Wizard

Joe M.'s page

FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 1,364 posts. 3 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 13 Organized Play characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,364 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

David knott 242 wrote:
Felinus wrote:
I'm guessing Druids and Paladins will also have anathemas. I'm curious to see how balanced some of these are and what the penalty for breaching it is. Are you just unable to lie, do you loose access to class/domain features, are you just unable to be proficient in it?

Mark Seifter did describe a paladin falling during the playtest by lying to some NPCs.

Relevant information:

Joe M. wrote:

Okay, you can find the Know Direction Paladin clip HERE (starting around 1:14:37). Here's a quick transcript.

Interviewer wrote:
Would I be able to play a Chaotic-Good Paladin of Milani?
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

[Laughs] Boy that Paladin argument. Every single time. People love to get into very vicious debates about Paladin alignment. I’m going to say this. Alignment is still a thing in the game. Paladins still have to pay attention to alignment. That’s still something that’s important to them.

I think the thing that I’m most excited to talk to people about is how we have modified the Paladin’s Code to actually speak to reality and not be so inflexible that the characters are a pain at the table. I can’t tell you how excited I am about how that Code is written to the point.

And this is what I’ll leave you with. A Paladin can lie if he has to. If it will save people’s lives, if it is for the greater good, he can look you straight in the eye and lie. And it’s awesome.

It all comes down to the Code. And you have to follow the Code. The Code is the way that you live. But that Code now actually has guidance and it isn’t just a bunch of strictures that just say, ‘Nope you have to do this! You can never lie, you can never talk to an evil person, you can never’, you know ... There were a whole ton of things that you couldn’t do. Like, ‘Oh, I can’t associate with an evil person’.

Well, that made a lot of stories not work. It’s like, ‘Well, I have to go into Cheliax and I have to negotiate with these people. Drawing out my sword and murdering everyone is not really an option. I have to negotiate with these guys so I guess I’m going to need an atonement after this’ — was never really an acceptable way to run a Paladin.

So I’m really excited about that and I don’t want to spoil any more than that. There’s lots of great stuff about the Paladin but that’s one of the things that I’m most excited about, by leaps and bounds. It is great. I love Paladins and I always have. And this makes them really fun and dynamic to play.

Note, of course, that 'Paladins still have to pay attention to alignment' is NOT the same as 'Paladins can only be Lawful-Good'. Jason might have very artfully dodged the 'Chaotic-Good' part of the question ...

Silver Crusade

Dastis wrote:
Can't confirm or deny Vancian casting. What I can say is that 5e(which much of 2e seems inspired by) uses very similiar language to what has appeared in the blog posts so far. 5e uses arcanist style casting. Prepare spells to spontaneously cast

Jason confirmed in his recent Game Informer interview:

Jason wrote:
At its heart, like every system, [the magic system] still works the way you’d expect. If you’re a spellcaster, you can prepare your spells every day so you know what spells you can cast and once they’re cast, they’re gone. We kept what is called Vancian spellcasting. There are still spontaneous spellcasters who don’t quite work that way but are close. They have spells that they know that they can cast from a certain amount of slots.

Silver Crusade

ChibiNyan wrote:
Kyra stats seem 2 points lower than what your prediction says, but otherwise that one is pretty likely.

One possibility: ability boosts applied to 16 or above only give +1. So if Kyra applied 2 floating ability boosts to a 16, that would yield an 18 Wisdom and account for the "missing" +2 you mention.

I haven't thought through this carefully, but this seems suggestive:

Leveling Up Blog wrote:
You'll also amp up several of your ability scores every 5 levels. The process might be familiar to those of you who've been playing Starfinder for the last several months! There are, of course, a few tweaks, and we made all ability boosts work the same way instead of being different at 1st level. Learn it once, use it in perpetuity.

Silver Crusade

thflame wrote:
If AoO IS a general feat, then I feel bad for any Goblin PC that picks "+1 fire damage" over AoO.

Good news: that's never a choice a Goblin PC would face, since Burn It is a Goblin Ancestry Feat and AOO (if it's a feat) is not an Ancestry Feat. So you'd never be trading those off against each other.

Silver Crusade

thflame wrote:
Laird IceCubez wrote:

I hope deities have obediences baked into their worship block, I always liked reading those parts.

As for the feat tax argument, I remember people arguing over having to re-purchase Attacks of Opportunity. Isn't this the same argument?

EDIT: Have they said how many general feats we get yet?

The Level Up Blog post says that we get 10 class feats and 10 "other" feats (skill, ancestry, or general), plus maybe a couple extra at first level.

10 class feats (Levelling Up Blog) + 10 skill feats (Rogue Blog) + 5 ancestry feats (Jason's Game Informer interview) + 5 general feats (Levelling Up Blog + Rogue Blog) seems to be the default.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Cole Deschain wrote:

Anathema just made my day.

Hell yes.

Since I haven't done much commentary on the actual preview, lemme second this. Anathema seems like an elegant way to clean up all the different sources that might place behavior restrictions on your character. Another good example of where PF2's standardization goal seems to really pay off. I'm hoping we get a bunch of different Anathemas for different classes and concepts (e.g. mixing up the druid and the paladin) but even if not in the playtest this is easy to expand later.

Silver Crusade

MerlinCross wrote:
Joe M. wrote:
(Also #3, that we have a pretty long playtest to test the playtest rules and tweak any balance issues before the final PF2 rules! Jason tweeted the other day that they're at the point where they're seeing things they want to change but can't because it's too late for some rules changes ahead of the playtest.)

I find it kinda weird that they don't want to change something because they want to, but can't because a playtest is going to happen soon, when the playtest is being done to actually see what needs to change.

I mean it does make sense, don't shake up the rules ahead of the test too much and get some data to see if X needed to be changed anyway. But it's one of those things that still sounds weird when you write it out.

They need to put their pencils down at some point if there is to be a playtest. (Especially important to lock in the base rules so that adventures and monsters can be built on a non-shifting base!) And when they're laying out a playtest PDF and a physical rulebook for print and distribution, the "pause" has to happen few months in advance.

I don't know how locked in they are right now, of course. Mark said something recently about how they just got through the hectic layout push. On the one hand, that Jason tweet I referenced. On the other hand, bombs were changed from 2-handed to 1-handed after the preview blog stirred up some comments. So maybe it's at a stage where tiny tweaks are doable but bigger scale changes have to wait. All pure speculation!

Silver Crusade

6 people marked this as a favorite.
eddv wrote:
Tangent101 wrote:

It's more that you start out with three apples and then as time went by you could also get three bananas.

Now you start out with three fruit, one of which has to be an apple. Over time you can get two more fruit of any kind. In the end you are left with five fruit of any kind rather than three apples and three bananas - you have greater diversity but lower quantity. (The other fruit are no bigger than a banana or apple - so apple-sized pineapple, or apple-sized grapefruit.)

This puts it pretty well, but also that there is something psychological about the act of taking my apples from me in the first place and then saying I need to get them back 1 by 1.

It's called the Endowment Effect and it's heavily on display in all of these preview threads. People overvalue things they already have and undervalue things that they do not or do not yet have.

It's a very common phenomenon, and explains a lot of this kind of thing. (I'm not a psychologist but I work in a field that uses this term a bit—perhaps in a way that a psychologist would say is inaccurate.)

So here, folks are worked up because they're "losing" some things from the PF1 Cleric and they don't appreciate: (1) that in addition to what the Cleric is "losing" in the transition it also gains valuable class features; (2) that this kind of guesswork evaluation is fundamentally mistaken anyway, since it assumes a PF1 background or baseline but really PF2 is a new system that is being balanced against itself.

(Also #3, that we have a pretty long playtest to test the playtest rules and tweak any balance issues before the final PF2 rules! Jason tweeted the other day that they're at the point where they're seeing things they want to change but can't because it's too late for some rules changes ahead of the playtest.)

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
MerlinCross wrote:
As for the Archetype worry, Which blog is that as I don't listen to the podcasts. I find the podcasts far to... I don't want to say untrustworthy but I'd prefer Official claim I suppose? Unsure how to actually word it.

See here:

Joe M. wrote:

NEW INFORMATION from Jason's Game Informer interview:

Jason wrote:

The new version is built upon the idea of classes that have all these feats that they give you. When it comes to archetypes, it makes sense that they have additional feats you can choose. In the new game, they work similarly to how they did before, but instead of telling you what you’ll lose, you’ll get a package of feats you can choose instead of the feats from your class. They work just like an add-on package for you to choose from. It allows them to be more open and it’s not tied to specific features of classes. This kind of speaks to whatever character wants that to be a bigger part of their character concept. The rogue might want to be a pirate, but so might a wizard. It might have a feat or two that’s better at casting spells that burn sails or knocking holes in boats with lightning bolts. There could be a wide variety of abilities that speak to how the class works and you choose the ones that are appropriate to you. In this case, the archetypes allow us to expand the character types that we have. We’re not just at 12 classes, but we have dozens of different character concepts to explore from that decision alone, not to mention all the choices you have within skills and feats. It’s about giving you as many tools as possible to make the character you want to play as. Archetypes are a big tool that allow us to do that. They’re a box of toys that we can let people play with to customize their character. The playtest will have a number of archetypes in it, but we’re not putting them into the final version until we have time to test it out.

. . .

With the way we redesigned them, they can connect to a specific class, but they don’t have to. We can design an archetype that speaks directly to what sorcerers are supposed to be and exclusive to them, but for something like ‘pirate’, there’s nothing that says that anyone can’t decide to be part-pirate. That’s a concept that you can apply to almost any character. It doesn’t make sense to recreate the archetype for each class when we can create a suite of feats that speak to what the pirate is, and then pick the ones that you want as needed.

Silver Crusade

FedoraFerret wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Heh, if you wind up needing 166.5 healing in a round, you should tell that barbarian to be a bit more careful next time!
Not gonna lie, this has been my life in a PbP game for the last several days. Friggin barbarians charging in and getting shredded to pieces.

Yeah, that Oracle of Life I used to play could do ~so many cool things~ ... but just ended up desperately healing the martials to keep them full-attacking. Efficient teamwork, but kinda boring when an AP's major boss battle was like 4 rounds and each round I just healed.

But that's off topic I guess.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Blog wrote:
Your deity has a major impact on your character, and you'll see a lot of similarities to Pathfinder First Edition, such as being trained in your deity's favored weapon and getting access to one of their domains. (Come back on Friday for a ton of detail about those parts of your character!)

I like a lot of what I see in this blog, but ~especially~ this bit. A lot of this blog talks healing. which, fine. But I'm more interested in everything else that different styles of cleric will be able to do.

Silver Crusade

Blogs seem to be releasing around 4pm Pacific, especially when there's another blog on the same day, like today (my guess is this is intended to let the non-playtest blog have some space so it's not crowded out)

Silver Crusade

11 people marked this as a favorite.

"Remember channel energy from earlier? This feature lets you cast heal or harm an additional number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier! "

Simplified to Spell Points only to immediately complicate it again with 3+CHA abilities? I'm curious why.

Lots of great detail here, though! plenty to dig through

Silver Crusade

Have there been any hints as to the topic of the Monday blog? I haven't seen any.

Silver Crusade

Lots of good information in this. Archetypes, 10th level spells, and more

Silver Crusade

Yeah, I definitely see the concern, but this feels like exactly the sort of thing the playtest is for. So I'm trying to be less "not happy Bob" and more, "this might not look great from what we're seeing, flagging as area of concern for playtesting once we get our hands on the full playest rules." That's what the playtest is for!

Semi-related, Jason tweeted recently:

Jason wrote:
We have reached that point where there are still things we want to change and iterate, but there simply is not enough time.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

NEW INFORMATION from Jason's Game Informer interview:

Jason wrote:

The new version is built upon the idea of classes that have all these feats that they give you. When it comes to archetypes, it makes sense that they have additional feats you can choose. In the new game, they work similarly to how they did before, but instead of telling you what you’ll lose, you’ll get a package of feats you can choose instead of the feats from your class. They work just like an add-on package for you to choose from. It allows them to be more open and it’s not tied to specific features of classes. This kind of speaks to whatever character wants that to be a bigger part of their character concept. The rogue might want to be a pirate, but so might a wizard. It might have a feat or two that’s better at casting spells that burn sails or knocking holes in boats with lightning bolts. There could be a wide variety of abilities that speak to how the class works and you choose the ones that are appropriate to you. In this case, the archetypes allow us to expand the character types that we have. We’re not just at 12 classes, but we have dozens of different character concepts to explore from that decision alone, not to mention all the choices you have within skills and feats. It’s about giving you as many tools as possible to make the character you want to play as. Archetypes are a big tool that allow us to do that. They’re a box of toys that we can let people play with to customize their character. The playtest will have a number of archetypes in it, but we’re not putting them into the final version until we have time to test it out.

. . .

With the way we redesigned them, they can connect to a specific class, but they don’t have to. We can design an archetype that speaks directly to what sorcerers are supposed to be and exclusive to them, but for something like ‘pirate’, there’s nothing that says that anyone can’t decide to be part-pirate. That’s a concept that you can apply to almost any character. It doesn’t make sense to recreate the archetype for each class when we can create a suite of feats that speak to what the pirate is, and then pick the ones that you want as needed.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Ancestry Feat spread confirmed in Jason's Game Informer interview:

Jason wrote:
You get one at first level, another at fifth level, and so on.

Also:

Jason wrote:

So, if you want to say, “I was an elf, but I was raised among dwarves,” what does that mean? We’re building ways in the game for you to make these distinctions and possibly pick up some dwarf feats. We’re still trying to figure out how this will work during the playtest, but I think we’ve got a solution, so bear with us. It might take us a bit to get right. But you can have a character that crosses those lines that makes sense, which is fun and exciting. It’s the story of your character. The rules are opened up in a way that lets us tell even bigger stories.

What we’re trying to figure out is how to make that work mechanically without the player just picking whatever they want. We’re still playing around with that and I think we might have something that will go into the playtest, but we’re still teasing that out right now. That’s ultimately the goal. What I’d love to be able to do is to have a system in which you can say "I was an elf raised by dwarves and there are certain elven feats that I can take because they’re genetic. This is a thing that elves have based on being elves." But then there are other things that are cultural. For example, dwarves have a training and fighting against giants. There’s nothing genetic about that really; it’s more of a cultural thing. There’s nothing physiological that allows them to fight giants. It’s about the training regimen that they have that allows them to fight them after centuries of perfecting that. It kind of makes sense that you might be able to pick that up if you’re not a dwarf, but there are other things that don’t make as much sense. For example, elves have magic running through their blood, but it wouldn’t make sense for a human to pick up that ability because they don’t have magic running through their blood.

We’re trying to tease apart which parts of the ancestries we can keep exclusive to that ancestry against the ones that background and choices can dictate. That’s kind of where we’re heading. You might make a choice to say how you were raised in order to access certain things.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.

NEW INFORMATION about 10th Level spells. From this (long) interview with Jason in Game Informer:

Jason wrote:

You don’t get tenth-level spells automatically. You have to take a feat just to get them. That’s where spells like Wish live now. Let’s be honest, it’s one of those spells that can do anything. We have some guidelines built into the spell, but it really is there to be the make-or-unmake-reality spell. You shouldn’t use it to wreck your campaign, since it always comes with the chance that the DM will mess with you and corrupt your wish, so you have to be careful.

But this also gave us the opportunity to write other cool tenth-level spells. There’s one for druids that can wreck an entire environment by invoking a devastation on an area. Don’t make a high-level Druid angry because they will ruin your town! I think we’ve got another spell floating around there that allows you to turn into Godzilla or something akin to it. There are some crazy things floating around with the high-level spells of the game, but that’s appropriate for that level. At that point in time, characters are able to do amazing, almost god-like things when you’re up at the nineteenth-level or something. You know, the magic system is really exciting. 

Reading through the rest of the interview to see what's there. I think Jason mentioned in his last Know Direction interview that he talked about archetypes in this interview ...

Silver Crusade

Rysky wrote:
Don't forget Prestige Classes.

My guess, FWIW, is that prestige classes will likely be rolled into archetypes.

Joe M. wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
1of1 wrote:
Joe M. wrote:
Logan says:
Logan wrote:
It’s not that much like Starfinder and it’s not that much like first edition. It’s kind of one of the more experimental parts of the rules ... I will say we’ve taken a few different concepts that were kind of all pointing at the same type of character customization and kind of said, that’s all under the archetype umbrella. So we’re interested to see how people react to that, for sure.
This one, specifically, hurts my head like some sort of eldritch knowledge. It means too many things all at the same time for me understand it, and it means them pretty darn intensely. So uh, I'll guess I'll just have to wait until I have something more defined in front of me before I can give them any interesting reactions.

I'm guessing those things are:

Class archetypes.
Prestige classes.
Multiclassing/VMC.
Yeah, that's about what I figured. Can anyone think of anything else Logan might have been referring to?

Silver Crusade

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:

So there are only four spell lists correct?

So that would be cleric, druid, wizard/sorcerer, and maybe bard?

Material, mental, spiritual, vital.

Wizard = material/mental
Cleric = spiritual/vital

I don't think we know for sure how the "essences" and spell lists will interact. Mark had this to say upthread:

Mark Seifter wrote:
JRutterbush wrote:
Notice how Mark didn't say that spell lists weren't divided up based on the essences. I'm gonna take that as a 100% confirmation that I'm correct in my prediction. There's no other possible interpretation of that.
The spell lists are certainly based on the essences in some way. Is it exactly what you guys predicted in this thread? Well, now's not the time to confirm or unconfirm; we have more tricks up our sleeves to share with you in future blogs. I predict if you liked the essences bit in this blog, you will really like a few more of the things to come!

Silver Crusade

Erik Mona has said in one of the interviews or podcasts that they're committed to having the Core Rulebook cover GMing (so no separate GM guide)

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:
Mr. Seifter (or any other Team member who wishes to answer): will there be an avenue for providing in-depth feedback other than via the forums?

Thankfully, nobody needs to even look at the forums to participate in the playtest. Quoting myself from elsewhere ...

Joe M. wrote:

Jason discusses it in this presentation. (Disclaimer: I don't know where in the video he starts talking about this, and I may even have the wrong presentation! There have been several.)

As I recall, it's something like this. The playtest adventure is split into 7 segments. The "formal" playtest will give players 2 weeks to playtest each segment. For each segment, they'll advertise the aspects of the game they're most interested in hearing about. For each segment they'll also put out a detailed and structured survey for folks to complete, which will allow them to gather a lot of data quickly and in a more-organized and targeted fashion than through a bunch of disorganized forum posting. (It'll also help them hear from a wide range of players, including those who don't spend time on the forums or who may read through but don't want to wade into what can often be a pretty noisy environment here.)

Jason also says something to the effect of how he's read thousands and thousands of messageboard posts since the playtest was announced and that the messageboards are a great way to get information *in* to Paizo. But he adds that the boards haven't proved a good way for them to push information *out*—that if they comment in one thread it's quickly lost and not everyone sees the message or can find it for future reference. So they're planning to respond to feedback and give updates to how the playtest looks from their side through regular blog posts and video interviews, including previewing what they're planning to change as a result of playtest feedback.

Silver Crusade

19 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah—folks joking about rape. Stop. Just stop. It's horrible behavior and you should stop.

(1) For one thing, you don't know when someone at your table—or on this thread—is a survivor of sexual assault. Think of the environment you create when you make those jokes, and how they might affect others.

(2) Please don't suggest that you're "just joking." That is no excuse. It doesn't negate the harm. (See this thread for a good discussion of "just joking.")

Silver Crusade

Lausth wrote:
I want the see the wizard or human blog.

Honestly I'm kinda tired of the ancestry blogs. Kinda hoping they bundle the Human, Half-Elf, and Half-Orc together in one big blog and get it over with.

Silver Crusade

All I know is that Mark wrote it:

Mark Seifter wrote:
Bardic Dave wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
I am thinking/hoping that all (not both, since there's more nuance to this discussion than just two opinions) groups of people in this thread will enjoy Monday's blog.
Are you writing it, Mark?
I wrote it on Monday, so somewhat yes, somewhat no.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Fuzzypaws wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

One of the few "flaw" I see in the APs is that they are too fast paced. The most adventure paths have a "20 levels in 20 days" feeling. I enjoyed the feeling of the oldest versions of the game where you could spend months between adventures instead of constantly running to save the world.

The Bleaching is something that matter when you aren't running at a pace that give a new level every few days. In adventures like Kingmaker you can risk suffering from Bleaching, but in all other AP I have played it is irrelevant. A pity as it give a lot of flavor to gnomes.

The ridiculously accelerated pace of leveling in published work is something that bothers me too. It may seem silly, but as a GM one of the things I like about scifi games like Starfinder is that taking extra time to travel from adventure hub to adventure hub due to SPESS will normally result in at least a couple years going by in-game before a group gets to level 20.

I don't recall where, but I *think* I remember hearing a Paizo person complaining about this exact thing. The context, I believe, was talking up the PF2 Downtime system as a natural way to work in time off between adventures. It *may* have been said that this would be a regular feature of PF2 APs.

Silver Crusade

14 people marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:
I wouldn't mind seeing halflings default to Wisdom myself, to be honest. As long as they don't have a Charisma penalty, you can still have one that's as charismatic as ever. ^_^

Yeah, add my name to the "Halflings should get Wisdom rather than Charisma" list.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Also!, this is interesting.

Blog wrote:
Most ancestries get three ability boosts

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Character creation is ABCs: Ancestry, Background, Class. Backgrounds are confirmed to adjust ability scores. Maybe Class and then one or two floating boosts? I don't really know what to expect here

In other news, guess we're going to have a ~lot~ of Small-sized Sorcerers.

Silver Crusade

Reposting this tidbit from elsewhere, since it seems relevant:

Joe M. wrote:

FWIW, Jason and Stephen discuss PF2 Backgrounds in this presentation, starting at 43:00. It's a good overview. Some highlights.

Jason wrote:
Building your characters is following your ABCs: Pick your Ancestry, your Background, and your Class ... You pick your Ancestry, that's where you came from, that's how you were born; you pick your Background, which is how you grew up; and then you pick your Class, which is what you've trained to be.

Stephen describes Backgrounds as a more-robust system that serves about the same function as PF1 traits. "We wanted something a little more robust and mostly, that Adventure Path people could play with." The Core Rulebook will present generic Backgrounds (e.g., old barkeep, ex-slave, "all sorts of stuff") but the goal is to allow AP writers to create Backgrounds that really fit into the world of the AP (much like the AP traits from PF1).

Stephen: The Background system "affects the skills that you're good at and it also your ability scores to a certain degree."

Jason adds that your Background gives you one Lore for free, which is a highly specific Knowledge skill. He gives as examples Lore (Alcohol) and Lore (Warfare) (which Valeros has).

Silver Crusade

RumpinRufus wrote:
Joe M. wrote:

Yeah, I'd missed this one. Thanks!

(Not directly related, but Jason will also be on Know Direction this evening, so we might get a few more tidbits there.)

No news from this - it was mostly getting to know Jason Bulmahn, rather than any reveals about PF2.

I slightly disagree with that assessment. Check my most recent posts for a few bits that I found "newsworthy."

Silver Crusade

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Okay, you can find the Know Direction Paladin clip HERE (starting around 1:14:37). Here's a quick transcript.

Interviewer wrote:
Would I be able to play a Chaotic-Good Paladin of Milani?
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

[Laughs] Boy that Paladin argument. Every single time. People love to get into very vicious debates about Paladin alignment. I’m going to say this. Alignment is still a thing in the game. Paladins still have to pay attention to alignment. That’s still something that’s important to them.

I think the thing that I’m most excited to talk to people about is how we have modified the Paladin’s Code to actually speak to reality and not be so inflexible that the characters are a pain at the table. I can’t tell you how excited I am about how that Code is written to the point.

And this is what I’ll leave you with. A Paladin can lie if he has to. If it will save people’s lives, if it is for the greater good, he can look you straight in the eye and lie. And it’s awesome.

It all comes down to the Code. And you have to follow the Code. The Code is the way that you live. But that Code now actually has guidance and it isn’t just a bunch of strictures that just say, ‘Nope you have to do this! You can never lie, you can never talk to an evil person, you can never’, you know ... There were a whole ton of things that you couldn’t do. Like, ‘Oh, I can’t associate with an evil person’.

Well, that made a lot of stories not work. It’s like, ‘Well, I have to go into Cheliax and I have to negotiate with these people. Drawing out my sword and murdering everyone is not really an option. I have to negotiate with these guys so I guess I’m going to need an atonement after this’ — was never really an acceptable way to run a Paladin.

So I’m really excited about that and I don’t want to spoil any more than that. There’s lots of great stuff about the Paladin but that’s one of the things that I’m most excited about, by leaps and bounds. It is great. I love Paladins and I always have. And this makes them really fun and dynamic to play.

Note, of course, that 'Paladins still have to pay attention to alignment' is NOT the same as 'Paladins can only be Lawful-Good'. Jason might have very artfully dodged the 'Chaotic-Good' part of the question ...

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Jason had some interesting things to say about the Paladin on the Know Direction livestream just now ... (He left most for future blogs/etc, but there were some juicy teasers.)

I'm waiting for the stream to end so I can go back and transcribe the Paladin bit ...

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Elfteiroh wrote:
Joe M. wrote:

On the Know Direction livestream right now, Jason is asked about 4 spell lists. His response: "Yeah, there's 4 spell lists. That's interesting!"

He adds: "I think there are some folks who have guessed the direction we're heading with that." And says that it's not all that hard to figure out.

Oh! There's a livestream now? Thanks for the report!

Well, I'm happy there seems to be many thinking the same way I am, and combining with what Jason said, that may mean we're in the right direction! (I'm pretty sure he didn't mean my thread, as it's not been up long enough, but eh, I'd still be happy to have guessed right! )

I honestly wouldn't be shocked if Jason had read the thread. He mentioned a previous interview (the Paizo Twitch livestream from either last Friday or the week before) that he had read "thousands and thousands" of forum posts since the Playtest was announced and that he was trying to keep on top of the forum, and that the forums are generally a really good way to "get information in" to Paizo even if no Paizo staff specifically responds to something. So my impression is that Paizo folk are lurking a lot even if not posting.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

On the Know Direction podcast this evening, Jason said: "I think that the way that Archetypes work is going to be familiar to everybody." A blog is scheduled "but I don't think it's for a little bit."

He repeats that there is a limited selection of Archetypes in the Playtest book: "Not the full suite." "More of a test and proof of concept."

He says he just did an interview with one outlet (I didn't catch the name) where he talked about Archetypes and leaked some spoilers, says to wait for that to come out for now.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

On the Know Direction livestream right now, Jason is asked about 4 spell lists. His response: "Yeah, there's 4 spell lists. That's interesting!"

He adds: "I think there are some folks who have guessed the direction we're heading with that." And says that it's not all that hard to figure out.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.

On the current Know Direction livestream, Jason just mentioned that the next blog is Friday and it will talk about Gnomes & Halflings. And maybe some more about ability scores and how they're generated.

Generally, he says they're guaranteeing Mondays and Fridays and trying for some Wednesdays, but Wednesdays will be used more for art and stuff. (I've noticed the PFS playtest blogs dropped on Wednesdays, so I guess that's the "spare" slot.)

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Small bit of news from the Know Direction livestream that's happening right now. Jason says flat out: "The Oracle is not in the playtest rulebook."

He also says, when asked about the teaser in the blog, "I'll have to go ask Stephen what he meant by that. I have no idea what he was talking about."

And adds: "But there are some very interesting implications [for the Oracle] that will play out" from what's forthcoming

Silver Crusade

I have no idea what to expect, but I'm very curious to hear more from Paizo ...

Silver Crusade

Mark Seifter wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:

If nothing else it seems reasonable for Paizo to investigate-

- Why was the Oracle more popular than the Cleric
- How much of this was because of the Oracle's mechanical advantages over the Cleric, which might inspire ways to change the Cleric, and how much of this was because of the Oracle's flavor and conceptual differences from the Cleric, which should remain the province of the Oracle exclusively.

Like the one thing we shouldn't do is change the concept of classes. Change the mechanics all you want, but strong concepts can be reproduced with a number of different mechanics.

I reread the blog since I've been seeing this all over, and realize the blog is pretty misleading in one regard: alchemist and oracle were the most popular non-core classes. I don't have the data in front of me, but I recall it was something like most of the core classes were significantly more popular (the cleric was among the top of all classes, period), then there was a series of drop-offs where the last few core classes, alchemist, and oracle lived, then another drop-off.

Interesting. Thanks!

Silver Crusade

Yeah, I'd missed this one. Thanks!

(Not directly related, but Jason will also be on Know Direction this evening, so we might get a few more tidbits there.)

Silver Crusade

I would need to go back and listen to the Erik + Logan Know Direction interview to be sure, but if I recall correctly:

(1) they talked about wanting to be careful about turning popular classes into archetypes (no promise not to do it, but indicating that they'd hesitate) (this should be around 24:00 ff.?);

(2) they commented that the Oracle and the Witch were very very popular in PF1 and almost made the cut for the Playtest book (as the Alchemist Blog reiterates for the Oracle!).

Add in the thought (related to #1) that it's always easier to add something new than take something away ... And we have at least the possibility that the Oracle will be added to the Playtest as a Core class. That's my best guess, putting everything together.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Bloodrealm wrote:
Tallow wrote:
- I did not get that once an item is made, that resonance would be needed to use it. The Alchemist will only need to use resonance to quickly make alchemical items on the spot. But they get a daily allotment of items they can prepare without using resonance.
I'm certain we were told elsewhere that characters other than the Alchemist that created it would need to spend Resonance to consume an elixir.

We really need a blog post on Resonance.

Silver Crusade

glass wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
So something I'm curious about from these, can this floating +2 be assigned to a stat you're already getting a racial boost to? It's been mentioned that it can negate your penalty, but I'm curious about a super boon. I kinda hope not cause then more races open up as having good stats where a double up makes some races king of that stat option.
In the Goblin blog, I am pretty sure they said the floating stat was for any other stat. My assumption would be that that is the general rule, but it would be an assumption at this stage.
Yes, from what I can tell the floating boost cannot be assigned to a score that's already got an ancestry boost. Goblins & Elves both imply this. Goblin Blog:
Goblin Blog wrote:
Beyond that, your goblin's unique ancestry allows you to choose one ability score other than Dexterity or Charisma to receive a boost.
Dwarves & Elves Blog wrote:
Elves' grace gives them an ability boost to Dexterity, and their years of study give them one to Intelligence. Their third ability boost can represent the other score they developed over the years.

Silver Crusade

doc the grey wrote:

So... What exactly do you get level to level beyond either damage increases or the ability to qualify for more feats? As it stands it sounds more and more like a lot of the options that used to be features of the class you'd take as part of your leveling progression are just becoming feats you take instead when you qualify.

Now, don't get me wrong, it's an.. "interesting"? idea, but it feels like it's falling back into the dead level trap of 3.5, with more levels that are just devoid of anything save BAB & Save increases. Those were crap back then, and I'd hate to have another game where we've got levels where nothing unique is happening at that level.

Also, if a lot of these powers are being moved to feats, what are archetypes going to be modifying?

As in the other thread, I'll refer you to the Leveling Up Blog. No dead levels!

Silver Crusade

Dracala wrote:
My problem here is that I'm seeing absolutely no mention of the cool grotesquerie discoveries that I attribute to the Alchemist class (and Absolutely Love about it) like Mummification, Parasitic Twin, Bottled Ooze, Rag Doll Mutagen, Tentacles, Tumor Familiar, Alchemical Simulacrum, etc. I want more of These types of Discoveries, they're what made the Alchemist one of my Favorite classes!

See this interview summary, which Mark linked upthread, for a few more details, including confirmation of an Alchemical Familiar class feat. But there will be a lot of class feats, I'm sure, so plenty of room for these kinds of gross goodies.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Elfteiroh wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
So are we getting more feats at different levels and they are just feat locked, or are we getting more feat options that have to compete with a similar number of slots like we did before? Has Paizo piped up much about any of this?
It's the former. You have Ancestry feat slots, Class feat slots, Skill feat slots and general feat slots.

Yeah,the different types of feats are mostly not competing with each other so there's no question of trading off. Which is great!

The one semi-exception to that is that you can spend a General Feat slot on a Skill Feat if you like, in addition to your dedicated Skill Feat slots (since Skill Feats are also in the category of General Feats).

See the Leveling Up Blog for the official preview of all of this.

Silver Crusade

QuidEst wrote:
1of1 wrote:
Joe M. wrote:
Logan says:
Logan wrote:
It’s not that much like Starfinder and it’s not that much like first edition. It’s kind of one of the more experimental parts of the rules ... I will say we’ve taken a few different concepts that were kind of all pointing at the same type of character customization and kind of said, that’s all under the archetype umbrella. So we’re interested to see how people react to that, for sure.
This one, specifically, hurts my head like some sort of eldritch knowledge. It means too many things all at the same time for me understand it, and it means them pretty darn intensely. So uh, I'll guess I'll just have to wait until I have something more defined in front of me before I can give them any interesting reactions.

I'm guessing those things are:

Class archetypes.
Prestige classes.
Multiclassing/VMC.

Yeah, that's about what I figured. Can anyone think of anything else Logan might have been referring to?

Silver Crusade

The Archetype discussion is really interesting. I'm thinking along the lines of some of you as well, but also speculating—wildly—that Archetypes might encompass multiclassing a la VMC. I threw up a new thread over here if we want to split that discussion off.

1 to 50 of 1,364 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>