CactusUnicorn's page

This question has been answered a lot by others so like Mathmuse let me tell a story.

I was at a party once when a friend brought up that he plays D&D (5e). I've played some RPGs, D&D (2,3,3.5,5), Mutants and Masterminds 3e, Starfinder, Pathfinder (at this point only 1e was out), and some smaller games like Everyone is John and Trash Pandas. The resulting conversation went like this:

My Friend: Have you ever played CactusUnicorn?

Me: Yeah, but I prefer Pathfinder

My Friend: What's that

Me: It's another pen and paper RPG

My Friend: Why don't you like D&D

Me: It's not bad, I just don't really like the fact that it takes 15 minutes to make a character

My Friend: Well you can use generators or pre gens to make it faster it doesn't have to be that slow

Me: *Laughs* That's not what I meant. I meant it's to short. I like to spend 2-3 hours on a character at 1st level. More when I'm making higher levels

So yeah that's my story. I thought it was funny when it happened but it's probably not read like a year later. But it gets the point across, Pathfinder is far more complex and it rewards system mastery which I enjoy. I can spend days with a circle of books laying on the ground making NPCs and future PCs.

Since Initiative is always a skill or perception, you can focus on increasing those. Aldori Duelist has a class feat that gives a +2 to iniative as a reaction

My first character was a 'bloodrager.' I went Barbarian with the dragon instinct which gave me the electricity on my attacks from level one. Having to push charisma up hurt a little during character creation but I didn't really notice during play. At second level I went sorceror MCA and I haven't gotten to play him at second yet, but it feels really good.

I'm in high school, and of course every player plays some sort of pseudo rogue. We have a Slayer, Swashbuckler/Shadowdancer, Rogue, Summoner (played like a rogue), Trickster (homebrew full 20 level Arcan Trickster), and Ranger/Magus (who likes to go invisible). We also have a Barbarian and he gets to be special. It's pretty usefull because we can all Stealth together usually (someone just casts invisibility on the Barbarian), but we do step on eachothers' toes.

It's not just fighters, rangers can dual wield well too. I do wish things like double slice or power attack weren't class specific though. Most of my character's will probably be multiclass so I can get the class feats I want.

Yes please.

I literally started to fill them out wrong the first time

Me too! Also SCORE (Modifier) makes more sense than MODIFIER (Score) to me but I get why they did that.

I like the old aging effects.

I think there should be templates:

Infantile:
-10 to all ability scores (minimum 1)

Very Young:
-6 to all ability scores (minimum 1)

Young:
-4 to all ability scores (minimum 1)

Normal:
-0 to all ability scores (minimum 1)

Middle Aged:
-2 to Str, Dex, and Con (minimum 1)

Elderly:
-4 to Str, Dex, and Con. -2 to Int and Wis. (minimum 1)

Ancient:
-6 to Str, Dex, and Con. -4 to Int and Wis. (minimum 1)

I vehemently disagree. What is the point of this? If everything is negative no one will be a different age so you are just eliminating choice. If there are trade offs people will just min max. It's so much easier to just not have mechanics for age. Plus, these modifiers are ridiculously unrealistic.

His point is that it doesn't matter after first level.

They weren't already?

Magic weapons have always been required if you are a martial (unless you are doing a niche build like natural attacks or something). Some of tge abilities like Keen are also basically requirements for certain builds. They also overcome DR and basically prevent breaking.

Yeah that makes more sense. The uncommon weapons thing is hard to think about, especially in conjunction with exotic/martial/simple. I do like it though. There goes my exploit.

The Barbarian Giant Totem says this, "You also gain access
to your choice of weapon at character creation." To me that sounds like the RAI is to let them start with a Large weapon, as that is the point of the Giant Totem. However, I see no restriction that stops you from getting a +5 [insert runes here] legendary large [insert weapon here].

Am I missing something? If not, Paizo, we need eratta.

I love the multiclass system. I think it is really good. I love that I can take as much of Fighter I want while still being a full level 20 Sorceror. My only complaint is that not ever class has one yet. My initial idea was Barb with Sorc multiclass. However I forgot Sorc isn't core 4 (it always seems like it is to me). I can't wait for the full game so I can do this. I may end up homebrewing my own based off Wizard.

Well the OP doesn't want to change the system. He wants to change the content which is completely on the table. I agree with the OP. I love the system, but the content is a little lacking.

I'm working on getting my download now, but can anyone post the Half-Orc feat that humans take. I want to see what the options are. Thanks.

I'm on Android. Moto G4. I'm downloading a .zip reader. Thanks

Im trying to download the playtest. I have downloaded the rulebook twice and the bundle once and hit the "not working click here" buttons a lot. Can anyone help me. Also, what are the "not working click here" buttons supposed to do? When I hit them it says "preparing download" then doesn't do anything.

If you need more information I'm downloading on my phone bc a storm took out my wifi. When I open the files it goes to my PDF viewer but says is under dictionary tool instead which doesn't make any sense. Please help

Ok, let's break this down.

The barbarian gets +14 in law, the lawyer +10

But, the lawyer gets to turn a success into a crit and a failure into a success.
So, against a dc 24 case the barbarian crit fails on a 1, fails on a 2-9, succeeds on a 10-19 and crit succeeds on a 20.
The lawyer crit. fails on a 1-4, succeeds on a 5-14 and crit. Succeeds on a 15-20. He may drop more cases, but he also roflstomps a load more.

.

Close, but the Later doesn't drop more cases. He is better in every way despite the lower number. I think that a lot of people need to realize that the number isn't the most important thing anymore, the proficiency is. It let's you do the real stuff with the skill.

I can't really just do a background out of the blue. I make a character than develop his background based on the mechanical choices I made. Like why does he use this weapon, why does he worship this deity, why does he have this feat. It just feels better for me this way.

All my players would have 100s till I told them they can only do 18. Then they would have all 18s.

I'm weird, I want to read the foreword first (if there is one), then the afterword (if there is one), followed by the introduction, then the introduction to each chapter. I like those things. After that I'll go to page 1 and read it all the way through.

A few more things. This class looks like a lot of fun but it seems really strong. For the demon lords, some of them aren't demon lords. Lamashtu isn't but I'd say she's fine on there. Rovagug definitely is not a demon lord, he is debatably either a qlippoth or is linked to the Great Old Ones.

This is a really cool class idea. I would suggest some changes. I would remove the proficiency with their deities favored weapon or change it to demon lords as it is talked about in unholy weapon. I would also take the bonus/penalty for skills down to +/- 1 or remove the doubling during possession. This is way too good for a 1 level dip. In fact, this class is a perfect one level dip for a Bard, rogue, or a barbarian. Bards and Rogues can get +20-30 bluff at 2nd level with this class as a dip and Barbarians can put rage and possession together. Also, the flavor text doe possession makes it sound like you can't control yourself. This is a really cool class.

Falling objects: the rules are to small and it comes up to much to have so little rules.

I agree with Fuzzypaws. I can't read what you're sYing as a result

Malthraz wrote:

It is also partly about the strange coincidence that adventures always seems to be lucky enough to face encounters +/-3 the level. With the +1 scaling, an encounter 3 levels above you now is very dangerous, whereas with less extreme scaling it is not so dangerous.

With reduced scaling there are far more encounters that could be considered challenging. With the standard +1 scaling things have to be far more fine tuned for the party, which I find breaks the suspension of disbelief.

Sorry, I don't want to spam your posts and say the same thing to boot, but isn't this the case with pathfinder 1.0?

Actually I guess it depends on the level as a 1st level party will find a cr 4 encounter super deadly. While a 20th level party will propably find it a 23 cr encounter normal.
However level+4 encounters are theoretically at least deadly since 3rd edition dnd and I am not certain an encounter 3 level higher than you will be deadlier for a party of 4 pcs's in pathfinder 2 than it was in pathfinder 1.

Just had to laugh there for a second. Cr 4 at level 1 is by no means deadly. You can take down Cr 5s and 6s at level 1 if you play right and optimize. Cr 4 is if you don't optimize.

Yeah these sites are the reasons I prefer Pathfinder really. It makes the game so much easier to learn than 5e

I like d20 better just because of how it looks and feels.

195) Can I get the playtested rulebook delivered by the Flash?

Blinded accuracy is really bad in my opinion. I like what PF2 is doing so every player can contribute something. In 5e however, you can get two 2nd level PCs to beat a Solar Angel. Both Rogue 1/Barb 1 +8 or +9 athletics, rage for advantage (or flank if you say it doesn't count). If we win initiative we can lock the Solar down by one pushing it to the floor and the other grappling in round one. Then we just wail on it as it can't do anything about it. That's how broken 5e is. That's how broken bounded accuracy.

This is really a hyperbole but you get the point.

Roll a d% then roll a Str check and add them together. This simulates the disparity between actual strength and arm wrestling as arm wrestling uses your deltoids which you never really use for pushing or pulling objects, just raising your arms and doing the arm wrestling motion. If you can't tell, I hate arm wrestling.

Ha, I play with fellow middle schoolers and we have people do 19+3 on their hands. Mostly, me and my brother just do the math for them because we can look at their character sheet and then do the math faster than them.

The Cross is different because, at least to Christians, the Cross was a good thing. In fact, it was the goal. Raptors aren't.

CactusUnicorn wrote:

I'm 14 been playing since I was like 7 with my brother. I wish my parents would play. Anyway, thanks for saying you don't have to dumb it down for kids. That made my day.

Gamer kids are a breed, man. :D You were totally building rockets.

Seriously, though. I think we underestimate kids all the time. It's like, "I started playing 1st Ed DnD at age 8" or "I read the entire LOTR set by 7th grade" and we forget the next generation of kids can do that, too.

I haven't built a rocket in like, a whole two weeks

I'm wondering what you guys think. I'd say Rovagug but I can see a compelling argument for Pharamsma.

In Rovagug's lore it says that all the gods together couldn't kill him so...

Plus he has the strongest herald.

And before anyone else does it, we all know the real answer is Chuck Norris.

I'm 14 been playing since I was like 7 with my brother. I wish my parents would play. Anyway, thanks for saying you don't have to dumb it down for kids. That made my day.

That's sexist. Emily is better. (Just kidding)

Paladin style is more important since it's different from cleric more and warpriest/Inquisitor while handle that later.

Umm, what is this post for? We have psychics as a class and there are plenty of 3rd party psionic classes.

You guys are so awesome! Go designers! Yay!

Behemoths were designed for that purpose.

I'd also add some Nagas too. I like Nagas.

This looks very good. I suggested the name Drakon. Some of the mutations (like dragons) are weaker than the others.

I have a rock throwing warpriest. It's actually viable (though I do bend RAW a little but GM permission!)

I don't want to remove Paladins from the game. I do want to remove them from core. They have no reason to be in core as they are an incredibly niche class (unless blackguard, tyrant, and avenger [or whatever names] are also available).

I'm hoping for 3 archetypes in core Tyrant (LE), Avenger (CG), and Antipaladin (CE). Each one should be different (zfrom each other and vanilla paladin) and I hope smite works on both of the opposite alignments (chaos/evil for pallies)

Yeah. Morality is 100% objective in Pathfinder. I would say it's objective in real life too. Just because people have different ideas of what's right doesn't mean it's subjective. Just that some people are wrong.

Sort of agree with HWalsh. A paladin can kill a fighter easy (esp without advanced armor/weapon training) but a barbarian/bloodrager can keep up imo.

Wait Paladin's are overpowered? Why would devs deliberately make a class overpowered? That seems like a bad idea, especially as for people who wanted to play LG anyway the alignment isn't a restriction and thus changes balance not at all.

They're not. Some people say they are. In PF1 they are better than the fighter sure, but equal to barbarian, bloodrager, etc. Spellcasters are like 5 leagues ahead still

Paladin...

It's the only class I ban

Arcane spell failure

184. Will there be an answer to question 185?