|
Camellen's page
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber. 33 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.
|


4 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
With the release of Treasure Vault, I was excited to look over the new array of weapons available for characters to take- but I noticed some snags as I planned out specific builds. The build I had in question was a Ranger using falcatas, but this issue expands to other build types as well. So the question was, "How do I get this build to work?" So I thought I would gather all the ways a player could gain training in advanced weapons.
Level: 1
[Ancestry] Weapon Familiarity: Reduced proficiency requirement in specific weapons.
[Human] Unconventional Weaponry: Reduced proficiency requirement in ancestry weapon OR an uncommon weapon belonging to a specific culture.
*[Class] Fighter. Scaling proficiency in all advanced weapons one step behind martial weapons.
Level: 2
[Archetype] [Uncommon] Aldori Duelist and Red Mantis Assassin. Grants scaling proficiency in specific weapons. Must have proficiency to begin with. Increase level to 4 for non humans. Required Feats: Two. RIP rogues that wish to take the Red Mantis Assassin dedication.
Level: 3
[General Feat] Weapon Proficiency: Limit of Trained.
Level: 4
[Archetype] [Uncommon] Butterfly Blade Dedication. Grants scaling proficiency for butterfly blades, must have proficiency to begin with.
Level: 6
*[Class] Advanced Weapon Training [Fighter], all advanced weapons in one group scale to your highest proficiency.
Level: 10
[Archetype] [Uncommon] Provocator Dedication: Increase to one advanced weapon to trained.
Level: 12
[Archetype] Diverse Weapon Expert (Req. Fighter Dedication), trained in all advanced weapons. Total Feat Cost: Two
*[Archetype] Advanced Maneuver (Req. Basic Maneuver, Fighter Dedication), take the Advanced Weapon Training feat. Total Feat Cost: Three.
Level: 16
[Archetype] [Uncommon] Performance Weapon Expert (Req. Provocator Dedication), gains expert proficiency in one advanced weapon.
Special:
*Same applies to Gunslinger, but only to firearms and crossbows. Uncommon.
All these together show that it's very difficult to get scaling proficiency with an advanced weapon that you aren't explicitly incentivized to get via a specific route. Rogues have an especially difficult time compared to other martials due to the need to gain martial weapon proficiency before they can gain access to advanced weapons via weapon proficiency, making certain archetypes difficult to qualify for. Going back to my first example, the only way to make a functional ranger using a falcata would be through the fighter archetype. This would take three feats (one of which providing little benefit), wouldn't come into effect until level 12, and take up space that could be used for other class feats and archetypes to fit the build.
I can't help but compare this to Pathfinder 1e. A martial character could (from levels 1 or 3, depending on BAB) take exotic weapon proficiency to have access to a specific weapon with the same level of proficiency as other weapons. Yet in this, a non-fighter martial struggles to gain proficiency. I understand the idea of fighters as being "experts of weaponry," yet fighters are already a level of proficiency higher than all other classes- there is no need for them to be the exclusive owners of advanced weaponry. Certainly, advanced weapons aren't so powerful that they are worth 3 feats of up to 12th level, right?
With that in mind, I think there are a few options available to allow non-fighter/gunslinger martials to use their preferred methods of destruction:
-Martial Classes can gain access to advanced weapons at a level one proficiency lower upon reaching expert proficiency
-A class feat is added to all martials 1 level after expert proficiency that functions identically to the fighter's "Advanced Weapon Training" feat.
-All martial classes gain a themed version of the above feat. Rogues can gain scaling proficiency with an agile or finesse weapon, barbarians with a melee or thrown weapon, monks with a monk weapon (requiring Monastic Weaponry), and so forth. This keeps the theme of individual classes, but allows them access to advanced weapons that fit that theme.
In any case, I just hope there are feats added that allow me to live out my fantasies of a falcata ranger without having to resort to multiclass shenanigans. If I missed anything, please fill me in, because this wrench in my character build does sting.

7 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
So I'd like to make a warpriest work, playing a melee (or even an archer) oriented cleric sounds like a fun idea. But the Warpriest doctrine as depicted in the core rules seems sorely lacking. To compare what the 20th level benefits are of each doctrine:
Cloistered:
Legendary in Spellcasting
A free Focus Spell (1st lvl class feat)
Expert in Unarmored
Expert in Deity's Weapon
Expert in Fortitude
Warpriest:
Master in Spellcasting
Expert in Light and Medium Armor
Expert in Deity's Weapon
Trained in Martial Weapons
Master in Fortitude
The warpriest has to sacrifice legendary in spellcasting, which is huge- they're the only spellcaster that doesn't actually get legendary in spellcasting. This makes their offensive actions for spellcasting sorely lacking, as their spell attack and DCs are going to be behind the other classes. They don't even get better weapon attack to make up for it, since they reach the same proficiency as a cloistered cleric in their deity's favored weapon (and only trained in all martial weapons). Sure they get it earlier, but that doesn't mean much when you realize you've gotten all you're gonna get out of your proficiency at level 7 (and at the cost of expert spellcasting).
Now take this: the Sentinel Dedication feat. For a small 2nd level dip, you get light and medium armor proficiency, which increases at the same rate of warpriest's improvement. In that case, the cloistered cleric (with one feat) now equals or eclipses warpriest in all areas except in fortitude saves. However, there is no similar feat for Warpriest to shore up its weakness in spellcasting.
I remain optimistic that the Magus playtest releasing Monday will have a better presentation of what a mixed martial/caster can accomplish and how we could improve the warpriest to better scale along with the other classes. Hopefully, what we learn in the Magus playtest can help with an errata for the Warpriest as well!
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Core Rulebook pg 86, the Deer animal instinct has the "charge" trait in its attack, which sounds interesting, except I cannot find the trait in either this book or the bestiary. I apologize if I've missed it or if it's been addressed already. Feel free to post any other missing traits/rules here!
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
In the treasure for these two areas, the players receive:
Thank you for any clarification you can give on this issue.
4 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Relics, eh? A throwback to Weapons of Legacy perhaps?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Sorcerers and bards, the two spontaneous casters we will see in this playtest. Bard was previously a "half-caster," with reduced access to spellcasting in return for a plethora of abilities. In PF2e, this is reflected by lower overall spellcasting capability compared to its dedicated caster relative (sorcerer, gaining an additional spell per level), and having several powerful cantrips that interact with its other abilities.
Now, with sorcerer established as the "spellcasting class," it seems odd that bard would be the class to have the 8th level "additional heightening" feat, directly related to having more powerful spellcasting capability as opposed to the typical bard abilities (dealing with powers augmenting their cantrips and so on). I'm not sure if this is an oversight, or simply a quirk written in for an unknown reason.
That leads to a final point, the case for Universal Class feats. I've seen many complaints about certain feats or techniques being gated behind certain classes. Now, take the "Additional Heightening" feat described above. Imagine this was made into a "Universal" class feat, available to any who meet the prerequisites "Spontaneous Heightening class feature." Or Power Attack/Double Slice, "Trained in a martial weapon." Widen Spell, "You are a spellcaster."
You could add a variety of depth to character creation without taking too much away. Fighter could still have access to many open/press feats not available to other classes, with some unique abilities besides. As an added bonus, you might save page space avoiding the extra entries on the classes that would normally gain them. The problem comes in when you look at terms of balance. Martial classes will likely have more to benefit from in variety, since many spellcasters will already have access to a feat that would otherwise be made Universal. Would Double Strike be too powerful in the hands of a Barbarian or Rogue, and how does a Monk's ability to take Power Attack change things? Of course, these are all questions that would have to be asked to address multiclassing balance anyways. A potential solution would be to increase the level requirement, with a special note at the end stating "Fighter and ranger treat -X- as a level 1 feat," as an example. Thoughts on how a universal class feat system might affect balance? Would adding another group of feats make character creation needlessly complicated?
TL;DR for Developers:
1. Sorcerers don't have access to additional heightening. Oversight?
2. A universal class feat system including feats such as additional heightening, power attack, Double Slice, some metamagic, etc.?
3. Would said universal class feat system adversely affect game balance?
4. If yes to 3, does multiclassing adversely affect game balance?
5. Would the cost in game balance be significant compared with the improvement in enjoyment to the players?
6. Would it make the game significantly more complicated?

Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
I could not find rules related to creating custom NPCs to use as antagonists, so I'm going to do a bit of guesswork based on the NPCs provided in the bestiary.
Cleric of Rovagug (CR3) vs level 3 cleric:
-Both have spellcasting ability of a level 3 cleric
-NPC has 41 HP vs a PCs 38, or a PCs 42 (W/ Toughness)
-NPC has one higher ability boost, but also an ability flaw
-NPC has no obvious class feats
-Reflex and Fortitude are higher than you'd expect vs PC
Demonologist (CR5) vs level 5 sorcerer:
-Spontaneous Heightening Summon Monster & Darkness
-Identical spells known/per day as PC sorcerer
-Identical ability boosts vs PC
-NPC has 58 hit points vs a PCs 53, or a PCs 58 (W/ Toughness)
-Class Feats Reach Spell, Steady Spellcasting, missing one vs PC
-Saves are each 2 higher than you would expect vs PC
-NPC Potentially has Great Fortitude and/or Lightning Reflexes
Mercenary Scout (CR3) vs level 3 ranger:
-NPC has 45 HP vs a PCs 41, or a PCs 45 (W/ Toughness)
-Perfect Aim doesn't require being hunted, but doesn't grant a bonus to hit as per ranger's Favored Aim
-Identical ability boosts vs PC
-Saves are each 1 higher than you would expect vs PC
In conclusion, although I did not do an in-depth analysis of their proficiencies and various other scores, it seems that NPC classes can now be considered an equivalent challenge for their level. Feat decisions seem to favor simple choices such as toughness, and many class/ancestry feats seem to be canned in favor of simpler presentation and artificially boosted defenses. Does anyone have anything to add?
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
I have room for one additional player in my upcoming playtest campaign. The campaign will be an adapted version of the Tomb of Annihilation campaign.
Disclaimer: In the spirit of having a diverse party to playtest, each player will be playing a different race and class (with human as a possible exception). Each player will have a random number to prevent disputes.
Platform: Fantasy Grounds (You only need the demo)
Time: Every other Saturday night at 6pm eastern.
Meet up on August 4th for character creation and rules discussion, first session on the 25th and playing every two weeks from then on out.
It will be primarily text, with voice used for roleplaying through Discord's chat
Characters: Non-evil preferred, no homebrewed content. This is a playtest, so feel free to make as powerful a character as the rules allow. We will start at level 1.
|