Mass Kneebreaker's page

I mean i am surprised there already isn't one, considering the inspiration. Anybody else think so?

I definetly agree on that. Mystic theurge could be an awesome idea, especially if you could combine any two Branches of magic.

However, i think personally the class needs something unique, instead of just wearing two different hats. Even Druid, Wizard, Bard and cleric feel different From each other.

How about some sort of a "Magical overload" mechanic, to represent the two methods clashing in the caster?

I admit, that is confusing.

Hmm...how about That if you go unconscious, your Eidolon doesn't vanish, but is also knocked unconscious? You do share the same life force after all?

In the Gencon this year was promised that at least one of the next 5 classes will be a totally new one.

Ooh that does have me very intrigued. I wonder what it is.

Dragon: the class plz

Dragon the class?

The Reveals of Magus and Summoner have made me ponder something for quite a while (as much as it has been a while since then), about what is the future of Pathfinder 2E.

When do you guys think we get an entirely new class in this edition? Is that ages away? Will it happen when this 10 year travel is almost over? Do you think all classes should be ported over from 1e first before thinking of something new, Or would trying to create something entirely new take priority for freshness? And More importantly...what would you like it to be? Any ideas for that?

Warlord pls, if i may wish.

Hey there! I have to say, i'm liking the new edition a lot. I remained very skeptical till the release, but now, i can say was happy to be surprised. Regardless, i hope paizo keeps churning support for this game for another ten years!

I am not good at segue's, so what i was wondering, what class support would you like to see in the future? Not as in new classes, but new options for existing classes. Here's what i would like to see!

Two-weapon barbarian: I think the whirlwind style barbarian is just as iconic as the huge weapon type in fiction. The option is sadly not yet really viable for a barbarian without multiclassing. How about giving Barbarian their own version of twin strike?

Weapon bard: Bard has always been a versatile character, able to do a little bit of everything. But right now, the option of playing a more combat oriented bard (like dervish, remember that?) is not really there without multiclassing, as you can only get expert with weapons. Also, Skald would make for a great dedication.

Blight druid: Can we have this again? I loved it in first edition.

Reach fighter: Oddly, there is a not single feat in the entire book that specifically supports reach weapons. I find that...strange.

Drunken monk: My favorite archetype of all time. Please bring it back~

Thrown weapon ranger: Doesnt have to be ranger, but please, more support for thrown weapons.

Thats pretty much what i would love to see. or maybe i am an idiot and just missed the options. Anyways, what would you like to see?

Oh yes, Gnolls please! I'm all for that! I want races that weren't in first edition in second edition!

After the survey for ancestries, i noticed a part where we were asked if orcs should be a core race, along with their half brethren. I think it is an important question, though personally Im all for it. I mean we got goblins so orcs arent that big of a stretch. Also am i the only one who thinks allowing half-orcs but not full blooded ones feels a bit weird? Are half orcs really that common?

What do you think about this?

I havent seen much talk about this in the forums, so i thought i'd bring it up. How do you think how animal companions should be handled in PF2?

Ps: for the love of gods finally give us large bears.

"one true builds" are for people more intersted in their characters mechanics than the character itself. So it makes me sad to see it everytime.

Or you can multiclass. Its not mandatory.

This is the internet. Of course it's mostly people whining over the smallest things.

Just be glad you arent in d&d forums. The edition wars...i still have nightmares about it...

Kerrilyn wrote:

Cheeto Sam, Esquire wrote:

120. How will i make witches into enemies if there are no witches in p2e?

121 - How do you know she's a witch?

She turned me into a Newt!

A newt?

113: What does the scouter say about PF2's power level!?

Well obviously the canon is not going to be the same as in pf1,especially after how much conversation there has been over the subject.

What is better: to be born good or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?

I dont think theyre gonna do it. I would love that, but i dont think thats gonna happen.

Hell, 70% of the curremt iconics are humans, so i don't think Paizo cares about race that much.

Haha, thanks. You gave me a good laugh.
Seriously people, get over it. Theres bigger issues with pf2 than ONE race. Like resonance. Or if Crossbows are gonna suck again. Or if casters are gonna be broken again.

Guys! These are nt PF1 goblins! These are PF2 goblins. The "canon" of golarion is obviously different! It is pointless to argue about this. And judging from the preview we got, things are indeed different. Hell, considering goblings now have a CHA bonus, they could easily ease their way into society.

Oh by the gods, how many threads do we need of this?

If you don't like goblins, fine. Dont allow them in Games you DM. But dont take them away from people like me who are excited to play goblins in the new ed.

And remember. Not everyone makes characters based on stereotype.

Snapgab, the goblin monk. After getting captured and imprisoned in a jail following an unsuccesful raid, he spent his dues with his cellmate, who was a monk. Snabgab was slowly converted into a more lawful way of thinking in the prison, learning from him the way of the fist. Sadly, his cellmate died before his release, but now Snapgab carries out his teachings, trying to figure out what he meant with "path to personal enlightment."

Ohmygod it's true! NO STR penalty!
My prayers have been answered!

As crossbows are my favorite ranged weapon, i would really like them not get shafted so hard. Also, it would be cool to be able to dual wield hand crossbows, withouth having to drop one to reload every time.

Also off topic question, how is dual wielding handled in PF2?

Personally i think it would be cool if we dropped stat penalties related to race.

80: Is a Butterfinger better than 2.0?

81: Do you feel lucky, punk?

82: How come leftover lasagne from the day before tastes better than oven fresh one?

Make shapeshifting a bit more easier to understand.

I do hope they change the strength penalty to wisdom. Makes way way more sense when looking at the flavor of Paizo goblins

Idd. Goblins lack of common sense is pretty evident.

53: is it finally possible to see the sun with new perception changes?

For example; The differences between a Pathfinder Halfling and a Pathfinder Gnome.

My rule of thumb. If it has normal looking hair, it's a halfling

I agree! There has been quite a lot of negativity surrounding the second edition. The old pathfinder is still gonna be around guys! You can just stick with it!

What i love about Pathfinder is the flexibility. The customization and the infinite possibilities characters have. 4th edition made characters slide into exact archetypes, making very few characters different. Which is why i love pathfinder so much. But i also don't think it could not be made easier to understand.

TheFinish wrote:

bookrat wrote:

Kerrilyn wrote:

gustavo iglesias wrote:

In real life a crossbow should need several rounds to reload, yes, but then it should do something like 6d8, if a longbow does 1d8. English longbow had an estimated 100-150lb pull. There are medieval crossbows that beat 700-900.

That would not be very balanced, so let's use a dose of handwavium here

The little tiny prods of the crossbow could not impart the same velocity onto a bolt that the long limbs of a longbow could put into an arrow. The draw weights aren't directly comparable. 1 pound of longbow draw is worth many pounds of crossbow draw.

Also those 700 pound crossbows? They're cranequin-drawn. You would be very lucky to reload those once in two encounters' worth of time.

Anyways in Pathfinderies, the crossbow just puts you a feat behind for the light variety.

I didn't know what that word meant, so I looked it up and watched a video of a guy using one. Going at a decent speed, his rate of fire was about 1/minute. So in PF terms, that's once every ten rounds, and the entire rest of the time you're reloading.

Wow.

That's the kind of weapon you need one or two people to help you reload.

And yet, you will not find videos of someone using a legit english long bow to fire three or four times in six seconds at full draw at a target 90 feet away.

Or a guy doing the same.....with a musket. A muzzle loading musket, no less.

I think if we can suspend our disbelief for those, we can do it for the poor crossbow as well. If you want to make them take longer to reload, that's fine, just make sure it doesn't cripple the weapon to the point of uselessness in most cases.

And be fully accurate, no less. Not only can they be fast, but flawless in execution and actually hitting the intended target.

Consistency! What's that?

One of the things i always note about slings, especially sling staffs, is that they can be used to lob things other than Pellets, at least my DM allowed me to. My rogue character, Cat Burglar Mususu, Wielded a sling (which was flavored into a slingshot) And she lobbed things like bags of broken glass, Rotten Eggs, Sand, Flour, Oil flasks, among other things. Rarely killed anyone, but sure did cripple foes.

So...allow slings to lob things other than pellets, maybe?

Nail it on the head. I don't like bows, but i love crossbows, and have an affinity for Thrown weapons. The fact that Bows seem to be the only ranged weapon (aside from firearms if theyre allowed) worth caring about is stupid, especially considering in real life, crossbows pretty much entirely overtook bows before firearms were invented.

How about allowing Crossbows and light thrown weapons (like knives and shurikens) to use Dex for damage, ? It would be a good start

Don't make them all have a strength penalty, Please. Otherwise we have 3 races in the same book, all excelling and Sucking at almost the same things. I'm not sure how to best do it, but please, don't make all the little folk so similar stat wise.

1. Drunken Brawler Monk. My favorite archetype out of all of pathfinder. This is such a flavorful and fun option, and you get to breathe fire! If you keep any Monk Archetype, make it this one!
2. True Primitive Barbarian. Not so good, but i love it. Having a character who still uses stone and bone weapons, and can't speak common is very fun to rp.
3. Hurler Barbarian (and other thrown weapon specialists). This is amazing in concept, i had fun designing an ax thrower barbarian. But Paizo...Please fix thrown weapon builds. Don't make them suckier archers, give them more options.
4. Forgemaster Cleric. One of the best ways to create a Smith type of character!
5: Seasoned Commander Fighter. AllRIGHT YOU MAGGOTS! The best way to create a "warlord" in Pathfinder.

Those are my favs. And if you want new ideas...How about a Fighter Archetype who gets Bonuses for constantly switching weapons?

Humanoid Otters? Granted, didn't expect that, but not bad. Keen intellect seems a bit too much though.

Also, Tunner? how did you come up with that name?

Yeah i quess i worded it poorly. Being a Wizard is not a must, just someone who uses sand.

Your suggestions so far have been great though!

I have this concept in my mind about a Arabian style Desert elf wizard who uses magic themed around sand for an upcoming game. Unfortunately, i haven't found a way to really do this in game terms? Does anyoen have any ideas? Are there a lot of spells themed around sand in the game?

Mass Kneebreaker wrote:

The fact that every small race aside from one nobody plays has -2 to strength.

Yes i am still not over it.

Psst... small-sized aasimars, tieflings, and changelings.

To be honest that always felt kinda like cheatong to me.

I can tell some examples i've had on non-evil undead.

In one of my campaigns the party came across little noble girl, who was vampire. She couldnt control her instincts and thus was forced to killand feed. The group decided to help her and hunted down an magical cup that was always filled with blood. The little girl ended up becoming the groups most valuable ally.

In another place there was a ghost who was cursed an unable to pass to afterlife. Tye group had to burn down the manor, and destroy the demon inside, after which the ghost rewarded them and passed on.

Another time they found a skeletal champion, who was guarding a magical sword. The skeleton told them only the ones who could defeat him in an honorable duel could take the sword. After being defeated, the skeltal champion said. "finally..my task is complete."

So, at the end of the day, unlike with demons and devils, evil is not in the undeads nature. Most of them are victims themselves, and just want to pass on back ti the grave. Its up to you as a GM to make it happen.

The fact that every small race aside from one nobody plays has -2 to strength.
Yes i am still not over it.

Only a foolish wizard would put all his eggs in one basket. Even one of my favorite characters, A fire obsessed Wizard, still had non-fire spells, as he didn't want to be just rolling his thumbs when a red dragon showed up.

Mass Kneebreaker wrote:

They could have given Halfling -2 to Con instead of Str to make the difference but noooo....

I guess this is because Tolkien's hobbits were hardy folk. Cannot stray too far from J.R.R.

Hit it right in the head. Let's just copy paste races from Tolkien while completely ignoring his themes.

As a big fan of Dark sun, this all sound very interesting.

By the way, did you guys know Dark Sun was originally going to be an artic world instead of a desert one? It was changed cuz creators thought it would give them an excuse for using "bikini armor" designs.

Except, u kno, you would have to be a complete idiot to wear revealing clothing in a freaking desert.

I like the concept of being one with beasts. I also like the concept of having multiple Companions. However, i agree with others, this feels more like a Ranger archetype. I mean, We already got a class more focused around animal companions, the hunter.

Personally i have never understood why Gnomes get +2 Con, other than the fact that if they had 2+ Dex, they would be identical to halflings.

They could have given Halfling -2 to Con instead of Str to make the difference but noooo....

Yes i am still bitter about it.

Reestricting classes from races really doesn't make sense to me. It simply raises too many questions. As for race builder, don't use it. Sorry, but while it was a good idea in theory...it is way too limited and easy to abuse to be of any good. None of the races i have created use it.

A Man wishes his family was safe. They are granted a fortress where nobody gets in...and nobody gets out. And he himself wasn't included.

A boy wishes he would have the strength to stand up to his bully. He is granted this strength..by being turned into a werewolf.

A man wishes for riches. He is granted them, only to be hanged for stealing the local nobles treasures which mysteriously vanished.

A coal miner wishes his luck would change. He's mine suddenly discovers a huge seam of gold....which attracts lots of greedy and violent bandits.

A lady wishes to be the most beautiful in the upcoming festival. She is turned into a Siren.

A young man wishes for the heart of the woman he fancies. He is granted it...in a present box.

The town priest wishes people would come visit his church more often. The chruch soon is filled with refuges trying to hide from the orcs ravaging the countryside.

Druids are merely upholding the true law of nature.
Biggest jerk wins.