Dargath's page

Ed Reppert wrote:

Bluemagetim wrote:

he thought this game was just a copy

Why would anyone bother producing a ttrpg that is "just a copy" of another one? Even aside from Intellectual Property theft considerations?

I don't think such an assumption is too unreasonable. Pathfinder 1e was a modestly-patched replica of D&D 3.5, after all, so maybe they figured that Pathfinder 2e was a modestly-patched replica of D&D 5e?

I would argue more of a modest spiritual successor to 4th edition D&D personally. I find way more 4E DNA than I find 5e. It feels like this game has very little in common with 5e aside from commonly named Classes and uses a d20.

Basically title. I just want some axes for finesse builds.

SatiricalBard wrote:

I like a ton of things in the Remaster, but some things I dislike:

1. The change to the dying & wounded interaction rules. I also dislike that there has been no advance discussion, no player surveys, and no explanations about why they have done this.

Everything about the Remaster was great to 'sure fine' for me. Mostly great. Until I hit this change.

It's totally unexpected.

Previously we had a lot of talk of it being in the old playtest from 2018 but it's not - I happen to have a print copy of that I bought in a store back in 2018, and also have a print copy of the first and second printings of 2.0 (bought it a second time on accident during the pandemic, didn't realize I already had it until I found the first printing sitting under a pile of books and discovered I'd bought it a year prior on Amazon).

Also: It's NOT in the beginner box - checked that last night.

This new rule apparently DID come from the GM Screen. I lack this so it's something I cannot verify.

But the idea that it was a copy-paste error as we were floating last night appears to be incorrect.

That noted...

This change has a severe impact on game survivability. Folks running the numbers over on reddit seem to come back with a near doubling at each level of dying in the chance of PC death after going down.

Dying 3 seems to be more or less skipped. You're usually dying 1, 2 if you go down a second time, or jump straight to 4.

I find this a very bad change. One of the worst tRPG game design moves I've seen since the first version of GURPS Super's. Granted I missed most of the D&D 4E/5E eras so maybe there are things others experienced I didn't...

But this single untested and unannounced change has so severe an impact on gameplay that's its currently "taken the wind out" of my enthusiasm over remaster. While I don't have to use it myself, it makes 'Society' a non-option for me.

I just don't understand how this got in there without comment.

It maybe be one tiny change in...

It's toxic for monsters to want to kill you? Change in GM Style? All the stories I heard of early D&D was "make 20 characters, you'll run through 19 of them til you get one that manages to survive." And now literally Dungeon Crawl Classics does that too. Oldschool is a billion times more deadly.

1 small change?

Finesse on Hatchet. I know Sweep is the "axe thing" but please. Throwing Axes, Tomahawks, all of that are real life weapons with no way to fulfill the fantasy of a throwing axe. So just...finesse Hatchet. Otherwise it's really MAD to pull off. Something like 18 Str, 16 Dex, still always less accurate when throwing. Besides everyone poo-poos finesse melee unless you're a thief anyway.

Well yeah PF2E is maybe nice for some but it utterly fails to answer the question who killed Aroden. 1/10 game.

Hmmm based on that description I think I prefer 2E’s. Haven’t gotten to play yet but did have my Barbarian die in abomination vaults and wanted to play a goblin Chirurgeon alchemist, looking forward to the versatility and utility. I hand picked all my mutagens for the benefits of the party. I picked bombs with nice debuffs to cripple enemies. I have some neat toxins for the melee guys to apply to their weapons. I’ve got loads of healing and the medic dedication. Excited to support the party and continue researching alchemical items. I liked making this character so much I have ended up trying to make an alchemist for each subclass. I have a Dwarven bomber, a Ratfolk toxicologist with a hand crossbow looking at Drow shootist archetype and trying to figure out how to make a hobgoblin mutagenist with the bestial mutagen to be a sort of chemically imbued werewolf.

Yeah, so the Deep Gnomes are just a subset of one heritage of Gnomes as a whole.

I don't see why the Duergar couldn't be likewise a Dwarf heritage and I've long been mystified as to why there's so much resistance to making Drow an elf heritage.

Doesn't bother me any. Although I am not sure if there is currently a good Dwarven heritage that represents Duergar. Maybe the one that grants fire resistance. Live close to lava or something idk.

Do Duergar and Snifveblin have the same problems as Drow? Does nobody discuss them because they are less popular?

Call me boring but with Minotaurs being released in the Howl of the Wild book...

Really the only "WOW WACKY CRAZY" ancestries I want are the Darklands Gnomes, Dwarves and Elves. Yes, that's right, Svnifeblin, Duergar and Drow.

I for one would love it if drow got the same treatment as goblins and gnolls. That is, classical evil drow are acknowledged as existing within the setting, and then also expanded upon with other groups of drow with radically different cultural leanings.

I think that would be best as those who want simple evil adversaries for their games can have them, and those who want a deeper more nuanced ancestry can have it as well.

It'd be even better to take a mix of ideas from this thread and apply them to some groups of drow but not others, while making yet others into rumors. Some could be demon worshippers, others tainted by Rovogog, yet others just defending their Darklands home from intruders, while still others actively fighting to hold back some great evil and keep it from spilling out into the world. This would help divorce the social ickiness a lot of people are uncomfortable with from "being drow" and suppor their being a frightfully mysterious entity of the Darklands.

I like the all of the above tactic.

I think changing the Drow in Pathfinder 2E to be the Valiant Vanguard against the eternal darkness and the horrors of the Darklands is a pretty cool spin IMO.

Take the Houses and turn them into Noble Knight Houses each with a rich martial and magical tradition trained and specialized in hunting and killing various specialized Darklands menaces. I'd give examples, but every single example I can think of is WOTC exclusive. I don't think we have Beholds or Mindflayers anymore. I don't know...Darklands Dragons. Do we get to have Fomorans the two-headed evil giants?

Perhaps they were the first of the Elves to realize what a threat to the surface the Darklands posed and took it upon themselves to create a bulwark agains the darkness. Perhaps many were corrupted by the horrors below and yes, went renegade and became evil. However most fight a fight agains the darkness alone, unaided, and unknown to almost the entire world.

That, to me, is a cool heroic spin that makes them special and cool and unique (as far as I know). I don't want my post deleted but to me the thing that made Drow cool was how cool they look, not because they were evil. I never cared about actual Drow lore personally. Something something Lloth something spiders idk. Then in PF2E something something Rovagug that's it. THey have like 2 lines of background.

You know maybe generally good Drow should be the way to go.

As I said I learned about Drow in 2005 (the year) and guess who was the most popular Drow to ever do it. Mr. Drizz’t Dourden himself. I actually don’t know why he was popular because I’ve never read R.A. Salvator’s books but from an outsiders perspective I assumed it was because he was a good guy. He would put “good” on his character sheet and presumably “every body liked that”. Obviously not literally everyone, but enough to spawn a billion copycats.

So maybe we make them all good and some sort of organized fighting force holding back the horrors from the Darklands spilling out onto the surface and if you want to throw in something about maybe being Rovagug’s jailers? If you want to somewhat keep the origin story but put a twist on it: yes they were exposed to his corruption… but on purposes like the Exorcist Space Marine chapter who let demons posses them, then by force of will expunge them and exorcise them. This makes them more resistant to chaos. Maybe the Drow is close themself to Rovagug to reinforce their resistance to his corruption?

This would be a big spin and make them super unique imo.

What if, in world, the existence of a type of elf known as “Drow” was always a fabrication. The histories, the mythologies around them, and the cultural assumptions about their society was a carefully orchestrated conspiracy to hide the true complexity of dark lands social structures?

There have actually been elves living below ground since well before earth fall. The elves there always had skin in shades of lavender, gray and blue. During earth fall, many elves from the surface did head below ground, and in the resulting apocalyptic events of earth fall, rovagug’s energies did erupt through the dark lands causing much damage to many of the peoples that lived there. Including leading to some very evil and destructive elven nations/empires etc, but it was never all of them. People on the surface had never encountered these elves before, and no one yet knows how they got to Golarion, because they do not exist on castrovel. Are they from a different planet? It is still a big mystery that is just starting to come to light. All the elves turning into dark elf’s because of evil stuff was a deliberate narrative being spread by someone or something out there that has a vested interest in making sure that the truth about the elves of the dark lands stays obscured.

I think playing with the history and tracing how it has been manipulated could be a way to have an interesting complex under dark elf but really doing something new that doesn’t have to erase the past, but can explain how that past wasn’t the whole picture.

This is pretty cool. I’m somehow probably going to get this wrong and I suppose I could just look it up, but it really doesn’t matter. It doesn’t need to be exactly precise. All I was going to say is I am a huge fan of Warhammer 40,000’s way of story telling which has the motto to the effect of something like, “Everything is cannon not everything is true.”

essentially unreliable narrative due to the fact the what you learn from the Imperium about Eldar could be pure propaganda.. and what you hear about the Imperium from itself is probably, again, propaganda and the truth is out there somewhere… but we may never find it. Bits and pieces of information from a variety of in universe sources with varying degrees of correctness and education etc.

Although you know maybe Paizo wants a lot more precise story telling than that. Who am I to say.

Sanityfaerie wrote:

Temperans wrote:

In interest of no further derail I'll just say this one last thing.

Kineticist abilities were "spell-like abilities". Now they are "spells" or "focus cantrips" or some variation thereof. There is no such things as an ability that creates matter that is also not a spell.

But yeah, as Jacob Jett implied, that's a whole lot of mass getting added to the planet because you bet geokineticist and metalallumkineticist would be adding a whole lot of free adamantine.

In interest of no further derail, you'll continue to derail?

Back during the playtest, they were not spells, they were impulses, and the specific power of Adapt Element wasn't even that. Primal, yes. Evocation, yes. Spell, no.

If they've made a declaration that the kineticist is going to run on spells now, I'd be very interested in hearing more about that. Where did you come across such a thing?

Jacob Jett wrote:

I mean just think about it. If I had an elven character who spent every waking moment of every day (except for breaks) producing one of these elements, how many squares could I cover? For the sake of planetary cosmology this ability has to have some limits (like, think of the gravity of the situation). [It's a physics pun for those who miss it.]

Why would they, though? I mean, you're positing someone who got all the way up to 7th level and then decides... that they want to try to break the world in the slowest and most mind-numbingly boring manner possible? You're making at most 125 cubic feet of material per casting (realistically significantly less). If you did this constantly without stop for anything, for a year, you'd have 7.5*10^10 cubic feet of stuff. If you somehow managed to gather together the physical and mental fortitude, the longevity, and the peace from your neighbors to keep doing it for 1000 years, you'd have 7.5*10^13 cubic feet. Golarion is canonically the same size as earth, at 3.8*10^22 cubic feet. The

...

I’m writing this down for my game… special lunatic cult that wants to very slowly drown the world. This is good stuff.

I wonder how a PC who is a follower of the Whispering Way and has aspirations to Lichdom might be received by his fellow adventurers.

Used to be I'd probably have to label him evil, but adays perhaps, much like Rahadoum, those of us who would rather throw off the shackles of allegiances to gods, and imbrace ourselves as our higher power, people can go away with all that and leave us to our very important scientific and magical research and as we try to uncover the secrets of the universe and save everyone else from the fate of death.

Pls stop bullying us Necromancers, we've done nothing wrong.

If half dragons are finally coming then hype!!!! I love dragons!!!

But I do have a concern

If half dragons are coming, I hope it can be versatile in appearance

I already know some people are going to go for the “human with horns” like D&D3e’s half dragons, but me and others are gonna want a very draconic look, with a head like a dragon and a tail and full scales and everything, like half dragons in D&D5e or Belmazog. https://2e.aonprd.com/Monsters.aspx?ID=1546 https://www.worldanvil.com/uploads/images/7e10fc404270ff23ab418867bebbee23. jpg

Belmazog is a half black dragon, and she has a very strong draconic appearence, and that draconic appearance is what I would like. I think she is from the ApA adventure for PF2e

But some people are just gonna wanna play a half dragon that looks like a human with horns and maybe a couple scales, like Au’ra from final fantasy

If half dragons are coming, they should have versatile appeared like Nagaji. Nagaji could look like a human with a couple scales or maybe just serpent eyes, or they could look very snake like with snake head tail and everything

I don’t want to be forced to give my half dragon a “human with horns look”. I like my half dragons to show physically they have a dragon parent and to look tall and have a dragon head and tail and clawed feet and everything

I think you've conflated Vishkanya and Nagaji. All Nagaji look like "snake" people except Sacred who look like "snake mermaids".

Vishkanya are the *other* snake people who look like humans with yellow eyes, faint fangs, and maybe some scales.

It is incredibly unlikely that they will use Virtue/Sin.

It sounds neat on the surface, but some of us can still remember the Satanic Panic and Mothers Against Dungeons and Dragons and being targeted for playing that one game that the OGL came from.

Use those two terms and they *will* come back, and in the current political climate they will come back with a vengeance.

Here in Nashville, TN they are alive and well and currently panicking about all the Satan everywhere and D&D is still not safe. Belt Buckle of the Bible Belt and all that...

My mother, and I kid you not, told me I was "summoning portals through my Warhammer miniatures [because they have skulls on them which is satanic] that was allowing Satan to attack my dad's business" and that's why they are hurting for money. You see, Satan attacks the person in the family with the weakest faith and uses them as a foot in the door to get at the other members of the family. Because I play D&D and Warhammer Age of Sigmar and collect Slaves to Darkness and play Orcs and stuff...

Who or what is Eorean or Forian? Are they a bot? Someone sock puppeting two accounts? clearly one is a something and the other is a familiar but...like I never quite know what's going on here. Kind of off-topic but just been confused about it for awhile.

Thanks Gortle, I like this thread it brings up a bunch of great points.

There's also another trick some kids' cartoons use of substituting out what would normally be human enemies. So you get a lot of robots, like in Thundarr whose sword chopped cleanly through most anything...except actual living creatures. Or G.I. Joe: Renegades which had legions of slime soldiers to blow up (so they could actually use their weapons on something other than vehicles for a change). So while you're emphasizing the humanity of many if not most creatures, you can have "obvious non-feeling enemies" too (without resorting to dehumanizing them because of "Evil!").

So the cannon fodder/nonspeaking members of a rival tribe could become a bunch of "wood men" made out of trees via a ritual, turning back to logs (or snow, dirt, clay, metal for the tougher ones, whatever works). Of course undead and actual constructs work too, though in a world of magic you could go most any direction you want, making clear delineations between feeling & unfeeling (rather than "us/them", "good/evil", or other simplistic notions which overshadow the pain being inflicting).

Or one could go with the "once subdued/wounded to where they'd normally die (by stats, not description) the spell controlling them breaks" or the "a dimensional rift sends them back home" which one Conan cartoon used vs. Set's snake warriors (when touched by Conan's sword's special metal).

Tangentially, if she or another player has a fear, i.e. spiders, you could add a sympathetic, sentient version to roleplay with. Then they'd be confronted with their own "icky-kill" preconceptions. :-)

I've never known how badly I wanted to play in a campaign like this because I had never considered it before, but it sounds actually awesome. It reminds me of Dragon Quest anime where he talks to the crocodile man and they eventually become strong allies, as well as one of the stronger lieutenants.

It’s entirely possible 2E might not be for you and that’s okay. Trust your instincts. As is true of all systems RP can happen no matter what but it’s no secret the core Rulebook goes the great length and a lot of class features are centered around the combat aspect. It might not be for you.

Some people have the view that any class that is not the best of all classes at a particular strategy is weak in that strategy. That viewpoint is sensible in a competitive game such as Magic: The Gathering in which a small advantage can determine the winner, but in a roelplaying game such as Pathfinder any strategy that wins against...

I myself often find this completely black and white, all or nothing thinking to grossly misrepresent a lot of aspects of this game. It's incredibly misleading.

"Don't ever play Witch, it's the worst class in the game, completely useless and ineffectual, literally just dead weight, like you might as well just show up with all 0's in your stats for all the good your character will be worth. literal unplayable garbage."

People straight up have this attitude about a lot of stuff in this game, or even strategies. "If you're a Magus and you're not spellstriking you might as well delete your character sheet. It's literally unfathomable of having a turn in which you're not doing OpTiMaL dAmAgE"

Oh thanks!

Yeah, this whole notion of PF2 being a coat of paint on 4e is an erroneous oversimplification. There seems to be a current of online discourse that boils down to "4e was great, we just kneejerked it too hard" which is frankly laughable. I went all in on 4e, made fun of the people who *were* knee-jerking, and just went about playing it for years. After buying a bunch of books and playing it a bunch our group all came to the realization that it just kind of sucked and wasn't letting us tell the stories we wanted to tell. The reasons are multitudinous, from small to large, but to say it didn't have serious ground-up problems is sheer rose-tinted glasses talk.

We went from 4e to PF1 and found it was a strict upgrade on all levels, for goodness sake.

To address this currently discussed fallacy: Encounter powers and Focus Spells are really, very different and to pretend otherwise is... odd. You can opt-in to Focus Spells, refocusing takes time and you can't always do it, Focus Spells don't replace basic physical activities, nor do they replace a Wizard's spell list, and refocusing is tied into specific thematic activities. Equating the two is such a stretch, it's dishonest. Focus Spells obviously have a shared ancestry with Encounter Powers, but they fulfill very different design goals.

The problem with this is nobody is saying this is 4e with a new coat of paint. That’s not what a spiritual successor is. It doesn’t mean it’s “the same thing but different” but something more like a product or fictional work that is similar to, or directly inspired by, another previous work, but does not explicitly continue the product line or media franchise of its predecessor, and is thus only a successor "in spirit"

You can definitely see and feel the bones of 4e here it’s just not that obvious as previously stated. Some people didn’t notice.

There is a hidden benefit to the battledancer. First of all, it doesn't have a range limit, it doesn't have a language limit, and it works on mindless things. So it gets you panache on the widest variety of stuff (as opposed to say, intimidate, bon mot, which requires something having a mind.) Plus, if you pick up leading dance, battle dancer becomes SUPER good. (You put yourself in a corner where you can't be flanked? No, no you come out here where we can flank you good and proper.)

That and the true benefit of making the Swashbuckler SAD via Acrobatic Performance meaning one could technically dump Cha and go full Dex and some other stat instead (wisdom for initiative, perception and will saves maybe?)

So for me it’s looking like a tie between remaking as a Battledancer or Gymnast. I’m liking Gymnast for the trip into an attack at only technically -1 or 2 MAP due to using an Agile/Finesse D6 weapon which automatically puts map for second attack at -4 then another -2 from flat footed. Not to mention any other bonuses. Then at 6 of course there’s the combination finisher which really basically erases your map so long as you tripped (or grappled etc) your opponent. I think with a Kukri it could be pretty nice, although I could probably stick with a Shortsword since the trip trait wouldn’t do much considering my build is staying free handed.

Uh...why don't you let them make that determination?

EDIT: And you know...Critical Role started with PF1. I'm betting they'd settle into PF2 just fine. (Feels like you're really taking a dig at others...while I get you're L33t, I really don't think it belongs on these forums...)

Making an observation that they are an RP Heavy party who does not optimize and do not seem to get deep into the mechanics isn't a dig. It's a playstyle preference.

This leads me to the true, or potentially false, conclusion that they may bounce off the more mechanically complex PF2E. Especially since they *left* PF1E and didn't stick to it for the entirety of their campaign.

I'm sorry if it feels like a dig to you. To me it's just preference. Some people really don't want to dig in. I know a person who won't play PF2E because it doesn't have a version of 5e's Warlock class. They are not interested in doing anything else outside of Eldritch Blast and nothing can convince them otherwise, and that's okay. Warlocks and Eldritch blast are literally fun.

You know, this is probably going to sound Gatekeepy, and I don't mean it to be, but I'm not sure I want *all* D&D 5e players to come to PF2E.

I think it's pretty much like League of Legends vs Dota 2 players. One is fast, casual friendly, and lighter on mechanics. The other is famously impenetrable, rules (mechanics) heavy with heroes like Invoker or the guy who splits into 5 of himself and you have to have insane Micro to use and much more, plus denying your own minions, farming is harder, supports spike harder, there's no B button or anything, and it's overall more dense.

I bounced off DotA 2 because it wasn't for me. Not every game is for every person you know?

I'm always happy to hear more people enjoying a game I love, but One by one makes me pause...because what's the goal here. Like why? Why do we need or expect everyone to play PF2E? There's nothing inherently wrong with 5e. I feel I've personally outgrown it, and it no longer appeals to *me* but, like for example, I don't think I can imagine the cast of Critical Role enjoying or wanting to play PF2E myself. Maybe they'd love it. Maybe Matt Mercer would cry tears of relief at running it after years of basically rewriting 5e to be a game he'd rather play (from what it appears lol, so much DM work). But..yeah idk I don't think they'd like it as much?

Dragonchess Player wrote:

An archer ranger starting at 1st with 14 Str, 18 Dex, and 14 or 16 Wis planning on warden focus spells, multiclass Druid Dedication/spellcasting, and the Eldritch Archer archetype? It's not even like this is a "strange" concept. As mentioned, a 14 Str (easily boosted to 18 by 10th level while also pumping Dex for ranged attacks and Wis for spells; it's not as if Int or Cha will need a lot of investment for this concept) for propulsive bows is not a "bad choice" for a primarily ranged attacker.

Yes, wearing medium armor "wastes" some the Dex bonus used for AC by a high-Dex character, but
1) the maximum AC bonus for armor plus Dex is capped at +5 total for everything except heavy armor (+6) or no protection at all (which prevents armor runes and/or affixed spellhearts; even explorer's clothing or bracers of armor are capped at +0 item/+5 Dex bonus before magic) and
2) the full Dex bonus still applies to everything else (saves, skill checks, etc.) as long as the Str requirement for the armor is met.

You don't "lose" anything wearing medium armor vs. light armor in most cases, unless there is a very specific capability from a particular light armor you are looking for or you completely "dump" Str...

Of course you do: You lose 1 bulk and a bunch of gold pieces. As you are speaking of level 1, you definitely go for leather with this build. Now, if you want some medium armor runes, like Fortification, I can understand you switch later on. But it looks like Fortification Rune is the only selling point for medium armor (and I'm sure light armor also has some nice runes).

The selling point of medium armor to me is that it's free for my class. Not in GP, but in the fact I just get it as a Ranger or Magus or even Barbarian. I have no desire to spend a level 2 feat, especially without Free Archetype, and even WITH Free Archetype to get heavy armor, when I could spend that feat slot on literally anything else and still have the same AC as everyone but a Champion.

SuperBidi wrote:

WWHsmackdown wrote:

My strength greatsword precision ranger stayed with his medium armor through to lvl 20.

I've never said it doesn't exist. Also, I'm curious if you made this choice because you had no room for Sentinel or if it was just for RP reasons (which is perfectly valid, it just doesn't answer OP's question).

The plus 1 to ac didn't matter to me compared to animal companion feats and ranger feats. If I had room to spare I'd still use them for interesting things instead of a +1 to ac that locks me into a dedication. Maybe not optimal, different strokes and all that. I just consider getting locked into something not worth small gains

Penny wise, pound foolish as they say. (Not you, the people micro-obsessing over a whole +1 AC without regard for the greater cost on the char overall)

Unicore wrote:

HumbleGamer wrote:

Unicore wrote:

Why does it matter if players over time gravitate towards other armors? Medium is very useful at level 1 and for many characters to level 10 at least. Why bother having striking runes if everyone eventually wants greater striking runes eventually anyway? these are things people pay much more money for.

Characters and their equipment change over time.

a medium armor shouldn't be "good for some character up to lvl 10".

It should be a solid choice that gives something that light and heavy can't have. But so should a light and heavy armor do.

The current situation sees heavy armor giving +1 AC ( and, eventually, bulwark ) in a system where even a +1 is godlike. It's no surprise that this would lead to heavy armors.

Changing/upgrading equipment it's intrinsic in an RPG, yes.

But "why" do you change it, as well as "what" you decide to get as a new piece of equipment, is what should be taken into consideration.

ps: over 2 years and still have to see a weapon without extra damage runes ( except maybe thrown that are forced to get a return rune ).

Medium armor is the best armor many characters that can't max DEX, or don't want to max DEX are going to be able to get without investing feat choices into. And even Sentinel never gives you master proficiency in heavy armor, so your AC ends up -1 compared to wearing medium armor if your class only gives you medium armor, right?

Yes, lvl 19 and lvl 20 a character wont be able to use heavy armor ( big deal).

Those who don't want to invest in dex go with str.

Going with str they'll be better with heavy ones for 90% of the game ( sentinel and, eventually, a general feat) .

It will be -1 AC for the last 2 levels, but with greater rune of fortifocation available... I mean, yes, the last 2 levels will be without heavy armor, but doesn't seem a big deal to me.

As someone who has built and played a lot of Strength Martials who don't have innate access to Heavy Armor, such as a Ranger, a Magus, a Warpriest Cleric, I've never thought about getting heavy armor. I set it to 12 or 14 dex, grabbed my armor and that was it. I have better things to do with feats.

Xenocrat wrote:

Eoran wrote:

Remember that half the people you meet are above average. That is literally what average means.

That's what below average people believe.

Above average people know the difference between average and median. You're talking about the latter.

Some people wonder about "Your friends have a greater number of friends than you do." I wonder if you are more likely to meet people with above average charisma. Low charisma people probably avoid meeting new people.

Low Con people are probably more likely to die young.

Low Wisdom or Dex might make you more likely to die in a driving accident.

So I think most people you "Meet" are above the median.

Not me. I'm average at everything. I'm just lucky to be here. I probably should have died quite a few times already.

Jacob Jett wrote:

I'm an old grognard, so I'd like to see some companion, henchperson, hireling/staff, and minion rules. Like how great would it be if it were possible to play a character like the dark lord in overlord who primarily spends most of the game directing a mob of gremlins around the map? I'd also love to see more worked examples (i.e., monsters) that simulate large groups as singular multisquare/hex monsters that just do damage when they attack. E.g., a pike square covers a nine by nine area and has x hit points, reduces in size by y whenever it loses z hit points and deals w damage to everything within reach, basic reflex save to reduce damage. You get the idea.

I second that, right now animal companion and eidolon are serviceable (animal companions seems to be a bit on the weaker side, but not so much that they're a detriment, especially if you play with something like free archetype enabled), but summons are just plain bad (be it throught a spell or a ritual), and hirelings seems to simply not exist.

Some more options for summonners (as in caster who use summon spells, not the class) and for using minions in general could only be beneficial.

I overall disagree. I think it's fine in a video game where all the minions are automated with AI. However I think it's terrible in TTRPGs and literally the only person having fun is the Summoner themselves. Nobody else is having fun on your 20 minute turns while you command each creature to do some menial task. The GM probably isn't having fun as the encounter balance did not account for 10 new creatures on the battlefield. It's just not fun. It's cool in theory, but minion-mancer is boring and un-fun for everyone except the person doing it...so I'd rather just not have it in this game.

The two things I'd *love* to see addressed but probably won't be: Better weapon proficiency on the actual summoner and not just all on the Eidolon. Dragon Rider theme with a lance, etc, basically martial character on giant martial beast is the dream, but currently not a thing in this game. Maybe it would break to game to allow it, but I'd still love to see it.

Second thing: medium sized animal form scaling all the way up to 20. Just like normal cat, bear, toad, wolf, etc... some people (like me) probably don't want to become Elementals, or Dragons, or Kaiju or Dinosaurs and just wanna be something normal and fight like that. Let Feral Druids loose without having to get exceedingly big and take on more extravagant forms (if we don't want to).

That's all.

It'll never happen but...I'd like to see it addressed in 2023 :P

The-Magic-Sword wrote:

...

Honestly I have no idea why shields are being used as a hill to die on when its really the least problematic of the "costs an action" issues.

I think this type of discussions will continue as long as things that cost an extra action remain being strictly worse than stuff that doesn't.

Yeah, everyone has compromises, and I have no idea why there is such a battle over the taste of one person.

As for "this is ruining the game" doesn't everyone has one or two things that they think that way about? I think the biggest issue is how much overproportion people are talking about it in this case in a thread that honestly has nothing to do with that. A veritable derail into what is honestly an interesting discussion, just not for this thread.

No. Nothing in PF2E is “ruining the game” for me. I have like 2 points of frustration but they’re so niche I’ve just decided to build different characters and not worry about it. It’s literally fine.