Look at this thing I found in Pathfinder! The bad feats/spells/etc thread

[Sinfire Titan]

Not "bad" as in near useless, but very overpowered.

/人◕ ‿‿ ◕人\ Make a contract with me, and become an etc. etc.

Somehow I can't imagine Asmodeus employing those things.

Prime wasn't implying Asmodeus. He was implying /人◕ ‿‿ ◕人\

And Raineh was saying that Asmodeus likely doesn't have Incubators as servants.

[veekie]

Yeah, Incubators buy hopes and turns them into despair. That's yugoloths.

[Power]

New feat found:

FALSE CASTING
Source Inner Sea Magic pg. 10
When using a magic item, you can trick onlookers into thinking you used spellcasting instead.

Prerequisites: Magical Aptitude, Bluff 1 rank, Sleight of Hand 1 rank.

Benefit: When you use a magic item or a spelllike ability to create a magical effect, you may add additional magic-seeming words and hand gestures to trick onlookers into believing you cast the spell yourself. If using an item that is recognizable as a magical implement (such as a wand or ring), you can trick viewers into thinking you are just using the item as a focus component. Onlookers who have no ranks in Spellcraft have no knowledge of what is genuine spellcasting, and automatically believe you are casting a spell.

If an onlooker attempts a Spellcraft check to identify your “casting,” his check is opposed by your Bluff check. If he succeeds, he realizes the deception. If he fails, he believes you cast the spell. Regardless of the result of that opposed check, he uses the result of that Spellcraft check to identify the “spell” you cast, except the DC is 20 + the spell’s level instead of 15 + the spell’s level.

Well the +5 to spellcraft DCs is something, but most sane GMs would already let you use Bluff or Disguise to convince others you are the source of spellcasting when using an item anyway. This is one of those feats that indirectly nerfs pre-existing mechanics because it suggests to the GM that without this feat he shouldn't let you do that.

[TuggyNE]

New feat found:

FALSE CASTING
Source Inner Sea Magic pg. 10
When using a magic item, you can trick onlookers into thinking you used spellcasting instead.

Prerequisites: Magical Aptitude, Bluff 1 rank, Sleight of Hand 1 rank.

Benefit: When you use a magic item or a spelllike ability to create a magical effect, you may add additional magic-seeming words and hand gestures to trick onlookers into believing you cast the spell yourself. If using an item that is recognizable as a magical implement (such as a wand or ring), you can trick viewers into thinking you are just using the item as a focus component. Onlookers who have no ranks in Spellcraft have no knowledge of what is genuine spellcasting, and automatically believe you are casting a spell.

If an onlooker attempts a Spellcraft check to identify your “casting,” his check is opposed by your Bluff check. If he succeeds, he realizes the deception. If he fails, he believes you cast the spell. Regardless of the result of that opposed check, he uses the result of that Spellcraft check to identify the “spell” you cast, except the DC is 20 + the spell’s level instead of 15 + the spell’s level.

Well the +5 to spellcraft DCs is something, but most sane GMs would already let you use Bluff or Disguise to convince others you are the source of spellcasting when using an item anyway. This is one of those feats that indirectly nerfs pre-existing mechanics because it suggests to the GM that without this feat he shouldn't let you do that.

Stuff like that shouldn't be a feat, but an expanded skill use or something. Backward compatibility, people!

[Power]

Wait, I got another great candidate: EDIT: This feat was already posted on page one, whoops.

HELPLESS PRISONER
Source Gnomes of Golarion pg. 31
You can talk your way out of most restraints.

Prerequisites: Bluff 5 ranks, Escape Artist 1 rank, gnome.

Benefit: When you are restrained or imprisoned, you can make a Bluff check against any one creature within 30 feet in which you emphasize both your own harmlessness and the pain or inconvenience of your current condition. If the creature knows you are dangerous, it adds a +4 bonus to its Sense Motive check. If you win the check, the target does something intended to make you a little more comfortable—or at least shut you up—that gives you a +5 bonus on your next Escape Artist check.

Special: At the GM’s discretion, an especially evil or cruel creature may gain a +2 bonus to its Sense Motive check to resist this ability. If it succeeds, it does something to make your bindings even more secure and less comfortable, giving you a –5 penalty on all Escape Artist checks made in those particular bonds.

Another feat that enables you to do what you should already be capable of without the feat, plus this one has a lot of stupid restrictions and drawbacks. You have to be a Gnome, you must only make it within 30 feet, and the dude gets a +4 bonus to its Sense Motive ("if it knows you are dangerous" - if you are a player character and locked up, the answer is generally "yes"), plus for good measure it encourages GMs to give even more of a bonus to its Sense Motive and screw over your Escape Artist check if you fail your bluff - in the event that you happen to be locked up by an evil or cruel villain, which seems to be a popular villain archetype if you ask me.

I'd rather try this without using the feat, but that's just me.

[linklord231]

Not only that, but imagine if an NPC had this feat and used it against a player?
"he's so pitiful, your character can't help but go loosen his handcuffs a little
"but I'm a pitiless mercenary! That's totally out of character for me!
"too bad, he has a feat"

[TiaC]

I'm not quite sure if this is the right thread, but from the PFSRD's Movement page:

Note: The details for Burrow were not included in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook so the above information was copied from d20srd.org.

Really? They left out one of the movement modes?!

[deadkitten]

The Haunting Mists spell looks to be like a pretty terrific multi-utility 2nd level spell that a good majority of arcane spell casters would love to have in their repertoire.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/h/haunting-mists

Sadly, it's range and effect puts the spellcaster right into its effects.  Since it is a figment spell, it should also have a Disbelief component to the Saving Throw.  But hell no ... it doesn't.

I guess Arcane Archer is the only way to make this usefull.

[phaedrusxy]

The Haunting Mists spell looks to be like a pretty terrific multi-utility 2nd level spell that a good majority of arcane spell casters would love to have in their repertoire.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/h/haunting-mists

Sadly, it's range and effect puts the spellcaster right into its effects.  Since it is a figment spell, it should also have a Disbelief component to the Saving Throw.  But hell no ... it doesn't.

I guess Arcane Archer is the only way to make this usefull.

Cast it, take a 5' step back. The worst thing is you might take 1d2 wisdom damage. It would sure be more useful with a longer range, but it is still useable (barely...).

[Sinfire Titan]

But an awful lot of games (the majority I'd say) never even reach 17th level.

Just gonna say: Scrolls and Staves exist. It's expensive either way, but it is very possible to get a 9th level spell in the mid-levels (albeit in limited quantities). Given how Paizo made crafting easier, obtaining a scroll of Shapechange allows to craft a Staff of Shapechange (provided he can pump up his CL).

[Power]

Here's a bonafide trap option feat:

QUARTERSTAFF MASTER (COMBAT)
Source Ultimate Magic
You can wield a quarterstaff as either a two-handed or one-handed weapon.

Prerequisites: Weapon Focus (quarterstaff), base attack bonus +5.

Benefit: By employing a number of different stances and techniques, you can wield a quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon. At the start of your turn, you decide whether or not you are going to wield the quarterstaff as a one-handed or two-handed weapon. When you wield it as a one-handed weapon, your other hand is free, and you cannot use the staff as a double weapon. You can take the feat Weapon Specialization in the quarterstaff even if you have no levels in fighter.

This is amazingly stupid. I think the following rules text about double weapons from the PRD needs to be quoted: "The character can also choose to use a double weapon two-handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can't use it as a double weapon—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round." And these are already free actions, not "choose at start of turn and it's set in stone."

So the only thing this feat really does is enable you to take the Weapon Specialization feat so you do +2 damage with your quarterstaff, in case you felt like investing 3 feats as a non-Fighter to do +1 attack and +2 damage with quarterstaves.

For a novice though, they might think this makes for a good quarterstaff build.

[ImperatorK]

Um, quarterstaff is a two-handed weapon. This feat allows to use it in one hand.

[Raineh Daze]

Um, quarterstaff is a two-handed weapon. This feat allows to use it in one hand.

The rules text already mentions wielding a double weapon with one hand.

[phaedrusxy]

Um, quarterstaff is a two-handed weapon. This feat allows to use it in one hand.

The rules text already mentions wielding a double weapon with one hand.

The thing that's left out is that you can only do that with a weapon that's undersized for you (i.e. an ogre wielding a double-bladed sword made for a medium creature in one hand). This was definitely in the 3.X rules. I don't know if they transferred it to PF or not.

[Raineh Daze]

Um, quarterstaff is a two-handed weapon. This feat allows to use it in one hand.

The rules text already mentions wielding a double weapon with one hand.

The thing that's left out is that you can only do that with a weapon that's undersized for you (i.e. an ogre wielding a double-bladed sword made for a medium creature in one hand). This was definitely in the 3.X rules. I don't know if they transferred it to PF or not.

True.

It's still rather pointless as it's two feats to wield a weapon you would have no sane reason to want to wield in one hand... in one hand.

[ImperatorK]

It's still rather pointless as it's two feats to wield a weapon you would have no sane reason to want to wield in one hand... in one hand.

Flavor.

[Raineh Daze]

It's still rather pointless as it's two feats to wield a weapon you would have no sane reason to want to wield in one hand... in one hand.

Flavor.

That's rather outside the scope of this thread. Weapon specialisation adds flavour, but that doesn't make it a good feat.

[ImperatorK]

Weapon Specialization adds numbers, not flavor.

[Raineh Daze]

Weapon Specialization adds numbers, not flavor.

The flavour is in the name. >.>

Along with Weapon Supremacy.

[ketaro]

Weapon Specialization adds numbers, not flavor.

"You are skilled at dealing damage with one weapon..."

Technical flavor tastes technically like math 

Just as strong an argument as trying to take weapon spec. for a mechanical purpose though