I'm a long time Paladin Stan.
One of my first AD&D characters was a Paladin rolled the hard way. (I was stupid lucky)
Paladins have always been a thing for me.
And yes, I am guilty of more than a few instances of Lawful Stupid Paladin.
Honestly, while I like most of what they outlined in this blog post, what I really wish they'd done is this:
But, oh well.
I don't know if this is doable, maybe you have a list of blog topics for the playtest previews going till release, but I have a topic I'd really like to see a Blog post on.
The "Party Healer" Barbarian that keeps getting mentioned.
I would really like to have a blog post dedicated to showing us what sort of choices and options allow a Barbarian (using none of the barbarian class options) to be an effective party healer.
It doesn't have to be 100% detailed, but something like "They can do this, because they have THIS skill feat, and they can do THIS because of this ancestry feature/feat, and this power is from a general feat, and this is because they put a bunch of skill advances into this skill so they have it at Master."
Personally, if I'm not specifically going for a companion based build, I find mandatory companions burdensome for 3 reasons.
1> To make a Companion of any sort useful 5-10 levels in, you have to spend limited resources (I.E. Feats) to improve it. Otherwise it's the first splat in each encounter. Also, you have to spend limited combat resources (Actions of various sorts) to make it do stuff which, if you're not going Full Companion, could be better spent doing other things. Fluffy, Attack! is not as useful as I Cast Swarm of Deadly Deadly Bees!
2> There is often a Penalty for letting your companion die. So, if I choose NOT to spend my feats and Magic item allowance on making Kitty able to survive a cr 23 elder dragon fight, I can expect to take some sort of hit. Even if there isn't a Gotcha like the old 3.X 'Lose 200 xp per level when your familiar dies save for half' there's still the GP cost and lost day to summon a new one.
3> Opportunity cost. Designers at least INTEND classes to be fairly balanced, each class feature therefore has a conceptual 'Value', totaling up to the target value of an entire class. If these 'Class Feature Points' are spent on a feature that you won't use, like a familiar or animal companion you don't want, then they AREN'T being spent on features you DO want and will use.
Vic Wertz wrote:
Also, we have been contemplating the concept of spell cards since we were making game aids for 3.5, but we've never found a good solution for the problem that some spells take up more than half a page in the rulebook, and so just can't be made to fit on a card. Since the point of having these is to avoid having to reference the rulebook, as soon as you have to make a card that says "See Core Rulebook p. 331," you've defeated the purpose.
WotC made it work in 5e.
Bard of Ages wrote:
I mean, we keep letting people play Humans...
Ninja in the Rye wrote:
Fish live in water, Trout are fish, therefore you get no further saves against Dominate ever.
You're assuming things that we don't know yet.
This is a Teaser, not full rules.
Don't assume that the stupidest possible implementation is the one they've chosen.
Dominated is PROBABLY a condition, and they've shown already that conditions can generally be shaken off with specific actions (Like mentioned earlier in (I think) this thread, Nauseated can be decreased in severity one step by taking an action to Vomit).
The logical conclusion is that even if you Crit Fail your save v. Dominate there will be the possibility to resist and try to shake off the condition.
Crafting a Laser Rifle requires Gunsmithing at LegendaryCrafting an automatic Rifle requires Gunsmithing at Master
Crafting single action pin fire gun requires Gunsmithing at Expert
Crafting a smooth bore black powder gun requires Gunsmithing at Trained
Not accidentally shooting yourself in the head and dying is a dc 20 untrained check.
And now, having just made a post decrying the making of assumptions, I shall, Hypocritically, make an assumption.
Why are they adding the 1 20 Auto-Fail/Success mechanic to skill checks?
Why, when it is not the rule in PF1, Not in 5e, specifically called out in the rules of 3.5 as not the way skill checks work, are they putting this into the PF2 playtest?
I think it's because they pay attention to how people play. You listen to D&D podcasts? Most of them do it. Most game groups do it. It even happens, INCORRECTLY, at Adventurer's League and Pathfinder Society tables (YES it DOES, I have personally witnessed it).
The human brain likes patterns that match, and if 1 is auto fail and 20 is auto success on a d20 roll for COMBAT, and for SAVES, SURELY, SURELY our brain tells us, SURELY it MUST be the rule on this other d20 roll.
It is how, to my observation at least, the majority of people play the game. Paizo is simply changing the rule to accommodate the fact that the majority of their customers are going to do it that way at home, to avoid confusion and arguments at Con tables.
Anyway, that's my take.
It's a shame (actually probably a good thing) that we can't post images in threads here.
So just imagine the accompanying screen shots, or go to Morbotron and look them up.
[Zoidberg, calmly] Relax Friends...
Preeeeeeety much all the Playtest threads, just continuously.
I mean, I think we all know that we all want more info, and that these teasers are really light on actual detail, but man the level of assumption, baseless extrapolation, and vitriolic defense and attack of said assumptions and baseless guessing is just absurd.
All fish live in water, all Trout are fish, Therefore Fighters can divine smite at 3rd level and if I roll a 20 on acrobatics I can jump down your throat and wear you like a power suit.
[Insert pic of Finn from adventure time wearing Jake as a suit]
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
You know what Adventurer League GMs get? XP to apply to a character. Gold and Downtime days to apply to a character.That's it.
There's also special quests to get a cert for what is essentially an Amulet of Mighty Fists +1, or a 5 use 2d8 heal potion that also does Remove Disease/Remove Poison.
So, as I said above, I have no problem with certs for, literally absurdly broken and abusive items. I don't consider access to Specific Magic Items to be a core part of a character.
Give the DM a cert for, as I said in my first post, a +10 Bazooka of Infinite Godslaying. IDGF.
But having aasimar, catfolk, changeling, dhampir, fetchling, gillman, grippli, goblin, merfolk, ratfolk, samsaran, suli, tiefling, vanara, vishkanya, gathlain, ghoran, and vine leshy gated behind GM Boons means there are 4 more locked races than there are freely playable.
There are 18 boon locked races.
Do you see how that feels really poop to those who CANNOT AFFORD in time or money to go to enough cons to grab these certs?
By all means, give boons. Give good stuff. Just consider that gating races, especially popular races like CATFOLK, GRIPPLI, GOBLIN, AASIMAR, & TIEFLING is a good way to put off new players and casuals.
I've always considered Bards to be Generalists.
They get a decent attack bonus, less than warriors but better than wizards.
They in 2nd ed AD&D they got some thief skills, in 3.x they got the second most skill points and had access to almost every skill as a class skill.
They get magic. Often a mix of wizard and cleric spells.
I hope they work this way in PF2 as well.
To me, that's what Bard is.
Also, I hope they get some form of the Bard Arcane Duelist/Skald Spell Warrior - Bladethirst/Weapon Song feature. That was one of my favorite PF1 things. Although who knows if it works with the new PF2 math, but I'd love something thematically similar.
Another thought that occurs to me: It seems to me that, generally, the logic behind BoonGating races was that they were in some way "Complex" or had features that would be "Disruptive" to play, and by gating them to dedicated GMs theoretically they were kept in the hands of people who wouldn't cause a problem.
In PF2, depending on how Ancestries work, and ancestry feats, would it not be possible to take a race with "Disruptive features" and either JUST BAN those AncFeat options, or Gate JUST those powers with a boon?
Like (and this is just a crazy made up example) say Ifrit somehow got unlimited fireballs. Just ban that. Say a winged race got a feat for fly speed (at low level). Boon Gate JUST THAT.
Just. Don't lock/ban EVERY new race. Or MOST races. Make 90% of races available, and don't BoonGate things you KNOW are going to be super popular.
Lets have less gating of new races (or ancestries in this case) behind Special GM certs.
I'd far rather have "GM's get a cert for the +10 bazooka of infinite god-slaying" than "Only people who GM'd at GenCon 2014 can play the cute froggies, only Bob Thulglflorp who bid $1,000,000 in a charity auction can play a catfolk".
PF2 will get a foot hold, because PF1 is being discontinued.
Will the 2019 Chevy Silverado sell if the engine pistons aren't backwards compatible with the 2018 Silverado? YES, because they aren't making the 2018 anymore.
Or perhaps a better analogy is why the Can$1 coin and the £1 coin took off and worked fine, but the US$1 coin has never worked. Because Canada and the UK withdrew the Can$1 bill and the £1 note from circulation. The US has never had the gumption to remove the $1 bill and force the issue.
When PF1 STOPS GETTING NEW MATERIAL, and PF2 is getting adventure paths, pawn collections, new books, and flip mats, etc., PF2 will gain pretty much full traction, and PF1 will become a niche game like AD&D, OD&D, and other defunct editions.
I will pretty much guarantee that 3pp will stop supporting PF1 within a year as well. They'll pump out whatever they already started on that they feel they can't just port to PF2. A few 3pp companies will put out the occasional legacy item when they feel like it, the way some publishers occasionally put out 2nd ed AD&D adventures still. But any real support will be gone.
That's edition changes. That's how it is. That's how it works.
Rip the bandaid off, stop picking at it, it'll hurt less.
Human Fighter wrote:
Flying magic man in the sky rains down fire death, while if I put up my shield as an action, I get a bonus to reflex saves.
FMM spends one action to concentrate on Fly so he doesn't plummet to the ground.
FMM now has a choice, spend 2 actions for a decent spell, or spend an action to move and 1 action for a single magic missile dart.
Also, Normal Fighter Dude, with Master Grade Athletics (so, lvl 7) has literally been said in a blog preview to be able to leap into the air and smash flying foes to the ground.
FMM needs to rethink his plan.
Idea: Call it Momentum. Not sure what to call the class, but basically, you have a bunch of powers that do low damage and effects. Pushes, pulls, slows, etc. And once you've built up a bunch of Momentum (And used your low dmg powers to move all the enemies into a clump) you spend it on a high damage power. Probably price extra damage to cost extra momentum like most of the Psy-point or Spell-point systems do...
I'd certainly play it.
What I've wanted ever since I first picked up the Advanced Class Guide is a Cleric Rogue Hybrid that specializes in hunting Undead and/or Evil Outsiders. Give them d4 sneak attack, but against Undead/Evil Outsiders it does d8 radiant/holy/whatever-good-energy-damage-is-called-i-forget.
We clearly are. Probably 99% of the picture at this point.
I know I'm niche here, but I want good solid rules for Improvised Weapons right out the door.
Here are some Damage values based on size or number of hands needed, etc.
I want PF2 to have an equivalent of Catch Off Guard, but I want it to SPECIFICALLY make you Trained with Improvised weapons. Not "remove the -2 untrained penalty" or whatever, but Actually Trained Proficient.
I want to be able to advance my skill with Improvised weapons or a small subset of items used as improvised weapons, just like I could with any regular weapon, even if it requires a feat tax.
But if a level 15 fighter specializing in the war hammer can do some sort of crazy area attacks with legendary Hammer Skill, I want to be able to do something similar using a Chair if I've paid the extra feats to make up for the fact that I'm using a Chair not a Warhammer.
(Yes, this is again all about my El Cabong based character)
Why do they have to leave half the party behind?
They've said proficiency applies to both armor and weapons, and implied that higher proficiency levels grant bonuses (IIRC an example in the proficiency thread implied that a master gets more AC from the same armor than someone just trained)
So, likely the theory craft here is wrong.
God I wish I was like the rest of you, able to form a fully nuanced, complete understanding of a system without having played it, or read it, or even seeing a preview of like 90% of it, or knowing how the system works at all yet.
What we know: There are 5 skill levels ranging from -2 to +3
But I mean by all means go off on your absolute lack of knowledge "OMG teh game iz ruined b-cauz untrained lvl 18 barbarian can UMD to cast miracle 18 times a day"
Let's stop and think.
Also, if you're playing a game where one character is a Level 1 Rogue Expert in a skill and another player is a Level 18 Barbarian Untrained in that skill, WHY ARE YOU IN A GAME WITH A LEVEL 1 AND A LEVEL 18 AT THE SAME TIME?!
Is this WoW? Are you power leveling your friend so he can join your raiding guild? [Seinfeld voice] What's the Deal? [/Seinfeld voice]
TLDR - Let's reserve judgement until we have the playtest document in hand so we HAVE SOME ACTUAL IDEA of how these things work.
Having observed the wild speculation in every thread, I now feel that, if the Paizo Staff posted a Blog Post that simply said "The Core book will include stats for Bears." and that was it word for word, within 12 hours we would have 600 posts discussing:
and 100 of those posts would be
- I just assumed Bars would be in
So it looks from the Proficiency blog post like Fighters will be able to up their weapons proficiency before other classes.
So, while 'BAB' seems to be the same for everyone, fighters will still spend most of the game with a better to hit roll, and presumably gain access to combat related feats faster than other classes.
I assume there will be feats that require Master and Legendary weapons proficiency.
I don't think the skill points per level is a thing any more.
I'm holding a baby typing one handed so forgive me not going into detail, but the stuff so far looks like all skills are basically class level + stat mod + [-1, 0, +1] depending on proficiency.
But we need minimum 4 skill proficiencies definitely assuming a similar number of skills.
Do, do Europeans think measuring feet aren't a fixed set size? Do you think we're using our actual lower leg appendages and not a fixed, regulated, government standardized measure?
Cause that's the vibe you're throwing off right there.
Patch Notes PF v 126.96.36.199.b
I've thought of one thing I'd really like in the new edition.
From day 1, decent rules for Improvised weapons.
Rules on improvised weapons such that, if you choose to build that way you aren't ALWAYS going to be WAY BEHIND a similar character using a short sword.
I Just Want To Be Able To Beat Monsters To Death With A Guitar Is That So Wrong?
So, the main reason people seek political power is the fringe benefits. Power equals Wealth which in turn guarantees good food, drink, the nicest living spaces, and all other desirable forms of comfort and ease.
Now, Actually BEING IN CHARGE of something large like a country, and trying to do even a halfway decent job of it is a LOT of work. Being a decent ruler and providing a decent life for your subjects is hard time consuming work. And that's assuming no one under you is betraying you with the intent to usurp you.
But what if you're a Wizard? With access to spells up to 9th level. Do you desire good food? A Lush well appointed Home? With many Servants to cater to your every whim? Mage's Magnificent Mansion, as soon as you can cast it, lasts 26 hours and has 26 staff.
So, if you can have all the benefits of high office without any responsibilities, WHY WOULD YOU CHOOSE TO TAKE ON THOSE RESPONSIBILITIES when you don't have to?
Assumption, I have to stick to one class list. I pick Wizard.
0. Prestidigitaion - As father of a newborn, if I could have ONE SPELL period, being able to clean the diaper by magic at will POOF done in under 6 seconds, I would take over anything...
1. Feather Fall
5. Overland Flight
6. Form of the Dragon I
7. Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion
8. Form of the Dragon III
9. Teleportation Circle
For me, Fun characters aren't determined by class, so much as by build. The more ludicrous sounding the build, the better.
Equipment Trick (Rope) Half-Orc Warpriest (alt-racials to have Whip and Spike Chain profs)
Anyone specializing in an odd weapon or non-weapon (beat them to death with a Guitar)
Finagle the rules to max out a special power pool. Swashbuckler with max panache and extra tricks.
Hey, yo, I went and read the monster entries for those oozes, and I got a little hung up on the Plasma Ooze.
Plasma Ooze Entry wrote:
... While their origin is not fully known, it is widely accepted that plasma oozes are not from this world. Some scholars believe they dwell in the sun, while others maintain they hail from the Plane of Fire. That plasma oozes have been encountered in both of these locations does little to help solve the debate.
Is, is there a module that take place ON THE SUN?!
What module is this and how much fire resist do I need to stack to survive...
This is why I like what Adventurer's League has done with 5e D&D, with the PHB+1 rule.
For Pathfinder, I'd probably go a bit more open (Core + 1 HB + 1 Floppy).
Keeps bloat down, and allows for players to much more easily own the books they need for their character without the need to own everything, and reduces the chances of catastrophic game breaking interactions. PHB +1 means that if two spells from different non-phb books cause endless loops or other game breaking effects, it doesn't matter, because no-one can HAVE both.
To be an Atheist is to Not Believe in God/The Gods.
But there are two definitions of "Believe".
Clearly, in a setting like Golarion, you cannot 'Not Believe' in the gods in the sense of "No, Desna Irori and Asmodeus Do not Exist" because they provably DO exist, and some of them might just suddenly appear and smack you if you say they don't.
However, you CAN 'Not Believe' in them in the same way that you can not believe in a sports team, or not believe in a politician. So, sort of a "These beings exist, but they are not SPECIAL, merely powerful, and to accept that they should make the rules simply because they are powerful is to accept that the strong have dominion over the weak. Gods are not special and not worthy of worship."
At least that'd be my take on it.
Feat wise, beyond the obvious Skill Focus, Prodigy from UM provides a similar but smaller bonus (+2/+4 @ 10 ranks) to two skills, and nothing says it DOESN'T stack with Skill Focus, so...
Also, Cooperative Crafting on an Ally might help, depending on how the class is written and how your DM interprets things.
I want your opinions, what would you rule in your own games.
Spell Warrior Skald's Enhance Weapon Song allows part of the bonus to be spent to add effects, as long as the weapon is either granted or already has at least a base +1.
This also allows you to add bonuses and effects to Improvised weapons.
So if I'm attacking someone with a Chair, and have the benefit of a Lvl 5 SpWarSk's song, I can have a +1 Flaming Chair.
Gloves of Improvised Might add magic bonuses to Improvised weapons. If I'm wearing a pair of +1 GoIM my improvised weapons function as +1 magic weapons.
Here's the question finally: If I'm wearing a pair of +1 GoIM, AND I have the benefit of a SpWarSk's 5th level Weapon Song, and I'm wielding a Broken Bottle, can I spend BOTH enhancement points from the Song on effects since the gloves make the bottle a +1 weapon?