Goldenfoxx's page

I am still convinced that pf2 is trying to solve an issue that 5e has... Single monsters suck. Limiting support classes in the amount of damage they so increases durations of combats. I think that paizo made a mistake in that they have vastly given monsters a greater chance to critical that PC's ...but they are trying to deal with the boss monster issue.

RizzotheRat wrote:

I’ve been playing 3/3.5/Pathfinder since the 3rd Edition came out. I started with 1st Ed aged 6. I guess this makes me old! Played my first Playtest chapter today. Initial impressions -

I liked:

* the three action economy. No more swift/move/standard is a huge improvement

* New skills list. More than enough.

* AOO isn’t automatic. This frees up the “board” a lot.

* AC increases as level increases. Your BAB does, why shouldn’t your ability not to get hit?

Things to work out:

* the transition from exploratory to encounter mode is not clear. Not surprise round!

* Resonance wasn’t well understood when I was playing

* spell points seems like the wrong name for this counter

Overall, really enjoyed it and it still felt like Pathfinder to me.

Is it weird that I feel almost the complete opposite way?

I dislike the new action economy, mainly because "Free Actions" are now Actions.

In PF1, you could drop both items you are holding, draw two weapons, take a 5 foot step, and attack 7 times in one turn.

In PF2, that would take 12 actions, or 4 turns.

I'm on board with the skills, but the proficiency system doesn't put enough weight on your character's talent or training, than it does their level.

I LIKE AOO. I LIKE that you can get punished for doing stupid stuff in game, and that getting cornered means you are in trouble. I think it's dumb that an enemy can drink a potion next to the cleric, and he can't do anything about it, because he lacks the skill to thunk him with his mace.

I dislike +level to everything. BAB only equaled your level if you were a full BAB class, it was a coincidence.

I LIKE Resonance, I just think it needs some tweaks.

Spell Points could use a new name. Something like Resonance! Because you shouldn't have to manage 3 different pools of supernatural power.

You still can...fighters with two agile weapons doing dual slice and then the two weapon fishing and tacking on desperate finisher nets you six attacks... Add quick in there and get seven. You can still be a Cuisinart... 2e just slows you down a bit...and makes you fully commit if you want seven attacks in a round

Kobold... and maybe Mites. The idea of a blue bobble head riding a giant beetle into battle just brings a smile to my face.

This is an awesome idea. I think this will pigeon whole a character alot, but currently the feat progression does a good job of pigeon holing a class already (at least with the current released set of feats).

Its important to notice that many of the spells cross spell lists, so I think the same idea can be applied to Fighter Paths with specific feats. It could even be more interesting to make these feats available to all Martial classes, with requirements limiting specific feat progressions and class features granting fight feats or powers.

I would say that for adding the monk feats, many of these would have to be very restrictive... like you cant do this feat in armor. I know the idea to have dragon stance full plated armor riding his animal companion into battle doing Power attacks sounds like a great idea conceptually... I think that might actually be non-viable.

Xenocrat wrote:

Madclaw wrote:

Xenocrat wrote:

Look at Possession and Resilient Sphere for some good hard nerfs. And LOL at Dominate.

Dominate got upgraded to a two action cast. Unless you prepared a reaction to disrupt it Dominate is going off in the same round.

Yes, instead of needing to avail yourself of the many great PF1 defensive spell options (which no longer exist) in order to get off a juiced DC Dominate that is very likely to have the target fail the save and become your days long thrall, you now can easily cast this spell that is much less likely to do anything, will not last for long if it does, and is a level higher.

fly and invisibility (with mirror image and blur as runners-up) are by far the some of if not THE best defensive options in pathfinder, as they don't even allow a foe to roll against your defenses in the first place. all of them do in fact exist in 2.0, are obtained very early in one's career, and aren't uncommon spells.

blink is another notable as it's another "remove yourself from the source of damage entirely, no roll needed" option, likewise a common spell.

Actually, Invisibility is nice but in order to make it a total defense, you need to spend all of your time successfully sneaking. There are very many ways to become sensed (granted 50% miss rate is still awesome).

Blink, I dont really see as a viable defensive spell. If you could use it as a reaction, maybe... but its just concentrate for random movement. It does allow you to avoid AOO, but with randomness it could land you into a much worse place. All that said, it looks like a fun spell .. and a great way to create stories that end like this "... and then I blinked away from the ogre, right off the cliff"

You are spot on with fly... its why many creatures have a range option. Blur, with its 20% flat roll miss rate is nice. But mirror image is awesome... definitely going in my spell book. Along with Shield, of course.

Your the DM... do whatever you want. I personally like the resonance idea (needs work though) and will keep it in my games.

This is nice in some ways but not nice in others.

Monk's whirling throw says nothing about breaking the grab or restrained conditioned on success.

In situations where the monk throws the target outside of the monk's natural reach, this is silly and should be reworded.

In situations where the monk throws the target to a location still adjacent to the monk, the grapple, pin could (and should, in my opinion) be maintained.

Also, for extra fun, can the monk throw the target 1 foot just for free extra damage?

Yep...and improved combat grab works with reach weapons...hello whip and flickmace.

Edit cause didnt have the book in front of me.

I foresee the mount attribute and the pack animal attribute. Mounts an easy one, beast countinues stride until interrupted by command or some outside affect. Pack attribute sounds awesome too.. I envision my gnome bard with his trained pack mole.

Interestingly enough, attributes could be the feats for animals with the tight control of the action system and could certainly be a way to customize your character more.

Azih wrote:

Funnily enough both of those concepts (and classes) are pretty gear light so I guess I should be making a gear heavy class next. Maybe a fighter or a paladin.

Have fun. Gear selection is actively more painful than spell selection.

Oh you get two level 3 items? Well f+&+ you, there are only six that exist (that aren't consumables), and two of them are wands and one's a staff.

Haha.. I spit out my Horchata I laughed so hard at this.

I think those items are set up to include mundane items as well.. so like expert items. Not sure, but its seems to me to be a problem with the play test that should be sorted out at game release

Ryan Freire wrote:

You could start by not responding to peoples unhappiness with "nothing is wrong with the game its surely the players who are wrong"

"Bulk is bad and needs to go away because my 8 STR Alchemist cant carry his equipment & 15 other things without being encumbered."

This is no different, you're actively choosing to leave your Cha at a negative score and you complain about the drawbacks.

Having a Character die because of poor rolls is one thing and it feels bad that I'll admit, but when the player knowingly chose to endanger the PC by relying on luck in order to use a Healing Potion... that on the player, not the system.

Mane, I totally get it. It doesn't matter how many resonance points you had... At one point, you are gonna need a heal potion not to die, and a flat roll failure that you have no agency to control, could make your character die. Totally get it. I think what alot of people are saying is that the heal stick is not the option because it totally removes a key role to the party, which is a "healer type". I believe that pf2 is trying to get away from the one man army and be more team oreinted...and that means party roles.

Why not try again, but with lowering the attack and defenses of the monsters ...see what difference it makes.

I still think the problem with resonance is that it doesnt go far enough. Consumable items should have two levels, one basic and one "Resonance charged". You want the heal stick... ok, that will be 1d4 per activation unless you charge the activation with a resonance. Consumables are never wasted, just a much lesser effect. Already made a post about this previously.

I have been very impressed with the Pathfinder version 2 so far. I have seen a couple of new versions of D&D (I still miss Birthright) and have never seen an edition where I'm constantly saying "Thats clever" or "I like that!" You guys have done an amazing job with the new edition.

That being said, I think I agree that resonance needs a bit of work... and I have a proposal, although it requires a lot more work on behalf of the Game designers. It essentially is doubling down on the resonance idea. Make it more important.

The idea that Charisma represents a characters magical force is great and I think resonance is a great way of representing that force. But instead of having an item fail when a resonance doesnt get off, why not have two levels to a consumable items... say a healing potion will always give you a base 1D4+1 hit points, but an infused (ie potion that someone just spent a resonance point on) unleashes the magics' full potential and now heals 2D4+2. The system already has 4 levels of effects (crit, success, failure and crit failure) ... now just bring that level of detail to magical items. Consumables have minor affects until infused with a little magic from the character.

More permanent items would require the character to again offer up their own essence to bond with an item. A +1 longsword will cost you one resonance point, which will reduce you daily max cap but want that Vorpal sword?, thats gonna really represent a huge part of your resonance pool. Do you want a powerful sword of wounding +3 that invests four of your resonance points or do you want the +1 sword of corrosion that only cost one investment but allows you to turn it corrosive three times a day for 1 minute.

It gets even more interesting when resonance points can be used to replace charges. Have a staff of the Magi with 1 charges and need to cast one last disintegrate to stave off that swooping dragon, well you have the option of spending three of you daily resonance points instead of using that charge or maybe just one resonance point to cast Magic missile. Or some items could only work on resonance points... Wand of cure light wound anyone... no charges but cost a resonance point every time you use it.

BUT... this causes some interesting change potential.

Dwarfs are not naturally Magical, so Dwarven made items now have a reduced resonance cost. Elves are naturally magical, so higher cost of resonance investment is required but allow for possibly different investment levels or abilities that cost a resonance point but are cool.

Many people are complaining about sorcerers being not as versatile as they used to be...but what if they received a class feat or ability at certain levels that allowed them to use resonance points to boost or heighten a spell that they can cast... or higher level abilities that let them directly translate those resonance points directly into spell slots. After all, these sorcerers are innately magical... they scoff at using magical items that the lesser, less gifted use.

Paladin been laying on hands too much or your Battle cleric need one more Enduring Might to defeat the hill Giant... convert that resonance point for that one more important heroic feat. Paladin need a bit of Divine intervention... feel the grace of your deities favor embrace you (and a couple extra Resonance points as well)

And speaking of Heroic... need a couple of extra resonance points... let the player buy back resonance points at a cost of one hero point = charisma modifier of resonance points.

Alchemist not powerful enough for you... They will be when every level they receive one extra resonance point. Sounds like a lot, but if that True Elixir of life can only be infused for 3 resonance points...is it really.

Elf and Gnome a little fragile for your taste... not if these inherently magical ancestries have feats that grant them more resonance points. High Elf Ancestry anyone... :)

Think that Wraith is to easy... not when you find out his touch drains you of your very essence...costing you both health and resonance. Bad touch, indeed.

And of course there should probably be a tiered General feat for resonance points... Remarkable Resonance +2 Resonance req: Cha 12 | Enhanced Essence +4 Resonance req: Remarkable Resonance and Char 14 | Soul of Magic +6 Resonance Points req: Enhanced Essence and Char 16... ect ect.

You can see what I mean about it being a little bit of work but I think it would be awesome. I always like more options and it seems like this system would confront many of the issues that resonance was designed for (and probably create some new ones)

So I have noticed that the new game has a ton of conditions. Is there an already made pdf download of cards for conditions, or do you think paizo would care if I made specialized game cards for all the conditions (through a service, not myself) ... I figure it will be something that Paizo eventually comes out with, but waiting a year for it is alot of slow role-playing? What are your thoughts?

Also... anyone else think that the Doppelganger being a humanoid is a bad idea? Seems like that makes the humanoid Shape spell pretty damn powerful. Maybe, I missed an errata or am over-thinking the ability to mimic anyones form and read minds.