Mastering Pathfinder

Monday, July 22, 2019

This week, we’re going to take a look at the tools the new edition provides the GM to tell awesome stories full of interesting foes and hazards as well as plenty of opportunity to shine the spotlight on the PCs and show off how incredible the PCs are!

Digital artwork: Desert, under a sky filled with blood-red clouds. Amiri battles an axe-wielding gnoll, while beside her Linni strikes another gnoll with a crackling web of lightning, causing him to drop his scimitar. In the foreground, Linni's snow leopard Droogami faces off against a snarling hyena.

Illustration by Igor Grechanyi

But before I get too mired into details of the rules, I want to talk about the high-quality overall GM advice in the book. For instance, my favorite bit of GM advice is this section in Gamemastering on adjudicating the rules, where we flat out tell you the underlying principles so you can design improvised rules on the fly!

Text inset: If you don’t know how long a quick task takes, go with 1 action, or 2 actions if a character shouldn’t be able to perform it three times per round.  
					If you’re not sure what action a task uses, look for the most similar basic action. If you don’t find one, make up an action adding any necessary traits (usually attack, concentrate, manipulate, or move).
					When two sides are opposed, have one roll against the other’s DC. Don’t have both sides roll (initiative is the exception to this rule). The character who rolls is usually the one acting (except in the case of saving throws).
					If an effect raises or lowers chances of success, grant a +1 circumstance bonus or a –1 circumstance penalty.
					If you’re not sure how difficult a significant challenge should be, use the DC for the party’s level.
					If you’re making up an effect, creatures should be incapacitated or killed on only a critical success (or for a saving throw, on a critical failure).
					If you don’t know what check to use, pick the most appropriate skill. If no other skill applies to a check to Recall Knowledge, use an appropriate Lore skill (usually at an untrained proficiency rank).
					Use the characters’ daily preparations as the time to reset anything that lasts roughly a day.
					When a character accomplishes something noteworthy that doesn’t have rules for XP, award them XP for an accomplishment (10 to 30 XP, as described on page 507).
					When the PCs fail at a task, look for a way they might fail forward, meaning the story moves forward with a negative consequence rather than the failure halting progress entirely.

There’re tips on encounter, session, adventure, and campaign management as well! One useful new tool we added was the Pathfinder baseline, which essentially explains a baseline assumption for edgy content. Whether you want to follow it or not is totally up to your group. It’s a conversation starter; the baseline determines what you should expect from our published adventures, and we’ll tell you if there’s an exception. Similarly, for a home game, if you read the baseline and want to add or remove restrictions (or scrap it entirely!) you now know that you should talk to the rest of your group first. Lack of communication often arises when everyone has their own baselines and assumes everyone shares theirs.

But you want some hard rules, right? We have rules for encounters, exploration, and downtime, as well as rules for all sorts of environmental effects, natural disasters like volcanic eruptions, and hazards like haunts and traps. For a quick taste of these before we move on, take a look at these temperature effects. Unlike First Edition, they aren’t based on the legacy Pacific Northwest sensibilities where a day of summer back home on the East Coast would kill me from nonlethal damage!

Text inset: TABLE 10-13: TEMPERATURE EFFECTS.
				Category: Temperature: Fatigue: Damage.
				Incredible cold: -80 degrees F or colder: 2 hours: Moderate cold every minute.
				Extreme cold: -79 degrees F to -20 degrees F: 4 hours: Minor cold every 10 minutes.
				Severe cold: -21 degrees F to 12 degrees F: 4 hours: Minor cold every hour.
				Mild cold: 13 degrees F to 32 degrees F: 4 hours: None.
				Normal: 33 degrees F to 94 degrees F: 8 hours: None.
				Mild heat: 95 degrees F to 104 degrees F: 4 hours: None.
				Severe heat: 105 degrees F to 114 degrees F: 4 hours: Minor fire every hour.
				Extreme heat: 115 degrees F to 139 degrees F: 4 hours: Minor fire every 10 minutes.
				Incredible heat: 140 degrees F or warmer: 2 hours: Moderate fire every minute.
				*Adjust temperatures down by 15 degrees in areas of high humidity.

For our in-depth look, let’s start with guidelines for skill DCs! You might’ve seen the simple DCs before from Jason’s spoilers, but we have those, as well as a level by level DC table for tasks against something of that level, which you can adjust by 2, 5, or 10 if it’s particularly easy or hard. For instance, learning a 6th level spell or identifying level 11 monster is DC 28, but uncommon spells or monsters are DC 30, and rare spells or monsters are DC 33. You’ll also notice these DCs are much easier to make than before, thanks to playtest guidance through a series of other numbers, we’ve alighted on a strong set that can help show off how amazing your PCs are!

Text inset: TABLE 10-4: SIMPLE DCs. 
				Proficiency rank: DC.
				Untrained: 10.
				Trained: 15.
				Expert: 20.
				Master: 30.
				Legendary: 40. Text inset: TABLE 10-5: DCs BY LEVEL. Text inset: TABLE 10-6: DC ADJUSTMENTS. 
				Difficulty: Adjustment: Rarity.
				Incredibly easy: -10.
				Very easy: -5.
				Easy: -2.
				Hard: +2: Uncommon.
				Very hard: +5: Rare.
				Incredibly hard: +10: Unique.

Also, by popular playtester demand, we can a table of typical skills to identify monsters.

Text inset: TABLE 10-7: CREATURE IDENTIFICATION SKILLS.
				Creature trait: Skills.
				Aberration: Occultism.
				Animal: Nature.
				Astral: Occultism.
				Beast: Arcana, Nature.
				Celestial: Religion.
				Construct: Arcana, Crafting.
				Dragon: Arcana.
				Elemental: Arcana, Nature.
				Ethereal: Occultism.
				Fey: Nature.
				Fiend: Religion.
				Fungus: Nature.
				Humanoid: Society.
				Monitor: Religion.
				Ooze: Occultism.
				Plant: Nature.
				Spirit: Occultism.
				Undead: Religion.

Speaking of monsters! The Bestiary contains friends and foes of all sorts, from the classic to the brand new. Take a look at the skeleton for a moment.

Pathfinder Bestiary Entries for various types of Skeletons, including the Skeleton Guard, Skeletal Champion, Skeletal Horse, Skeletal Giant and Skeletal Hulk. Featuring illustrations of the Skeletal Champion and Skeletal Horse.

Illustration by Johnny Marrow

You can build any skeleton you need at lightning speed, and add fun special abilities like exploding bones, throwing heads, or collapsing into piles of bones! Plus check out the lore sidebar about vital essence; playtesters demanded to see more of the four magical essences in the foreground, so they’re coming out to play everything once in a while!

What about a newcomer? The gogiteth is a gross skittery critter with a lot of fun movement and grapple abilities. Can you still have an interesting encounter against a purely melee 12th-level foe when the PCs have so many special options at their fingertips? The gogiteth wants to say “yes” but it has you in its mouth and is currently skittering around, so you’ll have to take my word for it.

Pathfinder Bestiary Entry for the Gogiteth, featuring an illustration of the Gogiteth tearing apart its prey.

Illustration by Mark Molnar

To close out our monster review, let’s take a look at some friendly creatures…

Pathfinder Bestiary Entries for various types of Gremlins, including the Mitflit, Pugwampi, and Jinkin. Featuring illustrations of the Pugwampi and Jinkin.

Illustration by Yasen Stoilov

Whoops, some gremlins in the gears! Those aren’t friendly at all. Each gremlin has a special way that they make life miserable for those around them, except perhaps the incomplete mitflits, who are just themselves miserable little guys. Maybe you can help give them a social order and teach them that self-loathing isn’t the answer? If you think like that, you might like these actually friendly allies.

Pathfinder Bestiary Entries for various types of Archons, including the Legion Archon and Shield Archon. Featuring illustrations of the Legion Archon and Shield Archon.

Illustrations by Bryan Sola and Firat Solhan

Each archon represents a particular virtue, with justice and courage shown here. The legion archon takes justice into its own hands (literally) with some powerful offense, while the shield archon explores courage as the virtue of bravery to sacrifice yourself for others and stand in the thick of things. And if you’re sharp-eyed, you now know one of the other archons in the book as well! Meanwhile, on the chaotic side…

Pathfinder Bestiary Entries for various types of Azatas, including the Lillend (Muse Azata) and Ghaele (Crusader Azata). Featuring illustrations of the Lillend and Ghaele.

Illustration by Raph Lomotan

Azatas each represent a freedom. Ghaeles stand for the freedom to bear arms against oppression, and they’re energy form and energy focus have a revamp to fit their concept and be a bit more interesting; take a look! Lillends are the embodiment of freedom of expression and a great summon for a party looking for a quick bard. Plus, they are a great choice for your bard’s muse. The other great option? Take a look at the nymph!

Pathfinder Bestiary Entries for various types of Nymphs, including the Naiad Queen and Dryad Queen. Featuring an illustrations of the Dryad Queen.

Illustrations by Emile Denis

The nymph entry gives you not only low-level nymph allies like the naiad or dryad, but also tools to build powerful nymph queens like Myriana or Svevanka from Rise of the Runelords or Nyrissa from Kingmaker, with special rules for being a bard’s muse! This should make the entries for classic nymphs like the lampad much more interesting—note the intriguing and new-to-Pathfinder hesperides mentioned in the sidebar as well!

To close off, a personal note: I’m most of the way through book five of the War for the Crown Adventure Path, which I’m running in Second Edition. GMing it has been a joy; preparing and running have been much easier than when I ran Jade Regent or Rise of the Runelords in First Edition, even including the effort of converting the adventure. Other Paizo community members running in the playtest have noted this as well, including community member Ediwir, who is running War for the Crown in both First Edition and the playtest at the same time to compare. If you’ve ever wanted to GM Pathfinder before but it just looked daunting, Second Edition is the perfect time to give it a shot! You’ll have all these tools at your fingertips to make life easier, and everyone’s starting out too, so there will be tons of community support and goodwill, as well as more than a little patience for mistakes. I hope you’ll join me and give running a game a shot. If you do, what are you most excited to run first? The Age of Ashes Adventure Path? The Fall of Plaguestone? Pathfinder Society adventures? Something special you’re brewing up at home? Let me know in the comments below!

Mark Seifter
Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Pathfinder Second Edition
101 to 150 of 348 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
User69 wrote:
Waiting for the US to convert to the International System of Units (SI) like the rest of the world, I hope all this can be useful to you.

That will never happen.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Zaister wrote:
User69 wrote:
Waiting for the US to convert to the International System of Units (SI) like the rest of the world, I hope all this can be useful to you.
That will never happen.

Unfortunately. More likely to collapse and be re-founded.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zaister wrote:
User69 wrote:
Waiting for the US to convert to the International System of Units (SI) like the rest of the world, I hope all this can be useful to you.
That will never happen.

I mean, I find it unlikely to happen, but never say never. Weirder things happen all the time. Rest of the world did convert to it so its not like its impossible, just feels like it.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

But... but... but... then we'd all need to measure our TVs and monitors in cm rather than inches. Ahh, television, the only place that imperial still holds sway all around the world.

As for how big a square should be. My vote is 1/11th of a chain. That's a nice easy number to remember and work with. Gives a bit more space for those overweight dwarves to stand in too.


For those who are interested in why the U.S. didn't pick up the metric system along with the rest of the world (and a number of other interesting things) I recommend the GM Word of the Week episode "Ten-foot Pole".

It's a good listen.


For the Gogiteth, when it uses it’s Skittering Assault, are each of the leg strikes free for each stride or do they use an action?
Do they each count towards the multiple attack penalties?
Example: Gogiteth Moves in and bites PC 1, and succeeds in grappling them. Gogiteth Uses Skittering Assault to move three strides. During the 1st stride attacks PC 2. Gogiteth Then runs away, munching on PC 1 along the way.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
likrin wrote:

For the Gogiteth, when it uses it’s Skittering Assault, are each of the leg strikes free for each stride or do they use an action?

Do they each count towards the multiple attack penalties?
Example: Gogiteth Moves in and bites PC 1, and succeeds in grappling them. Gogiteth Uses Skittering Assault to move three strides. During the 1st stride attacks PC 2. Gogiteth Then runs away, munching on PC 1 along the way.

All the striding and all attacks made during that is included in the 2-action cost of that ability. So no additional actions needed.

And MAP is only counted up after the whole ability is done. So all attacks during the Skittering Assault are made at the MAP when the ability started. If it is the first thing the Gogiteth does that round, all attacks are made without MAP.


It's Sir Owlbear to u wrote:


Now THIS is the main reason I'm coming to PF2e after years of dismissing 1e and playing mostly D&D: the monsters! While many people have come - primarily - for the tools that this new edition has for players I fell in love with the way creatures are presented, by only reading a creture's stat blocks you already know its history and place in the world (and also how cool they are to throw at your players). Of course I'm excited to let my players customize, with an obscene amount of possibilities, their characters to their heart's content and the 3 action system is AMAZING, but "monsters" and magic items are what gets me going while being a DM.

Can't wait to get the books next week!

I placed a preorder for the books last month, but it appears it's on backorder now. Is it possible to find out if it will be shipped before GenCon? If not, I'd rather just pick it up there so I can have it by the time I play PFS2


8 people marked this as a favorite.

Love this blog post, Mark!

First off, the art is wonderful. Amiri & Lini fighting the gnolls are already good, but the Bestiary pics are freakin' great!

Love the section on adjudicating the rules, will definitely print it and keep it next to me at all time!

I'm Italian, so I'm among the many who would've liked temperatures in Celsius, but still, this is a quick conversion:

Incredible cold -62°C or less
Extreme cold -29°C to -61°C
Severe cold -11°C to -28°C
Mild cold 0°C to -10°C
Normal 1°C to 34°C
Mild heat 35°C to 40°C
Severe heat 41°C to 45°C
Extreme heat 46°C to 59°C
Incredible heat 60+ °C

I'll write it on a post-it and stick it onto that part of the page ;)

Table 10-5 is something else I'll want to print and keep handy, but 10-4 is still the best idea since hot water and I love it.

I love the skeletons abilities and advice for creating more. I also bet the large one is a minotaur's...

Gogiteths sound like a heap of skittering bad news... would love to try them on for size...

Gremlins are fantastic. A little surprised by how hard these damn things can hurt you - even with low str, a tiny gremlin can deal a decent amount of damage... also, damn they fight well!

Archons are fantastic too, but I'm wondering - if archons represent virtues and azatas freedoms, what about angels? And also agathions? And then one remembers garudas and peri too, it'd be interesting to know what a garuda conceptually represents, if anything...

Love that lillends and nymphs are specifically called out as typical bardic muses, although I would have liked one of those pretty chicks to be a pretty boy instead ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I do appreciate that goodly creatures are detailed in their behaviors and possible interactions with people anyways, that's always a blast for me.

The foreshadowing for more types of nymphs is also very welcome! Lampads and Hesperides would be great. Heleionomai too (wetlands and marshes) but honestly there's a clusterf&$@ of cool nymphs you could come up with.

So it appears naiads are made of flesh and water, and dryads of flesh and wood... that's pretty cool. Or am I getting the wrong impression? Perhaps they're all water, all wood?

Personally I'm starting off running Age of Ashes as soon as I have the necessary books, the group is ready, almost no problems, we will still have to wait to actually get into the thick of things because August is vacation-time as always here, but after that I'll unleash such horrors on their unsuspecting minds (bwah-hah-hah).

Speaking of horrors, I'll also convert Wrath of the Righteous, and I'll post a thread when I'm starting that job, to ask all you fine folks how to better simulate mythic levels in a balanced way (that's the real catch!) - and since I can't just take it easy, I'll also convert RotR for a pet project of mine. I'm gonna read your WftC thread, Mark, and Captain Morgan's Ironfang. If anyone else plans on converting, or has already done so, do let me know! I'll need to remake npcs, unstatted monsters, magic items, I'll need to calculate the right amount of experience to toss around... I'm gonna start a thread or two anyways, so it's not something I'm needing exactly right now. Later on.

Again, fantastic post, my hype is reaching critical mass, all my friends know of this beautiful new take on the game (and we friggin' love the setting), and personally THANKS MARK because waiting for the book to ship is taking its toll and this helped a lot XD

Love everyone,

XOXO
Ros-


no good scallywag wrote:
It's Sir Owlbear to u wrote:


Now THIS is the main reason I'm coming to PF2e after years of dismissing 1e and playing mostly D&D: the monsters! While many people have come - primarily - for the tools that this new edition has for players I fell in love with the way creatures are presented, by only reading a creture's stat blocks you already know its history and place in the world (and also how cool they are to throw at your players). Of course I'm excited to let my players customize, with an obscene amount of possibilities, their characters to their heart's content and the 3 action system is AMAZING, but "monsters" and magic items are what gets me going while being a DM.

Can't wait to get the books next week!

I placed a preorder for the books last month, but it appears it's on backorder now. Is it possible to find out if it will be shipped before GenCon? If not, I'd rather just pick it up there so I can have it by the time I play PFS2

The setting book (I forget the name) releases on august 12th, that could be what's pushing back the package, you may be able to contact customer support and have them shipped separately.


13 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I live in Arizona and can confirm that 116 degrees does minor fire damage every ten minutes.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh wow. When I read about Bards having Muses I was thinking it would be a more abstract concept but to see Nymphs giving out actual bonuses for Bards who use them as Muses is getting me extremely excited to see what other possible Muses are waiting in the bestiary.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Pathfinder 2: Adding important charts that can't be easily memorized formulaically. Those DCs by level/Spell DCs... sure, there might be an underlying formula, but it's not easily grok-able. Pathfinder was nice in that the vast majority of things could be easily memorized because they were formulaic and steady. This is turning it into a chart-reference type game. Which is a bad thing.

As for the discussions on units: PF2 would have been a great time to replace combat distances with squares (one of the few things "Big Name 4e" did well) instead of 5'. There'd still be the conversion issue for big jumps and climbs and whatnot, but it'd simplify a lot of things.

Githzilla wrote:
My favorite of the bullet points is the reminder that only make one roll for opposed actions. Roll against a DC instead of opposed is great.

I felt the opposite. I liked the list except that. Opposed rolling is the meat and potatoes of playing RPGs!

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
emky wrote:
Pathfinder 2: Adding important charts that can't be easily memorized formulaically.

The temperature and monster identification system was used in 1st as well.

As for the DC charts to help GMs, you're not supposed to memorize them really, they're there to help when making stuff.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Telling us which skills identify a monster was added "by playtester demand"? How was it supposed to function at all without that?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Voss wrote:
It claims 'most skeletons have one of these abilities' (which seems rather extreme, to be honest). Yet none of them do. Should they just be assigned one for free without adjusting their level?

Yes, but you don't have to add one. Or you could add more than one and make a higher-level skeleton.

Voss wrote:
Skeleton Guards are 'Creature -1.' The rest are just Creature X. What does -1 mean in this context?

It's the new CR 1/2 - CR 3/4. Instead of fractional CRs, the developers have chosen to use CR -1 to represent creatures that are weaker than a level 1 PC.

Voss wrote:
Why do skeletal giants have horns? Let alone agile horns with a bigger die type?

Maybe it's a minotaur skeleton?

Voss wrote:
They are mindless [though the champion seems not to be, given the higher int score and languages, and lack of the mindless tag), but evil because they're about creation? What do skeletons create? Evilly create? Why is this evil at all?

The creation of a skeleton is evil, because using negative energy to create instead of destroy is a perversion of the natural order.

Voss wrote:

The 'Creating Skeletons' side bar seems unfinished. Start with size, add strikes, speed or other shape related abilities and... that's it?

How are level, stats, skills, saves, AC and HP assigned? I'm assuming it would get the same laundry list of immunities and resistances, but that's extrapolation.

The skeleton statblocks listed are all different size categories. So you start with the base skeleton that's the right size/level, and switch out its attacks and special abilities to customize it as needed. I think I saw Mark Seifter say somewhere that the monster creation rules will be in a later book.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Telling us which skills identify a monster was added "by playtester demand"? How was it supposed to function at all without that?

The GM would suggest whichever one(s) was appropriate.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Eoni wrote:
Oh wow. When I read about Bards having Muses I was thinking it would be a more abstract concept but to see Nymphs giving out actual bonuses for Bards who use them as Muses is getting me extremely excited to see what other possible Muses are waiting in the bestiary.

I remember writing in a survey (or was it on the forum) that a muse should be a person (possibly an imaginary one), not some abstraction. Very happy to see it happening!


awesome post, cant wait for 2e era to start!

I will be GMing Rise of the Runelords in 2e and converting starfinder to 2e -
-I mean... why the hell not ? ;-)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I am not a big fan of the Ghaele Azata picture, besides that: AWESOME! :D

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Seisho wrote:
I am not a big fan of the Ghaele Azata picture, besides that: AWESOME! :D

I like the cape and the eyes, but otherwise it does seem kinda "too" down to earth rather than a Celestial.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

My biggest issue with the art is the legion archon's weapon being cut off. I wanna see it :(

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Telling us which skills identify a monster was added "by playtester demand"? How was it supposed to function at all without that?
The GM would suggest whichever one(s) was appropriate.

...that's horrible. I can't imagine PFS play doing well without that as a rule, at that point the skills lost half their value. Beyond society, consistent play is my biggest draw from pathfinder and internationally leaving such a big part of the game undefined in the new edition would be a big strike.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Telling us which skills identify a monster was added "by playtester demand"? How was it supposed to function at all without that?
The GM would suggest whichever one(s) was appropriate.
...that's horrible. I can't imagine PFS play doing well without that as a rule, at that point the skills lost half their value. Beyond society, consistent play is my biggest draw from pathfinder and internationally leaving such a big part of the game undefined in the new edition would be a big strike.

I enjoyed it, specially because of how different all the monsters are so it makes sense for more than one Knowledge Skill to able to identify them.

As for PFS, that's what Campaign Clarifications are for.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

@Mark Seifter, I been very excited about the changes coming to PF in PF2. Thanx for all the hard work in bringing this to life.

Though I am rather disappointed with one thing, which happens to be in your post above. In this day and age, why is temperatures is listed only in the broken antiquated F scale? Considering almost entire world is already on degrees Celcius scale, with even the USA is rapidly changing to using Celcius (many news channels already have both F and Celcius scales displayed on weather maps).

From the Table 10-13 Temperature Effects above, there is clearly enough space to also include the Celcius scale. This would cater for rest of the world outside USA that know nothing of the F scale.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
DarkOne the Drow wrote:
In this day and age, why is temperatures is listed only in the broken antiquated F scale?

That's not really doing your argument any favors since, Pathfinder is made in the US which predominantly uses F. It's also an aesthetic thing, since as pointed out no one brings up switching feet with meters.

Not to say having them both would be bad though.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Telling us which skills identify a monster was added "by playtester demand"? How was it supposed to function at all without that?
The GM would suggest whichever one(s) was appropriate.
...that's horrible. I can't imagine PFS play doing well without that as a rule, at that point the skills lost half their value. Beyond society, consistent play is my biggest draw from pathfinder and internationally leaving such a big part of the game undefined in the new edition would be a big strike.

I think it would work quite well as you just ask "what knowledges do you have? Roll that one then". Rather than having to have a party that covers every possibility.

That's what I do now with undefined knowledge rolls in 1E. And if no knowledges sound relevant, I tell them 'sorry, your character doesn't know'.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0U-XEmKPKg

This video is very informative on the US and metric system.
It is very surprising.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

The Fahrenheit and Celsius thing, the conversion is really gibberish, but the thing is we never thought about what temperature it exactly is. Adventurers don't go out with thermometers and check, they care if it's Severe Heat or Extreme Cold, so we used that jargon rather than the exact temperature.

Grand Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

That's probably the best. Throw out the numbers and just use conditions.

"how hot out is it?"
"severe heat"

Scarab Sages

Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Telling us which skills identify a monster was added "by playtester demand"? How was it supposed to function at all without that?
The GM would suggest whichever one(s) was appropriate.
...that's horrible. I can't imagine PFS play doing well without that as a rule, at that point the skills lost half their value. Beyond society, consistent play is my biggest draw from pathfinder and internationally leaving such a big part of the game undefined in the new edition would be a big strike.

I enjoyed it, specially because of how different all the monsters are so it makes sense for more than one Knowledge Skill to able to identify them.

As for PFS, that's what Campaign Clarifications are for.

A base function of the game should be in the core book, not campaign clarifications. And if multiple apply, they definitely should! Either in the bestiary entry or like in the table (like constructs). In 1E knowledge checks to ID monsters is one of the bigger things I have GM variance on, and I hate that so much. I'm glad the table is in, and I hope how to dole out info is codified as well or it's not an improvement over 1E.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
DarkOne the Drow wrote:
In this day and age, why is temperatures is listed only in the broken antiquated F scale?

That's not really doing your argument any favors since, Pathfinder is made in the US which predominantly uses F. It's also an aesthetic thing, since as pointed out no one brings up switching feet with meters.

Not to say having them both would be bad though.

That is one of reasons I like Monte Cook's cypher system's games, they include both metrics for pretty much everything (also why I'm skeptical about it taking too much space to include them considering I've seen it in practice and it really doesn't)

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I like that a celestial beast is going to have three skills that could identify it.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Just so we can move beyond all of the unit conversion math:

-80 F -> -62 C
Incredible Cold is anything less than -62 C.
-20 F -> -30 C
Extreme Cold is between -30 and -62 C.
12 F -> -11 C
Severe Cold is between -11 and -30 C.
32 F -> 0 C
Mild Cold is between 0 and -11 C.
94 F -> 34 C
Normal temperatures are between 0 and 34 C.
104 F -> 40 C
Mild heat is between 34 and 40 C.
114 F -> 46 C
Severe heat is between 40 and 46 C.
140 F -> 60 C
Extreme heat is between 46 and 60 C.

Incredible heat is anything above 60 C.

Scarab Sages

TriOmegaZero wrote:
I like that a celestial beast is going to have three skills that could identify it.

Add do I, I just need to see how much info we get from a check now.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Telling us which skills identify a monster was added "by playtester demand"? How was it supposed to function at all without that?
The GM would suggest whichever one(s) was appropriate.
...that's horrible. I can't imagine PFS play doing well without that as a rule, at that point the skills lost half their value. Beyond society, consistent play is my biggest draw from pathfinder and internationally leaving such a big part of the game undefined in the new edition would be a big strike.

I enjoyed it, specially because of how different all the monsters are so it makes sense for more than one Knowledge Skill to able to identify them.

As for PFS, that's what Campaign Clarifications are for.

A base function of the game should be in the core book, not campaign clarifications.
Specialized houserules enforcing something is not a base function, letting the GM have some control over how their game progresses and how they present it to their players is.
Quote:
And if multiple apply, they definitely should! Either in the bestiary entry or like in the table (like constructs). In 1E knowledge checks to ID monsters is one of the bigger things I have GM variance on, and I hate that so much. I'm glad the table is in, and I hope how to dole out info is codified as well or it's not an improvement over 1E.

What you see as a flaw I see as a boon, I miss having the various DCs for monsters to learn different stuff that 3rd editon had.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
emky wrote:
Pathfinder 2: Adding important charts that can't be easily memorized formulaically.

The temperature and monster identification system was used in 1st as well.

As for the DC charts to help GMs, you're not supposed to memorize them really, they're there to help when making stuff.

This, and also a quick glance of the chart showed me it's a really easy pattern. It starts at DC 14 for level 0, and then it goes up in a "1,1,2" pattern all the way to 20. You memorize those two things (and for a shortcut, every 3 levels above 0 is +4 DC) and you can easily grab any level DC. Much easier to remember than the PT table, and that's as someone who didn't mind that table.

Scarab Sages

Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Telling us which skills identify a monster was added "by playtester demand"? How was it supposed to function at all without that?
The GM would suggest whichever one(s) was appropriate.
...that's horrible. I can't imagine PFS play doing well without that as a rule, at that point the skills lost half their value. Beyond society, consistent play is my biggest draw from pathfinder and internationally leaving such a big part of the game undefined in the new edition would be a big strike.

I enjoyed it, specially because of how different all the monsters are so it makes sense for more than one Knowledge Skill to able to identify them.

As for PFS, that's what Campaign Clarifications are for.

A base function of the game should be in the core book, not campaign clarifications.
Specialized houserules enforcing something is not a base function, letting the GM have some control over how their game progresses and how they present it to their players is.
Quote:
And if multiple apply, they definitely should! Either in the bestiary entry or like in the table (like constructs). In 1E knowledge checks to ID monsters is one of the bigger things I have GM variance on, and I hate that so much. I'm glad the table is in, and I hope how to dole out info is codified as well or it's not an improvement over 1E.
What you see as a flaw I see as a boon, I miss having the various DCs for monsters to learn different stuff that 3rd editon had.

Various DCs are fine, if they're consistent and codified.

And what are you on about with "specialized house rules"? If it's in the core book it's just the rules.

Liberty's Edge

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Telling us which skills identify a monster was added "by playtester demand"? How was it supposed to function at all without that?
The GM would suggest whichever one(s) was appropriate.
...that's horrible. I can't imagine PFS play doing well without that as a rule, at that point the skills lost half their value. Beyond society, consistent play is my biggest draw from pathfinder and internationally leaving such a big part of the game undefined in the new edition would be a big strike.

This would be the playtester demand Mark was talking about. Something I was definitely one voice among many asking for.

My issue with having no such guidelines has nothing to do with PFS and everything to do with the fact that I don't want to have to ask every GM I ever play with individually what all the skills do, and which I should take to know about X, and then hope and pray they remember what they say and handle it consistently.

And, as a GM who values consistency, I don't want to have to keep track of what skills I said were usable for what creatures twenty sessions ago.

Baseline character knowledge should not be susceptible to that degree of table variation, nor do GMs need the extra cognitive load. But most importantly, it's easy to ignore the table if you want to...it's much harder to have a consistent basis if there is no table to start with. The value of having the table is that it provides that consistency and can be house ruled away. No house ruled in table will ever provide the needed consistency.

So even if 75% of people house ruled the table out, it would still be a huge quality of life improvement for the other 25% and cost those 75% basically nothing.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Various DCs are fine, if they're consistent and codified.
They are.
Angel Hunter D wrote:
And what are you on about with "specialized house rules"? If it's in the core book it's just the rules.
?
Angel Hunter D wrote:
A base function of the game should be in the core book, not campaign clarifications

The original iteration, the openness for the GM to decide, was the base function, not an accident or oversight by the Designers.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Telling us which skills identify a monster was added "by playtester demand"? How was it supposed to function at all without that?
The GM would suggest whichever one(s) was appropriate.
...that's horrible. I can't imagine PFS play doing well without that as a rule, at that point the skills lost half their value. Beyond society, consistent play is my biggest draw from pathfinder and internationally leaving such a big part of the game undefined in the new edition would be a big strike.

This would be the playtester demand Mark was talking about. Something I was definitely one voice among many asking for.

My issue with having no such guidelines has nothing to do with PFS and everything to do with the fact that I don't want to have to ask every GM I ever play with individually what all the skills do, and which I should take to know about X, and then hope and pray they remember what they say and handle it consistently.

And, as a GM who values consistency, I don't want to have to keep track of what skills I said were usable for what creatures twenty sessions ago.

Baseline character knowledge should not be susceptible to that degree of table variation, nor do GMs need the extra cognitive load. But most importantly, it's easy to ignore the table if you want to...it's much harder to have a consistent basis if there is no table to start with. The value of having the table is that it provides that consistency and can be house ruled away. No house ruled in table will ever provide the needed consistency.

So even if 75% of people house ruled the table out, it would still be a huge quality of life improvement for the other 25% and cost those 75% basically nothing.

Which is basically something I already do, which is why I liked the playtest, I allow different knowledges to identify creatures if it suits them.

Dark Archive

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Heh, having lived most of my life close to the Arctic Circle I'd say that -11 C or even -20 C is hardly "severe cold" in my books. Then again I *love* cold, and +20-25 C is severe heat for me. :)

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Asgetrion wrote:
Heh, having lived most of my life close to the Arctic Circle I'd say that -11 C or even -20 C is hardly "severe cold" in my books. Then again I *love* cold, and +20-25 C is severe heat for me. :)

Same, aside from having lived near the bear circle.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Various DCs are fine, if they're consistent and codified.
They are.
Angel Hunter D wrote:
And what are you on about with "specialized house rules"? If it's in the core book it's just the rules.
?
Angel Hunter D wrote:
A base function of the game should be in the core book, not campaign clarifications
The original iteration, the openness for the GM to decide, was the base function, not an accident or oversight by the Designers.

It was either an oversight, or terrible design. No function is not a function.

And just because you're consistent with it, doesn't mean anyone else would run it like you do. You being able to handle something doesn't make it good or functional - just usable, for you.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Asgetrion wrote:
Heh, having lived most of my life close to the Arctic Circle I'd say that -11 C or even -20 C is hardly "severe cold" in my books. Then again I *love* cold, and +20-25 C is severe heat for me. :)

I also live somewhere where temperatures way below -11 C are fairly commonplace, and I'm willing to bet that the table only seems goofy when it's presented out of context like this.

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that wearing appropriate winter gear will allow you to ignore the effects of "severe cold". Imagine going outside in -11 C in a t-shirt and jeans and attempting to hike through the wilderness for several hours at a stretch. It might get a bit uncomfortable.

Scarab Sages

Deadmanwalking wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Telling us which skills identify a monster was added "by playtester demand"? How was it supposed to function at all without that?
The GM would suggest whichever one(s) was appropriate.
...that's horrible. I can't imagine PFS play doing well without that as a rule, at that point the skills lost half their value. Beyond society, consistent play is my biggest draw from pathfinder and internationally leaving such a big part of the game undefined in the new edition would be a big strike.

This would be the playtester demand Mark was talking about. Something I was definitely one voice among many asking for.

My issue with having no such guidelines has nothing to do with PFS and everything to do with the fact that I don't want to have to ask every GM I ever play with individually what all the skills do, and which I should take to know about X, and then hope and pray they remember what they say and handle it consistently.

And, as a GM who values consistency, I don't want to have to keep track of what skills I said were usable for what creatures twenty sessions ago.

Baseline character knowledge should not be susceptible to that degree of table variation, nor do GMs need the extra cognitive load. But most importantly, it's easy to ignore the table if you want to...it's much harder to have a consistent basis if there is no table to start with. The value of having the table is that it provides that consistency and can be house ruled away. No house ruled in table will ever provide the needed consistency.

So even if 75% of people house ruled the table out, it would still be a huge quality of life improvement for the other 25% and cost those 75% basically nothing.

You might not do society, but that's the big issue society needs to address. Thanks for your efforts on this.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Various DCs are fine, if they're consistent and codified.
They are.
Angel Hunter D wrote:
And what are you on about with "specialized house rules"? If it's in the core book it's just the rules.
?
Angel Hunter D wrote:
A base function of the game should be in the core book, not campaign clarifications
The original iteration, the openness for the GM to decide, was the base function, not an accident or oversight by the Designers.

It was either an oversight, or terrible design. No function is not a function.

And just because you're consistent with it, doesn't mean anyone else would run it like you do. You being able to handle something doesn't make it good or functional - just usable, for you.

We disagree, openness applied correctly is a good design.

The DCs are consistent, the only thing that would change from GM to GM would be what types of Knowledge skills are used (in a setting like PFS it wouldn't, Campaign Clarifications or the gUide would have exacts to avoid table variance). Note I'm not heartbroken over the design ruling and I'm not advocating for it to be changed or its somehow wrong now. I will continue using it like I had been.

Dark Archive

5 people marked this as a favorite.

As for the blog, it is AMAZING! It makes me really excited about 2E, maybe almost as much as Oblivion Oath. I love those monsters, and Sweet Asmodeus, the new action system is implemented in their abilities PERFECTLY! Finally monsters can keep on constricting their victims round after round, instead of the silly 3E 'grab + constrict + release + grab....(repeat ad nauseaum)' routine. If there was one thing I really wanted to get from 4E mechanics, it was more exciting and evocative monster abilities. This is *exactly* what this fiendish dwarf wanted, hah! These are all well-designed monsters with fitting, evocative and flavorful abilities! :D

And while the art is truly beautiful, I do have a minor issue with the layout; I might have preferred the monster name and level to be on a colored background/"bar" (just as in 1E), and the traits would have been easier to read and (IMO) looked better if they weren't on a colored background (that mauve/orange-ish color behind trait boxes makes them all look even hazier, at least in my eyes). But this is a very minor issue for me.

Mark, Logan, Stephen, Jason and all the others... you guys have done a fantastic work on 2E! Bravo!

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm actually so excited that I want to dance... the Dwarven Nekkid Beard Dance (TM)! ;P


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Asgetrion wrote:
Heh, having lived most of my life close to the Arctic Circle I'd say that -11 C or even -20 C is hardly "severe cold" in my books. Then again I *love* cold, and +20-25 C is severe heat for me. :)

Well, I think a person like you would probably have an Arctic Heritage, don't you think? And while we only got those for goblins and elves in the Playtest, I feel like we can safely assume humans are going to get them too as the most adaptable and versatile ancestry.

101 to 150 of 348 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Paizo Blog: Mastering Pathfinder All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.