Pathfinder Is Still Bad

[Voss]

But the fact that you managed to start bitching about people not getting their aura bonuses in your first response to Voss is kind of... telling.

Yes, it is telling of the fact that whether or not you arbitrarily declare that the baseline could only ever be that allies doesn't include you means that you are more likely to make mistakes that deprive people of bonuses than give them ones they shouldn't have.

Since one of those is a problem and the other is not, it makes perfect sense to declare the default to be the one with no problems.

Then you're stilling missing the point. They declared one the default (which is functional, if sloppy*), and then 'clarified' with that the other is also sometimes true.

They're not even going to go part way and provide samples of ones that don't include you, just a general vague warning that those cases exist in the rules, which opens the door for all sorts of fun places for the game to suddenly bog down.

Taking away the caster's or source's bonus was never part of the discussion, except for you, in your own head.

*though I can accept DSM's response of 'shut up no one cares' about the linguisic bit.

[Kaelik]

But the fact that you managed to start bitching about people not getting their aura bonuses in your first response to Voss is kind of... telling.

Yes, it is telling of the fact that whether or not you arbitrarily declare that the baseline could only ever be that allies doesn't include you means that you are more likely to make mistakes that deprive people of bonuses than give them ones they shouldn't have.

Since one of those is a problem and the other is not, it makes perfect sense to declare the default to be the one with no problems.

Then you're stilling missing the point. They declared one the default (which is functional, if sloppy*), and then 'clarified' with that the other is also sometimes true.

No you complete fucking retard. For the four thousandth fucking time. I am arguing that allies including you is the better default rule, not that Pathfinders fucking FAQ answer is right.

You colossal fucking retard, I have said this like eight fucking times. And you still don't understand? Learn to fucking read.

[TOZ]

You colossal fucking retard, I have said this like eight fucking times.

Then stop wasting your time repeating yourself.

[Kaelik]

You colossal fucking retard, I have said this like eight fucking times.

Then stop wasting your time repeating yourself.

Or, since he still hasn't gotten it, and there is no particular reason to believe he is incapable of getting it, I can continue to post on an online forum that has nothing to do with my job and I obviously show up to for entertainment and tell him he is wrong on the internet.

[infected slut princess]

But if you smoke crack then you are your own worst enemy and you cannot target yourself with spells that target allies.

[Username17]

But if you smoke crack then you are your own worst enemy and you cannot target yourself with spells that target allies.

In this way, smoking crack is like playing 4th edition or allowing Voss to be your DM.

-Username17

[Pseudo Stupidity]

This thread got awesome in a horrifyingly retarded way in the last few pages.

almost always? Hell, just logically, it never makes sense for you to be another entity allied with yourself. The 'makes no sense' clause should always be in effect.

Voss, you are stupid. Your allies always includes you. I mean, not apparently in Pathfinder, and not in 4e, but in any well designed game.

The thing that started it is Voss talking logically about alliances (you are not an alliance of one unless you change the definition of alliance) and then Kaelik Kaeliking.



If somebody asked who my allies are I wouldn't start off with "myself" because that is stupid as hell. As a game term, who gives a shit, define it and move on but don't Pathfinder it because their 'solution' just obfuscates the meaning even more.

Buff spells shouldn't only target allies anyways, they should target "# of creatures/things in X range" because you should totally be able to buff an enemy if you want to. Auras should be their own things that affect anyone (including yourself) you designate them to affect in X radius.

I want to hear more about making prestige classes useful in PF and swording souls out of people.

[Sashi]

The problem is that "allies" and "enemies" are stupid ways to refer to "targets of your choice". If it's meant to exclude you, then it should say "can't target self" or something.

the word "ally" is too loaded. Is a traitor an ally?

[Pseudo Stupidity]

The problem is that "allies" and "enemies" are stupid ways to refer to "targets of your choice". If it's meant to exclude you, then it should say "can't target self" or something.

the word "ally" is too loaded. Is a traitor an ally?

Only until you find out about their betrayal!

But yeah, shit's dumb. It should all be targets of your choice with exclusions if there need to be any. It's not like the game is run by a computer, people can handle "I don't want my aura to affect <target>," but they'll fight it if that breaks the rules. There's no reason I can't make an enemy I'm trying to sneak up on exempt from my aura of pain that doesn't affect certain people anyways.

Edit: To preempt the "OMG YOU HAVE TO DESIGNATE EVERY TARGET FOR YOUR NEGATIVE AURA:" dumbassed argument that could exist: Just say "My aura affects things that are hostile/friendly to me unless I say otherwise." The MC is a person, they'll fucking get it.

[Voss]

Yes, it is telling of the fact that whether or not you arbitrarily declare that the baseline could only ever be that allies doesn't include you means that you are more likely to make mistakes that deprive people of bonuses than give them ones they shouldn't have.

Since one of those is a problem and the other is not, it makes perfect sense to declare the default to be the one with no problems.

Then you're stilling missing the point. They declared one the default (which is functional, if sloppy*), and then 'clarified' with that the other is also sometimes true.

No you complete fucking retard. For the four thousandth fucking time. I am arguing that allies including you is the better default rule, not that Pathfinders fucking FAQ answer is right.

You colossal fucking retard, I have said this like eight fucking times. And you still don't understand? Learn to fucking read.

Right. So... you agree with me completely (the Paizo FAQ provides dumbass answer), but wanted to pick nits about what I was criticizing by engaging about who can be the better word-Nazi? Hurrah. I don't give a shit about what you think is the better 'default rule,' because they are both bad.

In this way, smoking crack is like playing 4th edition or allowing Voss to be your DM.

-Username17

While being a player at a table I am hypothetically DMing for isn't something I'd recommend, I'm not sure what you're basing this particular remark on. I've said nothing at all about how I'd run a game.

[Avoraciopoctules]

I need to stat an aquatic eidolon for a level 6 NPC summoner. I need 3 tentacle attacks and one bite. It can have a couple pieces of gear and will likely receive a buff spell or 2 before going into combat.

Here's the picture I'm using: http://i1.minus.com/iocdYjySb04Ks.jpg

Thoughts? Suggestions?

[ishy]

Old comment, but:

Edit 7/12/13: The design team is aware that the above answer means that certain races can gain access to some spell caster prestige classes earlier than the default minimum (character level 6). Given that prestige classes are usually a sub-optimal character choice (especially for spell casters), the design team is allowing this FAQ ruling for prestige classes. If there is in-play evidence that this ruling is creating characters that are too powerful, the design team may revisit whether or not to allow spell-like abilities to count for prestige class requirements.

Hahaha holy shit. Yeah man getting into mystic theurge like 4 levels early is totally sub par.

Getting into MT 4 levels early is still probably weaker than straight wizard / cleric IMHO.
Disadvantages

• you need multiple attributes (lower dcs, less bonus spells)
• you'll always be a spell level behind,
• lower caster level checks (spell resistance, concentration etc.)
• less high level spells.
• no class features / scaling of class features
• possibly no domain spell slots / bloodline spells etc (the pathfinder forums seem to argue about this a lot)
• only 10 levels of MT progression

Advantages:

• more low level spells (but how many spells can you use?)
• bigger spell list (but you can plunder any real good spells you want in other ways too)
• lvl 10 MT, cast two spells once a day

Just seems like people are still stuck back in 2003.

About ten times a day, I’d have a slight variation on the following conversation:

“Dude, the mystic theurge is totally broken!”
- “Really? You gotta tell me—what happened when you tried it?”
“Well, um…”

[Juton]

Getting into MT 4 levels early is still probably weaker than straight wizard / cleric IMHO.
Disadvantages

• you need multiple attributes (lower dcs, less bonus spells)
• you'll always be a spell level behind,
• lower caster level checks (spell resistance, concentration etc.)
• less high level spells.
• no class features / scaling of class features
• possibly no domain spell slots / bloodline spells etc (the pathfinder forums seem to argue about this a lot)
• only 10 levels of MT progression

Advantages:

• more low level spells (but how many spells can you use?)
• bigger spell list (but you can plunder any real good spells you want in other ways too)
• lvl 10 MT, cast two spells once a day

Just seems like people are still stuck back in 2003.

About ten times a day, I’d have a slight variation on the following conversation:

“Dude, the mystic theurge is totally broken!”
- “Really? You gotta tell me—what happened when you tried it?”
“Well, um…”

The big change now is that MT has gone from a joke to something to consider in niche games. The old rule of thumb was never give up a level of casting unless it is for something awesome. 11 levels of Cleric casting is really awesome if your campaign stops around level 12. A MT will basically act as a Wizard since it doesn't have the melee options of a regular Cleric. I think you're right that a MT isn't stronger than a Wizard, but I think now the MT is an excellent tool for a Wizard player to consider using when designing a build.

[TiaC]

I need to stat an aquatic eidolon for a level 6 NPC summoner. I need 3 tentacle attacks and one bite. It can have a couple pieces of gear and will likely receive a buff spell or 2 before going into combat.

Here's the picture I'm using: http://i1.minus.com/iocdYjySb04Ks.jpg

Thoughts? Suggestions?

If you're hoping to use the tentacles effectively in combat damage is going to be a problem. I recommend Energy Attacks to alleviate this. You'll also need multiattack. If it's being buffed, you could bump it's AC to 26 with mage armor and improved natural armor. If possible, Trip is quite good, but it might not work while swimming.

Alternatively, you could focus on the bite. Take Bite again, Buff strength to 22, take power attack, INA(Bite), Increased damage(Bite), and trip and you attack at +11 prebuffs for 2d6+9. If your summoner is a half-elf or has a free feat, take Reach(Bite).

[ishy]

PF faq[/url]]Free Actions: How many free actions can I take in a round?

A: Core Rulebook page 181 says,
"Free Action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more fr ee actions while taking another action normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free, as decided by the GM."
Core Rulebook page 188 says,
"Free actions don't take any time at all, though there may be limits to the number of free actions you can perform in a turn."

Although there are no specific rules about how many free actions you may take in a round, it is reasonable for a GM to limit you to performing 5 free actions per round if each is a different free action, or perhaps 3 free actions per round if two or more are the same free action.
Part of this is for the sake of game balance (as some abilities used together may allow you to perform an unlimited number of useful free actions on your turn).
Part is for realism (as just because you can do something as a free action doesn't really mean you could realistically perform that action 5 or more times in 6 seconds).
Part is to speed up gameplay (as one character taking a dozen actions on his turn slows down the game compared to a character who only takes a standard action and move action on her turn).

Again, these are guidelines, and the GM can allow more or fewer free actions as appropriate to the circumstances.

Example: In one round you could speak, cease concentrating on a spell, dismount (with a DC 20 Ride check), drop a weapon or shield, and drop prone, as each is a different free action.
Example: In one round you could reload a pistol three times (using alchemical cartridges and Rapid Reload [pistol]), or speak and reload a pistol twice, as you are repeating the same free action multiple times.

Because reloading your pistol and talking at the same time is game breaking of course.

[tenngu]

Old comment, but:
Getting into MT 4 levels early is still probably weaker than straight wizard / cleric IMHO.
Disadvantages

• you need multiple attributes (lower dcs, less bonus spells)
• you'll always be a spell level behind,
• lower caster level checks (spell resistance, concentration etc.)
• less high level spells.
• no class features / scaling of class features
• possibly no domain spell slots / bloodline spells etc (the pathfinder forums seem to argue about this a lot)
• only 10 levels of MT progression

Advantages:

• more low level spells (but how many spells can you use?)
• bigger spell list (but you can plunder any real good spells you want in other ways too)
• lvl 10 MT, cast two spells once a day

Just seems like people are still stuck back in 2003.

About ten times a day, I’d have a slight variation on the following conversation:

“Dude, the mystic theurge is totally broken!”
- “Really? You gotta tell me—what happened when you tried it?”
“Well, um…”

I completely agree that there are stronger things than mystic theurge. But thats not exactly what I said.

Hahaha holy shit. Yeah man getting into mystic theurge like 4 levels early is totally sub par.

I wouldn't say getting into a dual progression class about 4 levels early is what I'd call sub par. It's kinda arguing semantics, but I don't want to start a separate "allies" debate though

Also, You can burn a bunch of spell slots on quicken or use one side for buffs and the other for whatever else, etc.

[rasmuswagner]

So, over at Paizo, they started answering rule FAQs regularly. With hilariously retarded results. Whether or not a lance in one hand for a mounted combatant gets 1,5*Str bonus and how it works with Power Attack is still unknown because they have contradictory FAQs and they can't even keep the numbers consistent within one book.

But here's the latest stroke of genius: You can only take the same free action three times per turn. Such as, drawing an arrow.

[Rawbeard]

GENIUS! I will totally bork every archer with that FAQ. Fantastic!

[Roog]

But here's the latest stroke of genius: You can only take the same free action three times per turn. Such as, drawing an arrow.

No, drawing an arrow is "not an action" which is totally different. However, drawing a thrown weapon with QD is a free action.

[ishy]

But here's the latest stroke of genius: You can only take the same free action three times per turn. Such as, drawing an arrow.

No, drawing an arrow is "not an action" which is totally different. However, drawing a thrown weapon with QD is a free action.

No.

Drawing ammunition for use with a ranged weapon (such as arrows, bolts, sling bullets, or shuriken) is a free action.

Nocking an arrow is a no-action.

[hogarth]

But here's the latest stroke of genius: You can only take the same free action three times per turn. Such as, drawing an arrow.

True story: I once went with my friends to a place that served "All U Can Eat" fish and chips, and they told us that they scientifically determined that the average "U" can only eat two helpings, so that's what the maximum was.

Fuckers.

[zugschef]

But here's the latest stroke of genius: You can only take the same free action three times per turn. Such as, drawing an arrow.

True story: I once went with my friends to a place that served "All U Can Eat" fish and chips, and they told us that they scientifically determined that the average "U" can only eat two helpings, so that's what the maximum was.

Fuckers.

lol

[Avoraciopoctules]

How would you go about giving a Raktavarna an enhancement bonus in weapon form? Raktavarna are basically fiendish snakes that can take the forms of one-handed weapons or jewelry.

The rules seem kind of murky but it has been suggested that Magic Fang might work for a particular form. What about an amulet or something, should it still apply when the fiend has turned into a knife or revolver?

[Avoraciopoctules]

Is there a decent way to make someone basically invincible in melee without playing a cheesy monster or template like Dread Mummy?

[Lago PARANOIA]

Well, aside from the standard 'invincible to melee' bullshit like Antilife Shell and Air Walk...

Assuming that you're like around level 8+, being a cleric that rolls Sword and Board with various stupid caster-level boosters like Prayer Beads of Karma or a Wayfinder + Orange Prism rocks.

If you're willing to sacrifice a domain and spell slots, the http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-
classes/cleric/archetypes/paizo---cleric-archetypes/crusader will hand out a few extra feats you can use to get things like shield specialization and heavy armor proficiency.

But basically:

Be a Samsaran.

Pick whatever two domains are your fancy. As always, I recommend Charm + Darkness, especially if it's a low-level again.

Grab these spells
www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/a/aura-of-doom
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spell ... nding-bone
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spell ... c-vestment
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spell ... inst-chaos
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spell ... d-of-faith

Grab these spells with your Samsaran ability
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/s/stoneskin <-- Specifically, communal stoneskin which is much cheaper.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/s/barkskin
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spell ... inous-skin
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spell ... cal-acumen

Grab these items
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/mag ... courageous <-- Kind of cheesy, but it works great with Extra GMWs
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/won ... e-shepherd <-- Use this in conjunction with variant channelling. Or just by itself.