Griffon

CharlieIAm's page

67 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 67 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Quandary wrote:
AFAIK, the "can Refocus without any special effort" only applies "If you don't already have" a Focus pool, so if you DID already have a Pool, the RAW doesn't seem to grant new Refocus method. I had strong impression having multiple tradition's Focus spells was supposed to allow using ANY of their refocus methods to Refocus, but RAW isn't doing that now. This applies to each multiclass' special Refocus method.

From the sidebar on Pg 302 of the core book: "Focus Points are not differentiated by source; you can spend any of your Focus Points on any of your focus spells. Likewise, when you Refocus, you get back a point as long as you follow the guidelines of any abilities that granted you focus spells."


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Redditor darthmarth28 has posted a PF2 Google Sheet here.


Okay, then.

This is all DM stuff, I really should spoiler it:
So the task here is getting the PCs headed for Scrapwall (because that's a lot easier than rewriting the entire rest of the AP. :D )

If Meyanda mentioned Scrapwall, you can try having the town council get increasingly nervous over the course of 2-3 weeks about her threats, and make the reward offer from the start of Lords of Rust to check out/deal with any potential danger to Torch ("Just in case"), in addition to Joram Kyte's request to contact Dinvaya (he should have no trouble convincing the party cleric to do it as a professional courtesy, right?)

If Scrapwall didn't come up, it gets trickier. Garmen Ulreth probably knows that Meyanda came from Scrapwall and might sell that information to the town council - if so, you might want to knock 500 GP off the reward offered to the PCs. ;)


Peter Acs, what happened in your game with Sanvil Trett? If he's still active I could totally see him getting in touch with Meyanda and trying to sell her on an alliance with the Technic League. Mind you, if she's as honest with him as she was with the PCs it will be a setup so that he can find out about this Hellion entity, who is obviously a threat to the League.


The downloadable character sheets are linked in this blog post or there are a number of fan made ones being touted in the General Discussion section.


There's a lot of "partial caster" space that can be covered by Multiclassing Sorcerer.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Put me down as another who wants to see the Kineticist and Gunslinger first, though I am interested in seeing how PF2 handles the Witch and Summoner.

Ramanujan's idea of the Synthesist as a class sounds good to me as the Shifter done right.

I'm still trying to decide if the Arcanist has enough space in PF2 to warrant being its own thing, but it's telling that my group hasn't had a Wizard in play since Arcanist was published.


There are certainly people who have converted Iron Gods to 5e, at least up to a point; I've seen discussion both here and when doing searches online for GM resources to check out. In particular, searching for the names of prominent NPCs (and monsters like Robot types) in the AP have turned up links to 5e conversions.

On the other hand, these were campaigns meant to be run in 5e from the beginning, so any adaptation of appropriate classes got done in advance and not in mid-AP. Still, they might be worthwhile looking into for ideas.


My group hasn't braved the west end of the Engineering deck yet (in favor of exploring the Habitat Pod and Security Deck first) but I'm planning on also treating Page 50 as correct.


Edge93 wrote:
Ediwir wrote:

The Demonic Bloodline actually says a lot more than you’d imagine:

The same update added a feat that lets Sorcerer heighten bloodline spells.
All Demonic Bloodline spells can be heightened.

No other bloodline does that.
Yet.

HMMM...

(X-Files theme intensifies)

All but the 3rd level Draconic bloodline spells can be heightened, as one of my players noted with delight when we got to the last chapter of Doomsday Dawn.


kitmehsu wrote:
I wonder if skill boosting magic items will mirror the ability score bonus one by boosting your proficiency one step. So that a magic item makes someone able to perform the skill if incompetent with it, gives a small boon to most characters and nothing for those already legendary with it.

Oh, I like that a lot! Elegant and useful.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I really appreciated that suckage was relative in the Playtest, and am skeptical that any way to get generally better will work as well.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Spells per day in general, but Sorcerers in particular. In PF1 you could get some extra mileage out of lower-level spells because they scaled with caster level. In PF2 a caster is far more dependent on their higher-level slots for serious combat.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

While I wouldn't have minded a FAQ-style update to finish off the official Playtest period, I can understand while the actual final product has taken over the developer attention.


In my Playtest game I have two PC Goblin Sorcerers, one Arcane/Draconic and one Fey/Primal with a Rogue Multiclass. At 17th level (the last chapter in Doomsday Dawn) the Arcane Sorcerer is using Bracers and has an AC/TAC of 37, and the Primal Sorcerer is using magic Armor and has AC 38, TAC 36. I'd call it a wash, myself.


I had a player make a Goblin Sorcerer (Fey Bloodline) with Intimidating Glare; the Demoralize-then-Cast technique works pretty well for him.


My players also love Demoralize, especially the one playing a Goblin with Intimidating Glare.

Point Out also gets used sometimes, mostly by the casters with See Invisibility.

They've used Take Cover occasionally.

In Pale Mountain's Shadow the Monk's player used Long Jump to deal with difficult terrain and obstacles.

In Lost Star the Paladin with a shield stood in front of the Fighter with the two-handed reach weapon and did Assist (He'd taken Cooperative Nature). It worked OK, actually. Naturally, by the time I ran Mirrored Moon both players had completely forgotten about the technique.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have been encouraging my players to fill in the player surveys about anything they dislike (or like!) about the playtest. Sadly, I'm not sure any of them besides my wife is interested.


Captain Morgan wrote:
They left before day 7, so the Night Heralds didn't catch up with them. Obviously I could have made them catch up anyway, but I want to move on in the playtest and frankly wasn't stoked about running multiple NPCs with different abilities. I've found that encounters that involve separate pages of the bestiary are just awful to run from PDF. I'm dreading part 3's various undead combinations, TBH. I can probably solve some of that by copy/pasting into word, but then I lose action icons. If anyone has suggestions for how they handled it, I'm all ears.

I've been opening the Bestiary PDF in multiple tabs in Edge (I don't use Edge much otherwise) so I can switch between different pages easily.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like the idea of making Clerical Channeling a Spell Point function; one less thing to track and less dependent on a secondary stat.

Sorcerers still lag, especially non-Arcane ones (though proficiencies have a lot to do with that). Full Spontaneous Heightening as soon as meaningful would help, along with either giving them more worthwhile things to do with Spell Points and/or more casts per day.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

One thing that I have found really helpful is that a couple of awesome fans, Caio Henrique Di Giaimo and Gustavo Malek, have been annotating the Rulebook PDF with the updates as they come out. Here's the link.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm trying to get The Mirrored Moon and When the Stars Go Dark done before the end of the year. I wish that I'd run the Resonance Test instead of Affair at Sombrefell Hall, to tell the truth.


David knott 242 wrote:
Focus points have a completely different problem: At first, they are used to power class abilities, then they are used later on to get more out of magic items. In short, Focus points are doing too much, and Resonance points are doing too little.

That's something I am trying to address with my approach.


I'm going to repost this, because I think it's relevant - here's how I'd like to see it done.

Resonance:

Resonance is how permanent magic items are used.

Consumables are invested at the time of crafting and do what they do, and the Level/Price/Effect reflects this (you could, if absolutely necessary, make some sort of rule about how often the same sort of consumable could be used on the same target, but I think that in the end it would be too much trouble to write and adjudicate).

Permanent items use Resonance for investment or activation much like the original Playtest rules as appropriate (including there being types of items that don't need either). I would avoid using charges in general; if item spamming is a problem I would limit problem items to one use per minute/10 minutes/hour/day as necessary.

Staves being invested and then usable with either Resonance or spell slots is a great system and I'd keep it, but I don't think additional charges or the like is needed (investing still gives access to a cantrip, after all). I'd change typical Wands to a single spell that doesn't use charges, just activation with Resonance or spell slot (time-limiting them if that turns out to be a problem); I don't think investing on top of that is necessary.

Resonance starts out low (basing on CHA is fine) and increases with level, because that's pretty much how magic item access/use works and not including consumables makes that much less of a problem. No overspending. Classes/builds that would be unduly hampered by a lack of Resonance can have class features or feats available to increase their total.

Focus:

Focus is how class features that aren't persistent (or just don't need limiting) are used (unless they are time-limited instead, like Barbarian Rage, if that system is kept). This includes all of them; Bloodline Powers, Domain Powers, Channels, Wild shape, Daily/Quick Alchemy, Ki Powers, Lay on Hands, etc. One pool, one thing to track.

The key to making this work is realizing that a character's Focus can vary by need; not all Classes/builds have to have the same totals and ways to obtain Focus, and some may not need it at all, any more than all classes need spell slots. We saw a version of this with Spell Points; what I'm proposing is similar, just with all the side pools folded into it.

Besides working out when and how much Focus should be provided to each character build, the other major issue with Focus is balancing the powers that it fuels. I doubt that trying to make every possible power equally worthwhile is going to be practical (especially when Multiclassing is taken into account), so a Major/Minor 1-2 Focus per use or Lesser/Regular/Greater 1-3 Focus per use cost system will probably be needed, which will affect how appropriate Focus totals will be designed; it's not the easiest thing to work out, but it's doable (I think. It may be that Multiclassing is going to requite multiple Focus pools to work, but it requires multiple sets of spell slots where that's an issue, so I'm okay with that).


Mostly I'm trying to solve the problem of several different fiddly things to track, plus what as far as I can tell what Resonance was intended to solve in the first place (simplifying item slots and preventing item spamming).

I'm not claiming my approach isn't going to need work to get the numbers optimal, but that's true with both the current playtest system and the Focus test, so I'm more interested in how the final result could work.

As it stands, the Test system makes it a choice between using what are supposed to be defining class abilities and making items (including consumables) really useful, which strikes me as a bigger problem than having to select between a plethora of item uses.

As for channel versus other class powers, given the general commentary I'm seeing on both how powerful channels are and how underwhelming a lot of class powers are, it looks to me like that could use some adjustment anyway. It may be that even with channel at three Focus and improved domain powers at one Focus that clerics will still use all their Focus on channels and call for more, but I'd like to have a chance to test it.


I had some thoughts along those lines but they don't seem to have been very compelling.


When I began hearing about the Pathfinder Playtest rules, I was very excited about what I saw as the promise of Resonance and Focus (Spell Points); a relatively straightforward and flexible way to handle magic items and class powers that was resistant to abuse. I don't think that either the current playtest rules or the Resonance Test rules really delivers on that promise, but I do think that it is possible, so I'm posting my framework for doing so to see what the community at large thinks.

Resonance:

Resonance is how permanent magic items are used.

Consumables are invested at the time of crafting and do what they do, and the Level/Price/Effect reflects this (you could, if absolutely necessary, make some sort of rule about how often the same sort of consumable could be used on the same target, but I think that in the end it would be too much trouble to write and adjudicate).

Permanent items use Resonance for investment or activation much like the original Playtest rules as appropriate (including there being types of items that don't need either). I would avoid using charges in general; if item spamming is a problem I would limit problem items to one use per minute/10 minutes/hour/day as necessary.

Staves being invested and then usable with either Resonance or spell slots is a great system and I'd keep it, but I don't think additional charges or the like is needed (investing still gives access to a cantrip, after all). I'd change typical Wands to a single spell that doesn't use charges, just activation with Resonance or spell slot (time-limiting them if that turns out to be a problem); I don't think investing on top of that is necessary.

Resonance starts out low (basing on CHA is fine) and increases with level, because that's pretty much how magic item access/use works and not including consumables makes that much less of a problem. No overspending. Classes/builds that would be unduly hampered by a lack of Resonance can have class features or feats available to increase their total.

Focus:

Focus is how class features that aren't persistent (or just don't need limiting) are used (unless they are time-limited instead, like Barbarian Rage, if that system is kept). This includes all of them; Bloodline Powers, Domain Powers, Channels, Wild shape, Daily/Quick Alchemy, Ki Powers, Lay on Hands, etc. One pool, one thing to track.

The key to making this work is realizing that a character's Focus can vary by need; not all Classes/builds have to have the same totals and ways to obtain Focus, and some may not need it at all, any more than all classes need spell slots. We saw a version of this with Spell Points; what I'm proposing is similar, just with all the side pools folded into it.

Besides working out when and how much Focus should be provided to each character build, the other major issue with Focus is balancing the powers that it fuels. I doubt that trying to make every possible power equally worthwhile is going to be practical (especially when Multiclassing is taken into account), so a Major/Minor 1-2 Focus per use or Lesser/Regular/Greater 1-3 Focus per use cost system will probably be needed, which will affect how appropriate Focus totals will be designed; it's not the easiest thing to work out, but it's doable (I think. It may be that Multiclassing is going to requite multiple Focus pools to work, but it requires multiple sets of spell slots where that's an issue, so I'm okay with that).

Thoughts? Do you think this would work? Am I oversimplifying, or opening things up to abuse? I'd like to know.


MMCJawa wrote:
Technically we get a reduction of pools though, since spell points are now combined with resonance for Focus. "Resonance" as it will exist is just the flat ten slots you get for magical items. You won't really have to track Resonance than.

Wouldn't you still have to spend Resonance to swap out worn items during the day? I get the impression this is still to stop the "collect bunches of cheap 1/day worn items" technique.


I just finished running Pale Mountain's Shadow for my group, and the only thing I thought was out of line was the latch trap on the tomb door (I ended up letting a PC open the door while taking the hit).

The Manticore was a nasty fight, but between a Ranger and Cleric with bows, an Alchemist with bombs, and an Arcane Sorcerer with spells the party had enough ranged capability to bring it down (admittedly I was not rolling my best with the spike attacks).

My party bypassed the elemental rooms at first, got to the puzzle room, examined the controls and sighed, figuring out that they probably needed to fight the elementals. Those fights were the closest I came to killing any PCs, but the Cleric managed to keep the worst of it to a PC being down to 3 HP (the party did do a night's rest between the two rooms).

We did benefit greatly from being a bit late to the chapter, because the 1.2 Update on Skills meant the Alchemist had taken Occultism, giving them good rolls in all four applicable skills.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My vote would be for Kineticist, as the class that's most distinct from the core classes and it would be nice to see a PF2 rewrite now that Spell Points are a thing and we could perhaps not have to go with damaging yourself as a base mechanic.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

+2 to Spell Rolls being used for attacks. It's not like Touch AC is the giveaway that it was in 1st edition, and simplicity is good.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Add me to the people who like the "Damage Saving Throw (Reflex)" terminology and would also like the lists a spell is on to be part of the spell description.


If you read the rest of the Stages section on page 325, it mentions that making the new saving throw reduces the affliction value and if it is reduced to zero it goes away.


Lost Star party of five:

Burnie Cinders, Goblin Sorcerer (Primal)
Clive Aethelwolf, Human Paladin of Erastil (Sword & Board)
Kento, Human Fighter (Ranseur)
Lanxim Greenglass, Gnome Cleric of Cayden Cailean
Voydra, Goblin Sorcerer (Arcane, Draconic)


You do have the ten minute reset after using it to Shield Block, though.


Yes please!


Fair enough, and that's what I've done.


In chapter one of Doomsday Dawn, it has players use a set of Backgrounds specific to the adventure. Is there a player handout for these? The actual page in the adventure contains some spoilers.


I'll take a look at the HLO Pathfinder Playtest demo online but I doubt they will have anything like the GM tools that Hero Lab Classic has, so there's no point in having all my players use it if they don't want to.

At least Lone Wolf hasn't actually starting charging for server access for the people who have the Starfinder packages (which is consistent with the early history of Realm Works).


Trained / Expert / Master / Legendary


Yeah, I'm using the Hero Lab package for the AP, and it's instructive to see where they had to adjust an NPC to make it fit the stat block instead of the rules.

In the case of Metweska, they applied a -6 penalty to her chainsaw attacks (though explicitly adding proficiency) and removed Perception as a Class Skill (as opposed to reducing her Skill Ranks).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Souls At War wrote:
172) will any PF2 rules get backported to PF1 in some way?

Pathfinder Unshackled?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd be happy with Spell having Levels and Characters/Classes having Ranks, though I suppose that's even more of a flouting of tradition.


Meophist wrote:
It doesn't appear as though natural 1's are auto-failure. They become critical failures only if it would normally be a failure anyways.

Similarly, it appears that a natural 20 is no longer auto-success.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:

As to thievery... Larceny? Pilferage? Thievishness? Filch? Purloin? Plunder? Looting? Pillage? Stealage? Roguery? Swindle? Robbery? Finagle? Trickery?...

What was wrong with thievery again?

Isn't the traditional euphemism "Treasure-Hunting"?


I need more information to know what to think. If a Cleric uses a Cure Wand on a Fighter, who gets charged Resonance; the Cleric, the Fighter, or both?

It does seem to pretty much eliminate the concept of the at-will item unless they're defined as "wielded" instead of "worn", like the Apprentice Cheating Gloves mentioned above.


1) Arcanist
2) Inquisitor
3) Keneticist
4) Oracle
5) Investigator
6) Summoner
7) Slayer
8) Psychic
9) Witch
10) Magus


Huh, I had thought that readying a shield was like drawing a weapon, not something that you had to do every round.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It really depends on how 2e ends up. The local gaming circle is big enough that there will probably be both first and second edition games going on; besides Pathfinder there are games of D&D 4e and 5e currently running.


In my game, I'd require Smash from the Air to be effective versus beam weapons; if it's not an explicit anti-magical/technology effect, I can't see treating a laser beam differently than a Scorching Ray.

1 to 50 of 67 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>