[Information] Questions, you say? Let them come.

[Fendrith]

Charm anger will just make them angry and I don't think they'll know it's you that's causing it. It just makes their disposition rather unpleasant. If you want to force them to attack you directly, you'll need compel.

[dbaque]

Well, it mentions that the Charm victim is angry/happy/whatever at a target of your choice. But still, if Compel is the way to go, then how do you make it worth it? If it is no easier to make hostiles fail a will save to focus their fight on me than to stop fighting altogether, then why bother? Unless I'm missing something.

[Fendrith]

Well the Charm target is who you're targeting to affect their emotions. You can't force them to do things with those emotions afterwards. That's compel. Well, you can just Compel 3, Gen 3 for a discerning aoe that causes everyone you target specifically within the aoe to "Attack you and only you with all hostile actions." That's pretty clear and simple. Is there some pathfinder spell you're trying to mimic? The traditional Defender of the Weak build just focuses on being so bad-ass that if they don't attack you, you'll destroy them and their families. Ignore Str, build Dexterity, Paladin 8 | Inquisitor 8, sword and board, Shield focus, greater shield focus, agile on the shield spike using a madu or buckler and your one handed weapon, combat expertise, blundering defense, cautious fighter, uncanny defense, that one trait that reduces the hit penalty when combat expertising, missile shield, ray shield, Double bane, two weapon fighting, imp twf (I realize you won't have enough feats for this yet). 5 smiting attacks with dex on all of them and bane along with phat ac and deflecting ranged attacks... basically the idea is that if they don't kill you'll first, you'll dominate them. If they try to hit you first, they can't hit you. Which is the point at which you say "Give up and accept mercy." Alternatively, for anyone who's curious, this is literally the only time the Skirnir magus archetype has any merit. You can do the same thing except instead of smiting, you can cast spells.

[TheMystic]

To my understanding Charm's Anger effect changes the target's disposition, which would be next to useless in combat, where all your enemies are likely hostile to you and your companions. I'd say compel, command simple ("Attack Me") would work best, perhaps adding subtle compulsion.

[Fendrith]

Lol I missed my original point which is that I'm not sure a spell that does what you're trying to do even exists in pathfinder, but Compel remains the most compelling way to do it.

[Fendrith]

Right, and the only other use is to cause them to rage... which. Well you don't want that. That's bad. Unless they're a caster. Then that's good. Do any of you guys have skype?

[SolarDragon]

I believe there are spells and abilities in Paizo Pathfinder that apply penalties for not attacking the caster, not sure if there are any that flat out force them to.

[dbaque]

Well, there is this spell in Pathfinder. It obviously suggests that Compel is the way to go for this approach.

Hm, any other ways to 'dissuade' enemy attention on allies ... contingent Evoke wards? Actually, that may be promising; how do you make a contingent spell able to fire more than once within its duration? E.g. Evoke?

Anyway, I was also wondering: Evoke [alignment] specifies that it deals half damage to neutral targets. Does Heal [alignment] heal half to neutral targets, too?

[Fendrith]

Probably to your last question, and as far as the evoke, I have no idea. Have you considered just running around naked? I can promise you that you will be the first target in almost every scenario. Lol, I'm sorry. Yeah, I don't know, technically evoke can be fired off as many times as you want during the duration as long as the total doesn't exceed the damage cap you get from the spell if I remember correctly?

[dbaque]

Does sword & shield fighting interfere with spellcasting somatic components? If so, anyone know any feats/tricks to get around that? I'd rather stick with my preferred fighting style if I can, rather than a greatsword.

[TheMystic]

Fendrith's perogative of course, but rules as written I think you simply lose your shield bonus that round if you use that hand to satisfy the somatic components (along with, if applicable taking the spell failure penalty of the shield and armour).

[Fendrith]

Don't clerics and paladins and all the divine classes get armored casting from EoM? My intent was to not have you divine guys mess with the somatic components.

[dbaque]

Yes, the divine casters (& bards incidentally) all get that as a bonus feat. I wasn't asking about arcane spell failure. I was asking about your take on somatic components. Do I need a hand free (i.e. w/o shield or sword held) to do somatic components?

[Fendrith]

I mean technically a shield counts as a hand free unless you're holding it weird or it's a tower shield or something, does it not?

[Fendrith]

Well either way, I believe TheMystic is correct. Using your shield hand counts as a free hand for the purposes of somatic components but you would lose the shield bonus on the same round you cast a spell until the beginning of your next turn. I'd allow whatever feat it is that allows you to shield bash and retain the shield ac to also allow you to cast a spell and retain the ac.