Pathfinder Is Still Bad

[...You Lost Me]

ishy that appears to be a Pathfinder book...

[hogarth]

Emphasis mine. Actually, in 3.5, Empower Spell does apply to +X modifiers.

This is part 5 in Lago's ongoing series "Hey, look what you can do in Pathfinder! (Oh wait, you can do that in 3.5, too.)"

[ishy]

ishy that appears to be a Pathfinder book...

It might appear to be one, but it isn't a pathfinder RPG book.

IIRC paizo had an adventure line of pathfinder. Then 4e hit, and they thought, hmm lets make our own RPG, anyone know a name? Lets grab the one from our adventure line: Pathfinder.

[Prak]

Yeah, I think so. I was working for FLGS at about that time, the actual path was the Rise of the Runelords thing, or it's predecessor, but the product was called Pathfinder. So... Product was called Pathfinder, but it was for 3.5, and Paizo made Pathfinder the name of their RPG, as ishy said.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Emphasis mine. Actually, in 3.5, Empower Spell does apply to +X modifiers.

That would have been really nice if it was on the SRD, but I see your point. Still, in the primal recesses of my mind, I seem to remember Skip Williams and then Andy Collins going 'you only empower the 1d4 part, because 1d4, not the +1, is the variable numeric effect' at some point.

It was published for 3.5 not pathfinder. But good luck in getting it past your DM that you can use a property released for a different game, that was published a year and a month before the actual pathfinder RPG was released.

Why not? It's not ironclad, but:

A.) It was published directly for Pathfinder several years after 3.5E was discontinued.
B.) It's part of the same tradition as the other Pathfinder adventure paths; the product catalog for the adventure paths definitely do not imply that it is supposed to be 3.5E only -- though it may just be a deceitful marketing trick to sell product to an audience who will only buy and use Pathfinder product.
C.) Backwards compatibility and all.
D.) D&D, at least for 1E and 3.5E D&D, has a tradition of creating products for an edition or revision before the edition or revision is specifically released.

No smoking gun though, I admit. A DM who is all 'I don't want to look like a dick by outright banning stuff even though that's my right, so I'm going to use whatever wiggle room I have so I can have my aura of fairness' has some room to maneuver.

If that's the case, though, not all hope is lot. I had dexterity as a secondary stat anyway, so it'll 'just' be +2-3 points behind. Not that archers don't have attack bonuses to spare. Just keep base strength at about a 10 or so, paying for slotless/piggybacked strength enhancement upgrades. And then use a

Hat of Greater Disguise

for another strength bonus (or size + dex bonus, depending on your pleasure). As for the missing enhancement property you can get the grayflame property if you have the swift actions to spare -- compared to the guided weapon property, that whole shenanigan will put you about 1 or 2 attack and damage bonuses behind. If/when you don't have the swift actions to spare, who gives a shit, because by that point in the game you'll already have a smorgasbord of effects to throw down with.

This is part 5 in Lago's ongoing series "Hey, look what you can do in Pathfinder! (Oh wait, you can do that in 3.5, too.)"

Hogarth, you have to be the most sniveling, smarmy, passive-aggressive little coward I've ever seen on this or any boards.

[ishy]

It was published for 3.5 not pathfinder. But good luck in getting it past your DM that you can use a property released for a different game, that was published a year and a month before the actual pathfinder RPG was released.

Why not? It's not ironclad, but:

A.) It was published directly for Pathfinder several years after 3.5E was discontinued.
B.) It's part of the same tradition as the other Pathfinder adventure paths; the product catalog for the adventure paths definitely do not imply that it is supposed to be 3.5E only -- though it may just be a deceitful marketing trick to sell product to an audience who will only buy and use Pathfinder product.
C.) Backwards compatibility and all.
D.) D&D, at least for 1E and 3.5E D&D, has a tradition of creating products for an edition or revision before the edition or revision is specifically released.

a) If by several years you mean, a few months at most, then sure.
b&d) Well keep in mind, the pathfinder RPG open beta started in September 2008, and the RPG launched August 2009 (according to a pathfinder wiki) while this module was released in June 2008

c) I don't really believe anyone really believes pathfinder is backwards compatible (except for the paizo devs), but yeah that could work.

- Edit:
And to give my post some more content. Have you seen this Paizo FAQ yet?
http://paizo.com/paizo/blog/v5748dyo5ld ... FAQ-Attack

Chargers can't have nice things I guess.

[Lago PARANOIA]

If by several years you mean, a few months at most, then sure.

Hrm.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rp ... -date.html

Huh. Damn, they were releasing stuff after the Monster Manual V? I thought that was the last book. Those guys were getting desperate.

Chargers can't have nice things I guess.

If I have the pounce ability and I charge with a lance, do my iterative lance attacks get the extra damage multiplier from charging?

No, for two reasons.

One, because a lance only deals extra damage when you’re riding a charging mount—not when you are charging.

Two, even if you have an unusual combination of rules that allows you to ignore the above limitation, it doesn’t makes sense that those iterative attacks gain the damage bonus. To make that second attack, you have to pull the lance back and stab forward again, and that stab doesn’t have the benefit of the charge’s momentum. (The Core Rulebook doesn’t state that you only get the damage multiplier on the first attack with a lance because there is no rule in the Core Rulebook that allows a PC to charge and take multiple attacks with a weapon, so that combination didn’t need to be addressed.)

WTF is Sean even talking about there? Don't bring real-world weasel crap into here; especially when momentum in the real world actually does work like that!

If you want to do errata then just friggin' do the errata. Trust me, we'll understand if you want to do that -- we had enough of that crap with uber-charging druid-monks in 3E.

[hogarth]

This is part 5 in Lago's ongoing series "Hey, look what you can do in Pathfinder! (Oh wait, you can do that in 3.5, too.)"

Hogarth, you have to be the most sniveling, smarmy, passive-aggressive little coward I've ever seen on this or any boards.

I save my politeness for other message boards.

WTF is Sean even talking about there? Don't bring real-world weasel crap into here; especially when momentum in the real world actually does work like that!

If you want to do errata then just friggin' do the errata. Trust me, we'll understand if you want to do that -- we had enough of that crap with uber-charging druid-monks in 3E.

I agree -- there's nothing that drives me crazy as much as when the designers say "black is white, and the rules have always said that black is white".

[Lago PARANOIA]

I save my politeness for other message boards.

I don't care if you're polite or not. A Kaelikish 'Lago, you're a fuckwit and you need to read the rules because here's what's actually going down' wouldn't cheese me off nearly as much as your snide little asides. This backhanded insult crap is obnoxious; if you got a problem then be direct about it or shut the fuck up.

[Username17]

Hogarth doesn't like to make definite statements, because when he does he invariably embarrasses himself by making claims like "Canadian conservatives aren't anti-feminist" - in response to a link to Canadian religious conservatives demanding that women "submit" to men.

So when he gets caught making a damn fool of himself like that, rather than admitting to being wrong or attempting to find some evidence to make himself look less retarded or trying to redefine his position into something less obviously untrue - he just slinks away and makes snarky comments that don't have a truth value for a while.

-Username17

[hogarth]

Hogarth doesn't like to make definite statements, because when he does he invariably embarrasses himself by making claims like "Canadian conservatives aren't anti-feminist" - in response to a link to Canadian religious conservatives demanding that women "submit" to men.

<shrug> That's my opinion about the usage of the word "feminazi", anyways.

So when he gets caught making a damn fool of himself like that, rather than admitting to being wrong or attempting to find some evidence to make himself look less retarded or trying to redefine his position into something less obviously untrue - he just slinks away and makes snarky comments that don't have a truth value for a while.

That's awesome -- Frank criticizing someone else for never admitting to being wrong!

[Archmage Joda]

Pathfinder has a few more wonky loops to it, too, like a... actually, I'll keep this one to myself, but I already know of one way for a cleric to plunder any wizard/sorcerer spell they want with a couple weeks downtime. The reverse is possible, too, with a sorcerer (but can plunder any list). The latter isn't as inventive, though, just play the Razmiran Priest archetype for a sorcerer and blow your wad on scrolls. Be sure to get a familiar or a telepathically controlled helper of some sort (hello thar, craft construct) who will juggle your scrolls for you.

While I know you said you were going to keep that loop to yourself, perhaps you would be willing to share at the very least a starting point for those of use interested in reconstructing that loop for clerics to plunder wizard spells?

[ishy]

While I know you said you were going to keep that loop to yourself, perhaps you would be willing to share at the very least a starting point for those of use interested in reconstructing that loop for clerics to plunder wizard spells?

I think the easiest ways are:
1: Spell research
2: Eldritch heritage feat + arcana bloodline

New Arcana (Ex): At 9th level, you can add any one spell from the sorcerer/wizard spell list to your list of spells known. This spell must be of a level that you are capable of casting. You can also add one additional spell at 13th level and 17th level.

3: spells like shadow evocation
4: staves and other items

You can also grab some spells from the same type of casters (so divine choses divine) if you take the Mystic past life racial from the Samsaran race from the Masterrace guide

[Tardzilla]

While I know you said you were going to keep that loop to yourself, perhaps you would be willing to share at the very least a starting point for those of use interested in reconstructing that loop for clerics to plunder wizard spells?

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/prestig ... -Magic-Ex-

[Lago PARANOIA]

While I know you said you were going to keep that loop to yourself, perhaps you would be willing to share at the very least a starting point for those of use interested in reconstructing that loop for clerics to plunder wizard spells?

There's also http://www.d20pfsrd.com/races/core-race ... oracle-elf. Not cleric specifically, but same basic idea -- cleric +wizard spells without losing spellcaster levels. Of course, I despise being behind on spell levels so I can't in good faith recommend an oracle.

[Mask_De_H]

So it's Thought Bottle bullshit with Pathfinder Savant? Makes sense.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Well, Pathfinder Savant causes you to lose a spellcaster level. And you only get seven spells of your choice from that class. And if you want to be a cleric archer, it torpedoes your BAB -- not that getting tomfoolery Named Bullet + Abundant Ammunition won't more than make up for the missing damage.

If you're a preparation arcane spellcaster, you can go Daivrat too. It's not even particularly hard, with a couple of weeks of advanced prep and some pearls of power, to cherry pick every spell for your prepared arcane spellcaster. And it's not even a bad idea, because clerics and druids get some downright killer crowd control spells. And who the hell could turn down getting Pathfinder animate objects or summon nature's ally VIII?

But you're still behind a caster level. So... let the buyer beware.

[ishy]

Must say, I do kind of like the idea of playing a human witch
Take Orc for the racial heritage feat then take the orc witch arctype and have a con-based witch.

[Tardzilla]

-- not that getting tomfoolery Named Bullet + Abundant Ammunition won't more than make up for the missing damage.

I don't think that'd really work - Named Bullet doesn't enhance projectileS but a projectile, singular. All the examples given in Abundant Ammunition are for spells like align weapon which affect 50 projectileS which seems pretty telling to me.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Named Bullet doesn't enhance projectileS but a projectile, singular.

I guess we'll be having a beast of a time then trying to find this one projectile in the entire campaign setting that Named Bullet enhances under that interpretation.

[...You Lost Me]

Wat? No, you use the spell on a single piece of ammunition. Now it's enchanted, and now you use it, and it comes back in the next round. But you can only use one, so if you're making multiple attacks, only one of them will get the benefit of magic bullet per round. Whereas with align weapon, unless you're using some Pathfinder equivalent of Storm of Arrows against 50+ targets, your attacks all get the enhancement.

[LR]

not that getting tomfoolery Named Bullet + Abundant Ammunition won't more than make up for the missing damage.

You don't even need to do that. Just cast the spell and dump a bunch of spell storing ammo into the container.

[Tardzilla]

Named Bullet doesn't enhance projectileS but a projectile, singular.

I guess we'll be having a beast of a time then trying to find this one projectile in the entire campaign setting that Named Bullet enhances under that interpretation.

Uh, no?

Named bullet isn't cast on projectiles but a single projectile, and nor is it like align weapon or greater magic weapon, both of which specify 50, not 1, projectiles enchanted.

But hey if you can blag your GM into it, go wild.

[Prak]

So what? Abundant Ammo pretty explicitly clones the ammo in the quiver. There is a vague case that can be made for your argument, but it's pretty damned dumb.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Named bullet isn't cast on projectiles but a single projectile, and nor is it like align weapon or greater magic weapon, both of which specify 50, not 1, projectiles enchanted.

The phrase you're looking for is 'multiple projectiles at once' then, not 'projectiles'. Because if/when named bullet can work on more than one projectile in the universe at all, it has thereby enhanced projectiles.

The fact that abundant ammunition explicitly stated greater magic weapon (instead of magic weapon, which enchants exactly one weapon/ammo bit) is weak beer, too, unless you believe that you can't put the ghost touch property on ammunition.