Data Lore's page

Anyone else think animal companion types are a bit unbalanced? The dex based ones can get expert (nimble) and then master (using dex specializations) prof with unarmored. Strength based options leave armor prof at trained. Considering that higher dex also means higher ac, the str based companions seem really really hosed.

Typical dex companion: +3 base dex, base trained unarmored, +1 dex mature, +2 dex nimble, expert unarmored nimble, +2 dex specialized, master specialized

Base ac unarmored (not counting level) seems to be able to reach 24 with all those bonuses (10+X). Unlike PCs, I can't find a rule that caps ac from dex at 5 for animal companions. Other benefits include more sneakiness and better reflex saves.

Typical str companion: +2 base dex, base trained unarmored, +1 dex mature, +1 dex savage, +1 dex specialized.

Base ac unarmored (not counting level) seems to be 17.

The strength companion can wear heavy barding but due to the dex cap that only increases ac potential by 1. So, 18.

I know the str based companions do a bit more damage. By the time it's specialized, the strength based companion will probably do a few more points of damage due to having a higher die size weapon and like 3 more from higher strength (maybe 6 more damage on average or so).

Also, the first time you get specialized, you get +1 dex but not +1 str. So the str based companion will have 1 less bonus to attack than the dex companion.

Looking at it, str based animal companion seems like a trap to me.

Hello,

I am new to Paizo subscriptions. I go to my subscription page but I do not see a way to cancel a subscription or put it on hold. How is this done?

I am starting another campaign for some friends that are relatively new to roleplaying and am cobbling together the house rules for that game.

I had introduced them to the hobby with 13th Age since its relatively rules light but is similar to PF2 in some ways (like how level is added to things). As we transition to PF2, I want to make a few changes so that PCs remain as broadly capable as they seem in 13th Age. So these are the rules I am mulling over.

1. Intelligence Bonus: A PC's Intelligence modifier may be used to increase a skill from Trained to Expert INSTEAD of training a new skill (but not for taking an Expert skill to Master or beyond).
2. Lore Skills: At levels 1, 7 and 15, PCs get a special Skill Increase that can only be spent on Lore Skills. This will allow PCs to easily become legendary in a Lore skill (or Expert in several) while still advancing their other skills.
3. Untrained Skills: Add level to Untrained Skill Checks right from level 1.

There are a couple issues that jump out at me when I consider these house rules.

Issue 1: Some feats like Untrained Improvisation and Gnome Obsession are now useless or near that. Other feats based around getting expert skills seem less attractive. Problem? Or whatever?
Issue 2: PCs will reach Expert in a lore and possibly a couple skills at level 1. This is normally 2 for Rogues and 3 for everybody else. Would that be too much success early on?

Of the three house rules, I think the first is most possibly problematic but I do like that it makes Int attractive. Still I am likely to scratch that one. Anywho, any folks out there ever dabbled with any house rules similar to this? What was it like in play?

EDIT: I was also thinking of scrapping the Int house rule and adding a skill feat that lets you bump a skill from trained to expert or expert to master or even master to legendary. Each feat could be taken only once and would have some kind Int requirement. Hmm...

This is the 1.4 update to my homebrew Neo-Vancian (5e-style) variant casting classes and related play aides. Please read this Reddit post if you would like a full rundown on design goals and methodology.

CHANGES & NEW STUFF
A Note on the Why. My group wants to have a crack at the whimsy-filled Extinction Curse. One player thought it would be fun to play a Halfling Witch. Another was eyeing the Skald (Bard). After talking with them, I whipped up a Neo-Vancian Witch and made a smattering of other changes.
The Witch. I try to skew close to the original design in most cases but this is somewhat different than the APG Playtest take on the class (Neo-Vancian casting, patron choice matters more, a divine option is included, Cackle is useful, etc). Also, I kinda felt that the Witch was a bit too similar to the Mage (Wizard) so I did remove the Improved Familiar Attunement thesis from the Mage (Wizard) just to help them feel more distinct. The Witch's familiar also gets one more ability to start but the Witch no longer gets access to the Enhanced Familiar feat (it's somewhat baked in). I have not yet made a multiclass archetype version of the Witch. By the way, I couldn't come up with an alternative name that I or my player were happy with. I had considered "Crone" but it didn't quite fit.
MORE Small Tweaks to Spontaneous Casters. My spontaneous caster variants no longer gain a class feat at level one (which I had added in my last version). Feedback from my players suggested that the feat was not particularly necessary for the Thaumaturgist (Sorcerer) and seemed unsatisfying for the Skald (Bard). For my new campaign, my Skald (Bard) player asked for something that worked with his Performance skill and that gave him a tiny bit more flexibility. So, I gave the Skald (Bard) the "Practice" feature instead. The Skald (Bard) may now Retrain spells/cantrips at the same time that they Earn an Income from using Performance during downtime. This starts at 1 spell or cantrip a week at Trained, that increases to 2 at Expert, 3 at Master and 4 at Legendary. He seemed happy. I don't foresee further iterations here but if they do come, they will come from actual play experience at my table.

THE GOODS
The Mage, [UPDATED!], the Wizard alternative (PDF)(InDesign)
The Shaman, the Druid alternative (PDF)(InDesign)
The Skald, [UPDATED!], the Bard alternative (PDF)(InDesign)
The Thaumaturge,[UPDATED!], the Sorcerer alternative (PDF)(InDesign)
The Vicar, the Cleric alternative (PDF)(InDesign)
The Witch, [NEW!], the Witch alternative (PDF)(InDesign)
The Archetypes, does not yet include the Witch (PDF)(InDesign)
Related Tweaks (PDF)
PF2 4x6 Spell/Action Cards (PDF)(InDesign)
Spell Tracker (PDF)

A NOTE ON BALANCE
I care about balance but perfect mechanical balance is not my top priority. My group just doesn't obsess over that sort of thing. I chiefly focus on facilitating ease of play and on character options being compelling in a mechanical and narrative sense. I aim for said options to feel effective and fun in an adventuring party. Once I get in that ballpark, I call it good and move on.
My perspective on being “in that ballpark” may be different than yours. If you demand tighter balance than what is presented here then, by all means, continue to use the stock options or make your own.

I hope its alright if I start a new thread for my newest release. This thread is for my complete 5E-style casting alternative. Before I get into the the how and what of this, I want to delve a bit into some of the larger drivers that led me and my home group to move towards these changes.

DESIGN GOALS
Our group wanted a few things. First, we wanted casters to be more flexible. We were OK with toning down spells and the move from straight save or suck to 4 degrees of success. However, we were not OK with PF2's strict Vancian systems and were a bit more at home with the 5E implementation. We knew that spontaneous casters were a bit more flexible but the sorcerer and the bard simply did not appeal to my players or fit the character types they wanted to play.

A secondary goal for us was ease of use at the table. My players wanted to quickly select their spells and painlessly track their use. While this could be done OK with a spell list using the stock system, it wasn't as easy as we were used to in 5E.

Our last goal was around giving casters a bit more oomph. They had been nerfed significantly from 3.X (and we are ok with that to an extent). But having to deal with strict Vancian as well made casters just feel lackluster. They may well indeed be "balanced" but they didn't seem fun. We were hoping to make playing a caster a bit more enjoyable. That is SUPER subjective. So, please be aware that this is more fun for US but may not be more fun for YOU. YMMV

Please be aware we came to these goals AFTER playing through several playtest scenarios AND the Fall of Plaguestone. We are gearing up for my PF2 conversion of Curse of the Crimson Throne and wanted to alter things before starting that.

THE GIST
So, the gist is this:
1. Prepared casters get to prepare a number of spells equal to their base spellcasting ability modifier plus level every day. When a prepared caster uses a prepped spell, it is not expended but an appropriate spell slot is.
2. Spontaneous casters get to know a number of spells equal to their base spellcasting ability modifier plus level every day (sorcerer bloodline spells do not count against this limit).
3. All casters may spontaneously heighten their spells (whether prepared or known) into higher level slots by using those higher level slots.

With all these things in there, class feats and features had to be changed or removed to better work with new mechanics. The Wizard in particular had to undergo massive changes and significant thought went into balancing different schools against the universalist and how to balance the Wizard against the Sorcerer.

THE GOODS
Here are the links to the classes themselves. Please note that I have provided these as alternative classes with different names. This means my players know that any Wizard feat that may be released later is not going to work with the Mage I present unless I vet it first, for example. Additionally, this reinforces that using these classes is, for me, optional. If a player wants to play with the vanilla casters, they may do so. I have not bothered with Multiclass Dedications for these. They should be more or less like the vanilla ones.

I have linked by the PDFs and my InDesign files. Please note the InDesign files do not have fonts embedded. They are commercial and you will have to get them on your own. I am providing the InDesign files so those of you that have your own ideas about addressing concerns about casters in PF2 can do so on your own time and in your own space. Please be aware that more thought and energy was put into the Mage and the Vicar since those are the classes that my players will be using in our upcoming campaign.

The Mage, Wizard alternative (PDF)(InDesign)
The Shaman, Druid alternative (PDF)(InDesign)
The Skald, Bard alternative (PDF)(InDesign)
The Thaumaturge, Sorcerer alternative (PDF)(InDesign)
The Vicar, Cleric alternative* (PDF)(InDesign)

*Significant changes were made to the Cleric in putting together the Vicar. These are mostly to meet what my player wanted from the class.

PLAY AIDES
One of the benefits of the casting classes linked above is that tracking spell use is pretty easy for all of them. We use spell (and action) cards which I am putting together and a small tracker sheet. The cards and the tracker sheet are all meant to be printed out on 4x6 cards. You have to have a printer that allows for that and you typically have to define a custom paper size to do it.

Here are the links:
PF2e 4x6 Cards* (PDF)(InDesign)
Spell Tracker Card (PDF)

*Please note that my group's house rules are reflected in these cards. This is notable in stuff like Electric Arc being a bit nerfed and in Orc Ferocity being a free action.

A few notes on the Spell Tracker:
1. The drop down does not show up when you print.
2. The Spell Tracker can help the Mage I made track his special "School Slot" as well. When you click on a check box before printing, a grey out star appears to denote a "School Slot."
3. You will likely need to open this in Adobe Reader (not your web browser) to get it to work.

CLOSING THOUGHTS
These are the house rules our group will be using. If you have your own wildly different thoughts on how to balance this stuff or you feel this is crazy OP or whatever, please offer those alternatives in your own threads. However, if you find any typos or would like to provide specific constructive feedback on the solutions provided here, please do so.

Anywho, thats it, I hope folks find this useful. I am still working on the PF2 cards and will be updating them based on what my group members need over the course of play. I may also update other items as time goes by depending on player feedback.

I am prepping to run Curse of the Crimson Throne in PF2 for family and friends starting in mid December. The players playing the casters prefer 5e casting mechanics and voiced displeasure with the strict Vancian casting.

Being a lover of homebrew, an understanding DM and not terribly fond of strict Vancian casting myself, I came up with some alternate casting classes for them.

The gist:
Like 5e, players get spells prepared equal to Spell mod plus level. They get spell slots like it shows in the class sections. Casting a prepped spell uses up the slot not the spell.

Alot of modification had to go into the Wizard replacement (the Mage) due to alot of feats relying on preparation and Arcane Bond. I went through all the Wiz feats and mucked about with them and removed some.

For the Cleric player I made the Vicar. Same basic gist as the Mage. I went further and merged aspects of the Cloistered Cleric and the War Priest. I made the class more like the base 5e Cleric (Medium Armor + Good Spellcasting, not so great at melee) since thats what the player wanted and I didn't think it would hurt party balance. I modded a few feats too for the heck of it.

I posted this on Reddit. Vote count ended up at 0/1 due to getting equal amounts of up and down votes. I saw people were voting often too since I saw the numbers jump around at different parts of the day. I see why Paizo went with classic Vancian for PF2. If they would have done anything like 5e casting, something I advocated for often during the playtest, people would have rioted.

Anywho for those interested here are the files. I have included the InDesign files for folks who want to make their own stuff:

The Mage (PDF)
The Mage (InDesign)
The Vicar (PDF)
The Vicar (InDesign)

This clearly means you would need to do something for Spontaneous Casters if any of your players wanted to play one. I would let them treat all their spells as Signature Spells. Maybe also do their spells known as Spell mod plus level too if you think the everything is a Signature Spell thing is too good. Or not. Who knows. I haven't thought about it too much since none of my players want to be a Bard or Sorcerer. *shrug*

As far as martial/caster disparity, I don't really think giving casters more flexibility is a bad thing. The spells are still heavily nerfed compared to 3.X and absolutely weaker than 5E, so I am not terribly concerned.

Anywho, even if you hate it, I hope the InDesign files are of use to you.

Have a good night folks.

This will likely be an unpopular opinion but I really dislike the Alchemical Sciences subclass. It seems to me that a very similar conceptual and mechanical niche is met with just the Alchemist Dedication.

I heard the PF1 Investigator was associated with Alchemy in some way. So, I get the idea of putting in that subclass to help fans of the PF1 version. But, I would rather have some other subclass that fills a totally different niche than have something I can kinda accomplish with the Alchemist Dedication.

Thier Revelation spells should be thier own thing (not related to Focus spells). I would make them special oracle only cantrips that trigger thier curses.

This would remove the janky limitation of not being able to have focus points, etc from multiclassing.

Not quite sure why its set up as a special focus spell that you can just do infinjte times instead of just being a cantrip (which already works that way).

Hey folks. I posted this in the Homebrew thread a while ago but I decided to crosspost here since some may not visit that forum often (in hindsight, I probably should have posted here in the first place) and because I have made some major updates.

Anywho, here is a link to my hack of the official B/W Paizo character sheet. The link is a Google Drive link. It will always point to the most updated version of the sheet.

LINK

Features:
- Form Fillable
- Some Auto-calc (includes support for those feats that add 1/2 or full level to untrained skill checks)
- Less Clutter
- Multi-Attack Penalty calculation/display for each weapon
- Inventory with Auto-calc. Can state if unworn items are stowed, readied, or placed in one of two "stashes" (ie. bag of holding, cart, etc). If a stash is selected, bulk is not applied to encumbrance. You can describe what each "stash" is in the notes section located where the inventory is.
- More space to describe spells, feats and actions (less need to pop open the rulebook)
- Reset button to clear the sheet (the reset button, untrained gray circles and setting boxes do not appear on print).

Anywho, there you go. I have some more plans for the sheet. I likely need to add a page for Rogues (and likely the upcoming Investigator class) to add their extra skill feats. I also probably need to add a thing for Alchemists too. Those changes are a ways off though.

I hope you enjoy it.

Do backpacks reduce bulk (ie, make things easier to carry)? Or do they suggest that players need to declare what CONTAINERS within thier inventory carry what items?

So, like, a workable player inventory should be made up of containers, each with a bulk limit, and then they need to list what items are in each container?

Reminds me of the 90s Ravenloft pc game if that is the case and not in a good way.

How does this stuff work?

Here is my hack of the official Paizo sheet. Its form fillable and has auto-calc built in. Also, also has been done to de-clutter the sheet.

There is a button to reset the sheet. There is also a toggle to allow you to set untrained skills to +0 (default), to +1/2 level or to +level. Neither of these are visible when you print.

All TEML default to untrained (tiny grey circle). This tiny circle is not present when you print the sheet.

Due to the inability to edit posts on this board, I will just keep updating the sheet on Google Drive. The link below will always connect you with the newest version of this sheet. I will post to these thread when/if I make a major update.

LINK

See title.

A feat to heighten one or two spells your are forced to take and can't swap is just bad. If the sorc has to take the spell and cant swap the damn thing, let the sorc heighten it as soon as he can.

Not sure if its ok to post this here. Running a Paizo adventure on a non-Paizo system.

Looking for players for my 13th Age conversion of the Age of Worms adventure path. It will run weekly on Sundays at 7:30 am Pacific for 3-3.5 hours on Fantasy Grounds. I have the Ultimate License so you can play with the free demo. Please click below for more information and apply on the Calendar link if interested.

CLICK HERE: LINK

As I read through the Resonance update, I saw plenty I liked and some things that gave me pause. I wish I could test these out but I am not sure if I will be able to. My groups are focused on finishing Doomsday dawn. Maybe I will run a one shot of this on FG on Friday Night but I can't commit to that. Anywho, concerns...

Chief among my concerns as I read through the Resonance Test was all these 1/day use items. I do not like the large amounts of extra record keeping PF2 has in general and this adds more to it. I also feel this is not enough of a shift away from the old resonance system since after that use Focus must be used to use the item.

A good example of this are the Bracers of Missile Deflection. They read:

A ranged weapon Strike targets you and you aren’t flat-footed against that attack; You gain a +2 circumstance bonus to AC against the triggering attack. You can activate the bracers once per day. After you’ve activated the bracers, you can activate them again in the same day by spending 1 Focus Point each time you do so.

First things first, this is an Invested item. So, this uses one of your ten magic item slots already. Also, you have to use your reaction (so, only against one attack a round). Finally, after you use it ONCE, you have to spend Focus to use it again. I dunno. It doesn't feel very good.

I would keep it as an Invested item but I would change it as follows:

A ranged weapon Strike targets you and you aren’t flat-footed against that attack; You gain a +1 circumstance bonus to AC against the triggering attack. You may spend 1 Focus Point to increase this bonus to 2.

I would maybe boost the bonus to 3 on focus use. I dunno. paizo can figure that out.

Now wands. This is how they currently work:

Once per day, you can activate the wand and spend one of its charges to cast the listed spell at the indicated level. You can spend 1 Focus Point and another charge to cast the spell again that day. Once you do, for the rest of the day, you can continue activating the wand and spending one charge to cast the spell again without spending more Focus Points.

So, you get one use without focus, then you have to use focus to use it all you want. Each use still eats up a charge. Man, so much tracking. So, first thing, and this may not be popular, I would make wands INVESTED and require the user to have the relevant spell list and so on. Then I would do this:

You can activate the wand and spend one of its charges to cast the listed spell at the indicated level.

That's it. Gotta keep it simple guys.

Also, I can see maybe adding special "Focus" spends on each wand too to make the triggered spells hit a larger radius or have a neater effect. Maybe the wand can have some metamagic baked in that requires focus for use? I dunno, just spit ballin'.

Here's one last one. The Hat of Disguise (an Invested item). This is how its written in the Resonance Test:

Activate 1 minute (Interact) Once per day, you can activate the hat to cast a 1st-level illusory disguise spell on yourself. While setting up the disguise, you can also alter the hat to appear as a comb, ribbon, helm, or other piece of headwear. After you’ve activated the hat, you can activate it again in the same day by spending 1 Focus Point each time

This is how I would change it:

Activate 10 minutes (Interact) You can activate the hat to cast a 1st-level illusory disguise spell on yourself. While setting up the disguise, you can also alter the hat to appear as a comb, ribbon, helm, or other piece of headwear. You can spend 1 Focus Point to activate this as an action.

So, you can use the thing all day but if you use Focus it improves the use in a significant way.

Anywho, whatever Paizo decides to do here, the gist of this suggestion is please, please reduce the amount of fiddly bits that must be tracked. These suggestions are just meant to illustrate a point. They may not be perfectly balanced and, surely, Paizo can do a much better job than me at making these things. All I know is that 1/Day charge items do not help reduce the fiddly bits one has to worry over in play. Please Paizo, less fiddly stuff!

Why does Twin Take down state this:

The second Strike takes a –2 circumstance penalty if the weapon doesn’t have the agile trait.

I mean, if the second strike is already subject to MAP, is that penalty needed? Is this a typo of something held over from Double Slice?

Should be removed right?

Unburdened Heritage seems way too weak at -5 penalty. An elf in heavy armor moves faster and than unburdened dwarf (and leaves all other dwarves in the dust). This just does not seem right.

I am not sure what the right answer is but the heritage currently seems weak. Maybe ignore 5 feet of armor penalty (as now) and also gain 5 feet of speed? This would make it good for a wider array of builds and make sure the elf in plate isn't faster than the unburdened dwarf?

I just ran the Lost Star for some experienced players. We had an Alchemist, a Fighter, a Cleric and I ran a DMPC Sorcerer. This is the third time I have run this.

The party basically demolished everything. This was in no small part to the Magic Weapon spell. The Cleric used MW and Weapon Surge to basically have a +2 weapon when needed. The sorc used it twice. Once to buff the fighter and once himself. In most instances, MW seemed to be the best use of spell slots since it lasted a while.

The other stand out spell was Ray of Enfeeblement.

Compared to other times I have run the Lost Star, the PCs did very well (though it got a bit dicey here and there). We even forgot about Hero Points.

I think the players liked Treat Wounds. As a GM, I like that players pushed on because of it. One asked if they should rest for spells and they said naw, lets keep going, hp was fine.

We finished in one session. This was in no small part to using Fantasy Grounds. I coded in the effects and didnt need to stop to figure out what stacked with what. That was a massive time saver.

Admittedly, part of their success and speed was due to luck.

Overall, good session.

So, I don't much like some of my Bloodline spells. Can I swap them out as I level?

I don't see anything in the rules that says I can't but I may have missed something.

So, as I look over the barbarian, I feel kinda... unimpressed.

The core ability, Rage, lasts an awfully short amount of time and takes an action. The bonus is kinda lackluster. The damage resistance varies in utility depending on the totem. Its only a few points of damage that are easily overshadowed by magic weapon damage. On top of that, rage takes an action, the bonus is conditional, limits your actions, confers an AC penalty and the fatigue afterward basically makes you lose a round. It seems almost like it hurts more than it helps in many cases.

The class itself doesn't even become an expert with weapons until level 13. A caster with the Fighter Archetype gets that at 12. Even a Paladin nabs that at 5. But...man... 13....

I dunno what the fix is here but I think that a raging barbarian should feel more imposing than it looks now.

These feats state...
"For the purpose of proficiencies, you treat martial ____ weapons as simple weapons and exotic ___ weapons as martial weapons."

Can we can consider removing the "For the purpose of proficiencies" part and changing that to "For all purposes"? Being able to treat some of those weapons as simple for that Brute rogue and other such abilities would be fairly neat.

FG License: Ultimate
Game System: Pathfinder 2nd Edition Playtest

Time Zone: PST (PACIFIC STANDARD TIME) - See below for some Time Zone conversions
Day of week and time: Sunday MORNINGS; 7:30 AM
If new game, planned start date: 10/7/18
Planned Duration & Frequency: 3.5-4 Hour Sessions; Weekly
Term: Medium Term

Text or Voice: Voice
Voice software used: TeamSpeak (for easy music streaming)

Roleplay & Combat mix: Heavy Combat due to Playtest
Number of Players in game & needed: Need 4 or 5
Character starting level & equipment: PCs of different levels to be made for every part of the adventure
Character restrictions: Restrictions are dependent on the part of the playtest.

Details of your scenario: This is a multipart adventure. Players make characters for every part. We want to have fun as we try out this new system but I am running mostly to give Paizo feedback on PF2. So, we will follow rules closely. That means a bit less rule of cool than I may typically go with in a typical home game.

Players should be willing to frequently make new characters and should be open to some scenarios being a bit more challenging than usual - we are stress testing a system after all.

We will use a G+ community for out of game comms and announcement. Players are expected to post there in advance if they cant make a session.

Time Zone Conversions:
Los Angeles, United States
Sun, 7:30am - 11:00am (PDT)

New York, United States
Sun, 10:30am - 2:00pm (EDT)

London, United Kingdom
Sun, 3:30pm - 7:00pm (BST)

Moscow, Russia
Sun, 5:30pm - 9:00pm (MSK)

If you are interested, please apply below or on the calendar.

As I have been DMing the playtest, I have noticed the large amount of things that must be tracked in a given combat.

There is screening, cover and raised shields (none of which stack). There are these poisons and effects that work in shifting stages. There are a wealth of conditions that all work at different levels (Enfeebled 1, Enfeebled 2, Enfeebled 3...) and all work in different but sometimes overlapping (and non-stacking) ways.

There is alot of looking up whats circumstance and whats conditional. Flanking is a circumstance penalty. So, it stacks with this but not with that, etc. What does Inspire Courage stack with? Oh, its conditional, so doesn't stack with Burn it or Dangerous Sorcery - but only for damage, the other stuff works. What does this do. What does that do. Tons of small random modifiers allover the place.

On top of all that, you gotta track Hero Points, Spell Points, Resonance Points... Guys, if its late, I have had a glass of wine or two, this can get to be a bit hard to juggle.

I do not think that increased system mastery will help much here. This game seems like it comes with the assumption of condition cards, tokens and page flipping. When the official Fantasy Grounds ruleset comes out I can play this online when all the effects come hard coded since it will, hopefully, keep track for me. Until then, this is gonna be rough to run.

Has there been any consideration on this? I am not sure what, if anything, can be done. I really like how Shadow of the Demon Lord handles this sort of thing but thats a much simpler game. I get that PF2 is meant to be crunchier but, man, this is as crunchy as gravel at times.

I am just curious if this is on the dev radar at the moment? Will any of the upcoming changes deal with ease of play?

See title. Seems a bit too good at no save.

I believe the feat should state that the scroll you use to add a spell to your repetoire for the day should be of a spell from the Arcane list.

Is there any way Animal Companions can get some kinda AC bump? Like maybe they can get some "tough hide" or some such which increases their AC by one every time they get an "upgrade"?

Roll Medicine when treating wounds. Compare the result against the Medium DCs on table 10-2. You heal the level corresponding to the rolled result times the patient's constitution modifier in hit points.

Example: Joe rolls Medicine when treating wounds on Virginia. He gets a result of 17. That corresponds to level 4 on the 10-2 table. The patient, Viginia, has a constitution score of 16. That is a constitution modifier of 3. 4 times 3 is 12. Virginia regains 12 hitpoints.

A roll of 1 restores no hit points and bolsters the patient against further uses of Treat Wounds.

If thats too much HP, compare against the Hard DCs.

Simple request:

Please allow Spontaneous Casters to heighten their spells into higher level slots without needing to use weird heightening abilities or, even worse, having to add higher level versions of said spells to their repertoire.

Just let them heighten away into a higher level slot - not just 2 or 4 spells like it is now but all spells they know. Analysis paralysis is not a thing that you need to worry over - as players get the ability to heighten they will already have gained technical fluency in playing the class.

Speaking as a 3.5e player, my sorcerer had heighten spell, versatile spellcaster and all kinds of feats to let him manipulate his spell slots as he saw fit. Having played the guy from first level, I did not slow the game down since I knew how to play my class by the time heightening became a thing I cared about.

Guys, I know that DD is meant for feedback on mechanics but, damn, Pale Mountain was a horrible, terrible slog. I can't imagine any game system making it an enjoyable experience.

Difficult terrain everywhere. Unfair hazards and traps. Two boring random number generator games (one for survival; one for knowledge skills). Enemies who cheat (manticore with its single action double shootiness; elementals with all their insanity, the ankhrav). A couple of these things in isolation is one thing but a glut of them over two sessions of play is just terrible.

Please, never release an actual module like this. Also, if later modules are this terrible, let people know so they can skip them.

Even watching the Glasscannon Podcast, you can tell those guys were struggling to get through Pale Mountain. And those guys usually make anything seem fun.

I have new players I met online and I am trying to sell them on PF2 as a system. I want to follow up Doomsday Dawn with my own campaign using the system (which I rather like). I am not going to be able to find players if such modules are their introduction to PF2.

Thankfully, I was able to convince my players to give part 3 a try. Thankfully, part 3 reads better and it looked fun on the GC Podcast. But I would have totally understood if these players would have walked away after part 2.

This game has alot of modifiers here and there. There are loads of little conditions with nested conditions and so on.

When running this, it can get hard to keep alot of this straight. I am hoping that some of this could be collapsed a bit. Dont get me wrong, I like what PF2 is doing but some complexity seems to be inefficient.

Examples:

Touch AC - Find a way to get rid of it. Just make it go away. Casters have like two less dex. They don't need this. There is no 1/2 BAB or whatever. If you are concerned, say enemies are always flatfooted against certain magicky attacks or whatever. Heavy armor isnt so OP that it needs to be screwed by this either.

Screening - Remove this. Just make it cover when enough crap is in the way; one creature in the way, no prob, two = cover. Done.

Enfeebled, Fatigued and Sluggish - Do we really need all three of these? Conceptually, these are pretty similar. Mechanically different, but maybe we can reduce these to two or something?

Grabbed and Restrained - Hmm...

Asleep and Unconscious - Ugh...Ya, I get that you wake when injured when asleep but not unconcious. But maybe we can reduce the amount of verbage here.

Theres lots of stuff like this. There is a good game under the hood here but it needs to be more efficient.

Edit:
Other stuff. The action economy. Its good, but some stuff is silly.

Seek as an action I get. But Point Out? Cmon...just let people do that for free

Change grip...one action? Hmm... I dunno... Seems counter intuitive. I can see how it serves some balancing needs but...

Every attack should be quick draw. Basically, you should be able to just draw a weapon as part of an attack. At the very least let folks draw a weapon set (two weapons or sword and shield) with one action.

Seems mostly fine to me. Looking at it, this is how I might make it more palatable...

Permanent Items: Keep current implementation; like 5E attunement

Consumables: Use of Resonance is not required for consumables but allows them to work to greater effect or duration; base effect or duration for some items may need to be downtuned a bit (stolen from today's stream)

Alchemists: Change Studied Resonance so you add Int mod to Resonance pool IN ADDITION to Cha (maybe limit it so you can only use those extra points for Advanced and Quick Alchemy)

They had considered making all casters like Arcanists and scrapping the Sorcerer but nixed the idea.

Damn.

That would have been cool.

So, I was making a DMPC to help my party through part two and settled on a Fighter.

One of the things I like about PF2e is all the disparate weapon effects. I especially like the idea of mixing and matching weapon types. However, mastery class abilities poopoos on this a bit since being really good with one means that I am disincentivized from using another.

For example, I made a combat grab build. I liked the idea of a bastard sword in the main hand and a spiked gauntlet in the offhand. He could swing his sword and use the gauntlet, an agile weapon, to do the grab. Maybe not to most optimal build, but I liked the flavor.

Sadly, mechanically, I was just better off using the bastard sword to do the combat grab maneuver and the spiked gauntlet was kinda useless thanks to my bastard sword being at master (sword group) and everything else being at expert.

My suggestion: consider having Weapon Mastery (and similar proficiency features for other classes) apply to two weapon groups to allow some more flexibility.

Pure opinion here:

Currently, light and medium armor +1 potency runes are "Level 3" and heavy armors +1 potency runes are "level 4." I disagree with this as heavy armors not needing as much dex is already counterbalanced by numerous armor penalties.

Edit: I am making a DMPC for part 2 and have zero idea how to spend my "level 3" item. I want him in heavy armor for visual reasons. So, not sure where to go from here.

Bird Companion should probably be of tiny size. Small is awfully big for a bird. Also, once it grows, small races could ride it. That confers flight at level 4 (druid) or 6 (ranger) for small races which seems too soon. By making it tiny, it wont be ridable unless its made savage which is at a later, more appropriate level.

Power Attack seems like it could use a slight amount of love. Maybe add an additional point of damage per damage die?

Currently, Combat Grab seems a bit weak since its so easy to make an enemy flat footed.

Can we maybe make Improved Combat Grab into Combat Grab?

Experience in my games is that Double Slice feels a little too good - especially when compared to other fighter feats of the same level. Multiclass rogue feels a little too effective with it.

Maybe make TWF work more like the Double Shot archery feat? That seems a bit more balanced and it does very similar things. Maybe reduce the penalty to -1 on both attacks? -3 on the offhand if it isnt agile?

Seeing as how devs are unlikely to bolt on something like Stamina, Healing Surges or Short Rests, maybe they might consider better mundane healing feats? Here are a couple suggestions:

Battle Medic (requires Trained in Medicine; changed as stated below)

Improved Battle Medic (requires Master in Medicine; NEW)

Natural Medicine (requires Expert in Nature; changed as shown below)

Improved Natural Medicine (requires Legendary in Nature; NEW)

This is just me spit-balling. Something like this would function as a sort of "ghetto Short Rest." Combat healing is still way better but this is at least kinda OK.

Hey there,

A bit about me. I am an almost 40 something husband and father living in California. I played DnD briefly in college and have gotten back into it in the past year. I have been playing 3.5E with a local group on weekdays and ran a short 5E campaign (along with a few One Shots) on Roll20. I want to try running a longer campaign using the PF system since, while I like 5E (great system!), I miss the tactical movement and mini focused combat of 3rd Edition.

I am really interested in running the Iron Gods adventure path. The game will use assorted Variant and House PF rules (see here).

I will be running this on Maptool. I am still familiarizing myself with the software and reading up on the adventure path, so it may be some time before we get started. Consider this a bit of an interest check.

Games would most likely be every other week on Sunday evenings (PST) and run for 3.5 to 5 hours or so. On rare occasions, we may be able to reschedule the game to a Saturday or Monday. I am really looking for consistency - especially since this will be played every other week.

If interested, please message me. Thanks for reading!

I was fiddling a bit with some rules today. How would a casting system like this work, do you think?

LINK

The idea is to maintain some of the flexibility of the prepared caster over a Sorceror/Oracle but make that come at a more significant cost (significantly less spell choices in the moment; significantly less casts per day; etc) while addressing some of the issues with typical spell prep systems.

Would a Tier 1 caster using such a system drop a Tier or stay the same?

I am thinking of running a PF campaign and wanted some feedback on the house rules I am cooking up for it. I want to make character creation more straightforward, to get rid of some feat taxes and to avoid overly wide gaps in player character effectiveness.

Here is the link:
LINK

Any specific feedback would be great. For example, is there enough choice in classes or will players be miffed by the lack of Wizards and Clerics? Are there any other spells or feats you might ban? I want to get all this in now since I dont like nerfing or banning something once play starts.

Thanks!

Are you considering releasing better quality maps for virtual tabletop use? Current maps are very low res.

Hey folks, Pathfinder newbie here (3.5 vet though).

I am excited by the premise of this AP and am gearing up run it. Would anyone who has run this be so kind as to give me some feedback on how well this AP would run with the house rules I have thought up?

LINK

My goal is to limit this to T3/4 classes and builds. I also wanted to eliminate some feat taxes to allow players to diversify a bit. I am not sure how this will play out though.

Any feedback is welcome.

Also, is anyone familiar with running games via MapTool? I am thinking using that. I have used Roll20 in the past but I have heard good things about MapTool.