Pathfinder 1e I need help locating things to improve a weapons threat range

[samduke]

just as the title suggests
I need help locating things to improve a weapons threat range
this is for pathfinder 1e
my classes and race are set in stone and can not change I have feats I can use and money for magical items

the weapon I wish to improve has a base 18-20 threat range, I would like to get this as close to 1-20 as possible
now I have the improved critical feat (15-20 threat range)
I am having a hard time finding other things to improve on that so any help is greatly appreciated

[exelsisxax]

You're done increasing your crit range. Not only will you get nowhere close to 1-20, you won't hit 10-20, and you're also almost certainly not going to get the class capstones that are the only valid means of increasing crit range beyond 15.

[Seward]

Pathfinder made a lot of things crittable but was very careful not to allow anything that increased threat range other than the unstackable keen or improved crit effects.

D&D 3.0 was sloppy about that. 3.5 mostly cleaned it up but a handful of things snuck in at the end that could open it up a little. You've done all you can in 1e to widen your range.

There are a bunch of "xxx happens on crit" feats I don't think much of whose entry feat just makes it easier to confirm a hit. I think there might be more than one and possibly stackable things to improve odds of confirming a hit but me, I'm in the camp of "just have a high attack mod so you'll only fail to confirm very rarely anyway).

[Kurald Galain]

Amulet of the Blood Scarab autoconfirms a crit, as does the Eldritch Assault feat. Not quite the same thing but it may help.

[TiaC]

There are a few ways to get criticals that don't involve increasing your threat range

A Cyclops Helm will guarantee you a 20 on one one attack roll a day.

An ally with Butterfly's Sting can give up their critical to make the next attack from an ally against that target an auto-crit. You count as your own ally, unless that would be absurd, so you might be able to use this on yourself. With Combat Stamina, you might be able to get an extra crit out of it even without an ally. But even without that, you could turn your pet's critical into yours.

[samduke]

I already had the Cyclops Helm + auto confirm crits
oh well

[Thunder999]

Your best bet for getting lots of crits is an ally TWF with a pair of keen kukri and butterfly sting.

[Rynjin]

You're done increasing your crit range. Not only will you get nowhere close to 1-20, you won't hit 10-20, and you're also almost certainly not going to get the class capstones that are the only valid means of increasing crit range beyond 15.

You won't even hit 10-20 with 3pp support. I know the Stalker (Path of War) can hit 14-20, but I think that's the best threat a character can get in anything vaguely balanced and mainstream.

[Darg]

An ally with Butterfly's Sting can give up their critical to make the next attack from an ally against that target an auto-crit. You count as your own ally, unless that would be absurd, so you might be able to use this on yourself. With Combat Stamina, you might be able to get an extra crit out of it even without an ally. But even without that, you could turn your pet's critical into yours.

If the text mentions "allies" then yes you count as your own ally. If it just says "ally," then it means someone not you.

[TiaC]

If the text mentions "allies" then yes you count as your own ally. If it just says "ally," then it means someone not you.

Can you give me a source on this? It seems like a good rule of thumb, but all I could find was a FAQ saying you count as your own ally unless it would cause a absurd result.

[Rynjin]

If the text mentions "allies" then yes you count as your own ally. If it just says "ally," then it means someone not you.

That's not the case. The reason Butterfly's Sting doesn't work on yourself is that it specifies the "next ally", who by definition cannot be you, because you are the "current ally".

"Give an ally +2 to attack rolls" works on you just fine. Eg. Warpriest's Soaring Assault Blessing:


Soaring Assault (major): At 10th level, you can touch an ally and give her the gift of flight for 1 minute (as fly). The ally gains a fly speed of 60 feet with average maneuverability. She gains a bonus on Fly skill checks equal to your level. Whenever the ally succeeds at a charge attack while flying, that attack deals an amount of additional electricity damage equal to your level.

They can cast this on themselves just fine.

[Darg]

Can you give me a source on this? It seems like a good rule of thumb, but all I could find was a FAQ saying you count as your own ally unless it would cause a absurd result.

It's the 3.5 definition of "ally" which can be found in the PHB glossary. As PF is based on and uses the same terminology with the assumption that the two are compatible for the most part, the assumption is that unless the rules/FAQ conflict it's safe to assume they are the same.


ally: A creature friendly to you. In most cases, references to “allies” include yourself.

Examples of the differences in how they work can actually be found in the bard's bardic performance class feature. Inspire courage is "allies (including himself)." Inspire competence is "an ally." Inspire greatness and inspire heroics is "himself or a single ally." When in the plural they include the bard in the effect. When in the singular the bard is mentioned as a separate target from an ally or excluded as a target in the case of competence.

The paizo answer:


Do you count as your own ally?

You count as your own ally unless otherwise stated or if doing so would make no sense or be impossible. Thus, “your allies” almost always means the same as “you and your allies.”


If it says the target is your "ally" it makes no "sense" commonly or otherwise for it to affect you.


That's not the case. The reason Butterfly's Sting doesn't work on yourself is that it specifies the "next ally", who by definition cannot be you, because you are the "current ally".

"Give an ally +2 to attack rolls" works on you just fine. Eg. Warpriest's Soaring Assault Blessing:

They can cast this on themselves just fine.

Feel free to play that way. Paizo is pretty back and forth on whether anything they say is definitive or too vague and their answer for all tense and purposes in this case basically tells you it's the DM's call. You won't be guaranteed to act as your own ally in all situations so it's safer to assume you aren't if it doesn't mention "allies."

[Rynjin]

Feel free to play that way. Paizo is pretty back and forth on whether anything they say is definitive or too vague and their answer for all tense and purposes in this case basically tells you it's the DM's call. You won't be guaranteed to act as your own ally in all situations so it's safer to assume you aren't if it doesn't mention "allies."

No, it's...really not vague at all. You are your own ally unless it wouldn't make sense. In the case of a touch ranged ability, you can always touch yourself with a spell or effect. An example of a scenario where it doesn't make sense to consider yourself your own ally is with things that specify an "adjacent ally" (it is impossible for you to be adjacent to yourself) or when something specifies "yourself and an ally (you cannot apply the effect to yourself twice for multiple reasons here).


If it says the target is your "ally" it makes no "sense" commonly or otherwise for it to affect you.

Ironically, this statement in itself makes no sense, commonly or otherwise. Literally in the text you quoted it says "you count as your own ally". Trying to turn this into some recursive anti-logic where you don't count as your own ally because a FAQ clearly states it is so is extraordinarily silly.

[Mordaedil]

If you can, your DM could allow you to play the 3.0 class Weapon Master, which has a Ki Critical class feature, which you can use to gain +2 to your threat range if you already have Improved Critical feat.

But you might as well convince your DM to allow Keen and Improved Critical to stack if you want it that bad.

[Darg]

No, it's...really not vague at all. You are your own ally unless it wouldn't make sense. In the case of a touch ranged ability, you can always touch yourself with a spell or effect. An example of a scenario where it doesn't make sense to consider yourself your own ally is with things that specify an "adjacent ally" (it is impossible for you to be adjacent to yourself) or when something specifies "yourself and an ally (you cannot apply the effect to yourself twice for multiple reasons here).

Ironically, this statement in itself makes no sense, commonly or otherwise. Literally in the text you quoted it says "you count as your own ally". Trying to turn this into some recursive anti-logic where you don't count as your own ally because a FAQ clearly states it is so is extraordinarily silly.

From the viewpoint of moving from 3.5->PF there is no debate. If it says ally it means not you. You can say it isn't vague, but from my viewpoint it doesn't make sense for "ally" to not actually mean "ally" when there are a plethora of better words to choose from (that have actually been used I might add) that make much more sense. The quote actually says "You count as your own ally unless otherwise stated or if doing so would make no sense or be impossible." To me it makes sense that you can include yourself in the plurality of "allies" and not in the singular of "ally." It's how English works. It doesn't make sense to understand otherwise in a plain reading or consistency with language in the CRB.

In he case of touch spells, "touch" is the range of the spell and is usually accompanied by the target field which identifies the type of target. Your comparison doesn't make sense.

[Rynjin]

From the viewpoint of moving from 3.5->PF there is no debate. If it says ally it means not you. You can say it isn't vague, but from my viewpoint it doesn't make sense for "ally" to not actually mean "ally" when there are a plethora of better words to choose from (that have actually been used I might add) that make much more sense. The quote actually says "You count as your own ally unless otherwise stated or if doing so would make no sense or be impossible." To me it makes sense that you can include yourself in the plurality of "allies" and not in the singular of "ally." It's how English works. It doesn't make sense to understand otherwise in a plain reading or consistency with language in the CRB.

In he case of touch spells, "touch" is the range of the spell and is usually accompanied by the target field which identifies the type of target. Your comparison doesn't make sense.

How English (and all other languages) works is that "You count as your own ally unless otherwise stated" is a phrase that has meaning.

You are literally saying right now "Yes I know this is the text but I'll ignore that because I don't think it should work that way". "Ally" does in fact mean ally. And ally means "yourself and any other allied creatures". Once again, exactly as the text says "You count as your own ally". You are talking yourself in circles over this and nothing about what you're saying makes sense to me.

Aside: 3.5 has no bearing on this discussion. They are not the same system, and things that were ruled one way in 3.5 (eg. SLAs/caster level with an SLA meeting prereqs that require the ability to cast spells/have X caster level) is the exact opposite in PF.

[MornShine]

Combat Stamina with Improved Critical.

[Darg]

How English (and all other languages) works is that "You count as your own ally unless otherwise stated" is a phrase that has meaning.

You are literally saying right now "Yes I know this is the text but I'll ignore that because I don't think it should work that way". "Ally" does in fact mean ally. And ally means "yourself and any other allied creatures". Once again, exactly as the text says "You count as your own ally". You are talking yourself in circles over this and nothing about what you're saying makes sense to me.

Aside: 3.5 has no bearing on this discussion. They are not the same system, and things that were ruled one way in 3.5 (eg. SLAs/caster level with an SLA meeting prereqs that require the ability to cast spells/have X caster level) is the exact opposite in PF.

You are ignoring the "or" exceptions. If it doesn't make sense, that is an exception to the rule. It doesn't make sense when the text is referring to an ally to refer to yourself. Therefore the only 100% accurate and unquestionable reading is if you are your own ally only when referred to in the plurality of "allies." Each of the conditions have no hierarchy as written. Prioritizing "unless otherwise stated" above the others is personal bias/understanding over the literal meaning of the text. Maybe reordering the text would make it easier to understand? "You count as your own ally unless if doing so would make no sense or be impossible or otherwise stated.

[Rynjin]

It doesn't make sense when the text is referring to an ally to refer to yourself.

This is the part I'm not understanding about your argument. When the text specifically says "you count as your own ally" why would you make the assumption that it wouldn't make sense or be impossible to be your own ally?

Nothing about that tracks.

Let's break this down.

Statement: You count as your own ally.
Exception A: Unless otherwise stated.
Exception B: Unless it would not make sense for you to be your own ally.
Exception C: Unless it would be impossible for you to be your own ally.

Conclusion: Counting as your own ally is the default state of being, when the exceptions are not met.

In the case of an ability referring to "ally", "ally" is defined, very explicitly, to include you (the player) by default. The only time this ceases to be the case is:

Using the same ability as before:


Soaring Assault (major): At 10th level, you can touch an ally and give her the gift of flight for 1 minute (as fly). The ally gains a fly speed of 60 feet with average maneuverability. She gains a bonus on Fly skill checks equal to your level. Whenever the ally succeeds at a charge attack while flying, that attack deals an amount of additional electricity damage equal to your level.

A.) Not applicable; it is not otherwise stated that you do not count as your own ally.

B.) Also not applicable, as the activation requirements are capable of affecting yourself. You may touch yourself, so there is no targeting issue. There is no specification that it must be "an ally other than yourself". It is not impossible.
C.) Once again, not applicable. There is no circumstance here where the ability ceases to make sense if you were treated as your own ally.

And so, the ability works on any ally. Which, again, is defined to include yourself. Explicitly. By the text.

[Seward]

T

And so, the ability works on any ally. Which, again, is defined to include yourself. Explicitly. By the text.

That ability does require you to touch yourself to activate it, but that's true of any touch range spell, so agreed. It doesn't affect you AND your ally (other effects do, such as bardsong, which affects allies including you unless you can't perceive it, like a deaf bard singing)

[Darg]

This is the part I'm not understanding about your argument. When the text specifically says "you count as your own ally" why would you make the assumption that it wouldn't make sense or be impossible to be your own ally?

I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree. The exception doesn't limit itself to that only the ability not make sense. There is a way to read the text to which you don't have to rely on a paradoxical statement. Paradoxes by their very nature do not make sense.

[Denomar]

only thing I've seen is through class features.

Vigilante 20's vengeance strike effectively increases your critical range by changing your dice, but it also takes....like five rounds before combat.

The Inspired Blade swashbuckler archetype's 20th level Rapier Mastery grants plus one to the threat range of a rapier and explicitly calls it out as stacking with its other class features for a 14-20 threat range.

The Edgelord archetype of Harbinger's 8th level ability Papercut gives +1 to threat range of any weapon after improved critical and cannot be doubled. So that's also 14-20, but its also third party material.

Beyond that I'd say you are looking for abilities that allow you to roll attack rolls twice and pick the better.