Ephfive's page

I like the idea of letting players break up their spellcasting actions. The risk of disruption, missed triggers, and the like could easily make up for the advantage of the added flexibility.

You could always require an increasing flat or spellcasting check with each non-spellcasting action between beginning and completion.

I agree. Resonance is a good idea, but it's not well implemented at the moment. I think they wanted to make it a resource players didn't need to think about too much... which is why it's all "1 point here / 1 point there."

I want to take it a step further and combine it with the poorly-themed spell points and the completely overlooked and neglected hero points. Give people more resonance across the board, modify costs, and make it a sort of stamina / energy / focus currency that powers anything you do that requires more than simply skill, knowledge, and talent.

Like:
--The idea of resonance. It does need some work, but I think it can add a different and interesting economy to the game that doesn't exist yet.
--More use of feats for customization that matters.
--3 Actions.

Dislike:
--Piles of HP and damage. The totals get too high for fast and exciting combat. At high levels, I could easily be rolling and adding up 15-20 dice a round.
--Reaction Clog. There are too many reaction options available but only one reaction per round. Nothing feels worse than burning a reaction and then having a much more important reaction trigger occur that you can't execute. At the same time, you might skip a crappy reaction in favor of a better one only to have the better one never get triggered.
--Bards and Sorcerers need more revision and update. Bards shouldn't be spell slot casters. We got away from Paladins and Rangers having spell slots... it's time for bards too. Sorcerers can still have spell slots, but they need something to better distinguish them from Wizards.

When using higher level versions of the dragon claws power, does/should the item bonus increase the elemental damage?

I know the power says "...granting a +1 item bonus to attack rolls and adding a damage die..." but that seems underpowered. That's also a trivial amount of damage to track of an alternate type at high levels... an amount that seems likely to be completely negated by damage reduction often enough to be silly.

Is this a typo? Is this balanced? Is this on purpose?

Resonance is one of the newest features of 2nd ed, and nearly nothing interesting is done with it.

Here's where it shows up as it relates to character creation.
----Dwarf is the only race that mentions resonance. They have one (mostly terrible) feat that loses them 2 permanent resonance.
----Alchemist is the only class that mentions resonance. They get extra resonance and use it for a lot of their alchemy stuff... mostly in the same way it is used in the rest of the book.
----A single feat improves a character's resonance by 2 points.

A lot of people are complaining about resonance... it is poorly presented, easily forgotten, and unintuitive. I have a few suggestions to fix this.

1) Resonance should be as prominently displayed as hit points.

Currently, it is buried in the first chapter, but goes largely under-defined until the treasure chapter (skipping the Advancement, Playing, and Game Mastering chapters). There's plenty of room in the sidebar for each class for a RESONANCE section.

This affords the opportunity for differentiation. Resonance can key off different abilities for some specific classes (like Alchemist and Intelligence, perhaps Wisdom for Monks) without needing an entire feature to explain it. Some classes can have more resonance than others.

This also drives home the point that resonance is a key resource that players should keep at the forefront of their mind (like HP) and utilize to help them progress.

2) Combine spell points and powers with the resonance system.

Again, this pushes the point that resonance is a resource to be spent. It is as important as hit points (perhaps moreso). Most classes have something to do with their resonance from level 1. Those that don't can have something added pretty easily.

This may require some rebalancing of powers, but it will make character management easier for a lot of classes. Players will have an easier time evaluating the opportunity cost of their actions. DMs will have less players not understanding the difference between spell points and spell slots. And so on.

Paizo might even find that this is easier to balance for as well. It means that everything can be balanced based on a single currency instead of multiple.

3) Let ancestries, classes, and feats do more interesting things with resonance.

Elves should be able to get more. Half-orcs might get more abilities but have less resonance. Gnomes might be able to spend resonance on some magical effects... and so on.

Perhaps druids can give their resonance to another player. Perhaps bards can create temporary resonance for their teammates. Perhaps Sorcerers can siphon resonance out of items and enemies. Perhaps clerics get bonuses towards overspending. Perhaps Monks can reset an individual that has failed an overspend check... and so on.

Feats: Even More Resonance, Resonance Refunds on a particular high resonance cost action, spend a resonance to attack of opportunity, spend a resonance to ignore a penalty, spend extra resonance to improve a feature that already spends resonance, metamagic that cost resonance... and so on.

Pretty much anything you might do with hit points, you can find ways to do with resonance to some degree. This can add a new layer to the system that makes for some interesting stories and exciting actions.

If resonance costs are tied into more than magic items (like class features, rituals, powers, and maybe even some basic "take 10" or "add +1" everyman effects), you may also find that the "Wand of Cure Light Wounds" issue solves itself.

EDIT: This could also be used to clear up some of the reaction "clog" people are experiencing if some reactions are instead free triggered actions with a resonance cost.

Some quibbles...

I would like shurikens to work with at least some if not all monk abilities if you have monastic weaponry... it's not that significant... less damage but range. At a minimum, I should be able to flurry them.

It also doesn't make sense that a fighter can be a master of unarmed combat at level 3... but a Monk has to wait till level 13. A fighter can be a legend at unarmed combat eventually... a monk never can. I get the mechanical reason for this... but there is no thematic reason for it. At a minimum, a 20th level monk should have the option to become an unarmed legend through feat choice.

I think some stance bonuses should be passive outside the bounds of being in the stance... The Dragon's +1 vs paralysis and sleep feels like it should be an always thing... the Crane's jump bonus has already been mentioned.

I also think there is a missed opportunity for single-stance focused builds that give bonuses if you have one stance and never take any others.

Bard has always been the odd one out when it came to spellcasting.

Clerics and Paladins get spells from their devotion to a God, Druids get their spells from a deep connection to nature, Sorcerers have magic in their blood, and Wizards study arcane science. Bard... music good and that makes them magic?

Traditional spellcasting for the bard feels a bit out of place. We now have an entirely new spell subset for them, Occult, which feels a little off brand and more in line with a warlock theme (monster summoning, shadow control, telepathy, teleportation, mind control, and the like).

I see a lot of potential in the composition cantrips... and I think Bards should lean into that. If they're still going to have spells, find a way to get away from traditional spell slots. Perhaps use resonance -- a word that frankly has a lot to do with sound and music.

Make them a lot more like Alchemists in form and function. Thematically, they are perhaps the most closely connected. Give them more functionality as a party buffer and a single-enemy debuffer.

There are plenty of existing features you could already copy and reflavor for them. Use the Cleric's Channel Energy for Bless/Bane. Use the Paladin's Rightous Ally but offer a singing sword, a special instrument, or an extraordinary wardrobe. Or even give them a social version of the Ranger's Hunt Target.

Whatever the case, I think the current version has some thematic issues that stem largely from a combination of holding over too much from previous editions and simultaneously trying to distinguish them from the other casters. The easiest way to fix all of that is to just stop making them casters.

Soooo... here's the thing... I think all this is wrong and shields shouldn't be taking dents from shield block.

From the Shield Block description (pg. 309): "Your shield prevents you from taking an amount of damage up to its hardness--the shield takes this damage instead, possibly becoming dented or broken."

So I have a shield with 5 hardness. I get attacked for 10 damage. I use shield block, the shield takes up to its hardness (5) and I take the rest (also 5).

From Item damage description (pg. 175): "An item reduces any damage dealt to it by its hardness."

So the 5 damage dealt to my shield is reduced by its hardness (also 5). The shield doesn't take any damage.

The example on page 175 even says that a shield with 3 hardness takes only 2 dents if it takes 10 damage. So hardness shouldn't be ignored unless stated otherwise.

I think that last 5 words of Shield block can be wholly ignored. It could/should instead be read as "...the shield can be dented or broken by an effect or enhancement that dents or breaks things."

Thematically, this can still make sense... after all, your shield isn't sitting on a hard surface getting hammered with full force. You and your arm give way to the impact, the attack is angled at you instead of your shield, and force has a tendency to deflect. I think some reality show could prove it incredibly difficult to break a shield on a proficient fighter's arm.

Just my 2 cents... maybe this has already been said...

Of 5 races with ability flaws, two have strength as their flaw. Strength comes up as a key ability more than any other ability score. Hampering that score on a third of the available races seems very problematic. I would suggest changing the gnome flaw to dexterity. They already have the slowest movement in the game. And with a constitution bonus, it makes sense for them to be sturdy little buggers.

To take that a step further and relate this to the discussion of Goblins, I would give goblins an Intelligence penalty instead of Wisdom. I'd also swap in Strength or Wisdom as their bonus over either or both of their current bonuses. Strength, because they are warlike and battle-hardened. Wisdom, because they are survivalists that train beasts.

3 races already have dexterity bonuses. So there is a mechanical argument for dropping one. If the counter argument for any of this is that either dexterity or intelligence are too important to have as a penalty or drop as a bonus, then that is something to fix about those abilities.

My solution for this would be ancestry feats with leveled effects. Select one at level 1 and gain on-theme benefits when leveling.

Here's 2 examples:

ANIMAL SPEAKER (GNOME ANCESTRY FEAT)
You recognize the chittering a ground creatures as a language of its own.

At 1st level, you can ask questions of, receive answers from, and use the diplomacy skill with animals that have a burrow speed. The DM determines which animals count for this ability.

At 3rd level, you gain one of the following:
- You gain a familiar with a burrow speed.
- You can speak to and understand all animals.

At 7th level, you gain one of the following:
- Your familiar becomes an enhanced familiar.
- You gain a +2 bonus to diplomacy checks with animals.
- You gain the level 3 option that you didn't take. Your familiar no longer requires a burrow speed and you can also communicate with beasts even if you do not share a language.

At 13th level, you gain one of the following:
- If your familiar dies, you can replace it during your daily preparations at the cost of one Elixir of Life.
- When you make an impression on an animal or beast, you treat a critical failure as a failure.
- You gain all level 7 options that you didn't take.

ELEGANT WARRIOR (ELF ANCESTRY FEAT)
You are trained in the creation, maintenance, and use of weapons unique to Elven culture.

At 1st level, you are trained with all bows, longswords, and rapiers. You also have access to the Elven curve blade. You are trained in Elven Lore and can use this skill when crafting, repairing, or recalling knowledge about the above mentioned weapons.

At 3rd level, you gain access to the critical specialization effect of the above mentioned weapons.

At 7th Level, you know the formulas for Elven Chain, Malyass Root Paste, Boots of Elvenkind, and master-level versions of all the above mentioned weapons. You can craft these items from memory and can use your Elven lore skill when doing so.

At 13th level, add the Cloak of Elvenkind and Keen weapon rune to the list of formulas you possess. Additionally, your movement speed increases by 10 when not wearing heavy armor and not encumbered.

Perhaps you pick 2 ancestries and the effects of one beyond 1st level are delayed 2 levels (to 5th, 9th, and 15th level). My elf can be a forlorn elegant warrior or a nimble keen observer.

This makes ancestry feel more meaningful while reducing the decision space. Rather than picking one of 10 or so ancestry feats at level one, I'm choosing 2 of 5 or so. It also drives more tangible level excitement. Rather than "I get another ancestry feat next level," it's "I can't wait to hit next level and get this specific power."

I was trying to determine if the fatal trait applies to precision damage dice. That is, can a rogue use a light pick to turn sneak attack dice into d8s on a critical hit. Sneak attack dice are referred to as "extra precision damage" but the fatal trait says it increases "all the weapon's damage dice." So I'm not sure if sneak attack damage counts as a weapon's damage dice.

I tried looking up "Weapon, damage" "Precision" and "Damage."

I did not find anything that definitively answered the question.

I would combine resonance and spell points (which sound too much like spell slots as it is). Both do very similar things and few spell point powers do enough to break balance if players can do them more often as long as they still cost a resource.

Call the new resource focus (or energy or willpower or mox or anything that suggests an intangible ability to put a piece of yourself into your efforts).

I would better establish it as an integral character resource by listing the amount classes get as prominently as hit points are listed now.

I would better establish it as a core component of item activation by listing costs as prominently as somatic and verbal actions are on spells.

Modify costs... Almost everything costs 1 point. Activating a 6th level fireball out of the Skyhammer costs the the same as getting a 1st level heal out of a wand. Make some things cost more than others. Otherwise, the tendency is to impose daily use limits in addition to costing points and then you've got redundant systems.

Give some of the classes unique ways of playing with this point pool. Maybe alchemists regain a point when they crit with a bomb. Maybe druids can give their points to other players by feeding them goodberries. Maybe the ranger can deplete their hunting target of its points. Maybe the sorcerer can recover points by sacrificing spell slots... and so on.

I feel like there is a lot more design space here without players getting lost in the complexity.