Medical Drone

DM_aka_Dudemeister's page

Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 6 Season Dedicated Voter, 7 Season Star Voter, 8 Season Star Voter, 9 Season Dedicated Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber. Organized Play Member. 7,332 posts (7,557 including aliases). 11 reviews. 1 list. 4 wishlists. 2 Organized Play characters. 21 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 7,332 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
HWalsh wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Lucas Yew wrote:

- Classes give you stat boosts at 1st level, Confirmed. Now I'm frightened about some players' sixth senses...

Ugh. Not sure I like this idea.

I don't like my ability scores being chosen for me.

Were you not going to max out your Wisdom playing a Cleric anyway?

Not always.

1. I don't always maximize a specific stat, I have run clerics that started with a 16 rather than 18 Wisdom.
2. I'm not always going pure Cleric.
3. There are a few Cleric Builds that don't really focus on Wisdom as the absolute highest stat (though this ties into number 2, as often this is leaving the class at some point.)

A +2 to Wisdom isn't going to max it out anyway, so you could still go lower Wisdom. Also if you start as a different class then you still might not max your Wisdom. I'm sure there's plenty of ability score customization from Ancestry, Background, Class and whatever freestyle bonuses you get at character creation.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
HWalsh wrote:
Lucas Yew wrote:

- Classes give you stat boosts at 1st level, Confirmed. Now I'm frightened about some players' sixth senses...

Ugh. Not sure I like this idea.

I don't like my ability scores being chosen for me.

Were you not going to max out your Wisdom playing a Cleric anyway?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Canadian Bakka wrote:

Yeah, I thought more about it while at work and the Elder Things are not really relevant to the overall plot so there is no need to bring them back into the campaign. I am considering running the Iron Gods AP after the Kingmaker one so I can tie them in to that one.

I got enough modifications to the AP as it is. ;)

CB

Moving at a speed of 20 ft./round through space. Maybe they should show up in your next Starfinder Campaign, really annoyed by the time they met up with the Dark Tapestry and came back, Golarion had already gone missing. ;)

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
edduardco wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
edduardco wrote:
Rules Artificer wrote:

One thing to keep in mind with the "nerf" to number of spells per day:

Your lower-level spells have the same DCs as your highest-level spells. Gone are the days where it's pointless to cast your low-level spell because it only has a DC 16 and enemies have a +25 bonus to thier saving throws.

Now, these lower level spells won't be as powerful as your higher level spells, obviously. That's the point. But a spellcaster won't be useless as soon as they run out of spells of their top 1 or 2 slots.

Yes but now spell don't autoscale with caster level, so the bigger DC for lower spells levels got balanced with the requirement of heightened. But that still leave us with fewer spells per day, so that stills looks like a nerf.
They may not autoscale with caster level, but they do start off with higher damage dice than your typical low-level spells. Magic Missile for example throws additional missiles based on how many actions you throw into it. So there's more ways than one to scale lower level spells.
Are you sure about this? I have the impression that magic missile cost one action so if you wanted to throw more missiles you were expanding more spell slots.

Nope, you spend one spell slot, and if you spend 1 action in the casting you get 1 missile, two actions gets you 2 missiles and 3 actions I believe (don't quote me) you get 4 missiles.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
edduardco wrote:
Rules Artificer wrote:

One thing to keep in mind with the "nerf" to number of spells per day:

Your lower-level spells have the same DCs as your highest-level spells. Gone are the days where it's pointless to cast your low-level spell because it only has a DC 16 and enemies have a +25 bonus to thier saving throws.

Now, these lower level spells won't be as powerful as your higher level spells, obviously. That's the point. But a spellcaster won't be useless as soon as they run out of spells of their top 1 or 2 slots.

Yes but now spell don't autoscale with caster level, so the bigger DC for lower spells levels got balanced with the requirement of heightened. But that still leave us with fewer spells per day, so that stills looks like a nerf.

They may not autoscale with caster level, but they do start off with higher damage dice than your typical low-level spells. Magic Missile for example throws additional missiles based on how many actions you throw into it. So there's more ways than one to scale lower level spells.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

Really excited about the updates to clerics, 9th level casting and the interaction of clerics, deities and channelling.

Interesting that channel energy pool is separate from spell points.

And odd that channel energy pool is built off Charisma still, since I would suspect Wizards, Sorcerers and Bards won’t need to keep up a secondary ability for any of their class features.

But then Clerics have always been consistent powerhouses in the game, between buffing spells, decent weapon/armor proficiencies, medium HD, and self-healing ability it might be necessary to spread the cleric a little thinner. That’s what a playtest is for after all.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
graystone wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:
Going at a different angle, what happens to traps that are Weight based?
Yeah, I'd asked this before. How do pressure plates work? If it's weight based, are we going for both weight AND bulk? If not, then we NEED a way to acuratly calculate bulk for creatures, vehicles, ect... So far, a 100% variance in weight isn't very accurate: If your trap is set for 100 lbs and you're 8 bulk, you may or may not trip it...

You make it based on the size of the creature, which is generally what happens in Adventures anyway.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
graystone wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
If a spreadsheet is required for inventory, that's not a good rule.
It already does in essence. column #1 item name, column #2 cost, column #3 weight/bulk... You can call it by another game, but it's been a spreadsheet all this time...

Don't be deliberately obtuse, I was talking about electronic spreadsheets.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

If a spreadsheet is required for inventory, that's not a good rule.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

This isn't enough information. What do the players want? What are they doing there? What are their goals?

Did they just stumble upon the city and infiltrate it because they could?

Disguise is not enough to navigate the complex political intrigues of the Drow. The Drow they mind controlled? That person is going to be missed (either because they're important enough to be missed, or aren't doing something expected of them). Someone is going to come looking.

The players have crawled half-way down a dragon's throat, just because they could, they shouldn't be surprised when they get burned.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
MerlinCross wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

I’m not going to ask who keeps track of coin weight, because the boards are full of contrarian pedants.

Even when we did track encumbrance, we never kept track of coin weights. I prefer to be having fun.

I just went with "Coin Weight" as it was an easy thing to visualize.

More complex example? Holy Zen, how badly does Bulk help or harm Alchemist? With all the bombs, bottles, ingredients, etc; you're less person and more walking tool shop.

Most of their bombs, elixirs and whatnot are going to be “L” weight (so 10 add up to 1 bulk), their alchemy kit might be 1 or 2 bulk. Their ingredients, spare bottles and whatnot will probably be covered under “alchemy kit”.

Gee that didn’t seem hard at all.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

Also carrying an ally doesn’t need to play into the bulk system really. Bulk is about keeping a limit on the stuff you can carry so you don’t end up with teams of inventory and bog down the game in every situation going: “I HAVE A THING FOR THAT!”

Carrying your ally should just be an action, and maybe half your speed if you’re carrying a character of the same size, or third your speed if they’re larger than your size. It shouldn’t be another math problem.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

I’m not going to ask who keeps track of coin weight, because the boards are full of contrarian pedants.

Even when we did track encumbrance, we never kept track of coin weights. I prefer to be having fun.

Silver Crusade

19 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
HWalsh wrote:
OCEANSHIELDWOLPF 2.0 wrote:
But it is going to be a core class. And Alchemy is coming front and centre for anyone with the Craf-ability. I think it's bold, but not terrifying. If PF2 wants to grab some niche with a little Alchemipunk and Goblinry, so what? Neither are my favourite part of fantasy, but I like a little razzle-dazzle, and this seems razzle-dazzle with a purpose rather than style over substance for its own sake.

I've seen this happen before.

It never ends well. Dev bias is really bad and needs to be put it in check. Whoever is pushing this agenda needs to be checked.

Overactive imaginations should be kept in check as well. We'll see how it goes.

Silver Crusade

26 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

After the article on Rogues we got an article on Skills.

The rogue bias must end!

Silver Crusade

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Wultram wrote:

That hobgoblin art is AWFUL, not like just that ain't a hobgoblin, but the desing is just bad. That figure could never even pull back a bow, not ment for hunting let alone combat anyway. And any resemblence to Paizo goblins is automaticly bad because their desing has always been stupid. That part is preference. But look at that 'armor' no just no, WH40k has more reasonable looking things. Shield would fall into that things waist in about 3 seconds of walking. That art has not one redeeming quality about it and I feel sad that money was spent on it.

*snip*

In matters of taste there can be no debate.

However, in matters of criticism, there are effective ways to do that without being unnecessarily insulting. Insulting not just the artist, but people who like the art as well. The quoted above is the worst kind of criticism, and I hope in future you consider your words more carefully.

Silver Crusade

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

Honestly making the goblinoids look related to each other is a fantastic move. I’m downright horrified by what bugbears will look like if they get some more goblification.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
CorvusMask wrote:

<_< I liked that hobgoblin art. I can't be only one who likes it?

I mean, old art for hobgoblins look like gray colored orcs really.

I loved the art, and was excited about it which is why I made the original post in the first place.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
totoro wrote:

Actually, I believe the "optimization solitaire" slight was against PF1 chargen (and those who like it). It takes more time than Starfinder. Whether you can house rule it is another matter.

EDIT: Sorry, Dudemeister. I misread your intentions.

No problem at all. Text based media is difficult to convey tone in after all. Glad we're on the same page.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
totoro wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
totoro wrote:

This made me nervous: "If you have to spend a great deal of time creating a character or reading a manual, that’s a time investment that you have to sink in before the fun can begin."

A huge part of the fun for us is the character creation part. We build a party while sitting together and fussing about story and matching abilities to concepts. I do not like games that short the character creation process.

What they're trying to simplify is the process of understanding character creation.

In PF1E, you don't have to learn how to make a character, and advance that character once. You have to learn how to do it every time you pick a new class because different classes have different nomenclature for similar phenomena (ki powers, tricks, talents, rage powers, discoveries etc).

The goal Jason was talking about isn't to give you less options, it's to make sure that if you learn what a "class feat" is, that knowledge applies to every class because they all get a selection of "class feats".

It removes a barrier to entry. But you'll still get to play "optimization solitaire", because even with all good options players are still going to look for them combos to try and "win" Pathfinder.

When I say nervous, I mean only that. I'm still looking forward to seeing what is done. Worst case, I play PF1 until I'm old. (Assuming I am not already old, in which case I might play PF1 until I'm Venerable.)

I hate starfinder-style character building, but I didn't insult your playstyle. If they switch to something that you apparently like, I will most likely bow out. No reason to accuse you of playing "deoptimization space monkeys."

I apologize if I made it sound like "optimization solitaire" was a bad thing. It's not at all. Character building when you're away from the table is absolutely a valuable part of the game. People like building characters for the sake of seeing if they can, how far they can push the rules, or to see if they can express a creative idea mechanically.

There's no judgement on my part. I enjoy that part of the game too, it's why I prefer Pathfinder to D&D 5e. Building a Strength based on Monk in Pathfinder is a fun activity in and of itself. Trying a Strength monk in 5e is an exercise in frustration.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

I prefer bulk, it's got less cognitive load than encumbrance, is more likely to be used at the table. You know what your bulk is because it's your Strength score. There is no additional table to look at.

Literally, this is the first useful reason for ability scores over modifiers only that I've seen in the game.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Mike Lindner wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

People waving the flag about weight over bulk should look up the idea of cognitive load.

Bulk has way less cognitive load than weight, and requires you to look up a separate table to work out their carrying capacity.

Every item you pick up you have to look up the weight (is this the straw that breaks the camel’s back?)
Every time you get a bull’s strength, strength mutagen or other temporary strength enhancement its back to the table.

The cognitive load of large numbers is real. So encumbrance is the rule that gets skipped or ignored the most. Which enhances the value of melee dexterity builds.

You personally might find encumbrance very easy to track. Bully for you. However, you aren’t everybody, and for my players encumbrance has always been easier to track. I already houseruled something similar in my game and while dexterity builds were still popular, strength/heavy armor builds started seeing more play again.

I think the bulk system doesn't and can't fix one thing you mentioned: having to keep an eye on your encumbrance when you are near the limit. If I am at 9+B out of 10 max I still have to check everything I pick up to see if it will put me over the limit. Players who push up against the limits are going to have to pay close attention to those limits, no matter how they are expressed.

I will agree that the current PF1 encumbrance system is far too fiddly.

From the Adventuring Gear Page From Air Bladder to Bell there are 11 unique weights listed among items.

For Bulk the majority of those would be considered Light Bulk (or 0.1) or 1 bulk (maybe 2 bulk for Alchemist's kit). Which means that if you're at 9 bulk you're either going to pick up small stuff, or only one Bulky item and be done. And it's fairly intuitive to guess what kind of bulk an item is based on what it is.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
totoro wrote:

This made me nervous: "If you have to spend a great deal of time creating a character or reading a manual, that’s a time investment that you have to sink in before the fun can begin."

A huge part of the fun for us is the character creation part. We build a party while sitting together and fussing about story and matching abilities to concepts. I do not like games that short the character creation process.

What they're trying to simplify is the process of understanding character creation.

In PF1E, you don't have to learn how to make a character, and advance that character once. You have to learn how to do it every time you pick a new class because different classes have different nomenclature for similar phenomena (ki powers, tricks, talents, rage powers, discoveries etc).

The goal Jason was talking about isn't to give you less options, it's to make sure that if you learn what a "class feat" is, that knowledge applies to every class because they all get a selection of "class feats".

It removes a barrier to entry. But you'll still get to play "optimization solitaire", because even with all good options players are still going to look for them combos to try and "win" Pathfinder.

Silver Crusade

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

People waving the flag about weight over bulk should look up the idea of cognitive load.
Bulk has way less cognitive load than weight, and requires you to look up a separate table to work out their carrying capacity.

Every item you pick up you have to look up the weight (is this the straw that breaks the camel’s back?)
Every time you get a bull’s strength, strength mutagen or other temporary strength enhancement its back to the table.

The cognitive load of large numbers is real. So encumbrance is the rule that gets skipped or ignored the most. Which enhances the value of melee dexterity builds.

You personally might find encumbrance very easy to track. Bully for you. However, you aren’t everybody, and for my players encumbrance has always been easier to track. I already houseruled something similar in my game and while dexterity builds were still popular, strength/heavy armor builds started seeing more play again.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

Interview Here

Check out new hobgoblin preview art page 3!

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Dragon78 wrote:
A bomb that does only 4d6 damage plus 1 splash damage at level 11! That is weak.

That’s base damage. On a critical hit that 4d6 doubles. Additionally if an opponent is vulnerable to an element, that’s even more damage. Since you can prepare bombs before hand you could potentially throw two or three a round.

So now it’s 12d6 damage in a round with a potential for it to be 24d6.

Touch AC is still a thing (from the podcasts), so crit chances are higher for bombs than other weapons. Higher still if you open with bottled lightning to increase the crit chances of subsequent bombs. Higher still if you hand a few high level bombs to the party fighter.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Barachiel Shina wrote:
Well that's just disappointing. Already bad enough that if you say anything negative about PF2e, they suspend your account. It's like WotC and ENWorld when you said anything bad about 4e.

This is pure nonsense.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

I am not a fan of games without specificity. There are very few creative endeavours in the world that benefit with no restrictions. Creating to a purpose often makes the creative process easier. Thinking of a personality for a whole new fictional person is hard enough. But making an elf rogue, or gnome Paladin creates an immediate mental image, and make sure the shared fiction functional.

I mean if you’re going classless, why not make an ancestry and background builder? Suddenly though, the world is unrecognisable as pulp fantasy, those Tolkienisms are a franca lingua for fantasy tabletop players.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

I hate having the GM rules in a separate book when I buy an RPG.
An RPG Core book to me, should tell you how to play AND how to run the game.

Frankly it bothers me that there aren't ANY monster stats in the core rulebook. Even if it was just a goblin, a skeleton, a wolf and an ogre so with the core rulebook alone you could get started playing a level one game.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
Tangent101 wrote:
Stone Dog wrote:
Tangent101 wrote:
Okay. I'm actually going to jump on the bandwagon here for asking for "Spell Level" to be renamed "Spell Circle" or "Spell Sphere" or something similar to that. There is a legitimate reason for this suggestion.
How about something like Spell Level and Caster Power?
That still have the problem of "well I'm 7th level, why can't I cast 7th level spells?" That's why I suggested Spell Circle or the like. A 4th circle spell can be cast by a 7th level cleric or wizard - you don't confuse folk with multiple incarnations of "level" - and while I didn't have an issue, I've also been playing AD&D and its descendants for nearly 40 years so....
There are definitely those at Paizo who agree with this, since everything else that is done by level is on that 0-20+ scale. On the other hand, certain deeply entrenched terminology being changed has a risk of dramatically changing the feel of the game, and I can see both sides on that topic. This is one of a few places. One other that springs to mind for me is that we don't change saving throws and attack rolls to be called saving checks and attack checks in PF1 or PF2, even though everything else is called check, and checks are d20 rolls against a DC, so they both are checks. But imagine how it would sound to call for a saving check?

I agree that sounds weird, however saving throw (or saves as they’re called at the table) or attack rolls and skill checks don’t generate confusion as much as the plethora of things that are all referred to using the word level.

Character level, class level, caster level, dungeon level and spell level can cause genuine confusion at the table.

The amount of times someone playing a caster asks me: “How do I work out the save DC for my spell?”
“It’s 10 + Spell Level + Casting mod”
“Okay, so I’m level 5 so 10 + 5 + 4?”
“No, it’s based on the level of the spell. So what’s the spell you’re casting?”
“Hideous laughter.”
“Okay, so that’s a level 2 spell.”
“No it’s a level 1 spell.”
“Oh right you’re a Bard.”
“It’s 15.”

Of course as I understand it, the Save DC will be based on level caster mod and proficiency so that particular conversation will become a thing of the past.

Of everything that could have its terminology updated, I think Spell Level is best because it’s the one that would actually ease confusion for those familiar with the game as well as those who are new.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Gregg Reece wrote:
"Spell pool" is still an upgrade from "Spell points"

You’d still spend spell points from your spell pool. For all practical purposes that’s just adding another step.

If the name is to be changed (and it probably won’t), but if it was I’d prefer it have a single word.

Mana is popular, but has too much association with card games.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

Honestly I wish the game had a universal pool accessible to all classes called “Stamina” or “Reserve” or “Resolve” or something that could function as the resource for rage, domain powers, bardic performance, fighter abilities, very fancy rogue tricks etc. hp replenishment etc

Similar to Starfinder but I’m aware that’s not everyone’s cup of tea.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

If you call it a power pool, and spend points from the pool for all practical applications players will call them power points, and you’re back where you started.

Silver Crusade

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

While we're at it can we replace Spell Levels with Spell Tiers, because between character levels, class levels, caster levels and dungeon levels you'd think somebody would have pulled out a thesaurus in the past 40 years.

Tiers, valence, grades there's plenty of good words to use that don't make reading a sentence like, it's an SAT Word problem:

"A 5th level character with two fighter levels and three wizard levels can cast 2nd level spells. If that character chooses to heighten the 1st level charm spell to 3rd level then the target is charmed for a number of minutes equal to the character's caster level, instead of a number of rounds."

For instance.

Silver Crusade

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
nighttree wrote:
The more they release....the less interested in 2E I become.....I am starting to throw up in my mouth a bit every thing that's released.....

You should probably see a doctor about that.

Silver Crusade

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
Bardic Dave wrote:
thflame wrote:
Deranged Stabby-Man wrote:
So are we CERTAIN the the whole Material, Mental, Vital, Spiritual thing is actually a thing, or is it entirely conjecture?
I'm pretty sure it's just wild conjecture that people are running with at this point. None of the devs have said anything about it and the blog post doesn't imply that to me.

Paging Mark Seifter! Paging Mark Seifter!

Without giving away more than your allowed to, can you expand on the mechanical implications of the Material, Mental, Spiritual, Vital classifications for spell lists?

Thanks!

They are important metaphysical lore implications about magic and the way it works. You don't technically need to know about them to follow the rest of the blog, and indeed, there was a potential suggestion that we might want to cut it out of the blog, but I wanted to include it because people were commenting that the decisions we made seemed like they weren't based on rich lore, and this is one of the biggest magical metaphysics story aspect we delved into (based on an idea from James Jacobs combined with some comments and analysis by Mark Moreland and then synthesized first by the design team and then at a meeting with a lot of other stakeholders). I'm really big about making rules that follow the story of the magical universe, not just in a vacuum, and I figured others who share that opinion would get a kick out of seeing that little tidbit. There's all sorts of cool implications about these essences by the way ** spoiler omitted **...

Gold Medal level post, this is exactly the sort of thing I care about in my RPGs.

I don't want fantasy to be generic, I don't want mechanics to be universal, I want it specific and tied deeply to flavor. The essences are the most exciting part of all of this to me.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
james014Aura wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
james014Aura wrote:
Heal spell question: If we heighten it and use the the 3-action version, did we just waste a high-level effect? Or does heighten override the reduction to just casting modifier?
Heighten modifications are applied to whatever the spell did before.
I'm sorry; I don't think I understand that entirely. Does that mean a 2nd level area heal would be 1d8+casting modifier?
Correct!

Not to correct you Mark, but I think a 3-Action (Area effect) Heal cast from a 2nd level spell slot would heal 2d8+Casting Modifier.

While a 2-Action (Ranged) Heal cast from a 2nd level spell slot would heal 3d8 + Casting Modifier.

Heal wrote:
Heightened (+1) Increase the amount of healing or damage by 1d8, or by 2d8 if you're using the one- or two-action version to heal the living.
It starts at just Cast Modifier for AoE though, so should be correct.

Ahhhh! I understand now, I misread the 3 action version and assumed that it still had the 1d8 to begin with.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
james014Aura wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
james014Aura wrote:
Heal spell question: If we heighten it and use the the 3-action version, did we just waste a high-level effect? Or does heighten override the reduction to just casting modifier?
Heighten modifications are applied to whatever the spell did before.
I'm sorry; I don't think I understand that entirely. Does that mean a 2nd level area heal would be 1d8+casting modifier?
Correct!

Not to correct you Mark, but I think a 3-Action (Area effect) Heal cast from a 2nd level spell slot would heal 2d8+Casting Modifier.

While a 2-Action (Ranged) Heal cast from a 2nd level spell slot would heal 3d8 + Casting Modifier.

Heal wrote:
Heightened (+1) Increase the amount of healing or damage by 1d8, or by 2d8 if you're using the one- or two-action version to heal the living.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

Really excited to see magic divvied up primarily by power source, this shift where classes gain access to a combination of two lists based on the focus of the class looks really interesting and has bags of flavour:

Scaling contrips, fixed power for spells (requiring higher slots for more spectacular effects), and unified rules for x/day powers many spellcasters had access to is going Io go a long way to making spellcasters easier to teach to new players. It also means spontaneous casters aren’t going to feel punished for sub-optimal spell choices, since each spell can have a wider range of effects based on spell slot used.

I am now wildly speculating if sorcerers even share the wizard’s material/mental list by default or if instead their list is based on their bloodline?

Looking forward to seeing what those spellcasting classes are going to look like.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

I disagree entirely with the sentiment of the OP.

Unfortunately sharing the reasoning behind changes usually causes argumentative nerds to focus on arguing with that reasoning rather than engaging with the content presented.

Also I like the tone of the blogs, the enthusiasm of the staff is real.

Silver Crusade

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Xenocrat wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

All three small races get bonuses to Charisma?

That seems redundant.

Dwarves are still small.

Dwarves have always been medium and they didn’t indicate that changes in the dwarf/elf blog last week.

Silver Crusade

36 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

All three small races get bonuses to Charisma?

That seems redundant.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Diffan wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:


I hope not. "Here's BIGGER NUMBERS!" is something that high level martials need to get away from as their carrot on a stick. Being more dependent on using all three actions to attack doesn't make gameplay more interesting.
Is it bigger numbers if it's just an unchanged modifier? Instead of +12/7/+2 it's just simply +12 for 3 attacks? Sounds legendary to me...

Except because of the >10< rule that also explodes damage way beyond what can be reasonably balanced against. Unless hp a values for enemies need to be tripled to compensate, but then you needy blow out spell damage and sneak attack and that’s an endless spiral.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

Perhaps there’s an “Aim” action that negate some penalties for shooting into melee instead of a precise shot feat?

I look forward how the new edition will tackle the issue.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

I'd definitely change them just to roleplaying quirks, 5e moved away from mechanically representing the minutiae of character details mechanically (which is why I still prefer Pathfinder). But for new players having a drawback hook is fine.

I would either remove the Demonscarred trait entirely, or have it do something else? Perhaps it only functions when detecting, but not other effects? Or perhaps it provides proficiency in Intimidate as the demonic taint manifests physically?

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

It’s funny looking at the PF1e Beta, the cleric has class features going all the way to 20th tied to their domains. But between 9th level casting medium BaB and space issues in the book the domain powers were cut way down.

(Mind you not all those powers were winners, but still it was a feature every other level)

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
ChibiNyan wrote:
Companion should have all 3 actions so they behave like pretty much every other creature in the game. It's fine to spend 1 of your actions to put a command, which they will then perform until you give a different order or it becomes invalid.

I like that companion creatures get 2 actions.

From a balance perspective it means characters with companion creatures have a net bonus of one extra action a turn when you make a command. Or two extra actions if your previous command is still in effect.

That’s way better than two whole turns.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Erik Mona wrote:
Basically if there's a place in the Inner Sea region that people have been begging us to cover from the beginning, you can expect it will get something significant within the first few years of the new edition.

Absalom or bust!

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

Sometimes it’s a matter of simplicity and page space and I never saw it as the Cleric knows every spell on their list. It’s that their deity knows all those miracles and grants them to their devout champion on the mortal realm.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

I got fingers crossed for psychic/occult magic.

1 to 50 of 7,332 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>