Atalius's page

"Make an unarmed melee Strike against the creature you have grabbed or restrained". It literally says "Make an unarmed Melee strike". For Furious Grab the requirement says "Your last action was a successful Strike".

Devs are probably reading this like "how clearly do we have to write this for these guys to get the idea...."

The hardcores may even say it says "Your last action was a successful Strike, not an Unarmed Strike!"

Seems to me like "permanent flight where you don't even have to spend an action to hover, at the cost of one free hand" falls squarely in the realm of "too good to be true".

Definitely going to be adjudicating the passive effect of the item to require a player to spend an action guiding the broom each round to prevent falling.

I'm not so sure "too good to be true" though. I mean this is a fairly high level class feat here.

Atalius wrote:

Does he ever MAP2 or is it basically just one attack a round?

There's no one right answer to that. It depends completely on the situation.

In general, it's recommended to limit casters to one attack per turn since their lower attack bonus makes even MAP -5 attacks risky.

However, there can absolutely be situations in which a second attack is worth the risk. If you've just spend a Focus point on Inspire Heroics (or Fortissimo as I believe it is called now) to boost your whole party and then miss on your first attack, going for a second Strike can be worthwhile in an attempt to extend the duration of the buffed composition.

This proved most devastating indeed. Used Fortissimo and it was a thing of beauty. I hope I played it right, casted inspire + heroics, then attacked twice (one landed) then next round attacked twice again. The following round cast inspire courage again with inspire heroics and did the same routine slaying the beast. So we were getting 4 rounds of heroics.

Does anyone know when the update will be put on AoN?

Indeed I have book marked this, a true beauty. Could you offer me any advice on the above my friend? Would you recommend being resistant to fire or poison when selecting Dragon Disciple archetype.

Just looking for some clarification on this spell for the 2 action version. Assuming I am using a (H) third level version of the spell would the damage on the first round be 8D4 and then on the second round be 12D4?

Thanks a lot guys, 2 action for 1 still feels very worth it, and if I wanna full on Flurry with all 3 actions, the AC getting 1 free strike is solid.

Cool guide, learned some new things. So is Shocking Grasp not worth getting even with Reach Spell metamagic due to having to make that difficult Spell Attack roll?

Atalius wrote:

SuperBidi wrote:

Atalius wrote:

Interesting. If taking Psychic dedication then I wouldn't need to take two feats I'd that correct, just a single Dedication could get me Amped Guidance? And how does it work, is it basically the same as the Guidance cantrip it's used before the actual roll?

You just need the Dedication to get Amp Guidance.

And it's now a reaction that can be used if an ally fails an Attack roll, Save or Skill check by just one point.

Wow that's super good, so do you mean the GM has to say you missed the attack roll by one and I can say "ok I use my reaction to give him the +1"? Or?

Yes it is.

Note this is using your focus pool as well as your reaction.

As such the cost is higher than the other options here, and it is probably only once per encounter.

Wait this reaction costs me a focus point?? Thus making is useful once per fight, which also means I can't use elemental toss? :(

I thought I read somewhere that these do not stack but I can't find it now. Do they stack?

Although the rules say

"Your reactions let you respond immediately to what’s happening around you. The GM determines whether you can use reactions before your first turn begins, depending on the situation in which the encounter happens."

Warpriests from my experience aren't horrible but they are definitely worse then fighters/champions/barbarians if your trying to compete on the front lines. They can however do things that those classes likely can't do as well like Demoralize (fighters and barbarians will usually tank charisma), and other things which those classes definitely cannot do like Castdown, and Channel Smite. Channel Smite vs a Boss will do some serious damage and can easily rival the most powerful barbarian in the game in terms of alpha strikage for the limited number of times you can use it per day. The Warpriest has some very solid third actions, whether it be Demoralize, Shield cantrip (cuz you'll be wielding a two hander no doubt), Harm, True Strike (followed by a Channel Smite vs a Boss). I agree if you have a Barbarian in your group, it's best to not use Heroism on yourself, it's best to cast it on him or the Fighter. But stick to your strengths, prone the enemy with Castdown, Demoralize them when they are on the ground forcing them to basically stand up, and when they try to get up either your Barbarian or Fighter will get a free AOO. The WP makes an excellent support frontliner IMO alongside either a Fighter or Barbarian. Its easy enough to get a coveted Reaction too for your WP just by MCing into something.

Looking for some good reactions for a Warpriest. I do have champion dedication however the problem with grabbing Glimpse of Redemption (can't qualify for Retributive Strike due to alignment) is that it'll make me more of a target. However I do plan on using (H) Invisibility during combat, I'm not sure if it's still too much of a hindrance to get Glimpse of Redemption since I'll likely get focused more and I'm not the tankiest of heroes (but not squishee at all either). We have two other front liners in the party. Are there any other reactions I could look at getting? Fighter dedication is a possibility are there any other good ones?

A +4 circumstance bonus is possible by level 9, Helpful Halfling.

With Time Beacon could I:

1st action: Time Beacon
Second and third action: Searing Light (if it fails to land I use a Hero Point and let's say I miss again)

Can I go back in time and attempt the same thing getting the Hero Point back?

I was actually thinking about Carrion Crown, Giantslayer, or Reign of Winter. Interesting would Carrion Crown be easy to convert and what level does it go to? Is it a good AP?

ahh the good ole days of PF1, i miss 500+ damage per round with Cave Druid ooze level 14. R.I.P old friend.

Ouch, so actually it may be better for me to wait until the enemy acts, then I could slap on the debuff on my enemy. Is that a standard play? I thought it's always better to act first?

I like the theme of touching people (uhh that doesn't sound good) like a Bad Touch Cleric from pf1 with a lethal Touch attack, a front liner that isn't very tanky but very lethal in his own right that can burst for a massive amount of damage. I don't like the idea of fighting from range casting Harm.

Are there any plans to buff Harm just a tad bit to help bring it inline with Heal? Currently it appears a bit underpowered, of course going up against Fortitude is rarely ever a good thing. How do people feel about the balance between Harm and Heal currently? Heal feels phenomenal and it's in a good place imo, I would rather see a slight buff to Harm rather then a nerd to Heal to bring them closer together.

https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42q1g?True-Target-spell#1

Yes RAW your right, however it was cleared up by the Man, the Myth, the Legend himself.

So a funny thing happens when you're quarantined for two weeks and you don't have anything scheduled for 4 days: you lose track of time really fast. So I missed last week's updates, but that's fine because we've gotten to the point where the levels are short AF and they can easily be combined.

Anyway here's volume 6, consisting of 6th and 7th level. On Sunday we'll have volume 7, which will be 8th, 9th and 10th level, and next Wednesday will be the Gods and Magic updates to all existing guides. I'll be taking April off to build up a backlog of content and then we'll be back in March with a guide to the cloistered cleric.

As per usual phenomal work! Just one thing, True Target affects all party members first attack.

By RAW, I disagree you can release the shield to escape the Grabbed condition as it is the PC who is grabbed, not the shield.

However, if you decide by RAI to allow it, remember that unstrapping the shield is an Interact action which means it has the Manipulate trait, therefore the PC must succeed on a DC 5 flat check or the action is lost because of the Grabbed condition.

Welcome back, I see you haven't missed a step.

The big benefit of single-targeting haste is that it allows for optimal positioning of 3-action abilities. That's a bonus it's hard to put a price on.

I can put a price on that bonus, a 3rd level spell slot.

Haha that is true perhaps it's too strong every battle, but currently it's too weak. Something needs to be done.

I don't think it would fit too well with the current design of the game: no activity or ability uses this type of limitation anymore, you either can use it during an encounter or you can't , there are no limited numbers of uses per encounter. The only exception is the way focus spells work, when 10 minutes of rest are available between fights.

For a 10th level feat, Quickened Casting is underwhelming, above all since metamagic feats can no longer be used together on a single cast. I really fail to imagine a recurring scenario where a single spell per day cast faster (not even nearly instantaneously) would make much of a difference. Making it usable once every few minutes would probably work and still wouldn't break the action economy in half.

Captain Morgan wrote:

Once per encounter would be extremely strong.

What exactly would make casting a single spell in an encounter in one less action "extremly strong"? It's not as if spell slots grew on trees, and not even the strongest spells available can be quickened (it only works on spells at least 2 levels lower than the caster's maximum spell level).

Completely agree here. Sorry Captain normally I'm with you, but in this case this feat is so weak it needs to be buffed in some manner, once a day restriction is devastating.

I kinda like the concept of the spell, but I think the implementation is very open to cheese;

* The chance that if you have this spell, you'll also have an AoO heavy party is extremely high. I mean, if you have this spell, it'll encourage your martial party members to pick up AoO. And you were more likely to pick this spell if you had AoO heavy party members. So I think its power should be evaluated in that context.

* If you do have an AoO-heavy party, the expected damage from AoOs could mount up quickly. So the enemy would often have to choose not to Stride. At that point, it deals rather a lot of damage, scaling up rather fast with heightening.

* It gets really cheesy if you combine it with anything that reduces enemy mobility. For example, if you also trip the enemy, they have to spent two actions to avoid this spell, and at that point they'll usually not be able to use any special abilities anymore because those tend to cost 1-2 actions.

* It combos too well with other action-reducing spells like Slow and effects like Stunning Fist.

Altogether I think it's too inviting to abuse. You could mitigate it a bit by for example saying:
If the enemy starts the turn with less than 3 actions (perhaps due to a Slowed condition), or unable to Stride (due to being Prone or Grabbed perhaps), then the spell immediately ends.

It also needs to be heightened to the heighest level or second heighest level in order to be relevant otherwise monsters will just choose to take the damage everytime. You mention if you combine it with a trip, the enemy will need to spend an action to get up and then an action to stride to get away in order to avoid the damage, that is true but Command can do the exact same thing and is a level 1 spell.

I'd argue that not having a fly speed doesn't mean you can't yeet someone off a cliff or pull them into the air; you can still occupy open air without being able to fly, otherwise jumping wouldn't do anything, likewise, swimming without a swim speed. That rule sounds more like for cases like "you cant drag someone literally into the ground unless they have earth glide" more than "no shoving palatine over the rails and into the reactor shoot".

I would, however, say that holding people in midair or lifting them is beyond the scope and intent of the spell. If someone made a well in midair, I'd rule it that you just get pulled to the closest square to can on the ground. YMMV, of course.

Sounds fair for a third level spell

If you want to spend a 3rd-level spell slot on a 1st-level magic missile, go right ahead.

That would be nice, but some are saying it's not allowed.

Couple examples:

Enemy casts Grim Tendrils (lv2), a spell I have prepared at lv1. Having Counterspell, I spend the spell slot as a reaction and roll a spell check against the enemy's DC. Because the enemy Tendrils is only one level higher than mine, I can counteract it with a regular Success.

A magical trap triggered midway through an encounter, casting a summoning spell and conjuring a beast (a handy way for the GM to slightly nerf the creature, thanks to the Minion trait). Being a wizard, I can use Dispel Magic to get rid of it - however, the spell is a Summon V, and I only have Dispel Magic at lv2. My spell check must critically succeed against the trap's spell DC for me to banish the creature.

I cast Invisibility while under Nondetection (lv3). The enemy has See Invisibility (lv2). Because Nondetection counteracts all Revelations, I roll a spell check against the enemy's spell DC. Because See Invisibility is lower level than my Nondetection, I am only revealed if I critically fail my Counteract.

KingTreyIII wrote:

rainzax wrote:

I think of my Counteract Level as how big of bat I have.

Then, my foe's Counteract Level as how big of ball they have.

Then I roll to swing.

I was really confused about this until I realized you were talking about baseball and not bat swarms. XD

Honestly if it was reversed (your Counteract level being how big the ball is, and the foe's Counteract Level being the size of the bat) you could make it work. At least here in Australia.

//do not actually harm the bats, they're important and already dying enough, even outside the fires//

Great example Ediwir particularly the Non-Detection one! I'm running a character who plans on getting heightened Invisibility and Non-Detection, would you suggest always Heightening Non-Detection to it's highest level or are there certain levels where it's better than others? For example would you need a level 7 Non-Detection to overcome True Seeing would it work like your example for See Invisibility?

...

Or perhaps Tongues.

I mean the ability costs a valuable action (talking about recall knowledge) either have it cost something less valuable (maybe a reaction? Still wouldn't be worth it IMO) Or simply have the piece of information given be what the player wants. Let's face it an action is a pretty big deal.

Ya or just bypass the instrument altogether and keep your weapon in one hand and have the other hand empty (for Material component spells) while wearing a Persona Mask, there's your Performance bonus item.

CRB PG. 233 "Key Ability" wrote:

Each skill is tied to a key ability. You add your modifier for this ability to checks and DCs when using that skill. For example, skulking about the shadows of a city at night with Stealth uses your Dexterity modifier, navigating the myriad personalities and power plays of court politics with Society uses your Intelligence modifier, and so on. The key ability for each skill is listed on Table 4–1: Skills, Key abilities, and Actions on page 235 and also appears in parentheses following the skill’s name in the descriptions on the following pages. If the GM deems it appropriate for a certain situation, however, they might have you use a different ability modifier for a skill check or when determining your skill DC.

This line would support the idea that under the proper circumstances, like using a whip to trip an opponent (that's just fun to say), you could in fact be allowed to use your Dex rather than your Str for that trip check despite trip being an Athletics ability.

I for one am all for it. Otherwise there would be no way to build an agile wrestler or Judo martial artist who uses their dexterity to throw around their opponents more than their brawn. Or the fencer deftly disarming their opponent with a lithe flick of their wrist rather than brutally snatching the weapon from the opponents hands all Guts style.

The real question in my mind is this: Does this do anything to severely unbalance the game? I don't believe so personally. Thoughts?

Beowulf your absolutely right, I think the excerpt you pulled out stating "If the GM deems it appropriate for a certain situation, however, they might have you use a different ability modifier for a skill check or when determining your skill DC." As Athletics is both a skill check and can be an attack roll this is the most underrated and important statement of all. I don't even need an errata, this will do for me just fine.

theservantsllcleanitup wrote:

Quote:

When you use a Strike action or any other attack action, you attempt a check called an attack roll.

Did you just miss this part or are you ignoring it?

There is a whole chapter defining what an Attack Roll is. It is called Attack Rolls. There's a part speaking about Finesse weapons, a part speaking about MAP to combat maneuver, but there is nothing about Athletics checks being Attack Rolls. So, you found one sentence in the whole book that is general enough to enforce your point of view, and you ignore the rest.

Sorry, I'm not the one ignoring the biggest part of the rules :)

Ugh not this again :( A dev has already said in the past (going back to playtest days) that Trips are indeed attack rolls which use Athletics. Therefore Athletics checks to Trip are attack rolls. I for one believe that dev, for he is God and this is his world, we just live in it.

Samurai two comments above is correct.

Removed my post. Just realized this is the 2E forum.

I was going to say WELCOME OLD FRIEND, been a long time, damn wish you would come over to pf2 brother. Always loved your insight on grappling topics.

I'm not totally sold on Phantasmal Killer, the reason being it's basically Fear with 8D6 damage and 4D6 damage on a successful save (might as well take Fear). Do I want to pay a 4th level slot for extra damage while I have a group full of damage dealers? I wonder if I should be focusing on the things the party doesn't have like spells that don't deal damage like Resilient Sphere, Hideous Laughter, Slow and the like.

This gentlemen's guide is interesting. His analysis on the spells seems to be quite off. Many spells which are extremely good he doesn't consider extremely good, there are lots of examples, but one is Synesthesia. And be considers summoning spells to be pretty garbage.

Zapp wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

That entirely depends on what you mean by "their job", which you didn't outline.

What do you think?

Killing monsters while not getting killed in return. Obviously.

(Sorry to be blunt. But while you can argue the game is about other things than combat, it's only when your life is on the line a discussion like this really matters. That is, in any other situation, just about any character can get the job done eventually)

Not sorry to be blunt, but you seem to have no idea how the original tier list was designed, and why did it rank Druids as tier 1 and Fighters as tier 4/5, despite the fact that Fighters were great at killing things.

Savage.

I like your GMing style Captain, very reasonable.

We should be praising this man for the work he put in here, this is brilliant stuff must have taken quite a long time. Very well done sir.

Four alchemists of the mutagenist variety, hands down.

As a GM, I personally don't care what kinda rules lawyery nonsense a player tries to cook up here. You want to patch up your buddy, you need two hands and a kit.

You can access it a bit easier by putting it in a bandolier. But thats about it.

Common sense, folks.

Nah this game has nothing to do with common sense, we are talking about a fantasy setting where you got unicorns s****** rainbows, I agree with Shroudb I think he's right.

I like the whole Treat Wounds thing, it's nice being able to make a Harm Cleric and not having to be a Healbot.

Although it says "Your forced to run..." That would tell me you can't step even if you know the player has an AOO, because the target is Commanded to do so, he is given a command and thus becomes like a puppet to that request (approach you, run away (as if it had the fleeing condition), release what it's holding, drop prone, or stand in place). So no matter even if the enemy knows you possess an AOO it is irrelevant, thus is the power of the spell.

Casters have suffered the following nerfs and I wouldn't call the current situation balanced:

1. Per your cited values, monsters have a 70% chance to succeed (strong save), 60% chance to succeed (mid save), and 45% chance to succeed (weak save). This makes critically failing a save almost non-existent (only on a natural 1 in most cases). This only gets worse for a boss battle due to non-linear treadmill scaling where you absolutely shouldn't waste your real spells on them unless you want to get shut down.

2. Casters spell proficiency rolls are heavily delayed. That means you are only likely to crit on a spell attack roll on a natural 20 and can't take advantage of easy to inflict conditions that martials can (e.g., flanking for flat-footed)

3. There aren't many true trike worthy attack roll spells in the game right now, so it doesn't make up for accuracy via proficiency issues.

4. Without metagaming you can't know the monster's weakest save via the recall knowledge action based on RAW. Even if your wizards thesis was "Battle Acumen and the Magical Application of and Common Golarion Hostile Creatures" it still falls under the purview of your GM to be nice enough to give you the information you want.

5. Spell mechanics for control spells are all about action removal are not strong enough to really delay a creature from battle for more than one or two rounds. As identified in #1-4 since critical failures or critical hits are mathematically 5% for most instances of spell use really spell power is based on a save failure or success (since they have a much higher than 50% chance if you targeted their strong save unknowingly). What this means is that you end up with a large percentage of 'control' spells that remove 1 total action through some kind of effect that requires them to clear the debuff via one action, move out of the AoE, etc. On the rare instance a spell has some mechanical value beyond this, it almost certainly has the incapacitation trait, which forces the overall success rates...

I hope Paizo takes note of this, this was a very well written and thought out post.

Is it a playtest thing? Because I find it strange that the flavor text of the patrons mention deities, demigods and archdevils but you can't choose the divine tradition.

I would really like to have the option of playing the historic witch with a 'pact with the devil'.

That Divine list isn't a big loss.

Yep, I'd still prefer having to spend the action each round to maintain it then use a focus point. Those are valuable. I agree with you, Bard may be a better debuffer and there's something not right about that.