Captain Morgan wrote:
Awesome unless Umbral Gnome = Svirfneblin and we're back to the problematic lore implications we saw in the playtest. Some of the heritages could use the rarity rules applied to them!
Doktor Weasel wrote:
Blade of Justice or whatever that just added some dice depending on your level would work pretty well even at level 1 because of it's scaling nature. Smite is supposed to be strong vs the specific enemies in can target, too!
In the Playtest it felt like the Rogue straight up ran out of choices at some point and they started learning/boosting random skills.
The goal is that you'll want a mix of both, which I think it's reasonably succeeding at. You'll probably want at least one spell that you can use once you unlock level 2 slots because you don't get many opportunities to learn new spells.
This. The developers have all the math. I wouldn't mind my Ranger being noticeably weaker than the Fighter/Barb if my 3-4 feats invested AC can help even things out.
I think the "tactical" advantage of the AC is minimized a lot in this edition compared to before.
First off, some of the ACs used to be really good, comparable to full martial party members or even stronger in some instances. I'm glad this is gone and they are pretty weaksauce now. They are a pet, after all, a class feature and not your entire character.
Being weaker is compounded a lot by the tight math. Having -2 attack and AC relative to the other characters/enemies was barely noticeable before. Now it goes a long way and you have to use the pet more carefully to get the most benefit. Their low health is specially good at balancing this aspect.
Lack of reactions or AOO ability from the companion reduces some of their utility in controlling the battlefield. Having more "bodies" could be a real advantage, but now weak creatures are just speedbumps. However, flanking is still very valuable and lack of enemy AOOs might make it particularly easy to get the pet into advantageous position.
Keeping the pet strong now costs a bunch of feats and leaves you with a pretty bland main PC whereas before the power boost was pretty much "free" (Boon Companion for Ranger was the main tax) and the PC didn't even need the AC to remain competitive.
I think it would have been at least worthwhile to check if those nerfs were sufficient to balance the old action economy advantage (Except it always costs an action to give/swap a command), and it'll be interesting to try this out once we get the full rules. The Orders/Trick system would be mandatory, of course, full tactical control can make them significantly better both in and out of combat without helping the "realism" issue we got here.
Not exactly satisfied with "the player has to do mental gymnastics to make sense of this" as the conclusion of why animal companions operate so poorly. Was there even alternative ideas for balancing them?
Also, I'm on the camp that the PC should not control the exact movements of their animal companion. The "trick" system was their interface which made them not be tactically optimal. The issue to me was how they could get huge stats and pounce, not the action system.
Captain Morgan wrote:
By fiercely I mean in determination, not effect. Of course they're not much compared to a Wolf or dinosaur AC in power. However, they will jump in to defend me if I'm under attack and probably use several actions in the process.
The joke was a jab at how people here keep saying the Animal Companion would just "run away" and abandon you mid-fight like that's completely natural.
"Eventually, for a feat" is a steep cost to get some semblance of verisimilitude. If this was automatic for all pets then it would be a pretty good step forward.
People here really think animals are stupid and useless. If anything, real animals trained to attack will attack to the best of their ability unless told to stop rather than stop every 5 seconds unless told to attack.
Also, I liked the "tricks" system which gave the GM a lot of control in making the animal feel real rather than just "a second PC". But I think now commanding gives you full control of the 2 actions?
I feel like this system is going backwards. 5E also had pretty dumb companions on launch, but the revised Ranger one is pretty good and balanced without all these restrictions.
TO CAPTAIN MORGAN EDIT: So do they get all 3 actions to do that? That part needs to be codified or it's so vague as to be unusable. How doe sit interact with the feat that gives them 1 action? That line just makes it confusing.
My issue with Minion actions is more with animal companions than summons. The explanation we got for summons that they require 1 action to concentrate to keep the spell going or manually controlling the creature's movement is enough for me to accept it.
That living animals who are not magical in any way and have some measure of intelligence follow the exact same system, though, that's where things fall apart.
Sure, summons and Animal Companions are both "minions" in that they obey you, but I would say "persistent pets" can't just operate the same way as "temporarily conjured summons".
Well, all these new fancy advantage the Rogue gets to shore up the lack of sneak attack don't really extend to spells, is what I was saying...
Might have synergy with certain spells, but I don't think Cantrip sneak attacks are the way to go.
This could be pretty powerful in some circumstances and would totally be worth a feat. People would just cast the 1 action magic missile to get 2 Strikes without any MAP using that spoiled ability.
Can't say I'm too impressed with that magical sneak attack feat, though. Rogue's sneak attack damage in the playtest was significantly reduced, likely to account for multiple attacks per round. Enemy HP was also vastly increased, with most things having no less than 2X their original health compared to PF1. Spells are still mostly once per round, so they don't get this benefit.
So I don't think +2d6 on a spell at mid level is going to be worth anything at all, specially if compared to a shortbow. Can see it being good only if it hits several targets at once.
The wording in the Playtest was definitely a little unclear, since sneak attack just required you to use a "ranged attack". Hopefully the wording in the final version will make it clear that spell attacks and ranged attacks are different things, or specify "ranged weapon attack" on sneak attack.
Well, being able to sneak attack with Snowball in PF1 was one thing, but being able to sneak attack with Fireball required the AT prestige class.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Is that so? I'm just going off that +7 to hit and 20HP. Both should be higher than most level 1 wizards. Damage is probably comparable and the grab ability seems pretty decent.
If anything they're closer to like STR focused clerics or a Rogue, assuming I understand the lv1 mechanics.
If anything, I figure level -1 is peasant tier, or there an even lower level than this?
EDIT: I remembered the SLOW penalty thing. I suppose that could make up for this zombie being tougher than other level -1s numbers-wise.
Mark Seifter wrote:
And he has the Healing channel? I figured this was a lord of corruption and destruction of nature! He has the nature domain somehow... Is this because blighted forests are still nature?
I do know most people get into 5e from their Starter Box thing (Which was released before the full game somehow!) since it gives them character sheets, dice and a beginner-tier adventure. Lost Mine of Phandelver is probably the most played 5E module BY FAR!!
Also I consider that Box to SUCK compared to the Paizo ones which include pawns, bases, colored maps, mats and pregens.
This product is gonna be important to get new people into PF2.
This is freaking awesome, the monsters were IMPROVED from the playtest! Plus we got templates and guidelines for customizing. You're the man, tqomins!! Thanks for all your effort <3.
Though these are probably some of the more complicated monsters in the entire bestiary, I like how the outsiders have a large variety of spells and abilities (But not overwhelming) which makes them more than just one-trick ponies, specially since these creatures might be summoned with planar binding or be recurring NPCs.
Even the simple basic monsters like the zombies have some unique tricks up their sleeves, no monster is just a meat-bag; there's always some cool gimmick! They even kept their resistances and such. This bestiary looking to be far superior to 5E's.
Heine Stick wrote:
Sarkoris cleanup gonna take a while, indeed.
Doktor Weasel wrote:
If School Specialization is a thesis and it precludes getting this... Heads will roll...
Meant things like Treasure distribution guidelines, monster power level and flexibility in their design, easier to figure out skill DCs to challenge players, etc. A lot of the PF2 innovations are quality of life improvements for adventure writers rather than player-centric.
Also I thought you were already deep into the project using PF1 and didn't want it to go to waste, sorry.
When an ability is so good it's an autopick it either shouldn't exist or be granted automatically as class feature. Quick Prep is such an overwhelmingly powerful ability that it could invalidate the other theses unless they're incredibly amazing, which I'm skeptical about.At least when it was a feat you could still make your wizard normally, it didn't carry much opportunity cost (just a feat slot), now it has a huge one.
There's that "Spell Substitution" spoilers now. It's essentially the old "Quick Preparation" except it's now a Thesis, so it will not be Universal to all wizards.
Just gonna say it'll be very hard to compete with this thesis since it can be used unlimited times. I liked it when it was free for all wizards since it wasn't going to dictate builds.
Captain Morgan wrote:
Ok that is pretty good, but current taste in my mouth is that one from the spoiler card: "When you drop a creature to 0 HP, spend a reaction to gain temp. HP equal to your CON mod for 1 round". That's the pacific ocean between the two abilities
Captain Morgan wrote:
I'm not familiar with this effect, can you show me?
One thing that still bothers me is that passive/trigger abilities still have to be "Free Actions". Stuff like: When you land a critical hit, you heal X HP has to be an action type for some reason instead of an automatic thing. The main side-effect of this is that 2 free actions cannot trigger off the same event, so it's gonna stop some interactions down the line.
Even sillier is stuff like "Free action after you cast a heal spell to heal an additional +X" rather than just "Add +X to the amount healed by Heal spell".
What's worse is when they use up a reaction instead...
That Trash action seems really cool, almost like wrestling, but am kinda disappointed it looks weaker in every way than just punching or attacking the target with anything else. Only advantage I see is that it asks them to roll a save which MAY be lower than AC.
Kind of want to build a character around this, but need to confirm it doesn't just suck.
To be fair, while it takes a while to internalize all of the "tags", they add a lot of future proofing since you only have to do it once and they'll apply consistently throughout the life of the game. Now that you know about manipulate, you'll never question whether an action will provoke an AOO or not if you have access to the tags. I still sometimes check the PF1 chart for provoking after many years and I was surprised to learn that drawing a weapon didn't provoke, but sheathing did (unfortunately it's different now).