Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
1+int skill increase at each odd level wouldn't work. Int based characters would run out of skills to increase very fast (Level 10 to be exact when int goes to +5). Levels 11 and 13 you would have every skill you are trained in maxed already as well. I think a better idea would be to give characters 1 extra skill increase at a +4 int(only on odd levels or else rogues that invested in +4 int and investigators would end up with 12 legendary skills). This would give most classes a max of 6 legendary skills and rogues invested in int and investigators 9 legendary skills. Another idea I had was at levels 3/7/15 they can increase a number of skills equal to their int mod. This would give 10 legendary to +7 int characters and investigators would have 12 or 13 legendary skills depending on their apex which still sounds like a lot. A rogue with a +4 int would have 10 legendary skills.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Things I would have liked for the untamed druid are for the form spells to be reworked entirely. I would like them to all be heightened to level 10 with attack/AC/damage dice all uniformly set at the level of the spell. Attack should be a bonus + level like AC and if not that you may add the status bonus from untamed form when figuring if your attack is higher than the listed attack. Explicitly state that weapon specialization and runes are added to damage. With barbarians and eventually monks/fighter being able to enter rage or stances at initiative it'd be nice for untamed druids to gain an action compression for shifting focus spell like shift and attack for 2 actions. mechanically the worst class has to be the investigator in a combat heavy game like PF2 but I love the flavor. Flavor wise I feel the wizard misses the mark.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
I'm not a fan of locked doors or traps because there isn't always someone in the party that can take care of them. If there is then it's a great time for them to shine but I don't want to penalize a party because no one wanted to invest in thievery. I personally wouldn't let a special sense detect someone with the foil senses feat. Instead if I thought it was necessary I'd boost a bosses perception. But as I want my players to win so they have more fun (especially using the trick they built their character on) I'd probably not do that often.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
The real meta gaming is keeping a member in your party who uses substandard tactics with no interest ever listening to his teammates because you want to play PF and have little choice. I'm pretty sure most adventures would have little interest forming a party with such a person.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Finoan wrote:
Ah yes. I stand corrected. I didn't read the feat description before posting.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Angel2357 wrote:
From my reading since the warriors are making the strike it would use their map even though it's using your spell attack mod. Also, while the descriptor text says makes a strike and disappear it doesn't say when they disappears so the last line clarifies that after making a strike when you use the power they disappear at the start of your next turn. This lets your allies gain flanking buddies for a turn.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Personally, I'd like to see holy/unholy tied to each deity like heal/harm is. I'd like to see champion codes and causes tied first and foremost to deity anathema and edicts. I'd like to see the old "law/chaos/good/evil" codes and causes made into oaths that give small bonus if taken but are optional at level 1 and with True Neutral being similar to the wizard Universalist School. Anyway that's my 2 cents.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
One point I see brought up is the extra AC fighters can get from heavy armor, however MC monk requires both a 14 str and 14 dex. If one were to wear heavy armor that 14 dex seems a waste of stat allotment. Plus one would be locked into just a couple of stances. A fighter that is unarmored to qualify for wolf/tiger/ect would be in a much worse place for AC. Plus Metal Strikes isn't nothing. Stance Savant is also something a fighter can't get.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Verzen wrote:
Thanks. I guess I didn't read that section closely enough. I wish they would more clearly mark traits in those sections similar to abilities. I really hope that this doesn't make it through the playtest or at least a melee blast would be one of those abilities that changed it. Tonight I'll be trying out a Dedicated Gate Earth Kineticist. They're a level 1 half-orc with General Training-Armor Proficiency. I'll be sure to leave feedback later.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Kekkres wrote:
I'm sorry for my ignorance but why does a melee blast provoke and AoO?
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Kelseus wrote:
Short of devolving this thread to an argument about alignment my argument is that he doesn't have a code other than peace at any cost. He doesn't care about social structures. He'll break everything down if it gets him what he wants. To me he's N. He's just devoted to his ideal.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
keftiu wrote:
When I think True Neutral Champion I think of Peacemaker from Suicide Squad. Peace at all cost not matter what it takes.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
They way I see it is you can draw the Jezail with ten paces but only in the 1h grip. Then you'd have to spend an action to 2h grip it like one would do for a weapon with two handed trait(dwarven axe/bastard sword). I'd say the same thing for pistol twirl. You'd spend a free action to drop to 1h grip than you can use the feat but you'd be stuck in 1h grip until you spent an action to grip 2h. Anyway that's my 2 cents.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:
I ran a campaign where the paladin did that exact same thing. He put a boss on his shield and used a doubling ring so all he needed for s, p and b damage was his longsword and shield. On topic, I can understand why people don't like the mandatory items as presented in the game. For me, I guess I like my character to gain power from more than just leveling up. I know what feat I'm taking when I level up. It's planned. I don't know when I'm getting that new rune. It can be assumed I get a mandatory rune at level x but not at what point at level x. By giving it out automatically it feels less organic to me than finding one as treasure or by earning enough gold to buy one that happens to be available at the level I just attained. For me it adds another power dimension separate from what is completely within my control as a player. I may have to go through some of level x without that bonus or I may get it a level early. Not having that complete control adds some flavor to the game. That being said I wouldn't mind being in a game that used the automatic progression or even running one if my players preferred.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
I also ran a session with a Magus play test. There were 4 combats that didn't last long due to the barbarian critting all night. The magus was a level 5 arctic elf and used sustaining steel with a +1 striking scythe(Crono Trigger...). Stats were 19 12 12 18 14 10. Truthfully at level 5 the chance to hit with a spell was equal to our wizards. We fought 3 wasp swarms, 2 level 5 drow fighters, 2 Ettins and a Hill Giant. Melee the magus was fine. He had low HP due to being an elf. Sustaining Steel helped off set this. He hit with all but one melee attacks. No crits. The one miss was a spellstike. He hit on the next round but still missed with the spell anyway. The other 2 spellstikes used he hit with both attack and spell. Against the swarms he used electric arc. One made their save the other failed. Overall he felt competent in battle. I was surprised that he didn't have any level 1 spells. I didn't notice it until character creation. For feats he had Combat assessment and spell parry. While playing I was wondering if attacking at -5 would have been better than spellstrike. 2d10+4 (16 average) vs 3d4+4 (11.5 average) at really a minus 2 as spell casting had a worse chance to hit. Though the magus didn't crit I think that would have made up for that relative -2 for hitting with a spell. Also the 6 temp HP from sustaining steel was necessary due to low HP. So it wasn't all about raw damage. I'd like to have a chance to play him more but I don't want to disrupt the campaign further. EDIT-Sorry spell attack was +11 and melee was +16. It's a difference of 4. EDIT 2-Wow my math is good. A difference of 5.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
I don't think it's a big deal for warpriests to be better healers than druids. I was just making a reference to another class that has a battle type order that has a built in pseudo master proficiency. I don't think expert in all weapons is that great. As a cleric I'd use my deities weapon anyway this ability would be unused. The warpriest should be able to be a warpriest without having to take an archetype which was my goal. Also if warpriests are unable to take advantage of divine font due to MAD then it'd be just as well to take it away. Give them a nice focus spell that gives them a +2 status attack bonus for one action that lasts 1 minute. This way they can cast heroism on the fighter instead of themselves and actually have a chance of being competent in battle. They would still be 1 behind on attack stats and not be able to take advantage of bard attack buff so I don't think this would step on any warrior class toes. Anyway this was just my idea. It's cool if it's not liked. EDIT:Well the post I was replying to was deleted. Oh well.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
I don't think warpriests need to be great healers. They still have all those divine spells. They wouldn't be any worse off than any none plant druid as a party healer. Balance wise they really need to give up something good to get something good as a striker IMO. Plus this would help set them up better to distinguish themselves from CCs.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
I agree with thenobledrake's interpretation of RAW. However I find it weird that the Wall of Force seems to be the only wall that doesn't say if it can or can't be place horizontally. That being said, I'd allow for it to be place horizontally in my game if only because walls of stone and ice both can and are lower level than force despite the RAW. Also I like to reward my players for coming up with interesting strategies as it makes it more fun for them.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
My daughter is going to take the Eldritch Archer at level 6 (next level now). She's an archer fighter who wants to have more of a divine influence from Iomedae. She plans on taking Divine Lance. This choice is due to the Paladin of Iomedae in our group converting her religious beliefs.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Abyssalwyrm wrote:
I'm fine with the bonus being a status bonus since PF2 has defined magical bonuses as status bonuses. I think my fix would be to inspire courage where I would state that it can stack with another status bonus (possibly to a maximum of +3 if one were worried about level 9 heroism). This would help for future classes like oracles that use similar mechanics. I also thought of some way of wording the Wild Shape status bonus to instead increase a druid's unarmed proficiency by 1 stage while being in use, but this wouldn't help oracles.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Feral wrote:
I have nothing to quote to you. I just believe you're reading more into it than you should. I believe it's worded the way it is in the animal form spell because no one would use their own attack bonus if it were lower. It makes no sense for a druid using wild shape to go from a +16 attack bonus for levels 7, 8 and 9 but suddenly at level 10 they can have a +19 attack bonus. It's clunky and illogical and shows no progression for leveling up. Anyway this is the last I will say on this subject.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Sorry, I wanted to add that if a Wild Shape druid were unable to use their +2 status bonus to qualify for being able to use their own attack bonus then a player would find themselves, at level 20, with a higher attack bonus for every form spell than their level 20 feat Nature Incarnate (+34) as a level 20 wild shape druid would have +24 prof +6 Str +3 item and +2 status for a total of 35. This also would make no sense to me.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
The ability to use your own attack bonus from animal form isn't the same as wild shape's. Wild shape is a much more powerful version. It's a bonus for wild druids and they most certainly are able to add that +2 status bonus to qualify to use their own attack bonus. Wild shape's rules overrides animal form's rules. It makes no sense otherwise. If it worked they way you proposed one could end up with cases where a druid, in the middle of combat, would gain a status bonus that would put their attack bonus over this supposed threshold and would allow them to use their own attack bonus. This would, in turn, let them gain the +2 status bonus from Wild Shape (which could be up to a net +1 bonus). If then then lost the first status bonus would they then lose their wild shape status bonus or would they keep it until they left wild shape. Would my druid then have to keep potions of bless to drink so they can use their Wild Shape status bonus at certain levels. The way I read the rules is that Wild Shape grants you a +2 status bonus to determine if your attack bonus is higher than the form spell. This is RAI imo if not RAW.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Feral wrote:
A strength optimized wild druid can usually have a higher attack bonus at one level higher than the level a druid can memorize the form spell. EG
Spoiler:
Level 4 dino form gives +16 attack bonus. At level 7 a wild druid can have 9Prof+4Str+2Status+1Item=16. At level 8 when a druid can learn ferocious shape a wild druid can have an Attack Bonus of 17 when using wild shape which is already 1 higher than the spell gives and this is the very level they can get the feat. With the exception of level 2 animal form I have yet to find a single form spell that didn't work this way. (For some reason it has an attack bonus of +7 and at level 3 a druid can have +5prof+3Str+2status+1item for a total of +11.) So truthfully a wild druid that maxes str will almost always use it's own attack bonus with wild shape. Edit
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Squiggit wrote:
Certainly not the end of the world and I wasn't trying to say it was. They do still gain the other bonuses from inspire courage and heroism. I just hadn't read any discussion on this topic. I didn't even really notice this till recently and wasn't sure how many others had. Also as I said earlier that I find it weird that they gain the bonus when using the form spell's innate attack modifier but not when using their own.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
I'm was away from the forums for a while and I haven't been able to find if this has been brought up before but I'm wondering if it's been noticed that Druids using their own attack bonus while using Wild Shape don't gain the extra +1 to hit from the inspire courage status bonus or would only gain a net +1 status bonus from level 9 heroism and no bonus at all from the lower levels of it (Truthfully bless and heroism doesn't bother me as much). I have a few issues with this. 1)I find it unfair to druids. They're already behind master proficiency classes due to their max stat being stuck at wisdom. This puts them even further behind if there is a bard in the group and hurts class synergy. 2)I find it weird that a druid using the attack bonus given in the spell would gain the benefit of these other status bonuses but not when using their own attack bonus. 3)There have been those in the magus chats who have advocated for a similar bonus to the magus in place of a master weapon proficiency and I would like to point out the issues with going that route. That wild shaped druids gain a +2 status bonus for free is really nice and maybe I want to have my cake and eat it too. Wild Druids are, after all, still full spell casters. It's just losing out on the potential +1 attack bonus from inspire courage seems painful to a class that is already not as good as other classes at doing what it's trying to do.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Martialmasters wrote:
There's nothing saying you can't ride another Animal Companion (as long as it's one size category larger than you) but the animal in question can only move. No attack or support while you're riding it. It is the horse AC's reason for existing really. EDIT
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Quote:
Or for a druid str score 20 and 22 respectively as druids can't start with an 18 str. Assuming one didn't increase str at level 20 as it wouldn't help of course.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Quote:
There are a lot of general rules broken by specific rules. When something tells me I use my attack bonus i assume it is my attack bonus. My attack bonus includes an item bonus. It would be the same attack bonus as if i punched the monster. If you don't agree that's fine. I wouldn't ever play a druid at your table though.
|