Elter Ago's page

Okaayyyy... That didn't really address anything in my post.

Are the skill proficiencies really as extremely important as they have seemed to me so far or is that just an oddity of 1st level in the particular scenarios I've seen?

Is it really quite so likely that a random group of PC's like you see in Society play will be very hard pressed to have the necessary skills or is that just an oddity of 1st level in the particular scenarios I've seen?

Is the rogue really fairly useless or is that just an oddity of 1st level in the particular scenarios I've seen?

Ok, so I have watched most of 1 scenario and played 3 with pregens (wiz, sorc, & druid). So I am embarking upon the voyage of discovery to build my first PF2 Society PC.

Naturally my only experience is at first level, so I want to check some of my observations before deciding. Maybe these change substantially at higher levels or just in other scenarios.

Skill proficiencies seem even more important than in PFS1. The pregens and built PC's rarely seem to have the needed skills.

Other than 1 combat encounter in all 4 scenarios, nearly all the difficultly was in getting high enough skill rolls to learn, build, find, or make friends. The last scenario would have been an almost guaranteed failure if we hadn't brought the druid (or maybe ranger) pregen. All of the other PC's had almost none of the necessary skills.
Agree?

That is kinda leaning me toward either the bard or arcane trickster rogue for a class (since they have the most skills). With intelligence as the highest or second highest stat.

However, the rogues I have seen in action so far have been startlingly ineffective. Stealth rarely seemed to succeed. Even if it did, the advantages of surprise didn't make up for the fact that they couldn't seem to hit or do much damage. There weren't many traps or locks. Yet if there was one, the rogue couldn't deal with it.
Is that just an odd statistical blip or is the rogue really kinda hopeless?

All the above is pushing me toward bard as the most likely to be a major success contributor in PFS2.

What are your thoughts and experiences?

GM Granta wrote:

Wait, your F2F conventions start on time? The ones I go to are still figuring out which table to cancel, which players will move, and hoping for more players--and that's 10 minutes after start time!

Oh, fear not! My F2F ones are still doing that 10 minutes after start time...but...we start anyway! :-P

It isn't what I'd call common, but we have had a few times when everyone shows up and is ready to roll a good 15-20 minutes ahead of time. If we have a full table, we go ahead and start. I've noticed that some of our people role-play a little more fully when they know there won't be any time pressure.

That is actually one of the reasons I like the PbP almost as much as F2F games. I have all the time in the world to think about what my non-human, cowardly, pathological liar, with a Scottish accent will say or do in a given situation.

K. Thx folks, we might give it a go.

First, no spoilers please! I don't want any details.

From what you have read of the first book, how well are the social situations set up? My concern it that it could end up being too much like Carrion Crown.
I understand CC was going for a creepy unfriendly vibe. However, we came to hate almost every NPC so much that we were seriously in-character considering just letting the bad guys win. We were just going to help the few decent people escape and leave. The only way we could complete the AP was to seriously meta-game and choose to keep playing just because we players wanted to do so. There was no in-game reason to help almost anyone encountered. I don't want to slog through another one of those.

This won't start twill April, when Outpost II is halfway done, but who wants to play Tyrant's Grasp in AP mode for PFS credit? ... You'd create your character the same as you would if you had played PFS.

I am likely quite interested and the Player's Guide is downloading. However, I have a few questions.

1) Have you set a thread or sign up sheet yet?
2) Any chance you would relax the restrictions on races? It seems almost designed for Dhampir or some of the other more exotic races (like Fetchling or Aasimar).
3) From what you have read of the first book, how well are the social situations set up? My concern it that it could end up being too much like Carrion Crown.
I understand CC was going for a creepy unfriendly vibe. However, we came to hate almost every NPC so much that we were seriously in-character considering just letting the bad guys win. We were just going to help the few decent people escape and leave. The only way we could complete the AP was to seriously meta-game and choose to keep playing just because we players wanted to do so. There was no in-game reason to help almost anyone encountered. I don't want to slog through another one of those.

..

Bottom line, is for Adventure Paths, you may have to stick relatively close to the WBL chart, as the challenges in the AP will assume a certain power/wealth level. You don't want the party to be too far off (high or low) than the AP's assumptions.
...

Actually I find WBL way too powerful even for adventure paths. Most of them are written such that they can be accomplished by players and GM's completely new to d20 system. Also most were written assuming 15 point buy and 4 players.

Most players typically seem to be set on at least 20 point buy if not 25. All of mine are very experienced gamers with PF and other systems, so they build and play with some expertise. Most groups I've seen in the past few years have 5 to 7 players.

I already have to build up encounters because they curb stomp the written ones.

Problem with running below WBL - Monsters at specific CRs assume the PCs have access to specific bonuses.

... just to name the Core 7.

The Core 7 is expensive, and falling behind the curve on The Core 7 due to a lack of wealth can leave your PCs behind their opponents.
...

I have 2 issues with this.

1) That assumes CR is an accurate judge of difficulty for your PC's. It really isn't, for a whole host of reasons (see the above section just for a beginning). CR is, at best, a very general flag to say "you might be willing to consider this creature." The whole game system has always heavily relied on the GM to give some consideration as to whether or not this party will be appropriately challenged by this opponent.
The only thing I find needing to be really careful about is incorporeal and/or high DR before the party has the means to over come those defenses. Also, really powerful SLA or SU powers can occasionally throw a wrench into the works.
2) Most of my really challenging and memorable fights are with NPC's. Take away the Core 7 from the NPC's has about the same offsetting effect as taking away the Core 7 from the PC's.

If he thought it had nothing to do with founding, running, or expanding their Kingdom the GM actively chose to use the "Kingdom in the background" rules because unless that is done every one of those things are CRUCIAL to the story, development, and playstyle of the game...

You may well be absolutely correct. As I said, I've never played and don't know anything about it first hand.

...

The big exception is that the king really needs good CHR as you mention, I'd desire at least a 16 as a starting character...

...

For the Ruler, you need a PC with High Charisma, flat-out, nothing will replace this, ...
Honestly, a Paladin, Sorcerer, or Bard would be a great fit for Ruler.
...

I think that agrees with where we were leaning. So some charisma prime stat build for ruler.

... though I do recommend NOT NOT NOT letting a PC take the role of Ruler at ANY POINT, I played in 3 Kingmaker type games (2 Actual Kingmaker, a 3rd pseudo Kingmaker in Ebberon) and twice the party elected a PC to Ruler and it turned out as a mess with them wavering between "my way or the highway" with the Ruler ignoring their council to "I dunno guys, what do YOU think, I know I'm the boss but I really dont care..." all the way to "Lets kill the King and take his Crown" because a pair of PCs teamed up with the Spymaster to start a rebellion...

I think we could probably get around this. At least a couple of us could do a good job of playing a figure head. Knows he's a figure head for the others making the real decisions and doing the real hard work. I don't think the rebellion thing is too likely with our group. I can see the campaign dying away if people lose interest, but not that sort of PvP BS.

So now the question is, what would make 'the best' figure head?
Paladin seems ideal, since everyone looks up to them. But I think the lawful-oath thing might get in the way too much. Hmm... You know the more I think about it, isn't there a magus archtype that casts off of charisma? Might just be ideal. A magus can really nova a huge amount of damage to a single target. So can gloriously 'win' any fight when people are watching to be the saving hero. But probably won't have the skill points for much more than diplomacy and bluff to be well liked. Magi aren't my favorite class (I prefer sorcerer for my charisma caster), but I'm sure one of us can come up with something we will enjoy. We will have to think about it.

Ok, so a friend has been talking about making a new campaign. However, more like he imagines Kingmaker should have been. I guess he played through part of it, read some of the books, and wasn't happy with how it was done. He said too much of it had zero to do with founding, running, and expanding your kingdom. I haven't played or read any of it, so I don't know.

But anyway he says he's making his own campaign where the PC's are trying to set up a new nation and/or swallow up the other tiny cities/nations. He said he still intends to use the kingdom rules from UC though.

So some of us were talking about building our group with an actual group plan. {GASP!} Shocking! I know right! Most of our group can have fun with almost any general type of character.
He isn't exactly a killer GM, but he does always play on 'hard mode' which I actually like. And his 'hard mode' usually includes the non-combat stuff as well as the combats. So we do need skills, strategies, plans, etc...

This led us to trying to figure out the 'best' group composition. We have to be able to function in combat, handle non-combat encounters, and run a kingdom. Hmm...

Right away, we got into disagreements on the very first role. The king (or whatever ruler title). Divination wizard for the info provided to make good decisions (but do many of the divination spells actually work very well for national type decisions). Cleric for the heavenly assistance (but do we want a theocracy). Martial type to lead the battle forces (later generations can go for a more cerebral leader after the nation is established). High charisma bard or sorcerer so people want to follow him and he can get people to agree with him (but kings don't usually actually do their own bargaining). On and on and on and ...

Toward the end I think we were kinda leaning toward a paladin or the magus that uses charisma to be a like-able figure head. With a council of smart people, spy, general, and so on.

Thought I would ask you folks what you think. How would you build a king and council that can fight, make bargains, and run a kingdom?

Thanks.

...

2)You do not need to play Version's A-C, there is a boon for playing as many parts as you can though.

Does it have to be on the same character? Different levels? Same level?

What? We've moved to a new page and there is no link for Outpost II Recruitment?

Outpost II

March 11th through May 6th, 2019. Register now to get open seats in Standard or Core Pathfinder, or even try a game of Starfinder or ACG!

Quick question:

"...
Purple background means the game is at a website other than the Paizo forums
Yellow background means the game is on the Roll for Combat Discord server
Green background means the game is on the Cosmic Crit Discord server
If the Location is left blank, it will be on the Paizo forums
..."

1) However, much of the list has a light blue background. What does that mean?

2) Also, "The Solstice Scar, Version D" - what does the version D mean? DO I already have to have played versions A-C?

If this has been discussed before and I a missed, I apologize.

Not here to argue the merits of PF2 either way, just asking about a consequence.*
In my local area, almost no one is happy with the PF2 as currently presented. No one has expressed any interest in GMing or playing PF2 as society games. It seems PFS in my local area will continue with PF1 for some indefinite time period. (Probably getting lax on the replay rules.) I'm not sure what they will do when people have played most of everything and begin getting bored with replays. Won't be an issue for me. I kinda doubt I will ever have enough gaming time to get through all of it to the boring point.

Anyhow, I'm wondering about the PbP PFS. Will these fine folks switch to PF2, stick with PF1, or some combination of both?

* On a personal note, I have not made up my mind on PF2. Reading through the rules, it seems kinda screwy. But I felt the same way about D&D 5thEd, which actually works out fairly well in actual game play. So I won't make a decision on PF2 until I can at least get the opportunity to make an honest attempt at trying it out in actual play.