Right now with this wording, this means that as long as the area is not completely cut off from the point of origin from the aura, it will effect that area. This is due to auras in 2e lacking the spread rules from 1e.
Essentially, no matter how far you walk, as long as you end up within the radius of the aura without needing to go through a solid wall, that area is considered to be a part of the aura.
Instead, we could make the edge of the aura be considered a wall
suggested wording wrote:
This clearly states how they work and helps clear it up.
Edit: Relevant Image Currently the ? case on the left is included, this change would fix that.
That is an incorrect reading, you only partially quoted the relevant text of empower bombs.
At 3rd level, you can create 3rd-level bombs that deal double the bomb’s base damage as presented in its entry.
This means that only the base damage and not any conditionals from other effects (ex: burn it) are multiplied by empower bombs.
So a level 19 alchemist fire would deal 6 + 9 (level 19 /2) = 15 persistent damage, not 60 persistent damage.
Back to the original topic, I'd really like to see the combat feats scale based on proficiency like the skill feats.
EX. when you have cleave, and expert or master in the weapon you use with it, you should automatically get the benefits of great cleave as well, no need for separate feats.
Same thing for double shot becoming triple shot, and knockback becoming awesome blow.
Continuing on with the OP's line of thought, just to show how much it breaks the system. (Note that I disagree with it)
This means that by using the archetype feats that gain a class feat from another class, I can instead take another archetype feat, allowing me to get 2 (or more) archetype feats into my archetype and allowing me to take other archetypes faster since I complete my dedication requirements faster.
This is especially unattractive when you consider how few spells the sorcerer learns per spell level: 4, 1 of which is dictated by the bloodline.
Aside from ya'know, it not actually being dictated by bloodline.
At 1st level, you learn two 1st-level spells of your choice and four cantrips of your choice, as well as an additional spell and cantrip from your bloodline (see page 130). You choose these from the common spells on the spell list corresponding to your bloodline in this book, or from other spells on that spell list to which you gain access.
It makes so all your bombs are infused, not invested there's a big difference. This allows you to use the empowered bombs ability with bombs that you didn't make using advanced alchemy or quick alchemy.
For mutagens this allows fast onset, extend elixir, eternal elixir or persistent mutagen to work for mutagens you didn't make using advanced alchemy or quick alchemy.
They used heal as a 4th level spell
Simply by using the 1 action version (or 2 action), they heal for 1d8 + casting modifier + 2d8 * 3 (4th level spell) for a total of 7d8 plus casting modifier.
If the creature is 2 sizes larger than you, it doesn't provide screening, it provides cover, which doesn't stack with screening.
As long as what the martials receive is equal in power to the spellcasting that casters get, then I see no issues with this.
Because martials get their weapon proficiencies on their odd levels as their class features, Spellcasters on the other hand get their spells as their class features on odd levels and their proficiencies on their even levels except for legendary caster (which would have to be changed to increase the spellcaster prof by one).
So spellcasters either have to give up their proficiency gain at those levels in order to counter for the fact that they're getting class feats at those levels now, or they don't get class feats at those levels in exchange for proficiencies.
Yeah, just change the fixed features they get at those levels to feats, and make legendary spellcaster only increase their proficiency by one step.
Just make the schools the weapon groups.
DEBILITATING BOMB wrote:
There aren't any bombs with the elixir trait. This feat does nothing.
Or, you know, it takes a year of downtime, so while possible, it's definitely not easy or convenient.
I find it both annoying and dumb that you can't retrain your class. This and the lack of traditional multiclassing kills off builds.
How retraining classes helps:
For instance if I want to be a rogue who slowly changed into a wizard, I could start off by taking the wizard multiclass archetype feats, and then retrain into a full-blow wizard, maybe with the rogue multiclass feats to represent my change form a rogue to a wizard.
I like having restricted feat access, though I agree there should be some "general" class feats though, such as TWF. There are also some class feats that only make sense for specific classes to be able to take (such as quick prep, animal rage, ki strike, etc).
I actually somewhat like resonance, but only on the investiture and x/day magic item side of it. I dislike it's applications to consumables right now, and I feel it actually needs to be split into two systems, one dealing with "slotted", investment, and x/day items, and another for consumables.
I disagree, I like being able to actually have the party sneak around, instead of the old "Fighter is is full plate and no stealth ranks" keeping it from being able to happen. It also helps people not be completely irrelevant (just mostly irrelevant now) in things they aren't good at, while the uses being gated behind proficiency level also keeps it from going overboard.
The big issue with the old system was what the disparity could be between two characters who were both good at something, and that it could be a difference of +30 or more. There's a bunch of stuff in the forums about this, I'll let you go find it.
If you don't want to update all your skills every time, you could just do what I did and just use the skill line for the TEML bonus + ability, and then add your level as well every time you use one.
You mean unlike PF1 where they could freely heighten their invisibility to gain the effects of greater invisibility without knowing greater invisibility, or just by knowing summon monster 1, they could freely use summon monster 2-9. Oh wait, that wasn't how it worked, they had to know those spells in those slots in PF1 just like they do in PF2.
Yes, the removal of caster level as a statistic for everything hurts.
Another fairly common reason for multiclassing in pf1, the paladin gets cursed by a god and becomes an oracle, or their latent bloodline is awakened and they become a sorcerer.
Retraining is a thing in core, if your rogue has decided to become a Wizard from now on, have them retrain into a wizard and stop using their rogue ways completely. If they want to still be a rogue and a wizard, take the damned feat set.
Edit: Yes, I realize that you can't retrain classes right now (which is dumb), but if you are a GM I highly advise allowing as such.
4. A bit of each, also some changes in the core rules to make up for issues and failings in the rules in pf1
5. I'm am unsure what you mean, if you mean opening up pf2 to a lot more players, then sure, as long as it doesn't bring down the quality of the game.
7. Somewhat, I think the action system, they way characters are created, the critical system, and the levels of proficiency should stay. They are done extremely well imo.
8. Pretty much what we currently have, I'm not that imaginitive of a guy, I can't think of any major changes I'd make to it, aside from an overhaul on resonance.
I would agree if there is terrain issues it should just be cover and if it is some monster/person/animal between then that should be screening. The second part of the description of screening muddies the waters.
The issue is creatures 2 sizes larger act as blocking terrain and thus provide cover, that's why the description of screening needs to be changed.
To determine whether a target has cover from an attack, the attacking creature or object draws a line from the center of its space to the center of the target’s space. If that line passes through any blocking terrain, the target has cover. The cover grants that creature a +2 circumstance bonus to AC against the attack.
Screening and cover both mention blocking terrain, it needs to be removed from screening as that leads to confusion.
Also screening needs "one size smaller than you or larger" to be changed to "within one size category of you", right now it's jsut confusing.
Posting this here since backgrounds fall under ancestry in the book.
Backgrounds only give trained in a skill, this is a typo, unless it's supposed to make the trained skill a signature skill as well.
Matthew Downie wrote:
That that is valid, do note that since it's 2-handed weapon though, you couldn't make attacks with it between rounds since you're not wielding it in both hands.
And like I said earlier, that leads to issues when supplements put out bombs that aren't available at 1st level due to their effects.
So it's even worse than I thought, just wow.
Power attack muliplies them.
Page 179 wrote:
It needs better wording though.
The big issue for me is the inconsistency (why do I only increase x level by y amount, instead of all levels by y amount) and the fact that creating bombs of levels other than those levels (such as ones made in a supplement at some point) are way weaker.
Empower Bombs currently does nothing for bombs that the alchemist creates that aren't 3rd, 7th, 11th, 15th, or 19th level bombs.
In addition, at level 7 it still only doubles 3rd level bombs while tripling 7th level bombs.
The text should change to say, "At the xth level, you can create bombs of your level or lower that deal y times the base damage."
I feel like that's how many people are going to run it, whether it be on accident or on purpose, please fix this.