I actually hope we do not end up with 5E style macro feats. I enjoy the customization option more than the macro.

I really am enjoying the new mechanics to 2E. However, regarding the progression process of new characters, can we keep it similar to 1E but just write it in a way that is compatable with 2E's fluid like mechanics? In other words, still allow actual multiclassing, create actual archetypes, maintain character progression (similar to the oracle with 1E where the revelations had their own progression options), allow the selection of feats based on their category: Combat, metamagic, crafting, teamwork, general, etc. My group is having alot of fun with the playtest and the new system, but I think if we kept the same customization options as was available in 1E, this will really be an awesome system.

I agree with the initial statement in this forum. This is the problem I have been discussing with my group. I, and speaking for everyone else, do not like the bottle necked feeling. I love the mechanics of PF2 so far. However, there has to be a more efficient method of feat selection. I liked having combat feats, teamwork feats, and metamagic feats readily available in order to customize your character. Forcing selection into multiclass feats as the only way to customize your character seems a little too restrictive. It has been a common issue among my group. I am happy you all have brought this up and our concerns were not unique.

Why does Twin Take down state this:

Quote:

The second Strike takes a –2 circumstance penalty if the weapon doesn’t have the agile trait.

I mean, if the second strike is already subject to MAP, is that penalty needed? Is this a typo of something held over from Double Slice?

Should be removed right?

I completely agree with it being flawed right now. You are looking at a -7 penalty on that second attack. Compare it to the fighter's double slice, which is worded in a way that indicates both of your attacks in that activity use your current multiple attack penalty. I think Twin Takedown should operate the same way, it should use the current MAP for both attacks. Hoping there will be further updates to this feat.

It seems watered down to me

Centurian 919 wrote:

What is wrong with using the magic item's focus pool? Also known as charges? The focus pool already existed, it was the amount of charges within the item. I'm specifically talking about wands. I do like the decreased number of charges that wands hold. I don't think the players need a separate pool of points, other than the wand's assigned charges, in order to activate the item. It would be a lot easier and less frustrating to the players.

The thing is I have no problem with item charges, but I should never need to spend a personal resource to activate an item with charges.

Charges OR Focus. If a character is going to spend focus, then the wand needs to do something more than just activate again (perhaps heightening, or ignoring the spell roll cap).

That is precisely my point! Why do we need a focus pool for wands when they are loaded with charges, that once are used render the wand useless?

What is wrong with using the magic item's focus pool? Also known as charges? The focus pool already existed, it was the amount of charges within the item. I'm specifically talking about wands. I do like the decreased number of charges that wands hold. I don't think the players need a separate pool of points, other than the wand's assigned charges, in order to activate the item. It would be a lot easier and less frustrating to the players.

Vic Ferrari wrote:

Dire Ursus wrote:

Centurian 919 wrote:

Scenario: I am out of spell slots, no more focus points, I have a wand that is loaded with 9 charges and can cast a spell that I need at that moment. I have already used my once per day charge and need focus points to tap into its remaining power. Yet, I have no way to access this item because I do not have any focus points because I already used them on my class abilities. Sounds rather discouraging and I can see people at the table getting very frustrated on this restriction.

In this scenario it sounds like you didn't prepare well enough.

I don't think blaming, passively insulting people's lack of preparedness is the way to go to champion a new mechanic.

It was a fictional scenario...

anyways back on topic.

Scenario: Sorcerer ran out of spell slots but needs to cast a spell.

Do you blame the system or do you blame the sorcerer for not saving spell slots? It's the same scenario.

If you are out of spells, and you have a wand loaded with 9 charges and have already used your focus pool points on your class abilities, the players should have access to the charges in the wand. Failing to grant players access to resources is not a good idea, and can make a fun game not enjoyable. Class pools, spells slots, and magic item resources are separate things. I am telling you, I have seen my players very frustrated about the mechanic.

Centurian 919 wrote:

Vic Ferrari wrote:

Centurian 919 wrote:

Scenario: I am out of spell slots, no more focus points, I have a wand that is loaded with 9 charges and can cast a spell that I need at that moment. I have already used my once per day charge and need focus points to tap into its remaining power. Yet, I have no way to access this item because I do not have any focus points because I already used them on my class abilities. Sounds rather discouraging and I can see people at the table getting very frustrated on this restriction.

I believe they mentioned classes with powers/ki getting extra focus points or something, but that could get messy.

It just feels a little too restrictive. There's gotta be a better way. Still thinking about how to do that.

Oh, I agree, I think they should keep the 10 (I would prefer less) items restriction, but scrap the Focus Points deal. Powers should be spells, or class features, or talents, or something.

I agree. I have no problem with using resonance to assign the 10, but this focus point system either needs to be gone or redone so your class abilities and magic item usage do not cancel each other out.

Centurian 919 wrote:

Scenario: I am out of spell slots, no more focus points, I have a wand that is loaded with 9 charges and can cast a spell that I need at that moment. I have already used my once per day charge and need focus points to tap into its remaining power. Yet, I have no way to access this item because I do not have any focus points because I already used them on my class abilities. Sounds rather discouraging and I can see people at the table getting very frustrated on this restriction.

I believe they mentioned classes with powers/ki getting extra focus points or something, but that could get messy.

It just feels a little too restrictive. There's gotta be a better way. Still thinking about how to do that.

Scenario: I am out of spell slots, no more focus points, I have a wand that is loaded with 9 charges and can cast a spell that I need at that moment. I have already used my once per day charge and need focus points to tap into its remaining power. Yet, I have no way to access this item because I do not have any focus points because I already used them on my class abilities. Sounds rather discouraging and I can see people at the table getting very frustrated on this restriction.

Centurian 919 wrote:

Why do we need a separate point system, unique to character ability scores, to use magic items? What good does an item that contains charges do for a player who has run out of pool points and cannot use them. Seems rather discouraging. Magic items have commonly been used when player resources have run dry (at least in the groups I have played in). The concept of using a magic item to save your butt when you are out of resources is where the "Epic" comes from. I am curious to know why this system is a good one.

Because in a high-magic setting, where magical items are easy to buy or craft, characters can easily stuff twenty cheap items into their magical bag and use that cool 1/day ability over and over.

With the Focus rules that are in testing now, consumables can be used freely, so they are the safety net for when you are out of resources; what Focus does is just overpowering them a few times per day, if you want so.

You make a good point, but loading up on those items seems like a GM discretionary problem. It seems you believe more regulation is better. Is this because society groups were abusing the magic item availability? In my private campaigns, an overload of those items would not be allowed.

Centurian 919 wrote:

The more I read about this resonance or focus system as it pertains to unleashing the abilities and potency of magic items, I cannot help but think that my beloved Pathfinder is being molded to shadow some sort of online video game MMORPG format.

What MMO uses the format of using a renewable player resource to buff up their consumables and the like?

Quote:

Magic items seem to be like a "Bind to Account" item that becomes more powerful as the character grows in power.

Which in the Playtest do that? Also you do realize that not only did 1st Edition Pathfinder do that but so did 3.5 DnD with Weapons of Legacy, long before WoW did.

Quote:

This philosophy needs to be gone. The power of a magic item is unique to the item. It should have no bearing on a character's charisma score, or focus pool.

Conversely, a character able to "draw out an item's true potential" or whatever is a common trope and one that I'm not opposed to.

Quote:

Thats what makes possessing and using magic items epic.

I have never felt "epic" having a potion of CLW or +1 Greatsword. Nice to have, but not epic.

Quote:

They should not be enhanced with character progression.

Almost all items are, and always have been. The Barbarian's increasing BAB and Strength score made her better with her +1 Greatsword, the sword wasn't the end all solution. The sword is an accessory.

Quote:

They are the rewards that are granted as a character gains power unique to his class.

I would be vehemently against having items be class locked (now that's a WoW thing), having items that boost certain class powers is fine and a staple but "+1 Greatsword Class Requirement: Barbarian" is gonna be a hard no from me.

Quote:

Scrap this pool system for magic items altogether please, and leave the focus points to class development only.

I'm still undecided on if I want FP to work with both class features and item boosting or have two seperate things, and possibly combine the class one with Hero...

Why do we need a separate point system, unique to character ability scores, to use magic items? What good does an item that contains charges do for a player who has run out of pool points and cannot use them. Seems rather discouraging. Magic items have commonly been used when player resources have run dry (at least in the groups I have played in). The concept of using a magic item to save your butt when you are out of resources is where the "Epic" comes from. I am curious to know why this system is a good one.

The more I read about this resonance or focus system as it pertains to unleashing the abilities and potency of magic items, I cannot help but think that my beloved Pathfinder is being molded to shadow some sort of online video game MMORPG format. Magic items seem to be like a "Bind to Account" item that becomes more powerful as the character grows in power. This philosophy needs to be gone. The power of a magic item is unique to the item. It should have no bearing on a character's charisma score, or focus pool. Thats what makes possessing and using magic items epic. They should not be enhanced with character progression. They are the rewards that are granted as a character gains power unique to his class. Scrap this pool system for magic items altogether please, and leave the focus points to class development only. I have been a DM or GM for around 30 years and this will substantially change my outlook on this product.

The idea you must use a pool of points to utilize a magic item is not a good one. I have been a GM or DM for around 30 years. One of the most rewarding elements of the game is watching a good party utilize magic items properly. The whole purpose of a magic item is to allow a character to do something extraordinary by unleashing an item's power without relying upon his own personal pool of power. Your personal power pool should only be used for class abilities, consider it career development and magic items are the fruits of your labor. Using resonance to limit the amount of invested items a character can use at any given time is okay by me, however, I do not like the idea of telling a character that he has a very powerful item in his possession but because his charisma score is too low, he can't unleash its full potential. In summary: Consumables are consumables, once used, they are gone (Scrolls, Potions, Oils, Elixers). When wands are out of charges they are gone, who cares how much of their magic is used at one time (this is up to the player - conserve or spend, and the distribution is up to the GM). Wands are basically a consumable with an extended shelf life.

Just a heads up... For the first time ever, I am unable to download any of my PDFs, including those I have downloaded previously using the same OS platform I have used for years. I use Safari. Hoping you all can resolve this soon...