Jamus Hainard

Biztak's page

Organized Play Member. 292 posts. 4 reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 292 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think that the weird DC for lingering composition is because it affects debuffs on enemies


Elleth wrote:
2 class feats and natural ambition again. I suppose it might do that?

It seems that way, and I'm a little disappointed about it. I mean in PF1 humans were more prevalent than any other race because their build would come online earlier and it seems that thos will be the case again.

I was excited about General Training because it was a good way to keep humans on brand without having the same problem we had in PF1 but with the inclusion of Natural Ambition humans are an even better option since they can pick either feat depending on their needs.


With hardness 5 getting your shield completely destroyed in one hit is a real posibility when taking a hit from a great axe


Surprised to see that the dagger does not get the backstabing trait


Elleth wrote:
QuidEst wrote:


Huh. My guess is that with all their features compared to Wizard (casting, armor proficiency, a martial weapon proficiency or upgrade to a simple weapon, a bunch of heal/harm spells, 8 hp, and a domain power), Cleric doesn’t get a class feat at first level. The feats still have level 1 as their requirement, because (as seen in Valeros) humans can get an extra class feat at first level.

Or it’s a sheet error.

Valeros has the same total number of class feats + features as Fumbus, so I don't think that extra feat is coming from human. Though maybe I'm wrong and that's what natural ambition does, which wouldn't be too surprising I guess. Kyra's ancestral feat is spent on a general feat (toughness) it would seem.

I think is a class thing just like the barbarian in the character generation video got to choose a totem and sudden charge the fighter got to choose reactive shield and sudden charge


The Raven Black wrote:
Biztak wrote:
Roswynn wrote:
Biztak wrote:
Barathos wrote:
Biztak wrote:
I'm disappointed to see that slings need an action to reload ...
They also made them only get half STR mod to damage.
Yeah didnt notice at first, my guess is that they dont want it competing with composite bows, on that note why not make all bows composite from the beginning?
Because not all bows are composite?
I'd rather have all bows add str to damage from the get go, I doubt it will break level 1, I asume that the sling is a simple weapon and as such should be weaker than a bow which is why it has the reload property, Im just disapointed because I wanted to try an urban rogue that favored a sling not because I dont understand the design choice. That said I still think that most range weapons should add str to damage from the get go, slings included

Even Crossbows ?

STR 8 characters would not be amused

Crossbows would be the exemption, maybe make an aditional version of bows that does not add str to damage


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Roswynn wrote:
Biztak wrote:
Barathos wrote:
Biztak wrote:
I'm disappointed to see that slings need an action to reload ...
They also made them only get half STR mod to damage.
Yeah didnt notice at first, my guess is that they dont want it competing with composite bows, on that note why not make all bows composite from the beginning?
Because not all bows are composite?

I'd rather have all bows add str to damage from the get go, I doubt it will break level 1, I asume that the sling is a simple weapon and as such should be weaker than a bow which is why it has the reload property, Im just disapointed because I wanted to try an urban rogue that favored a sling not because I dont understand the design choice. That said I still think that most range weapons should add str to damage from the get go, slings included


Barathos wrote:
Biztak wrote:
I'm disappointed to see that slings need an action to reload ...
They also made them only get half STR mod to damage.

Yeah didnt notice at first, my guess is that they dont want it competing with composite bows, on that note why not make all bows composite from the beginning?


I'm disappointed to see that slings need an action to reload, also why not give ray spells and powers a hit bonus equal to casting mod plus proficiency?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The dogslicer seems surprisingly good


Thanks a bunch Sam. Have a nice day


They said that medium and small humanoids use weapons of the same size


I would like to change my payment method for this order, and pay with the other credit card that I have in my account


Is it me or is the ogre uding medium sized weapons?


4 people marked this as a favorite.

looks great, now I just need to find out how many hp per lvl do they get and what weapons proficiency natural or otherwise they can get, to see if it is actually possible to play the demonic/draconic melee sorcerer without being a liability to the party


I tried to cancel by email last week but got no reply, please cancel my Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscription as soon as possible.
Thanks.


Sammy T wrote:

2) "you (and your allies, if you tell them) gain a +1 circumstance bonus to your next attack roll against it, but not against other creatures of that species" So, if we're fighting a pack of 5 wargs, and I critically identify one, the bonus doesn't carry over to the other creatures in the same combat?

It could be roleplayed in many ways, in your warg example it could be something like the ranger noticing that the target of his hunt is trying to avoid putting weight on its front left paw and exploiting that knowledge to get an advantage and the warg after noticing that it is being taken advantage off simply adjusting acordingly


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The martial artist is a popular character archetype that is not necessarily covered by the fighter. Weapons associated with martial arts like the Nunchuck and Bo Staff are as much a part of that character archetype as is the asumption of superior unarmed combat prowess and so I am somewhat bothered by the exclusion of the monastic weapons as part of the baseline monk. On the other hand the mystical part of the Monk like Ki belongs to a subcategory of the Martial Artist archetype and so I'm glad that it is not part of the baseline monk.


Tholomyes wrote:
Agreed, but I also don't know why you'd need the "2 feats from the pirate archetype" even. Feats are already level limited, and sure, they want to design against dipping, but if dedications are already a thing, then you're already cutting back on the attractiveness of dipping. If archetypes are designed well enough, then they should only need to be as attractive as class feats, maybe a little less, by default, but a little more for certain situations or concepts, which means I don't see the reason for mandating full commitment to the archetype. There's power in a broader selection, but there's also already a cost to get that selection in the first place.

That was just an example but I think that the more powerful feats should need a prerequisite to avoid someone at level 12-13 to just dip and get a feat that would be considered a capstone of the archetype.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I actually like the way the new archetypes are being implemented, but I do not like how the prerequisites are being use for the class feats. I'd much rather have the prerequisites for an archetype feat be to have x amounts of feats in the archetype than a specific feat. For example for Roll with the Ship I'd rather have: For this feat you need to have at least 2 Feats from the pirate archetype. And for a feat like Boarding Action you can add a caveat that if you have Rope Runner you can use this feat While swinging on a rope.

By doing it this way you can add player customability while still limiting acces to the more powerfull feats and so preventing people from just taking the archetype at high levels to get the more powerful feats


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The only thing I disliked about this was Sea Legs being a prerequisite for Roll With The Ship, I mean unless I can trade a skill feat for Sea Legs it would be hard for me to take it instead of a class feat unless I really want Roll With The Ship


12 people marked this as a favorite.
TheFinish wrote:


First of all, absolutely no weapon proficiencies without spending a feat is just horrible. It's just a Feat Tax for people not wanting to play a punchy monk.

I agree with this, having to spend my first level Feat to be able to use a Bo staff is more than a little disappointing


Been looking forward to this


7 people marked this as a favorite.

The info about Barbarian's fatigue was really interesting, they don't become useless in between rages, which is good, but they potentially open themselves to attacks. This open up some strategy for barbarian players on whether or not taking all of their actions while fatigued, each -1 to AC increases the enemy's chance to crit by 5% up to a total of 20% counting the -1 they start with that round making it the smart move to maybe take only one or two actions while fatigued


If crossbows need an action to load then Id like to see them adding strength to damage from the get go, specially if composite bows are gone


I think Diviner's Sight would work better as a reaction or with a longer duration


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Excaliburproxy wrote:


Town drunk could get a feat related to poison/intoxicating resistance and have lore for alcohol.
Slacker could start with 4 mostly useless lore skill.

I don't think any background should give a mechanical advantage in combat.

A Town Drunk could easily get an Alchemy skill feat (after all they should have experience getting rid of hangovers) and for lore a town drunk (does local drunk sound better? drunkard?) could have lore brewery or brews.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
GM Aerondor wrote:


That will still leave open the option for some backgrounds that break out of the mold, and give unusual benefits, such as the earlier mention bonus to a grapple, or trait like things in terms if a bonus to init, or +1 damage with an acid spell etc

Giving Combat bonuses to Backgrounds would be a mistake, as long as they stick to lore training and a skill feat, they avoid creating obviously superior options and thus all options are technically viable.

If not only combat relevant backgrounds would be picked.

**Edited a word**


Weather Report wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
LuniasM wrote:
I posit that there is a clear and present issue with the class gap for the full-BAB divine warrior when Gorum, the core setting deity of war and battle who is worshipped by soldiers, can't grant divine power to any full-BAB class. That's just silly.

Uh...two things:

#1: BAB no longer exists.

Yes, and it looks like most classes get Trained (+0), whereas fighters can get Legendary (+3). As we can see, every +1 is a big deal in this edition, due to the 4 tiers of success action.

Fighters go up to Legendary by level 13 it, was implied that they get it earlier than any other class and so I'm quite sure that other classes will be able to get it at higher levels either through feat investment or as a class feature


10 people marked this as a favorite.

Also Seelah's new artwork is fantastic


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I just hope that smite can be used on any enemy regardless of alignment, Paladins are a God's champion they should be trusted to make the right calls. A giant beast with Neutral alignment about to descend on a village can do as much harm as an intelligent and evil creature and a Paladin should have all the weapons at her disposal to beat it.


Can cleric of Torag use their warhammer as divine focus? can clerics use a shield painted with their god's insignia as divine focus?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The decrease in spell slots is more than overturned by the Spell DC being tied to class level instead of spell level. A Hold Person will be as useful in the level that you learn it as when you get to level 20 that is not bad at all.

That said the idea of having to prepare multiple copies of the same spell is not appealing to me


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
This feature lets you cast heal or harm an additional number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier!

Battle Priest Cries in Orc


Rules Artificer wrote:

On the other hand, there are some sorts of tiered item lists.

From the Secrets of Alchemy blog, they showed off some level 1 alchemical items and a level 3 item.

From the following Twitch stream, we were given the Philosopher's Stone as an example of a 20th level alchemical item.

The levels in those Items is the level the Alchemist needs to be to be able to craft that item


In an interview with Gameinformer Jason Bulmahn revealed that Pathfinder is sticking to Vancian Spellcasting though I don't believe that this is an inherently bad idea I think that players will be better served by slightly modifying the spell preparation system in two ways.

First, allow for a single spell to be used multiple times without having to prepare it multiple times. When I introduce the game to new players that want to play a wizard the idea of having to prepare burning hands multiple times if they wanted to use it more than once is always met with resistance and disappointment, so this is a particular feature of Pathfinder that I hope is fixed with the second edition.

Second, allow for heightened spells to be prepared just once and also be cast at whatever level the caster wants to, instead of preparing a level 5 Fireball, it'd be best to simply prepare a Fireball and allow the caster to decide in what level to cast it in the moment, that way more room is opened to pick more spells. Or at the very least If a caster prepares a level 5 Fireball allow it to be cast at level 3 or 4 by spending the appropriate spell slot this way the player is saved from having to prepare multiple versions of the same spell.


Now my question will the DC of Poisons also be increased as the alchemist levels up, I'd hate to have to learn five versions of sleep poisons to keep making enemies drowsy, and I'd hate it even more if I have to stop using it because the DC stayed at 13 throughout my career.


I don't think that higher level bombs will do more damage than level one bombs, neither do I think that they should. An alchemist can throw 2 of these bombs on the same round. at level 11 this amount to a total of 8d6 damage, not taking into account the potential critical damage, this damage is not on par with the only level 6 spell we know of which does 10d6 damage but spells are a more finite resource than bombs, at level 11 a wizard can cast a single level 6 spells (if they work like in PF1) while the alchemist will have a higher amount of bombs available to him, plus the ability to actually throw different bombs to get different effects on enemies.


Cavalier!

Imagine the ability to give up an action so that a teammate can have 1 action on your turn, that is how tactician should work.
Also I'd like having all the horse and charge options be class feats instead of baked in.


If I play a cleric with the death domain or PF2 equivalent do I get all the Necromancy spells in the game? (At appropriate levels of course.)
One of my biggest complaints about PF1 was that if I was playing a Cleric necromancer I was suddenly unable to pick many of the spells from that list, my domains granted me a few but I was still missing some great and flavorful choices, this problem only grew as more books came out with even more spells that I could not touch.
If the Cleric's ability to expand the list of spell relevant to the domains is baked in this might solve this problem.


Will we see a Barbarian with decent AC without the use of armor similar to how the Monks do it?


Pretty much that, is there an AP where a villainous Dragon is the main antagonist of the story?
I know that Dragons do appear as villains and enemies in some of the APs. But is there one where the Dragon is the actual "Big Bad" at the end of the story, and not just a pawn of the actual villain?


Lastly in defense of small weapons doing same damage, wouldnt this be realistic by having them being shorter but thicker, if a halfling and a human both have the same strength it should be plausible for both to swing a weapob of the same weight


Also I'm really pleased with the idea of the sling being powerd up, is a really deadly weapon that is easier to hide than a bow and quiver, perfect for urban envrioments


I'm pretty sure we will get 1 to 2 ancestry feats and 1 heritage feat (with the posibility to make it into a regular ancestry feat), my suspicions are unfounded, but I'm pretty sure that we will get something quite similar to this.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Stone Dog wrote:
I'm still in favor of halflings getting Wis for their tenacious spirit and gnomes getting intelligence for their keen minds. All small races getting Charisma seems bland

I actually like the Idea of Halflings being +dex/+wis, but I'd prefer for the Gnome to remain +con/+cha

But I don't mind things staying the way they are now


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ChibiNyan wrote:
The laws of a city are not intrinsically "Lawful", though the social contract of adhering to their restrictions in order to improve society is a lawful act.

That is why I said that societies can be chaotic, the examples I gave mostly work in a traditional society but in larger scales like nations and Gods think about it this way.

Lawful: Brings Order and Structure to the World/Multiverse.
Chaos: Undoes Order and structure in the World/Multiverse.

Example: A tribal leader that follows tradition and serve as the arbiter of Laws to her tribe may sound lawful, but if her society raids neighboring tribes for food and supplies, that makes her a chaotic leader of a chaotic tribe. Like I said chaos can be organized.


thflame wrote:

2) Alignment, despite being explicitly said to not be used as a straight jacket, is often used that way in the rules and by GMs.

Want to play a barbarian big on tradition (or in your case, that wants to be a town guard)? Sorry, he's got to be Chaotic(Non-Lawful?). He has to reject tradition (or oppose the law, in your case).

We have NUMEROUS threads about people who want to play a paladin and don't want to be forced into playing a strict, by the book type character, when the flavor of the class fits ANY good alignment just as well.

Though in my version a Barbarian can be a perfectly disciplined individual who follows tradition he simply does not enforce the rule of Law. Also a chaotic or neutral law enforcer is possible, a guard who uses excessive force and makes "preemptive" arrests can be CG, while a guard that take Bribes would probably be CN, or CE.

About the Paladin problem, he can be a whole range of Characters while remaining Lawful Good he does not even needs to be a disciplined fella, he just have to respect and adhere to Law, both moral and legal Law, and when these are in a conflict he should probably side with moral law


Chaos in my opinion is not necessarily a criminal but a disruptor of order or someone who attempts to accomplish her goals by going outside of societal norms, an example of this are the Drows in Golarion, they have a perfectly organized society but everyone is trying to find loopholes or ways to trick the system to get an advantage against their enemies and preferably getting rid of them altogether


One More Caveat:

Nations can be chaotic: a Nation of raiders that has no interest in making trade deals when it can simply take the crops from its neighbors is a Chaotic nation even if it is well organized.

1 to 50 of 292 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>