Ancient Vortex Dragon

Duskreign's page

23 posts. Alias of Strachan Fireblade.


RSS


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Captain Morgan wrote:
Duskreign wrote:
One other effect I think shields has had on the game is that in order to make the shield math generally work, its pigeon holed the math of creatures to be pretty same-y on the same levels. There are some outliers though.
I don't think that has much to do with shields. Creatures of similar levels need to have similar stats to make encounter building guidelines worth a damn.

One dial can be turned up while another is turned down. More damage could mean less HPs or lower AC. There are ways to still balance the encounter. I think the game would be better for it with more of these adjustments. I just think Shields is one of the things that is thus far limiting these changes.


One other effect I think shields has had on the game is that in order to make the shield math generally work, its pigeon holed the math of creatures to be pretty same-y on the same levels. There are some outliers though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I agree, its a slippery slope. But I do think a brief beta test would have been good. If I recall, PF1 went through alpha and beta tests and that was already on top of pretty polished 3.5 game (ymmv).

I think overall, PF2 is very solid, but a beta test would have caught some of the language omissions and rules edge cases that exist now.


Well, I currently run a level 13 game, and shields work fine at these levels if you believe in the idea that shields aren't meant to block damage round after round. But I also think there is a lot of moving parts with shields. If you run shields differently than the expected way (which is admittedly confusing), then you will have drastically different results and feelings about shields.


Slamy Mcbiteo wrote:
Duskreign wrote:
NA Palm wrote:
Duskreign wrote:

So here's something to consider. Shield Block's trigger says "While you have your shield raised, you would take damage from a physical attack."

What if you had Resist 5 Physical Damage? If an attack hit you for 4 damage, you would not take damage, thus you could not activate your Shield Block, but you can't even choose to use Shield Block at that point because you didn't know that you took damage. Therefore, you need to know that you took damage and the only way for you to know that is for the DM to tell you that you took X damage.

So the trigger has to happen after you are told damage.

Therefore, the player will know at all times whether an incoming attack will destroy the shield or not.

I don't think he was arguing that it wasn't how it worked according to the rules, only that the decision making it promoted was bizarre.
I just felt it was important to point out to anyone reading the thread why the timing for Shield Block is important and that players benefit from knowing the incoming damage before making your decision. A certain segment of DMs force the player to decide before hand, and this is not the correct ruling. So I grabbed the opportunity to reinforce this. :)
Has "knowing the damage" been clarified? Watching episodes of Oblivion Oath Jason B seems to ask if they want shield block first before they know the damage. So sorry if I missed that clarification but reading the feat it does not specifically state you know the incoming damage amount...just that damage made it through all you resistances.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Slamy Mcbiteo wrote:
Duskreign wrote:
NA Palm wrote:
Duskreign wrote:

So here's something to consider. Shield Block's trigger says "While you have your shield raised, you would take damage from a physical attack."

What if you had Resist 5 Physical Damage? If an attack hit you for 4 damage, you would not take damage, thus you could not activate your Shield Block, but you can't even choose to use Shield Block at that point because you didn't know that you took damage. Therefore, you need to know that you took damage and the only way for you to know that is for the DM to tell you that you took X damage.

So the trigger has to happen after you are told damage.

Therefore, the player will know at all times whether an incoming attack will destroy the shield or not.

I don't think he was arguing that it wasn't how it worked according to the rules, only that the decision making it promoted was bizarre.
I just felt it was important to point out to anyone reading the thread why the timing for Shield Block is important and that players benefit from knowing the incoming damage before making your decision. A certain segment of DMs force the player to decide before hand, and this is not the correct ruling. So I grabbed the opportunity to reinforce this. :)
Has "knowing the damage" been clarified? Watching episodes of Oblivion Oath Jason B seems to ask if they want shield block first before they know the damage. So sorry if I missed that clarification but reading the feat it does not specifically state you know the incoming damage amount...just that damage made it through all you resistances.

Well, that's the real trick. I think Jason plays it simpler for the stream but who knows. What I do know, is that I had a long conversation with Mark Seifter (one of the PF designers) about this and he stated this was how it worked. Although he did say that he wasn't authorized to make it official as Paizo wants to have a single source for definitive FAQs and errata. So while its not official, its as close as it can get. Further, he brought up the resistance example I used above which clearly illustrates that you need to know that you actually take damage before you can trigger the reaction.


NA Palm wrote:
Duskreign wrote:

So here's something to consider. Shield Block's trigger says "While you have your shield raised, you would take damage from a physical attack."

What if you had Resist 5 Physical Damage? If an attack hit you for 4 damage, you would not take damage, thus you could not activate your Shield Block, but you can't even choose to use Shield Block at that point because you didn't know that you took damage. Therefore, you need to know that you took damage and the only way for you to know that is for the DM to tell you that you took X damage.

So the trigger has to happen after you are told damage.

Therefore, the player will know at all times whether an incoming attack will destroy the shield or not.

I don't think he was arguing that it wasn't how it worked according to the rules, only that the decision making it promoted was bizarre.

I just felt it was important to point out to anyone reading the thread why the timing for Shield Block is important and that players benefit from knowing the incoming damage before making your decision. A certain segment of DMs force the player to decide before hand, and this is not the correct ruling. So I grabbed the opportunity to reinforce this. :)


Matthew Downie wrote:
thenobledrake wrote:
...and the chance isn't actually 50% because the timing of Shield Block is such that the damage roll has already been made before you choose whether to block or not since "roll dice" is step 1 of figuring out damage and "take damage" is step 4. So you can use the reaction on the hits that won't destroy your shield in one go if that's what you'd rather do than just get a little extra reduction of damage at the cost of your isn't-just-for-defense item.

That decision still doesn't feel right to me.

GM: "You are hit."
Player: "Fortunately, my character is ready to use her shield to absorb the blow, thus preventing damage to her body."
GM: "It's a heavy blow: 68 damage."
Player: "Yikes! In that case she will use her body to absorb the blow, thus preventing damage to her shield."
GM: "The fiend's axe sinks deep into your flesh. Blood flies everywhere."
Player: "Don't worry, little shield. I won't let you come to any harm..."

So here's something to consider. Shield Block's trigger says "While you have your shield raised, you would take damage from a physical attack."

What if you had Resist 5 Physical Damage? If an attack hit you for 4 damage, you would not take damage, thus you could not activate your Shield Block, but you can't even choose to use Shield Block at that point because you didn't know that you took damage. Therefore, you need to know that you took damage and the only way for you to know that is for the DM to tell you that you took X damage.

So the trigger has to happen after you are told damage.

Therefore, the player will know at all times whether an incoming attack will destroy the shield or not.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

My take is that shields are meant to absorb damage once a fight. You have the option of doing it more, but at extreme risk of destroying your shield.

Shields are not meant to absorb damage endlessly. Remember that choosing a shield build needs to be balanced with other non shield builds, and being able to absorb damage multiple times in combat in addition to an AC bonus quickly eclipses the benefits of non shield builds. The math (creature damage vs hardness/hp levels of shields) strongly supports the once a combat Shield Block.

Thus, shield users are meant to use Shield Block later in the fight when the healer is busy and your shield wielder would remain standing by using the Shield Block action.

Certain magical shields CAN support taking more hits though. In my own games I see almost every shield wielder gravitate to shields that have higher hardness and HPs in order to absorb more damage which is understandable because people who use shields want better defense whether its through an AC bonus or damage absorption. The tradeoff is that you are giving up some potential offensive/utility abilities of other magical shields for a purely defensive build.

Once you understand that shield damage absorption is limited and you understand when you should use Shield Block, magic shields with other abilities than a higher hardness/hp threshold become a little more appealing.

In my view, if the designers were a bit more obvious about the shield niche in the game, this would curb a lot of confusion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Like the wraith and the nightmare. Not a fan of the PF2 shadow design. Too spindly for my tastes. Looks like a strong set tho.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
Davor Firetusk wrote:
I'd be curious for some alternate ideas, side quests or material for earlier in the adventure path. The last volume isn't the natural place for that exactly, but even if you start playing as it is released you might barely be through book 2 by time book 6 is released.

I don't think this is the right place to add in "cutting room floor" or "developer's addition" type content. That stuff is more useful during play, not after the campaign is over.

That said, we ARE looking for ways to get more stuff like web enhancements or bonus material out there via other routes, so hopefully some day we'll be able to do web enhancement type things more easily and quickly and efficiently.

I know that you already answered this but I still feel I want to second the "cutting room floor/developer's addition" content idea. Many GMs don't run APs as they come out for various reasons and I think this is an opportunity to further link the individual adventures tighter together. I've read enough anecdotes about published adventures that sometimes things get missed, forgotten, or not entirely lined up with the overall story that this provides an opportunity to resolve some of this at the very end.

I completely understand that this could lead to a lot of work and that perhaps producing this in the final volume is still too soon to notice these sorts of errors/omissions but I think it would be great if you tried the concept at least once in the future to gauge community feedback. I think this sort of thing can only enhance the overall AP in my opinion.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Three questions:

1. What is the design reason behind some adventure gear giving a bonus to some skills, while others provide a penalty if you don't have them. It seems that penalties for not having an item can be easily forgotten about (compass and crowbar for example). It seems like it would have been easier to make them all one way or the other.

2. Can a hero point save you from an instant death? Say a creature that kill you outright on a failed save?

3. Musical Instruments in the equipment section are 2 handed items. On pg 96 under the Bard Occult Spellcasting, it states if you use an instrument you don’t need a spell pouch or another free hand. Does this mean a bard can cast spells with an musical instrument in one hand?


At one of the streamed panels from Gen Con, Mark Seifter specifically called out that Disrupt Prey was meant to be a reaction and not a free action. I'd suggest treating it as such as there will be errata for that in the near future.

I have no link, but it should be on Paizo's twitch channel and I believe it was the PF2 Rules Q&A seminar.


Man, did we play that wrong last night (our first PF2 session). We were applying the extra 2d6 damage on the triggering attack.


Something I am curious about are spell shapes and sizes. Do they follow a similar pattern to PF1 or have they been altered at all? I have always hated drawing the weird patterns to determine if targets are in the area of effect.

Much appreciated.


I would like to hear James talk about some of the new mysteries of the setting. I know that he likes to seed too new questions for everyone that is answered.


I too would like to see a few examples with ambushes and how that interacts with initiative.


10 people marked this as a favorite.

One trend that I hope continues is the alternate abilities for common creatures. The skeleton, for example, will always keep players on their toes wondering which ability this group of skeletons will have.

Plus I think it's super easy to print additional skeleton abilities in future products further enhancing the GMs toolbox.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Love this preview! PF2 without a doubt is going to rock!


BishopMcQ wrote:
Duskreign wrote:
Are there any NPCs in the Bestiary? Soldier, assassin, wizard, that sort of thing beyond just monsters?
Don't see any

:(

Thanks for the reply!


Are there any NPCs in the Bestiary? Soldier, assassin, wizard, that sort of thing beyond just monsters?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Curious if weapons have changed much (traits, etc) from the playtest.


I plan to use rarities pretty much as they have been described...at least to start. I like the theory behind the idea. But if not, I am open to changes for sure.