Alchemic_Genius's page

I really wished paizo would start caring about giving us more utility options in the playtest phase. It's really hard to give data about how fun a class is when all we're given is a basic suite of combat abilities which are mostly damage focused.

Like, the rune of binding is incredibly cool; but it's also, like, level 17. I also really like the rune of sorrow. Make no mistake, I think the blasty Runes are fun and important too; but I'm not a fan that blasting is one of the few things a low level runesmith can do

Howl of the wild introduced grafts for unarmed attacks, and and shield bosses/spiked shields are only one die size smaller than the highest damage 1h weapon.

Not having a 2h option is almost certainly intentional; you get some pretty high damage spikes through invoked rune blasting; and that says nothing to the potential damage you're dealing through ally buffing.

So does this mean that if I'm legendary in deception, but master in ranged weapons, I can use the card gun at legendary?

I'm also confused on how this works with the singing coil, which uses a class DC

I almost always pick an interaction skill between Diplomacy, Deception, or Intimidate, but aside from that, not really. Every skill except crarfting or performance is interesting and nice on almost every class; and the classes that do use crafting or performance can use those skills in interesting ways.

For me, the issue is often more a metagame one; where I kinda get soft locked into a specific wedge of roles because the other ones are more popular. In my case, I don't get to play melee characters much because support isn't as popular and melee is VERY popular (though, to be fair, I'm less interested in big damage and more into playing an athletics user).

I really like the direction these seem to be going! I think the way these choose to play with the class mechanics should still hit the vibe, while still feeling like a pf2 class. I was actually a bit shocked to see slayer reprosed since the precision ranger has the whole "mark a target for death, then hurt them really well" shtick, but I like the holy assassin angle a lot.

Now, I know why Inquisitor had a name change (and imo it's a good reason), but I also just want to throw a little thanks for the specific use of Vindicator. I know it seems a lot of people either forgot or aren't aware of the Holy Vindicator prestige class, but it was one of my faves, and with the warpriest basically getting all of its cool stuff, it's neat to see the name live on, too! Also a class archetype is a pretty good analog for a prestige class!

OP has not had to explain how to open up a pdf and it shows :p jkjk

In all honesty though, I don't mind computers not being on everyone. Untrained means that it might take a half an hour or so to find an accurate source for a fact you were looking to find, or a few hours to do intensive research on a subject assuming you're using a Simple DC; which is about accurate. Imo, you really shouldn't be expected or able to do better than that without training, and it's not super hard to get trained skill in pf2/sf2

Like said above, piloting and computers arent needed for mundane operations, amd professionals get by on a lore skill just fine

I don't know if I'm neurodivergent, though I do play with many neurodivergent players. I know overall they they've responded well to neurodivergent coded ancestries (skittermanders and gnomes are popular with my adhd players), and I'll be honest, I didn't actually read the witchwarper as inherently neurodivergent until after reading the sidebar.

I actually really like the current coding because it does kinda "force" people into thinking about their character's mental health. The anchors in that class all describe various grounding techniques, and quite frankly, grounding is something even neurotypical people practice. Therapy and mental health awareness aren't just for people with autism or adhd.

For some non neurodivergent flavors on each anchor:

Core Memories: anything your character feels strongly or nostalgically for, like memories of home. It can also be an oath you swore; if your character is part of a military, it might be what you recited when you took the uniform, if you are part of an organization like the space Firebrands, it would be the moment you declared yourself publicly, etc.

Focal Point: if we peel away the hypeefocus/special interest flavor in the front, every listed example in the book are applicable to every person; you dont need to be ND to have a hobby you love! Another somewhat tropey example is advising a character suffering stage fright to imagine the audience in their underwear or in an otherwise silly state to defuse the tension.

Tangible Object: you know all those war movies where someone touches a locket of photo of a loved one? Yup, you bet that counts. Also people clutching holy symbols, making warding gestures, etc

Tracking adds to class DC, so even someone who has master class DC max is more accurate than a legendary spellcaster; the soldier blows them out of the water (and has con as a KAS to boot).

My biggest issue with it honestly is that casters don't actually improve class DC and are thus hard locked from using Area weapons at all after a certain point; which I feel is a big deal since the elemental mystic's first focus spell is "summon gun" and the flamethrower or singing coil to shoot a big blast of element feel like cooler picks than a regular ol gun if your thing is channeling elements.

Tbh, a galactic scale is the only time an ancestral language even remotely makes sense (but only in the cases where one culture; such as the vesk; took over the whole planet and went on to subjegate others).

That said, I'm pretty sure both pf and sf mention you can take languages that are common where you were raised. Inwould definitely prefer though if the bespoke lists were more like "most lashunta interact with these languages the most" or even better, having a list of regions with a collection of languages, edicts, and anathema similar to dieties

Kinda weird considering the one of the mystic's focus spells is "summon gun"

To reiterate (again), I'm not arguing that they should have a bonus to cha.

What I am saying is that in starfinder, mechanically, mediation is two skills; perception to Sense Motive as you listen to the parties discuss the matter, and Request to get them to agree to a resolution (and also to make someone stop bickering when things get heated).

Request is a Diplomacy skill action, which is keyed to the charisma stat. A mediator that can accurately identity a problem, but not get people to agree on a solution, is not really a good mediator.

More to the point, it's rather obvious that Diplomacy, as in the skill, is supposed to be important given that the skills granted by Shirren Lore are Society and Diplomacy (along with Additional Lore for Shirren Lore).

+con/wis/free, -cha *is* a good spread to cover the story of being recently freed from an all consuming swarm, it's just bizarre to prop them up as being good mediators when the stats say otherwise. It wouldn't so much be an issue if the text read "expect you to find a peaceful solution to a problem before turning to violence" instead of the bit about conflict resolution

How does the Professional trait interact with Area Fire? The professional trait lists a cap of up to your simple weapon proficiency, but Area Fire goes off of class DC, which is a seperate value from weapon proficiency.

Two scenerios where this gets a little weird:

A Rythem Mystic takes a Singing Coil because dope flavor. Is it supposed to be intended for them to be able to "cheat" around only getting trained class DC (since they can go up to expert in simple weapons), or is it intended to cap out at the class DC (in which case, sad mystic noises)

Conversely, a soldier only goes up to master proficiency in weapons, but Legendary class DC. Do they just suck more with the singing coil than any other area weapon, or are they supposed to be just as good with them as any other area weapon?

Equating Charisma to diplomacy is flat out wrong.

I didn't equate the two, but Diplomacy is a cha skill. Like I said earlier, I don't think they need a boost to cha (imo, a high wis already gets the "calm mediator" idea across already), but a penalty actively hinders the story they are supposed to be shooting for

But writing that others probably actively look to you for conflict resolution, and that a popular edict for you is seeking peaceful resolution for problems, and then giving you a penalty towards the skill that would make people listen to said solutions is like saying that a class is good at throwing bombs and then only giving them expert proficiency in said bombs they are supposed to be good with

Reading the feat, you spend an action to give you allies the ability to make an extra Transfer action or reaction, but as far as I can tell, every action and reaction with the Transfer trait are only usable by the mystic themselves

Is this feat just here to help out other mystics, or am I missing something?

That's a good point why does the natural diplomats take a -1 to Charisma that just seems silly. I mean that is why there is the +2 Free Boosts I suppose? However that's a little bit like cheating or just bypassing the Ancestry's natural attribute scores/modifiers.

Oh absolutely. I dont mind taking the 2 free boosts, but I'm very strongly in the camp that the mechanics should support the flavor, and the flavor talks a lot about communally minded individualists that like to work out problems together.

It would be one think if there a way to Make an Impression and Request using wis to kinda go with the "yeah they look creepy and talk in your head, but Chk Chk is wise and fair, we should them out

They are good with words, but many people probably look at bug face and go, "Eeeugh"

But on a more serious note, with three boosts comes a flaw. The only flaws that would really make sense for a Shirren based on their lore are Strength or Charisma. Guess the devs when they drafted the Shirrens in SF1E they figured Charisma would work better between the two.

As for tricks, you're not required to take their stat spread, as you can swap it for two free boosts.

The entry says that other probably seek you out to mediate conflict; which while not necessarily implying a boost to cha, definitely implies that it's not your dump stat

As someone who regularly uses potions, it's wild to me to see so many people claiming that being able to effectively draw 2 potions for one action to be useless.

Even that use alone would make me want to use multiarmed ancestries

The book describes the Shirren as being natural diplomats and mediators, but their stat spread makes quite bad at it!

Is this intended, or is there some trick I'm missing?

Is the Barathu's Manifold Evolution supposed to give 17th level ancestry feats, or 13th level?

Getting two 17th level feats for a 17th level feat seems kinda wild

So can versatile vials be used for their alternate function without quick alchemy first? If I'm playing a toxicologist, does that mean I can use a VV directly from my stash to poison an attack and then make a strike?

If so, that changes my mind quite of bit on them from what I saw on the YT vids that seemed to imply that you had to QA the item and them apply it and then strike

One thing to keep in mind is that the feat that lets you move with the swarm basically turns sustaining it into an action thats locked into moving rather than a tax, and that theres another feat that gives every ally and yourself lesser cover inside the swarm, which also turns it into functionally an AoE Parry.

As others have stated above, the damage of 2 actions is roughly analogous to a cantrip, but the additional upgrade feats also add on save targeting and/or status conditions or area control effects. Two actions to fling out nearly garanteed damage and another to do a MAPless strike or one action activity isn't the worst way to spend your turn, especially since you aren't spending resources to do it, and you are also supporting your team in the process.

Bravado seems pretty neat; not sure I like it over juat changing panache, but I'd have to see what got it before I draw too many opinions one way or the other.

The feat seems very... okay. I feel like the real benefit is ignoring the range increments for 2nd and 3rd. If I'm playing a flying blade, I feel like I'm either packing Quick Draw and a Thrower's Bandolier or just etching a returning rune onto my weapon.

Really excited to see Dirty Trick capitalized; I made an NPC kraken caller druid who was an absolute menace to the PCs, and her specialty was Dirty Tricks. The party HATED seeing her, but also thought she was really cool. I'm guessing its a swashbuckler feat that applies debuffs rather than returning as a "combat maneuver", but is nevertheless exciting

Just a note on the shield thing; while I do think that Shields Up should apply to the shield cantrip, any class can use a shield, and I'd actually argue it's the most universal option.

It's not hard for caster to use a a shield. The only people is left out is 2h combatants and bow/2h gun users, but like, when you take up a greatsword or whatever, you're making an active choice to not use a shield in exchange for more damage. At least in my tables, people generally use shields unless there's something specific they are going for, even if they aren't packing shield block, since getting +2 ac is a nice way to use a filler action

Alchemic_Genius wrote:

But I also find it really odd that for a class that breaks the norm in being a non caster and having a Legendary DC, but only has 4 instances where that DC is actually applied (critical hit specialization, stupifying charge, intimidating charge, and executioner's volley). Are there plans for more tactics that utilize this really awesome DC? I also would certainly enjoy tactics that target other saves; like ones for toppling foes against reflex to avoid being knocked down or a relentless onslaught thats a fort save against being enfeebled.

I'd love to see something like "Break Their Ranks" that could inflict fleeing on enemies for a round, but I think the structure of Tactics is too narrow to allow something like that without it either being broken or useless after its first instance - effectively reducing your already limited tactics.

Someone else in the thread suggested feats that work like meta-tactics, something which would allow you to apply effects to more general tactics.

That way, Tactics could stay fairly broad in scope / function, but allow people to select add-ons to tactics which enable them to give extra effects on the fly, if they have the feat.

You could have a feat which works something like:

"Once per round, When a squadmates makes a strike granted by a tactic, they can attempt a Trip Attack as a free action against the target using your Class DC"

"When a squadmates uses a reaction to stride, they do not provoke and gain a +1 status bonus to their AC"

________________

Edit: Just had the idea of the Commander actually having a pseudo focus point mechanic called "Tactical Genuis".

Wherein, instead of having feats like the above, there is a series of modifers a commander can make to tactics, but these modifers cost points from their Tactical Genuis pool.

The pool could refresh per 10 minutes, and allow the Commander a certain degree of additional utility to their tactics.

Additional Tactical Genuis options would then...

I'm not sure if you've ever played Fire Emblem: Three Houses, but one of my favorite mechanics in the game was kinda like this; you could assign powerful strategems before each battle and they could only be used a couple times per fight, but had really big impact.

I think you kinda hit the nail on the head for what I was looking for: basically a few "showstopper" type abilities to go alongside your bread and butter tactics.

I know we have stuff like End It and Forced Surrender, but the former is a "win more" type ability, and I personally don't enjoy stuff like that, while the latter is level 18, so you probably won't be seeing it much.

So first of all, I *love* the framework of the class overall. It's exactly the style of martial I enjoy playing, and I really like that the commands provide support by letting your allies do extra stuff rather than just being "yet another class providing AoE status bonuses". I also like Int as a KAS and the auto scaling warfare lore, and having feats that give it extra utility. I also REALLY like the feel of a "spend one to two actions giving my allies a command and then doing an attack with my own weapon". I was also really impressed and happily surprised that I saw that they get legendary in their class DC; which means those crit spec effects and intimidating charges will actually have a shot at landing.

But I also find it really odd that for a class that breaks the norm in being a non caster and having a Legendary DC, but only has 4 instances where that DC is actually applied (critical hit specialization, stupifying charge, intimidating charge, and executioner's volley). Are there plans for more tactics that utilize this really awesome DC? I also would certainly enjoy tactics that target other saves; like ones for toppling foes against reflex to avoid being knocked down or a relentless onslaught thats a fort save against being enfeebled.

Lastly, is the choice to not have specialized mounts intentional, or was it omitted for the playtest because specialized mounts don't need playtesting and you'd rather people try out the new stuff?

If you read the description of the underwater shooting customization, it says it shoots the projectile using the spark from the rune.

Furthermore, the reload action in of itself does not have any prohibition on using it underwater.

If your DM is preventing you from reloading in the water while you have the mod; they are being a dingus

From my experience, Create a Diversion and Dread Striker are the best ancestry agnostic ways for a ranged character to make someone Off-Guard outside of using level 4 Invisibility, Legendary Sneak, or something similar.

That said, the main reason to build a thrown weapon user over, say, a bow user from a mechanical standpoint is being able to fight in melee and range. Otherwise, using a bow is going to do more damage with a generally better range.

The reason I mention this is that your problem becomes less of one if you embrace the idea that you're rogue's earliest levels will probably be opening with Create a Diversion -> chucking a knife, followed by melee stabs when enemies close in; you'll have a pretty good time. Once Dread Striker kicks in, Demoralize because a hell of nasty debuff, and you probably have Confabulator to start taking the edge off of repreated Create a Diversions.

Also you can have your teammates and items help you. Trip and Grapple are already good actions; your friendly neighborhood melee martial will probably be twice as eager to use it as they already are if you're going to get something out of it, too. Smokesticks are a cheap way to be able to hide anywhere starting at level 1. Mist from an ally caster kicks in at level 3. Cover lets you hide and most maps probably have something you can at least duck behind

Quite honestly, there's really not much of a difference between killing them and taking them to the authorities if they are just going to execute them at the party's word; at that point you're just passing the buck to keep your hands clean

There's not really an easy answer; but personally, I think a "good" character would probably disarm them and send them off or take them somewhere they can be rehabilitated. Killing prisoners is never "good"; no matter if it's performed as lawful punishment or not

That could be a nice feature for the Toxicologist, but also maybe a bit much because they printed Clown Monarch

Oh, if they did that change, I think basically all poisons would have to change to have fairly mild stage 1s since it'd be mostly garanteed as long as you poison is somewhere remotely close in the ballpark.

That said, I'd much prefer thatnover spending gold for a rider effect that mostly wont apply. Even when I played a toxicologist that preemptively poisoned every piece of ammo, I still didn't get many failed saved with the poisons and I eventually asked the gm to change to a bomber and I just used the blight bombs and actually felt like a better poison user than the poison user subclass

Hoping for a massive increase in "Chance to poison" for Toxicologist, Alchemists current attack Proficiency multiplied with monsters Saves and the poisons DC(even alchemist increased one) make the chance for poisons to do anything in a meaningful encounter abysmally smal.

Something need to change there, ither give Toxicologist Better proficiency with poisoned weapons or massively increase its DC on the poisons it self makes,

in short, increase the chance for an attack to land, or the chance for a failure on poison saves.

Personally, I wished poisons in general would work more like, say, the curse of death where a passing save would just afflict stage one for a single interval and automatically cure afterwards. No need to jack up DCs or anything, and it makes poison have a better shelf life.

Most poisons aren't overly frontloaded, so this would translate to a small bit of damage plus [condition] 1 for most cases

Interesting!

I've heard a lot of horror stories about players who just refuse to use them (and I see it all the time from my PCs) so it's nice to hear about someone liking them.

It's sad because consumables often have unique and interesting effects.

Yeah, for a lot of people, the single use nature and non scaling DCs makes them either claim they are a waste of money or they are too scared to use them because "what if they need it later".

To me, the limited shelf life makes me go "There's no reason to hold onto it, because it will get outdated soon" and as such, I just use it at the first opportunity where it will be helpful.

Also, pf2 gives so many abilities to characters that as long as I have my item bonuses; I don't have to rely all that hard on gear to function, so being able to try out completely new things is really fun

For the most part; as a player, I'll buy all sorts of weird items, but despite that, I really enjoy it when my DM will just stuff loot caches with oddball consumables. Because consumables in pf2 are kinda built to be most effective when used at their levels, I don't really stash them until "I really need them" because if I wait, they wont be good; so instead, I just use em the first time they would be helpful.

They might not completely alter the course of history, but like cracking a smokestick in the middle of a dero infested cave and just hucking bombs and AoEs out of it while the dero struggle with the miss chance makes for a battle where the party gets to feel clever for drastically reducing the challenge rating through the use of a level 1 item when we were still too weak to cast Mist

The main issues is that they are really underfunded. It's just pateron and ads to work with as far as hiring people. If they are working as the official place to get information on the game mechanics they should be funded as such and not have to ask for donations

People keep mentioning coercion but it literally says:

"The target gives you the information you seek or agrees to follow your directives so long as they aren't likely to harm the target in any way."

So that doesn't appear like you can force a suspect to confess.

Also, it doesn't say the target tells the truth. If you try to demand that person A admits that person B was at X location, then if you intimidate A they'll give you the information you seek...even if it's a lie. Because they're scared of you and will agree with your incorrect conclusion to protect themselves.

"Gives you the information you seek" is telling you the truth (to their knowledge) on a subject.

In game turns, if you pass the check, you get what you want; if you fail the check; thats when they'll keep their mouths shut or attempt a deception check (or maliciously comply and give you the bare minimum). Punishing a player for passing is against the spirit of the rules.

That said, the person complies to their ability, so like a grunt that really only does know only surface level stuff can't give you more than that no matter how good you roll.

The "as long as they aren't likely to harm the target" is really only based on player behavior. If they have a history of executing/torturing/etc people even after they get what they want, then yeah, they'll lie or whatever if that'll help, but otherwise they'll work with you. Even the most wicked parties I've been in let people go after intimidation specifically because letting people if they comply is a great way to get more people to comply in the future

I think my main issue with FA is that it creates a gap between "players who are using their free archetype to maximize power" and "players who are using their free archetype for one of those archetypes that wouldn't otherwise be worth taking, but are fun and thematic."

Like there's a big difference between the Magus going FA into psychic or the monk going Student of Perfection into Jalmeray Heavenseeker and the characters who are taking like celebrity or dandy.

I feel like in a FA game it's especially important to talk to players about their expectations and goals for the game so we're not ending up with players feeling like they "wasted" their free archetype by not minmaxing.

I find it weird that people treat dandy like it's a weak pick thats only there for memes or flavor.

The base dedication is two expert skills that cover most social situations; since at level 2, assuming you background and 2nd level skill feats go at society feats; society can practically replace most uses of diplomacy provided you're able to tap your social circle while deception covers any lying you have to do; the downtime activity is just gravy.

Gossip lore is an uber knowledge with dubious knowledge tied on. Really solid

Distracting Flattery is a solid when brining your more boorish allies to the social event; if you have an ally the runs Intimidate, you can use this feat to negate the drawback of Coerce; which is really cool. Otherwise you can safely pass on it, but with the right party composition, this feat is a really good support ability.

Fabricated Connections just doubles down on the "allowing you to replace other skills with your dandy skills" thing; letting you sub in for Make and Impression and Request 1/day is probably sufficient to meet your needs when you can't just use your connections from society feats. The Earn Income and Subsist are pretty much ribbon benefits, but like, most games I played in have enough downtime where Earn Income is helpful, so may as well make it off one of your best skills.

Party Crasher is like, the only base dandy feat that I would call situational, but if you're going in on the social aspects of your character (which, let's face it, if you're playing a dandy, you are), it's a garanteed way to get an audience with anyone of social importance, which, if you have the connections feat, means you then can get them as a contact; all at no roll. A week of forcing your way into social events giving you access to basically anyone at no roll is REALLY good if you're clever

As far as I know, you don't actually know if it works or not unless you roll Sense Motive and pass.

Dominate does let you know if it works because it sets up a mental link when it does. You would know right away because a passed save would not set the link. That said, there is a feat that lets you pretend that a domination spell passed when it in fact didn't.

I imagine that the foolish might assume anything (or almost anything) said under the zone to be truth, while the clever would use it to make it that much harder to lie.

I've never used it though, since RAW, succeeding a Coerce or Request gives you garanteed information; while zone of truth just foils lying, so you still have to actually persuade them. Since spells cant get bonuses at all, and skills can, the skill check is way more likely to work

Alchemic_Genius wrote:

The-Magic-Sword wrote:

Stuff

Yeah, I have somewhat similar experiences at my table; it turned me off of the "FA is the best way to play the game" pretty hard.

I had a player who got really angry when people had redundant abilities/skills with him; but he played a magus with Investigator as his free archetype, so like for him, melee, arcane casting, and most int and dex skills were "his niche".

I wouldn't blame that on Free Archetype.

It may be a good reason to not use Free Archetype with this particular player, but it isn't an inherent problem with Free Archetype or a good reason to promote not allowing it in general.

Even without that one specific problem player, I still tend to find the rest of the people in my group get overwhelmed by the options and usually end up not using them

I don't think FA is bad or anything, I just don't see it as something that's as mandatory to building cool characters and having fun as many people make it out to be

Alchemic_Genius wrote:

I had a player who got really angry when people had redundant abilities/skills with him...

It's so weird. As you say, Aid is a thing. And in odd cases where multiple people can attempt a check and only one needs to make it, having two people with the same skill is basically like having True Strike on it. Have three people with it? Even better. Geez, as a player I would want every PC in my party to have every skill if possible. Why not? There's no downside. Alice on my left or Bob on my right succeeding at a check is just as good for the party as me succeeding at it.

You know it and I know it! The player in question was a hard time forum junkie and tends to regutgitate anything that looks official; so when he saw the term "niche protection", he took as jargon for a thing thats definitely well established and good and took it to heart.

As you said about the pseudo true strike thing though, for me personally, like yeah, it doesn't make a difference where I succeeded my lie to the the guard "we're on the list", my friend saying "we're on the list" with Diplomacy and a bribe, my sister saying "we're on the list" with implicit threat in her tone, or my wife pulling out a forged invitation and saying "We're part of Don Pelezzi's entourage, check that list again".

Stuff

Yeah, I have somewhat similar experiences at my table; it turned me off of the "FA is the best way to play the game" pretty hard.

I had a player who got really angry when people had redundant abilities/skills with him; but he played a magus with Investigator as his free archetype, so like for him, melee, arcane casting, and most int and dex skills were "his niche". He butted heads a lot with the enigma bard; who would overlap with occultism rolls, the Gunslinger whonhad higher dps, and the fighter who was generally a better melee character because she didn't lock herself into a strategy of banking on doing spellstike -> recharge every single turn. Had I not run FA, he wouldn't have been able to just pick up almost every skill so his niche would have been more narrow and therefore would have spent less time "defending his niches" and more time actually shining in the ones he did take.

On the other hand, I played a game where 4 people all had soft overlap of social skills and it created AMAZING dynamics and friendships between the PCs because we were all really good about taking turns stepping back and rolling the aid check when another ally's skill was better. I had Deception, my sister had Intimidate, my friend had Diplomacy, and my wife had Society, but was packing all the feats like Streetwise and Underground Network

Hmm... the real issue with diverse lore+assurance, in my mind, is the burden it creates on the GM when combined with dubious knowledge (Which of course is built into the Thaumaturge). Assurance can't hit level based DCs, but it doesn't crit fail them either, so if a Thaumaturge uses the combo a lot, the GM is put on the spot to generate a lot of convincing sounding lies.

Personally, I mostly use assurance (Esoteric Lore) for exploint weakness against mooks. Given the risk of critical failures is minimal for Thaumaturges, I feel going for the good chance of success and decent chance to crit is better.

Tbh, that's pretty easy. Since RK is focused now on a question (lowest save, weakness/resistance, combat abilities, etc), just pick one correct answer and one plausible answer within the same catagory; so like "it's lowest save is will or reflex", "either it has no weaknesses, or a weakness to fire", "it has either arcane or occult spellcasting"

I feel some dieties might be so loose even the concept of rank might be seen as weird; for example, I can't really imagine Desna's faith having titles; or at least having them in any way that matters much, since her faith is largely centered on personal journeys.

Alternatively, I could see Asmodeus being so strict that all regions of his faith use the same title (all of which are in Infernal) no matter where the church is because in Hell, everyone has a place, and the order must be obeyed no matter what

My group played with the dying rules adding wounded and dying together since day 1 of the playtest for the phb and the only time I've had people die is crit failing an instant death spell once

If I were to personally have a say in how a hypothetical 3e would be made, my approach would be:

-Arcane magic would essentially because the "natural science" tradition, mainly focused on controlling natural forces and elements from the material side and the mental side leaning into things like divination to analyze things and augment perception and to manipulate/control/decieve how the mind interprets things. In this proposal, the arcane list's scope would become narrower, but more thematically cohesive and more in line with the other traditions.

-The wizard, as the "magical scientist" class would have curriculums much as the remaster works, but these curriculums would poach spells from other lists and add them the the wizard's spell list. Irl, scientists generally have to have a broad general education to cover the fundamentals, but also have a specialization in their studies. A wizard's curriculum would give them thematically appropriate spells off of other lists that ties into their studies; for example, a mentalism wizard might nab some spells that influence the mind from the divine and occult lists that dont appear on the arcane list, a battlemage would poach healing, aoe, and other "battle magic", a conjurer would be able to learn a wide variety of summoning spells, etc. This would allow the wizard to feel like an actual magical scientist ("I know the fundamental theory of magic so well, I can create things beyond the normal scope of the arcane tradition") while dodging the weirdness of why in a world where medical science is so advanced that first aid can take you from deaths door to looking fairly decent in like 10 min at low level can a magical scholar not leave how to mend wounds.

One thing that sticks out to me still is if the "divine spark" is something that the Character who has it or others who know/witness/see said PC would KNOW about at all. I can't imagine that anything short of some kind of cosmic instruction manual that is projected into the PCs mind would actually do ANYTHING to explain their abilities let alone give them a clue as to the source or nature of their power let alone what OTHERS see.

This type of character is supposed to be BRAND NEW to the universe after all and it would make absolutely zero sense if the source and nature of the powers were fundamentally understood even on the most basic level by those who have it or anyone who isn't some insanely big-brained divine scholar who is currently in an active research mode about the topic.

I'm sort of hoping that this is explained at least a little bit and that it's made explicit that this knowledge is NOT made known to the PC or others who encounter them so that there can at least be some kind of intrigue about the situation rather than the rather dull "you've obviously a demigod, you know it, they know it, anyone who looks at you knows it because you're clearly just better than everyone else, jeez isn't it obvious sheesh" situation that is basically the only other alternative that would lead to an untold number of egotistical PCs and games that include that would necessarily revolve around that PC building their own cult of NPCs while hogging the limelight.

Do other people just... not get entourages of fans? In most games I've played in, getting a following of noncombat npcs was just a normal part of being a successful adventurer with plenty of time to establish a reputation; no player egotism needed (actually it was usually the egotists that ended up with less/no followers since they didnt like to RP being nice to their followers, so they just tended to leave after a while)

I was a little sad to read the exemplar was losing domains; for my archer exemplar, they were literally the only feats that supported my playstyle; but that sadness was immediately removed when I saw mentions of an archetype. I find domain spells some of the coolest sets of focus spells, and I do enjoy making characters who are divinely empowered, but aren't necessarily a priest, so that'll fulfill a lot of concepts for me

The gmg was the best book I've bought for helping run the game, so this remastered one has me hyped

It's really going to depend on what other level 14 feats are available. Feats compete against each other whether optimizing for damage or choosing a feat that suits from RP or thematic purpose.

When I read this level 14 feat, it seems attractive to me absent seeing anything else. It's something I can do over and over again for 1 action for extra damage at range. Do I wish it went off at the same time? Sure, but that would be too powerful, make every other bonus damage feat look terrible. So it goes off the next round making it more situational, but still powerful.

You have to think of it in base form: it's a 1 action feat usable as often as you feel like that adds extra damage to your evocation spells. That's pretty cool for a blaster wizard. I'd take that on an evoker and use it a bunch. Even if it lands 50% of the time, it's extra damage for 1 action and a feat that I can use so often it's bound to show its value.

It doesn't even require a focus point. It requires 1 action and an AoE spell. It seems like a very high value feat based on a low resource cost and high value return throughout an adventuring day.

The extra damage is right around a two action single target cantrip; shaving off an action in exchange for giving the target the option to move out of the way seems pretty fair to me; especially since unlike a focus spell that does similar damage, like elemental toss, it doesn't cost resources at all. I have a hard time imagining when forcing an enemy to either take damage or move (and possibly even procing a reactive strike) wouldn't be a fun way to use my filler action. Plus if metamagic mastery gets converted into something like spellshape specialist or w/e; it's straight up a nearly 50% circumstantial damage boost to most bread and butter blasting spells

Giant robots vs kaiju? Sign me up!

I know it takes 30 min, but that's like 3 exploration turns of not doing things when it could be 1 turn.

It's not like I'm saying it's essential; but both the monk and the champion get the refocus feats so I don't see why the exemplar getting it is so objectionable

Grumpus wrote:

Did they ever clarify if your "next action" can be the first action of the following round, or if it has to be in the same round?

They did. It has to be the same round. Source is the How It's Played YouTube channel and one of their Ask a Designer videos.

---------------

Anyone else note that the new spell doesn't say the spell has to come from a spellslot? If you find a cantrip that fulfills all requirements, you could use it to lay down the detonation array. It's probably save to assume the 5ft burst has to fit within the spell's area (even though the feat could be clearer about that), so the only current cantrips that would work are haunting hymn and spout (when used on water).

Timber as well, I think!