Vencarlo Orinsini

Asurasan's page

224 posts. Alias of Tyler Trisler.


1 to 50 of 224 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I believe one of the sections in the first two chapters of the AP say the town is level 4 for the purposes of downtime activities. If I stumble across where again I’ll let you know.

Please disregard this. I spoke with a neighbor who has apparently received the package by mistake. All is well.

Hey guys, I’ve never had this happen before but it appears my shipment is missing for the above order.

I checked the tracking and usps shows it should have been delivered last Wednesday but I have not received it. I contacted the post office and they sent me you guys way. I’m not sure how to proceed so any help would be appreciated.

Ascalaphus wrote:
I'm not sure if shields breaking is quite that unrealistic - holmgang apparently involved a specific number of replacement shields per participant in the duel.

That is informative, thanks! Specifically sounds like they just took turns bashing each other.... I have a Ulfen character in my 2E game that might have 'beef' in his backstory that could possible have an old rival show up. I smell a challenge brewing.

As for the discussion, I wasn't trying to use the real world as an example. I was just trying to add weight to the 'shields probably aren't as fragile as to be obliterated in a single blow' conversation.

I think mechanically there needs to be some small tweak or addition to let shields scale to keep the 'shield game' happy at higher levels.

My problem is when extracting the images from PDF’s I sometimes have to rescale the maps in order to make the squares actually square.

The caves map in Hellknight Hill are an example of this. I just wish there was an option for each individual map image in full res to be available. I’d gladly even pay money for it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, and purely anecdotally. All the historical testing I’ve ever seen about shields implies the man on the other side of the shield gives out long before the shield itself gives way.

I’m wondering why they didn’t go with shield runes similar to weapon runes. You could have just baked hardness and durability increases into those.

I think I know the answer to this, but it’s worth it for some clarity. The shard of the golden dragon orb, do the PC’s need this for anything in later adventures?

Brew Bird wrote:

While this is true in general, there are a few cases where a class's functioning depends a bit on feat selection. The Alchemist is the worst offender, requiring some feats just to make their class features actually work/scale, but there are certain fighting styles for the other classes that depend on feats that act a little more as "fixes" than additional options.

Yeah, I agree alchemist is the oddest duck in the core classes. I'd probably lay this primarily at the feet of the 'Powerful Alchemy' feat which feels like it should just be baked in to your infused items(simply to cut down on the book work that a player has to keep up with). Which would keep it 'scaling' similarly to the spell DC's.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the above post begins to hit on this concept slightly, but there is one stand out element that is in relation to how the action economy and the decision to multi-class or not interact.

Pathfinder 2E is not a system of nesting stacking bonuses in the same way you dealt with in 1E. In general any thing your feat selection does is add options on to the chassis of your class of choice. This means multiclassing 'poorly' or 'optimally' has little to do with dealing the most damage possible, or hitting the bad guy. It simply gives you choices of how you want to proceed.

From my perspective, in combat, higher level class feats vs lower level multiclass feats aren't as much of an issue as people seem to make them out to be. These are(from a combat perspective) simply the way you want to spend your actions. Ultimately there is very little interaction beyond that. The core 'chassis' of your class will continue to function even if you never purchase a single class feat from it.

Things that improve proficiency are the rare exception I can find that I think alter the 'core' mechanics of the system. So if your choice is between taking Power Attack on your sorcerer/fighter or Advanced Bloodline is simply just expressing how you want to do things with your actions. Neither of those choices determine how 'well' you do those things, simply just give you the option to do one or the other.

This is a large improvement from 1E where to successfully multiclass characters often required a high degree of system mastery to pull off depending on what you are going after. 2E Multi-classing allows you to dash in some options to enable you to possibly stretch your abilities in a different direction.

Fumarole wrote:
Feel free to share something if it fits with this Adventure Path, but if it is designed specifically for another one it is probably best shared in that subforum. I haven't checked every AP subforum but I imagine there is a community content thread for each of them. Even if there isn't you can certainly start one if you really want to get your content out there.

Thanks, just to clarify. I mean to share Age of Ashes content. I just was referencing what I had previously shared in similar threads for other AP's.

Just a quick question:

I contributed fairly heavily to the Jade Regent thread like this and I wanted to know if you guys had any interest in supplementary social encounters and social/setting vignettes? I appreciate the technical resources but I was curious if anyone would feel it is off topic to share other AP related materials? I want to avoid a hijack if I can!

Oh man.... I showed up to give a snarky answer like Stunned(30) or something being the best but thorin wins.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:
I feel like the big takeaway here is that htere's no clear indication of WHAT familiars/companions/minions can do in exploration mode. All of the rules surrounding them seem completely focused around encounters.

I agree with this. To give a true take on rules as written as people are usually looking for here there are no explicit rules about familiars, animal companions, or minions in general that I can find.

6 seconds of time in exploration mode is not equatable to a round in encounter mode. Those are different modes of play RAW.

Actions in the same index are described as part of a turn, and turns are described as part of encounter mode. During any other non encounter mode of play there is no explicit rules I can find to support much of what people are proposing here about the limitations of what a familiar or animal companion can or can’t do during other modes of play.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Colette Brunel wrote:

Here is something to think about: consider a character who is playing in a game from 1st to 6th, and likely is not going to see 7th level. They want to play a cleric.

Why not, then, be a cloistered cleric over a warpriest even if the plan is to never swing a weapon? All the character has to do is focus on Wisdom and Charisma. Their Dexterity does not need to rise above 12, and they do not care too much about the armor check penalty and armor speed penalty from medium armor.

I think you might have gotten that backwards, but I'm assuming you mean why not be a war priest over a cloistered cleric?

If so, they might be interested in dex related skills, could be planning a thematic multiclass into something else, don't want the aesthetic of wearing armor, or just feels like it doesn't fit into their mental image of what their cleric is about.

If you are talking about all things equivalent, the 'mini-wargaming' version of Pathfinder 2E you are probably correct that War Priest is easier to bring more to the table at levels 1-6.

I've played a level 1 and level 2 cloistered cleric(of Nethys) and brought plenty to the tables that I played at. I had plenty of healing and modest spell damage that I never felt out of the fight, and my knowledge domain actually helped me plenty when it came to nailing most recall knowledge checks.

I think the main thing about 2E is things are on average closer between what is considered optimal and not optimal.

Please disregard this request. It looks like the lost omens guide isn't part of the core subscription. I'll just wait for my CE books for a few weeks.

Sorry for the confusion!

Hey guys, can you remove the age of lost omens guide from this order so it will ship?

I’m subscribed to the core line, so I should receive this normally through my sub.

Just bumping this to make sure it was seen.


Ugh, I went to check my order status again on my items in my sidecart and I think they have once again messed up(no longer showing in my order history, but the items are still showing as ordered).

Sorry to bring this back up again. I'm literally just viewing my side cart and it seems to vanish and go back into my shopping cart as soon as I verify the 'ship as soon as possible' selection.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:

To say the exploration chapter wasn't well received by my old gaming group would be an understatement. I read it and went "yeah, kinda useful to read I guess. I'll be ignoring that in my games".

Will the whole exploration tactics and being forced to use one tactic carry over to the core rules?

Not a big deal if they do. Much like D&D 4th ed's skill challenge rules I'll ignore it 100% except to use as inspiration for adjudicating what to do in certain situations (skill challenges weren't a terrible idea, just terribly executed).

I think I saw someone(Jason?) mentioned that exploration tactics were more of an 'under the hood' mechanic to give the GM a tool to adjudicate what their players were doing based off their described actions and not so much a "Declare your exploration tactic to me!" type mechanic like it seemed to read in the play test.

I think you are spot on when you say you want to use it as inspiration and not inherently a tool to codify every single element of the game.

Looks like I sorta answered my own question here by signing up for the RPG line. In this case it looks like I'll be able to pick up a normal book + bestiary at gencon and have my limited editions from my preorders sent separately?

I planned to gift a second book to some folks in my play group, so I think this will work out for me. I'll be able to have books in hand at gencon for PFS games I was planning to play in and I'll end up with a 2nd set of core books I can gift to a friend later after my normal Limited Edition versions arrive. Let me know if that sounds incorrect? I don't mind spending a little extra in this case.


Hey Sam,

I appreciate it. Can I go ahead and subscribe to the Core line and pick up my things at gencon?

Hey guys, I was messing around with my orders trying to figure out how to opt into Gencon Pickup for my 2e pre-orders and AP pickup's since it appeared to be available at this time. As I was looking around at the options I found out how to turn on gencon pickup for my subscriptions, but I didn't see how to enable it for my pre-order.

I opened up my sidecart and looked to see if there was some way to adjust the pick up location there, but as I looked through my order(the number listed above) I believe I've done something to have that moved out of my sidecart and back to my normal cart.

I just want to double check to make sure I haven't incidentally done something to cancel my pre-order while trying to enable gencon pickup.

If you guys don't mind double checking to make sure I have set myself to pick up my things at gencon and not accidentally canceled my preorder it would be much appreciated!

Thanks as always!

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thflame wrote:

Point buy is REALLY easy.

Each Score costs a number of points equal to the modifier the score gives you(minimum 1).

9 through 13 all cost 1 point each.

14 and 15 cost 2 points each.

16 and 17 cost 3 points each.

18 costs 4 points.

I'll agree on Scores vs Modifiers. Ability scores are almost never used, and when they are, the rule can usually be tweaked to not need them.

It is mathematically easy to understand. Once you understand the game the effect of each value is meaningful as well.

In my experience, teaching it to players who are new to the system is frequently confusing due to the inherent lack of value in odd scores(as you mention above) vs even scores. Depending on the amount of point buy you are doing, you are talking about walking someone through making 10-20 choices about their before they understand the value and implications of their choices 4 levels later.

If 2e is anything like the playtest, you are making significantly fewer choices, each choice is in some way improving a character, AND potentially playing with building blocks in your characters backstory. That is what I consider a huge improvement over 1st edition.

To me, this is a huge improvement for my ability to onboard people into Pathfinder.

3Doubloons wrote:

Pathfinder Spoiler #98 describes the wand rules. If you overcast, there's a 55% chance it's merely broken (unusable until repaired) and a 45% chance it's completely destroyed

Thanks 3Doubloons,

I had missed that one.

Charon Onozuka wrote:

Pricing in particular seems to be something I'm worried about. They say scrolls are way cheaper, but how expensive will a wand actually be? After all, a wand can't be too expensive or players will, A) complain about their expensive toy got permanently destroyed & B) create wealth issues within the party if one player's wand is destroyed and their equipment value is now significantly lower than the rest of the party. On the other hand, if wands aren't expensive enough, then they're just a pure upgrade to scrolls.

Unless I'm misunderstanding what was said above in the first post, isn't the wand 'broken' if you fail the flat check not 'destroyed'? In Pathfinder lingo broken is more of a temporary state until repaired?

i.e. Fighter's shield takes more damage than it had it in HP, it becomes 'broken'. During the next rest(In the playtest it took 10 mins) the fighter made a skill check and repaired it.

It seems like wand might be very similar to this, right? Then it dosn't upset the whole WBL problem you are describing.

azhrei_fje wrote:

@Asurasan The terrain modifier stuff is in the current version (1.5.1, but 1.5.2 should be out this weekend, probably). You can plop down tokens on the map (on any layer, including Hidden) and then double-click the token and set the Terrain Movement Modifier. This feature, combined with the new "AI" button in the upper right corner, will perform more intelligent pathing to get the PC token from point A to point B. (We're still testing these features and we'd love to get feedback. We have a Discord server, but the best place for feedback is , in particular the Issues tab. You can fill in a template and tell what feature(s) you'd like to see.)


Thanks for pointing this out to me. I've actually grabbed the new version you mentioned and messed around with it. I also hopped over to you guys github and looked around some. I'll probably grab eclipse and refresh myself on java and take a look at the source code tomorrow.

The terrain movement modifier on tokens works like I would expect. I think I had envisioned something more like a 'paint on' style of difficult terrain using a template tool that snaps to the grid, but the current approach is completely serviceable.

I'm a maptools guy and a software dev, and I feel like it goes hand in hand to pick that over the other options.

I feel like it gives me 'almost' everything I would want. I use it as my 'actual' table top on a embedded 45 inch TV with an IR touch screen overlay that works well enough(even though maptools isn't great with touch type capabilities).

I built a 'lite' Starfinder NPC/Ship maptools library/macro set to allow me to quickly spin up stuff for my games in about a day and a half of work. It's not perfect but it gets the job done!

I've also considered 'rolling my own' VTT over the years just to bypass a few of the limitations that maptools has, but I usually realize my 'eyes are bigger than my stomach' when it comes to actually doing the work.

The few thinks that I would love to have in Maptools is the ability to 'paint on' difficult terrain and create custom templates(for effects), since the default ones are a little 3.5-y and aren't flexible for alternate systems.

Anyone else have any particular nitpicks? Those are the two I would like along with some small UI/usability enhancements(initiative tracker being able to be visible in full screen!).

Sam Phelan wrote:

Hello Asurasan,

I noticed the issue you are describing in my own PDF copy. While this certainly doesn't look right, I have no capabilities to diagnose the issue or its fixability myself. I have passed along the information and will let you know what I hear about it. Thank you!

Thanks Sam,

Glad to know I wasn't the only one who noticed! If they update the pdf document for download I'll go grab it again.

I made this thread over in the Starfinder AP section and it was suggested that I bring up the issue here as well.

I initially noticed the maps in the Soldiers of Brass PDF seemed way lower res than usual. Page 18 of the PDF from the site is a perfect example of the issue but it seems to apply to literally every map in the PDF. The compass rose and grid lines are super pixelated/faded compared to the actual printed copy.

My group typically uses the maps from the PDF's to create things for our virtual table top that I use to run games. Normally some minor image quality issues are there, but this case seems like this is likely unintentional.

If you compare the PDF to the print copy it will be immediately apparent what I'm talking about.


I just got mine in today and noticed the same thing.

I'll give the customer service route a shot and see if that helps.

Hey folks,

Is it me or is the map resolution for the second book lower than what we normally see in Paizo products? I've been pulling these out for literally years now for session prep and the resolution in Soldiers of Brass seem quite a bit lower quality than usual?

Take a look at page 18, even the compass rose in the center of the map is severely low res. Also the grid is incomplete and fades in and out of existence. I feel like this was just a simple oversight when someone was converting the image.

I know it will be too late to do anything about the copies that have gone to print, but the PDF's could be fixed up and reloaded with a bit of work and the original images. I normally wouldn't bring this up but this seems like it's half the quality/resolution of the original.

boring7 wrote:

Still having fun though.

That's what counts.

I kept them 2 levels down except for Ameiko, who was a single level down by the end of the campaign to help offset that NPC class level she had.

I felt like this was about the right place for being able to 'have them around' in combat scenario's without feeling like they were too fragile/useless.

I like Amplifier as well.

I'll throw Splice into the mix for some genetic sounding terminology.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think I might be having a slightly different experience than a lot of you who enjoy multiple dice. I feel like it takes too long to adjudicate at my table with my players. They typically have taken to asking me to roll their damage for them around level 9+ to 'speed up' play. Essentially every crit or spell I'm rolling damage for them because they don't want to have to play 'go fish' for more dice every time they roll well.

There aren't any specific rules outside of just 'crafting' rules.

That said! I have a super-biologist scholar in my group who was super interested in all things related to these creatures, so I decided to offer a bonus.

I personally houseruled that it cuts down on the amount of UPB's required by 50% to craft the item, due to having a potential source for some of the materials required. The same was true for the Ksarik's my party killed and the item that can be crafted from their 'parts'.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DM_Blake wrote:
Colette Brunel wrote:

Let us start with liberator paladins. Their code of conduct is fairly problematic:

• You must respect the choices others make for their own lives and can’t force someone to act in a particular way or threaten them if they don’t act that way.
• You must demand and fight for the freedom of others to make their own decisions. You must never engage in or countenance slavery or tyranny.

A liberator in Cheliax meets a slave merchant (with slaves) on the road. Slavery is legal in Cheliax, so this merchant is not a criminal, no more than a rug merchant with a wagon full of rugs.

How does he deal with this?

This is the same conflict a Lawful Good Paladin has as well when dealing with a corrupt government offical, abusive guard, or tyranical king. Typically by making a choice to serve a particular tenant over another and hope that you did the right thing in the end. Living by an ideology full of hard choices unfortunately.

If this is attempting to boil this down into mechanical terms, that is ultimately going to come down to a player and his GM to determine what is a bridge too far. It's unlikely there will ever be 'perfectly ironclad rules on a philosophy'.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I actually really like the quick prep on the Wizard being baked in. I feel it actually fits well into the 'preparedness' category and planning ahead for Wizard. Specifically it makes the idea of interacting with your spell book a bit more... interactive?

A 'prepared' wizard has added lots of odd spells to their book as they level to solve problems they encounter during their day. I think it will make those moments where a Wizard, particularly a low level one has that eureka moment of, "I have just the right tool for this job, give me a moment." without having to wait a whole day to be ready to use that.

I never thought of a 1e Sorcerer as 'flexible' because of their narrow spells known list. They just had more 'raw' power from more spell slots and the ability to focus on a particular type of magic that fit their character. In an absence of magic scrolls/staffs/wands, the Sorcerer was always going to be 'rigid' by comparison to the Wizard with regards to what he can cast(and even less likely to have some of those 'less used' spells on his known spell list).

In the playtest I feel like Sorcerers need a defining mechanic outside of bloodline powers or just simply up the number of spell slots to make them different from a wizard in that way.

I liked the other changes. Though the Cleric channel energy change might have been too far? I agree with a lot of the others who have said 1+ charisma mod would be probably a better middle ground just to have the primary class feature of cleric give some benefits.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Spell Bevel, it should take some of the edge out of the spell-caster balance threads around here.

Can't believe I typed that. :(

Also, just a side note/bonus tip. I've been struggling to remember to do secret rolls fairly frequently for my table. But the end of this adventure was a really great chance for me to use them with the elemental floor puzzle.

I had two separate players attempting to solve the 'puzzle' at the end of the adventure. I was able to use that as an interesting chance to pit them against each other and other times have them come to a consensus about which steps they needed to take next(i.e. lining up the elemental effects to open up the door).

That might just be my table though as my players seemed to appreciate the overall back and forth of trying to solve it.

Worlds Okayest DM wrote:

Asurasan wrote:
B1- My players chose to not be stealth for the first hour of their movement through difficult terrain, so they were ambushed by the Hyenas but spotted them. They also chose to stealth after this point, fearing gnoll scouts(passed their knowledge checks).

Can you expand on how you adjudicated this? Did the hyena "ambush" simply mean they used Stealth for initiative?

Sure thing, in our case, our Barbarian was out front 'hacking' his way through the underbrush so I assumed there was basically no chance for the Hyena pack to not take notice of them. Also the party wasn't making any attempts to be extra observant(they were basically trying to make as much progress as possible to get clear of the difficult terrain).

As soon as it came time to start the combat, I rolled the stealth for the Hyenas, then checked against the PC's Perception + 10 DC. Two of the Hyena's failed said check, so I put down their tokens and proceeded to have the PC's roll perception and started combat as normal.

If I would have theoretically beat all the PC's perception, I would have probably had the encounter begin closer and in the midst of the back lines as the Hyena's jumped out to attack.

Also, I'm not completely sure I handled this correctly but I felt like it could work well for ambush scenarios. The Hyenas that were noticed by the PC, I made their tokens visible, where-as the one who was not noticed, I kept their token hidden at the start of combat.

If someone noticed them, it seemed like a good chance to use the seek and point out type of actions.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

We got a late start(3 weeks ago), we just finished Pale Mountain.

I imagine Somberfell will take me 2 sessions, so I don't expect to ever be 'caught up'.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Camels - My party chose to ride these all the way to B1, due to a party reached the foothills in about 3.5 days like you said as your worse case scenario due to only succeeding at 1 check for their entire ride(Bad luck).

B1- My players chose to not be stealth for the first hour of their movement through difficult terrain, so they were ambushed by the Hyenas but spotted them. They also chose to stealth after this point, fearing gnoll scouts(passed their knowledge checks).

1) I kept them in exploration mode until combat broke out.
2) If my party was sneaking and they all beat the perception DC of the Hyenas I would have let them sneak past if they so desired.
3) I wouldn't play it like this personally unless there was something the hyenas needed to do before combat broke out. If you were interested, it might be worth considering to allow them to be positioned more favorably(i.e. snuck around behind the party, ect) but I'd probably never let it break down into free attacks.

B2- Once the party hit the sand flats, they decided stealth wouldn't benefit them as much since the terrain was so open. They instead chose to move forward and scan for trouble.(I treated this like search) They spotted the Hazard and Identified the Ankhrav nest.

1) If they were not searching, I think they could technically 'walk into the quicksand.' without notice. This is basically a trade off for them 'going fast' I assume.
2) Mine totally did, wanted to save time and resources. I was pleasantly surprised that so many encounters in this particular adventure were able to be bypassed if they chose to.

B3- Group chose to swim the river and stealth through the gnoll camp as opposed to taking the extra time to go around.

1) Mine didn't, but they did take a slightly riskier approach that could have lead to combat.

B4- My group settled down and camped for the night after the gnoll camp(as sun was setting and they figured they would rather save the climb for the morning). They then chose to find an easier path as opposed to scaling the cliff face. They climbed out of stealth mode until they found the corpses and decided to take a more subtle approach from that point on.

1) I had this first check cost the characters 4 hours of time. It seemed like it was in the spirit of the adventure to cost time(since that is an important resource). Not totally sure if that is correct or not, but that is how I would run it every time.
2)I had the party roll their stealth against the manticore's perception DC. Since I assumed it was passively looking for things to ambush as it glided around, this seemed to best represent how this worked without an 'easy button'.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Our party was a Druid, Ranger, Alchemist, and Barbarian. The manticore essentially spent it's entire 'life' of its encounter doing flying spike attacks from well out of range of most of the PC's. This made the fight take a bit longer, but the eventual outcome was satisfying.

The fight opened with the druid eating a crit from the tail spikes during the manticore's first attack, pinning her to the ground. The alchemist wobbled forward near the druid on the incline to position itself to bomb the manticore when it approached within a ranged increment for his bombs. The Ranger drew her bow, hunters marked, and sent out a volley of arrows, hitting with one and dealing moderate damage. The Barbarian grabbed his shortbow and missed with two arrows due to poor-ish rolls. Druid breaks free of the spikes, grabs her staff of healing and heals herself.

Second round the manticore makes another flyby pass from the distance, lobbing spikes at the druid and alchemist combo this time. Missing the alchemist but hitting the druid once more, dropping her into the single digits. Ranger attempted to move on the incline but lost her footing and had to stay still. She decided to take out her oil of magic weapon and apply it to her bow from there. Alchemist turn rolls back around, he decides to create a smoke bomb and spike it at his own feet, granting the party some concealment, hoping it will hurt the manticore worse than it hurt the party. Barbarian fired arrows, landing a decent hit, and druid tried to move, lost her balance, then healed herself with the last two charges on her staff.

Third round the manticore continues it's lazy circle around the party, coming closer than usual, content with its range, moving and throwing a pair of spikes followed by a single spike at the druid/alchemist. Fortunately the concealment actually negates an attack that would have otherwise been a crit on the druid, the alchemist takes a hit. The Ranger realizes the sleep arrow they are carrying, might end the fight in a single shot, proceeds to fire it off, missing by entirely, much to everyone disappointment. She makes up for it with a crit on a secondary attack with her now +1 weapon longbow, dealing a mighty 4d8+2 and 1d10 from the deadly trait. Alchemist drinks a healing potion and the druid uses storm surge, dealing a bit of damage and dropping the creatures AC. Barb gets a plink in with his shortbow.

The 4th round sees much the same happening with the manticore starting to run low on spikes, but the concealment from the smoke bomb miraculously comes through again for the party. Seeing the writing on the wall, the druid decides to use the scroll of fly on the barbarian who moves out over the cliff face and within striking distance of the manticore, landing an attack with his +1 weapon.

The manticore proceeds to bite on the barbarian for a bit, before using its mandatory fly action to move away from the Barb who uses the no-escape reaction to close the gap as best he can. Barb rages, moves and attacks, landing a crit that manages to finish the manticore, sending it's body tumbling down the cliff face.

The tactics and terrain really caused the fight to drag a bit, without two big crits from the party, things would have potentially carried on for a few more rounds most likely. Ultimately it was a 'tough' encounter but one I felt like the party could handle at the level they were at. Also, the party was particularly capable of making the acrobatics checks to move, but unfortunately just couldn't manage to roll above about a 3 on the dice to actually manage it, leaving them largely stationary for the whole fight.

The character in my game who carries around an injection weapon chose medicinals because it was one of the few affordable things at low levels that actually won't make you broke.

That said, it's mostly used situationally and not super effective. I.e. We want to take this one down alive, ect.

I used the same calculation as Sanmei posted above. Mechanically it felt right for the start of doomsday dawn 2 without trivializing the whole encounter.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So.. of interest to me here...

PF1 had 34 conditions in the back of the Core Rulebook

The playtest has 42, of which 2 are helpful (accelerated and quick) and 5 are attitudes (which were in PF1 but not well codified). If we yank those out, we are down to 35.

So, I am not sure if the confusion is coming from the number of conditions (which seems to be about the same) or the fact that they can be different values.

Just trying to track this down. I see a lot of folks saying that various aspects of the playtest are more confusing or challenging that PF1, but in most cases we worked to make sure that the new system was at most, the same complexity, if not simpler.

So.. is it something I am not seeing or is it that its new, and that in and of itself is a challenge. So much of the old system is like second nature now that I take it complexity for granted.

For me it is knowing what stacks and what dosn't(on the fly). Bonuses are worse than penalties in this regard for me(bard + barbarian that keeps being brought up is a good example). But it still feels strange to know that the flat footed guy who is sluggish 1 isn't at -3 AC but at -2 AC, I messed this up at my last session. That said, after I did some looking, it dosn't look like quite as many overlap as I had initially thought on the condition side.

The overall number of conditions aren't bad for me, nor are the numbers beside them, at a glance it makes it fairly easy to adjucate.

I can probably adjust over time, like you said some things are just second nature in the old system and 'new' just means I have to learn it as a GM.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:

I'm now curious about the balance levels of power in the APs, since I don't play them, don;t they usually only ever get to like 16th level tops?

Do you ever get to 9th level spells?

I like the idea of "e6 edition" where your "level" merely determines your feats (and thus character complexity) but the power balance of the game remains relatively similar.

I think however, that may be the underlying mechanism for 5e.

Typically the games tend to end around 14-16, yes. It's basically right about the time when the game starts to become particularly swingy(i.e. a full attack from a dangerous badguy is going to drop a character if it happens, full spellcasters can poof you from existence, ect). You rarely get access to 9th level spells. I've never seen someone drop a wish spell in an AP, ect.

Typically the encounters are balanced around the idea of a 15-20 point buy party of 4 without having to resort to 'knifes edge' optimization. Some encounters are just plain hard for certain parties while others make it look easy. Generally speaking, they are built in a way that most everyone has a chance.

That has been my experiences at least.

They are mentioned in dead suns 1. I don't have my book in front of me so I can't give you a page, but I think it is in the write up about the Spike.

1 to 50 of 224 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>