Ah, then Kith is very much in the favour of surprise attack. Maybe Kith and Kalum can try and negotiate, and if that doesn't work Vanedar and Zava can start the attack?
There's no such thing as a surprise round in this version of the playtest right?
triggered might make an attack with its reaction before the initiative order begins. In these cases, resolve all the results of the reaction before calling for initiative rolls. This means it’s possible that the trap or creature with the reaction might get to go again immediately if it’s at the top of the initiative order. (P 330)
I think that this is where I messed up the hyena fight. It seems that if a group is actively in search mode (or whatever it is called), then traps, etc. will function without a perception check needed, or a passive perception check being beaten (which is probably what I should have had happen against Zeva's stealth). So I *think* that the above quoted text means that you all could get one reaction (including, I *think* an attack). It would have to be a ranged attack, or you could move across the river with a move action.
Map is updated.
Not how I read it.
I read it as the reaction is for traps that you discover by 'springing them'.
I thought ambush was just 'you may use stealth for init'. I could be wrong on this - there were a lot of people in the forum going "what?"
It isn't that hard. The PCs have to state what they doing in exploration mode, which determines what skill is rolled for initiative. If there is nothing in particular (like using Stealth) then you roll Perception. The trap text simply says that a reaction is used to start the encounter. Don't let the word reaction through you. There is no set 'time' when a reaction can be used. Hence the fact that a trap can 'react' and spring, then when initiative is rolled the trap can potentially go again.
The key is stating what you are doing before you go into encounter mode. The hyenas should have rolled Stealth for the initiative if they were in ambush, we would roll Perception. Page 316 covers Exploration mode tactics that we should be giving to GM BP.
A high Stealth character will have the advantage in Ambush over a low Perception, and vice versa: a high Perception keeps you from being ambushed - if you roll well. The effect is the same as the opposed Stealth v. Perception roll of PF1.
For this battle, those of us who want to ambush state so. They will roll Stealth for their initiative. The rest of us roll Perception. Page 304 covers it pretty simply, and page 305 states that the GM can decide if you can use a reaction before your turn. It is even possible that if we were going to negotiate, the person talking could use Diplomacy for their Init roll (per the rules).
IMHO, one of the downsides of PF2 is that it doesn't appear to be as pbp friendly as PF1 - at least not yet. My group has found that we have the most trouble with PF2 when we try to relate to PF1, rather than take it as a new and separate system. Easier said than done.
Yes, I agree that you may use stealth for init is a big part of the rules now, and something that I like quite a bit.
But, the hyena fight seemed designed to be an ambush without a mechanical way to put that ambush into place. I think it is supposed to be automatic unless the PCs are in search mode, and then a stealth check vs perception check is called for?
And then, depending on the results, and ambush goes off or init is rolled, with one group using stealth for init?
Anyways, y'all are up!
I'll break out my copy of the run and read it, but I don't think it's supposed to be an automatic ambush.
We were in exploration mode, so we should have given you our Tactics. Then the hyenas roll Stealth and we roll whatever the applicable skill was. If they beat us, their Init score would have been higher and thus they would have ambushed us. Maybe some hyenas would have ambushed and some not, etc etc, based on Init order.
So in this case we should just be rolling Init right now, and the 'surprise' is based on our order.
Yeah, that's how I ran it (they hyena fight). You were in exploration mode, but everyone was using the wander tactic, which I don't think allows a perception check. So the ambush happened with stealth vs. perception as init, and most of you all beat the hyena's init, even though there was no possibility of you seeing the ambush as you were in wander mode. And so you acted before the hyenas even though they successfully ambushed you.
That makes things wonky, as without a perception check, the ambush goes off, but there's still the chance that there's no surprise, as init is rolled. Which begs the question: Why have a wander mode at all if there's no penalty for not moving at half speed?
I suppose the benefit of moving in search mode would be that if you noticed the hyenas you could have prepared for the ambush or circumvented the encounter entirely, but PF, being xp-based off of combat, passively discourages people skipping encounters.
It seems like there needs to be a reward for successful avoiding detection and ambushing someone, and the line "For instance, a complex trap that’s
triggered might make an attack with its reaction before the initiative order begins" in the "initiative after reactions" blurb tells me that there is some intent there to do this.
At any rate, I'm giving you all an action because that seems to be the intent above, and you should be rewarded for beating a perception check and moving forward tactically.
Alright, I'm going to need to check the rulebook for this, but I think what I'll do then is...
Surprise (1 action): drop prone (free) shoot crossbow.
None of my groups do combat xp anymore. Mostly it is milestone related. I guess the incentives would change a lot.
I like stealth vs per for init for reducing the complexity and number of rolls in surprise attacks. I also like that it suggests other opposed rolls for init.
It does get a bit weird when per is much better than stealth - there is no benefit at all to ambush then. Your 'single action' seems like a good compromise.
Even just being able to buff or prep before combat would make a big difference - and it made sense to me that ambushers should be able to do that at least to a degree. On the other hand if someone bursts out of cover it makes sense to me someone with good enough perception and reactions might do something with it. Your single action thing covers that. Character is basically thinking "I will run out, stab that guy, and then jump to the left." as he runs out the stabee reacts and stabs him first.
Hmmm -2 to attack for +1 AC vs ranged and flat footed vs melee. Prone seems worse...
Still.
Kalum hit it on the nose. You DO get a Perception check in PF2 - it's vs the Stealth of the ambusher. It actually reduces the number of rolls you have to make. Just because you are ambushing, doesn't make you good at it. Even in wander mode, someone can still see a telltale sign of an ambush if the ambusher is careless.
In our current case, I'm using Perception of +6. I didn't roll very good, so unless the gnolls roll worse, they are going to get to go before my charge, EVEN THOUGH WE SHOULD HAVE THE 'DROP' on them. Call it seeing Vanedar giving himself away before he rushes, or whatever.
I played a two-hour PF2 session at Origins this year where we went through a simple scenario to learn basic rules and systems. We started in Exploration for a hot second just to get the explanation of how it leads into Encounter mode. This very question came up and proceeded to take 30 minutes discussion time of our allotted 2 hours. I had the rogue in Stealth (+11), we had the drop on some undead around a fire. Our fighter (Per +4), and paladin (Per +4) rolled poorly and went dead last. Their complaint was that they were penalized because of a poor Perception even though we should have surprised the enemy.
Our GM - who was very nice, just not a good GM - couldn't explain it, but we managed to get to a consensus that the misleading word is Perception. If you just said roll Init, then everyone can accept a bad roll means you just went too slow. When the term Perception is added to it, players have a hard time seeing how they are going so slow in order, when the result is exactly the same. I suspect if the term was 'Combat Awareness' it would be easier to grasp.
Sorry for the delay everyone. Life's been very busy at work and home. I'll get us moving forward here tomorrow.
OGGM, your post deserves a well-thought out answer - I'll get to that too!
Wait - is there a gnoll near Kalum? I thought they were on the other side of the river on the map.
Eh, that's probably my error in interpreting the tactical layout... sorry
Hi all, my sincere apologies for the absence. A combination of traveling for the holidays, sickness running through my family, and a second interview in San Diego this coming Wednesday (and the associated prep - academic interviews are one or two day marathons) has left me stressed for time.
I plan on being back in action on Thursday or Friday.
Still here.
Same!
I'm still here as well. Sorry, having trouble getting this going again. My time is pretty open tomorrow - I'll get a gameplay post up.
We're low on time. I like the game - not sure we're going to get it wrapped up in time though.
When do the surveys close?
Well, if we don't get it wrapped up in time, that's ok. We'll still better understand the rules.
For reference:
persistent mental damage. The target must attempt a Will
saving throw.
Success Full damage, but no persistent damage and the spell
ends immediately.
Critical Success The target is unaffected.
Failure Full damage, and the target is sick 1. If the target
recovers from being sick, its persistent mental damage
ends as well and the spell ends.
Critical Failure Per failure, but the target is sick 2.
Heightened (+1) The damage increases by 2d4 and the persistent
damage by 1.
I'm having a hell of a time figuring out Kith's DC for his phantom pain spell (heightened). Is it 10 + 2 (level) + 4 (charisma) + 0 (proficiency) basically like in PF1 or am I off base?
immobile and flat-footed. If you attempt a manipulate
action, activity, free action, or reaction while grabbed,
you must succeed at a DC 5 flat check or it is lost;
attempt the check after using it but before any effects
are applied.
When you make an attack and roll a natural 20 (the
number on the die is 20), or if the result of your attack
exceeds the target’s AC by 10, this is called a critical
success (also known as a critical hit).
If you critically succeed at a Strike, your attack deals
double damage (see page 293). This damage doubling
applies only on Strikes. Other attacks, such as spells or
some uses of the Athletics skill, describe the specific effects
that occur when their outcomes are critical successes.
I think we can just go ahead and handwave the DC since I myself just cannot find it. I'm sure a post on the forums would resolve our confusion on the detail but it doesn't seem worth it to figure out for a playtest version of the game that's now out of date :). Your PF1 calculation looks accurate to me though.
"When a creature is subject to dangerous effects it must attempt to avoid with its body or mind, it can often roll a saving throw to mitigate the effect. You roll a saving throw automatically—you don’t have to use an action or a reaction. Unlike most types of checks, the character who isn’t acting rolls the d20 for a saving throw and the creature who is acting generates the DC."
The DC is set by Kith. Per the rules on pg 290-291, it's 10 + lvl + key stat. This referred to as the 'Class DC' on the character sheet. It's pretty much the same as PF1.
Ah thanks, OGGM. I was looking there and just couldn't find the right verbiage.
Doesn't the scorpion have to spend an action to give the Grab condition?
Ah thanks, OGGM. I was looking there and just couldn't find the right verbiage.
Yeah, we're struggling here finding things the new book. It doesn't seem as well laid out as PF1, but I'm not sure if that's a layout problem or a lack of familiarity problem.
^ I think it is probably a bit of both!
Regarding scorpions and grab, they get grab with each attack, if I'm reading things right. Monsters don't seem to operate under the same rules as PCs which I kind of like. It means that they can be surprising again (at least until system mastery takes over).
plus Grab
Requirements The monster’s last action was a success with an
attack that lists Grab in its damage entry, or it has a creature
grabbed using this action.
Effect The monster automatically Grabs the target until the end of
the monster’s next turn. The creature is grabbed by whichever
body part the monster attacked with, and that body part can’t
be used to Strike creatures until the grab is ended.
Using Grab extends the duration of the monster’s Grab
until the end of its next turn for all creatures grabbed by it.
The grabbed creature can Escape using Acrobatics or
Break the Grapple with Athletics, and the Grab ends if the
monster moves away.
I did mess up the gnoll's attack, however. Sweep only works when attacking different enemies on the same turn. However, the attack would still hit so nothing is changed.
I think the issue is that the playtest doc is most definitely not a final product. Ironically I think the amount of polish Paizo threw into it has backfired as people are treating it like a final published game when it very much isn't. The language isn't appealing, the layout has some experimental aspects to it that roundly backfired (Like putting Powers and Spells in the same section). All things that are to be expected from a playtest but that darn pretty art makes it look like a retail product and that's how it was treated.
A bunch of .doc files wouldn't have run into the same problem with expectation!
Good point Kith. The PF1 alpha was just such a file as I recall, as was the beta. I hope you are right, because I spent a lot of money on those 2.0 products (never said I was wise, just Old), and I was pretty disappointed with the things you mentioned.
All things that are to be expected from a playtest but that darn pretty art makes it look like a retail product and that's how it was treated.
I agree largely with you, but Paizo treated this like a retail product as well. They probably should have just released the PDF and not physical books with a price tag attached.
I hope you are right, because I spent a lot of money on those 2.0 products (never said I was wise, just Old), and I was pretty disappointed with the things you mentioned.
I think you're pretty wise! I'm also disappointed with the layout.
Speaking of layout, anyone know how I figure monster ability DC? I'm pretty sure that Zeva's roll gets her free, but there's no DC on the monster stat block and I'm not seeing anything on calculating ability DCs in either book. Le sigh.
There's no CMD anymore either, right?
Speaking of layout, anyone know how I figure monster ability DC? I'm pretty sure that Zeva's roll gets her free, but there's no DC on the monster stat block and I'm not seeing anything on calculating ability DCs in either book. Le sigh.
There's no CMD anymore either, right?
No CMD.
Pg 291: "For tasks opposed by another character, the DC is based on one of the target’s modifiers, as defined in the task. A DC derived in this way is equal to 10 plus the creature’s modifier for that type of roll."The scorpion's base STR is +4, so I would think a DC 14 would be appropriate. I can't see any Skill applying to the Grab, so that would be it. According to the Skill DC Table on page 337, this would somewhere in between 'Trivial' and 'Low', although I just used this table as a reference because it really isn't supposed to be used for checks that are opposed.
Because Grab can be broken by either Acrobatics (Escape) or Athletics (Break the Grapple) (Bestiary pg 122), I think this works just fine.
Let's throw another CMD type act into the mix. What is the DC for Kith's attempt to Disarm one of the gnolls? He rolled pretty well so if it's like the Scorpion calculation above then I think he probably succeeded?
Overall I like the lower numbers. A well built Pathfinder 1 character is expected to have modifiers in the low teens by level 4 but that's definitely not the case in the playtest.
Both styles have their pros and cons of course.
I think you're right - but I hadn't gotten that before. I thought the core book last beta was published though?
Given the issues with the printing delivery this time, I wonder if they'll do printed betas again?
With the way everything has been changing - which is a good thing - a ring binder might have been better.
I'm headed to Colombia for the holidays, until 1/4. Expect to have internet but posting may be spotty.
Kalum's up!
Traveling with family is proving difficult to find time to post. I'll get us going when I'm back in the states.
Happy new Year to all as it starts to come around for people! Hope your 2018 was great and may your 2019 be even better.
Happy new year!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Happy New Year everyone, ready to continue my dice rolling farce!
Back in town, will get us moving ASAP!
Sick kid has me thrown for a loop. Will probably be able to post again Wednesday.
Hope s/he is feeling better soon, Kith.
So, you all are resting then?
Zeva is missing some hero points... errr hit points so as soon as those are recovered she'll be set to head back out into the forbidden wastes
Do you all want to rest another night?
Wait a minute, the playtest does have hero points doesn't it? Shouldn't forget those.
I'd say maybe we travel on and try to get to the tomb before resting, but that does put us at risk.
Since time does matter maybe Kalum can heal as much as possible and then we can travel on? would hate to use the spells per day that we do have.
So I built Vanedar using the beta of Herolab online. I logged into my account this weekend (for Starfinder) and found all my characters for both systems were wiped. I will have to rebuild Vanedar, which shouldn't be too hard if I copy from this site, but still...
They should have given some warning... it's really quite odd.