Trinkets and Treasures

Monday, June 25, 2018

Wayfinder. Bag of holding. Ring of the ram. Staff of power. Holy avenger.

The magic items you find during your adventures become a part of your story and let you do things beyond the techniques you've mastered and the spells you know. So how do these essentials of the game work in the Pathfinder Playtest?

Magic items are used in three major ways: by investing them, by activating them, or automatically. Invested items are ones you wear that you have to prepare as you don them, after which they work continuously. Activating items follows a system similar to that used for spells. Just as casting a spell requires you to spend actions to supply the somatic, verbal, and material components of the spell, activated items require you to use the Command Activation, Focus Activation, or Operate Activation action, or a combination of multiple actions. A potion requires you to spend an Operate Activation action to drink it. A necklace of fireballs requires you to spend 2 Operate Activation actions to unbind a bead and throw it. Activating a luck blade to reroll an attack just takes a mental nudge with a Focus Activation reaction (though you get to do that only once per day). Automatic activation happens with a small category of items that give their benefit whenever they're used for their normal purpose. A prime example is a sword with the frost property rune, which is always coated with frost and needs only hit a foe to deal extra cold damage.

Illustration by Wayne Reynolds

Resonance

Activating or investing an item costs 1 Resonance Point (RP). You might have heard a bit about this on the Glass Cannon podcast! Resonance is a new resource all characters have that can be used to activate items. Your innate magic item resonance is represented by a number of Resonance Points equal to your level plus your Charisma modifier. This ties back to the Pathfinder First Edition concept of Charisma as the main ability score tied to innate magic, as seen in the Use Magic Device skill and the fact that Charisma is used for spell-like abilities, oracles, sorcerers, and so forth. However, in Pathfinder Second Edition, true scholars of itemcraft *cough*alchemists*cough* might get to use their Intelligence instead.

The idea of resonance stems from the Pathfinder First Edition occultist, who was able to tap into the magical potential of items, and even before that to the idea of resonance between creatures and various magic items, as seen with the resonant powers of wayfinders. We've expanded that concept to apply to everyone. In practical terms, you're really unlikely to run out of Resonance Points unless you're using an absurd number of items, and you're at the greatest risk at low levels. You still have a chance even if your pool is empty, though. You can overspend Resonance Points! If you're at 0 RP, you can attempt to activate or invest an item anyway. You need to attempt a flat check (a d20 roll with no modifiers) against a DC equal to 10 + the number of points you've overspent today. So the first item has a 50% chance of working, and it gets more risky from there.

We expect Resonance Points to be a contentious topic, and we're really curious to see how it plays at your tables. It's one of the more experimental changes to the game, and the playtest process gives us a chance to see it in the wild before committing to it. Here are the advantages we see from a design perspective:

  1. Using items is clear and consistent. Spend the required actions and 1 RP, and you activate or invest your item. If someone else wants to use the same item, you can remove it and let them put it on and invest it themselves.
  2. You have less to track. We get to remove some of the sub-pools that individual items have (such as "10 rounds per day which need not be consecutive" or "5 charges") because we know you have an overall limited resource. There are still some items that can't be used without limit, but they get to be special exceptions rather than being common out of necessity.
  3. It puts the focus on the strongest items. Because you can't activate items indefinitely, your best bet is to use the most RP-efficient item, not the most gp-efficient item. You want a high-level healing wand because you get more healing for your Resonance Point rather than getting a bunch of low-level wands because they're cheap.
  4. Investiture limits what you can wear. That means we don't need to rely heavily on an item slot system, creating more flexibility in what kind of worn items are useful. You'll read more about this on the blog on Friday, when we talk about removing the magic item Christmas tree!

Will those benefits be compelling? Will people prefer this system over the Pathfinder First Edition system? We look forward to finding out!

Want to look at an item to see how this works in practice?

Cloak of Elvenkind Item 10+

Illusion, Invested, Magical

Method of Use worn, cloak; Bulk L

Activation [[A]] Focus Activation, [[A]] Operate Activation


This cloak is deep green with a voluminous hood, and is embroidered with gold trim and symbols of significance to the elves. The cloak allows you to cast the ghost sound cantrip as an innate arcane spell. When you draw the hood up over your head (an Interact action), the cloak transforms to match the environment around you and muffles your sounds, giving you an item bonus to Stealth checks. If you activate the cloak, you pull the hood up and are affected by invisibility for 1 minute or until you pull the hood back down, whichever comes first.

Type standard; Level 10; Price 1,000 gp

The cloak grants a +3 bonus.

Type greater; Level 18; Price 24,000 gp

The cloak grants a +5 bonus, and invisibility is 4th level. If you're also wearing greater boots of elvenkind, the greater cloak of elvenkind allows you to Sneak in forest environments even when creatures are currently observing you.

Here's a fairly complex item to show multiple parts of the system at once. The cloak of elvenkind is level 10, and there's also a greater cloak of elvenkind with an item level of 18. In case you missed it in the crafting blog, items have levels now, which indicate the point at which you can craft them (as well as being handy for the GM when making treasure hoards). Method of use indicates that this item is worn and that it's a cloak. A few items have this two-part listing because they're hard to wear multiples of. Multiple cloaks, multiple boots... not practical. Multiple rings or amulets? No problem.

This item is both invested (note the invested trait) and activated (as you can see by the activation entry). Investing the cloak lets you cast ghost sound. You get this benefit as long as the cloak is invested, which means you can cast the spell whenever you want without activating the cloak and therefore without spending more Resonance Points. You can also get an item bonus to Stealth checks from the cloak (+3 or +5 for a greater cloak). Finally, you can activate the cloak as you raise the hood, spending 1 Resonance Point to turn invisible! Certainly not every item has as much going on as a cloak of elvenkind, but several classic items seemed like they needed a little extra special treatment! What do you think? Too much?

How about something simpler?

Floating Shield Item 13

Magical

Price 2,800 gp

Method of Use held, 1 hand; Bulk L

Activation [[A]] Operate Activation


This master-quality light wooden shield (Hardness 6) protects you without requiring you to spend actions each round. When you activate this shield, you can release it from your grip as a part of that action. The shield floats in the air next to you, granting you its bonus automatically, as if you Raised the Shield. Because you're not wielding the shield, you can't use reactions such as Shield Block with the shield.

After 1 minute, the shield drops to the ground, ending its floating effect. While the shield is adjacent to you, you can grasp it with an Interact action, ending its floating effect.

You can hold this and use it just like any other shield. Activating it lets you free up a hand to cause the shield to float, where it protects you without you spending an action! While the floating shield offers far less Hardness than many magic shields of a similar level (some have Hardness up to 18!), it's not meant for Shield Block, and its abilities allow you to use it even with a character who needs both hands for other things.

Now let's look at two special types of items: one revamped classic and one brand-new category!

Staves

We went through several different iterations of staves. They needed to remain a powerful tool for spellcasters, but we also wanted them to appear earlier in the game so you didn't have to wait for most staves to appear at higher levels. Let's see the staff of healing!

Staff of Healing Item 3+

Invested, Magical, Necromancy, Staff

Method of Use held, 1 hand; Bulk 1

Activation Cast a Spell (1 RP)


Made of smooth white wood, this staff is capped at each end with a golden cross adorned with a multitude of ruby cabochons. A staff of healing adds an item bonus to the Hit Points you restore any time you cast the heal spell using your own spell slots, using charges from the staff, or from channel energy.

Type minor; Level 3; Price 60 gp; Maximum Charges 3

The item bonus to heal spells is +1.

  • stabilize (cantrip)
  • heal (level 1)

I've included only the level 3 minor staff of healing here. There are also versions at levels 7, 11, and 15, and they add higher-level heal spells, plus restoration, remove disease, restore senses, and more! A staff is tied to you, which means you have to invest it, unlike most held items. This investiture has two extra benefits. First off, it links the staff to you, preventing anyone else from investing the staff for 24 hours. More importantly, it restores charges to the staff equal to the highest level of spell you can cast. You don't have to expend any spells to do this; it's all part of using your Resonance Points. You'll notice this also means that if you find one of these as a 1st-level character, it will take you longer to recharge it than if you're a higher-level spellcaster. You also get the item bonus to healing as long as you hold the invested staff.

Now how do you cast these spells? Well, you activate the staff as part of casting one of the spells in it (spending 1 RP as usual). Then you have two options: You can either expend charges from the staff equal to the spell's level (1 charge for heal here) or expend one of your own spells of that level or higher. Yeah, your staff essentially lets you spontaneously cast the spells in it!

Trinkets

How about something completely different? One thing we wanted to add was a type of item that was like scrolls for martial characters. Spellcasters use scrolls and everyone uses potions, but how about something special that relies on nonmagical skills? Trinkets were the answer! Our first example was designed specifically for fighters.

Fear Gem Item 4

Consumable, Enchantment, Fear, Magical, Mental, Trinket

Price 11 gp

Method of Use affixed, weapon; Bulk

Activation [[F]] Focus Activation; Trigger You use Intimidating Strike, but haven't rolled for the attack yet.


Dark smoke seems to writhe within this obsidian gem. When you activate the gem, if your Intimidating Strike hits, the target is frightened 2 and flat-footed against your attacks until the end of your next turn. If the attack roll is a critical success, the target is flat-footed against your attacks for 1 minute.

Trinkets all have the consumable trait, meaning they're used up after being activated once. They have the "affixed" method of use, and as this one indicates, it has to be affixed to a weapon. You can activate it with a Focus Activation as a free action when you use the Intimidating Strike action from the fighter feat of the same name. This makes the Intimidating Strike more severe, increasing its effect to frightened 2 instead of frightened 1 and making it especially strong on a critical success.

Now how about a trinket that's less specific?

Vanishing Coin Item 9

Consumable, Illusion, Magical, Trinket

Price 85 gp

Method of Use affixed, armor; Bulk

Activation [[F]] Focus Activation; Trigger You attempt a Stealth check for initiative, but haven't rolled yet.

Requirements You are a master in Stealth.


This copper coin dangles from a leather strip strung through a hole drilled into the coin's center. It's usually tied just below the throat on a suit of armor. Until it is activated, the coin becomes invisible for a few seconds every few minutes, but always at random intervals. When you activate the coin, you gain the benefits of a 2nd-level invisibility spell until the end of your next turn.

Anyone with master proficiency in Stealth can use this trinket by affixing it to her armor. She can turn invisible by activating the coin when she rolls a Stealth check for initiative. Pretty useful in the first round of a fight!

Well, there's a lot to say about magic items, and we'll have more to say on Friday. For now, I'm going to leave you with a short list of some of the new items appearing in the Pathfinder Playtest Rulebook in addition to the classics.

  • Anklets of alacrity
  • Feather step stone
  • Forge warden
  • Grim trophy
  • Handwraps of mighty fists
  • Oil of weightlessness
  • Persona mask
  • Potency crystal
  • Runestone
  • Spell duelist's wand
  • Third eye
  • Virtuoso's instrument

Tell us what sorts of items you'd like to see in the final rulebook!

Logan Bonner
Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Playtest Wayne Reynolds
401 to 450 of 1,064 << first < prev | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
Staff cantrips seem pretty pricey, though, since they cost 1RP each.
They are actually free to cast.

I've been confused by this response for awhile and saw no clarification. The post by QuidEst is in regards to a 1RP cost for casting spells from the staff, specifically cantrips.

The blog clearly states:

Blog Post wrote:
Now how do you cast these spells? Well, you activate the staff as part of casting one of the spells in it (spending 1 RP as usual).

So I read this bit from the blog as if you want to cast a spell (any spell) from the staff it costs 1 RP and either a charge from the staff or one of your prepared/available spells. But then Mark's comment seems to be counter to this, either in regards to Cantrips specifically or towards spells from the staff as a whole making my less certain how this aspect operates.

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Cyouni wrote:
The funny thing is that I keep seeing numerous posts going "this obviously breaks on contact" or "nobody will ever be able to use items" as though Paizo hasn't done playtests before and found that's not the case. Whether it works on an overall scale in limit (and overall design) is a very different question, but I'm pretty sure "this doesn't immediately implode" is a safe assumption that can be made across large parts of the system.

Yeah, there's every evidence that the system works, and I suspect it does so in a relatively balanced fashion.

The issues are one of terminology (I agree that "Operate Activation Actions" is a phrase that hurts my brain and I never want to see again), which is an easy fix, and the logistical bookkeeping issue presented by Resonance + Charges on the same item. Which is not precisely a functional or even balance issue, but an 'ease of use' issue...and is much trickier to fix properly.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I will definitely echo the need for clarity on describing how magic items work. I read the Cloak of Elvin Kind about 5 times, and I am still not sure I fully understand it.

However, I definitely do not think resonance is the disaster that a lot of people are making it out to be. I think using a second resource, in addition to gold, is essential to balance magic items. I think there is definitely some room for improvement and fine (maybe not so fine) tuning. I really do not foresee tracking it is going to be a problem. It is like saying HP damage is a problem because you have to track it.

I think that the design for staves is really good. I think this could have been explained a bit more clearly though. I also really like trinkets, and I think that they have to be attached to a weapon or armour seems like a nice feature. Can you have more than one attached at any one time?

In terms of describing items better how about this?

CLOAK OF ELVENKIND ITEM 10+
Illusion, Invested, Magical
Method of Use worn, cloak; Bulk L

This cloak is deep green with a voluminous hood, and is embroidered with gold trim and symbols of significance to the elves.

Spell ([[A]] Somatic): The cloak allows you to cast the ghost sound cantrip as an innate arcane spell. {that is just a guess regarding somatic}

Use ([[A]] Interact Action): When you draw the hood up over your head, the cloak transforms to match the environment around you and muffles your sounds, giving you an item bonus to Stealth checks. You can raise or lower your hood as an interact action.

Activate ([[A]] Focus Activation, [[A]] Operate Activation, [[RP]] Resonance): When you activate the cloak, you pull the hood up and are affected by invisibility for 1 minute or until you pull the hood back down, whichever comes first.

Type standard; Level 10; Price 1,000 gp
The cloak grants a +3 bonus to Stealth.

Type greater; Level 18; Price 24,000 gp
The cloak grants a +5 bonus to Stealth, and invisibility is heightened to 4th level.

Synergy: If you're also wearing greater Boots of Elvenkind, the Greater Cloak of Elvenkind allows you to Sneak in forest environments even when creatures are currently observing you.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Cthulhudrew wrote:
OCEANSHIELDWOLPF 2.0 wrote:
The activations seem needlessly specific (hood raising etc).
I agree with this. Including descriptions of items for the benefit of ease is one thing (personally, I don't see why all staves of healing would look identical, but it is narrative shorthand).

Personally I wouldn't mind just getting rid of the item descriptions. The idea that all items of a certain type look the same is really silly (especially since so many are described as looking gaudy and silly anyway). It's not like these are being mass-produced from a factory, they're hand made. One wizard might make their Wand of Fireballs out of a twig charred in a forest fire, while another makes it out of a red dragon's horn while a third has a precisely made gilded rod with a gem at the tip. And if they don't all look the same, why bother with the description? It's just taking up space. Or maybe just mention the features that are an intrinsic part of the item, like the buttons on a bunch of rods.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Doktor Weasel wrote:
OCEANSHIELDWOLPF 2.0 wrote:
The activations seem needlessly specific (hood raising etc).
Personally I wouldn't mind just getting rid of the item descriptions. The idea that all items of a certain type look the same is really silly... And if they don't all look the same, why bother with the description? It's just taking up space. Or maybe just mention the features that are an intrinsic part of the item, like the buttons on a bunch of rods.

I would say I agree on that. If anything, I think the space saved from shorter descriptions could be better spent including illustrations of selected items, giving even better visualization but without dubious claim they ALL look exactly like that. Or more item stats. Or something else in the book. Or more blank space to facilitate future Errata.

I do think "hood raising" is perfectly fine detail to note about activation of Elven Cloak, the issue of "re-raising" (given it's dual uses/activations) which people have noted just being an implementation problem to be fixed.

Liberty's Edge

SamosNemo wrote:
Pan wrote:
SamosNemo wrote:
Do magic weapons cost RP to use?
I believe only when using abilities like the flametounge's scorching ray.

What makes you believe that? The article I read at http://comicbook.com/gaming/amp/2018/06/24/pathfinder-playtest-review/ made it seem like it does:

"Potions, magic armor, and magic weapons all expend resonance points, which is determined by a player's level plus their charisma modifier."
Some clarification would be appreciated.

I’m under the impression you’d still need to spend RP to invest the weapon...

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I’m not against Resonance, but I think the rules need to be so absolutely clear and watertight about when RP are spent to invest, activate etc, or where (like the ghost sound example) investing gives you a free activation ability....

As written it’s really grey area and has the potential to cause so much grief at the table...


"Command Activation, Focus Activation, or Operate Activation action", I agree that these are really clunky and ugly to read, I would much prefer:

Action (activation)

Someone mentioned needing to codify so much due to Attacks of Opportunity, but those are no longer a universal thing (every organism and its mum takes a swipe at you when you bail), they are now mainly a fighter deal, and maybe certain monsters, so I am thinking/hoping it will be a self-contained ability/feature/feat, and not as many things will trigger them.

The 1 point to resonate for the day and additional points to activate is a bit off, to me, not sure why, but in general it is a pretty cool way to rein in the Xmas tree magic item deal, and I like that Cha bumps it (at one point during the 5th Ed playtest your Cha affected how many magic items you could attune to, I dug that, but of course they dropped it).

I hope they clean up some of the language, I love the Unchained RAE (have used it for a while), but as of now, with the terminology for specific actions, it's losing its lustre.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alyss Glimmerthorn wrote:
SamosNemo wrote:
Pan wrote:
SamosNemo wrote:
Do magic weapons cost RP to use?
I believe only when using abilities like the flametounge's scorching ray.

What makes you believe that? The article I read at http://comicbook.com/gaming/amp/2018/06/24/pathfinder-playtest-review/ made it seem like it does:

"Potions, magic armor, and magic weapons all expend resonance points, which is determined by a player's level plus their charisma modifier."
Some clarification would be appreciated.
I’m under the impression you’d still need to spend RP to invest the weapon...

I believe this will depend on the weapon as there are three types of magic item uses:

blog post wrote:
Magic items are used in three major ways: by investing them, by activating them, or automatically.

I vaguely recall mention of at least some weapons simply needing to be wielded not invested, but I could be misremembering that information and can no longer remember where it came from, one of the videos wither a pathfinder friday video or some part of one of the streamed panels from PaizoCon. But there is also this which lends some credence to it:

Blog Post wrote:
Automatic activation happens with a small category of items that give their benefit whenever they're used for their normal purpose. A prime example is a sword with the frost property rune, which is always coated with frost and needs only hit a foe to deal extra cold damage.

Based on the two quote this would imply the frost damage from a sword with the frost property rune would require neither activation nor investiture. However, I would fully expect anything that happens only sometimes, such as the mentioned flametongue's scorching ray effect to require the weapon be invested and an activation action of some kind be used (either operate for pointing the sword at the target, focus to simply focus on making the weapon do this, or both)


14 people marked this as a favorite.

The thing which kind of frustrates me is that there seems to be a way of thinking with the devs that they need to fix CLW or other cheap magic item abuse (which I personally don't feel is worth creating a whole new sub-system over, but whatever), but then there seems to be a general lack of acknowledgement by them that this new system also creates completely new issues which change how the game narratively will unfold.

If fixing one "problem" you have with the current game creates two new ones, then maybe the new system is a bad idea.


Mark Seifter wrote:
graeme mcdougall wrote:
Fuzzypaws wrote:
Wandering Wastrel wrote:
Paizo Blog wrote:
A potion requires you to spend an Operate Activation action to drink it. A necklace of fireballs requires you to spend 2 Operate Activation actions

Urgh.

It's possible that I'll get used to this sort of phrasing, but right now it just seems... no.

The wording definitely cast Induce Greater Headache on me, yeah. >.>

Seriously, what's wrong with saying "A potion requires 1 action to drink" or "A necklace of fireballs requires a total of 2 actions to use: 1 to pull a bead loose and 1 to throw it."

Do we seriously have to overdefine every single possible action in the game? This isn't a computer program which requires that sort of thing for the machine to understand your intent.

If you really really have to define the actions, say Use Action or Operate Action instead of Operate Activation Action. Say Focus Action instead of Focus Activation Action. Etc

100% agree. It's really destroying the elegance of the 3-action economy. If Resonance requires this over-definition, then it's Resonance that should go.
The wording is completely unrelated to resonance, it's all a question of style and clarity. We originally had it as Operate, Focus, and Command, but Activation was added during editing to make it clearer. If people think it doesn't make it clearer, that's good feedback and it's easy enough to change if that's widespread.

Mark, I think the Activate and Casting actions would be easier to read and understand if they were written substantially as follows:

[[AA]] Activate (Focus, Operate)

....When you use the Activate action, xxxx

[[A]] Activate (Command)

...You can Activate this item by saying the command word XXX...

(In the rules section explaining Resonance) Spending Resonance: There are two ways to spend resonance: You spend 1 Point every time you invest an item and 1 point every time you use the Activate action. There are three types of Activate actions, which are explained below:

[A] Casting (Somatic or more)

....Casting (Somatic) XXX
....Casting (Somatic and Verbal) XXX
....Casting (Somatic, Verbal, and Material) XXX

Spellcasting: Spellcasters gain access to the Casting action. The Casting action is performed using one or more components, each of which takes its own seperate use of the Casting action. The components are Somatic, Verbal, and Material, as explained below:


4 people marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:
This general assumption that CLW wands completely negate damage between combat baffles me in the first place. There are many other considerations to such an equation, like ability damage/drain, status effects (nauseated, etc) and short duration buff uptimes (haste, mirror image) or even new opponents coming after the party shortly after an encounter, which make spending several minutes healing up with CLW wands between combats not always a practical solution.

It does completely negate Hit Point damage between combats. The fact that there are other things (Ability Drains, Poisons, etc...) has nothing to do with the ability to heal Hit Point entirely.

And if new opponents are coming after the party so shortly after an encounter that they can't heal with a wand, I would consider that to be the same encounter still.

The "problem" with unlimited daily uses of potions/charges is that, as others mentioned, forces you to make every encounter potentially deadly or else there is no point to it because, no matter what you do, you can fully heal afterwards without expending daily resources. At that point, if you have a problem with Resonance limiting your Healing Pool, you can just allow short 1-minute rests to fully heal everyone's HP, and it would be almost the same as having unlimited CLW Wands (which is the case after some levels and Gold starts to rain).

I hate how this Resonance post was worded and shown, but I like the concept of Resonance itself. Also, PF2 is making great efforts to give everyone new options to "heal". A Fighter rising his shield to be able to use a reaction to absorb damage is a pseudo-heal of sorts, but without feeling like you are healing, so is the Rogue's Dodge reaction; and all seems to indicate that investing in Medicine will also have some healing benefits that don't affect how you build your character for combat at all, nor does make you a heal-bot in any way.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber

If you want Staves and Wands to occupy a different design niche than each other you could try the following.

Staves are expensive, provide a numerical buff to some spells, grant you extra spells and you can use Resonance to cast those spells.
So pretty much as currently designed just deleting the spend charges/spell slots.

Wands are cheaper, have a power level between 1 and 9, provide 1 spell and let you convert your spell slots into that spell.
A wand will let you convert the equivalent spell slot you spend into the spell in the wand. You can spend a Resonance Point to heighten the spell to the power level of the wand.
So if you have a Power Level 3 Wand of Magic Missle, you can spend a level 1 spell slot to cast a level 1 Magic Missle or you can spend a level 1 spell slot and a Resonance Point to cast Magic Missle heightened to level 3.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Kaemy wrote:
It does completely negate Hit Point damage between combats. The fact that there are other things (Ability Drains, Poisons, etc...) has nothing to do with the ability to heal Hit Point entirely.

The point of using CLW wands is twofold. One is to replace a party healer, the other to alleviate the problem of the 15 minute workday. But replacing the party healer leaves the party with another problem, which is that there is no easy way to deal with things like ability damage (outside of purchasing way more expensive consumables or returning to town). This creates another metagame for such groups, where they try to avoid ability damage and other long-terms effects and have to decide if they want to forge on with their abilities somewhat diminished. Hit points are not the only resource in the game after all.

Kaemy wrote:
And if new opponents are coming after the party so shortly after an encounter that they can't heal with a wand, I would consider that to be the same encounter still.

Yeah, you're wrong. If the party takes heavy damage in one combat and then needs four or five minutes to heal themselves up, it is totally reasonable for occupants of the next room to come and investigate.

This assumption that you can always heal up all damage you have received in one encounter assumes always perfect conditions for the party.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Joana wrote:
Not sure I'm a fan of trinkets. I get that they're cheap, but that's a lot of little one-use items to clutter up a character sheet and erase and write in again and say, "Wait, did I forget to cross out that trinket after I used it, or have I not used it yet?"

That would be awesome and they somehow cost slightly less RP if you wore the whole set or standard cost but because you have the whole set it is treated like another item for no extra RP. This could be exciting.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

The issue of whether the game design should allow for full heals between fights has been discussed at length in the CLW thread.

It boils down to different strokes for different folks. Some groups like to grit their teeth and push on at lower HP, and consider HP a viable point of attrition. Other groups without a reliable between-combat heal say "Well if I take another couple whacks I'm dead so let's fall back and sleep for the day", which leads to the 15 minute workday.

Since we don't know exactly how healing is going to work out in PF2e yet it's pointless to argue about how resonance does or does not affect between combat health.

One thing that is nice about wands of CLW, though, is that it readily serves both groups because, as loot, it's within the purview of the GM to provide or not, so games that don't want easy out of combat healing just don't have to have wands of CLW. Whatever solution PF2e has is likely going to be much harder to excise.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
WatersLethe wrote:
The issue of whether the game design should allow for full heals between fights has been discussed at length in the CLW thread.

Would you mind linking to it? I didn't find it yesterday on a cursory examination of the playtest sub-forum. I'd like to check out that discussion when I get back from work.

Liberty's Edge

Joana wrote:
Not sure I'm a fan of trinkets. I get that they're cheap, but that's a lot of little one-use items to clutter up a character sheet and erase and write in again and say, "Wait, did I forget to cross out that trinket after I used it, or have I not used it yet?"

Then don't write it on your character sheet.

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I want to echo support for making the wands into single spell staves. Bond with them for 1 RP, and that provides some sort of benefit when casting that spell. (Extra damage? A bump to the spell DC? Something, doesn't have to be big.)

Then spend an RP to convert a slot to that spell.

This will make it attractive to have wands for your favorite spells. If you slot the spell that is in the wand, you get to enjoy the wand's boost to it, and if you need more or didn't slot? Then you still have access to your favorite spell by using spell slots.

It will also increase the class fantasy of wizards with staves and wands and make them into valuable tools instead of commodities.

Keeping track of charges and RP at the same time is... not something I want to do.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I am thinking perhaps I misunderstood something somewhere along the way. My understanding was the intent of P2 was to streamline the game. I'm not seeing how this contributes to that goal. Personally I have little interest in a game that is a crazy-quilt of complex -subsystems.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

If I give a potion to an unconscious PC, which character's RP is used? Or is it a choice? I imagine this would be tied to the narrative justification for what resonance actually is and how it's used.

I can support the design goals of adding RP, but personally I feel potions should be an exception. Since they're literally ingested and metabolized, they should always work. (Bulk helps eliminate the spamming issue vs a wand.) This would also allow them to consistently work on 0-level NPCs. Players could deliver potions of cure disease to a plague-stricken town (or whatever) and actually feel like they accomplished something rather than have half of them fail to function.

On a related note, can I loan my cloak of elvenkind to a 0-level NPC we're escorting through dangerous territory? Or would it not work? What if they had low charisma?

I feel like NPCs are now either operating under significantly different rules than PCs, or there are a now a whole heap of people who literally can't use magic items or potions due to having no level and low to average charisma. Or have I missed something?


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:
WatersLethe wrote:
The issue of whether the game design should allow for full heals between fights has been discussed at length in the CLW thread.
Would you mind linking to it? I didn't find it yesterday on a cursory examination of the playtest sub-forum. I'd like to check out that discussion when I get back from work.

Why are Wands of CLW such a problem


5 people marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:
Kaemy wrote:
And if new opponents are coming after the party so shortly after an encounter that they can't heal with a wand, I would consider that to be the same encounter still.

Yeah, you're wrong. If the party takes heavy damage in one combat and then needs four or five minutes to heal themselves up, it is totally reasonable for occupants of the next room to come and investigate.

This assumption that you can always heal up all damage you have received in one encounter assumes always perfect conditions for the party.

Of course it comes with the assumption that you have time to heal up... If you DON'T have time to do so, there is no need to discuss at all if wand healing should be limited by Resonance or not... you aren't healing either way!

But when you DO have the time to Heal (which I would say is an important amount of the encounters), it forces the DM to make all those isolated encounters potentially deadly, or else you can just heal afterwards to full anyways... A single orc appears, he is second in initiative... In PF2 you may consider how you act, you want to save HP if possible, in PF1 it doesn't matter what you do, you just heal it afterwards and continue.

When the DM creates an encounter with orcs next to other rooms with more orcs that will come check the fight before you have time to heal, that is the same encounter pretty much, even if its divided in two battles.

Giving the DM the ability to do use attrition or the players a sense of weight on their actions/resources, is important. Why should I use my Fireball for this groups of orcs if it's obvious we can beat them with just the martials and heal up afterwards as much as we want? Well... If you are limited by Resonance, maybe you start considering using the Fireball in this encounter to save HP, and you start seeing HP as something important (it represents your companions health after all) that you may want to prevent going down, not something that can allways be healed afterwards.

And again... If you really want the old Wand of CLW scenario, just use 5 minutes short rests that heal everyone's HP to full everytime. Is not like you were limited by Wand charges past Lv3 anyway.

The game will (in my opinion) be healthier if players are forced to start considering their HP as something precious they want to prevent from going down, which is something the characters should be doing... Stuff like rising shields, using dodge actions or spending resources on an encounter that could be considered trivial by PF1 standards will become more important and better options, as they should.
When I played my last Barbarian, I couldn't freaking care to expose myself to enemies in most combats, I KNEW I would be at full health before the next one anyway. Getting rid of that mentality will probably be for the best. We are too used to the asumption we are supposed to be at full HP at all times, as if our characters didn't just fight for their lives three times in the last hour and received multiple wounds...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Perram wrote:

I want to echo support for making the wands into single spell staves. Bond with them for 1 RP, and that provides some sort of benefit when casting that spell. (Extra damage? A bump to the spell DC? Something, doesn't have to be big.)

Then spend an RP to convert a slot to that spell.

This will make it attractive to have wands for your favorite spells. If you slot the spell that is in the wand, you get to enjoy the wand's boost to it, and if you need more or didn't slot? Then you still have access to your favorite spell by using spell slots.

It will also increase the class fantasy of wizards with staves and wands and make them into valuable tools instead of commodities.

Keeping track of charges and RP at the same time is... not something I want to do.

I'd like staffs to give me:

- At least one free casting per day. Casters have very limited spells, and a renewable source of extra spells would be nice. I'd also rather they have a little more cost/value so casters don't just juggle five to learn/boost/spontaneously cast their favorite spells.
- The ability to save up those castings across days. It feels good to go into a situation well-prepared, and this is a nice opportunity to do that.

I'm worried about the charge complexity on higher level staffs, but if they're still the most complicated type of item, that's fair enough.


I’m excited to see Charisma get a buff since its so often a dump stat. It will be cool to try these RP out and see if they are easy to implement; they arent that different than resolve points or panache after all. I do think the game could use some pressure to streamline magic items if you are really trying to maximize your power rather than rewarding you buying wands of cure light wounds in bulk.


Darius Alazario wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
Staff cantrips seem pretty pricey, though, since they cost 1RP each.
They are actually free to cast.

I've been confused by this response for awhile and saw no clarification. The post by QuidEst is in regards to a 1RP cost for casting spells from the staff, specifically cantrips.

The blog clearly states:

Blog Post wrote:
Now how do you cast these spells? Well, you activate the staff as part of casting one of the spells in it (spending 1 RP as usual).
So I read this bit from the blog as if you want to cast a spell (any spell) from the staff it costs 1 RP and either a charge from the staff or one of your prepared/available spells. But then Mark's comment seems to be counter to this, either in regards to Cantrips specifically or towards spells from the staff as a whole making my less certain how this aspect operates.

I think Mark's answer is pretty straightforward. I was confused because cantrips, which are balanced against being at-will, seemed to cost a point of RP. Mark clarified that they didn't. The rules section explaining how staves work probably lists cantrips as an exception, as one would expect them to be.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I'm fully on board with the concept of wands and staves replacing pages of spell knowledge and pearls of power. Those two items never had much of a presence to me, whereas a wizard hefting a staff to fire off a spell is just *right*.

It also gives casters something to hold at low levels.

If Resonance was removed from everywhere else in the game and only served to manage wands and staves, I'd be pretty happy.


Interesting. I'm not against RP, though I'm not for them currently either. I will wait and see. I think they can add something to the game if done right. But if handled the wrong way, I think they can take away from the game.

One thing I don't like, and maybe I'm misunderstanding something, is the comment that part of the system was intended to make less book keeping. Specifically removing the charges from items. That sounds like a good idea. However, when we get down to the staff example, it looks like charges are back. So I'm confused.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

So, here's the thing I really like about resonance.

Cloak of Elvenkind costs PF1 equivalent of 10k, when PF1 pricing would normally put it at that much just for a limited number of uses of invisibility. (Although, credit where it's due, the PF1 version would have three-minute invisibility instead of one.) This also provides a passive stealth bonus (so long as the hood is up) and a useful cantrip at-will (credit where it's due, the PF2 version also has a useful DC).

If resonance means that cool items can be more affordably priced without the concerns that drove up prices in PF1 (multiple copies of limited use items, getting tons of cheap items at high levels), then I'm pretty happy.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Kcinlive wrote:
One thing I don't like, and maybe I'm misunderstanding something, is the comment that part of the system was intended to make less book keeping. Specifically removing the charges from items. That sounds like a good idea. However, when we get down to the staff example, it looks like charges are back. So I'm confused.

Yeah... And from the looks of it we also have "1/day" stuff, like mentioned in that sword.

I guess the idea was to have LESS stuff that was X/day, and the X being your remaining Resonance and you decide how many charges you devote to each of the items you have equiped. I understand very powerful abilities wanting to be still limtied to 1/day and stuff like that...

I understood Mark's post about not being able to make wands just use 1 RP instead of 1 Charge because that means buying a Wand of Haste can easily give you 10 uses of Haste everyday forever... So price should go up accordingly; but I guess you could also make wands use more RP for higher level spells or stuff like that.
I hope we will see many changes/adjustements after the Playtest, and we will all probably see common House Rules that "fix" or "improve" on Paizo's system, and hopefully many will be added to the Core Rulebook.

The thing I didn't think about that I read in one of the comments, was that "forcing you to spend 1RP to invest in your magical item, makes you think more about it and what items you want to invest in". His point was how at higher levels, PF1 players often forget half the magical items their characters are wearing, and this system may increase the likehood of them knowing/remembering what they are actually wearing, and I like that.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Activation rules are still complicated as there's now multiple types of actions and inactions you can do with items. It's not immediately clear what you can do with an item by reading its description. I had to read cloak of elvenkind five times and read the explanation several times to figure out how it works. Resonance cost also isn't included. This will lead to many players and GMs getting confused and arguing how a magic item works.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, we need a gloves of improvised might and a similar item for thrown weapons.

I don't want to wait another 7 years for improvised weapon builds to be viable.

Dark Archive

6 people marked this as a favorite.

I feel like people here are being overly spiteful or mean, with stuff like focusing on stuff like how blog was written or amount of exclamation points <_<

Anyway, I can't actually comment on how I think this system would affect usual play because my campaign players don't actually do the PFS style "Let's buy cure light wound wand at high levels" often enough to become silly nor do they ever retreat from dungeons unless they really have to(they usually complete them in one adventuring day). Only way I could know how this affects the play in practice for my group would be to see it in action.

Otherwise, I'm actually pretty happy with resonance rules, they seemed simple enough to understand for me. Though I agree that its still weird that you have to spend points on one time items and that it would be easier if investing point gives you amount of charges rather than restoring amount of charges to the item.

Note that I do find names of the actions weird(because operate activation action does sound like redundant name), but I don't think they themselves sounded too complicated to understand what they meant. That said it is completely possible I misunderstood what they meant since blog didn't go into that much detail what different activation actions mean


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fuzzypaws wrote:
Arcaian wrote:

I think a lot of the issues that we're encountering with Resonance is that it's trying to solve two different problems.

1: Magic Item Slots - it gets a pain to explain to new players that Headband and Head are different slots, or that Chest and Body are different slots, and it's frustrating that if you want the Belt of Mighty Hurling you can't also have that Belt of Giant Strength. Resonance proposes a solution where you're still limited in the amount of magic items you can have at once, but you don't have to deal with the above issues.

2: Cost Effectiveness of low-level items - the classic issue here is the Wand of Cure Light Wounds. Many people find it to break immersion to have people spending a few minutes after each combat spamming wands of CLW, and similar issues with it being much more effective to use many cheap items rather than a powerful single item at higher levels. Resonance solves this by adding an additional cost to using many low-level items.

I've not seem many complaints about the solution to problem #1, it's problem #2's solution that has been causing issues. Might it be possible to look into keeping Resonance (likely in a smaller pool) as a solution to #1, but look into alternate solution for #2? Something along the lines of high level healing potions can give you temps above your max HP, restore conditions, and the like would certainly potentially help in this sort of thing.

You're pretty much right. I actually don't mind Resonance for point 1. It's the fact that they have a hammer and view everything as a nail that's a problem. Resonance works as a clean way of letting people wear multiple belts and rings and amulets and whatever without simply allowing infinite bling, but it doesn't work for me as a limit on other things and especially not as a limit on consumables.

Agree, Resonance looks like a good replacement for body slots and X/day items like Cloak of Elvenkind, but I just don't like it for consumables or Staves/Wands as presented

Dark Archive

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I like the variety of changes I'm seeing in magic items. I don't think I like anything about resonance however. I don't see how it adds anything to the game. Sure, it's likely to stop wand spam. But that's about it. Wand spam happens to be one of the things that actually reduces the 10 minute adventuring day. Resonance seems like it's almost certainly going to increase it. Why? Because with limited resonance, generally I would say a permanent item is greater than a limited use item that requires burning resonance. Just like in P1 that having a permanent item usually trumps having a consumable item if I have limited money to spend. Then, with some resources, people tend to have some healing items like potions/wands. Except now if I have limited resonance, they're going to start not working (possibly quite quickly if I have all or most of my resonance spent on permanent items). I can already predict my players being ready to rest when they don't think their healing items are going to work anymore. So now I'm back to creating stories that force time restrictions so they have to go on without the healing items.

Beyond that, the wording of pretty much every single item listed was cludgy and unclear and I would recommend a thorough reworking of how they are listed for clarity of use (and which parts cost resonance). There were several good examples prior to my post.

Think as I understand it, staffs as written will be something I won't ever want. You have limited resonance, and you have to spend 1 to invest the staff..and then 1 each time you cast a spell using a charge (instead of using your own spell slots...which is pretty much always been the point of having a staff), so to get much benefit from a staff, you either need limited numbers of permanent items (so as to have lots of free resonance points) which seems a poor choice or you don't worry about it and use the staff by overspending, in which case the staff barely works.

Ultimately so far, I see nothing about this system that works in any way to positively impact my gaming experience and it comes with a bunch of extra bookkeeping and though it will end wand and potion spam, I find it likely that when the playtest drops, I'll find it makes my parties 10 minute adventuring day come back with a vengeance.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Quandary wrote:
Doktor Weasel wrote:
OCEANSHIELDWOLPF 2.0 wrote:
The activations seem needlessly specific (hood raising etc).
Personally I wouldn't mind just getting rid of the item descriptions. The idea that all items of a certain type look the same is really silly... And if they don't all look the same, why bother with the description? It's just taking up space. Or maybe just mention the features that are an intrinsic part of the item, like the buttons on a bunch of rods.

I would say I agree on that. If anything, I think the space saved from shorter descriptions could be better spent including illustrations of selected items, giving even better visualization but without dubious claim they ALL look exactly like that. Or more item stats. Or something else in the book. Or more blank space to facilitate future Errata.

I do think "hood raising" is perfectly fine detail to note about activation of Elven Cloak, the issue of "re-raising" (given it's dual uses/activations) which people have noted just being an implementation problem to be fixed.

I like flavor text but I think of it like MTG flavor text. A few sentence description in italics separate from all the rules would be what I prefer.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Finally a magical instrument?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Wands should be spend one resonance per spell level of the wand to attune it for the day, then you can freely cast it's charges at your whim.
Staffs should be spend one resonance to attune, then spend further resonance per spell level to cast a spell contained within the staff, no charges.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Over the the CLW thread - someone stated that resonance was a balance lever that should make the fighter or other non-magic class want to rest for the day around the same time that a caster runs out of spells. I'd like to see how that is supposed to work.

This doesn't seem to solve that problem - and no matter how simple it might be to *track* resonance - the item descriptions are so complicated that I can't see how removing a bunch of x/day spots justifies 'focus action' 'use action' 'intent action' 'action action'.

I mean you guys revamped the *entire combat system* to get rid of the 12 action types - why add them back in on this side of the system?

RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I usually am pretty good at understanding rules, but I am having a real tough time figuring out the cloak. Knowing which abilities if any require resonance, and which actions are needed for all the different abilities is unclear too.

I was initially thinking that "item bonus" referred to the number at the top (like ITEM 10) was the bonus you get.

Overall I have liked a lot of the new directions pf2 is taking and it seems less confusing in a lot of area which is great, but this is the first blog that really had me confused. perhaps seeing the rules laid out when we get the book will help, but until them I am wary about some of the players in my gaming group being able (or willing)to adapt to a brand new system.

Grand Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

MORE THOUGHTS:

Making Resonance a Limited Resource:

For me, the real test of if the Resonance system is truly viable will come with the first PFS 2E multi-table special. (Yep, I am viewing all of this though the lens of Organized Play, but that’s where I will be doing the majority of my Playtesting.) Multi-table specials have so many different encounters in a single gaming day that some PF1 builds were not as useful in them because their special abilities were usable only a few times a day. In PF1, the only way to get through a multi-table special was to use healing wands because the whole system was balanced around the party arriving fully healed into every combat — particularly the boss fight.

Are we assuming that everyone will arrive wounded to boss fights? Will boss fights have to scaled down? Will we have to metagame to know it’s the boss fight, and we can all finally use our healing then?

I don’t know how all this balances, but I worry that ‘resonance’ will turn into the batteries of starfinder. In Starfinder, it was clear that the development team wanted batteries to be a precious resource and a way of limiting tech power. They made them tough to recharge. But this change was rather silly given what players know of technology and more importantly, it was not fun. The very first few games of SFS that I played involved whole groups of players that avoided anything that required batteries, and who stockpiled batteries like madmen. When SFS shifted to allowing batteries to recharge on ships, suddenly balance was restored and we could concentrate more on roleplay than on resource conservation.

With that small change, Starfinder Society became fun again and my favorite game.

Playing with different types of unusual magic items = fun.
Being hurt and wounded all the time = not so fun.

★ ---- ★ ---- ★ ---- ★

What I want and what I don’t want from resonance:

I really like certain aspects of the resonance system for investing items. I love that magic items in 2E are not straight bonuses. I want you to get rid of the BIG SIX. But I don’t want you to balance resonance around making healing a scarce resource. There are aspects to the resonance system that I think will be fun to roleplay, and that I am excited by. But I worry that you are applying a fix to healing that is not needed or wanted by your player base.

★ ---- ★ ---- ★ ---- ★

Aaaaaad now, back to the Playtest:

Still, like I said earlier — I want all of us to kick the tires. I want to see how the whole system balances and falls together. I loved how combat felt when I got to playtest 2E at PaizoCon — it was cinematic and fun. I can’t see enough of this yet to judge how it will work.

I am hoping that all of you join me in trying the resonance system out, and giving it an honest shake. It may work great as it is — or it may need a tweak, like batteries did in Starfinder.

Looking forward to playtesting with all of you,
Hmm


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Magic item complexity has gone up significantly, rather than down. Resonance is not the core issue, but rather many of the mechanics that are needlessly complex:
* If you want wands to essentially be multi-use scrolls, make a scrollbook at a reduced cost (or do something else with them, as others have suggested).
* Types of actions are probably unneeded here. Say the number of actions, and, optionally, the way it us used, or leave that second part to player imagination.
* Descriptions are widely confusing in the way their laid out. I like some of the suggestions regarding organizing the abilities by type and then indicating what items at various levels do.

Also, as a final point, please don't build upon the "buy and throw away" economy that creates pressure on waiting to purchase items that Starfinder had. Include paths to upgrade between these items (Heal wands to the next level and between elven cloak levels for example).


What I like about the Resonance system:

- The duality of Investment and Activation cost means I can either be a cristmas tree of magic but have to really thing about the few times I can use an activated item - or I can have only a few magic items that I can spam all day. I hope the balance is there.

- the same cost (1RP per investment/activation) for all items means, more powerful items are desirable.

I like how staves have changed! Basically giving spontanious casting of a few spells is nice. Wether they should have charges or not, I'll see during playtest. :)

I have to agree with others though that the description of magic items has to become much clearer. The Cloak of Elvenkind is really hard to read. In the header it says "Activation: Focus Action, Operation Action" but in the text it says drawing the hood is an "Interaction Action"... what is it now?
Please seperate rules and flavor text. With the rules section as a bulletin list maybe.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

"Consumable, Enchantment, Fear, Magical, Mental, Trinket" So many keywords.

Keywords are good if they improve clarity, but if you ever need to write something like "A potion requires you to spend an Operate Activation action to drink it." it might be going overboard.

Overall, this article reads a lot like something from a late stage RPG, Book of Nine Swords, Pathfinder Unchained: mitigating complexity problems by introducing more layers of complexity. That's not always wrong (I loved Book of Nine Swords, for what it was), but it doesn't look encouraging for that part of the audience who like Pathfinder but are fatigued by the complexity and were looking forward to the new edition as an opportunity for a reset to cleaner, simpler position.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

How I’m thinking resonate investing should work.

Magic items: swords, staffs, armor, and other wonderious items

1) Invest in magic items allow to use it for the day without spending more resonance.

2) Investing an item empowers it with X charges ( X = level ). No carryover of charges from previous day or user.

3) You can use the item standard and special powers without spending resonance, but special powers use zero, one, or more empowered charges per use depending on the power level.

4) Once all the empowered charges are used, you can still use the standard powers, but not the special powers that require charges.

5) You can re-empower the item by spending another resonate point (+X charges = level).

6) If you are out of resonate you can’t invest new items or re-empower invested items.

7) Invested and empowered items are usable only by the person spending the resonance.

Limited use Potions, Trinkets, and Wands

1) can’t be invested and use 1 resonance per use. (Or successful roll for over use of resonance.)

2) Wands would have a max of 10 charges. Maybe they could be recharged by spending resonance ( 1rp = +1 charge )???

Scrolls

1) single use, but cost no resonance.


Finally something in 2nd edition that isn't just something else stripped down into a bunch of feats and regurgetated back up.

But, seriously, Resonance seems to me to be a lot like VMC in 1st edition: a really cool concept that lacks proper design and implementation.
Hopefully the actual playtest will work out all the bugs...or just convince them to scrap the idea and use the perfectly fine 1st edition magic item system.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
masda_gib wrote:

I have to agree with others though that the description of magic items has to become much clearer. The Cloak of Elvenkind is really hard to read. In the header it says "Activation: Focus Action, Operation Action" but in the text it says drawing the hood is an "Interaction Action"... what is it now?

Please seperate rules and flavor text. With the rules section as a bulletin list maybe.

I'm pretty confident it's:

* Focus Activation to cast ghost sound
* Interact to pull up hood and get +3 Stealth
* Operation Activation to pull up hood and get invisibility (and possibly +3 Stealth, if that matters for someone already under invisibility)

But I agree it's very hard to read as it stands. Embedding rules in description can work (I like "The shield floats in the air next to you, granting you its bonus automatically, as if you Raised the Shield") and can make the presentation less dry and more natural. But having the stat block/power card format, but then also putting some of the info you'd expect to be in the rules header in the description body (only!) is the worst of both worlds.

I think I can see the reasoning here: Activation is a specific rules term, meaning powering a magic item with Resonance (with as much Resonance as required, even if that's 0, to cover Automatic Activation). For the cloak, the Interact action is not Activation, it's just manipulating your cloak as you'd normally do, and then it grants you bonuses (although... why doesn't that count as Automatic Activation?)

But that's back to my keyword complaint: it seems there's at least 5 different activities you can do with an item, which all have different rules meanings, even though they sound pretty much the same in common language, or at least don't suggest the specific rules meaning:

operation
activation
action
interact
use

I think that needs cleaned up. The best keywords are those that fit naturally even for someone not familiar with the technical usage: a [Fire] spell is, in fact, a fire spell.

Liberty's Edge

I honestly just want Paizo to polish a little more the wording regarding activation and action use of the more complex items. I could see a lot of arguing in the table about how that cloak works.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
CorvusMask wrote:
I feel like people here are being overly spiteful or mean, with stuff like focusing on stuff like how blog was written or amount of exclamation points <_<

As I said when I posted about the exclamation points, it is a pet peeve. (That said, if you have a preponderance of exclamation marks I feel like you are hard selling something to me or I am reading a parody, you know? The old !!!111one thing) As for how the blog was written, the major complaint seems to be readability and clarity, which, I suppose could be seen as being mean to the writer. However, if we cannot understand what is being presented how are we to debate about it and ultimately provide helpful feedback?

At least for myself, these comments do not come from a place of spitefulness nor anger/meanness, but a desire to understand what is being presented without needing the devs to come back to the thread to explain what is missing, what is formatted oddly and so on.

We already have enough misunderstandings in these threads without that, you know?

401 to 450 of 1,064 << first < prev | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Paizo Blog: Trinkets and Treasures All Messageboards