Anthropomorphized Rabbit

QuidEst's page

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. 4,589 posts (4,774 including aliases). 15 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 10 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 4,589 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Tangent101 wrote:
Counterspell feat things.

It's your first level feat, and it's letting you spend a reaction to negate two actions. That's an unbelievably good deal! So, there has to be the catch. What's the catch? Well, either you have to actually play your Batman Wizard as Batman (studying all your opponent's fighting styles in advance so you can counter them), or it only comes out when your opponents are foolish enough to try casting one of the better spells in the game (you, of course, have prepared the better spells in the game). If you don't like the idea of using spells you prepared for personal use, universalist seems like a good fit, giving you the ability to recast whatever that spell was later. Added bonus, you get an extra first level feat.

But, there are more uses than that! Suppose you have a strategy you like to employ. I'm going to use a PF1 example- possessing people is really fun, especially if your character is evil. In PF1, though, your fun is going to get shut down really fast by Protection From Evil. So, you prep Protection From Evil. Now, when somebody casts the one spell that can really unfairly ruin your fun, you counterspell it as a reaction.

Being able to counterspell Detect Magic as many times as you want will be fun. I'm thinking the shadiest merchant, but illusionist specialists might snag it too.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Asgetrion wrote:

Maybe -- I personally liked the "channeling hacks" and subdomains, and I see clerics being "diminished" by restricting them to a single domain. I don't think a few feat choices will make two clerics of the same deity feel different in the same way subdomains did. Although it's naturally too early to say; we'll see how it works when the book comes out.

I *do* think it's silly if clerics won't ever get another domain without burning a feat. Domains should be in the job description, that's what the deities are (in game mechanics) all about.

Sure- Cleric is already getting some channeling hacks, in the form of special metamagic and feats. There's even a capstone centered around it. For space reasons, the core book probably can't afford to do a whole bunch of deity-distinguishing tricks, but I think one of the goals is to eventually make it possible to build a Cleric of a specific deity out of deity and domain specific options. (The old core book didn't have subdomains or much by way of channeling tricks.)

Cleric is getting all these feats added on, though. If Cleric were to get both domains to start, balance would probably dictate that they not get that starter feat. They're already getting armor and weapon proficiencies, casting, and maybe five or six castings of a spell to heal yourself or somebody else half their health with one action.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
gustavo iglesias wrote:
An evocation specialist being able to cast less fireballs than an Universalist to maximize his spell slots doesn't sound right, yes.

An evocation specialist will almost always fill their top-level slots with evocation because of the damage advantage. They will have fewer castings of Fireball because they have diversified energy type and debuff-with-damage options. Or, they will have two Fireballs, and Universalist will have to give up its flexibility advantage if it wants as many. It’s the lower-level slots where you will see the difference.

Edit: Oh, right! Evoker still gets the re-casting on their top-level slot. Since those are disproportionately good for evoking, specialist is a pretty clear choice.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Oh my goodness, I’m loving all this!

- Wizard gets 4 spells/level.
- Lots of cantrips. Four is enough to get two boring cantrips (Detect Magic, Read Magic), one combat cantrip, and one fun cantrip.
- Familiars get swappable abilities! Predictably, I want “talking” as one of them. The extra low-level spell slot meshes with my playstyle, too.
- No opposition schools. “Pick the two worst schools” was a boring mini-game.
- Conceal Spell. Targets only noticing a successful save vs. Charm on a crit is a great quality of life improvement.
- Multiple options to get more low-level casting.
- No more “cast anything you know” Arcane Bond (at least for free). That always made spontaneous casters sad.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
rooneg wrote:

I'm not a fan of counterspell requiring you to have the spell that you're countering prepared. That seems like a recipe for just never countering anything at all (especially when the number of spells in the game grows as it eventually will). I had been looking forward to getting a cool and flavorful reaction for the wizard, and now it seems like it's not going to be anywhere near as useful as I'd hoped :(

Other than that, I like most of this. I'd still prefer arcanist style casting, but that can wait for the inevitable surveys ;-)

Well, that’s the first level counterspelling option, and it’s still incredibly good for a Wizard that does their research. Going to fight a monster with spells? You can shut them down hard with this. Fighting a Sorcerer? Find out from their enemies what spells they favor.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Asgetrion wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
Asgetrion wrote:
Hmmm... so channeling does not qualify as "brandishing your holy symbol"?
Channeling works as the Heal spell. If you do the three-action area heal, that has a material component, which Clerics substitute out for presenting their holy symbol. That triggers the second condition of the redcap’s weakness, and it needs to make a save. If any domain spells have a material component, they’d work too.
Hmmm, yeah, I forgot that it works that way now. I have to say I'm not happy with the new cleric, especially how channeling has been cut and how you need to memorize all healing spells now. I really liked how variant (domain-based) channeling worked in PF1, not to mention how channeling uses enabled a lot of other cool things, too.

Keep in mind that variant channeling and alternate uses for it weren’t core. PF2 will also get improvements over time. The huge variety in channeling options, though, was probably a result of Cleric not getting much else. Now they can just directly give Cleric options rather than hacking channeling.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
GM Rednal wrote:

My feelings are pretty straightforward - if the players can do it, so can the villains. And, as a serious question, how many of us want things like undetectable domination used on players at our tables?

(Even if it's the "smart" thing for a villain to do, my guess is that most players will not find it particularly fun to hand over their sheets on a regular basis.)

Undetectable Dominate would be bad. Difficult-to-detect Suggestion is pretty reasonable, though. That’s why I think it’s reasonable to have as metamagic, since you can’t use metamagic on really big-ticket spells like Dominate or summoning spells. And rather than undetectable, make it hard to spot.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Fuzzypaws wrote:
edduardco wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
I wouldn’t be surprised to see opposition schools go away, though.
I really hope so
Meanwhile, I'm hoping they make specialization and picking opposition schools /mandatory/, as part of reigning in the all-powerful generalist God-wizards who cherry pick all the best spells from every school without respect to theme or flavor.

I always thought that divination's massive bonuses to initiative and always acting in the surprise round were worth a lot more than the ability to take evocation and necromancy spells without spending up an extra slot. With PF1's unbalanced schools, it felt like a very clear choice to me to grab a specialist school.

But, the schools are supposed to be evened out at least a bit, I think. That might make a universalist a stronger pick than before.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The OP doesn’t just want raptors used as a symbol, but raised and ridden. Raptors will still kill and eat innocent civilians if they get loose, barring some very good handle animal or grapple checks.

I feel like his sacred animal being a horse is saying, “No, use these, like a society that cares about its citizenry not getting eaten.”


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Asgetrion wrote:
Hmmm... so channeling does not qualify as "brandishing your holy symbol"?

Channeling works as the Heal spell. If you do the three-action area heal, that has a material component, which Clerics substitute out for presenting their holy symbol. That triggers the second condition of the redcap’s weakness, and it needs to make a save. If any domain spells have a material component, they’d work too.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
1of1 wrote:
Do not take me for some conjurer of cheap tricks.

I’m an evoker of cheap tricks!


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I wonder when we’re getting the bonus blog with more details for Fighter, Rogue, Paladin, and Cleric builds. Presumably after today’s Wizard blog, since they’ll also be discussing familiars in the bonus blog.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Thebazilly wrote:
thflame wrote:

I'm pretty sure it has been hinted at that any magic weapon that does more than just extra damage dice will cost Resonance to activate.

[...]

Imagine if Speed grants you an extra Attack Action at no penalty, but requires Resonance to activate? What min-max power-gaming fighter is going to dump CHA now?

What if Keen adds an extra damage die on a crit, but only if you burn a point of Resonance?

It has been stated that magic weapons and armor cost 1 point of Resonance to "attune" at the beginning of the day, and then function all day without additional investment.

Individual Resonance point costs seem to be used for single-use or charged items like potions, wands, and things that were otherwise x/day abilities on magic items.

Still. A fighter with 6 CHA is going to have to make do with 2 less magic items than the 10 CHA fighter.

Swords don’t attune, so they don’t have a resonance cost at the start of the day. I forget whether or not that holds for armor.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kizan wrote:

In the interest of being clear. This sentence seemed a little vague.

"If a redcap sees a creature brandish a holy symbol of a good deity or use one for the Material Casting of a divine spell...."

I'm think the intent is that a PC could make a "brandish" action or cast a divine spell using the holy symbol (i.e. either would work). But another reading of it could be the redcap using a holy symbol as while casting the divine spell. It's not defined clearly. I had to re-read the sentence a few times to get the feel for intent.

Signed,

Capt Pedantic
(sorry)

If you wanted it to read as the redcap using the holy symbol, it would need to say “or uses one”.

“If he uses it” vs. “if he sees Bob use it”.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Congrats! I’m very excited for the megablog of content- build info for four classes, an item, and familiars!


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Orville Redenbacher wrote:
Bets on 3 spell slots a day?

Almost certainly. I’m curious about Sorcerer’s spells per day, personally.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see opposition schools go away, though.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I don’t care for playing with characters that dumped a mental stat down below 8 for the most part. They’re generally played as uncomfortable stereotypes. I’d rather not have there be an incentive for that, and I’d really dislike for dumping a stat into the ground to be the only way you can get the best main stat.

I also don’t think trading out the stat you care least about for the stat you care most about can be a balanced trade. If we need painfully overspecialized characters, I’d rather it be something like being able to trade the four +2s you probably get after ABCs to instead get +4 to one stat. Something that isn’t an automatic “yes”, even if you’re playing a crit-fish build or a save-or-suck Wizard. For a caster, this would balance the increased DC requiring three defense stats to be increased to match.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Now, Chris Pratt's sacred animal? Sure, that I can see.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A talking cat familiar at level one.

This is fantasy, I was promised a talking cat.

Spoiler:
At this point, that really is the main thing. It's one of the things I like most about 5e. For a spell slot, accessible by a feat if need be, I can get a minor character to play alongside my main character.

Further things that would be nice:
Plenty of distinctive Sorcerer bloodlines, preferably with some passive bloodline abilities, not just spellpoint spells. Four castings of each spell level eventually for the class.

Alignment restrictions loosened or even removed for Monk. Monk lets me fight without using hands, which makes me want the character to play a flute at the same time, which really feels like a CG or CN character to me.

As soon as can be managed, more ancestries. The core ones wear a bit thin quickly.

The ability to pick out fun items without worrying too much about saving up for things.

Cool archetypes, and lots of them. Eventually, I'd like to see archetypes that trade out fixed features of a class, not just give you more class feat options. The latter is really good, but shouldn't be used exclusively.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Conversely, spell casters are no longer limited to a single spell per turn, and casting time on many spells is reduced to a single action (with options to spend more) increasing their agency by virtue.

Wait, what? We have zero evidence of this. It's true of the Heal spell, but per the actual things the designers have stated about spells in general that's very much the exception and not the rule. From what they've actually said, most spells are two actions, especially offensive ones, with summoning spells being 3 actions and the only single action spell mentioned thus far being Shield, which is just like having an actual shield only not quite as good.

In short this is a huge assumption there's basically no evidence for and quite a bit against.

The devs have mentioned that Heal and Magic Missile aren't the norm; they're kind of getting special treatment as very iconic sorts of spells. Shield is one action because it mimics the action of raising a shield. Spells that perform the same function as a mundane action get a little more leeway in their casting time.

At higher levels, I suspect that casters will be getting an action economy nerf by having Quicken Spell removed or turned into a more limited ability.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

"You know those animals that I died trying to save innocent people from being horribly torn apart by? They're great. Stamp of approval. Raise them, take care of them, all that jazz."

I'm really not following the reasoning for those being his sacred animal. If he'd been drawn and quartered, I would expect his sacred animal to be anything but a horse. Having his paladins ride around on Peasant Slaughterer Jr. just sounds out of character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Asgetrion wrote:

I'd prefer a generic racial stat block, kind of an incomplete base that you always use and then add templates to it. For example, the "ogre base" might have 40 hit points, 15 AC, Fort +6, etcetera; and if you want a hard-hitting ogre, you apply the "Ogre brute" template on top of it. If your want a vigilant guard-type, use the "Ogre jailor" template. Both would add different bonuses and penalties to skills, ability scores, AC and saves. And naturally different kind of traits, reactions and attacks.

Maybe something like this (and this is just me typing something off the top of my head): +20 hp, +1 AC, +2 Fort/-1 Will, add 'Smite fallen' to ogre's reactions. And this 'Smite fallen' might be something like a free attack vs. anyone the ogre trips with its hook, probably with a hefty bonus. And maybe marking that creature as its 'prey' or 'quarry', thus granting the ogre further attack and/or AC bonuses?

In the end that basic ogre is just, well, a big bag o' hit points and nothing else. It's boring. It is able to trip enemies and dish out more damage on crits, but those are its only "gimmicks".

If PF2 is going for signature abilities and exception-based design, why not do it with all the monsters, especially ones that get used most often? Who cares how cool Elohim, Hundun or Vilderavn will be in PF2 -- you likely won't fight them as often as ogres, giant spiders, manticores and chimera.

There need to be some bag-of-hitpoints monsters, especially at the lower CRs. It allows you to vary the pacing, putting in something uncomplicated between more exotic fights. The PCs can use whatever strategy they want, rather than needing to adapt. And, in a bigger fight, these enemies don't distract much from the main opponent when used as supporting bodies..


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Weather Report wrote:
Hey, I wasn't having a go, just trying to get it straight in me ol' noggin.

Oh, I wasn't trying to be snippy, just provide information and clarify why I hadn't mentioned it previously. Sorry if it came across otherwise.

Tone is hard to convey properly on the internet sometimes.

C♯ or D♭


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Corrik wrote:
The Gap is garbage.

It does solve the issue brought up in the initial post.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
MerlinCross wrote:
Are we talking 3.5 or Pathfinder? I know people in Pathfinder, myself included, that will lower your carrying capacity(It makes bloody sense why not?)

I'm talking about the actual Pathfinder rules, which don't have you recalculate carrying capacity for anything less than ability drain. I know that a lot of people did it differently, but that's sort of the point- the actual rules didn't see a whole lot of use, and I messed them up a lot. Paizo even did an Oracle curse that didn't have an actual drawback because of how ability damage rules actually work.

MerlinCross wrote:
Okay I'll give you on the Shadow killing you with STR damage. Unconscious then. And I have no problem with monster that ignored normal defenses. If only because people tend to get to a point where attacks don't bloody matter vs AC.

I suspect that attack and AC will be more balanced now that they don't have to deal with backwards compatibility.

MerlinCross wrote:
It's an issue with having info scattered all around the place. Really they should just reprint the core book with Unchained changes and be done with it.

Unchained is a bunch of optional rules, and too many things reference page numbers and the like in the CRB. If they wanted to make any major changes to something in the CRB, they'd have to basically make an entirely new edition of the game. (Which is why we're here!)


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
MerlinCross wrote:

I don't know 1 DM that would actually ask you to turn off feats due to Ability damage. Encumbrance yes(Oi Mages, maybe don't DUMP it fully?) But feats? Same with skills. Now your Bow example? Can still use it, but you do less damage. Much like hitting something with your melee would. I don't see this as too hard to manage.

Especially with online play and Apps.

Ability damage and penalties didn't turn off feats, and strength damage didn't actually impact your carrying capacity. The rules were weird, and very few people played them as written.

MerlinCross wrote:
But can you still Die from it? That Shadow doesn't seem so scary if it does only 1d6 damage with Debuff. There's probably a good amount of creatures that are only threatening or notable because of the Ability damage. Take that away and either you need to give them a big boost or might as well remove them. To say nothing about having to revamp ALL Poisons and Diseases.

You couldn't die from strength damage normally anyway. Shadows had to have a custom rule just to make that work. Shadows in PF2 might kill you if their debuff stack reaches your ability score or something like that. Yeah, monsters will need to be changed if they had ability score damage, but I think it's reasonable to get rid of some of the options that ignored normal defenses.

Pathfinder Unchained already revamped how poisons and diseases worked to avoid ability score damage (which was more of a nuisance than a real threat). Personally, I found it to be a lot more interesting.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Wow, thanks to whoever made that huge last-minute donation for the familiar blog. I'm really excited to hear about them!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
NielsenE wrote:
I'm hoping for a system that doesn't bog down when dealing with doors -- the near constant "check for traps, (attempt disarm), check if locked (attempt to unlock)" when exploring some of the extremely door/room heavy location in some of the APs gets monotous very fast. But I've had very limited success in various approaches to streamlining it that lets characters who invest in rogue-type skills still feel happy with their investment.

It sounds like exploration mode is built for that, yeah. The following is my guess as to how it works.

GM: All right, what's everybody doing as you move through the tomb?
Rogue: I'm going to be checking for traps.
Wizard: I'm going to be checking for magic.
Fighter: I'll be on guard for any enemies.
Cleric: This dude was really paranoid about grave robbers, so I'll be backup on checking for traps.

During exploration, the Rogue and Cleric probably get automatic perception checks for any traps, because that's what they're doing. No need to say everything you're checking. Secret doors and the like might get rolled in as well, since they're also something with a hidden mechanism of some sort. The Wizard spams the Detect Magic cantrip, helping deal with weak illusions and so on. The Fighter makes sure the group is safe.

The group encounters something. Combat starts, and initiative is based on the skill being used.
Rogue and Cleric both roll perception. Because they were busy poking and prodding for traps, they don't start with their weapons at the ready.
Wizard was checking for magic, and might get to roll the relevant magic skill for for initiative. (Maybe it depends on if the targets have magic on them?) A good roll probably also gives a Detect Magic reading on one or more of the enemies.
Fighter was at the ready, and thus starts with weapons drawn and all that. Perception roll for initiative, with a +1 to the initiative result from the Fighter class feature.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dragon78 wrote:
I still think they should give the ogre a reaction ability of some kind.

I’m of the opposite opinion. If everything has a reaction, there’s no simplification. Every monster will demand tracking conditional stuff, with no simple options. Like they said, too, ogres fill in as low-level muscle at higher levels.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Saw a lot of discussion regarding bonus-only listing and ability damage. They’re moving away from messing with stats directly. We saw this with one of the mutagens, which now provides a long list of bonuses that happen to line up closely with what would happen if you boosted strength.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
David knott 242 wrote:

There is that "Personal Resistance" ability that enables the kineticist to gain the resonant powers of some (and eventually all) of her Ioun Stones as though they were in a high capacity Wayfinder. Anything else I can say would involve more mechanical details than seem proper for me to reveal.

Hmm. My initial reaction was that I'd have to ban the archetype because of my standing ban on resonant powers, but it seems that they've balanced some of the broken ones, and the remaining broken options don't have synergy with the Kineticist class.

David knott 242 wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:

An Antiquarian prepares spells from the alchemist list using a collection of trinkets/relics instead of a formula book.

Prepares them as spells? Or is it still extracts? Alchemist list casting would be an interesting twist.

He does indeed cast spells.

Ah, thank you! I have a friend who will be pleased to hear that.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm personally quite happy with symbols for actions/reactions, but accessibility is important.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
MidsouthGuy wrote:
All I'm going to say is that people who decide to roll for their stats need to get some kind of modifiers so we can stand alongside those who choose to use the standard method or point buy. Rolling for stats has been part of the game since the beginning. Would it really be so bad to put in a paragraph or two about what bonuses and penalties you get when rolling for ability scores?

There will be some rolled stat method.

We don't know exactly how it works.

We can reasonably assume it won't usually generate results drastically different from the normal method.

In the unlikely event that it doesn't involve the racial mods, you can submit feedback about that. (I'm guessing something like 2d6 + 5 would work if you subtract one to any odd results.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Joe M. wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
Just to add I think the only difference between SF stat ups and PF2E stat ups is they are always going to be +2, rather than Starfinders bizzare diminishing returns. I think generally odd ability scores will be a thing of the past (at which point we ask ourselves why have +2s instead of just +1s and make the modifier be stat-10)

Circling back to our ability score level up specilation from earlier in this thread, did y'all catch this in today's monster blog?

Blog wrote:
You'll also notice the monster gives just its ability score modifiers instead of scores. This lets you make calculations more quickly, and since monsters don't increase their scores the same way PCs do, listing those is unnecessary. Monsters with items also list those up top.
I'm reading this as a hint/evidence that my diminishing-returns-stat-boosts theory might be correct.

I'm reading that instead as "monsters don't base their stats on getting increases every five levels".


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dragon78 wrote:
So, the ogre doesn't have a reaction ability?

Nope. They're a bit lumbering that way.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
NorthernDruid wrote:
2 actions to take a hand off of the schythe and then put your hand on again after dunking the cap in blood.

Taking a hand off the scythe isn't an action, so that part is at most one action.

I do agree that the action system nickel-and-diming things makes this a little hard to figure out as it's written. I wouldn't know how much of a turn to take up for this. I'd probably end up doing three: free up a hand as a free action, dip the cap as an action (there's no need to draw it from a pack or anything, after all), wear it again as an action, and re-grip the scythe as an action.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Catharsis wrote:

Looking good so far, and I like that bugbear a lot it looks unmistakably goblinoid, but also more animalistic and dangerous. Nice!

I find the order of presentation in the attack listings jarring, though.

Melee scythe +13 (deadly 1d10, trip), Damage 2d10+4 slashing

It's strange to read about the extra damage done on a critical when the regular damage hasn't even come up yet! Wouldn't it be more natural to provide to-hit and damage first, then list the special properties?

Melee scythe +13 (2d10+4 slashing), deadly 1d10, trip

I would agree, but some weapon properties are necessary to calculate the proper to-hit. So, in practice, I would rather have attack modifier, weapon stuff (which can modify both attack and damage), and then the damage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hmm. Interesting.

It seems like either the redcap does more damage with his weapon than the PCs would, or am expert scythe is the same as a +1 scythe.

The redcap has a higher deception modifier than a PC could get barring buffs or Skill Focus existing still, and does so with just 14 charisma. Stats, then, determine how good creatures are at general things, but specialties (fey are quick and tricky) are what they need to be. But before we had racial modifiers and special abilities to bypass feat requirements, so that doesn’t seem like a stretch.

I’m really liking the lack of feats. Before, I’d have to go look up Cleave and recalculate attack and damage for Power Attack.

Also interesting- instead of massive DR, a redcap has tons. Of fast healing. Ill-equipped parties can power through now even with lots of moderate attacks, and stealing the cap now renders the redcap much weaker than in PF1.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
David knott 242 wrote:

An Antiquarian prepares spells from the alchemist list using a collection of trinkets/relics instead of a formula book.

Prepares them as spells? Or is it still extracts? Alchemist list casting would be an interesting twist.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
David knott 242 wrote:

The Ioun Kineticist is basically an aether kineticist who psychically throws Ioun stones at her enemies (and then gets them back). She starts out with three dull gray ones in a "cloud" and can add more as she gains levels. At high levels, an Ioun Kineticist can improve the enhancement bonuses granted by the Ioun stones that normally grant a +2 enhancement bonus to an ability score.

A sorcerer with the Vestige bloodline starts out with a bonded object (as a wizard) and can eventually use her magic to cause broken and destroyed objects in her possession to function as though they were in better shape. The top level abilities let her bring back a dead ancestor for a few rounds or create a mindscape.

Thank you! Intriguing... both things I’m looking forward to seeing the final versions on. (Vestige as much for VMC as anything. Sounds like a great thematic fit for Occultist!)


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Wow, that sounds very cool! If you have the time and inclination, my day would be even further improved by some general info on the Ioun Kineticist and/or Vestige Sorc bloodline.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Pretty cool! I’m very excited too, but I started out there. Even more excited when I consider the additional content we’ll probably be getting in the first year or two.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Fuzzypaws wrote:
One thing I don't think I've seen addressed yet: can creatures finally have multiple types? Such as Fey Animal for a unicorn. I feel subtypes should mostly be reserved for stuff like (Fire) and (Devil). If "BAB" and the like are now pretty consistently based on level rather than type or class, it seems like a good opportunity to move to type combinations where appropriate.

It’s probably tags. I think the high-level Paladin option for wings also gave you celestial and angel? So instead of needing to specify “outsider with the evil subtype”, the rules can probably just use “fiend” as a rules term.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hopefully folks on here will start getting their copies shipped soon. Can’t wait to hear what the index is.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Regarding legendary proficiency, I think that (with one known exception of Fighter getting legendary weapon proficiency at 15), legendary proficiency is available at 17th. You should have up to 16 broadly free of it.

(I’m looking forward to it myself, personally, since I liked the level 20 skill unlocks from Pathfinder for things like non-magical Suggestion.)


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Saint Bernard wrote:
I am hoping the next blog is a class review of the druid.

Friday is a more in-depth look at a monster stat block.

Monday is Wizard for GenCon, I believe. The subsequent Friday is probably a follow-up (although we now know there’s no familiar blog, barring their charity fundraiser getting a lot of money in two days).


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
CraziFuzzy wrote:
I'm just worried that the promotion of Goblins to full ancestries will make the brand managers push to NOT allow Orcs and Kobolds to get the same treatment for some time - to the detriment to both world building AND player choice, all in the effort of promoting their silly 'mascot'.

I’d expect the opposite, really. I think some of the less available humanoids (e.g. gnolls, lizardfolk, etc.) will be more fleshed out as non-core PC options.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
2Zak wrote:
N N 959 wrote:
As mentioned, Protection From Evil does squat if the caster isn't evil
Protection From Evil protects against all forms of mind control regardless of alignment.

Nah, just from evil sources. The wording isn’t great, but there’s an FAQ to clarify that, yes, Protection from Evil only protects you from evil.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
HWalsh wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:

There's gonna be some kind of tag line for "This isn't a spell".

At least for monsters. As an example, I can't see Sandman's Sleep Aura being a Spell that it needs to cast while In combat now.

That's more for over in the Monster topic though.

We know the Paladin's Detect Evil is a passive sense...

Good point! I imagine there will be a category for magic that doesn’t follow spell rules.


Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Thedmstrikes wrote:
I am still not a fan of the roll-less stat generation though...

They’ll have a rolled stats option in the final version. It would be difficult to get good playtest feedback from groups with rolled stats, though. Random stats mean a lot of noise in the data.

1 to 50 of 4,589 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>