White Dragon

Captain Morgan's page

Organized Play Member. 3,878 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.


1 to 50 of 3,878 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

The Gleeful Grognard wrote:

If you answer this please put it in spoiler tags.

I am going to be running Plaguestone, I would very much appreciate a list of enemies present in the book so I can get started on picking, ordering and painting miniatures. (otherwise I will have to default to pawns, and they lack that wow impact)
If anyone steps up to the challenge you have my gratitude.

Might be worth asking on that credit thread, he had Plaguestone but not everyone does.

Zaister wrote:
I am confused about the number of cantrips the druid can prepare per day. Her Primal Spellcasting class feature says "At 1st level, you can prepare [...] five cantrips each morning", however table 3-11, "Druid Spells per Day", lists only 4 cantrips. The other prepared spellcasters, cleric and wizard, have the same language in their spellcasting class feature, but their tables list 5 cantrips. Is the druid table wrong?

Probably. Sounds like it leftover from the playtest 1.0.

"Before" being the playtest. Lots of other classes got shield proficiency in PF1.

tqomins wrote:
Zaister wrote:
Rysky wrote:
tqomins wrote:
singingzombies wrote:

Are Bards able to Shield Block by default since they had Shield Proficiency during the playtest?

Is the Draconic Sorcerer Bloodline Focus Power different from what they had during the playtest, the Draconic Claws Power?

I'd make the shield question more general:

Which classes get shield block by default? We know the Fighter does, but who else?

I believe everyone can do the Shield Raise to get more AC, but only Fighters start with the option to sacrifice their shield as a form of DR.
Champions, warpriest clerics, druids, fighters all gain the Shield Block general feats as a level 1 class feature.
Druids? That seems strange to me

Well, they've always had shield proficiency I guess. And they probably are limited to wooden shields, so they aren't as good as the other classes who get it, and between that and their armor limitations might have needed the boost.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd be shocked if Champions don't get Shield Block out the box since the dwarf champion was doing it at level 1 in Oblivion Oath. And they are at least as tied to shields as the fighter is.

NemoNoName wrote:
Edge93 wrote:
I mean, for in combat use it wasn't great (decent if you REALLY need to trip the boss lol), but not every power has to be a combat-specific move. +1d4 to certain skill checks can be really useful outside of combat.

Problem is with actions and lenght. Length and inability to cast it over and over means it's not narratively appropriate for any actitives, and 2 actions to cast means it doesn't really fit for really fast, reactionary activity.

To give examples, it's appropriate for trying to jump a small chasm, but not appropriate for scaling cliffs, sneaking (here we also come with a problem that casting it is itself potentially revealing), or for example, using it when you are trying to balance to cross a rope bridge or frozen river.

Similar problem with Sigil. It's simply not useful enough frequently enough. I would actually give it to all wizards automatically for free. Prestidigitation could've easily been Transmutation school and useable enough.

The thing is, the wizard already gets more cantrips out the box than other casters. So they aren't exactly strapped for cantrips. Getting one less than other specialists doesn't really seem like the end of the world, and we will probably get other options to replace it with eventually. It is also prety great thematically for transmutaters to have, given its ties to guys like Karzough who liked to plaster their face on everything. (Also, there's a cleric in my game who has been preparing that on the regular and spamming it left and right just to mark her territory as they take over enemy dungeons.)

That said, moving prestidigitation to transmutation sounds reasonable.

And the new version of the Focus spell seems to be both quicker to cast and renewable, which addresses both complaints. It won't help much on a longer series of checks, but often enough physical skill checks are handled as one roll out of combat. As an example from Doomsday Dawn, giving an ally enough oomph to break down a door on their first try means getting the drop on the boss vs the boss laying an ambush for you.

FowlJ wrote:

It may or may not be easier to just redo the loot by hand, but if you wanted a 'simple' conversion, at least of the coins and art objects, this table will do it for you. (Using the level guide at the start of each AP chapter).

Magic items are harder, but they were always going to be, since so much has changed about them.

Does that do gold to gold? So at level 2, 100 gold becomes 3 gold?

Personally, I've found magic items to be pretty easy to convert. Item levels really help a lot for finding the closest thing, and I've found it pretty easy to make PF2 versions of plot specific items.

necromental wrote:
I found one very good article (I think it was Ashiel's blog) about disregarding the "silver piece a day" economy, and actually using the Profession or Craft rules as basis of economy. That said, silvers as basis serve to reduce the ridiculous amount of coins that character usually had to carry. The bad thing about that is that it means it's even more unlikely that dragons are sleeping on piles of coins :D Frankly I would divest the gold from magic item economy and use coins as basis for kingdom building subsystems rather than personal power through items.

There might be something interesting you could do with some sort of raw magical material instead-- something that could be used not only as a currency for purchasing items but also the material used to craft them. But... I dunno how you'd explain that having no intersection with the gold economy. Like, eventually a wizard is going to need to buy a house or whatever, or an island, and I don't see why you couldn't spend gold to get the raw materials a some conversion rate or another.

The alternative is doing away with magical item shops entirely, I guess. But to maintain the level of "let players pick their items" that Pathfinder is based around, you'd basically make crafting mandatory.

caps wrote:
What are the non-class dedications in the CRB? I know there's supposed to be an Archer

There aren't any. The only archetypes in core are the multiclass ones.

Arachnofiend wrote:
Could we get some insight into how the Intimidate skill uses and feats differ from the playtest? I assume there's been some nerfing since it could be a pretty insane combat skill but I'm interested in how much.

I'm pretty sure the fleeing on a critical success thing is no longer,he default because I saw a skill feat that grants it.

The Gleeful Grognard wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

Wait, you're assuming Voss has the actual final book? I wouldn't.

They said they weren't being hyperbolic, having access to the final rules is the only way for them not to be being hyperbolic in such claims.

So I asked because that is where the burden of evidence lies to progress the discussion, otherwise it is near baseless conjecture.

Sorry, that wasn't meant to be an attack. I just thought you might have been giving Voss a little more credit than he needs to say the sky is falling.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Matthew Downie wrote:

I'd tip my bag of holding into his bag of holding. Though dumping 18 pints of platinum onto a countertop sounds fun too.

But this isn't a normal transaction; I don't suppose many people in our world would buy a $20 million dollar passenger jet with sackfuls of cash.

Well, we have a much more robust banking and electronic payment system than Golarion does. I suppose it isn't impossible that in certain cities you could deposit your gold with a bank and use the equivalent of checks or money transfers at least within that city, though. But I'd guess that for any campaign that has you hopping between unaligned settlements (Like, say, the upcoming Age of Ashes) you've got to be handing over copious amounts of cash at some point. Now some of that could be getting your coins turned into platinum bars, but you still have the weight of platinum at that point.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Gleeful Grognard wrote:
Voss wrote:

Yes. Though also the second. No hyperbole.
Prayer, heroism, bulls strength,cats grace (and etc) and most spells like those are gone.

Bless, magic weapon/fang, inspire courage and haste are pretty much the only survivors, and the latter doesn't give bonuses. Bless and inspire don't stack and magic weapon/fang don't stack with items and don't have greater versions.

Can you share some photos of the spell lists?

Obviously it wouldn't give the whole picture but i figure paizo would be grumpy if you shared every spell with us.

Wait, you're assuming Voss has the actual final book? I wouldn't.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

2 of my 5 players in one campaign started with a 16. One is a cleric/rogue, and considering her lack of offensive spells it makes sense to increase her dexterity or charisma for attacking or channels. The other is a two handed fighter who is still on even footing for accuracy with most of the party (and in fact will be ahead when we switch to PF2) and still does the most damage despite only having +3 from strength. It helps that the first expert weapon drop was a maul, so he's been on even footing with the archer fighter. I expect even if the archer pulls ahead for accuracy, the melee fighter will still be the leading damage dealer.

LadyDeimos wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

While I did consider that special edition, I decided that it didn't make sense for me, personally, to pay extra to NOT get a cool picture of a dragon. (I really like dragons.)

But I'm excited for you! And jealous of course. Mine is still in Fife, WA with no projected ETA.

Same. And the last update was from Tuesday morning.

I'm beginning to suspect that Fife may be where they are sending all the books to be held for a while so they can be released as close to August 1st as possible. Which would be a bummer, but would probably be the most fair solution to those who are picking it up at GenCon and such.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Hendelbolaf wrote:
People are posting pictures of their 2nd edition subscriptions arriving today. I thought it was all going to be released on August 1st at Gen Con...

It seems that with this many shipments, trying to tie all of them to arrive on the same date would be difficult. And they may have opted to get some of them arriving early rather than late.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

While I did consider that special edition, I decided that it didn't make sense for me, personally, to pay extra to NOT get a cool picture of a dragon. (I really like dragons.)

But I'm excited for you! And jealous of course. Mine is still in Fife, WA with no projected ETA.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
rainzax wrote:
lordcirth wrote:
rainzax wrote:

Ok for comparison, Bastard Sword Caster vs. Greatsword Caster.

Assume both are using the 2-handed grip. If they want to cast a spell, they'd have to use an action to free up one hand. Then they can Somatically cast a spell. The difference is, the Bastard sword could now immediately make 1-hand attacks again, but the Greatsword user would have to use another action to "regrip" before attacking again?

Not quite. letting go with one hand is considered "dropping" and is a free action. going back to a 2H grip is an action.

Not bad.

And means Bastard Sword over Greatsword for better action economy with Multiclass Fighter-Wizards.

Well, that depends where they ended up on somatic actions. By the end of the playtest you could use a somatic action with your hands full. IIRC material components were the only ones that actually needed a hand free, and even then sorcerers could ignore that.

Deadmanwalking wrote:
Any creature that uses Arcane Magic will get you an Arcane Bloodline.

Let's take a look at the playtest bestiary and see what we have for arcane beasties.

Barghest (goblin exclusive?)
Caligni (Dark Creeper)
Various demon special abilities have the arcane tag, oddly enough, though demons are clearly divine.

Chimeras (really just dragons again innit)
Drow and Driders?
Efreeti, Janni, and presumably other Genie-kin
Fire Giants
Frost Giants
Rune Giants

Definitely a few of those can be used as options, at least. (Also, I'm pretty sure there are a bunch of arcane tags in here that are either outdated and never corrected, or I don't fully understand how a creature can have both divine and arcane abilities.)

Being descended from the products of fleshwarping somehow seems like it has some promise for a pretty horrifying bloodline. And a bloodline that turns you into a giant or barghast could be cool. And I guess there's no reason we couldn't have an elven bloodline that devles further into elven magic than ancestry feats represent?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

So I have been running this campaign in the second edition playtest rules, and plan to convert to second edition proper very soon. Book 2 was very fun, although a little easy as most of the enemies were very low level ghouls. We are currently just getting to Graul farmstead, but I'm looking ahead at Black Magga down the line. She's been hyped up already with some gather information checks, and I look forward to the "oh crap" moment when she shows up.

The problem is making sure she is survivable. In PF1, the enormous room for breaking the optimization curve meant many group not only survived her, but outright killed her. In PF2 the math is much tighter and level matters much more. Assuming they are level 9 when the fight goes down and she's level 15, even their martials buffed by Inspire Courage will need a 17-18 on the dice just to hit her on a first attack, an she's probably going to have a 50% chance to crit any of them on her first strike. That's before touching her damage resistance and myriad horrifying special abilities. She's gonna be auto-succeeding saving throws and critically succeeding many of them.

I can't see anyway the party can go toe to toe with her, so it basically seems to come down to whether they can distract her while keeping a distance. The Ranger can take pot shots from 200 feet away, the casters can fly to stay out of her reach... And they can hope for the best. I'm hoping I can instill the adequate sense of danger for them not to try anything more ambitious. The casters zooming 120 feet up firing magic missiles seems like it might buy 4 rounds.

I don't really want to diminish her by lowering her stats to where the melee folks can stand and bang with her, but I'd like to keep them contributing too. I've read some snippets about folks running her more like a natural disaster or something the party needs to drop buildings on. Anyone have recommendations for stuff like that? Ways the melee folks can be helping to evacuate folks while the ranged and fliers keep her distracted?

The only examples of checks being gated beyond trained seem pretty explicitly stated. You need higher proficiency for higher level crafting. And some hazard were explicitly labeled as needing X proficiency to disable, though often you could another skill with lower proficiency but a higher DC.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
If you're using a 2-handed weapon that isn't a d12, that weapon almost certainly has a property on it that already makes you not want to use Power Attack. A flail user is trying to perform combat maneuvers, for example, and trying to fit in Power Attack will make it complicated to do that.

With MAP confirmed as applying to combat maneuvers which have critical failure conditions? I really wouldn't advise it, unless you have Assurance.

(Guess what one of my first house rules will be.)

10 people marked this as a favorite.

In all the hubbub about fans getting their books, we haven't been talking about the stream much.

Fly now lasts 5 minutes instead of 1 and makes you fly at 20 feet or your land speed, whichever is faster.

Focus pools may be capped at 2 or 3 points? Not sure what the deal is there, but Logan made a comment that seemed to imply it. Also, we have confirmed sorcerers don't need to rest or do any special activity to Refocus, it just happens automatically. Clerics of healing deities can also Refocus from healing people.

Monster Identification is confirmed to have a table telling you what skills are tied to different kinds of monsters. One interesting thing is that Craft can be used to Recall Knowledge about constructs, as well generally evaluating the construction of objects. Sounds like this replaces Knowledge Engineering.

Skill DCs are going to have a "by level table" for stuff that should be rated by level, but the UTEML static DCs also got some elaboration. Sounds like they will be +/- 2/5/10 from their base levels to adjust for different difficulty levels.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

OOOoh, what about Black Maga? Did she make it in there?

I gotta say, if anything seems like it would TPK for where it is placed in the adventure, it's that ladymonster.

Did ogres get interesting new abilities in the playtest? I am about to run a bunch of them, but the playtest statblock was one of the more barren ones.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Anti-Magic field was rare in the playtest, and I don't recall that being the case for any other spells. A glance at the spell list seems to confirm that. So it seems like a good guess for the CRB.

Mark Seifter wrote:
Michael Sayre wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

Well, in the playtest, rarity was the answer. Those spells were marked as uncommon, so you generally needed to get the permission of your GM to have them. [...]
To elaborate slightly, "getting permission from the GM" in this context typically means "finding it in an adventure". If you beat a wizard who's been scrying on you, gaining his spellbook as treasure and copying the otherwise uncommon spells out of it is totally legitimate. "Uncommon" is generally going to mean "must gain access through feats or story progression".

It's also possible that you will eventually be able to track down an uncommon spell through enough downtime legwork as well, possibly at an increased price because of its rarity. Rare spells, though, are pretty much special rewards...

That said, those are all defaults, so your group is free to do whatever you like, from changing around what's uncommon and rare, to just making everything common, and more!

I suppose I should have specified what I meant by "permission from the GM." I count "changing the defaults" as part of that. If you ask your GM and they say it is fine, Bob is your uncle. Even if you don't have a feat giving you access or haven't found it in the story yet.

As an example, my player was very excited to bust out Raise Dead, not realizing it was uncommon, and I let it slide because the AP had a couple of scrolls of it as loot drops anyway.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
rainzax wrote:
Vlorax wrote:
Reckless wrote:
lordredraven wrote:
So if I grok the meaning of power attack, since it is two attacks, if it's your first attack it's most likely at -5 to hit in exchange for an extra die? Extra die is good but in a system where -5 real drops your crit burst damage not sure it is a fair trade off

I'm pretty sure it's only 1 strike, which is 2 actions and counts as 2 attacks for your multiattack penalty. Meaning that if it's your first attack, it's at full value, but your next one is at -10. If it's your second strike, it would be at -5.

this is also how I understood it to be.
I see. Kind of like 1E the Vital Strike feat.
Very much, yes. That has been a vocal complaint about the naming of the feat as well; but it works virtually like an evolving Vital Strike.

People say it should be called Vital Strike because that's how it worked in PF1, but Vital Strike never really made much sense as a name. It isn't like your targeting the creature's vitals with extra precision damage. You were just making one big powerful swing. A powerful attack, if you will.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
RangerWickett wrote:
I'm curious about how they decided to handle traditionally 'story-breaking' spells like scrying, divination, teleportation, and raise dead.

Well, in the playtest, rarity was the answer. Those spells were marked as uncommon, so you generally needed to get the permission of your GM to have them. But they make for fun story awards too when the GM deems appropriate. For example, my players defeated a creature with the Nightmare template, and by conducting a ritual involving its corpse they were able to learn spells it knew, namely Shadow Walk and Nightmare.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Midnightoker wrote:

Well whatever, I want to talk about some of the stuff. Cat's already out of the bag:

Shield Block as a General Feat This is interesting! One it shows that maybe some Combat centered General Feats that provide actual actions have had the precedent set here (an equipment specific one too). How far they will go with this is interesting, but I would expect Fighter and Champion to get this for free.

Wizard Progression Table Lots of interesting stuff going on here that wasn't in the Playtest. For starters, it looks like it's pretty likely most people will get free General Feats for increased Saves, which is probably necessary and allows "staggered" progression on saves for each Class (so there are notable weaknesses/strengths).

Also seems like new abilities made it into the Wizard and now at Every Odd level they get something else as well as their normal stuff (with the exception of 3rd). Resolve is likely a Will increase. Defensive Robes is likely an Expert -> Master on Unarmed.

Interestingly, they get Weapon Specialization.

Not sure if Weapon Specialization is going to be just a Weapon Proficiency Increase or if it will be in line with the Armor Specialization effects also mentioned (Perhaps Cones/Rays have a "specialization effect" or something that can be chosen).

Also looks like it's confirmed that Class Feats for all at level 1 and then every even, which is very nice.

Interesting notes:

Ancestry and Background are now coupled with an "And". Not sure that means anything, but it was deliberate.

Cantrips scale very well now. Now at level 7th level your standard Cantrips are doing 4dX + Spellcasting Mod. Telekinetic Projectile also got nerfed to 1d6, which given the new scaling, is probably appropriate

The Level 12 Alchemist feats look solid. The Poison one we catch the tail end of from Level 10 also looks pretty solid. Nothing mind blowing, but certainly good.

Proficiency values and Action Markers are defined on the character...

Just to clarify, necromancer is almost certainly a school choice still, not a thesis. WBL looks almost exactly the same as the playtest (they just added a handy lump sum column for folks who liked that) and Imperial was in the playtest and acted as the equivalent of the PF1 arcane bloodline.

I do like that shield block is a feat or feature now. The playtest mechanics for gaining shield proficiency were hella complicated, It makes sense that any old person can hold it up for cover but you need training to actively soak a hit with it. In the playtest, IIRC, it was the other way around.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
AnCap Dawg wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:
AnCap Dawg wrote:
So living near Paizo means the street date doesn't apply to you? I'm confused (and jealous.)
From now on this will be referred to as the "down the street date" ;-)
And real estate prices for nearby houses will go through the roof!

Their real estate prices already seem to be through the roof, actually, given some comments from Oblivion Oath.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sorcerers also sound like they can recover focus without doing a specific activity, just having time pass.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

So question for Paizo... would you like us not to discuss the details of the reveals on here? Because my hype levels are at maximum.

Diego Valdez wrote:

Hello Captain,

Your updated card authorized successfully. The order is just waiting for its turn in the shipping queue.

Thanks Diego! That is a huge relief.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
WatersLethe wrote:

Every character should be able to do borderline impossible things. Non-combat things should ideally be tied to skill feats, magic things should be tied to spells or focus powers, and in-combat martial things should be equally achievable by Fighters specializing in those martial things.

I don't think you can base a whole class solely on its ability to do something cool without going into detail about how they do that.

If it's pseudo-magical luck, then you've got some sort of luck-magic class going on with some cool potential.

If it's derived from training and skill, well say hi to Fighter and Monk.

If it's sheer determination or gumption, say hi to Fighter again.

Panache? Seems like it's tied to being flamboyant and confident, so should be tied to Charisma, but why can't Fighters and Rogues be charismatic people able to do borderline impossible things with sufficient training?

This really resonated with me. And it is worth remembering that a lot of limits have been really dialed up-- playtest fighters could leap 30 feet straight up and spike an enemy out of the sky like the volleyball by like level 8. The monk shenanigans with wall run are CRAZY. Rogues start walking through walls and Rangers can find their target across all of existence.

Which isn't to say you can't make a class with a panache pool, but our bar for "impossible things martials can do" has already been raised without a resource pool attached to it.

I'm not exactly sure where your problem is here, but yes, the best tank class in the game is going to beat the rogue or the sorcerer in a punch fest, largely thanks to his superior defenses, especially when he has 3 levels over his opponent. That paradigm isn't going to change in the final version. The rogue and sorcerer are significantly more versatile than the paladin and this don't bring as much to the punch table.

I haven't actually gotten into your numbers though to see if anything was wrong in it.

My players have just dealt with the cornfields of the Graul farmstead. The ranger opted to follow the cougar north instead of wait for whoever was singing to arrive, and then the party took cover in the trees and killed most of Rukus's dogs with the opening fireball, which set him to crying and running home to mama. The ranger heard him coming and wound up stepping out and talking to him with Glad Hand. While the rest of the party was climbing down out of the trees and following, he spent a few minutes working Rukus from hostile to friendly, including by using Battle Medic on the surviving pup. He got the whole story about the Black Arrows out of Rukus before sending him along home for some reason. It was a very interesting encounter, and those skills feats have really been putting in work.

I haven't been feeling inspired for converting the Graul family stat blocks though. I could just use ogres and then adjust levels and add the occasional class feat, I suppose. In general the humanoid NPC selection of the playtest bestiary was lacking past low levels though, and ogres are among the most boring stat blocks by default. I'm really eager to get my hands on the PF2 bestiary because even the "boring" critters like skeletons and zombies seem to have gotten new stuff in there.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I never loved the 75% rule, but that's because most of my players don't inherently enjoy shopping. Finding out that you went through the chore of digging through all the magic items to see if any interest you only to find out that item isn't there and you need to reevaluate your purchase plan feels frustrating.

But I've also seen players who build stock market mechanics inside campaigns. For some folks, having a realistic market is more immersive than avoiding excessive book keeping.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rek Rollington wrote:

For those that enjoyed the show, Joe and Troy just announced they will be running a one-shot on Friday night on twitch using the *official PF2 rules and will be running it as a prequel as the characters will be knocked down to lvl2. So perhaps we’ll learn how the Orphan Puncher first started punching orphans.

*Official in the sense they actually have the final PF2 rules. However applying the rules correctly is not their strong suit as Jason likes to tell them.

My body is ready.

Also, thanks to Rek and the mod team for trying to get this back on track.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
Mechalibur wrote:
Unless I'm missing something, Brutish Shove is a strictly better option than a strike for your second or third attack, right? You're not forced to make the shove if you don't want to. I would use it often unless I had an even better press feat to make use of, which is fine by my standards (unless some of the feats end up so good, you'll never use any others).
Eh, depends. As a level 2 feat maybe? It depends on what the level 1 options end up being; but this only makes them flat-footed 1) after you hit them with what ends up being your second strike and 2) only until the end of your current turn. From seeing what the Fighter could do at later levels in the PT i’m sure this ends up being a very powerful tool, but as early as level 2? If you aren’t shoving them it’s not that great with what little info we currently have.

Ah jeez, you're right. "End of your current turn." It was "until the start of your next turn" in the playtest. That's pretty much the only downgrade to this version of the feat I've seen. Well, that and it is sized capped, but the PT version was probably supposed to be as well and they just forgot the text. Improved Brutish Shove had some text indicating it was supposed to go up a size category, implying the original feat should have had the size capped in the first place. (I wonder if you can bump this up with Titan Wrestler? Maybe not by RAW...)

I'd say this feat still feels better than its PT version. Inflicting both flatfooted and the shove (plus allowing you to move with the shove) instead of *your opponents choice between the two* still feels better even if it doesn't make them flatfooted for your allies. I bet you can use the shove to push them into a flank anyway. And I'd imagine Improved Brutish shove not only lets you do it to large enemies but could extend the duration of the flatfooted.

I had an old address in my billing information for my credit card when I placed this order, which I believe is what made the payment decline. I've since updated my billing information but haven't been able to confirm if the payment has gone through. What should I be doing?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
Using Power Attack as your second strike seems counter-synergistic with Brutish Shove, which must be your second strike. I guess it's a choice between more damage and more control.

Well, he didn't choose Brutish Shove in the end, after all, so maybe it isn't meant to be the perfect pairing? After all, if he hadn't taken the wizard dedication there still would have been other fighter feats to pick from.

But the thing about Brutish Shove (and control options in general) is that they are situational. Making an enemy flat-footed is irrelevant if the enemy is already flat-footed (there are a lot of ways to make this happen) and Shoving them around the battle field is going to get varying results depending on the battle field. Brutish Shove is going to be very good indeed in certain situations, but when it isn't, having Strike > Power Attack as a fallback seems like a good way to maximize your damage.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like the idea of the alchemist getting 4 items for every advanced alchemy reagent used, largely because that is enough to give one to each party member. But it might be worth actually testing how strapped they feel for resources in actual play first.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Edge93 wrote:
If you're looking for a system that's tamer at high levels, 5e -might- be for you. Numbers in that game go up WAY slower and it results in a dynamic when even a high level party can be threatened by a significant number of low level enemies. You get stronger abilities and MUCH stronger spells as you level, which means some builds and classes definitely can dominate large numbers of weaker foes, at least to a point, but there are still ways to make more modest threats a threat still.

I'd like to point out that 5e isn't really better when it comes to magic making for gonzo plots. The bounded accuracy flattens the powercurve from a numerical standpoint, but outside of combat the spells are more plot breaking than the spells in the playtest. For example, casters get fly a level earlier in 5e, and both fly and invisibility last for 10 minutes out the box. Dimension door lets you carry another person, and teleport only takes 1 standard action to cast. The concentration mechanics mean your caster can't fly and be invisible at the same time in a fight, but combat isn't usually the big problem with plots breaking down.

If you want to avoid such shenanigans but still play with the mechanics of PF or D&D your best bet is capping your level.

Well unbreakable shields were also a thing in the playtest, and a 20th level Champion's shield would be restored to them each morning even if it was completely destroyed. So seems good on that front?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

You could do it in the playtest, really. Shield boss or shield spikes could be attached to a shield to make it a d6 martial weapon. That's admittedly not great damage and it seems a little risky if your shield gets broken because you have then lost your weapon maybe. So not optimal, but doable.

Pretty sure it isn't.

rainzax wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:
graystone wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:
So does that mean they can gather information on an uninhabited island?
There IS a way to do this in PF1 at least: the Ears of the City spell allows gathering info without actual people to talk to.
LOL. You got me there. But what I meant was "can you use gather information to produce magic items on an uninhabited island".

Perhaps "uninhabited island" is categorically ruled out, sure.

Typically, the idea is to use this within a settlement (village, city, metropolis).

What we would be "abstracting" is a character carousing the areas where shoppes, bizarres, or black markets might be located, either looking for specific items, or looking for specific buyers, based on a sense of knowledge and experience of doing exactly this type of activity.

The characters roll good enough, they get what they want, if they roll incredibly well, either it happens faster, or at discount.

That type of thing.

IMO, I'm not sure this is a good fit for settlements that are spelled out like the ones in APs. Usually there is a specified list of vendors that include all relevant shops for adventurers. I'd generally assume they stock at least one of any given common item they can craft craft based on their level and assumed skill feats, plus uncommon items that your player has access to from feats. Then add uncommon items at your discretion. Now, if you don't have those shops spelled out for you, your system sounds pretty good. I imagine the gamemastery guide will have some settlement rules to help you refine them.

Oh, and getting items at discount is best simulated by the bargain Hunter skill feat in PF2. You could make that a default trained skill action (essentially giving everyone the feat for free) but that makes one of the best skills in the game even better and discourages anyone with charisma investment from using their lore skill to practice a trade and earn income.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lanathar wrote:

I almost think the lore skills are just supposed to be a completely non mechanical boost that just enhances the flavour of a character


If you're using one of the generic background in the CRB, then probably. But campaign specific backgrounds? I see those being hella useful. Giant lore for the Giant Slayer background in Rise of the Runelords, as an example.

Arakasius wrote:

Not really. People then just pick from the next ten best “blue” traits. You need to ban a lot more than 10 to get rid of the trait issues from PF1. Players showed that they’ll ignore flavor to get the biggest bonus. Which is why I’m glad most math bonuses are gone. Although there are still some like initiative boosters and fleet. Hopefully those are more balanced out by skill/general feats that allow you to do something new. Makes sense there should still be some balance between “doing a new thing” and “improving the thing you already do”, but at the same time be more balanced than it was in 1e.

With backgrounds giving uniform bonuses I think the biggest thing will be the skill feat and the 2 skills . There will be lots of options to get the ability boost you want, but the the skill feat will allow you to define a focus for your character at early levels (before you get another skill feat) and the 2 trained skills will likely be the biggest differentiation for characters in the long term. If you get a lore skill that is synergistic with your campaign that will be amazing.

Odds are the none-lore skill will almost always be one you would have wanted anyway. If you were a doctor, you are almost certainly going to want Medicine. So the biggest deal breaker will probably be the skill feat. So hopefully the skill feats are diverse enough to fit your concept and relevant enough to an adventurer to merit having.

Seisho wrote:

If you actually look for sources for magic items I would say the skill is diplomacy for information gatherin

Maybe thievery if the rogue takes a look at the black market too

And of course the barbarian could intimidate 'Say me where get magic item or me punch you...hard.' but that has it's own problems :P

Eh. All the social checks in the world won't give a town an item that they don't have in stock because no one in town can make it. And if they do have it in stock, they intend to sell it anyway, so why require a check?

The only exception would be contraband or the rare corner case. The alchemist might not openly broadcast that he sells poisons too and require a check to know you aren't a cop. And you could get the odd case for an item a shop keep has reserved for another buyer where you need to convince them otherwise. Say, a semi important noble. Or the odd item with sentimental value. But otherwise, they have the items to sell.

rainzax wrote:

What about shopping?

Is there a "Market" skill in the game that would cover locating and negotiating places where to buy, sell, or exchange goods?

I know the 1st edition CRB had a section on item availability (even including DMs rolling higher-cost magic items that were "available" in select markets as a function of settlement size) - very clunky rules which our table turned into a houserule sub-system - and wondering what will replace it.

I know "Common" and "Rare" are a start, but how will it be decided which commodities are available where and when?

And importantly: any way to use Skills during Exploration or Downtime mode to modify base values?

I'd hazard a guess that item level will be the big thing that determines availability. You can't craft items above your level. That is probably true of NPCs as well, even if their stats don't align with PCs otherwise.

So if the town's alchemist is 5th level, he will mostly stock 5th level or lower items, being unable to make anything above that level. And given making a profit is dependant on taking your time crafting the item (as opposed to doing a rush job to order) it is in that alchemists best interest to keep his inventory as well stocked as possible.

Now, the alchemist probably has a few items he purchased from adventurers or imported. But that's a limited selection, maybe 1d4 items per shop determined by your GM.

Also... even clerics wind up being better healers, that is their thing. It is like being bummed the alchemist can't be as good with a sword as a fighter. The alchemist has other things going for it. For example, mutagens can make for significantly stronger buffing to the party without burning top level spell slots.

1 to 50 of 3,878 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>