| 21 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo talked about the playtest and changes coming on their weekly twitch.
Whoever sees these first (Fridays 4PM) can hopefully keep this thread updated and post updates about it on this thread.
Currently it is at
Major items I got...
1. Take the surveys for the playtest...please...it's a very important for feedback to Paizo.
1a. Jason is being sung about being Santa Claus
Starting around the 28 minute mark
2. Monday a PDF goes live on pathfinder playtest. It will be a download like the Playtest was (I think, they talk about it being a free purchase). This will be updates to the playtest based on feedback thus far.
It will be released alongside a blog explaining some of the feedback and information they've received.
Feel free to use the top 5 rule updates that will be in Monday's playtest update.
These are critical updates. Meaning they will affect many tables. There are other updates, these are just the top 5 updates.
2a. Alchemist Quick alchemy ability can use ANY alchemical item alchemists can use. It is no longer just common items.
2b. Rangers, key ability has been changed to STR OR DEX. You can choose either or.
3a. All characters can now use Very Sneaky (used to be just a Goblin feat) Feat.
3b. Second paragraph of Very Sneaky feat, as long as you continue to use sneak actions and succeed on your stealth check you remain unseen as long as you still have cover at the end (paraphrased greatly by me)of your turn.
4. Alchemist now have 3 skill choices, Druid goes down to 3 skill choices as well.
5. All characters are trained in unarmored defense.
Update is 1 page long.
6. Explains game decisions. Probably will be in the blog I imagine. First up why they went with Feats. At first they had different names for everyone...but changed it to all feats. Also why they gave certain characters feats and others not.
Some feats made more sense with some classes and others, not all are made equal. You don't have to sacrifice effectiveness with the new system (my interpretation, stops bad character choices...trap options).
7. Ancestries and testing, seeing in other prior products not all races made equal.
Negative reaction to ancestries is much stronger than expected and they are considering stuff in relation to this. Might look at heritage..etc.
8. Feats in PF1e that were general feats now being class feats and complaints about how that has affected flexibility in creating characters people want. Some feats in PF1e were specifically to remove penalties, now instead just remove penalty or other modification rather than focus on feat reducing penalty.
In many situations with classes, simply ran out of space.
Double slice addressed as something specifically they are looking at with feats and class feats.
Some builds are not living up to expectations in some classes.
Endless tinkering remains...expects to be stuck to computer to the last day at the last minute.
9. At 52 minutes starts taking questions.
I don't even understand what the first question is actually asking. Jason addresses persistent damage in answer to it.
Bloodline question...where it is a typo. Some of these questions I'm not understanding what is being said or they are confusing...most of them I'll just let them go and you can listen.
Fighter multiclass with wizard using any armor or weapon question. Answer is yes...wizards can use the feat to use armor and weapons and have armor better than mage armor.
They want to see what happens when people take the fighter dedication feat. They think many things can happen but are curious about the permutations and other things that happen with it.
No plans to add arcane spell failure.
Not sure if they have the right number of actions to pick lock. Various pick lock things. Still seeing how it goes.
Backgrounds testbed in Doomsday dawn. Backgrounds tying to adventure are something they are seeing how it works out and if people like that.
bow questions with shortbow agile, longbow volley, looking at bows intently.
Resonance is too early to make a decision thus far. Lots of comments on forums but not enough information yet to determine anything. Please make sure to answer any questions regarding resonance in the surveys. Really need to know the numbers. Steps 2 or 3 at earliest, and maybe later. They HAVE heard to outcry and complaints on it very clearly on the forums.
Resonance is the most out there and experimental or one of the most in the Playtest.
10. More questions and stuff on questions and answers. Sometimes when sees a question step back and watch responses because it shows where people are at understanding it and how well their ideas came across in the playtest writing (from what I understand in how Buhlman answered the question).
End. Anyways, it seems twitch will address these playtest things every Friday. If people want to keep this thread updated, it could make for a rather easy place to find all the twitch updates.
Just a thought...or this could just be a useless thread I guess. If can figure out how to edit it, and people like this idea...I guess I can also add the twitch update addresses.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actual Twitch addresses
Thanks for the text version of the twitch!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just watched (most of the) twitch and I think 3a has to be clarified - I understood that only this sentence applies to everyone now:
In addition, if you critically succeed at a Stealth check against a creature and then attack that creature, your target remains flat-footed during your attack.
While the extra 5 speed when Sneaking granted by that feat remains for goblins only.
Thanks a lot for making this thread - reading the updates is MUCH faster than watching the video.
The first question was really a complaint about persistent damage being too hard to remove. Jason stressed it's easier when you spend actions to do it.
The second question was 'are Sorcs really trained in 9+Int skills' and Jason said that was a typo from earlier draft where signature skills automatically granted trained, and it will be clarified in the Monday errata. Specifically the Bloodline entries will no longer say 'you are trained in the listed skills'.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1. Take the surveys for the playtest...please...it's a very important for feedback to Paizo.
Also make sure to finish the surveys. Uncompleted surveys will likely not be considered, so make sure you get to the end and click the button to finalize it. Leaving some questions blank is ok, but make sure you get to the end.
3a. All characters can now use Very Sneaky (used to be just a Goblin feat) Feat.
Not quite. If you succeed at your stealth check and attempt to strike a creature, they're considered flat footed against that attack, and then you become seen. Very Sneaky required a critical success. So it's actually better than Very Sneaky. The first part of Very Sneaky about moving farther while sneaking is still tied to that feat and not universal.
question...where it is a typo. Some of these questions I'm not understanding what is being said or they are confusing...most of them I'll just let them go and you can listen.
On page 129 where it says Bloodline Signature Skills: it says you are trained in the skill as well as get them as signature skills. This, combined with the 5+ int mod that sorcerers give for trained skills would give them a total of 9 + int mod skills. This is an error from an earlier version, you get those four Bloodline Signature Skills, but you don't get automatic training in them.
Thanks for putting this up, it really helps sum up an hour plus discussion into easy to use points. This stream was rather nice, it gave us an early look at some upcoming changes, and provided reassurance that Paizo is listening to our feedback and working on changes accordingly. Some things are already being changed and others they're looking at. I could be reading too much into things, but they seemed inclined to do some of these requested changes as dumping volley and giving shortbows Agile, reducing some class-gating, expanding ancestry at first level and maybe modifying resonance. So it's not set in stone, but encouraging.
|
Just watched this, was a very juicy update.
I'm just gonna clarify a few of the points discussed in the first thread - at least as far as I understood them:
Regarding 3b: To make the intent clear, currently when you end your stealth action out of cover, you are seen. With the errata'd Very Sneaky, this is only at the end of your turn. This makes it pretty powerful as you can spend a large amount of your turn in the open and still be hidden (you still can't attack/etc, of course, without being seen).
7. It sounded like they were considering making heritage feats a baked in freebie at level 1. They realize that races were one of the most popular way to distinguish characters and activate their playstyle at 1st level, this would help bring that back.
8. So the point here was there isn't much general weapon feat support because half of the default archery feats were just to get rid of the penalties. So what the intent is, weapons like bows don't need general feats and should work without extra feat investment.
The iconic rogue uses two weapons, yet there's no TWF support in rogue. Oops. They'll want to address that (as you said, space issues got in the way), but don't expect rogues to just get double slice as well.
9. First question is about how hard it is to remove persistent damage, it being either a 5% or 20% flat check. Jason's argument is that the 5% is only if you don't do anything (and you should probably do something about being on fire). Additionally, it's only what, one action to attempt the 20% so if you spend a full turn rolling you've got a good chance of removing it. He also states that most persistent damage effects have a guaranteed way to remove them, like dousing fire with water.
The next question was the infamous 9+int sorcerer skills. As Jason put it "So, Errata #6!" They forgot to remove some text in the book but the bloodline skills are just signature skills, not trained.
Someone asked about if it was intended for Wizards to just be able to multiclass fighter and get full armor/weapon proficiency. Answer: Yes! There is no arcane spell failure, Paizo reckons the opportunity cost of investing in strength and skipping a bunch of metamagic will make up for the difference. If it doesn't, it should show up in the playtest and they can change it.
Someone commented that picking locks can take seven or more attempts. Bulmahn states that it is meant to be a difficult task and this organically represents how long picking the lock can be, as you can just keep trying. They don't know if they've got the exact success rate but they also point out that locks generally have a static DC so this will get easier as you level up.
Someone mentioned how a lot of people dislike Volley on longbows, and why not just give shortbows something nice (agile in this case) instead of penalizing longbows. Turns out Paizo had already seen these discussions on the boards and have been discussing exactly this. Jason does point out that longbows are long distance weapons meant for large battles, and not really standard adventuring fare, but they are definitely thinking about it.
Thanks for the synthesis.
On the actual content. So, what we get after all this feedback is -4 skills for the sorcerer, witch is already regarded as strictly inferior to any other spellcaster option. And 1 more skills for the Alchemist. Talk about underwhelming.
But still, it has been only about 10 days from the release, I'm willing to give them a bit more time to see if they decide to stick to their design philosophy or finally take into account the direction most of the forum has expressed to prefer. After the feedback from 3 session with my pals, I'm currently holding from running additional games until an extensive update to the ruleset is released.
|
Thanks for the synthesis.
On the actual content. So, what we get after all this feedback is -4 skills for the sorcerer, witch is already regarded as strictly inferior to any other spellcaster option. And 1 more skills for the Alchemist. Talk about underwhelming.
But still, it has been only about 10 days from the release, I'm willing to give them a bit more time to see if they decide to stick to their design philosophy or finally take into account the direction most of the forum has expressed to prefer. After the feedback from 3 session with my pals, I'm currently holding from running additional games until an extensive update to the ruleset is released.
Remeber, this is a PREVIEW of the errata to be release Monday morning. So there will be more errata for us to review, these were the biggest items to address in this version of the errata. There will be more.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Someone commented that picking locks can take seven or more attempts. Bulmahn states that it is meant to be a difficult task and this organically represents how long picking the lock can be, as you can just keep trying. They don't know if they've got the exact success rate but they also point out that locks generally have a static DC so this will get easier as you level up.
He... is aware that Thievery has a critical failure effect, right? Is the first level Rogue just expected to put her entire starting wealth into spare picks?
|
|
Someone commented that picking locks can take seven or more attempts. Bulmahn states that it is meant to be a difficult task and this organically represents how long picking the lock can be, as you can just keep trying. They don't know if they've got the exact success rate but they also point out that locks generally have a static DC so this will get easier as you level up.He... is aware that Thievery has a critical failure effect, right? Is the first level Rogue just expected to put her entire starting wealth into spare picks?
Good question.
I feel far too many of these actions/skill uses were designed with "crit success, success, fail, oh, we need a crit fail effect, too!"But no, we really really really do not, especially given that nat 1s crit fail for reasons I don't understand.
I like the idea of success/failure with the three action system organically determining how long it takes things but everything having a crit fail attached breaks it entirely (plus it runs counter to the design intent of encouraging dabbling in skills).
Someone asked about if it was intended for Wizards to just be able to multiclass fighter and get full armor/weapon proficiency. Answer: Yes! There is no arcane spell failure, Paizo reckons the opportunity cost of investing in strength and skipping a bunch of metamagic will make up for the difference.
I wonder if he forgot that you can qualify with Dex and 18 Int, 16 Dex is a very sensible 1st level stat selection for a Wizard. Light armor for a cheap bonus plus rune options, a rapier or other decent weapon in your hand, that's better than the vast majority of class feat options at 2nd level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Someone asked about if it was intended for Wizards to just be able to multiclass fighter and get full armor/weapon proficiency. Answer: Yes! There is no arcane spell failure, Paizo reckons the opportunity cost of investing in strength and skipping a bunch of metamagic will make up for the difference.I wonder if he forgot that you can qualify with Dex and 18 Int, 16 Dex is a very sensible 1st level stat selection for a Wizard. Light armor for a cheap bonus plus rune options, a rapier or other decent weapon in your hand, that's better than the vast majority of class feat options at 2nd level.
Is that really better than taking (as an example) your Ancestry’s Weapon Familiarity at 1st level, Armor Proficiency (light) at 2nd and then being able to take a different multiclass or a prestige class after that? If we had them, I would be looking at Bard or Druid as a multiclass.
The Fighter dedication gives a lot in comparison to many of them, but it does lock you in. In order to take advantage of the better armor, you will need to allocate attribute boosts to Strength. I’ve done a very simple comparison and there are most certainly trade offs.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for the text version of the twitch!
I want to echo this "watching livestreams" is something I kinda hate doing, so a text version of the highlights is very much appreciated.
Thanks for the recap! These erratas seem like good improvements already, and it sounds like the developers are looking at the other areas that I'm concerned about. Very excited to see where it goes!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for the text version of the twitch!I want to echo this "watching livestreams" is something I kinda hate doing, so a text version of the highlights is very much appreciated.
Yes, this. I LOATHE watching though those videos for info, so kudos to the OP for the effort. ;)
Thanks for the text version of the twitch!I want to echo this "watching livestreams" is something I kinda hate doing, so a text version of the highlights is very much appreciated.
I don't know if this is your issue, but I regularly watch vods at 2.5x speed (I installed a browser extension, but you can watch at up to 2x, with the built in settings), which makes it far less time consuming to watch through.
Any new about light sources?