Ratfolk Troubleshooter

Dracala's page

Organized Play Member. 210 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Organized Play characters.


1 to 50 of 210 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Temperans wrote:
It's probably the same reason some think racial feats are new, but they are just not competing with other feats anymore.

You say this but now there aren't Racial Packages either... Which makes Racial Feats NEED to have their own space... Which was kind of the point wasn't it? To make being a part of your race be backloaded a bit? >.>

Honestly, I don't even understand why x.x

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The races I'd Love to see are Kitsune, Ratfolk, Vanarans, Skinwalkers, Grippli, maybe Cecaelia... & I know my BFF would Love Catfolk.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Narxiso wrote:
I don’t think something such as class should be changed on a whim or even could be. If someone actually spent years ( or months of harrowing life experiences) trying to perfect a set of skills, I don’t think all that training would just vanish and could be traded in for another equally consuming set of skills. Sure, anyone’s viewpoint could be completely changed from circumstances, but those circumstances are more likely to color that person’s intrinsic world view, which would be covered by that person taking a multiclassing dedication. If someone wanted to rid himself or herself of all that knowledge, that experience, I would take that as a complete mind wipe and an effective character reset from level 1.

Ok and the Ex-Rogue part? You know you gave up stealing, you gave up that life altogether, and yet... somehow... You're Still getting better at it, Despite You ACTIVELY Trying to steer clear of it... Yeah, that makes sense...

Will those skills still be there when you first give it up? Yeah, yeah, they will, But they Shouldn't Be Getting Better. Then down the line, Down the Levels, They should be Atrophying if Anything, unless you've For some reason Despite wanting to give up that life, have decided its a good idea to keep those skills. Aka the Class Swap, the class Retrain... Because you turned your life around, You did it... Now you're this Other thing...

Kinda like if I suddenly started spending less time gaming because I wanted to get in shape, and then I started feeling good with exercise, it empowered me, and I kinda stopped being a gamer and became a gymrat... Would it take time? Absolutely, should it be Possible? DEFINITELY

rooneg wrote:
Note that the weapon proficiency feat currently gives you no way the bump that martial prof up to expert. The ability to do that is part of what fighter dedication gives you.

Actually, that's a Completely different Fighter Archetype Feat you need to take at lvl 12 at the earliest... SOOO... No, the Fighter Dedication Feat itself is Still lackluster...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Loved: Multiclassing, and I mean putting 2 classes together for around 10 lvls each, and figuring out the proper balancing point. Do I want this lvl 13 ability? Do I want to give up this level 9 ability for it? That's how I built my characters. Absolutely Loved building them out to lvl 20 level by level whether I was playing a campaign with them or not, it always felt amazing...

Wanted: More

Hated: That we never got the Harrowed Medium... It's the same feeling that I got when David Hill left as lead designer of Changeling 2e over problems with the New White Wolf, and over time learned that we were getting Less than his 100 Kiths in the Core Rules... Then it came out and we got 12 and told here's how you make your own have fun... That's how having been there for the playtesting of the Original, the Harrowed Medium felt after getting what we got in the actual rulebook... Only WORSE because at least Onyx Path is coming out with Kith and Kin which will have more Kiths, whereas We Will NEVER get the Harrowed Medium... It is Gone FORever, because A) they've said as much and B) 1E is dead(as in not growing)..........

Will Miss: Getting new Official Pathfinder 1E books and options...

Aiden, the Kineticist isn't just doing "regular elemental stuff" though, they're channeling the power of the Elemental Planes, just as the Telekineticist(Aether Kineticist) is channeling the Ethereal Plane, or the Phytokinesticist(Wood Kineticist) is channeling the First World(which is basically the Nature/Fey Plane).

I will admit that the Chaokineticist(Void Kineticist) is definitely a weird headspace, having been connected to the Negative Energy Plane for the corpse stuff, but also apparently the Plane of Shadows for Shadow stuff and getting Gravity powers as if it were connected to Blackholes... It's Really weird and all over the place and I think could have really used a revamp just like the Phytokineticist got in Ultimate Wilderness.

The others though stick pretty much on theme with air/fire/earth/water/force/nature powers.

CyberMephit wrote:
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:

The Illuminati are obviously the real culprits behind all of this *adjusts tinfoil hat*
The Illuminati are themselves just a front for the true veiled masters of the world - the lizard people... It was all part of their plot to get the world to know them by their true name - Iruxi!

Pfffft the Iruxi are just a cover used by the true masters because they know that Conspiracy Theorists can't help themselves but Love the crazy idea of lizard people pulling the invisible puppet strings of the world. No... They Love watching people scramble over obscure crazed theories like this... What we need to do is inform ourselves, doubt all of it, hide in plain sight, and work outside of their box. Remember, Nothing is True, Everything is Permitted.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Leotamer wrote:
From what I understand, fire, water, earth, and air kineticists all tap into their respective elemental planes. Aether, wood, and void are combinations of elemental and other planar energies. Void energy draws from the negative energy plane, which is the source of undeath. I will be honest I don't know where gravity comes in.

Yep! Void Kineticists get their power from Elemental Energy meeting with Negative Plane Energy (and for some reason get Dark Tapestry motifs). Wood takes from The Elemental Energy meeting the First World's Primal Fey Life energy, & Aether is from the Ethereal Plane getting charged with Elemental Energy.

Seisho wrote:
On that notion I would guess Shaman would make a good primal caster - and since the preparing primal caster is already locked in maybe they become spontaneous - purely speculation here

I like that especially since one of the base classes for the Shaman was the Oracle who is a spontaneous caster, it honestly makes good sense

WatersLethe wrote:
Witch. I need my hexes, yo. Once we have Witch I can cobble together a Shaman.

The Shaman was more than just hexes though. Its familiar had special powers, it had a dedicated spirit that worked like the Oracle's mysteries, and then it also had Wandering Spirits so you could mix it up. The spirits and familiars are what truly gave the Shaman their flavor, not the hexes, at least in my opinion.

PFSocietyInitiate wrote:

I'd like a shifter where each path they can choose at level 1 is based on an archetype from 1st edition.

You'd have a shifter based on animals, based on plants, based on elementals and based on oozes

Animals, Plants, Oozes, Elementals, Outsiders, Dragons, Fey, Vermin/Swarms...

Leotamer wrote:

While I think themed character paths can work with the shifter, I am almost hoping it would be a more open-ended class. Maybe druid-like, where they can choose any feat, but some are improved based on your level 1 choice.

Once you are high enough level, having aspects of a fire-cat, fiendish plant, dragon ooze, and the like could be fun. It would also help define them. Some other classes can shape-shift into one thing. A sufficiently trained shape-shifter can transform into anything, including absolute mockery of the natural order and all that is good.

You know what throw my hat into the ring for people who want the Shifter back, though honestly, I like what the PF1 base class is, especially after the fixes and what they added to it in Wilderness Origins. I just Truly like that they can do things with their forms that Druids can't. Sure they have fewer forms to choose from, but they get more out of them. They're more Dedicated shifters, more dedicated to their forms, meanwhile, Druids are more versatile but get less out of their forms.

Though saying that, for PF2 and its fewer but more flavorful feats, I can definitely see different in-depth Lines of powers based on the different "Archetypes" rather than the kind of choices you made in PF1's base class.

Also, I got the reference XD

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Shaman & Kineticist most definitely are my choices.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There was a Reason I deleted that Cyouni, I realized that and checked it for myself thanks.

I did still have problems when I did the checking months ago, like going over Class Features in exchange for Class Feats (which is covered by Classic Multiclassing better in my opinion), but yes I give on the Class Feats at least being Equivalent, with the Feat Tax, thanks to the level 1 Class Feats.

*Sighs* I think I'm just gonna bow out now, my game is dead as of next month, and PF 2e & D&D 5e both don't interest me for different reasons. If you want to know them, I gave my story... *points back a few of her posts* I'm a niche case that this game doesn't appeal to and that's fine it's its own game and I respect that, so I'm gonna stop now.

Lanathar wrote:

What is the example where you lose 0 levels multiclassing? I am not sure I understand what you mean

You lose less spending a feat to multiclass than giving up or delaying class features. Sure there are some cases where this doesn’t matter so much but others where it really does. It is why there are so few multiclass clerics and when there are they are often awful (see : skinsaw cultists in all APs they appear in)

But that second paragraph is a distraction from the initial question where you 0 level statement has confused me

Not me personally, but people who were doing that s~~$e with Multiple classes in PFS, where they'd get Rage from Barbarian, Extra Feats from Monk, Fighter, Ranger, etc...

For me, it was getting my familiar in my Fighter/Hunter Build (which originally wasn't supposed to be Fighter but went that way during campaign, it completely diverged from my original plans) by taking Eldritch Guardian, I did go on to get more Fighter levels though...

The point of saying 0 though, was that 1 level wasn't a tax, because you got what you wanted out of it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Edge93 wrote:

I'm really sorry to tell you this, but just because there's a new edition coming out doesn't mean this is going to go away, eventually, there will be enough material for this to happen Again. This type of thing doesn't just go away, it builds up over time. But that doesn't change the fact about Multiclassing feeling bad now... In all of the things I listed for my character, did Multiclassing really seem like the real problem of my build? x.x

I mean, if your multiclassing was the result of simply trying to make a good TWF Rogue, sure. Which is how your initial post came across as there was a tone of "see? You can make a good TWF Rogue!" to it, hence some of the following replies.

Honestly the kind of build you were doing would be aptly fit for PF2 MC, you could totally do a Rogue/Alchemist, except you'd actually keep full Rogue feature protection. Everything you took from Alchemist sounded like an add-on to your rogue concept or fixing deficiencies PF2 doesn't have.

You wouldn't have all the tumor aberration stuff but that's just cause that doesnt exist in PF2 as of now.

Honestly Edge I probably would have gone Alchemist instead in 1E, now I'd probably go Rogue in 2E... but my characters are Meant to be Dual Classed... I honestly NEVER Make a Solo-classed character, because finding weird ways to put 2 classes together and make them work is what Is Fun to me. That's partly why "Featclassing" brings me down... because I can't do that x.x

I started multiclassing in 3.5 before I ever came to Pathfinder, even used APG class conversions to 3.5 from GitP threads back then (particularly Alch & Summ), and other homebrewed stuff... heck I'd build these 80 level giants just for the fun of it (4 full classes), then I saw how many shiny new toys Pathfinder had and I switched over to it (Note there was 7 year gap between when I actually got to play the two games). Eventually, I ground myself back down to 20 level builds where I thoroughly enjoyed balancing the classes around the 10 level mark each. This is how I find Multiclassing enjoyable, Dedications just don't do that for me x.x And forget 5e I Love Pathfinder currently and loved 3.5 when I first got into it in 2010, because of the Breadth of material available.

Heck I multiclassed MoMS/Drunken Master Monk with Shield Champ Brawler & didn't use Pummeling Style, I used Dragon, Tiger, & Monkey(#VanaraThings)...

Arakasius wrote:
Regardless of the reasoning for it I’m glad that is going away. This type of optimization makes the game less fun for other players and makes it very hard for DMs to make content that challenges both you and the other less optimized players. Now if you’re lucky enough to get a party where everyone does that then yes it can be cool. I was able to do that with the one 4e campaign I played in. But in a regular table it’s not a fun experience for anyone but the optimizer.

I'm really sorry to tell you this, but just because there's a new edition coming out doesn't mean this is going to go away, eventually, there will be enough material for this to happen Again. This type of thing doesn't just go away, it builds up over time. But that doesn't change the fact about Multiclassing feeling bad now... In all of the things I listed for my character, did Multiclassing really seem like the real problem of my build? Heck if I had gone full class I probably would have gone Full Alchemist instead Mad Bomber style or maybe gone Almost Full Vivisectionist w/ 2 Ninja Levels instead and would have had everything (except bomb damage, which didn't matter to me as much as the smoke) or maybe even 2 lvls of Base Rogue, anyways x.x

Arakasius wrote:
Of course you cared about maths when multiclassing. You looked at the maths of the alchemist stuff you were poaching and decided that was better than the rogue stuff you passed up. Your entire build is just math wonkery to get as high numbers as possible to the exclusion of all else. Your build is proof of the ugliness that came from PF1 optimizing.

You actually think I care about Math? XD I don't care about Math I care about what I find as Fun, when I got the mistmail as part of the Campaign that's when I went to see how to use it and got the goz mask, then I figured out how to get the smoke bombs and went for that... I don't do stuff because of Math, I do stuff because it looks like Fun, I just happen to be able to do that with knowledge of options.

I had already Built that character out long, long before the game, I had that character sitting around for a Long time, then I finally got to play her and I learned different things while doing so, like the grafting blade and the tailblade right before the game. Before I ever got to play her she was Already statted out to be a Rogue/Alchemist with a Tumor Familiar. Hell she was originally supposed to be a Feinting machine but I dropped that for the bombs and picked up other options instead, like an Extra Alchemist Discovery.

Arakasius wrote:
Multiclassing was much worse in previous games. It cost you class features, spell progression, could screw up your BaB and Saves and so on. There is a reason that the only way multiclassing worked was as a 1/2 level dip. And it’s not like the dedications don’t give you things, the only case it doesn’t work out as well is for a martial going to another martial.

Do you think I cared about Maths when Multiclassing? Hell I multiclassed Bloodrager with Shaman, Hunter with Fighter, & Witch with Undead Bloodline Sorc. I thought that was one of the big things this Gen was getting away from was caring about the Maths.

The problem with "Featclassing" for me I think comes down to the fact that this new game is celebrated for losing Feat Taxes, and then has an Arbitrary Feat Tax on Multiclassing, something that Multiclassing didn't have in previous games.

And before you say that it did, that that first level was one, no no it is Not the same, you lose one level (sometimes 0) before getting to what you wanted not 2 (in my case I want talents/discoveries/whatever).

Like I had said in the post right after that, my addition to the discussion was the PS, not the Post itself...

Also I can see where they're coming from because A) Spellcasting has Always been class specific and B) Fighting Styles were not tied to class in 1E they needed general feats, unless your class gave you combat feats (Druids did not). Honestly though its a new game Water, so now those Fighting Style feats ARE tied to certain classes, though everyone else, this is why they don't Like 2E as currently written, they want a Martial Druid, which before Shifter in 1E wasn't something I knew I wanted and then Reaaaally Reeeaaally did.

Edge93 wrote:
Dracala wrote:
what rules issues? >.>
Deadmanwalking went over a few things in one of his replies to you.

He didn't call out anything specific so let's get back to the actual discussion at hand, which is about feat starvation, Combat Feats vs Class Feats, etc x)

what rules issues? >.>

Seisho wrote:

Lets break it down

UnRogue = Unchained Rogue, Vivisectionist -> Alchemist Archetype which replaces bombs with sneak attacks
Goz Mask... dunno
Tentacle - Alchemist class feat for an additional limb (additional attacks)
rogue talents can be exchanged for ninja tricks (dunno which book but it is a 'Standard' option) with smoke bomb for more coverage
full progession on bombs and sneak attack...that is...heavy, I don't know how I could pull that off, only got a vague idea
mistmail gave bonus to stealth related stuff
tumor familiar (which I think is disgusting) is another alchemist thing, mauler archetype from animal archive to make it more battle worthy - dunno about the scurrying swamer though (and familiar as mount sounds weird to me)
tail blades are a kobold thinkg, I personally wouldn't allow it as the ratfolk tail structure (muscles, bones) are in comparisation to kobolds are way to flimsy
3.5 wrist blade is kind of cool but I also wouldnt allow it because 3.5 is in the end a different game then pf - wrist launchers were a thing later on but were basically 1shot hand crossbows (easily disguisable)
grafting blade and hanbo doesnt say anything to me, heirloom cane would be a masterwork weapon you got for a trait at lvl 1 (but it reads like it might be something entirely different)
all agile weapons, well you have to finesse that s#+* after all

this is really a weird combination and beyond everything I played

I think the skaven in Warhammer might be less insane then this character

the Ninja Trick gave me the Rogue Talent to get Bomber from Ranged Tactics Toolbox, and got Smoke Bombs as an Alchemist Discovery, because the archetype doesn't take those Discoveries away. If my GM had ruled they did I would've just gone with Ninja Smoke Bombs & a Ki Pool, because I was going more for the Smoke Bombs anyways.

the Mount is just saying I rode around on it because it is an intelligent (6 int) Medium Creature, and I as a Ratfolk am Small.

Ratfolk have tailblades in equipment in Advanced Race Guide, go look for yourself pg 154.

Again I got the sleeve blade for Aesthetic Reasons not mechanical, had Quick Draw anyways.

Nopes that is Exactly what my cane was it was a masterwork hanbo just fluffed up as a family cane (ala Sly Cooper) from trait, Grafting Blade is from elsewhere once I saw it I asked for it, didn't Need to have it just wanted to have it.

PS. Scurrying Swarmer is a Ratfolk only Feat from Dirty Tactics Toolbox.

Honestly on the further splatbooks and increasing the modularity of PF2e... I know this probably isn't the discussion for it, but I have to bring up ancestries... As we all know the Core Races always get more goodies than everyone else, but with how Ancestries have been done in 2e I'm honestly afraid that that is going to come at a high cost, because new races are going to come in feeling at a deficit with the core races getting more options than them. in 1e they don't because of every race getting their full stat block, and then getting other options like optional racial traits, or racial feats, or racial archetypes. But those all feel like add ons to the race rather than Being the Race itself. With 2e on the other hand, the options Are the Race because of how things have been set up, so new races if they don't get as many options as the core are going to Feel like they're at a deficit... I really hope Paizo has an answer for that.

My Post is in reference to the post mentioned, the PS is for the discussion.

Also, I don't think you should need to either, BUT Multiclassing is Multiclassing and I Much prefer it over "Featclassing" always have even when it was put in in Pathfinder Unchained as an alternative.

PS. Fixed the optimized uses, and gave a better descript of Why I chose to get a Sleeve Blade, I wanted it for the Aesthetics cuz Assassin's Creed & I'm a dork. Heck my Character was named Redtooth Slytunkhamen and the Heirloom Cane was literally a reference to the Cooper Family Cane x)

Narxiso wrote:

Honestly, I felt more feat starved in PF1. I’m that person who has a particular concept I like to try first in every single rpg I play, a dual-wielding elven rogue (read: sneaky, sneaky stab, stab assassin) despite each iteration being role played differently. The thing is that it didn’t really work in PF1 for me, ever. Before unchained (and even with it), I was outclassed completely by my party: a non-full BAB didn’t even allow me to get a hit in until level 3, and I had not gotten a kill until level 5 (this was my first game), I rarely able to survive a round in combat, and every single feat I used was geared toward being better at dual-wielding and landing attacks: weapon finesse, weapon focus, two-weapon fighting, and eventually two-weapon feint. My gripe was that two-weapon feint wasn’t really that helpful to my vision of stabbing enemies a lot to take them down, as the extra attack from dual-wielding is just used to make sure I can hit (maybe) and use sneak attack. My character wasn’t fully online until level 9 or so, and by that point, I was behind again on to-hit, making the whole point moot.

Now, as in my experience with the playtest, I don’t have to wholly focus on trying to keep up with BAB, especially if I want to dual-wield. In the playtest, I went rogue, took the fighter dedication and twin slice, and played out another concept of being a disguise master in addition thanks to skill feats. I was able to stay in combat as a front liner without being smashed into the floor on a single hit, and I could still feint without wasting an “extra” attack (which everyone got in 1e by picking up a second weapon). If I wanted, I also could have taken all the utility rogue feats as well and still be a valuable addition to the team instead of being an extra damage sponge for an attack, which I felt like most of the time in 1e and which could have been served with a hireling.

You say this... BUT my Ratfolk UnRogue/Vivisectionist without using any extracts through the entire campaign was the highest source of damage, over the UnMonk, over the Samurai/Ranger, & over the Battle Oracle >.> I mean I had Full Dual Wield Progression & pretty much doing everything I could to make my Sneak Attack relevant (including Goz Mask/Tentacle/Smoke Bombs[got me the Bomber talent due to using Ninja Trick->Rogue Talent shenanigans, so yes I had full progression bombs & sneak attack] & Mistmail, Scurrying Swarmer/Tumor Familiar[Compy w/ Mauler archetype, acted as my mount & I hers], & keeping my Stealth and Sleight of Hand fully up [I had a penchant for stealing people's weapons before they realized I was there or combat had started]). I also had a tail blade(hidden with a tail wrap & giving a secondary natural attack), a heavy wrist launcher/sleeve blade (from 3.5's Complete Scoundrel because there was never made an Equivalent in Pathfinder & I wanted one for the aesthetic), & heirloom cane/grafting blade (the cane acted as a hanbo) as my weapons (all agile), so I was armed with all my weapons At All Times <.< I didn't Need to be an Alchemist, I wanted to be one, and was both the skill monkey of our group and the highest DPS (had Int & Dex in the 20s before level 10)... DESPITE there being a full caster and 2 full BAB meat shields (one with a pair of pets a Tiger[Mount, GM let her use the Cav's Beast Rider Archetype] & a Hyena[Packmaster Archetype])...

TLDR; The Moral is the Rogue is Always Armed, Always Dangerous, and ALWAYS standing right behind you.

This was also from my second game ever actually played in Pathfinder (Mummy's Mask AP). The problem comes with the fact that I had been studying it & 3.5 before it for YEARS beforehand sooo I may have started with a high system mastery <.<

PS. Also for the discussion, during the playtest I literally did a write up on how classic Multiclassing gives you more options than "Featclassing." Sure you can't pick as High level of options, but you get More choices overall. And personally, I prefer to have More lower-level choices over having access to higher-level choices (I typically do an even-ish split of my classes as well).

We were going through Mummy's Mask, and our party was a Ratfolk Bomber Rogue/Vivisectionist who dualwielded & had a tailblade, used a tumor mauler familiar as her mount, and utilized smoke bombs & a goz mask for sneak attacking but never used her extracts >.<, a Catfolk Beast Rider Samurai/Packmaster Ranger (yes she talked the GM into the Cav Archetype) who kept picking up animals along the way (wound up with her Tiger Mount, a Hyena she "rescued" off some bandits, and a roc she found as an egg & hatched).... a Sylph Magus/Battle Oracle who also acted as the Crafter (and got Wings of Air asap), and a Pahmet UnMonk who packed a Multi Element Temple Sword and kept asking to be Tossed into the fray >.> (our Cav was Happy to oblige, we called him the Dwarven Cannonball)

We pretty much decimated everything we found with Melee Combat(rarely used our ranged weapons/spells(the Sylph's Oracle spells were kept mostly for healing standby) <.<)

My suggestion would definitely be for the Ioun Wyrd

Zaister wrote:
Ellias Aubec wrote:
Sounds nice. Good to see more weird and wacky playable races coming with that swarm race. Any chance that living hologram gets a PC option?
If so, how do you get around being tethered to a projector?

Know what would be awesome for that? Something akin to The Doctor's Mobile Emitter from Star Trek Voyager >.>

Does Rovagug even need a Purpose? Its the Largest of a group that is the Literal embodiment of Primordial Chaotic Evil.... Since when does Chaotic Evil Need a purpose? Hasn't Chaotic Evil always been seen as the alignment that does whatever it want whenever it wants?

Remembering this recently, and really wishing that we could have had this before 2E, hearing the official response, makes me pretty sad :< Especially as someone who isn't looking that forward to 2E, but was looking forward to this back during the Occult Adventures Playtest x.x

I do understand, I really do.... But it doesn't stop the hurt train from coming.

UnArcaneElection wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:

Baba Yaga purposefully keeps herself "weak" enough to avoid becoming a divinity because of all the constraints such status entails.

This just screams MOST POWERFUL to me ;-D

Which sounds like not really being weak, but running silent, running deep.

What they said, that's kinda like the cosmic equivalent of "Out of sight, out of mind", "Be afraid of the quiet ones, they are the ones who actually think", and "The most dangerous person is the one who listens, thinks, and observes"

Can a calecor restore the atmosphere? If Not, then yeah it probably deemed the planet beyond saving, seeing how as the atmosphere was Burned Away.

May I just say that blackmail only works if the party being blackmailed refuses to own up to what they're being blackmailed for? So trying to exert control through blackmail doesn't always work. Because honestly, I for one am completely unblackmailable, because I have nothing to hide, and the things I inadvertently hide anyways, would probably benefit me to be out in the light. A guilty conscience I have None of >.>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
UnArcaneElection wrote:
djdust wrote:
play an occultist with object reading. interrogate their clothes.
You might even disturb them enough this way to get them to confess . . . .

I'm not talking to you, I'm talking to your shirt! So sit back down till I'm ready to interrogate your pants!

I'm personally going to be combining the Races of PF1, with the PF2 Races, so I can have a nice baseline and Ancestry Feats.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

As someone who is neurodivergent, Tsukiyo is now my personal deity >.>

My suggestion would be for Occultism to be made Charisma based (I could honestly see the Occult Classes [Psychic, Occultist, Medium, etc] be Cha based...) and then give the Sorc an ability to make checks to learn uncommon spells based off of their Charisma rather than Wis and Int.

Sorry Gorbacz, I kinda figured that was what you were doing after I had posted, but it was a decent point to make, you were a good spring board to make it with, and it was early in the morning x)

@Edge93: That's exactly why I made the example I did, and referenced Robin Hood. Robin knew the need for government, but he also knew that John was a complete prick (there's a reason that the Magna Carta was first drawn up during his reign).

Gorbacz wrote:

Stealing from people isn't Good just because the victim is rich and you're helping somebody who actively failed to keep their parents alive e.g. by working hard to earn enough money to have them reincarnated.


Sorry Gorbacz, but for Chaotic Good, Stealing from those who have enough to not miss it, and giving to those who Desperately Need It (like food) is Not doing Evil, no matter how much you think it is, its doing a Good thing Unlawfully. Even more so if that Rich person Took the food from those people who need it, because he's a dick.

Remember that While Prince John was trying to get his brother's throne through blackmail and not paying his ransom (despite taxing the Hell out of the people), Richard still made him his proper heir when he got back, and he was going about it quite lawfully at that >.> so yeah....

That literally makes Robin of Loxley the Chaotic Good in this scenario, and I don't think anyone here would question him being Good and John as Evil. (Then again does that make Richard Evil? or just Lawful Neutral? Or is RL just less Alignment based than D&D)

4 people marked this as a favorite.

For me it is the multiclassing system, I'd like to be able to do 1E style Multiclassing, or at least be able to put Multiclass Archetype Feats into my General Feat Slots. I don't find General Feats as meaningful, and I don't need them for Skill Feats because I have plenty of those regardless of class.

I know they're looking into the bottleneck and I hope they come up with an idea much greater and more tied into their system than these.

5 people marked this as a favorite.
MER-c wrote:
That aside, I noticed that a lot of posts here that seem to basically only care about continuing 3.5 so I guess the question I have for you is, why did you not just continue to play 3.5? You had the material to last decades, probably longer. So why did you really put your faith and your wallets in a mid sized publishing company who was taking the single biggest risk they possibly could have taken?

The answer to this question for me is, that I switched over from 3.5 (the edition I was introduced to D&D with), because Pathfinder allowed me to have the dearth of options I was trying to put into my games with Homebrewed stuff, just from Official Content. That and again, its customizability were strong draws for me. Maybe 2e has an extensive amount of options for styles of play like Ursus says... but I'd at least like it if Archetypes could use General Feat Slots, and not just Class Feat Slots (there's Only 5 of them, and I see that as a much better use than any of the General Feats, or more Skill/Ancestry Feats [Why Why are the races so Bare Boned and Backloaded, It takes away their identity to me, and makes it so later races will Far more Obviously have less options than Core Races... In 1E sure that is also true, BUT its not as apparent, because each Race has a core set of racial features... >.<]).

Hythlodeus wrote:
Ongoing support. A game without support is dead

This also was part of what drew me to Pathfinder, and part of why I've been freaking out about 2e, seeing the death of my favorite iteration of D&D. I wasn't there to see 3.5 end because I got introduced to it during the reign of 4e.

You're right MER-c, I am sorry. I was responding to Ursus's claims, and the whole "FeatClassing" & Bottleneck issue has me upset (rightly so in my opinion)... I shouldn't take that frustration out here though, again I am sorry. x.x

PS: I cleaned up my language a bit, made the post more discussionary (rather than confrontational), and removed the part that could be construed as edition warry. Yet again, my apologies. I do not want this thread locked, and I should act more like it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dire Ursus wrote:

I mean as far as "archetypes" go there is literally 2 in the playtest book. and you can take away all the things you listed there and I still think there are more options in the playtest. It's not just that they took things from prior books. The actual mechanics of the game allow you more choices. The way Multi-classing works specifically opens up a ton of options. And personally I find the new class feat system makes it so that you can never really have the same build if you're different classes. Which I saw a lot of in PF1. Sure a fighter with a two handed weapon and a barb with a two handed weapon would have different abilities in PF1. But until they released Fighter Weapon Training they pretty much had the same feats (fighter had a few more they could spend on like weapon specialization woo flat bonuses so exciting... Kinda like what rage does right?) and they did the exact same thing in combat: Ran in and power attacked.

I think it's a bit ridiculous to even call those two different builds. It's just one guy rages one guy has a few more feats to choose from and a bit heavier armor. You play them the exact same.

Ursus, I'm sorry but did you just throw out the Barbarian's & Monk's Class Feats? Because you said to take out the equivalencies right? And without those the Barbarian & Monk don't have Combat Feats, right?

As for Multiclassing in general, I could make a Lot of different Multiclassed Builds from Fighters, Unchained Rogues(the equivalent to 2E's Rogue, because of class features the 2E was based on), Rangers, Cavaliers (currently an Archetype Only, so equivalency), Barbarians, Paladins, Alchemists (if the PF2 one is allowed, so should the original), Bards, Unchained Monks (the equivalent to 2E's Monk), and some Sorcerer levels (and mayhaps Dragon Disciple), to make some really fun Martial Builds.

Now for PF2, you have "FeatClassing" & Class Feats, including what used to be Combat Feat Lines, competing for the same pool of options. In my opinion, this is far too constraining, and not Enough options for my liking (Hopefully they make the new Class Specific Archetype system modular off of the packages within the class, just adding more options to that). I actually made comparisons between PF2's "FeatClassing" and PF1 Style Multiclassing using the Playtest's Alchemist & Rogue, and the subsequent Archetypes. I may not have had as many Formulae, or Skill Feats as the "FeatClassed" version's base class would have, but I had FAR FAR more freedom in my Class Feats.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Dire Ursus, did you Specifically gloss over where I said that it really isn't right to compare the Playtest to Only the CRB of PF1, when they're jamming options from further along in 1E into 2E? I mean that was the biggest paragraph of the post you quoted. I personally think you should at Least include the APG because of how many of the options are from it (like Archetypes, the Alchemist, Barbarbain Class Feats[Rage Powers], Divine Version of the Sorcerer[Oracle], etc.).

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Dire Ursus I like how you say that the character creation has been limited because core rulebook, when in the PF1 CRB, I can Multiclass between classes and still get more of my Feats & Rogue Talents, or just feats for my Fighter, than I can from the Playtest CRB.

I also get more out of my Sorcerer Bloodline(not to mention more Bloodline Options), than I do in PF2. Most might not be Multiclassing (unless going with the Prestige Class Dragon Disciple which is very much an option In the CRB) for chance of losing Spells, but I know I would, because I honestly don't care about spells, those powers though... Some of them I might Love to have for a build.

Also a number of the options from the Playtest are from Non PF1 CRB, so comparing CRB to CRB is a bad idea. The Barbarian's Totems & Class Feats are based off of Rage Powers which came in the APG, same as the entire Alchemist Class (Which I personally want more of the Thematic Odd Bodyshaping options of the Alchemist's Discoveries). Hell some of the things in the Playtest are based on Class Features from the ACG's Hybrid Classes, like the Ranger's new Hunt Target is based off the Slayer, or the Fighter's Combat Flexibility being based off the Brawler. So yeah, it's much better to compare the Playtest to more than just the 1E CRB, its not an equivalency because they learned from years of making PF1... Now if they just could have kept the Customizability of 1E instead of throwing so many options into one kettle, and bare boning the Races (Dwarves get it the worst, who thought untying their Slow Speed [20 ft when smaller races are 25, really?!?] from their Unburdened was a good idea).

8 people marked this as a favorite.

For me its the level of customization I can get with this game, between Multiclassing that allows me to stop in one class to start up in another (which is now how I build my chars, taking the two classes I want from the beginning and figuring out what levels I want to get them to), Feats every other level, Archetypes that trade out class features for another package of themed features, talents that allow me to customize within my class, & the ability to trade out Racial features for other racial features that may fit better from the beginning (not to mention feats later that work off of those base features).

This gives me Tons of things that allow me to customize my character to my liking, making it so that no one character is ever the same as another. Even if there are cookie cutter builds out there, and options that people consider as duds, it doesn't matter to me as long as those options actually work for my vision of my character. And that's something that the new version is lacking in.... Multiclassing, Class Archetypes, and Talents (now called Class Feats) are all, right now, seemingly based off of the same small pool... Half the options that make this game fun for me, are competing with each other, and that makes it very unfun... x.x

PS: Then there's the fact that races have become pretty bare bones, in order to backload them... Don't even want to get into that.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the matter right now, has greatly shifted from Dwarven Armies/NPCs to Players, because regardless of Dwarven Army practices, Nothing is being done for fixing the Player Predicament. Right now all Dwarf Players, who want Heavy/Medium Armor and don't want to be slowed down to 10/15ft movement for it have to take Unburdened regardless of if another one of the heritages actually fit their character more. Congratulations, we now have either pigeonholed Dwarf PC's into either being the Slowest Martials (regardless of Armor Type), or have Forced them to take Unburdened.... Grats Cookie Cutter Option...

There's a reason that Dwarves have always had Unburdened to mitigate their slower speed....

Voss, but with Unburdened, Martial Dwarves are better in Medium Armor than Light Armor, which is a Good thing. They should definitely be brought up to at least the speed of Gnomes and Halflings in my opinion (and they are a Medium Race, Unburdened and 20ft speed was always an attempt to put them in the middle between Medium & Small). >.>

Thank you

Anyone have a link to that "multiclass archetype document" the OP mentioned? I went looking through the Blogs and couldn't find it.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm glad this thread got started, it literally gave better reasoning/description for what my findings were about Multiclassing back in my thread. While my findings were specifically related to what I didn't like sure, it came out to be that "Featclassing" provided Far Less Freedom, which is clearly depicted as the Bottleneck of Class Feats. So thank you Archive for this thread, and actually getting the underlying issue I was seeing (even if I didn't know what I was looking at at the time) some recognition.

Again, from the bottom of my heart Archive, Thank you.

10 people marked this as a favorite.

Couldn't agree more! This is a problem I would Greatly like to be addressed.

1 to 50 of 210 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>