Axelwarrior's page

If this is an attempt to simplify all the different distances of Darkvision, I'd rather have 2 categories rather than none. Something like basic Darkvision (60ft) and advanced Darkvision (90ft/120ft/unlimited)

Axelwarrior: I think they very very deliberately are moving away from the monstrous stacking magnificence that is Pathfinder 1e where the things you describe are possible. It's just a different game.

That does seem to be the case, yes - I'm only doing my best to try and persuade them otherwise, as I am doing for other things I dislike in this playtest.

@Dire Ursus - if you do not find it fun to be skillful in PF1, you can still play a fighter with barely any skill ranks. If you don't like auto-succeeding, you can opt not to pick up Skill Focus, or that Cloak of Elvenkind. But the option is there for those that do. Your fun doesn't have to be lessened by my fun. That's what's good about that system.

Personally, I think you're looking at it the wrong way.

The problem with the design around the "coin flip" problem is that there isn't as much room for improvement at something as there was in PF1. This is me speaking for myself, of course, but being able to reach outrageous numbers for my character's specialty was something I really enjoyed.

When I have the character concept of a rogue who's an expert at sneaking or an occultist who's an expert at activating magic items, 50% as a success rate just won't cut it. These are characters who are supposedly well on their way to mastering their craft - and a random enemy has a good chance at besting them because they're the same or slightly higher level?

Because, sure, I can be, say, an Expert at the skill I'm "optimizing" - I might even have an item to give me a small bonus (+2 at level 7). In the context of a d20 and your level at the time you get there, that's not much.

And, I know the counter-argument could be that you want some chance in your TTRPG - that's the whole point of having dice. And yes, I agree, but sometimes you want the option to beat the odds, to make a character that doesn't fail at what they've dedicated their life to.

Totally agree - there's no reason for magical healing to be required in between encounters. Magical healing should be something extraordinary and impressive, bringing people back from the brink of death during combat. Currently, in PF1, magical healing is pretty much viewed as first-aid treatment for the most part.

I really dislike the view of the classic MMO "holy trinity", where a healer is required. Having a character dedicated to healing should feel like an actual boon to have in deadly situations, not like you're meeting the base requirements to stay alive and play the game.

If someone wants to play a healer - great! That means your martials can be a bit reckless, knowing you have their back. Maybe the casters skimp out on defensive spells and contribute more to the battle, because you can keep them alive. Everyone gets to have fun, without the healer feeling like an after-combat first-aid kit.

But if no one wants to be the healer, that should be okay too. And no matter how careful and optimized you are, the dice will inevitably get you hit. You should not be punished for that - especially not severely enough to get your character killed. Not just because you were at half HP at the boss battle after a bunch of goblins got lucky hits on you.

I'm thinking the intent is to mean that you are automatically seen if no part of your turn had you concealed or in cover, and the choice of wording was unfortunately vague.

That would be fortunate if it's true - it means they only need to rephrase it. However, I think the ruling about attacking from stealth not making the target flat footed is unreasonable as well.

Also, what really grinds my gears is the text from p. 332:

Quote:

Watches and Surprise Attacks

Groups usually put a few people on guard to watch out for danger while the others rest. Spending time on watch also interrupts sleep, so a night’s schedule needs to account for everyone’s time on guard duty. Table 10–1 indicates how long the group needs to set aside for rest based on everyone in the group getting a rotating watch assignment of equal length. If a surprise encounter would occur during rest, you can roll a die to randomly determine which character is on watch at the time of the encounter. All characters roll initiative, with sleeping characters typically rolling Perception with the –4 penalty for being asleep. They don’t automatically wake up when rolling initiative, but might get a check to wake up at the start of their turns as normal. If a savvy enemy waits for a particularly vulnerable character to take
watch before attacking, you can have the attack happen on that character’s watch automatically. However, you might have the ambusher attempt a Stealth check against the Perception DCs of the party to see if anyone noticed his approach.

Okay, sure, we need to check to see if we spot the enemy approaching. But if you "automatically become seen if you don’t have cover or aren’t concealed from them at any time during your movement" (p. 158) then provided you have no concealment or cover nearby, nobody needs to worry about being ambushed, since the "savvy enemy" literally can't avoid being noticed.

Yes, I really think this limitation makes no mechanical, narrative or any kind of logical sense.

Ranged attacks are still attacks, and therefore instantly reveal you before you attack per the Stealth skill, unless you spotted a rule I didn't. The rules for Concealment on p. 302 don't have any wording that negates the rules for Stealth on p. 158. There's even the Goblin feat Very Sneaky that only grants your target a flat-footed condition against your attack if you critically succeed Stealth against the creature.

I apologize, I misquoted. The text wasn't from the Unseen condition.

"If you’re unseen by a creature and it’s impossible for that creature
to see you [...] Acting to do something other than Hide or Sneak makes
you sensed instead of seen."

Which makes sense - If you're in the darkness, it's impossible for you to be Seen. But since you attacked, the enemies know you're there, making you Sensed. Sensed, however, still makes your enemies flat-footed to you.

But either way, I believe the matter of ambush is unrelated to the part of the skill I'm referring to. Surprise rounds aren't really a thing anymore anyway, from what I gather.
The only problem is that it's making Sneak Attack a very bland feature, with the only practical and accessible way of triggering it being flanking. Sneaky characters should be encouraged to take advantage of their surroundings, in my opinion. This new ruling only removes possibilities, which I believe ends up making the game less fun.

EDIT: formatting

Axelwarrior wrote:

JDLPF wrote:

On the other hand, I provisionally see this as a possible welcome change since this means no enemies can ambush the party. They can't use Stealth to attack since "if you attack a creature you’re unseen by, that creature is not flatfooted against that attack."

Why do you think that's the case? The Unseen condition states:

"If a creature is unseen, you have no idea where it is. You
don’t know what space it occupies, you’re flat-footed to
it, and you can’t easily target it with attacks or targeted
spells and affects. "

Enemies can still ambush the party by attacking from behind cover or concealment, such as in a dense forest or a dark dungeon (assuming there's no light on them and the PCs don't have darkvision).

The only difference it makes is that a melee rogue can't effectively use Sneak in combat to get Sneak Attacks, unless under very specific circumstances.

No, they can't. The instant before the enemy tries to attack, they are revealed and no longer unseen, per the Stealth rules, and the player is no longer flat-footed.

"If you’re unseen by a creature and it’s impossible for that creature

In the situations I mentioned, the Sneak result doesn't matter - the enemies are Unseen because they literally aren't visible. So they remain Sensed after their attack, making you still flat-footed.

Even if the circumstance is not like that, enemies can still "ambush" you. They can remain hidden while you're exploring and then attack when you're in unfavourable positions. Enemies rarely use the mechanic I'm talking about in 1E anyway.

I think they just need to put in a line about inattentive watchers. "You automatically become seen if you don’t have cover or

aren’t concealed from them at any time during your movement, unless a creature that might see you is otherwise distracted and not looking in that direction, as determined by the GM."

Yes, that is helpful, but I think there needs to be a way of determining that mechanically.

And what better way... than the PC's Stealth result vs their Perception DC? It just makes perfect sense, as it's the PC that makes the decision of when to move from cover. It should be part of the Sneak check to determine whether you took advantage of your enemy not paying attention.

On the other hand, I provisionally see this as a possible welcome change since this means no enemies can ambush the party. They can't use Stealth to attack since "if you attack a creature you’re unseen by, that creature is not flatfooted against that attack."

Why do you think that's the case? The Unseen condition states:

Enemies can still ambush the party by attacking from behind cover or concealment, such as in a dense forest or a dark dungeon (assuming there's no light on them and the PCs don't have darkvision).

The only difference it makes is that a melee rogue can't effectively use Sneak in combat to get Sneak Attacks, unless under very specific circumstances.

I was pleasantly surprised as I started reading the new stealth-related conditions - Seen, Concealed, Unseen and Sensed. It's all clear-cut, nicely defined with not much room for misunderstandings.

However - I then went through the Stealth skill and spotted a horrible change from 1E. Part of the Sneak action:

"You automatically become seen if you don’t have cover or
aren’t concealed from them at any time during your movement[...]"

What this means is, the moment you leave an area of concealment or cover, you are instantly revealed and any enemy with line of sight is immediately aware of you.
Practically, this removes a character's ability to sneak out of cover, approach an enemy and attack him while he's still flat-footed.
It also means that you can never go from cover to cover when sneaking around an area, because enemies are treated as always paying attention to every corner around them, even when unaware of an enemy's presence.

This used to be the case for Pathfinder's first edition, however the devs made the very welcome and necessary change of this paragraph:
"When you start your turn using Stealth, you can leave cover or concealment and remain unobserved as long as you succeed at a Stealth check and end your turn in cover or concealment. Your Stealth immediately ends after you make an attack roll, whether or not the attack is successful (except when sniping as noted below)."

I would like to suggest that a similar change be made in 2E's rules. It would really make a sneaky character way more compelling and interesting to play.