Eagle Knight

FedoraFerret's page

FullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 430 posts (938 including aliases). 2 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 26 Organized Play characters. 11 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 430 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Thundarr the Barbarian wrote:
Look on the bright side, after August gets here we won't care about the missing spoilers anymore since we'll have the books by then. So, the missing spoilers and reveals will only matter for a month and a half.

It's the principle of the thing. We had a task to try and accomplish and we failed.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
I hope the Witch ends up being the prepared caster for this school of magic, it'd be a very appropriate fit.

I don't think it would particularly fit the thematics of the Pathfinder witch, personally. I'm pulling for witches as the prepared sorcerer, with their spell list based on their patron.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

20
26

For the folks keeping up databases.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Moreland wrote:
We would have kept next week's reveals a secret if it weren't for you meddling nerds and your CSI image inhancement tools!!!

Just be glad none of us has enough skill to type randomly on a keyboard or else we would've hacked the entire book right out from under you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
Yeah, they do have some scary low AC, and even with feat investment it doesn’t seem to scale too quickly. The clunky interaction with melee ranger is interesting to know; i can picture it with PC and enemies able to move around a lot more; makes crowd control a lot more valuable.

I had a solid melee ranger with an animal companion by using my bear as a mount. Lost the Work Together benefit but it effectively gave me a free stride at almost double my speed every turn and effectively negate MAP for one of my attacks so I'd say it was worth the feat investment.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Per #MyPathfinderSpoiler 46, Clerics get Will at level 9 through the Resolve class feature.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Women can become liches too, Staffan.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I did some transcribing of my own.

4 - SKILLS

(cont. from Repair Item, presumably) both hands. The GM sets the DC, but it's usually about the same DC to Repair a given item as it is to Craft it in the first place. You can't Repair a destroyed item.
Critical Success You restore 10 Hit Points to the item, plus an additional 10 Hit Points per proficiency rank you have in Crafting (a total of 20 HP if you're trained, 30 HP if you're an expert, 40 HP if you're a master, or 50 HP if you're legendary).
Success You restore 5 Hit Points to the item, plus an additional 5 Hit Points per proficiency rank you have in Crafting (a total of 10 HP if you're trained, 15 HP if you're an expert, 20 HP if you're a master, or 25 HP if you're legendary).
Critical Failure You deal 2d6 damage to the item. Apply the item's Hardness to this damage.

Crafting Trained Actions
You must be trained in Crafting to use it to Earn Income (page 236).
Earn Income by crafting goods for the market.

Craft
<Downtime> <-Illegible->
You make an item from raw materials. You need the Alchemical Crafting skill feat to create alchemical items, the Magical Crafting skill feaat to create magic items, and the Snare Crafting feat to create snares.
To Craft an item, you must meet the following requirements.

  • The item is your level or lower. An item that doesn't list a level is level 0. If the item is 9th level or higher, you must be a master in Crafting, and if it's 16th or higher you must be legendary.
  • You have the formula for the item; see Formulas below for more information.
  • You have an appropriate set of tools and, in may cases, a workshop. For example, you need access to a smithy to forge a metal shield.
  • You must supple raw materials worth at least half the item's Price. You always expend at least that amount of raw materials when you Craft successfully. If you're in a settlement, you can usually spend currency to get the amount of raw materials you need, except in the case of rarer precious materials.
    You must spend 4 days at work, at which point you attempt a Crafting check. The GM determines the DC to Craft the item based on its level, rarity, and other circumstances. If your attempt to create the item is successful, you expend the raw materials you supplied. You can pay the remaining portion of the item's Price in materials to complete the item immediately, or you can spend additional downtime days working on it. For each additional downtime day you spend, reduce the value of the materials you need to expend to complete the item. This amount is determined using Table 4-2: Income Earned (page 236) based on your proficiency rank in Crafting and using your own level instead of a task level. After any of these downtime days, you can complete the item by spending the remaining portion of its Price in materials. If the downtime days you spend are interrupted, you can return to finish the item later, continuing where you left off. An example of Crafting appears in the sidebar.
    Critical Success Your attempt is successful. Each additional day spent Crafting reduces the materials needed to complete the item by an amount based on your level + 1 and your proficiency rank in Crafting.
    Success Your attempt is successful. Each additional day spent Crafting reduces the materials needed to complete the item by an amount based on your level and your proficiency rank.
    Failure You fail to complete the item. You can salvage the raw materials you supplied for their full value. If you want to try again, you must start over.
    Critical Failure You fail to complete the item. You ruin 10% of the raw materials you supplied but you can salvage the rest. If you want to try again, you must start over.

    Sidebar: Consumables and Ammunition
    You can Craft items with the consumable trait in batches, making up to four of the same item at once with a single check. This requires you to include the raw materials for all the items in the batch at the start, and you must complete the batch all at once. You also Craft non-magic ammunition in batches, using the quantity listed in Table 6-8: Ranged Weapons (typically 10).

    Sidebar: Getting Formulas
    You can gain access to the formulas for all common items in Chapter 6: Equipment by purchasing a basic craft's book (page 287). See the rules on page 293 for information on how to acquire other formulas.

    Sidebar: Crafting Example
    Ezren is a 5th level wizard and an expert in Crafting. He has a Crafting modifier of +13 and the Magical Crafting feat. With 2 weeks of downtime ahead of him, he decides to craft a striking rune, a 4th level item. The GM secretly chooses a DC of 19.
    The item has a Price of 65 gp, so Ezren prepares 32 gp, 5 sp worth of raw materials. He has another 32 gp, 5 sp worth of raw materials on hand. After spending 4 days buidling and incanting spells, he rolls a 12 on his Crafting check, for a result of 25! that's a success! At this point, Ezren can spend the additional 32 gp, 5 sp worth of materials to complete the item immediately for 65 gp.
    However, Ezren has 10 more days on his hands, so he decides to spend additional time to complete the item. Because he's a 5th level character and an expert at Crafting, he reduces the amount he has to pay by 1 gp for each day spent. After spending 10 days working, he reduces the cost to complete the item from 65 gp to 55 gp. He spends the remaining portion of its Price in materials, completes the striking rune, and goes out on his next adventure. (He could have stayed home to keep working on the striking rune, eventually reducing the item's total Price to just the half he paid up front, but adventuring is far more lucrative!)
    If Ezren's Crafting check result were a 29 or higher, he'd have gotten a critical success. In that case, he'd reduce the remaining amount by 2 gp per day, lowering the amount needed to complete the item after 10 additional days of work to 45 gp.

    Identify Alchemy
    <-Illegible-> <Exploration> <Secret>
    Requirements You have alchemist's tools (page 287).
    You can identify the nature of an alchemical item with 10 minutes of testing using alchemist's tools. If your attempt is interrupted in any way, you must start over.
    Success You identify the item and the means of activating it.
    Failure You fail to identify the item but can try again.
    Critical Failure You misidentify the item as another item of the GM's choice.

    Deception (Cha)
    You can trick and mislead others using disguises, lies, and other forms of subterfuge.

    Create a Diversion <A>
    <Mental>
    With a gesture, a trick, or some distracting words, you can create a diversion that draws creatures' attention elsewhere. If you use a gesture or trick, this action gains the manipulate trait. If you use distraction words, it gains the auditory and linguistic traits.
    Attempt a single Deception check and compare it to the Perception DCs of the creatures whose attention you're trying to divert. Whether or not you succeed, creatures you attempt to divert gain a +4 circumstance bonus to their Perception DCs against your attempts to Create a Diversion for 1 minute.
    Success You become hidden to each creature whose Perception DC is less than or equal to your result. (The hidden condition allows you to Sneak away, as described on page 252.) This lasts until the end of your turn or until you do anything except Step or use the Hide or the Sneak action of the Stealth skill (pages 251 and 252). If you Strike a creature, the creature remains flat-footed against that attack, and you then become observed. If you do anything else, you become observed just before you act unless the GM determines otherwise.
    Failure You don't divert the attention of any creatures whose Perception DC exceeds your result, and those creatures are aware you were trying to trick them.

    Impersonate
    <Concentration> <Exploration> <Manipulate> <Secret>
    You create a disguise to pass yourself off as someone or something you are not. Assembling a convincing disguise takes 10 minutes and requires a disguise kit (found on page 290), but a simpler, quicker disguise might do the job if you're not trying to imitate a specific individual, at the GM's discretion.


  • 2 people marked this as a favorite.
    MMCJawa wrote:
    FedoraFerret wrote:
    Quote:
    Bloodline Perfection (Feat 20). Prereq: bloodline paragon. You gain an additional 10th-level spell slot.
    That's an interesting little reveal. 10th level spells are apparently no longer feat gated.

    Not sure about that. Any spellcaster of suitable level gets 10th level slots. However without investing a feat into a 10th level spell they can only use those slots for casting higher versions of lower level spells IIRC. This just means they get two extra slots at 10th level, but presumably if they burn there 20th level feat on this they won't get wish or equivalent spells?

    You'll notice that there is no 10th level spell feat listed. That means that either there's another sorcerer page after the one shown, which I find unlikely given that there's unlikely to be a full page worth of capstone feats, or casters will be able to cast 10th level spells without a feat.


    Quote:
    Untrained Improvisation (Feat 3) (General). Your proficiency bonus to untrained skill checks is equal to half your level instead of +0. If you’re 7th level or higher, the bonus increases to your full level instead. This doesn’t allow you to use the skill’s trained actions.

    So... I question how they think everyone who isn't a rogue isn't going to take this at 3? Are general skills all going to be this good?


    6 people marked this as a favorite.
    Quote:
    Bloodline Perfection (Feat 20). Prereq: bloodline paragon. You gain an additional 10th-level spell slot.

    That's an interesting little reveal. 10th level spells are apparently no longer feat gated.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    ChibiNyan wrote:

    Am a bit surprised at some of these cards.

    Treat wounds doesn't say what the base healing amount is, or damage on a critical fail.

    Hydraulic Push critical success damage isn't double, so it improves at the same rate as normal success rather than faster.

    Presumably there's a success chart that just wasn't included on the card because that would make it too long.


    7 people marked this as a favorite.

    Y'all, I keep seeing a bunch of posts in this thread and thinking "ooh new rules reveals, must be." There is an entire board in which you could make a thread to discuss this, please do and stop throwing off the people with no interest in this discussion.


    5 people marked this as a favorite.
    Paladinosaur wrote:
    Is lastwall gone?

    Tyrant's Grasp spoilers:
    Well, considering the reason for its existence (guarding against Tar-Baphon) is now moot and TB kinda nuked Vigil off the face of Golarion, it probably is.

    3 people marked this as a favorite.

    "We'll try not to spoil the endings of APs for you."

    New Thassilon. Like, right there, smack dab on the map.

    ***

    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    BigNorseWolf wrote:
    Quote:
    The more you play or GM for the new edition, the more potential replay opportunities you'll accrue for the first edition campaign.

    Wow. Not cool. Really not cool.

    People and groups that need replays for first edition are the ones NOT playing PF2. This does nothing to get the people who need the replays to stay in the campaign the replays they need to keep it going.

    Agreed. This seems like it's designed not to help players who don't want to make the jump continue to play Society, but to create a transitional period while PFS2 gets off the ground so we don't see stuff like what happened in early Starfinder.


    3 people marked this as a favorite.
    Captain Morgan wrote:
    FedoraFerret wrote:
    Interesting. Does anyone recall any of the OO characters using or referencing a Lore skill? Because if any skill can be used for Knowledge, then Lore can easily be replaced by doing the same for Practice a Profession.
    Lore skills can already be used to Recall Knowledge. What change exactly do you think is relevant here?

    The change where the thing that Lore was used for, having specialized knowledge without having to invest in the appropriate knowledge skill, is now covered by having any appropriate skill (e.g. you no longer need to invest in Nature to know about medicinal herbs, nor have Lore (herbalist/doctor/whatever) because you can use the Medicine skill instead). However, as Quid pointed out that doesn't cover the use of skills for certain professions. So I'll amend and say "hey, maybe this means they can rename Lore to Profession so I can stop hating the skill name so much."


    4 people marked this as a favorite.

    Interesting. Does anyone recall any of the OO characters using or referencing a Lore skill? Because if any skill can be used for Knowledge, then Lore can easily be replaced by doing the same for Practice a Profession.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Not gonna lie, Twin Feint feels kind of lackluster given how prevalent the flatfooted condition is. Rogues in the playtest games I ran never had a problem inflicting it or getting it from their party members. So committing a feat to make two attacks as two actions, one of which has full penalties but gets the flatfooted that you could've gotten on both attacks by moving into a flank or, like, amping up your Intimidate skill seems like it'd be mediocre.


    Saint Bernard wrote:
    I don't understand the choice of a long bow over a short bow.

    Assuming they still work like in the Playtest, if Seelah is in shortbow range she's probably better off moving into melee.


    9 people marked this as a favorite.
    Quote:
    The way this is set up, why even have exp at all? Why not just write into the rules "you level up when the GM tells you." Right? That's in essence what they're doing.

    The thing is that a lot of groups prefer using Exp, and Exp is better than Milestones for sandbox games. If you make the default Exp, then it's easy to just discard it outright for Milestones, but if you make Milestones the default, then your players have to reverse engineer an Exp system from scratch.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    It also just, like, hard buffs champion, sorcerer and bard relative to everyone else, and cleric to a lesser extent.


    Mark Seifter wrote:
    Joe M. wrote:
    Mark Seifter wrote:
    Joe M. wrote:
    Captain Morgan wrote:
    Joe M. wrote:
    I haven't listened to the discussions of hp on shields. Could somebody who has explain how it works? How is damage from an attack distributed between the shield and the character?
    I think the only hard data we have on it was what happened in the game trade media demo.

    That sounds right (don't know if more was said in this seminar). I wasn't able to piece together, from folks confusing forum posts, exactly how this is supposed to work. E.g., if a shield has 8 hardness and blocks an attack that deals 10 damage, how is that distributed?

    (A) Shield takes 8, character takes 2;
    (B) Shield takes 10, character takes 2;
    (C) Shield takes 10, character takes 0.

    I would assume (A), but some posters made it sound like (B) or (C).

    It's the simplest possible operation that still applies damage to both the shield and the PC (A would never apply damage to the shield under any circumstances): Reduce by hardness, then both shield and PC take what's left. The dwarf axe and shield fighter in my WftC game has tended to have even greater durability with her shield from this method than from dents, I think it hasn't been broken since the change, but that depends on the exact amount that's dishing out.
    Thanks! I guess I was using "hardness" imprecisely :-P
    No worries! In your example, that means shield and character both would reduce their HP total by 2 (assuming they don't have other resistance hijinks going on).

    So if we follow the same example, but the attack only did 6 damage, neither the shield nor the character would take anything?


    To sate my curiosity, was anyone paying attention to what the snakes' and skeleton's ACs were? Trying to get a handle on where the math is now.


    Mark Seifter wrote:
    Dante Doom wrote:
    PossibleCabbage wrote:
    ...

    That's nice to hear!

    Although not a common problem with armor, with shields it is totally different.

    Taking a shield to defend yourself should not make your AC worse than it is.

    Training in shields worked in too bizarre of a way with a weird exception, so we don't use proficiency ranks for shields any more as a result. Much much cleaner.

    So does that mean anyone can use shields now, or is it a binary "you're either proficient or you aren't."


    CorvusMask wrote:
    Desna's Avatar wrote:
    Good to get a preview of how Amiri perishes in 2nd Edition.
    Ye would think that over 10 years of adventuring and completing all APs, all iconics would be level 20 already but nope, stuck at level 7 at max :D

    Don't forget the sheer number of Pathfinder Society missions they've been on.


    4 people marked this as a favorite.
    Rob Godfrey wrote:
    Paladins do not make sense when not tied to a deity or Empy Lord (or Deamon/Demon/Devil for APs) Didn't make sense in ADnD 2e, wouldn't make sense now.

    You mean aside from the ADnD 2e supplement entirely dedicated to paladins that explicitly unmarried them from deities by allowing them to be pledged to governments and knightly orders instead?


    Player Name: FedoraFerret
    Character Name: Theodora "Teddy" Locara
    PFS #: 139854 - 13
    Faction: Sovereign Court
    Progression: Normal
    Starting Prestige and Fame: 2/59
    Starting Experience: 28
    Starting Gold: Need to double check this
    Day Job: Information Broker (Knowledge (local)): 1d20 + 14 ⇒ (4) + 14 = 18

    Items to buy: Also need to double check this

    I've got busy nights at work this weekend but I'll transcribe my sheet into an alias and check my gold and items that I need to buy on Sunday.


    32 people marked this as a favorite.

    I have important feedback: the errata documents need to highlight or otherwise mark new changes from the last version. They're long documents, and asking us to read every single one through completely to find the new changes over the old is excessive.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    PossibleCabbage wrote:
    But I like the idea that in the course of adventuring my character will pick up basic things about tasks outside of their purview. Like no level 15 character stands the risk of drowning if they fall out of a boat on a still pond, and every level 12 character can climb a rope, and everybody past a certain level can tell the difference between a dragon, a vampire, and an ooze. Having these things not be true regardless of what a player chooses to invest in just makes our mighty heroes seem incompetent and ridiculous.

    Honestly, those are things that I'm of the mind any adventurer regardless of level should be able to do. Basic swimming, easy climbing, being able to identify that that's a dragon, this is a skeleton, and that's a vampire, shouldn't be rolls to begin with.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    No automatically scaling proficiency bonus. No level-to-level increases by skill ranks. Nothing. If you don't touch a skill between level 1 and level 20 it should be the exact same. Now that I've got your attention, please put your pitchforks down and hear me out.

    As it stands, the only differences between an untrained person and a specialist of the same level (which should be every party) are Proficiency, Ability Score, and Magic/Item bonuses. Level-to-skill, then, only applies when determining your likelihood of succeeding at a given check. A level 15 character is much more likely to succeed at scaling a wall than a level 5 character. My question is... why?

    I've seen the reasoning behind proficiency scaling with level. I even agree with it. I like the power fantasy of a badass character wiping the floor with a swarm of lower level characters because they're so much more experienced. So having attacks, AC, spell DCs, and saving throws all just automatically scale with level makes sense to me. But having skill checks and skill DCs scaling with level doesn't, as much.

    Taking out level based scaling altogether puts more emphasis on training and ability score. Right now, the highest innate difference in bonuses you can get from a skill is +17 (difference of 5 from training, 8 from ability scores (8 vs. 24), and 4 from an item). That difference of 17 is going to feel a lot more impactful when is a -3 vs. +14 bonus, rather than 17 vs. 34, especially when you're still running into the same DCs for comparable challenges that you were nineteen levels ago and they're still relevant to both of you. Furthermore, it makes all those little bonuses matter that much more. Every point you manage to acquire to improve your skill bonus isn't just another improvement against equal level things, where lower level things you now likely disregard anyway. It makes you better at everything related to the skill, from opening the tough little lockbox you found in that first level dungeon to cracking the king's secret vault open at level 15.

    And honestly, I think the most prominent thing it will do is let Paizo keep their desire to keep bonus disparity tight, without forcing a sense of constant improvement on every single thing for every single character, whether they want to or not. It makes progression and specialization feel like progression and specialization, and not just like a checkbox. It makes improvement in skills a choice, rather than an assumption. And most importantly, most importantly of all, it puts an end to (or at least severely limits) the idea that beating up goblins in the wilderness for three weeks with no library access makes you better at anything unrelated to beating up goblins.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    In first edition Pathfinder, it was occasionally pointed out that tying knowledge of certain cities was based on Knowledge (local), even if the city in question wasn't remotely local. Having a deep and intricate understanding of the inner workings of your home town somehow made you knowledgeable about every city in the world to the same degree, so long as you were physically in that city. This isn't a thing that often came up, mind, but it was one of those strange quirks of system that really only functioned because we had no good, specific way to represent it.

    Well, we do now. It's called Lore. And I think that should be embraced.

    Proposal: Every character should be given the Lore skill for their hometown or possibly home nation (multiples at GM discretion, for, say, the character that emigrated from Sargava to Sandpoint a few years ago). Checks made to know things about certain cities or towns are based on those Lores, with anyone who doesn't have that lore able to use Diplomacy to gather information in its place. Society then becomes used for nobility, government structures, and other knowledge checks based on things you would learn from reading a book about the place, as well as identifying humanoids.


    Forum name: Fedora Ferret
    Character Name: Simon Theodore Reginald Ogden Nantis-Guthry KOI
    PFS Number: 139854-1501
    Perception Modifier: +5


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    I guess that the softcover and Campaign Setting materials, which don't go on the PRD, get the shaft in PFS then?

    ***

    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Tonya Woldridge wrote:
    Long answer, make sure you are on the slack channel, as that is where the GMs are discussing running the playtest at Gen Con.

    Would someone be so kind as to private message me an invite to this Slack channel, because this is literally the first I'm hearing of this.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    PossibleCabbage wrote:
    I mean in practice most oracle curses were effectively "which thing is least inconvenient" and most of them weren't so bad so the execution of the class needs more work.

    I would like the record to show that this is not the case when you spam Oracle's Burden like I do, because then debilitating curses with really good ability scaling is awesome.


    So it says that sorcerers get the same number of spells per day as a wizard. Does that account for the wizard's school spell/recasts?


    So I'm curious if one of the designers could clear up some confusion for me: how exactly does Symphony of the Dark Prince work? Do you still designate an area where the effect is? Because as written, it seems like you spend a standard action to fling someone into the stratosphere with no default save.

    Edit: Never mind it's been pointed out that Masterpieces give saves to unwilling targets.


    Ludovicus wrote:
    Unfortunately, that would take a dedicated healer, and nobody wants to play a dedicated healer.

    I feel personally attacked right now.

    Honestly, I think Paizo has a good answer without this resonance nonsense already. Make charges lower, have them recharge daily (as they do with a staff). Keep the limit on how many magic items you can have at once (if it scales appropriately then your lower level items won't have to be thrown by the wayside to make room) and have your wands count. Boom, now you have a restraint on wand spam that still allows wands in general to fulfill their function, and makes it a genuine choice whether to dedicate multiple magic item spots to more wands or not. In the meantime, you also make other kinds of non-focused healing work (based on their assertion of a barbarian healer the heal skill is probably sufficient) and on top of that, make healing fun! Give me my AoE healing, HoTs, reactive healing, give my my favorite combo from WoW where I fired a laser out of my hands that damaged an enemy and shielded my allies. You can 100% make healing a fun, proactive and tactical mechanic.


    4 people marked this as a favorite.

    For the record, though, I love that a) you're making Gray Maiden an available concept off the bat and I hope you do that with all of the major organizations in Golarion (Hellknights, Red Mantis, etc.) and b) I love that the Gray Maiden feats appear to be actually really useful for the kinds of characters who would become Gray Maidens.


    5 people marked this as a favorite.

    Pirate seems like a really specific kind of thing to be putting in the Playtest. Barring someone running a Skull and Shackles conversion I don't see anyone touching it.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Arachnofiend wrote:
    Weather Report wrote:
    Deadmanwalking wrote:
    Halflings look likely to be Wis now, but I wouldn't bet money on it (I only bet on sure things).

    Like Nicolette Sheridan?

    Maybe Goblins should be Int, good with alchemy.

    Smart goblins are a Warcraft thing. One of the defining character traits of Pathfinder goblins is their illiteracy (though I guess that might change in whatever Paizo does to make core goblins make sense).

    While that is the case in general, Pathfinder goblins are actually very clever. Their illiteracy is a choice born of superstition rather than a physical incapability. The default goblin statblock has 10 Int, and half the We Be Goblins pregens have a positive Int score. They're inclined towards crafting, two of their archetypes are for the alchemist, and if we fast forward to Starfinder, they frequently make laser pistols out of junk and gorram spaceships out of bathtubs and solar sails (that's not canon, but it's entirely fitting with Pathfinderverse gobbos). So, like, +Dex/Int -Wis is actually perfect for them.


    How much experience do you have with Pathfinder rules?
    Four years, mostly play by post and Society.

    How much experience do you have with Roleplaying in general?
    Still four years, still mostly play by post and Society.

    Are you familiar with PbP formatting and how to?
    Literally how I started.

    Have you ever played Reign of Winter before, even just a little? (please be truthful)
    I ran book one and read book two.

    How many PbP games are you currently active in?
    Two currently, one Rise of the Runelords and one running PFS character.

    Will you be able to check the game at least daily or every other day to post? If not explain and we can work with you.
    Easily.

    What type of characters do you like to play? Personality, Class, Themes!

    I tend to prefer big valiant types, usually in more of a supportive or "tanking" role. Generally very capital G good (Paladin is my waifu class), although I've been known to play Evil and do so wel even in a mostly good party structure.


    12 people marked this as a favorite.
    The Sideromancer wrote:
    Joana wrote:
    FedoraFerret wrote:
    Not gonna lie, unless Remove Blindness/Deafness and Cure Disease have been turned into much higher level spells I'm not super impressed by that legendary Heal feat.
    The main benefit I see is that it opens up condition removal to classes other than cleric/paladin, making non-standard party composition more viable.
    Only at high levels. If it required Expert or possibly Master, I could see the point, but this might just be adding rogue to that list.

    This. Legendary Heal feats should be along the lines of Raise Dead/Breath of Life, or completely restoring someone to full hit points instantly. Things that are beyond the bounds of the physically possible.


    22 people marked this as a favorite.

    Not gonna lie, unless Remove Blindness/Deafness and Cure Disease have been turned into much higher level spells I'm not super impressed by that legendary Heal feat.


    The policy likely won't change. That policy is, in a very summed up and simplified way, "it's popular and we're out of print." If anything were going to get the nod it'd be Kingmaker but that's getting a video game so I doubt it.


    Honestly, in much the same way that Paladins have become spell point casters rather than quarter casters, I wouldn't be surprised to see monks become spell point casters as well. It would incorporate the popular Qingong archetype into the basic chassis, fit with the idea of mystical wuxia fighters, and unify all of their various ki powers and abilities into a straightforward system.


    14 people marked this as a favorite.
    Volkard Abendroth wrote:
    They seriously nerfed Phantasmal Killer, which now only forces the fortitude save if the will save is a critical failure.

    It's not a nerf, they changed the use case. It's no longer a save or die that allows two saves (the damage from passing the Fort save is basically irrelevant for a 4th level spell) but a damage/debuff spell that has the potential to outright kill the target.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    worldhopper wrote:
    That said, the main thing I'm taking away from the statblocks is that the new action names do look ridiculous in context. I assume going for things like Stride and Strike instead of move and attack is to prevent confusion, but honestly it - and I hate to say this because it gets bandied around so much here for ridiculous reasons - feels deeply gamey and immersion-breaking. I don't think it would be that much harder to process just marking in the action rules that an attack is always one action except when described otherwise, and then just have the action count in parentheses for things like Power Attack. Same for movement. "I move twice, to here, and then attack once" just flows better, IMO. (Also now that I'm looking at it, there's still room for confusion in the Stride/Strike setup, because the Redcap's entry describes it Striding half its speed, which means the Stride action is not always moving up to your speed, so there's absolutely no reason to give it a special name.)

    I can actually think of a reason for this: rider effects. If there are abilities that apply whenever you take a Stride action, say from giving something class levels, then any time it used Stomp, or, say, Pounce, or Sudden Charge (I assume Sudden Charge will be two Strides and a Strike) then that ability would apply. Likewise, if there was an ability that caused you to move but didn't involve Striding (say, if they keep the effect of Bull Rush that allows you to follow the target after hitting them), then the effect wouldn't apply there. Which all becomes much less ambiguous than "when you move."


    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    According to a dev post in another thread, rules for removing alignment easily will be included in the core rules.

    1 to 50 of 430 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>