Barachiel Shina's page

Organized Play Member. 773 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.


1 to 50 of 773 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm just looking for ways to reverse engineer their feats to PF1e. Man, Paizo sure made the new edition as alien as possible to stop people from converting and staying with PF1.

The Debilitating Shot feat, how can I make that a PF1e feat? I am guessing Point-Blank as a prerequisites with Dex 15 as well. I am thinking the target hit makes a Fortitude save or is slowed for 1 round.

I mean, if no one in their department is going to reverse these to make them work for PF1e, I might as well try.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:

Well, first of all, they aren't screwing anyone over, so you need to get over that.

Second of all, I'd support this idea with my wallet, if only as an experiment.

Well they are to me, I want more options and new monsters for the material they have now. I would also like maybe a PF1 version of some of the PF2 stuff that's coming out, but for my PF1 games. Right now, if I want to support Paizo, I MUST play PF2E. If that's not screwing over the base, then what is?

Ok, thanks for the info everyone. Gonna check out Legendary Fighters and Everyman Unchained

GM Nitemare wrote:
Cant wait for this, the last PF book I will probably ever purchase!!!

Likewise, I can no longer support a WotC 2.0 after this myself.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Here's an interesting idea that can easily rake in a ton of cash while ALSO pleasing the community at the same time.

Why not support BOTH PF1E and PF2E?

Yes, I know what people will say. But I'm not suggesting they equally do both, as we all know that will split their resources when they really want to focus on PF2E.

I'm saying maybe they release just a few products per year, better than nothing, I say! Right?!

It's better than screwing an entire community over who still want official PF1 material and don't really like and want to be forced to play PF2 because everybody else is, or arguing why they should switch.

I'm pretty much hanging on a thread here hoping I can look forward to more PF1 material, even if it's just a miniscule amount.

This is utterly depressing me thinking about it. :'(

Is there a 3PP for Pathfinder that has more stuff for Fighters, specifically new Advanced Weapon Training and Advanced Armor Training options?

Val'bryn2 wrote:

For everyone screaming about how all their stuff is useless now, you do realize that a booklet for conversions will likely be available, if not in the main rulebook itself? I'm planning on continuing to get the pdfs, probably going to continue 1st edition until I get the hang of 2nd edition, and see which is my preferred system.

One thing I might suggest, since everyone else is, perhaps mini-bestiaries in the Campaign Setting line, something to show the ecology of an area. Basically a larger version of what was in the back of the general nation books from 1st Edition.

Judging by all the PF2 information given on ENWorld, conversion to 2E is not simple at all. PF2 is entirely new system, a complete overhaul. Many many things are getting changed, hardly anything is being kept from PF1.

Many of the feats, classes, spells, archetypes and other options WILL NOT translate to PF2 well at all. What will happen is you'll have to sit around and wait for a PF2 version to be printed (again) and buy that product (again) or wait for a 3rd party website to throw it up since it's OGL.

It originally said the 28th.

Samy wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:
I'm glad to see that plenty of people who had reservations, have been more supportive of the idea of the new edition with every little bit of info the devs are giving.
Well, after the initial shock, I realized that I really do have enough 1e material to last me a lifetime, so I can happily keep playing it forever if need be. So once I got secure in that idea, it's easier to take tentative nibbles that maybe I could make use of *some* parts of 2e (like the APs).

The 2E APs are probably the only things us PF1 players will get use out of.

Considering the entire restructuring of their feat system, magic and spells system, and their monsters we are all screwed from harnessing any of the crunchy material from PF2 to our PF1 games.

Converting a PF2 monster to PF1, for example, is probably not going to be possible. Or may be with a ton of work.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Saw some more of the 2E Pathfinder rules today. It's all compiled on ENWorld.

It's no longer Pathfinder anymore. 2nd Edition is a complete overhaul and I hate it the more and more I read it. You don't want me playtesting it. I'll just be suggesting and pushing a lot of things to bring it more in line with PF1 again.

I expected this kind of garbage from WotC with D&D. WotC with the complete abandonment of the 3.0/3.5 community for their crap 4e and, then soon after, 5e, was why I left them and came to Paizo. Paizo showed the RPG industry that you can do an edition change without throwing away so much of the original material. This was why Pathfinder had the moniker of "3.75" but, to me, they are MY 4th Edition D&D. They were what 4E D&D should have been.

Now Paizo is just another clone of WotC, abandoning a great system like PF1 and giving us a completely new, different, and unnecessary 2nd edition.

The saviors have now become the perpetrators. Thanks for succumbing to the same mistakes WotC has made.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Atavar wrote:

When asked about remaining hardcover rulebooks for Pathfinder First Edition, Erik Mona said the following:



This makes me sad.... :(

It has me pretty mad. They couldn't fit in at least one more Bestiary at least? As like a going away present for us who don't want to go to 2E PF?

That would be very very crappy of Paizo to not at least fix the Shifter before they abandon us 1e Pathfinder players for good.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
CorvusMask wrote:

"Works better than everything that came since then" is major hyperbole and just wrong. If it did, nobody would have bothered to move on from 3.5 <_<

Like, I'm actually feeling very mixed here(I have spend a lot of little money I have) for "1e" products, but if nothing else, I guess year in future there will be finite number of them so I can actually buy all of them

Actually no one truly moved on from 3.5. Many came to Pathfinder BECAUSE it was a 3.75e

It was what 4e D&D SHOULD have been, I would argue.

The fact that many of the 3.5 material is very compatible with PF with minimal tweaking made it a very wonderful transition. The only things left in the dust were some of WotC’s classes (like Warlock, for example). It was specifically stated as a PILLAR to Pathfibdwr’s foundations.

Now they want to abandon it. And everyone who came on board with it with something more akin to 5th edition D&D than to Pathfinder 1e.

I’d rather play 5e D&D.

Brother Fen wrote:

Sad day. Instead of looking forward to the books that I've pre-ordered, now I just want to cancel them all along with this account. History repeats itself over and over. Out with the old and in with the newer dumbed down version of the game. Yay.


Pretty much. They lost a customer here.

I would prefer they continue to support 1st Edition PF, even if it means 1 product every few months. At least it's something.

To be completely abandoned (again, with D&D already having started that trend with 4e), there's only so much this gamer's soul can take.

The new edition sounds and reads like an overhaul, and not some kind of update/clarification/some new stuff/minor-but-important changes kinda thing.

So much for a Bestiary 7. Nice knowing ya, Paizo.

Would it be too much to ask for ONE more Bestiary before Pathinder 2E rolls in? That would be nice. (This time with more Aeons and Inevitables)

22 people marked this as a favorite.

Along with another poster above, this was why I left D&D too. Edition changes bringing TOO drastic of a change. And I'm not liking any of this at all, it's too unfamiliar and too simplified and too...different.

Well, I am going to pass on this. I'm not liking what I am reading, it's becoming too much like 5th Edition D&D and Star Wars Saga and everything else that's getting too "streamlined" and "easy" and all it really does is dumb down and make less options in a game. Also makes transitions really hard. Really hard.

I jumped onto Pathfinder because it was easy to convert 3.5 material to PF system, but now I'm supposed to make a 2nd jump? And I can't even enjoy new goodies from Pathfinder 2nd Edition because it appears that while PF 1e can be converted to 2e, it doesn't seem like Pathfinder 2e can be converted to PF 1e.

Therein lies my problem. (Doubt it is anyone else's, but it could be)

Were I able to, say, purchase a 2e PF product but find that it wouldn't be easy to switch it to a 1E PF ruleset, then you lost a customer.

But when you make things like "10th Level" spells, for example, you're adding a dimension to the game that really shouldn't be there and making backwards compatibility too much work to bother with.

Edition changes are more harmful, I believe, than good because it separates communities and sadly this is where I part ways with keeping up with PF anymore and just stick to its roots in 1e.

The players are heavily experienced and know how to optimize, so I have to go extra hard on optimizing my "boss fights" in order for my players not to run them over in 2 rounds using little resources.

Well, my players won't be too happy to learn the fiendish fire giant Fighter 12 that they successfully blinded was able to use his dual-wielded earthbreakers to use Cut from the Air to block the gunslinger's barrage of bullets coming at him. That was the idea, but if rules suggest otherwise, I get heat. Mainly because my players eyeball what the enemies do, because somewhere along the line they will try to pull a similar tactic knowing how I ruled it before.

That SHOULD be a cool thing Fighters can get away with but Fighters almost never get the good stuff.

For feats like Deflect Arrows and Cut from the Air, they require the character to "be aware of the attack."

So what does that term mean mechanically speaking?

My best assumption is, if you're surprised in the surprise round. Such as a rogue sneaking up on you, you fail Perception, and they take a shot at you from their hiding spot.

Does this term rely on the character also needing sight to the incoming attack, or just simply knowing the are being attacked? For example, mid-battle my character is blind. He's aware of enemies present and attacking, he just can't see, but can he still use Deflect Arrows?

If the answer is no, then a follow up would be "Does Blind-Fight prevent this, since you keep your Dex bonus to AC when being attacked while blinded/can't see enemy?"

I am asking this because I have a fire giant fighter against the PCs, who wields two weapons and has the Cut from the Air feat. He was blinded by a PC spell, but he still has Blind-Fight. The Cut from the Air feat specifically says it USES an attack of opportunity, but it's not making an attack of opportunity, it's using one to make a melee attack against an incoming ranged attack in order to deflect it.

Can my Blind-Fight blinded fire giant who is aware he is being attacked still use Cut from the Air when some arrows get shot his way?

Does Blind-Fight allow AoO when blinded at least or no?

Oh they added more stuff in the FAQ. Just noticed. That's a good start.

So how much more fixes can we expect and when?

For my next campaign, I have a player wanting something Druid-like without the spellcasting and Shifter is right up his ally cause he likes martial types. But, sadly, until the Shifter gets the update it needs, he's not going to want to opt into it.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I never knew this, but the Campaign and Companion lines also have errata. But it's for Organized Play, but looking at many of them it appears they are just as good fixes for core play. Why can't we get those into the core errata as well?

When exactly is this coming out? Next week is gonna be mid-Feb in fact.

Is it me, or is Starfinder causing the slump of new Pathfinder material? We used to have a PF Campaign and Player Companion product almost every month, but lately I have seen it every other month (and it looks that way for the future according to the schedule). Not that I have anything against Starfinder, but I thought Paizo was a growing industry yet it seems Starfinder is replacing some PF releases instead of side by side releases?

Dragon78 wrote:
Four months until the next campaign setting book. It does sadden me that they had to reduce the number of campaign setting books released in a year.

They did? What was the reason for that?

So the Adventure Path has come full circle? What made Paizo decide a Sequel to the first AP? I'm sure there's other themed APs that could have been explored.

For example, a Law vs Chaos kind of AP. (Where you can finally make use of Aeons, Inevitables, and Proteans and make more of them all!)

The lack of any real response from the company bothers me a whole lot. Something, anything, should be said at this point. Hopefully a future blog post or whatever.

Dragon78 wrote:
I would love to see a Pathfinder version of Savage Species.

Surprised they have yet to explore that option.

Probably a future hardcover.

Hmm, alright. Thanks for the info, I'll look into these.

Is there a method to use two one-handed weapons and benefit from Dexterity towards attacks and damage? Such as using two longswords, two battleaxes, etc.?

I am surprised we don't have PF stats for a fantasy version of Santa Claus since we have one of Krampus. Maybe some kind of Arch Fey I guess, probably why we haven't seen one yet. Just curious since Paizo tends to do real-life mythical being stats a lot.

This is why all damage should be typed, even if untyped, at least whether it's untyped physical/magical damage, etc.

nighttree wrote:

.......I'm not sure that it's reasonable to assume lack of playtesting caused any of the problems.

Paizo put out many high quality classes before they even tried the playtest thing.

Realistically they are the only ones who will know what factors contributed to the problems in this book. We can make wild guesses till the cow's come home but it's nothing more than speculation.

They haven't for Dragon Magazine, but an RPG system like Pathfinder they did do a playtest for the material. Even the rules material, not just the classes.

After that it was all classes, except for Words of Power.

Now...nothing at all?

Dragonborn3 wrote:
Paizo never playtested arcehtypes. It's sad we'll probably see more 'quality' like this now because there are no more playtests. What a cycle its in, eh?

Why doesn't Paizo do playtests anymore? I wholly believe past classes have been great and would have been horrible were it not for the playtests.

Does Paizo intend to purposefully let Pathfinder degrade in quality? Maybe to have some "legitimate" reason to usher in a 2.0?

It's mind boggling to me. Was there some sort of management change?

Personally, I don't see how hard it would be to do some sort of revision. A separate PDF file anyone can download and/or print. For those with the PDF, a new copy. For those with hard copies, well, best print out the PDF revision.

Many companies will take your product and replace it with something functional. If not, they still compensate you and you can get the same thing or something else entirely.

Car companies do "callbacks." Bring your car in, get what's wrong with it fixed, and continue on with what you originally paid for. A great quality product.

Now I'm not suggesting Paizo callback all their hard copy orders. But to do the electronic equivalent, instead. Revise, release as a PDF for those with hard copies to print (not the entire book, just the Shifter) and those with electronic copies can simply get a revised version of the PDF to re-download.

Done deal.

That's just how efficient customer service should work. Otherwise, you're just harming yourself as well as those who bought into something believing and being told it's one thing, only to find out it's nothing they expected or just poor quality of what they expected.

I believe we're not hearing much from their end because they're still considering what to do, if anything at all, but my hope is they're trying to do something. Maybe they're in the process and don't want to say much.

In time, we'll see.

Lot of stuff to sift through, just getting to the important part.

We getting a revision of the class or.....nah?

Mind you, this is going to taint future products introducing classes without public playtests.

Anyone have a copy yet?

Holy crap, I was looking forward to this and now an entire year!? Ugh...the hell?

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Just saw the FAQ on the Shifter damage. As if the Shifter wasn't weak enough already. Ugh.

Aeons and Inevitables. All I care about. Gimme more. Thanks. :D

Considering it brags about a bestiary, I really hope this is a book where we get more Aeons and Inevitables cause my games could really use more of them.

Well, the book is done, printed and sent out. Which means the Shifter is stuck as it is, because they can't rework the class considering how many of the books have been sold now and a reprint would just anger customers.

I am surprised there was zero public playtest on this. Hopefully this means Paizo won't do that again.

So what exactly is this topic about? Getting Paizo to make it a better class, or just hypothesizing what a better Shifter could be? I personally prefer a rework, release it as some kind of free web download maybe?

I dunno. It's just sad to see a new class just be thrown on the back burner and never used by anyone because of how flawed it is.

Fourshadow wrote:

Unlike someone else, I like the guns (2) in here. Multi-barrel, but rather short range and can do a variety of rounds/cartridges with them.
I like the Elysiokineticist, a lot. Is it optimum? No, definitely not. But it has its place/purpose.

The cylinder rifle cannot take in cartridges and has a hardcore reload time. But I can see why, it has 8 chambers so reloading won't be often.

Rather disappointing the book only presented TWO new firearms. Was hoping for several, really.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I personally wasn't thrilled at what I saw with the Shifter. It feels...lacking. Is that just me? I don't know what it's niche is and it feels a bit underpowered I guess. I'll have to see it in action I guess.

I think what would be awesome as future hardcovers are Pathfinder RPG books with real-world cultures as themes for a generic fantasy/Golarion version of them.

Such as an Ultimate Far East, detailing Tian Xia as part of the book and the rest a bunch of material for fantasy Far Eastern material such as archetypes, spells, expanded rules, NINJAS, and so on.

Others could be Ancient Americas, Egypt and such

zergtitan wrote:
When someone has the pdf, can they give us a list of the new firearms?

Was told there were only two.

SR I can base off CR since that's what is recommended. According to Monster SLA, it states to normally use it's HD. So I guess I will go with that, though that tends to have my upgraded monsters with CL 20th and higher.

Yeah but if they find a trap, a simple Disable Device check (which gets extremely easy to beat later) turns it off and bypasses it.

I can't find any rulings on exactly what it is a PC needs to do in order to make the check, or even what distance they can locate such a trap and how they find one.

Paizo needs a hardcover on Dungeon Building, with an entire chapter on new Trap rules and expansions to offer.

Considering the amount of options Paizo has released for monsters, going as far releaseding a "Monster Codex" book, I am very surprised how much lacking of feats or ruling on how a monster can advance their Spell Resistance and their caster level for their spell-like abilities. (Or even feats in general to improve upon the Universal Monster abilities, but I'll stick to the more common SLA caster level and SR abilities)

I consistently upgrade my encounters because my players are experienced enough to create characters that are not only min-maxed but also sync together well. This has made encounters of their level and even higher very easy encounters.

So I advance many of my monsters that I use, but the problem I keep running into is while my monster advances in HD/class levels, their skills, feats, etc. increase, but their CL remains stuck at a lower level for their SLA and their spell resistance remains too low as well, againt my caster players who have boosted CL checks due to their builds.

What do you suggest for increasing CL for SLA? Should I go by CR increase or HD increase? If a monster has 18 HD and a CL of 13th for their SLA, if I pumped them to 25 HD, should I adjust their CL to 20th going by HD? Or more of a 1 to 1 ratio of their CR?

The same for SR. If I have a creature at 15 HD with a SR of 20, if I increase their HD to 25, should their new SR be 30? Or should I base the 1 to 1 ratio on their CR and not HD?

With these high levels of play I am DMing now, traps and magic traps in particular, have become way too easy to detect and bypass.

Mechanical traps have built in rules to increase the DC as high as you want, but it's the magic traps I have issues finding ways to increase the DC for Perception/Disable Device.

I know of a couple of spells that directly help:

Improve Trap
Undetectable Trap

Both are very helpful, although Undetectable Trap's DC increase doesn't work on characters with Trapfinding, sadly.

So since I cannot find other ways to increase Magic Trap DCs, I figure finding ways to make them very hard to detect via magic would also help. Undetectable Trap helps in this, but I was wondering if Magic Aura would also work?

The spell specifies an item or person, but couldn't I build a Magic Aura effect into a Magic Trap like you can build an Alarm trigger or visual magic (like True Seeing) to hide its aura?

Thanks for any clarifications and/or advice.

1 to 50 of 773 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>