Search Posts
As others have said, it's a form of pseudo-action compression. Magus suffers a lot from being squeezed tight given all the actions you have to take to keep spellstrikes coming. Being able to do a bit of extra damage and recharge your spellstrike gives you some more options that some other focus spells just don't. You can manage without it, certainly, but it's still very good.
If the choice is between errata and people getting paid a better wage, I'm not going to go to miss the errata lmao. Also you yourself said Paizo have always had a problem with putting out conistent useful errata, so i'm not sure how you're connecting the dots between a union forming four years ago and this.
I think of it the same way we see grifters claiming magic powers in the real world. Some believe their own hype, fully.
Agreed. I try to normally avoid saying things are entirely bad because I think it can get hyperbolic quickly, but this one is pretty bad.
Thanks for the response Maya, but (and I'm speaking to everyone here, not just you or the paizo team) but I'm a little concerned that there isn't an errata for certain issues. The ambiguity over things like Oracle spells really does feel like something that needs addressing. Re: Gaulin
No it does look like an oversight. I suspect it was assumed that martial artist already had the reuglar monastic weapontry feat, and so it wasn't printed for martial artist. For a homerule fix, giving it to martial artist as a second level feat is probably fine enough.
I think the playtests got thrown a bit out of sync by starfinder playtests, so it might be a while.Weren't the Battlecry, Impossible, and Starfinder 2E playtests also fairly close together as playtests go? Or maybe I'm thinking of Tech Core rather than Battlecry. Yeah as I recall what happened was Impossible got moved up earlier to make space for Tech Core.
When you say "apply to critical failures" does this only work for spell attack rolls then? If so that's strong but honestly not the worst thing in the world.It's to improve your saves against one tradition, with the appropriate setup. Spell attack rolls don't enter the picture. Ohhh. I see. I read it as spells you cast, not spells cast against you.
This was the first ancestry I've gotten to write for Paizo, and I had so much fun with it. I hope everyone loves them as much as I do and is as eager to play with them as I am. (I also secretly hope that they make you ask your GM if you can have ancestral paragon instead of free archetype. Though I guess I just spilled that secret.) Were the pearl dragonets you? If so how do I send them fanmail. And undying fealty.
I think "absurdly unprofessional" is a bit much. Calling them rare just sounds like an oversight. They're not doing this to spite us, as annoying as the lack of "weapon" runes for spell attack rolls is sometimes.
Reanimator rejigged to work with necromancer!!! In the VERY unlikely event that summoner and magus get new goodies on top of hypothetical reprints, I really want a duel wielding hybrid study for magus. I think it'd be pretty easy by giving double slice for free and letting you spellstrike + double slice at once. Perhaps too many dice to roll at once, or perhaps, not enough!
I am brand new to the physical pathfinder game. I played WOTR on PC but besides that I have no experience with the game or lore. Which books should I start with to understand the history and lore of the world? Online people said I should start with the Inner Sea book but those posts were 10 years old. Since Lost Omens: Shining Kingdoms released is that the new major lore book? Should I start with that? I with Paizo would organize their books to make it easier to understand which ones are major and which are minor. What do you mean by "Major and minor"? If you're after lore books alone, anything that starts with "Lost Omens" is your major lore book. I'd personally reccomend browsing the list and seeing what grabs your interest, or share what you're interested in here and we can make reccomendations.If you liked WOTR, for instance, you might find rival acadamies interesting as it details the reclaimation of the sarkoris area after the closing of the worldwound.
I'm a fan of the idea of a modular-point based system. Eg you select a die size and hands, and then you pick a number of traits out up to the points that choice gives you. There can then be sample weapons printed for quick-selection purposes, and new books can add new traits alongside sample weapons for those traits. This then keeps the amount of repeats down because the new "weapons" would be more for illustration purposes. Higher profiency tiers could then give you more points for the same catagory which is all martial and advanced do anyway. I think this then strikes a balance between picking weapons for aesthetics and keeping mechanical weight, because at least personally, I struggle to just call something one thing if it doesn't plausably sell itself as that. You could give me a 1d4 B weapon and tell me that actually it's a greatsword but I'm never going to feel like it is. There's obviously limits to this, but I've been kicking this idea around since my 5e days, because it's always been clear there's some kind of internal system for assinging damage dice and traits. EG a 1 handed (martial) weapon with reach will always be 1d4.
For the love of all that is holy do not use LLMs to tell you how a system works. They're prone to just lying at the best of times, much less parsing specific information about a system with similar names and mechanics to other systems. I'm not going to comment on the size thing because this is clearly just going to come down to personal prefrence, but the rules are easily accessible online and you're more than capable of reading them on your own.
Yeah I really don't think this is a character problem*, at least with the information we have now. You can get away with a lot of stuff in this system. It sounds like a group not working together to deal with the boss. *Outside of not having ranged/mobility tools but that's an easy fix.
Regarding 3) Opening up the floor to some free retraining might also help. On the speed front it sounds like your party might benefit from tools that they don't have. Also - what are they doing in combat? This sounds eerily like my first party which were consistently using -10 MAP attacks instead of moving or using skill actions. Even something as simple as walk to boss - hit - walk away from boss (Or step if reactive strike is involved) would quickly drain the action economy from the boss.
We'll get you that arcadia book one day. I'm currently attempting hypnosis on paizo staff but it doesn't seem to work
Huh that's interesting, because I'm reading their (admitedly limited) entry on starfinder wiki and they sound like they're closer to some kind of beast. I wonder if the loss of aucturn will spur them forward.We've had beasts as ancestries already, too. Awakened animals, for one. (Anadi aren't, but I really think they should be.) Sorry i'm not sure why I said beast. I meant unintellegent. But Moosher seems to have answered my question for me.
Yes. Coming from 5e I really appriciate that taking options like a Champion oath or being a cleric comes with serious weight to it. Maybe I'm just in a bad mood but it really annoys me when characters that should be beholden to some tenants are incredibly flippant about it. Certain edicts and anethemas are problematic either generally or for some games, but that's a discussion you need to have to your DM so you can make them work for that game or table.
I think a lot of the fun of in-game myths like wukong becoming immortal is that they DON'T make sense. It hints that these stories are something mortals tell to explain something, and the "Real" events may be different. Perhaps wukong didn't just delete his name from a book, he used supreme trickery on a cosmic scale to make it so his name was never real, and that's much harder to communicate. Perhaps this is bias on my end, because in my setting I enjoy mixing the way TTRPGs normally do gods, and adding this unknowable aspect on top. My fave little tidbit is introducing doubt as to whether mortals actually ascend, or if their acenction has produced something that thinks it's the mortal. (Yes i stole this from swamp thing)
Battlecry's playtest didn't have them either.
Timber sentinel being a stronger guardian tree isn't power creep, because nobody in their right mind is going to take a kineticist dedication just for timber sentinel because it's stronger protector tree. Okay but now we're talking about kineticist in general being strong. Kineticist has not entriely overshadowed prior options to the point where you're causing yourself problems by not taking it. I'm not denying it's a stronger-than-baseline ability. It obviously is. My point is that it has not created a problem where anyone who would want to take protector tree is instead coaxed into taking kineticist dedication JUST for timber sentinel. Again to go back to YuriP's point, Strong =/= power creep. It's why I don't think Numbing tonic is a strict upgrade to elixir of life. There are lots of situations where you want to pick one or the other.
I really don't understand what timber sentinel is power creeping. Power creep is when an older option is rendered obsolete by a newer option which is stronger. Timber sentinel being a stronger guardian tree isn't power creep, because nobody in their right mind is going to take a kineticist dedication just for timber sentinel because it's stronger protector tree. Same with numbing tonic. What's that completely replacing? As yuriP said. Something being above baseline =/= power creep. There's above baseline options in the legacy PHB.
This sounds more like a PFS failing than the system itself. We've known from the get-go that mixing SF2e and PF2e will come with issues like flight from level 1. I don't know how much you can argue something is power-creep when it's from an optional ruleset that explicitly flags this as a problem. It'd be another thing if Dragonkin was a printed ancestry in Pf2e.
The beast boy comparision is limited, I just use it to emphasise the difference between barb and a hypothetical shifter. Druids are still spellcasters, so you don't get to commit fully to the fantasy of this blurring of man or beast as you swap forms freely in battle. Untamed form is also very limited, you get a small pool of fixed options, instead of a wider pool of options to pick from. Would my hypothetical shifter be derivative of wild order druid? Yes. But a lot of classes have a decent amount of overlap and I don't see the difference here. If you want to see what I'm on about, Teridax's shifter is essentially my pitch, though i would prefer it remain purely animalistic, at least at first. There's not really any reason for that, I just like the flavour of PF1e's shifter.
|
