Christopk-K's page

Excellent description, makes me want to go on and adventure there right away.

And I love the fun touch with the skeleton playing a flute.

Is there any site offering a quick and easy comparison of spell lists.
I'd like to compare bard and bloodrager spell lists to find which spells are available to both classes and which are only for one of them, like good hope or longarm.

Not talking about level 5 and 6 :-)

I feel a bit stupid and naive right now. I was hoping that with the end of the playtest the the aggressiveness would get less....

I hope that this community will find it's way back to a more constructive tone and spirit.

Our group will just keep on playing PF1. At our current rate we'll have APs for another two decades :-)

Perhaps we'll have to look more to 3PP for new rules options but well, doesn't matter to me. Or we'll explore home brew rules.

Despite this I hope the PF2 will be a great success. Paizo has brought our group maaaaaany hours of fun gaming.

Any online forum is by default a vocal minority. It's a self-selecting population made up of only the strongest opinions.

Definitely this. I'd expect most newbies to be intimidated by the current rough tone in the forum and not be very vocal due to this.

But the PF2 crowd is there irl. I recently met some of them at a small convention. Today I know more new people starting PF2 or switching to PF2 than I know people staying at PF1 (which includes me).

From this point of view I think Paizo won't go under due to publishing PF2 and I wish them great success. After all they have been and will be for many years to come provide us with fun adventures to play.

I suspect a lot of people are simply focused on PF2.

A slow down here is to be expected, and I don't imagine it will get better in time.

Those of us sticking with PF1 will just need to get used to it ;)

Yes, looks like it

Melkiador wrote:

Meanwhile by abandoning pf1, there is a good chance they will lose that audience to other games, instead of drawing them to their next game. I’m really shocked they are completely abandoning pf1 like they seem to be doing.

It's not just the radical mechanics changes, it's the design itself that has radically changed. And on top of that, PF2 seems to be intended for the LGBT crowd far more than the gamers that kept PF1 in business for so very long. The game is if anything more Golarion centric, probably because they want to sell their future PF2 prewritten campaigns. Thus, "you gamers must play our way or get lost" impression I get. Me personally, I never thought that sort of attitude was necessary in the first place.

The impression I get is that Paizo wants to create a game for a wholly different demographic than the one that birthed and nurtured it all this time. Thus, the totally different game design, so different that it isn't compatible with what has gone before.

All of this is IMO, of course.

No trolling and derailing please.

If you feel that's a topic that anyone might want to discuss make your own thread.

No. I don't even think PLAYER characters need ability scores.

True. If the ability score increases come only in even numbers the bonus ties directly to the ability score.

Being old school I'd still like to have them but in reality they don't give any extra info

I'm just hopping in to say I don't like replacing CMB and CMD with Athletics and Fortitude DCs.

People who run track and field or who rock climb or swim are not necessarily good at grappling or disarming.

People who can hold their breaths a long time or who have a good immune system aren't necessarily good at resisting being grappled.

Just because it's 'simpler' to combine multiple options into a single stat doesn't make it good for a role-playing game.

That said, I do love the idea of being able to 'grapple' with Diplomacy. That's inspired.

That would be a really shocking concept

Our group comes from the metric part of the world.

Still for PF we couldn't care less.

1 square 1 a square on the grid. 5 feet are one square for ranged combat. No benefit from calculating this into metric.

Same for weight, just add numbers and compare to carrying capacity.

Rounds go in seconds so that's the same.

To me that's all you need.

I find myself in agreement with a lot of what both Edymnion and magnuskn have said already.

My first pass through the material was "this is interesting, but it's not what I want to play when I think of 'Pathfinder' or 'DnD'.

It's a radical enough departure from the 3.0/3.5 mechanics that I have to ask - WHY would I choose this system over Dnd 4E or Dnd5E (or GURPS, for that matter). Myself and the group I game with all ported over to Pathfinder as "Dnd 3.75" precisely because it was closest to what we've played all these years.

For anyone whose running persistent homebrew campaigns, how do you implement such changes cleanly? How magic works, etc all help define, over time, how the campaign evolves. Sure Forgotten Realms was regularly blown to bits to accommodate changes in how magic worked, but I found that to be a pretty brutal way of doing things, and NOT suitable for my own campaign. That also helped Pathfinder pretty much be the shoe-in as the next logical step from 3.0/3.5 evolution. When WotC came along with 4E, I pretty much took one look and "noped" right out that - it wasn't DnD (despite marketing and branding). Pathfinder WAS.

I'm left with a distinctly 4E deja-vu feeling that I can't quite shake, and I'm not liking that.

I'll see how gameplay is, and I'm sure it can be a fun system, but 2E is going to fall into the same category that GURPS, Call of Cthulhu and other 'non-DnD" systems fall into for me.

I've got enough 1st Edition material to last 20 years. And two more AP's coming. In a year, it will be 3rd party publishers I'll be relying on more and more.

Meh.

I'm right there with you. PF1 will last us another 20 years worth of AP. Our group can easily skip this edition and the next.

Then we'll all be retired and have the time to write our own world or play with grandkids ;-)

Thanks. I definitly won't stopp playing. I've been playing since ADnD second edtion on and off. Still play with the same friends from 25 years ago.
We just won't migrate to 2.0 now. The currently published APs will keep us busy another 20 years and them there's 3rd party stuff...
Guess we'll just skip an edition or two ;-)

Still I think my character will leave the group after getting off the island. This was not the first time he felt that the rest of the group had significantly different ideas about moral standards after all.

This is no big thing though. I'll have to make a new character for the adventure. We've had this before that another of our players felt that his character would not get along with the other characters.

Fortunately irl I play with a group of friends I have know more than two decades so this will not sink our friendship.

Many thanks to all of you for voicing your opinions on this.
My take away is that this course of action would have been somewhere between neutral and evil in alignment terms but definitely not for a follower of Shelyn.

So to let you know what happened:
Actually I had my character speak up right in this session and the plan was dropped. Instead we went the route of making our own perception checks. There was a bit of hp damage but nothing major.

I'd guess we see enough new rules mechanics and options that re-doing the FCB into something be won't be needed.

Also I dislike the whole concept because it punishes multiclassing.

The favored class bonus is something that annoyed me for a long time.

To me only very few have any connection to the race they're linked to. Most seem very arbitrarily distributed amongst the races.

Multiclassing is always punished by FCB, as you'll lose several levels.

In the end this makes me rarely use racial FCB options because I don't want to choose race based on FCB.

Best option to me would be just to eliminate FCB in PF2.

I need more facts.
When I first saw the announcement for PF2 I was super happy.
But the bits we get now make me really dread PF2.
I don't want to have this dread build up until August.

To me "pestering" seems also quite harsh, especially since I did apologize before...

And for a complete picture it was Saturday to Monday but with 10 days in between ;-)

First of all, I didn't try to be rude. If anyone was offended, I'm very sorry. Please accept my apologies.

I'm a non native speaker and while I try to post properly I still sometimes stumble, especially in social contexts like this one.

Back to the point I was trying to make. I wasn't expecting anyone to have a solution ready, I was merely wondering if there was any feedback whether my suggestion might be implemented at some point in the future or not.

Thanks, linkifying is so bad from the phone

In thread that were flaggeg for a FAQ and have it actually answered it says "answered in FAQ" right at the start.

Quite often this leads to a new search. At least for me it is not evident which book(s) the FAQed rule(s) came from so I start my next search.

Would it be possible to link the "answered in FAQ" line to the relevant FAQ? When one of you guys puts "answered in FAQ" there they know excatly which FAQ they refer to so it would seem to be rather simple to do so.

@Darksol

Is this a prank post?
You have posted a lot (6000+) showing quite a bit of system understanding/mastery.

Now you claim you can't find/read any of the builds/guides for archry/ranged combat out there?

Excellent :-)

Super cool guide.
Many thanks to all contributors
:-)

Steve Geddes wrote:

You say ....

...

I was trying to play my character within the rules he allowed.

...
it is the fact he acted like a child throwing a tantrum when what he allowed he could not and did not want to handle, after the fact
......
as i didn't see the need for pathfinder to remove the reach quality from it.
....

All i got from him was that i like to build game breaking character, can you tell me how a Goliath specializing in tripping using a large spiked chain is game...

To me the whole tread looks like there isn't only one person throwing a tantrum. posting ~ 40 times in ~ 5 hours only repeating the same text over and over. This doesn't seem to me that you are even trying to understand the suggestions other people are making. This impression is reinforced by comments like "as i didn't see the need for pathfinder to remove the reach quality from it"

Obviously the DM has an issue with game breaking characters but I feel that this doesn't reach you. At least he's trying not to repeat his mistakes.

My strong advice would be for you to take your time and really read what you wrote and what people replied. Then think about it for a few days. It might tell you a few things about the way the communication is running in your group and in this discussion.

In general the DM obvioulsy is overwhelmed by the situation and most propably lacking the experience to handle the situation he got himself into properly.

It would really be enlightenning to hear from him or other players in that group. Unfortunatly that often gets the discussion locked quite fast due to rising levels of aggression.

Edit: Post #62 shortened by me

To me troll will ALWAYS look like this
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons)#/media/File%3A D%26DTrolls.JPG

So close to 1

http://www.dorktower.com/2012/01/26/dork-tower-thursday-january-26-2012/

Or having fun :-)

Almost all fighter ATs as most lose armor and weapon training

Jason, Could you link the answeres to the FAQ requests? It's not always clear which would be the right product, leading frustration and searching through the FAQs.

Let's FAQ this to get it sticky

- The FAQ will be viewable through the product page.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Could you link the answeres to the FAQ requests? It's not always clear which would be the right product, leading to more searching through the FAQs.

You are the GM. if you need the NPC to return alive he will. Don't let mechanics spoil your story.

This should stay a special thing though. If every bad guy comes back the PCs will be frustrated.

There already is a rather long list of Wall of Fire Placement threads in the message boards. In summary they seem not to give a consistent and conclusive ruling on several questions though.
Due to this I tried to gather most questions in a single post. The goal of this post is to get a FAQ for the spell if there is sufficient interest in the community. Please mark this tread for FAQ if you also think a FAQ would be helpful. For some questions there seems to be a rule. I included these at the end of this post for completeness sake.
For Wall of Fire and the range of other Wall effect spells (Wall of .., Wind Wall & Blade Barrier) there are some questions I couldn’t find answers to. Currently these spells don’t seem to be covered in the Pathfinder FAQ. The message board has a huge number of threads on this topic but no definite answers.
I did make a graphic for point (A)-(E) below. Is there a way to post it in the board? I still hope the points below are understandable.
How would the wall be placed on a grid? (A) Would it occupy a line of squares as per Core Rule book p. 215 or (B) the edge of such a line or (C) would it pass down a straight line with model standing in whatever is the larger part of the square?
- Can you see/cast trough the walls? E.g. Ice could be crystal clear but would not have to be so.
- Can you attack through the walls, e.g. Wall of fire: Would you or the weapon take damage as passing through if you did attack?
- If the wall occupies whole squares would you take damage for every square you pass through? E.g. you have a wall running along a 5’ corridor filling it completely (D & E). Would
Please let me know if the answers already exist and I just looked in the wrong places.
- Which walls are straight lines and which could be shaped? => This question came up quite often, only spells with (S) at the end of the area of effect are shapeable. The rest will be straight lines only and other shapes like rings if indicated. (Core Rule Book p. 215). I also did this wrong the first time I used the spell.