Search Posts
Hello, As I understand it, a cantrip listed as heighted 1, for example, means you applying the increased effect of the spell every level past 1st, i.e., at 2nd level, 3rd level, etc. However, when the spell is listed a Heighted 2nd, what does that mean specifically? For example, does that mean that for the cantrip, Animal Form 2nd, you get the spell effect starting at 2nd lvl. and every 2 levels past 2nd level or does it mean you get the effect starting at 2nd lvl. and then every level past 2nd, e.g., at 3rd, 4th, etc. Thank you.
Hello Everyone, I am in a group that is doing the Extinction Curse AP. We are all 9th lvl. and struggling a bit. We just switched over from 1st ed., so we are all still learning the game. However, our rogue player seems very frustrated with 2nd ed. One of the issues is that the damage he does has not increased for many levels; btw, all of the melee have +1 striking and potency runes on their weapons. Moreover, he seems to think some of the changes in the game rules are rather obtuse and arbitrary. For example, the rogue cannot use his thievery skill to look for traps. Can anyone suggest any ways that the rogue can increases his damage. He already puts bleeds on his targets, but any ideas on how he can increase his base damage?
Thank you and have a great day!
Thank you very much for the link and information. I really appreciate the help.
A boulder helmet is not drawn and in hand. Yes, but it is designed to be a worn weapon. Therefore, would it not be considered as being drawn and in hand by default. Nevertheless, by RAW, I suppose you could not place the training enchant on it. However, I want to make sure there are no clarifications/rulings that state that it is considered to be drawn and held since you wear the weapon. In any case, thanks for the response.
Hi, Can you place the Weapon Special Ability "Training" on a Dwarven Boulder Helm and have the feat apply to you in a general way. For example, could you pick "Combat Reflexes" as your the weapon special ability enchant on your Dwarven Boulder Helm and have it apply to a warhammer you are using in combat. Training Weapon Special Ability DESCRIPTION Popular among those who seek to impersonate skilled warriors, a training weapon grants one combat feat to the wielder as long as the weapon is drawn and in hand. The feat is chosen when this special ability is placed on the weapon. That feat cannot be used as a prerequisite for any other feats and functions for the wielder only if she meets its prerequisites. Once chosen, the feat stored in the weapon cannot be changed. To note, since you are wearing the helm, would that not count as having it drawn and in hand? Thank you and have a great week.
Hello Everyone, I just wanted to quickly make some observations and comments on the state of PF1, and a hope for PF2. First, role-playing has been my hobby of choice for 40 years. In that time, I have played in an incalculable number of game systems. As far as PF1 is concerned, Paizo has created an engaging and exciting game system-I greatly admire and respect everything that they have done with this system. Many thanks to them, especially for their creative output and I greatly thank them for the Adventure Paths. However, it my belief that PF1 now is in the same dilemma as what 3.5 was in at its end; a system that is very unbalanced in which power creep has warped the overall game system. For example, I run AP's and in the last AP chapter I ran, I saw 9th level players make DC:60 rolls and hitting AC:30+ creatures for over 300 hps. in one round, and that was on a bad day. In fact, my players are begging me to triple or quadruple the hps of the monsters. In addition, my players are not power players per se, but just working people that enjoy playing. Now Hero Lab (which I really like for its utilitarian value) has helped them a lot to manage their characters. Nevertheless, PF1 is no longer a challenging, nor by approximation, an exciting game system-and I know most of all the tricks and creative ways to make an encounter more engaging and difficult. The characters are just so powerful that the players are not exited nor challenged by the listed opponent(s) that they face. Therefore, my hope and advise to Paizo is that they take their time and carefully release PF2 with the goal to both entertain, but to challenge the players. I have seen comments on the forums that the monsters in PF2 (which I play tested) were too difficult. My suggestion is to not water down the monsters and to keep as they are, or to make it possible to easily adjust them to fit the play styles of individual game tables. As a gaming axiom, the more difficult and clever the monsters are, the sweeter is the victory in the end. Character deaths, which are not welcomed, must be allowed to happen from time- to-time to reinforce the sense of risk, and therefore, excitement of the game. My hope is that PF2 is enjoyable, challenging, exciting, balanced, and easy to learn. In conclusion, many thanks to the staff at Paizo and to the PF2 play testers. I am really eager for PF2 to be released. P.S. I really hope Paizo continues to release Adventure Paths. The APs are really a godsend to working adults that don't have the time to create adventures on their own. Overall, they have been exceptional and very fun to play. My only comment is that a stronger editorial presence is maintained for all 6 of the AP chapters in order to maintain both the continuity structure and qualitative aspect of the AP. The narrative thread of any multiple part story must be carefully maintained within the different parts in order to sustain the fundamental coherence of the story. Thank you and please have a great gaming year.
Hi, I am looking for add another player to on-going Iron Gods AP. The group is looking for a mature, easy-going player to come into the 3rd chapter of the campaign. We have been playing for 25+ years. We play on Saturdays, from 6 p.m. to 11 p.m. We play in the Lawndale, CA area. If you are interested, please e-mail me at: korgo535@gmail.com. Thank you.
A pet peeve (yes, I went there) is that for almost 9 years, I was waiting for Pathfinder to release a bear companion that would be a large animal companion...as bears (even black bears) in real life are not poodle bears, but are very large-in fact, they are the largest carnivorous land animal in the world. In the Ultimate Wilderness book, they finally released Grizzly Bears (large bear companions)..kudos. Nevertheless, as PF1 is winding down, I don't know why the developers, as in PF1, have again made bears small to medium companions. They should start as medium and progress to large animals. Yes, large companions have their issues, especially in dungeons, but so be it. You know the size issue as you are picking them as your companion. Anyway, please reconsider the poor Pooh bears, they are looking at you with very sad eyes, wondering why you hate them so..sniffle, sniffle...
Hi, I have been playing PFS for approx. 6 years now. It is my hobby and I play a lot for the enjoyment of the game, as I presume everyone does. In addition, I have read many of the the counterpoints to the proposal of unlimited re-plays and I see their logic against it. Nevertheless, regardless of the calculations of how many hours there are in total for all of the scenarios, I have hit a wall with finding scenarios to play. The fact is, no one has unlimited money to buy all the scenarios and the same ones are being offered time- and-time again.
In addition, I don't know why hard rules for replay cannot be instituted. For example, if you are replaying a scenario, and you spoil the game for others, then you will be asked to leave the table and the chronicle sheet will be not be given out to that player. Will it cause tension, probably, but after a few times of that, people will get the point. I know that 5e, the Adventure League, has unlimited replays; or more precisely, one replay per character. I don't play that game system, but I know people that do. According to them, their might be some issues that arise from time-to-time, but on the whole, it has gone pretty well. In fact, they really enjoy always having a game to play. Also, to the argument that unlimited replays (at least one per character) monopolizing tables from regular players, and discourages new players to sit at the table, then change the table registration rules. For example, reserve 3 seats for new players and 3 for people replaying the scenario. Everyone in a particular gaming area knows who always plays, and I don't think it would be hard to regulate this rule. In any case, I have given my 2 cents. I really like the game and I am excited on how I see PF2 is being written...more challenge from monsters, less over the top characters that end the fight by the second initiative order, and maybe more focus on role-playing that encourages team play over how much damage you can do in one round. In the end, it is a game to have fun in, and something that I think, done well, promotes camaraderie and a sense of community.
Thank you for pointing out the link to me. Good suggestion and I will give my 2 cents of advice in that section. Have a great week!
Hi, As Pathfinder 2 will be released next year, I strongly believe that PFS should take this opportunity to change their policy of allowing people re-play PFS scenarios-in the context of playing within the PF2 system. As they do in the Adventure League for 5E, I think allowing you to use a different character per scenario would go along way to extend involvement with PFS for a lot of people. Furthermore, you can easily have mechanisms in place to regulate re-plays in a way to prevent situations like the ones that arose in the World of Greyhawk. In the end, I think a change is in order with the release of the new edition, which would add a lot to the longevity for PFS. Thank you.
2 max damage attacks from a goblin with a dogslicer will leave basically anyone except a wizard still standing in PF1 too. It's a very low damage weapon and goblins don't have a particularly good str. Um...are not Goblins good guys now? Must have been a splinter group, perhaps disaffected with having a change to their bad guys status. I imagine it was much the same for the poor Gnomes in 4th ed. D & D who went from good guys to villains. Ah, those were dark days for the Gnomish race...I blame the Dwarves for that debacle.
Hi, I think I am not getting something regarding the following two issues: Spell DC's-if a Spell DC is calculated by adding 10 to your primary stat. and that is it, then are not Spell DC's going to be static? Therefore, is not a 1st level spell going to have the same DC as a 7th level spell? Spell Points-they are often the same number as your primary stat. bonus, in addition to any extra spell points from feats. For example, the Bard's Inspire Heroics Power is rated as being a Power 4*; and so if it requires 4 Spells Points to use, even with a few more Spell Points from feats, are you not going to consume a lot of your Spell Points in a power that will only modify Inspire Courage for one round? Is that correct? *Does the Power rating stand for what your character level must be before you cast it or does it stand for the spell level that you can cast before you can access the Power? Thank you.
Youngster. I have been playing since 1977 :) On a quick note, I like where they are headed with the game. Pathfinder 1st ed. is in a place where in the 1st round of an encounter, by the 3rd or 4th initiative order, the encounter is over. I play a lot of PFS, and the higher the level you go, the more unbalanced the game gets. I hope this new edition will level it out and bring back an assemblage of balance which I am looking forward to seeing.
Most unarmed attacks are agile. There are a few exceptions like the dragon style kick.Ah, is there a section in the book that states that? I have been looking in the book for it. Thank you very much for your help. Yep, listed under the Simple Weapons, Fist....there you go. I wish they would state that in the description of Unarmed Attack or state that in the Monk section as well. In any case, thank you for pointing this out. As has been stated, the book layout is nice, but needs work. Have a great week!
Most unarmed attacks are agile. There are a few exceptions like the dragon style kick.Ah, is there a section in the book that states that? I have been looking in the book for it. Thank you very much for your help. Hi, I think I have this figured out. Only in certain stances are Unarmed Strikes agile. If, however, you don't enter in one of those particular stances,then your Unarmed Strikes are not going to be considered agile. At least that is what I have deduced at this point. Thank you.
It would assume it is full, -4, -8, -8 since it doesn't say otherwise, though I wouldn'tbmind clarification. Hi, I just wanted to see if I got Flurry of Blows right as defined above. For example, a 1st level monk that has unarmed Strikes trained. Therefore, would not the negatives to hit be Full, -4, -9, -9. However, if unarmed Strikes count as Agile weapons, then the Full, -4, -8, -8 would make sense. Thank you.
I could not agree more. Since D & D 1st edition, the rogue's signature ability was to sneak up to a target and back stab his opponent. It is a iconic element of the class. Although I understand the many ways a rogue can sneak attack a target in PF, why not just include backstabbing an opponent from stealth again?; especially now that there is a new edition coming out.
In my mind, the two classes are so similar, especially in the spell casting area, that I don’t known why one would opt to play a sorcerer. The two classes need to be delineated in much more specific ways. As I saw it, in PF1, it was very nicely balanced between brawn vs precision-in magical casting terms. Besides the sorcerer being able to encroach on other spell casters magical traditions, the sorcerer seems very bland. I would prefer that they go back with being able to cast more but knowing less spells, than how the class is formulated now. The class is in a very unfinished form and Paizo needs to do more work on it.
Hi, I agree with everyone's very thoughtful and logical critique of the new 2nd ed. rule set. However, I really like how they have tried to tackle the power creep issue with the game. In fact, the power creep in 1st ed. has become such issue with me that I'm no longer motivated to play anymore. Therefore, I find the general philosophy in 2nd edition, which seems to try to address this issue, a very welcomed change. Have a fun everyone.
Hi, First of all, I want to thank Paizo for really making a terrific game. I have been involved with role-playing games for 40 years and I have played many games in that time. Paizo has really done a very good job at making their game system fun and exciting to play, esp. the APs. Nevertheless, as it is inevitable in most game systems, with the ineluctable publish or perish axiom for game companies, the game has become very wonky and unbalanced. When a mid-level character can easily do over a 100 hit points of damage in a round, or have skills in the upper 20 region, if not higher, a GM really can't do a lot to consistently challenge players which does not become repetitive. Therefore, having just bought the new 2nd edition Pathfinder rulebook, I want tip my hat at what I see as Paizo creative attempt with curtailing the power creep in the game. Although I am still analyzing the new system, I find Pathfinder 2nd ed. to be a much more balanced and broadly designed system than what the state of the game is now. I think it will challenge players in a way that will make the game more exciting and interesting to play, e.g., I hope most skills DC's will become appropriate for the players level and that fights do not last just 1 or 2 rounds-although I am not championing for the horrendously long fights that typified 4th edition D & D. In the end, I want to thank the game designers, the playtesters, and the staff at Paizo for making what I hope will be a challenging, fun, exciting, and balanced new edition of Pathfinder. I was becoming burned out with the game and now I see a very bright glimmer of hope on the horizon! Thank you. Have fun everyone.
I had a quick question regarding Bane with a Metamagic feat modifying it. Bane EFFECT
DESCRIPTION
Therefore, if I use a Metamagic feat to modify Bane, which states "You cannot use this feat on a spell with an instantaneous duration or a spell that does not target a creature or object, " would it work on Bane? Thank you.
Yes, you are correct, it would be a +5. Thank you. And thanks for the general input. Also, by hitting sixth level, you don't get the itinerant attack that come from hitting the 6/1 BAB mark. Therefore, is not the Shifter class always only going to have three attacks? It seems a very poor DPR class if it never can increase the number attacks per round. Thanks again.
Hi, I just wanted to make sure that I am interpreting Shifter's Fury correctly.
This ability has been added based on this FAQ entry.
Thank you.
We are looking for 1 additional player to join an Iron Gods AP. We play on Saturdays from 6 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. We have been playing for 25 years-yes, we are an old, um, older group. Therefore, we would like a very relaxed, easy-going, and mature person who just wants to have fun and play some Pathfinder. If you are interested, please e-mail me at: Korgo535@gmail.com Thank you.
Hi, I just want to make sure I am running this ability correctly. The Damnation Inquisition has the following granted power: Fear the Flames (Su)
Therefore, a character can order an evil enemy to say "lie down" in combat with this ability. The save would be 10 + 1/2 character level + primary caster stat. Is this correct? Thank you.
Hi, I just wanted to make sure I am reading the FAQ and other forum entries correct. Essentially, using the Enhancement SP Augment cannot be modified by the Idealized Arcane Discovery. Is that correct? Augment (Sp): As a standard action, you can touch a creature and grant it either a +2 enhancement bonus to a single ability score of your choice or a +1 bonus to natural armor that stacks with any natural armor the creature might possess. At 10th level, the enhancement bonus to one ability score increases to +4. The natural armor bonus increases by +1 for every five wizard levels you possess, to a maximum of +5 at 20th level. This augmentation lasts a number of rounds equal to 1/2 your wizard level (minimum 1 round). You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Intelligence modifier. Idealize (Su) Prerequisite(s): Wizard 10 In your quest for self-perfection, you have discovered a way to further enhance yourself and others. Benefit(s): When a transmutation spell you cast grants an enhancement bonus to an ability score, that bonus increases by 2. At 20th level, the bonus increases by 4.
Yes, they can be deadly. But with six signed up, maximum table limit, it should be easier for them. I have allocated enough time for them to complete it, so I hope it is fun for them. Have a great day!
|
