only to things that target touch in accuracy in this game.

this shit only works if you plan on being a fighter with weapon training, and don't be something else and trade it out.

even then it doesn't compare to all the strength bonuses you can get with spells.

>most cr threats
not that guy but if you are relying on cr then you are either not being challenged by your dm or you don't know how to play this game at a higher level.

>I did actually ask a couple of questions on behalf of 2hu
>delightful
Confirmed for sockpuppet.

>tips silly hat

Oh, no you are correct, I thought that was an elf, I was wrong.

No 3pp means no one will be interested.

Ooh! Ooh! Do Serpent's Skull!

speak for yourself.
3pp is what i've been dealing with for years and it's been mostly fine

but unfortunately as long as this shit happens at any time before 1130 pm est I physically can't reliably show up.

It's late, but my opinion on the subject is that instead of removing Cha to attack and damage, is remove all the shapes that allow you to conduct attacks.

The reason that no one complains about the sphere effects that conduct blasts is they can only occur twice a round, once with energy blade, another time with conductive and require a 2 feat tax to full attack while conducting.
You illiterate nigger, he said Paizo only, 3pp is fun, Paizo only is solved and unfun.

Please see CR is the best metric we have to make whiteroom assessments like this, as it gives us something to quantify our numbers against. I know that most appropriate CR threats will not be a life-or-death struggle for a party of four PCs of even decent optimization, but that's not really what we're examining here.
>your DM is isn't challenging you.
Bullshit. Nowhere is it stated that every encounter must be an epic fight that eats up chunks of party resources. If that's how you choose to run and play your games of pretend, then I hope you have fun, but I happen to prefer something different and a bit closer to how the system draws it up.

In terms of a video game, say Dark Souls, you aren't really challenged by the mooks. Yeah, they can kill you if you're careless or unlucky, but not every fight is Nameless King or Gwyn. Those mooks are your CR appropriate encounters. The bosses are above-CR encounters.

>you don't know how to play at higher level
>you're playing your game of pretend incorrectly REEEEEEEE
There is no 'game' at higher level. Once you get past level 12, PCs are essentially gods with mass reality altering spells, abilites and items with enough wealth to buy out small kingdoms. After that point there should be nothing that poses you a reasonable threat that isn't massively abose your average power level, at least 5+.

>durrr
I know what 3pp means you fucking dumbass, you're the one who can't read

>cr is a broken ruler, but we better use it anyway!
no. fuck you, shut up. the only metric that ever matters is other classes and builds because that level progression and the resulting if applicable disparity is what your dm will actually have to plan around for giving you a fair challenge.

The guy running the campaign here
has said >Paizo only, 25 PB, anti-feat tax, with elements negotiable if it fits backstories/is cool.

>paizo only

You're illiterate because you just said "there's no problem with 3pp" but the GM has said "paizo only".