Horse

David Silver - Ponyfinder's page

138 posts. Alias of Nuku.


RSS

1 to 50 of 138 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

This book is _fantastic_! Thank you. Is this part of the main line?

Grand Lodge

Could you not do that in PF1? Did it break the game?

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I feel like any great divergence in the lists is a bad place to squint right now, something to expand on with each supplement instead.

Grand Lodge

I am hoping, perhaps in vain, that this bit of information makes it into the final. A chart of costs for this, as exists in PF1, would be lovely. Well, actually, it's just a simple rule in PF1, and I'd be fine with that too. (50% of the cost to scribe the spell)

Grand Lodge

Well, sure, the scroll is an option, and one I knew of, but saying that literal magic guilds offer no text or instruction?

What kind of magic guild is this? Like they could have a text book dimensionally anchored to the middle of a lead-lined room and that would suffice for copying a spell if there's no faculty actually doing a drop of instruction.

Grand Lodge

You're in a settlement and you want to hit up the local wizard's guild and get a copy of magic missile. How much is that service? We know how much the scribing costs, but the access fee of borrowing an NPCs spellbook or time (since NPCs can just teach you verbally these days, I believe).

Grand Lodge

A 3/3 fighter/mage is a 6th level character. That they can stand with level 4 characters is not glowing praise.

Grand Lodge

Couldn't you add all the prices together and figure out what level it is that way?

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

+10 PER level? How would this work at any level?

Grand Lodge

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Themetricsystem wrote:

Is ANY PC still viable if they have no Wealth by Level to spend?

Is a Wizard who had his Spellbook stolen or Destroyed viable?

Is a Druid who is shackled in metal armor viable?

Is a Monk versus flying enemies viable?

...

This argument is painful.

Is a naked level 15 cleric still useful to a level 15 party? I dare say they could easily be.

Is a wizard with not a single gold spent (the spellbook is free) still useful? Bet they can be.

Most spellcasters can fake it without spent gold.

Martials cannot. Is this even really a debate? Is this questioned?

Grand Lodge

You say that, but I would think against a door, you don't roll to hit, you just roll damage.

But that's just my PF1 showing. And missing doors is sad.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Not getting it. Monsters are monsters. If they want an NPC in an AP to have the effects of spell A, Spell B and Spell C, they can, at this point, say they have them. Pre-buffing won't be a thing they have to worry about.

Heck, an NPC spellcaster might have a special one action move that they can do and a huge burst of sparkles happens as an array of things happens to them.

How balanced will it be? That's a different thing and up to the adventure designer, but saying you can't do it is silly.

Grand Lodge

I like what I see, by and large. I want to develop for this system. Let's tighten it up and make it sing.

Survey completed.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A legendary sword is +5 to hit, and no one's really complaining about that part, I think? You do want that.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

You also don't need to make OGL products if you are making it for DM's guild.

That aside, I pray that all books Paizo makes remain OGL. WotCs 'only the core stuff is OGL' model is irksome.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
David Silver - Ponyfinder wrote:
...
Assuming a 5 person party, sure. The game assumes 4 people though, so it should be 1/4, but otherwise yes.

What? No. You, the fighter, are dealing 1/5th your expected damage. You can't help this, your weapon lost 1/5th of its dice.

Grand Lodge

Are we forgetting about the persistent damage of produce flame? Crits with that bad boy will be extra happiness.

Grand Lodge

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
David Silver - Ponyfinder wrote:

You are a level 20 fighter.

You have a sword. It's a very well made word, heck, we'll assume it's a legendary sword, crafted in the heat of a live volcano by a master smith for the express purpose of being wielded by an awesome person like you.

What are your odds of success against a level 20 threat? 18? 16? 15?

We'll assume you have a party, but how much are you contributing? Can you do your share?

Alright, let's slap a few qualities on there, but it's still a +0 sword. Are your odds improved in any real way?

Is this alright?

Note, these are all questions. I am not making a statement, just inviting thought.

The same as a level 1 character facing a level 1 threat. The enhancement bonuses are built to counteract the factor that creatures at higher levels have much more HP and a multitude of defensive capabilities. Of course, you could just gut the HP bloat and keep weapons simplistic, but now you're in a system where the quality and magical properties of items don't matter, in a system that Paizo clearly wants to make matter. As such, those moving parts (including the magical properties of items) are designed in such a manner to compensate for certain changes.

A martial's role (hit things until they die or give up) hasn't changed from this edition. Unless your weapon or fighting style is inadequate to completing that goal (which is more often than not a player issue than an item issue), then taking the things that make you best able to accomplish your goal is what you will be striving towards. However, just like in first edition, this edition of the game still holds +X modifiers at the top of the food chain because it is still the biggest contributing factor to accomplishing your goal, and these auxiliary properties won't ever match up or surpass it because +X is the balancing point and not the other way around. Until either +X loses its value (in which case players won't ever increase it), or qualities become more closely balanced to +X...

So it is your opinion that, while striking for about 1/5th the damage that is expected, he is doing just fine? He will succeed just as often and be just as useful to a given party?

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

There is no such thing as a caster level.

Grand Lodge

The heighten is what gives it more damage.

Grand Lodge

You are a level 20 fighter.

You have a sword. It's a very well made word, heck, we'll assume it's a legendary sword, crafted in the heat of a live volcano by a master smith for the express purpose of being wielded by an awesome person like you.

What are your odds of success against a level 20 threat? 18? 16? 15?

We'll assume you have a party, but how much are you contributing? Can you do your share?

Alright, let's slap a few qualities on there, but it's still a +0 sword. Are your odds improved in any real way?

Is this alright?

Note, these are all questions. I am not making a statement, just inviting thought.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Boots of elvenkind, whenever you would be slowed by difficult terrain or trigger a reaction due to movement, you spend a resonance to ignore the triggering thing until you complete the action you were in the middle of.

Numbers given? None.

Grand Lodge

Seriously, just let the healer decide what level they aim for before they roll. If it's below their level, no crit success (They are literally playing it safe, no miracles to be had here).

Alternatively, they just roll. Natural 1? Crit fail. Anything else, add modifiers and see what level you just rolled, that's how much healing you did, no crit success. Didn't manage level 1? You wasted time, feel bad.

Grand Lodge

You both know me far too well...

Grand Lodge

No one should be shocked.

Grand Lodge

You want to blast things with elemental powa! Shoulda been a kineticist.

Grand Lodge

Consider harmonized compositions type B, and normal compositions type A.

You can only have one A going.
You can only have one B going.

You cast a composition (type A) but spend the spellpoint(Now it's Type B)
You cast a composition (type A). You do not spend a spell point.
You now have two compositions going, Type A and Type B.

If you had spent a spellpoint on that second one, uh oh, you can only have one Type B going at a time, the first stops.

If you hadn't spent a spellpoint ever, uh oh, you'd have two type As, can't have that, the first stops.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

That does answer one of the big questions. However, is an Asleep/Unconscious person willing? I would think so?

Still doesn't cover picking them up, and their bulk remains an inferred number in an unrelated effect.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Tholo, that's great, except it still doesn't, by the rules, let you actually pick someone up. Can you stand in their square? Are they occupying their square? Do they make the square they're in difficult terrain, or basically don't exist for sake of movement, or block it all?

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

A thousand guesses, but this really shouldn't be a GM discretion kind of 'thing'.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

You are Asleep or Unconscious. Can someone pick you up? How can people interact with you? Are you still considered a person, occupying a square and refusing others to pass? Are you effectively an object?

This is not really optional. Please. I have assumptions, as I'm sure most people who read this do, but it really should be in the book.

Grand Lodge

10 people marked this as a favorite.

Being able to set your DC seems to be the most elegant answer, in my limited view. If you can decide what level to check against, depending on if you're time crunched or not, that would change things nicely. Then even a level 1 healer can go for broke, and accept the risk involved, or a level 20 healer can gently kiss the papercut a random peasant has and cure it without thought.

Grand Lodge

What if you gained a +2(+1 if 18+) in every level but 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th. You cannot raise a stat if it's been raised in the last 4 raises?

Grand Lodge

Mudfoot wrote:
David Silver - Ponyfinder wrote:

At 7th level paladin, I can take 4 dents without breaking the shield, no problem. I can repair them in as little as one minute.

This is with the rules as they are. One minute. Is one minute too much?

That's OK if you want to sink a feat and 2 of your 3 skill increases into repairing things. Which is admittedly quite a decent return, but it does come with a real opportunity cost.

And the update above (max 1 dent) does help quite a lot here.

It only takes one repair person to keep a party going. If my paladin is any given group, they can all enjoy shields easily. This also pleases me, the idea that my paladin of the forge fortifies the team in more ways.

Failing that, he can make stuff!

Grand Lodge

At 7th level paladin, I can take 4 dents without breaking the shield, no problem. I can repair them in as little as one minute.

This is with the rules as they are. One minute. Is one minute too much?

Grand Lodge

in◆⃟ wrote:
Leedwashere wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:


You know what also might be cool? Maybe everyone could get a "subclass" or "achetype" automatically at certain levels.

I think I would be alright with something like this if there was also a benefit to doubling-down on your existing class.

...
Just as I wouldn't want to be unable to multiclass, I wouldn't want to be forced into it either.

This is the case for Gestalt For All. If you'd rather not take a second class, you could Gestalt your own class and play a Cleric//Cleric with twice as many spell slots and two domains.

That sounds broken compared to the other options. Simply, being able to take your own class as an archetype would do, and would NOT do what you describe.

Unless everyone gets archetype feats for free, you would not at as well. Meaning you'd be better off just plunking more feats down on actual class feats to be better at your class.

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

So, playing through part 3 as a level 7 paladin.

I decided 'I will be a mountain. None shall assail me!' and I focused on defenses. Heavy armor, heavy shield, put the spirit in the shield, of course. I went with the lion shield, cause why not? It's like a durable one with an extra option.

I also have a hammer, and I used ancestries to be good at that dang hammer.

Fight! I'm accurate with the hammer. I keep my shield up. I'm blocking attacks at my friends, shield blocking for myself. I block some attacks entirely, those feel super great.

Oh no, my shield is dented, what will I do?! Oh yeah, master crafter, quick repair, give me literally a minute. Alright, back in working order.

The GM was annoyed at how hard I was to hit.

There was a sorcerer next to me. He was much easier to hit. Didn't stop me from thrusting my shield in the way 1/rd, but he was much easier to hit.

Just saying, for all the talk, there is a difference between 'guy who specialized in a thing' and 'guy who did not' in actual play.

Grand Lodge

UltimateDM wrote:
Not trying to hijack this thread. But since we are on wands. The rules state "Any physical material components and cost were provided when the wand was crafted, but you must spend a Somatic Casting action in place of each Material Casting action required to cast the spell." So for a wand of magic missile you must use a somatic casting action in place of the material component which gives you one missile and counts as the casting action. Could a player then use another somatic casting action to give it two missiles and then the verbal casting action to give it the third missile as described in the magic missile spells entry? I guess the short question is can you use multiple casting actions of the same in this case the somatic casting action that takes place of the material casting action and then another somatic casting action for the somatic casting action? Just is a bit confusing to me.

You use as many actions as the spell requires (that being up to 3 for a magic missile). If any of those actions are somatic, you wave the wand. If any of those were material, you wave the wand! Verbal stuff you intone ominously, of course.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Since when did armor absorb hits like that?

Grand Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.

I would love an official poll on that.

Grand Lodge

Things I Like:
1) 3 action system
2) Multiclassing
3) As a designer, I can't wait to sink my teeth into this.

Things I dislike:
1) Seriously, can we answer the shield question?
2) Lack of take 10 (Or if you don't want to codify that, make it more clear that a GM should not feel bad for skipping a roll a person is mostly assured to make in a non-distracted environment)
3) Give familiars some not-caster master helpful options, since not-casters can end up with them.

Overall, I want to see more of this. Please keep it going, Paizo. It needs tweaks, but there's something here worth a poke.

Grand Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:
thejeff wrote:
magnuskn wrote:

Yeah. It always seems to boil down to the same conversation.

Martial: I'm jelly of casters! They can do more stuff than me! Nerf nerf nerf!
Caster: Well, how about the developers give you more stuff you can do, instead of nerfing me?
Martials: NO! Anime! Anime BAD!

I don't think the lines are that clearly drawn.

Those arguments exist, but it's not clear it's the martial players yelling about anime and the casters suggesting boosting martials.

At least from my side this has been the argument I've been getting out of the last weeks. I'm not sure there is a single fan of casters who has said that martials don't need buffs (although the nature of what those buffs should be is different between people), but there have been plenty of martials fans who want casters to be nerfed and who are vehemently against martials being buffed with abilities which are not strictly mundane in nature.

I remain firmly in the 'give martials magic' camp. The entire world is magic. We wield magic no matter our class. Even the most superstitious barbarian is going to be crowned with magical items.

Can we stop pretending martials shouldn't have it? Their magic should reflect them properly, but this insistence on mundane techniques for martials baffles me.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Let's keep this grounded, and with current nerfs. How about.... level... 5.

I picked that level without checking spells, which I will do now.

Alright, so you finish bopping a bad guy, good job, using what powers you have to win combat. We all have those, not interested how you did it, it's done.

You find out the king is going to be murdered, gasp! You set off to reach him as quickly as possible.

As a fighter: You can hustle to get there faster, hurry!
As a wizard or cleric or druid: You can do that too, but you also send a dream message (level 3 spell) to send a direct warning to the king and/or anyone else you may know that's close enough to act while you're hurrying over there.
As a bard/sorcerer with occult spells/druid: No horse around? No big deal, you summon one to get there faster, go go go!
If you can't make a horse, you can probably longstrider yourself for +10 feet all day long at this point easily.

Who has more options? This was done with 5'sh minutes of glancing at the spell lists. Narrative power, spellcasters have it, fighters don't. Both can win fights, but when the fight is over...

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Martial: MY power is getting a bunch of less-able people to hang around.

Spellcaster: I can step through walls when I'm not skipping through dimensions.

Martial: Pfft, lame.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Are you alright? You sound hurt.

In what way were martials 'brought up' in narrative power?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Is this a unique thing to some martial class? An edge they have that, say, a wizard couldn't get without multiclassing feats?

It used to be a thing. Get to high enough level fighter, you got respect, and people just kinda showed up, eager to be led by you.

Doesn't really help my ranger though, still, sure, that's a step in the right direction. I'd still recommend such a leader plunk down a skill-up in diplomacy and other things to actually lead his folks to victory and around problems that will arise. Even Conan took the time to learn how to use his voice to effect when his sword wouldn't cut the problem alone.

Grand Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.

And when the fight is over? When your problems are past 'deal damage to the thing and not die', what then? That is where I point at as a problem.

Narrative power, I repeat.

Combat power, we all have that. It's not the bone of contention, at least for me.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

So how was this in PF1? Since I could make a spellcasting rogue there with all the features given out.

I could also make one with rage.

I could make a barbarian with dex to damage if I wanted.

What you can't do right now, in the core book, is less telling than what you _can_ do, which is plenty. It will only get wider, not narrower.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I... think you are under the delusion that I'm making things up. This is the current system. I'm not proposing anything, just saying how it is.

Stop defending the past.

Grand Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.

A wizard, druid, or sorcerer or other spellcaster can do it at level 9.

Narrative power.

Can martials keep up? I say they can not.

1 to 50 of 138 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>