Hooded Man

Blave's page

Goblin Squad Member. 3,148 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist.


1 to 50 of 3,148 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
WWHsmackdown wrote:
Fort reaper 225 wrote:
Logan Banner wrote:
Heightened (+2) The damage increases by 1d4.

Is anyone else thinking that this scales quite poorly? 1d4 every 2 spell levels bounds up to practically nothing at most stages of the game...

For people to more reliably pick this i feel like changing the spirit damage to 1d6 base dice would be in order seeing as it is generally difficult to even keep the party within those 15 feet that the focus spell requires.

Cantrip damage thorns on one ally that is reactionary and unavoidable that is folded up into the ally gaining an AC PLUS you raising a shield ALL FOR ONE ACTION is some crazy value. It's essentially three actions of focus spell smooshed into one.

Does it actually affect only one ally? The wording is very weird. The second paragraph pretty much says it applies to all allies that are in the aura or enter it and even goes out of its way to remind you that you're not included yourself.

Thanks for the guide! Didn't have time to read it in detail, but when skimming a bit, some of the ratings seem off.

Warpriest's Armor has a great effect but it's ultimately easily replaced by a general feat since the bulk reduction will hardly ever matter. So giving it a blue rating seems a bit too optimistic. At the very least you should mention the easy substitution in it's description.

Divine Apex is nowhere near green in my book. If you could get it at level 14, it would be amazing, but level 18? Half the group will already have apex items by then. It's also listed to your deity's divine attribute so it might not be all that useful four your party at all.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Aaaaaaand the extra reach is a stance now.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Bluemagetim wrote:
Doesnt Leshy also have a ancestry feet that gives reach?

Yes, same limitation to two-handed weapons without innate reach. But the Leshy feat reduces the weapon die size by 1, so at best you get a d10.

Skeleton can also add reach to any one-handed weapon, I think. But that also limits you to d8 at best.

Leshy is a level level 1 feat. Skeleton level 5. I really think the Minotaur one should at least be level 9.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Grankless wrote:
Oh nooooo, minotaurs [...] can add reach to weapons that don't have many traits. How scary.

It's not exclusively about the d12 weapons, which indeed have very few traits and usually not particularly powerful ones. The feat can also be uset to add Reach to something like a Scythe. Or even better: an Ogre Hook. That does seem scary enough.

For the record, I don't think this feat breaks the game in anyway. Though it is curious that it doesn't come with the reduced weapon die size like the Leshy's Grasping Reach, while still not being of a much higher level. I think if it was a level 9 or 13 ancestry feat, it would look a lot more balanced.

Do any of the minotaur or centaur feats require you to be of a certain size?

Does the medium size heritage prevent you from getting any of that stuff?

3 people marked this as a favorite.
AestheticDialectic wrote:
I guess a raccoon would be a climbing animal here? Feels restrictive. I don't know how you'd have an awakened animal race and not immediately assume people are gonna play raccoons

I mean, the Tanuki ancestry is coming in like three-ish months. I doubt there's too many players who would start playing an awakened raccoon before seeing how that turns out.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Verzen wrote:
Blave wrote:
Verzen wrote:
Blave wrote:
So you want power creep.

This is what's known as a strawman also a false dichotomy.


To avoid power creep, a dedication should make the main class 0.8 and the dedication 0.8 instead of 1 and .33.

If your suggested changes take a character from 1.33 to 1.6 units of "power", then that is indeed power creep. Unless you can explain how gaining 20% does not qualify as power creep.
Do you.. do you not know how maths work?

I do. Thanks for asking, I guess?


.8 + .8 doesn't equal 1.6 and 1 + .33 doesn't equal 1.33 because the math itself isn't based on addition.

It's exponential effectiveness. It's not linear effectiveness. Having .33 power compared to a power of 1 often means that .33 option is useless as it's competing with the 1.

No, it just means you need to be smart about using that 0.33 power. If you can't use it for offense reliably, use it for utility, buffs, mobility, to grant good "third actions" or simply as an emergency option you don't want to fall back on, but might end up glad that you have it (like say a ranged cantrip on a melee character).

And .8 with .8 doesn't mean 1.6 power as there is diminishing returns. One of the reasons fighter is so damn good is because of that +2 to attack. It's adding to its main focus.

So assuming a martial class with a spellcaster archetype, you're suggesting that exactly to reach that 0.8 power? Dropping the weapon proficiency of the martial down one step while providing less spellcasting power than a spellcaster? That would be a Magus, or a warpriest if you take the fighter's proficiency as a starting point. If you take any other martial as a base class (other than gunslinger, I guess) you do what? Drop down to expert in weapons? And what do you get in return? Master spellcasting? Like the archetypes already provide? How would that work?

It's the same thing with power in a class. If you make a class .5 and .5, the class can do two things sure but both of them POORLY.

Well, then it's a good thing that we already established that the current design always keeps your main class at 1.0, no?

What needs to happen is a class can do two things well while if it's a single class it can do that single focus great.

That only "needs" to happen according to you. I'm perfectly happily with how archetypes work right now. On a basic design level, of course. There are individual archetypes that are very bad mechanically, but they can't possibly all be winners. And even those "bad" archetypes most likely have some fans who like the flavor and getting some mechanical benefits from it, however small it may be.

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Verzen wrote:
Blave wrote:
So you want power creep.

This is what's known as a strawman also a false dichotomy.


To avoid power creep, a dedication should make the main class 0.8 and the dedication 0.8 instead of 1 and .33.

If your suggested changes take a character from 1.33 to 1.6 units of "power", then that is indeed power creep. Unless you can explain how gaining 20% does not qualify as power creep.

16 people marked this as a favorite.
Verzen wrote:

One of the things I hope PF3E accomplishes is to acknowledge the dedication issue.

For example - A fighter with summoner dedication

The summoner dedication now allows the fighter to become a synthesis summoner. They only have both fighter feats and Eidolon abilities while the synthesis eidolon is summoned.

It combines the two rather than try to have them competing over niches.

So you want power creep.

There's no way to add the core feature of one class to another class at full strength without making the character significantly more powerful.

15 people marked this as a favorite.

I play an inventor. So your whole post is invalid. :P

Seriously though, I disagree with most of your points.

1) Dedications are not worthless. They are a gate to more abilities. The spellcasting you get from it is fine for utility and even for offense - IF you keep investing into the archetype. If you want classes "merged", you need to play a hybrid like a Magus. Expecting a single feat to get you full proficiency in what makes another class special is a but much.

2) That's by design. Weapon and armor choices are supposed to be locked behind classes. You can expand your options with general feats and archetypes but not everyone can learn everything with ease. Your thaumaturge can have full proficiency in Falcata at level 12 if you're willing to invest into it - or even level 1 if your GM is generous with Unconventional Weaponry. And you can have full scaling heavy armor proficiency by level 2.

3) Archetypes are your new subclasses. If you think of a non-free archetype game, you either have your regular class feats or the feats of an archetype. So they are a way to change your abilities and playstyle. Class archetypes could be a bit more frequent, though it looks like we'll get a good few more before the end of the year.

Out of time for now. Might comment on the rest later.

Doesn't seem likely. They might adjust a thing here and there if necessary. But I don't really think there's too much need for that, if any.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

How is that feat once per hour? I can't see any frequency mentioned anywhere on the reveal on Twitter.

I think they mentioned Rage becoming better in the remaster. This may or may not mean the limitation on Concentration effects is gone. It's certainly something I would change about Rage since it interferes with too many things. So maybe Bloodrager allowing spells while raging won't even be necessary.

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Apparently the Amazon page for this book reveals the new versatile heritage to be the dragonblood heritage.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Someone on Reddit recently suggested a Fighter using a Rooting, Greater Crushing, Grievous Bo Staff, preferably with Lunging Stance. Crit enemies at 15 ft (including Reactive Strikes), knocking them back 15 ft, immobilizing them and making them Enfeebled 2 and Clumsy 2.

The whole mixed ancestry thing is pretty new and only emerged with the remaster about 4 months ago. Before that, half-elves were strictly limited to humans for their "other half".

So there's really no information on how any of these newly possible combinations look or work.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Finoan wrote:
graystone wrote:
*PS: having someone 100% be able to enchant their frying pan alone would make me give any DM side eye over any ruling disallowing improvised weapon runes.
And I would fire back that I would give a player the side eye if they grab a rolling pin and want to transfer their weapon runes onto it just to save them the time and cost of buying runestones.

Since transferring runes from a runestone saves you the 10% rune cost, using a rolling pin to carry a rune will most likely be more expensive than using the stone in the end.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think shoddy means poor craftsmanship much more than poor materials. There's no rules against making shoddy items our of high quality Orichalcum, for example.

And for regular materials, the price difference between different qualities is negligible, so I don't see any reason why you wouldn't be able to etch runes into shoddy items.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

My AV cleric has dangerous sorcery and healing hands. So his heal hits undead (and fiends) nearly as hard as an equal level fireball. On top of healing every ally in range. That's a very, very good deal.

I also very rarely need to heal all that much in combat, so having 5 extra top level slots to essentially blast enemies with is very nice.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Holy Light, Heal, Holy Cascade, Infuse Vitality, Sunburst.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Removing the AC penalty and/or the inability to use Concentrate actions might make Rage too strong if gained via the archetype.

It's obvious that the archetype could needs some help, but outright removing these downside might swing too far in the other direction.

The classes mentioned as being revised in PC2 are champion, oracle and alchemist. You might want to curb your expectations for everything else.

That being said, PC1 only mentioned the witch as being revised, while the cleric got (at least) as big of an upgrade and wizard was - for better or worse - changed quite dramatically. So there is definitely room for changes/improvements to other classes as well.

7 people marked this as a favorite.

I think this a case of specific beats general. In general, non-living creatures are immune to bleed damage. But the vampire specifically is not immune to bleed damage.

Seeing how they kind of need blood to survive, just like a living creature, it does make sense that losing blood would harm them.

How are you hidden to an adjacent creature?

Does the effect of Patron's Puppet end after giving the command or after the Familar comletes its actions? If it's the latter, making the companion skilled in deception would allow it to Create a Doversion to become hidden.

yellowpete wrote:
I'm just realizing that the familiar ability of Starless Shadow is a bit awkward because you want the familiar to be concealed before casting a hex to cause frightened, but the granted hex cantrip is precisely what will (potentially) make it concealed to the enemy, right after you needed it. And I think sinking actions or even spells into making the familiar pre-concealed would be a pretty steep price to pay for the effect (cannot help but compare Dirge of Doom).

You can actually choose whether the new familiar abilities trigger before or after the effect of the hex. So you can absolutely cast your cantrip on a target that's adjacent to your familiar ans immediately make the target dazzled and frightened.

Player Core says:

Familiar Ability One of your familiar’s two bonus abilities is always the one listed here, a mark of your patron’s indelible influence. The benefit can occur only once per round when you Cast or Sustain a hex, and you can choose whether it occurs before or after the effects of Casting or Sustaining the hex.

Depends on what the poppet is made of, I would say. I could see bones being used to craft poppets in some cultures.

But then again, does a "skeletal system" need to be made of actual bones? Would the wooden shell of a Conrasu be a "(exo-)skeletal system"? I think it might.

So gut reaction upon thinking about it, I would let this affect anyone with a hard organic suporting system. Which at a glance means Automatons are immune, some Poppets and Leshies (and maybe Ghoran? Don't know too much about those) might be immune, depending on their composition. Any other ancestry would be fair game.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Any chance we can get a preview of the boosts and flaws for the already revealed new ancestries?

So the Ranger in my Kignmaker game got a Fangwire and used it to grapple an enemy. Rolled a Crit Success, so the enemy was constrained and then utterly failed to Escape three times.

Next turn, target is still grabbed/restrained (doesn't matter for the question) and the Ranger attacks it again with the Fangwire. His argument was that he's basically pulling on the wire to inflict damage, which honestly does kind of make sense. I'm just wondering if there's RAW somewhere that explicitely says you can't Strike with a weapon or unarmed attack that you are currently using to grapple.

I couldn't find anything like this, but if no such rule exists, he could in theory by RAW use the fangwire to grapple one enemy and then still attack someone else with the same weapon, which seems a bit silly.

Since it specifically calls out using a Recall Knowledge check, I would say yes, any effect that interacts with Recall Knowledge should apply.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Unklbuck wrote:
Blave wrote:

Dragon Disciple can get you a few specific spells added to your spell list.

Adapted Adept from the human ancestry can at least add one 1st level spell

There's no other way to get non-divine spells as a cleric beyond what your deity grants, I think.

Runescared Archtype

Runescarred doesn't really interact with the cleric's existing spellcasting though, or am I missing something? The question was about adding more spells to the divine spell list of the cleric.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dragon Disciple can get you a few specific spells added to your spell list.

Adapted Adept from the human ancestry can at least add one 1st level spell

There's no other way to get non-divine spells as a cleric beyond what your deity grants, I think.

keftiu wrote:
Hasbro is worth something like 8 billion US dollars. They've got a lot more money to throw at a notable videogame studio - and infinitely more name recognition to cash in on, for now - and that's something that folks wanting "a BG3 for other TTRPGs" often miss out on.

While this is true, I don't think it's known whether they actually paid for any part of BG3. In fact, Larian might have paid Hasbro for the rights to use the license.

But yeah, DnD has a huge brand recognition. Even if a big studio like Larian wanted to make a AAA game based on PF2, doing so without a big name like DnD attached could potentially be disastrous.

And quite frankly, something more akin to Solasta would be more fitting for PF2. Larian's very freeform approach to what you can do in their games would likely clash with PF2's comparatively strict ruleset.

So the ultimate dream would probably be a game with Solasta's adherence to rules and BG3's AAA production values. But alas, it will likely remain just a dream.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I didn't mention it because I directly linked to its steam page :)

But yes, mentioning the name would have been a good idea in hindsight.

It's also supposed to be a 10% off on launch, so you can save a bit if you grab it early.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

This might interest you if you like small indie games.

Otherwise, we got Gallowspire Survivor (Basically Vampire Survivors in Golarion) in early access, and Abomination Vaults, a Diablo-style ARPG coming up.

That's pretty much everything that's happening right now, unless I'm forgetting something.

As far as we know, all fiends and all undead have the Unholy trait by default with possible rare exceptions.

We will know details once Monster Core is released next month.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Isn't that's what apex items already do?

Or do you mean you want to create a lower level kind of apex items that basically grant a partial boost?

Ah, I missed that this was discussed already. So it IS a flaw in the system, not just some weird interaction I'm missing.

Good to know, thank you all. I will make sure to add the ability to be repaired to any construct familiar one of my players might want to use going forward.

"PC pg. 212 wrote:

Construct: Your familiar has the construct trait

instead of the animal trait. The familiar is immune
to death effects, disease, doomed, drained, fatigued,
healing, nonlethal attacks, paralyzed, poison, sickened, spirit, unconscious, vitality, and void. Your familiar
must have the tough pet ability (page 259) to select this.

This ability makes a familiar immune to healing. Previous construct companions (the one from the inventor and the clockwork specific familiar) had basically the same ability, but with additional text saying that they can be Repaired. The new ability lacks that language.

Repair says it only works on objects, not creatures. I can't find a general rule saying all constructs can be repaired.

So how does a construct companion regain HP? Only during rest and from other abilities like Focused Rejuvenation?

7 people marked this as a favorite.

The mummy statblock lists bleed immunity!

Even without the manipulate trait (which it absolutely still has by any sensible interpretation of what happened in the remaster, mind you), Phase Bolt in particular would still trigger Reactive Strikes anyway, since it has you make a ranged attack.

Sure there are other reactions that only trigger on manipulate, but Reactive Strike is by far the most common reaction.

But yeah, I agree with everyone else that those errata'd spells absolutely retain the traits buried in their original components.

Otherwise, one could also say there's no remaster rule on how to provide Somatic or Verbal spells at all, so you're outright unable to use any pre-master spell, period.

Abilities and effects that care about what you did with your previous actions or what yoi do with your next action do not carry over between turns. Yoi must use them at the same time as the thing they interact with. This has been clarified by Lead Designer Logan Bonner about 2 years ago.

So you can't use pacifying infusion with a 3 action impulse. Ever. (Unless there's a way to get quicken for infusions. I don't think so but Kineticist isn't exactly a class I'm very familiar with.)

Edit: Here's the source, if you're intersted.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Both these spells are still part of the game. Stuff that's not plre-printed in PC1 is not delet3d from the game in any way. Using spells from the CRB is no different than using spells from SoM or any other book.

But neither tidal hands not air cushion are aura impulses. I'm not sure what you're trying to saying?

Future proofing, most likely. Just in case they ever release a stance Impulse that does not affect your aura.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Spontaneous is better. I say that as someone who (subjectively) prefers prepared.

Witch and Wizard need more spells for free. If they are supposed to be flexible in their preparation, they should have access to more spells than a sorcerer has in his repertoire (Yes, I'm ignoring the handful of extra spells they get at level 1.). Giving both at least 3 spells per level up would go a long way to make them more attractive in my book.

The flexible spellcaster archetype has a similar problem. I can live with having fewer spell slots, but having fewer spells prepared feels terrible.

There's also plenty of other means to make enemies Off-Guard. If you have someone who focuses on Grab and/or Trip, you can often make do without flanking, for example.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bluemagetim wrote:

This is going to sound weird but +1 to hit while raging for fury barbs. Make them a little better at criting but its through fury instead of training.

Everyone' is going to say that's stepping on the fighters toes, but its not technically changing anything about their proficiency progression and its such a generic benefit that it fits generic fury.
In fact a +1 to hit and +2 to damage -1 Ac while raging is kinda reaching back to the 1e barbarian.

Last time I checked the math, a +1 to attack is roughly 15-20% increase in average damage. That would be way too strong on top of Rage Damage.

Fury needs better exclusive feats and maybe better damage resistance. Or more TempHP from Rage because "your Fury won't let you give in", or something like that.

Or maybe give it a level 10-ish feat that let's you choose a lower level feat from another instinct without being bound by its anathema. That could be fun.

1 to 50 of 3,148 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>