Castilliano's page

Castilliano wrote:

But it is a combat RPG, right? So we get angels more inclined to battle than peace, to crusades rather than charity.

Or those are just the ones PCs are more likely to meet.

Yeah, I occasionally wonder about the breadth of Golarion society & its fantastical elements outside of PC lanes. But until in print, they don't exist; not that they need stats, a simple nod in their direction would do. Heck, I like reading about odd, non-Earth fruits, trees, sports, songs, and holidays, but how much utility does that provide other gamers? Staff has its schedule full already perhaps, but yeah, I'd enjoy it if they tossed in an extra comment here and there about "hearth angels" or "spoiled bread demons". Magic's already pervasive so I don't think it'd water down the wonder, rather increase it. And there could be monsters designed like many humanoid NPCs are, where they have a different combat level than specialty/profession level.

(Spellcheck doesn't recognize 'gamers', but does recognize 'gamer'??)

Free hand-weapons work better than a fist w/ Doubling Rings and their ilk and make a fine second weapon for Double Slice or Twin Takedown while retaining the utility of consumables, Battle Medicine, and otherwise interacting w/ one's environment. There are other good feats (perhaps mostly Fighter ones?) that require weapons rather than unarmed attacks. I can think of several normal builds (as in supported by feats & Archetypes) that could make good use of them, just not the popular sword & shield or two-hander builds.

Yeah, Ace, I dislike the extra layer of morality and ethics too, as if Good/Holy creatures w/ Wisdom, Intelligence, and knowledge beyond even magically augmented mortal capacity act in shortsighted, even negligent ways. I can understand how a zealousness to destroy the Unholy or enforce Good might undermine one's own goals & morality, but so should they. They are exponentially wiser than the Buddha & Marcus Aurelius, and with a greater understanding of how reality operates on top of that. Yet it's the pro-status quo TN's keeping the universe operating? Heck, Asmodeus is selfish and has enough foresight he should be helping too (or maybe sees no need yet).

Of course it's kind of troublesome how many supra-minds are Unholy, like they have no concept of game theory or a civil morality based on rational self-interest. I guess that's the problem, despite having a stat that represents rationality, most planar beings have irrational natures. But it is a combat RPG, right? So we get angels more inclined to battle than peace, to crusades rather than charity. That might tie into existential threats, and how maybe they'd love to help Pharasma with the eternity problem, but feel they need to focus on the possible armageddons first. What benefit is keeping a universe overrun by evil churning along?

I think I've talked myself in a circle there, and Holy types do fight the undead and TN types do resist fiendish incursions. Hmm.

Christopher#2411504 wrote:

Claxon wrote:

Mangaholic13 wrote:

Either that, or there are low-threat monsters that eat waste?

In all seriousness, Otyughs. They like to live in sewers, and eat waste. And are neutral (generally).

I would imagine smart cities would work out deals with Otyughs to help with sanitation.

D&D outright states and the premaster version in PF2 alludes to the problem with that:

- as long as they have food, they multiply
- eventually they will outgrow even the "food supply" of a city
- they starve
- they wander to the surface looking for more food
So you need to tightly control the population and regularly, or you risk a "sewer stampede".

I can imagine that working out a deal with Otyughs would include some sort of provision for overpopulation. Otyughs aren't very intelligent, but they are sapient. They should understand if they're populous and start going to the surface that it's going to require action.

Yes, there have been many examples of humanoids taming them, going back decades. Oozes too, though often with the humanoids regretting that.

Question is if they can control their breeding. I believe there's an old example of mates, maybe even a PF1 example w/ the first Sewer Dragons scenario. So they have to choose a chaste life of gluttony or...probably being killed. Where does one even find these guys? How do they migrate to most every sewer everywhere??

The poop monsters (as one of my tables dubbed them) remind me of how we on Earth have realized the value of beavers building dams; let nature do the labor for us. In a fantasy world with hundreds of sapient creatures with various predilections plus frequent magical breeding, there could be a lot of off-screen infrastructure filled in by such creatures. There should be more to this than just lair & vault security.

There are already fey that enjoy housecleaning (as well as Gremlins ruining things, so maybe it balances). I can imagine others that enjoy tinkering on toys, delivering mail for cookies*, quizzing kids, eating soot, spinning fabrics, nurturing animals, etc. Flying creatures would help immensely w/ towers, bridges, hoists, and repairs. Heck, fire-breathing ones would be quite useful too, as well as those with acid, cold or electricity...on demand. While I doubt they'd have pervaded to household level, corporations and tycoons should have such (as well as automatons & the like).

Which is to say, we should avoid using Earth development as a proxy, and there might be startling exceptions even in rural areas.

*Unintentional mirroring of email w/ computer cookies. :-)

The earliest dungeon of proto-D&D was in sewer tunnels. They're a staple in fantasy cities if only to insert convenient creatures. So on that score they're ahead of Earth.

With decent technology and advanced magic, major cities should have superior infrastructure to Earth in other ways too, barring recent wars or visits from a marauding beast. Hospitals, universities, factories, and religious institutions flourish. Golarion scholars know much more about nature and their universe than Earthlings, learned from fey, deities, etc. I'd think sanitation, schooling, publishing, and other services a civil society would want would be present at the hubs at least.

I'd extend this to merchant routes too, so good roads, ferries, tunnels, hostels/way stations, etc. Some wealthy countries have established gates with elemental planes and old gates connect(ed) to other planets. Heck, the Azlanti in Starfinder had developed some way to travel through space before Pathfinder times. So one might find superior examples too.

There's a lot of undeveloped wilderness if one wishes a lack of infrastructure for their campaign. Some adventure sites have featured villages who speak only one language (and not Common/Taldan) or who fear outsiders or creatures of other Ancestries.

But generally I'd say infrastructure's a background issue, pliable to suit one's needs for a story, and seldom in the spotlight to give specifics other than for some oft-featured cities.

It's not like the caster has their bearings; it's only the player's meta-knowledge that provides the data the PC needs. So how are they getting that data? Can't detect the spot, then can't discern it's the spot you want. So 50% miss chance at minimum, say if an ally points out the direction to shoot or you're using a line AoE vs. a noisy enemy (or cone with near certainty). Unless the caster's dropping it on themselves of course.

But yeah, I'd certainly let them cast it. Hard to say they can't. Just beware, it's a literal shot in the dark.

ETA: There's a maxim for battle to seldom trust your eyes and never trust your ears. Such a cacophony A pitched battle would be very loud, with all kinds of actions packed into seconds, made worse if inside like many are.

Evil is unnecessary because Good/Holy could become strong enough to guard a greater portion of the proverbial parapet. But, Pharasma has to work with what she's got; the Maelstrom's relentless, as is the internal corruption of undead forces/Void energy.

There's an RPG precedent for True Neutral working for the greater benefit of reality. In Greyhawk, Mordenkainen and some peers recognized that the mortal, even immortal, conflicts paled in comparison to the ultimate threat of Tharizdun, that all resources would be necessary to fight him (or in practice continue to contain him by manipulating his own power so he traps himself; even combined he's still stronger). This higher awareness led to "heroes"/PCs doing some questionable deeds, arguably self-righteous evil ones! "From a certain point of view" indeed.

Difference seems to be that Holy/Unholy conflicts in Golarion don't seem to weaken the system, only keep it churning, except for those that consume souls like Daemons & undead.

And abilities might later lower or dispel your Resistance, give you a Weakness, or otherwise enhance the effect. So while it may seem meaningless at first there are (contrived) situations where it matters.

But IMO it looks cool. Your enemy's hoping they've inflicted something significant, but you're there burning blissfully. That should increase respect and/or fear (even if there's no mechanic behind it).

Arguably it's a light source too, albeit a poor one.

And if you finish the battle soon enough: marshmallows.

Remember the sacredness of one's body/bodily autonomy. Most cultures, presumably even more on Golarion given the metaphysical ramifications, place high value on the ethical treatment of corpses of one's kin, often including those of one's enemy. The ethics differ drastically in practice, yet few consider a human body a mere resource (even among cannibals).

Plus killing someone in self-defense does not give one rights to their body (well, except in the finders-keepers, possession is 9/10 of the law kind of way). RPGs have kinda made this feel like the norm; looting the body has often included its parts, especially if a magical component. But the bodies of formerly sapient creatures in actual practice? That feels like a fairly universal anathema among pro-social (or just un-antisocial) groups. Whether this is reasonable or not is secondary to the powerful emotional revulsion most will then use reason to justify.

"Occasionally among us we'll find a fledgling incapable of flight."
*class laughs*
"No! Do not mock these folk. This is often the mark of true potential. And we want such kindred to feel as much a part of the community as any, even as their calling leads them afar. They'll define the sagas."
*child raises a wing* "But why?"
"Nobody knows. Nobody..."

You are correct in that you only get the abilities listed; Paizo doesn't require investigation to unearth further traits. Also, few creature traits provide blanket immunities any more, i.e. "Construct" comes with none though in practice nearly all share a large set of immunities. This makes it easier to make exceptions.

As for the Elemental Form, it is only a form, not becoming an actual Fire Elemental. So you're going to fall short of some abilities which is something true for most every Form spell to keep their bonuses balanced while giving the player the desired imagery. You get as close as mechanically feasible for the spell level and again, only assume the form, not become any of the actual creatures.

Similar for the Familiar; You get as close as mechanically feasible for the feat/familiar-abilities spent on it. So yes, there could be a balanced version where you pay a higher level feat. PF2 stripped a lot of immunities from the game, so it'd be costly and I doubt people would pay for it, not on a Familiar.

The other two work it into their power balance too (which is why many complain about Summon spells being too weak, the caster's paying for those fringe abilities).

What factors went into Paizo's budgeting? I don't know.

There are some high level spells that achieve this, like Ferrous Form, but Fiery Body doesn't if you're focused on a fire form.

Castilliano wrote:

Note that Summon spells in PF2 create facsimiles, so you aren't desecrating anything or anybody's remains/spirit/etc. w/ Summon Undead (vs. Animate Undead where you were, however contrived it was for such bodies to appear at your location even with low-Rank magic).

Wait, summoned undead aren't real?!

Correct. If summoned via a Summon spell that is, not necessarily via other spells, rituals, etc. It might be better phrased that Summon-spell creatures of all types (and I suppose instruments too) have no existence external to the duration of the spell. They're created whole cloth from some sort of cosmic template not fully explained, but not from creatures on other planes, corpses, souls, nor any other preexisting stuff (except maybe metaphysical proto-matter).

This differs from previous editions, mainly to quell moral issues. There are threads in the forum that address this and supply citations, including one within the last month or so.

There's is room for philosophical inquiry on what such brief (un-)lifespans represent, especially since for that minute or so they're effectively indistinguishable. Ex. How do they speak languages and know facts that the summoner does not know? Soul magic effects them, right, but aren't they soulless? And so on.

Note that Summon spells in PF2 create facsimiles, so you aren't desecrating anything or anybody's remains/spirit/etc. w/ Summon Undead (vs. Animate Undead where you were, however contrived it was for such bodies to appear at your location even with low-Rank magic). Their faux-undeath doesn't mean Pharasma approves since you're still tapping into some Platonic "undeadness" or essence (whatever that is); the monsters are still abominations to her however temporary.

What's interesting to me is how Golarion (& Earth) cultures clash on such issues. Ancestor worship remains one of the most popular forms of religion. And in high fantasy there's LotR where the Good/Holy side very much depends on undead assistance in a world full of frightful undead. I think if you put enough cultural impetus behind it, you'd be able to frame necromancy as a positive form of magic as long as you avoid the Unholy tag. And skulls. Hopefully we've all learned that yes, using skulls as one's symbol does mean you're the baddie, at least in UK lore.

I think exploring different boosts and flaws for human ethnicities dives into dangerous territory, especially w/ penalties. Most of Golarion's cultures are analogous with real world people groups so that's too big a bullet to dodge IMO. No company wants to say "people X (who look a lot like people Y on Earth) have this innate flaw, but hey, at least they're better at stat Z, right?"

Heck, the bioessentialism issue had been tumultuous enough which is why "two free boosts to any stat" became available for all Ancestries (as well I think as wanting players access to all kinds of odd PCs, perhaps encouraged by anime's breadth).

One could argue, yes, but IMO it's too much in the realm of emotion & lived experience for players, onlookers, & customers to remain detached. At best you might be able to say "culture X values stat Y most of all", but even that lends itself more to which Backgrounds & Classes would be most prevalent more than an innate, culture-wide quality/penalty.

Also good at protecting a key skill (like Craft for Inventor or a Swashbuckler's go-to Panache skill) from Misfortune effects because it's a Fortune effect & you end up w/ your normal roll.

And another Athletics use is for low-Str PCs or those wearing armor too heavy for themselves. Some token rolls might be unintentionally hard if you don't have Assurance. Ditto for Acrobatics for a 10 Dex warrior trying to navigate an icy slope.

As with most static feats, its benefits help those at the bottom of the curve more than the top, against one's worst rolls or situations rather than for one's best.

Setting aside timing, PC cognizance, & adjudication for now, many of these Ready shenanigans lead to frustrating results that bog down gameplay. Flip the script to double check this tactic and I think you'd find players protesting how minions constantly Step or Stride away from Strikes. Maybe they even disperse when a caster begins casting (predicting an AoE or battlefield control spell). Maybe they close a door so a blast hits the party (which has happened to me under 3.X rules).

Except maybe vs. bosses, players will find a lot of their own actions being wasted. And that's unfun IMO. And if this were legitimate, duels would look kinda ridiculous (though I suppose in real life some do).

Note that even without split-second timing/faux-disruption one can imagine a lot of Readied actions that can ruin one's tactics. Wisdom's needed.

No.

Touch range spells work differently in that there's not necessarily an attack roll to touch/make contact. It might target AC or it might directly require a save w/o a roll to touch. AND you can't hold the charge like in PF1. Once the spell's cast, it's resolved; no precasting to touch later or stack w/ an attack. In PF2 "touch" is only the same as saying the spell's range is your reach (or 0' in some mechanics), plus that you might get hurt if they're spiky or have acidic skin, etc.). Nothing odd about them like in PF1.

A Magus (or MCD Magus) does have Spellstrike which combines cast + Strike, and they occur in one package (and it doesn't need to be a touch spell). So in that sense yes, this imagery still is a Magus thing (and Eldritch Archer's, but not for unarmed attacks). But most casters don't want this because they have a higher spell attack bonus anyway or dislike risking losing the spell due to a miss/critical miss.

Gouging Claw is one way to feel like you're attacking like a savage beast while unleashing a magical attack.

ETA: A Monk's Inner Upheaval spell features an unarmed Strike or Flurry, and there are other spells that also feature Strikes, like Blink Charge which came in Secrets of Magic alongside the Magus.

If it's tied to class or spell proficiency it's not the same progression, but if tied to a flat DC + level then it is. (And the latter's pretty easy to extrapolate from earlier items; subtract the item's level from its DC then add the user's level back in.)

Another aspect of a flat DC + level is it will fall behind the curve (as maybe it should for a lower-level item). The DC will go up only 1 per level when the normal DC curve is slightly higher. So some pressure remains to upgrade one's items, but not an "upgrade or sell" level of pressure (on an item one's PC might cherish).

In my first 3.0 game a powergamer with only secondary interest in RPing was truly bummed out that he couldn't upgrade his original sword to be the one he carried throughout his career. Which is to say, such seemingly minor things like item continuity can matter. (And yes I tweaked the rules so he could pay to upgrade it to masterwork so it could become magical.)

There is one exception in that you do use MAP when you Ready an attack for outside your turn. That prevents people from escaping normal MAP and has nothing to do with attack abilities like Reactive Strike whose values are balanced around not having MAP.

ETA: And the main reason it's an exception is it says so.

"Oh, that incorporeal being was under Religion, not Occult."
What? No bueno.

It's silly to differentiate Recall Knowledge attempts as if our minds have some segmented filing system. We're plumbing all of our knowledge at once. The only significant choice IMO is what type of info/what angle one's taking on it, and this presumes a level of topical knowledge to sift through meaning one has already narrowed down the applicable fields. GM should use the best ability to answer the question the player/PC asks (which with some multi-faceted creatures/situations might lead to different skills).

So yeah, as noted above, I wouldn't even call this a houserule so much as a player-friendly & realistic interpretation of the negotiation phase in the rules.

Yeah, your best proficiency carries over from any spellcasting class since it's no longer narrowed to one of the four magics, but you still use the stat of the class you're casting from. Except that's for spells, which DD isn't. So it uses whatever spell DC/stat is highest. That rubs me the wrong way, but seems the most straightforward reading.

Martials w/ their Class DCs already benefited from using one's top proficiency, which is why I think Paizo mirrored that for casters. Also there's no "this is a Ranger ability so only use Ranger Class DC" nor a "this comes from a Dex-based class so use your Class DC Proficiency, but with Dex". In harmony with that reasoning, I wouldn't override the straightforward reading.

Thus, use your highest Spell DC.

(I do read Kineticist as having exceptions due to phrasing.)

Arazni's had a more personal type of redemption, not the standard evil becomes good, rather the weak/victimized became strong/empowered. It's a redemption of her own agency, which is the first step for any future growth, but it's not a redemption to goodness (though loosely in that direction). She displays empathy, but it's for a tight circle of like-damaged folk. In the arc of her life's growth, her soul remains wilted more than at start, perhaps toxic too. She has a ways to go to balance (and heal) before becoming actively pro-social, if that's feasible in the time spans covered by Paizo (well, barring an appearance in Starfinder or cinematic epiphany).

I think her strong protagonist vibes might have misled some. She must be good, she's struggled and persevered against evil. It's easy for us to sympathize, to root for her, but she's a bitter being driven by vengeance (but at least not only that). But yeah, not top 20 material, which smells like Paizo bias to me, but maybe there was philosophical vacuum (or Golarion metaphysical one) that she filled, bringing her to fruition as a deity long longed for.

I want to share something I recently learned researching for my own post: the Brandish Trait keeps you from participating (unless the ability makes an exception). So those Tactics are just for others. That shouldn't make too much difference in a normal PFS party, but you're going to want some non-Brandish feats for when you are filling in a warrior gap.

Probably one of the best things to use Skittermander 6 arms are scrolls and implements.

Try a Thaumaturge using different implements and scrolls with different pair of hands. Probably would be cool and efficient.

Hugs?!

(OMG, I have such mixed feelings about releasing them into PFS, depending on which character I was playing. Not that I've played PFS lately.)

Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

Okay, let's try and figure some things out.

I think that I'm giving up on the idea of planting the banner. I don't mind carrying the banner myself and having it on my shield or hanging off my backpack.

Attached to weapon is the dominant strategy for most play styles.

Where's that data?

I was kinda waiting for that, your PC's personality or theme to gel so that options became more intuitive. Good thing about the centaur is they can handle the Bulk of heavy armor w/o needing to max out Strength. I'd say archer fits the trope too.

Unless using the Guiding Shot chain of feats, I might lean longbow, as when enemies are within 30' your Tactics most shine already. Though that feat chain does seem like what a teacher/Chiron would have.

And yeah, you might want that climbing speed Tactic to navigate obstacles or even ropeways built for medium creatures. Bizarre imagery, but like a mountain goat I suppose.

So yeah, PFS, go w/ +4 Int for larger parties (& DC abilities if any appeal to you, I have no recommendations as they seemed...odd). High Int means your warrior-budget is modest, but you'll have some great skill support for PFS challenges.

Yeah, table tents, maybe even larger sheets, would help a lot. Maybe even prep them with ideas like how they can do X w/ a bit of risk because you'll next do Y which moves them to safety (or whatnot).

You have to choose the balance of martial vs. support, mainly will you have the actions for Strike (or enough + enough success to warrant taking feats that depend on successful Strikes) or will Strikes be when convenient.

Until the character's fleshed out more, any (small) Ancestry can work as a placeholder until something clicks and we can look for synergy. The main thing to figure out is what role you prefer. Since you like the banner and the idea of planting it we can start there (even though that strategy makes me quite nervous!).

You want a banner you can plant (so not your weapon), so you'll be working with a one-handed weapon. Since a Commander doesn't get much in the way of damage bonuses you'll do more damage via allies, but you could go with a bastard sword (or its cousins). I don't think it has much synergy with planting a banner (at least in a random party).

Other options: throwing weapon to support the Guiding Shot chain. It won't hurt much, but leads to good buffs. That Dex is costly, but this puts blood on their weapon.

Shield; tank up. Get enough Str for Bulk and get Con & Wis up. You'll have no difficulty finding useful actions.

Free hand: Utility, and you could get Arcane & Occult scrolls w/ Trick Magic Item, maybe Battle Medicine, etc.

Bow w/ the thinking that if it's too dangerous to plant your flag, you'll likely be too busy to shoot arrows anyway. (You could also Plant/Strike/pick up banner) for bursts of temp hit points without putting the banner at risk. And of course no need to draw/wait for Returning Rune.

This all depends on what imagery you'd like on your PC's novel cover.

Commanders are so party dependent that yeah, it's hard to craft one in a white-room. Do you have enough melee/ranged/casters to enable the Tactics geared towards those PCs? Do you have enough support to operate in melee or should you stay back? Are your melee allies tanks or skirmishers? And so on. Arguably this applies to enemies too and their average mob size.

In the playtest thrown weapons were popular. You're up close, yet not in immediate danger, and you move less while having another hand for a shield or banner. That could be the seed you need to grow from, recognizing you're a secondary combatant alone, but made a primary PC by the contributions via others' actions/Tactics.

As for Int, do you favor the abilities w/ DCs? If playing PFS you probably want a +4 as party sizes fluctuate (and companions). If neither, then you can tune Int to your party's size, perhaps to beef yourself up a bit on a smaller team.

You're experienced enough to know the typical fights, so think about which your party might need help in and if you don't know your party/PFS, then which Tactics suit fighting a solo boss or are generic enough to have broad use like Strike Hard!. I prefer to look at the toughest fights when things are falling apart, as that's when you need your go-to abilities to kick in.

If you have a shield, you might favor 1-action Tactics so you can Raise/Strike/Tactic, same if you pick up an MCD (like Wizard) for Cantrips.

Dead magic zones are essentially a significant rules change so should be addressed in session zero so players can build suitable PCs. Unless optional (as say a shortcut) or for a short spell (pun unintended) much like a prisoner scene or other deprivation of standard resources. Getting out is much more a relief/reward than adventuring within.

Played a PFS1 scenario with some fights in dead zones. Miserable experience even though I was mostly a martial because yeah, I wasn't playing the real version of my PC (who probably never would have gone there had he known!). One PC had to practically carry us in our toughest battle where magic was randomly off/on each round. Blech.

Such zones have varied throughout the decades in their intensity and what does or doesn't operate, how stable or chaotic magic is, how much the environment weakened or corrupted items & magic (such as Regeneration might give you a demonic limb if used in the Abyss). Such randomness & game-changing setbacks can be fun in an old-school style of play, but modern PF2 favors a fully actualized PC facing obstacles that don't require such a blanket nullification of PC agency. There's still use for such areas as obstacles to overcome, but not so much as a setting (unless going for a bleak, nihilistic style I suppose?). Even if spare they should be balanced w/ opportunities/obstacles where magic folk can thrive.

It weighs 1 Bulk more than Full Plate, so there's the drawback. While that's minor, so is its advantage.

Best would be a wood heavy armor since the Reduction doesn't stack, but of course there are none. An argument could be made for trading 1 AC to get medium wood armor for its crit effect (and getting some Dex, maybe to throw?); a dubious trade for every other class, but trades in some of a Guardian's immense defense for a little bite.

ET fix term.

One of my favorite table interactions:
Super stealthy Gnome approaches minion-guards who are using darkvision.
"They turn to look at you."
"How do they see me?!"
"How do you see them?"
"I have my ligh...oh, crap."
No Gnomes were harmed in the making of this anecdote.

PF2 changed Summon spells so they create simulations of creatures, not summon actual creatures. So no moral quandaries, but also no relationships, souls, bargains, etc. No permission from gods necessary either since Divine casters that hate gods can cast them too.

There are Rituals already for actual summoning, like Planar Servitor. Though it does mention having to call upon a deity, it also allows other divine powers instead. Most importantly, you don't have to be a Divine caster (or caster at all). As for swapping out promises/blood/bargains for the actual payment, that'd be GM territory.

Oh, and they're not Outsiders anymore. They don't share a mechanical trait. In fact, the Planar Servitor doesn't have to be planar, though it's implied since the divine entity does the choosing.

Then there's Binding Circle, where the target is extraplanar.

Both of these are in the Remaster, so quite up to date & suitable, but Uncommon which is normal for Rituals so GMs have to opt in to this style of narrative.

In a nutshell, ambushing in PF2 is unusual, partly because it's so strong (even stronger in previous editions). At least vs. at-level opponents who are combat ready. Imagine if it were the PCs being approached, wouldn't players in hostile environs expect to react to a door opening as if in combat? Or noises outside when you have excellent Perception? And once one notices, it's dominoes as others notice the noticing. Once the PCs kinda know there are enemies behind the door, the party has to move very fast to get any advantage since they're in the enemies' detection zone too.

Of course there have long been narrative reasons in adventures for why guards aren't guarding (i.e. gambling, drunk, rely on a trap-alarm), but those aren't reflected in the dry mechanics. You could retroactively give such reasons to explain why the party's Stealth rolls were so good, and inverse reasons if bad. The door is only the obvious factor, not the sole determiner.

In one notorious fight in the playtest, one battle with goblins swung upon whether the GM played them as combat ready or not (not ready being the default as written). So if you approach this in terms of ambushes, consider if those behind the door have to stand up, draw weapon, even get their weapons off a rack. I doubt they have any shields on their arm either. Even being out of formation matters.

I have played a character encumbered by their own gear. He had a backpack of replaceable non-combat gear he'd drop first thing in combat. So there's that, which in PF2 isn't so bad since objects are safer.

Yeah, exposing the 8 schools model as a false construct imposed by the gods could shake up the setting in interesting ways. Maybe an outside force introduces/imposes the "heretical, but more accurate" 4 traditions + 4 essences model of PF2. Or even Starfinder's model (if SF2 kept the same one as SF1 rather than PF2's). These versions could be represented by different factions, with entrenched traditions resisting change that threatens their authority.

Aligning with the gods' 8 school model might be a display of faith more than knowledge, and that might include forgoing access to newer spells (those w/ no Legacy version to inform you what school they were). In the same vein, those who deny the 8 schools might lose Ray of Frost and other Legacy variants or Legacy only spells. It'd be PF2 old school (literally) vs. remaster academies/rebels/misotheists & apatheists perhaps among the non-Divine casters (maybe w/ new gods for the Divine ones). Essentially both variants of PF2 would be operating side-by-side with no need to convert and ample fuel to foster rivalries, maybe missions to steal/adapt spells from the other team (so you'd only have to convert as desired).

I'm getting geocentrism vs. heliocentrism vibes here, or a religious schism. One might go grim w/ an inquisition, war, purge, or such. Eek.

"So, are you a force barrager or a magic missiler?"
"What? I'm a Druid! That's why I have fireballs."
"When did Druids start casting those?"
"Are you serious?! A decade ago, before this conflict."
"I should probably kill you anyway, let the 8 gods sort you out."

Mangaholic13 wrote:

Kojo Imperial wrote:

What IS the weapon Ulka is carrying? Is it just a stylized glaive, or something more orc-specific?

My best guess is that it's either a glaive or a guisarme.

Probably a guisarme, since those are harder to know what they actually looked like.

Obviously she's an AD&D character and it's a glaive-guisarme.

There was an excellent guide to polearms, I believe in the back of AD&D's Unearthed Arcana (the very first one), with extensive drawings. If one had that they could Ulka's polearms against those...and still not know what Ulka's stats say or what the artist intended. :-)

That's such a Gozreh thing to do.

IceKid wrote:

It was confirmed that Earth and Golarion exist in the same universe in different galaxies.

Is there any lore that explains why both Earth and Golarion have some similar fauna (blue whale, great white shark, woolly mammoth, tiger, lion, bison, etc).

Because it is fantasy and Paizo wants to use things we are familiar with. Yea, they exist as Paizo probably didn't want to have to make up new but similar creatures.

Nor did Wizards of The Coast, Gygax, Tolkien, etc. Players & readers need a foundation to build the fantastic off of/contrast with.

Whether it's deities, portals, First World ramifications, who knows. Extrapolating any option with rigor would find inconsistencies and cut off narrative options. So pick whatever suits you, Paizo won't adjudicate this until it matters to an AP, which I doubt it ever will.

Let's not forget tricks, as it used to be "tricks & traps", where a party might get misled or split (as bad as that is to GM). A tricky trap might cut off their exit route, make the party look hostile to allies or like buffoons, teleport them, shrink them, spoil their food, or mess with gravity, even causality. Fantasy's a crazy genre, and myths are full of bizarre effects and environments heroes have to endure (with varied success).

I remember a high level 1st ed trap where the party had to eat plates of food that multiplied exponentially, otherwise it would expand and smother them. The pregens for it had different eating ability based on their descriptions, so the hefty guy could eat more for example. Disintegrate of course was of great use, and fire could shrink meals, but made them harder to swallow. Truly bizarre, but I imagine everyone who struggled there remembers it these decades later.

And I agree diseases are a good sticky impairment, especially if the party doesn't check for them. Also curses. And Doomed, which is probably why it's for high level play.

Most of the generic numbers boosts are gone, as also seen in magic items where they have to do something cool as well as help a stat.

The PF2 playtest had some feats like this, but they were so popular (yet ultimately vanilla) that Paizo integrated them into the classes' chassis (so no burning a high level feat because you felt your Bard needs Legendary Will, and they probably did). Nearly all of your advancement comes innately in your level or class proficiencies, not feats. Canny Acumen is a good example of an exception, it's a generic boost. But it only patches where your PC might be behind the curve. It doesn't aid those at the middle or top of the curve.

In the same way, there are many ways to raise sub-par abilities (i.e. Simple Weapons to all Martial), fewer to raise any higher, and zero to raise the highest numbers...those provided by the classes defined by those abilities. If a Barbarian could increase their attack, they'd have to, much as Fighter would have to increase their damage if they could. So yeah, the best way to emulate Weapon Focus feats...play a Fighter (or Gunslinger for those).

But that's on your main attack. There are many feat actions, like Swipe or Double Slice, that improve your secondary attack, plus the Press feats and Finishers. And Flourish feats usually help with action economy or sometimes with damage. And there are some passive feats, like Agile Grace, still not for one's primary attack though.

A PC trying to bring up a sub-par ability (like a pure caster with Strikes) to competitive (wants to hit as well as a martial) goes against PF2's grain. It takes much investment to get to mediocre, and with all the stats, gold, spell buffs, and such, they might break even to what a martial class can do innately...until the buffs wear off.

OR one can support one's allies. As well as teamwork being more important in PF2, PF2's support abilities are quite generous. So if say you talked another player into helping your build while you helped theirs, you could both reach effective levels higher than you could alone. The ease with which a Bard does this is one reason they're among the top classes and that some people emphasize One For All for non-Swashbucklers.

ETA...but not really, took 3 min. too long to write. :-P

Of course you can use the guisarme adjacent too. :-)
But also can Ready a Trip for an incoming enemy, which is good even if they have 10' reach (which at high levels is common). This can really mess up their routine, especially if they have a good two-action attack, like many Giants do, or an attack + Grab/etc. like tons of monsters do. They move, you trip, they stand, Reactive Strike (w/ Tactical Reflexes), they have one action left (so it's really good vs. enemies w/ 5' reach). Of course you can just Ready a Strike too, getting one when within reach and another if they keep moving.

And I forgot to cover the Slam feats better, but they're popular for a reason. Heck, consider: move, reach weapon for Slam w/ trip, Reactive Strike when they stand. If they need/want to move they have to Step to avoid another Reactive Strike, and if they move adjacent to you then your ally can move in to trigger Topple (if you don't get both Reactive Strikes). Lots of discombobulation & striking.
And Slam works fine w/ one-handed trip weapons too (or a free hand).

If focused on Stun & the debuffs, Monk (Stunning Blows) or Barbarian (Silencing Strike) have straightforward attack routines for that, no set up required; plus feats that augment tripping & grappling. Plus Brawling weapons Slow w/ crit spec. And Monks can disrupt standing w/ Stand Still (though unfortunately lack feats for bonus Reactions/round.)

Yeah, the silver blowgun dart that would bounce off anybody else's shield shouldn't break the werewolf's shield. It'd be a funny way to tell if your friend had caught lycanthropy though.
"Bob, I noticed your shield...kinda exploded there."
"Hah hah, funny, right?"
"Errr..."
"Grrr."

PF2 Player Core: "The GM determines whether you can use reactions before your first turn begins, depending on the situation in which the encounter happens."
So ask your GM. I think most GMs would let you use a Reaction before your first turn, especially if you Defend during Exploration. Some GMs might be thinking of PF1 and may require persuading, but "no" is not the default. Nor is "yes" for that matter, rather GM's adjudication of the situation is the default, which IMO means you do have a Reaction and the question is more whether you're alert enough to use it/notice the trigger.

But yeah, initiative is nice, but Delay is too often the better tactic for a melee character, at least vs. melee enemies. Give your casters some space to throw AoE spells, let the baddies spend actions getting to you so you get more swings, easier flanking, and better support. And as a Champion (and maybe as a Kineticist too), you should want to keep your allies in your Aura anyway rather than run forward.

Reflex, and I don't even see the dilemma. In the toughest situations, a poor roll on Perception is nearly always safer than a crit fail on a Reflex throw. Someone beating your Perception DC often has to beat your allies' too. You might want to try developing another ability for initiative, though I wouldn't sweat it if say you prefer going in with your shield up.

But as you know, Containment targets a creature so cannot act like a plug unless there's a creature to target. It also doesn't have a default size so even if allowed, w/o a creature it occupies no space. Plus it's no more hardy, which was the complaint.

It still has uses though; trap a poison-using Rogue in there and their great damage will struggle against the shell. Or a caster who specializes in AoEs and Mental spells. As noted even a brute who rolls a success still has to use an action + MAP to escape. That's a good trade vs. a boss.

Does the Soulforger give you a fully loaded weapon though?

Given that both examples of provided ammo (in a quiver or floating) come unloaded, I'd say no. It sounds like you summon the weapon, and the ability's kind enough to give you a stash of ammo so you can use the weapon, but I don't see the weapon coming in preloaded from the info given.

I imagine this would've become a must-have for many Gunslingers w/ Capacity weapons if it were preloaded.

Consider Assurance on your Panache skill/Acrobatics. It's not a must-have as you'll only succeed vs. below-level enemies, but you'd get your temp Panache and the feat does protect from Misfortune effects or nat 1s.

And you can carry a shield until the Stance becomes available I agree that in a tough campaign you'll want that AC maxed (though that doesn't necessarily make you the front-liner!).

Depending on party build & tactics, consider Guardian's Deflection.

Remorseless Lash is solid, but IMO not worth as much as it's costing here.
You might have to pick a lane re: All-for-One vs. Antagonize. See which face skills your party's covering. IMO All for One (in a tight combat) costs more than people realize, though yeah, it's also game-changing if you can pay it.

For a random recommendation consider Eldritch Archer. Only the Dedication, so that you have a significant ranged option (as always, depending on the party's gaps/strengths).

I have a hard time advising much since there are so many delicious ways to build a Swashbuckler as you've discovered. For example, I can't pass up Charmed Life, especially if going to 20 b/ of Incredible Luck.

Yes.
So it slows them down, but can't stop them or trap them. I have seen instances for NPCs in highest-level dungeons where the outer perimeter and/or key areas were enclosed so PCs can't bypass defenses by going ethereal. In one Paizo Dungeon Mag scenario it was every wall in the dungeon!

To be honest, I really wish we had gotten less ancestries, but added depth on the existing ones.

And I can still kind of keep that same hope in the sense of, don't add more ancestries, but do add more depth to the existing ones.

With ancestry options that help to differentiate these cultures/ethnicities from one another.

This.