paizo.com Recent Posts by Gortlepaizo.com Recent Posts by Gortle2024-03-28T08:40:29Z2024-03-28T08:40:29ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe&page=4?Remastered-Barbarian#1982024-03-27T08:43:29Z2024-03-27T00:00:20Z<p>High risk high reward can work if there is a big heal spell coming</p>High risk high reward can work if there is a big heal spell comingGortle2024-03-27T00:00:20ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Does splash damage even have rules?Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yi4?Does-splash-damage-even-have-rules#322024-03-26T10:40:46Z2024-03-26T10:33:26Z<p>I did a mounted rogue with gang up. It worked fine and the lowered refex defense wasn't a problem</p>I did a mounted rogue with gang up. It worked fine and the lowered refex defense wasn't a problemGortle2024-03-26T10:33:26ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe&page=4?Remastered-Barbarian#1772024-03-26T10:21:13Z2024-03-26T10:15:35Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ferious Thune wrote:</div><blockquote> Now a reaction to negate a crit might be something worth considering. </blockquote><p>Valuable when it fires.
</p>
It would be hard to use in practice as you have to leave a reaction spare in order to keep the option open.</p>Ferious Thune wrote:Now a reaction to negate a crit might be something worth considering.
Valuable when it fires.
It would be hard to use in practice as you have to leave a reaction spare in order to keep the option open.Gortle2024-03-26T10:15:35ZRe: Forums: Advice: Animal Companion Attack Bonus too low?Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ybh?Animal-Companion-Attack-Bonus-too-low#432024-03-25T22:12:20Z2024-03-25T22:06:38Z<p>What is bad about animal companions is the Apex companion feat. It is a minor set of buffs. Doesn't affect AC or to hit. You probably have the reach already.
<br />
Plus it doesn't last long so you have to do it in combat. As an apex ability it is very weak.</p>What is bad about animal companions is the Apex companion feat. It is a minor set of buffs. Doesn't affect AC or to hit. You probably have the reach already.
Plus it doesn't last long so you have to do it in combat. As an apex ability it is very weak.Gortle2024-03-25T22:06:38ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Does splash damage even have rules?Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yi4?Does-splash-damage-even-have-rules#222024-03-25T01:20:46Z2024-03-25T01:10:00Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Errenor wrote:</div><blockquote> Oh, remembered something: another rather nonsensical thing about splash is it's 5 ft around the target. So if it's medium, I understand that. Large? Ok. Now let's splash some Gargantuan creature. Now the whole perimeter of, I don't know, 40 squares gets splashed? That's rather stupid not only from narrative point of view, but from mechanical too... </blockquote><p>The difference for a 5 ft aura between a medium and a large creature is 9 squares versus 12 squares. That is not nothing. But 90% of the time it will be. Reach is far more important than total squares.
<p>Mechanically yes it is stupid suddenly we are covering a much larger creature and an even bigger area. But it is in keeping with the games simplified approach to size and encumbrance.</p>
<p>From a narative point of view , and for game play it is fine.</p>
<p>Yes personally I wouldn't have any problem if there were some minor size based effects - I think they really over simplified it. They could have down splash damage as a 3x3 grid rather than adjusted it for creature size and it would have worked OK.</p>Errenor wrote:Oh, remembered something: another rather nonsensical thing about splash is it's 5 ft around the target. So if it's medium, I understand that. Large? Ok. Now let's splash some Gargantuan creature. Now the whole perimeter of, I don't know, 40 squares gets splashed? That's rather stupid not only from narrative point of view, but from mechanical too...
The difference for a 5 ft aura between a medium and a large creature is 9 squares versus 12 squares. That is not nothing. But 90%...Gortle2024-03-25T01:10:00ZRe: Forums: Advice: Animal Companion Attack Bonus too low?Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ybh?Animal-Companion-Attack-Bonus-too-low#402024-03-24T21:30:46Z2024-03-24T21:24:54Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Red Griffyn wrote:</div><blockquote><p> <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pCLPZIQq8B-aY9gYqF1YdDScq_Y4fJ6HiVNe-SVFA3I/edit?usp=sharing" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">I worked up a quick DEX AC Spreadsheet</a> to show just how bad these Animal companions are.
</p>
...
<br />
You spent 5 feats on this plus another feat for a focus point healing spell.</blockquote><p>OK I haven't checked your numbers but it seems like a good companion to me. Know that you can take 3 specialisation feats not 2 depending on how you are taking your animal companion. They fixed that up for the Ranger in the Remaster.
</p>
Also you only take an animal only focus point healing if it is free. For the same price you can get one that does everything that lives.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Red Griffyn wrote:</div><blockquote><p>For a 1D6 DEX Maxed Animal companion on average from L1-L20
</p>
</blockquote><p>This seems OK to me. Beside Dex companions aren't where the problem lies. It is all strength ones.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Red Griffyn wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
So really what are the benefits? If there is a great support action that helps a PC with real attack/damage capabilities. A small pool of hit points to soak 1 round of a boss's attacks, or maybe delay for 1-3 rounds a minion. It can flank for some amount of rounds before it is dropped. Is that worth 5+ feats to you? It certainly isn't worth spending actions on healing in combat to decrease your effectiveness to keep this thing alive.</blockquote><p>Who heals in combat? Only rarely or if you have a specialist healer.
</p>
An animal companion at level 20 will have 180ish HP and will take 2 critical hits to take down. As a speed bump that will take a boss or 2 lessers a full round.
<br />
If you are playing with animal companions or summons or eidolons, then you want to be taking buffs that benefit the entire party. Things like Haste 7 or the composition cantrips. You just don't typically have the actions or the resources to buff your minions.</p>Red Griffyn wrote:I worked up a quick DEX AC Spreadsheet to show just how bad these Animal companions are.
...
You spent 5 feats on this plus another feat for a focus point healing spell.
OK I haven't checked your numbers but it seems like a good companion to me. Know that you can take 3 specialisation feats not 2 depending on how you are taking your animal companion. They fixed that up for the Ranger in the Remaster.
Also you only take an animal only focus point healing if it is free. For...Gortle2024-03-24T21:24:54ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Does splash damage even have rules?Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yi4?Does-splash-damage-even-have-rules#192024-03-24T06:30:45Z2024-03-24T06:25:33Z<p>Or you could apply it exactly as if the whole thing was a splash.</p>Or you could apply it exactly as if the whole thing was a splash.Gortle2024-03-24T06:25:33ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe&page=3?Remastered-Barbarian#1202024-03-25T14:10:49Z2024-03-24T01:42:43Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ferious Thune wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Gortle wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ferious Thune wrote:</div><blockquote> I don’t think Cleave as a reaction was the right direction for it in the first place.</blockquote>Well then you are just creating another problem then. There are too many Reactive Strikes in the game. I would prefer is the martials all had different reactions, and not just minor differences to Reactive Strike like they do now. Really speaking only the Champion and the Rogue's is good enough. </blockquote><p>I wrote a response earlier, but I guess the forums ate it.
<p>Isn’t Cleave just a minorly different Reactive Strike? But worse, and not as thematic as Vengeful Strike. </blockquote><p>It is the game play effect not just the theme.
<p>The problem I have with Reactive Strike is that it reduces tactical movement. That is an important effect that we want to have it the game. We just don't want it to dominate every game. Especially the way it does in D&D5. </p>
<p>Paizo set a design goal to free the game up so that the characters can be more mobile. They acheived that by having 85% of monsters not having Reactive Strike. Mostly it works. However when it shows up on almost every martial character it becomes a feat tax and it gets distasteful that the monsters don't have it. OR sometimes you end up in a tightly themed section of a campaign where everyone has it. That hurts a few classes fairly badly.</p>
<p>Unfortunately Reactive strike turns your reaction into an attack often enough that it is a significant power boost so most PCs who can take it do take it. I prefer that they have other options. Options that make sense for the class.</p>
<p>Cleave is an agressive maneuver that does suit a Barbarian thematically and because it is a reaction competes with Reactive Strike. I'd like it to be effective and somewhat comparable in powers so more players choose to take Reactive Strike less. There are other options in class like Embrace the Pain. But that is much higher level. (Personally I'd like to see Cleave have no MAP and the follow on feat allow a step)</p>
<p>Ranger, Monk, Magus, Champion, Swashbuckler, Thaumaturge all have a form of Reactive Strike.
<br />
The Champions Champion's Reaction truely competes with Reactive Strike. It is just that there is so much dross in the Champions feat list that most still take Reactive Strike as well.
<br />
The Rangers is much weaker than anyone elses.
<br />
The Swashbuckler also gets Opportune Risposte. Which is nice but it just doesn't trigger often enough to reasonably surplant Reactive Strike.</p>
<p>Gunslinger gets Fake Out - which is actually good in the right party. </p>
<p>Inventor and Investigator get nothing in terms of good reactions under level 10. Which really hurts the strength of those classes.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ferious Thune wrote:</div><blockquote> If there’s another reaction that would be thematic for a barbarian, I’d be all for seeing what that is. As things are structured now, most Martial classes have some alternative to Reactive Strike that grants an extra attack.</blockquote><p>As explained they have very little and it is mostly a rebadged Reactive Strike. Which I what to see less of in the game. I want other different tactical play styles.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ferious Thune wrote:</div><blockquote> Just some of them are much better than others. Opportune Riposte is in a similar place as Cleave, in that it’s too situational. .</blockquote><p>At least Opportune Riposte is free and doesn't cost a level 6 feat. You can build it and it plays fairly well. A Swashbuckler Fencer with Goading Feint and a focus on defense, can be quite a good point martial. It is not that popular though as Swashbuckler class itself could do with a little boost.Ferious Thune wrote:Gortle wrote: Ferious Thune wrote: I don’t think Cleave as a reaction was the right direction for it in the first place.
Well then you are just creating another problem then. There are too many Reactive Strikes in the game. I would prefer is the martials all had different reactions, and not just minor differences to Reactive Strike like they do now. Really speaking only the Champion and the Rogue's is good enough. I wrote a response earlier, but I guess the forums ate it....Gortle2024-03-24T01:42:43ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Does splash damage even have rules?Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yi4?Does-splash-damage-even-have-rules#132024-03-23T22:00:45Z2024-03-23T21:53:11Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Unicore wrote:</div><blockquote>Like I said, there are a lot of ways to interpret the spell and I have seen these disagreements at the table, to the end result of the spell being declared unusable at most tables. </blockquote><p>Really? Everyone at our tables just go with what the GM says even if it is wrong. Sometimes that can be quite fun.
<p>But I'm on your side it should be fixed.</p>Unicore wrote:Like I said, there are a lot of ways to interpret the spell and I have seen these disagreements at the table, to the end result of the spell being declared unusable at most tables.
Really? Everyone at our tables just go with what the GM says even if it is wrong. Sometimes that can be quite fun. But I'm on your side it should be fixed.Gortle2024-03-23T21:53:11ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe&page=2?Remastered-Barbarian#942024-03-23T14:40:47Z2024-03-23T14:32:49Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ferious Thune wrote:</div><blockquote> I don’t think Cleave as a reaction was the right direction for it in the first place.</blockquote><p>Well then you are just creating another problem then. There are too many Reactive Strikes in the game. I would prefer is the martials all had different reactions, and not just minor differences to Reactive Strike like they do now. Really speaking only the Champion and the Rogue's is good enough.Ferious Thune wrote:I don’t think Cleave as a reaction was the right direction for it in the first place.
Well then you are just creating another problem then. There are too many Reactive Strikes in the game. I would prefer is the martials all had different reactions, and not just minor differences to Reactive Strike like they do now. Really speaking only the Champion and the Rogue's is good enough.Gortle2024-03-23T14:32:49ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Does splash damage even have rules?Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yi4?Does-splash-damage-even-have-rules#82024-03-25T07:06:43Z2024-03-23T14:08:20Z<p>Yes they wrote a definition of splash that only applies to bombs and weapons. Then went and used it for spells. This is the sort of error that comes up a lot.</p>
<p>We just have to suck it up as Paizo is terrible at erratering things like this as they think it is natural language and obvious. </p>
<p>I mean they have a point. Splash is undefined in this context so we have to import the definition.</p>
<p>Read <a href="https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=888" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Corrosive Body</a> if you have any doubts about it. Spells with splash are supposed to splash.</p>Yes they wrote a definition of splash that only applies to bombs and weapons. Then went and used it for spells. This is the sort of error that comes up a lot.
We just have to suck it up as Paizo is terrible at erratering things like this as they think it is natural language and obvious.
I mean they have a point. Splash is undefined in this context so we have to import the definition.
Read Corrosive Body if you have any doubts about it. Spells with splash are supposed to splash.Gortle2024-03-23T14:08:20ZRe: Forums: Advice: Animal Companion Attack Bonus too low?Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ybh?Animal-Companion-Attack-Bonus-too-low#362024-03-23T14:10:47Z2024-03-23T13:56:54Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ravingdork wrote:</div><blockquote><p> How on earth are you guys only 2 point behind?</p>
<p>My 17th-level champion summoned his horse into battle last weekend and we all realized with horror that its AC was ten point behind my own. </blockquote><p>Well I said Ranger not Champion. Ranger, Barbarians, Inventors Investigators, Swashbuckler, Thaumaturges, ie most martials are only Expert in their armour till level 19. One was 17 I think. I'm not talking about Monks Champions or Fighters. I didn't see that as a fair comparison point.
<p>Your Champion is 2 levels of proficiency higher, so 4 points plus another 2 from a shield. Then for the rest I'd have to see how you built your mount. Those numbers were for an optimally barded Bear with every possible investment in it.</p>Ravingdork wrote:How on earth are you guys only 2 point behind?
My 17th-level champion summoned his horse into battle last weekend and we all realized with horror that its AC was ten point behind my own.
Well I said Ranger not Champion. Ranger, Barbarians, Inventors Investigators, Swashbuckler, Thaumaturges, ie most martials are only Expert in their armour till level 19. One was 17 I think. I'm not talking about Monks Champions or Fighters. I didn't see that as a fair comparison point. Your...Gortle2024-03-23T13:56:54ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe&page=2?Remastered-Barbarian#872024-03-23T09:26:41Z2024-03-23T08:15:38Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ferious Thune wrote:</div><blockquote> </blockquote><p>The whole point is to fix Cleave and make it competitive so there is a choice.Ferious Thune wrote:
The whole point is to fix Cleave and make it competitive so there is a choice.Gortle2024-03-23T08:15:38ZRe: Forums: Advice: Animal Companion Attack Bonus too low?Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ybh?Animal-Companion-Attack-Bonus-too-low#342024-03-23T07:10:46Z2024-03-23T06:58:20Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Gortle wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Animal companion becomes fairly useless after level 16. Can't breach DR. Doesn't do much damage. Attack roll is ok and AC not bad on a nimble companion. Saves are fine. Hit points fine.</p>
<p>Damage too low and lack of ability to penetrate DR or move in three dimensions if not choosing a bird makes them feel like a sort of tacked on useless bunch of feats.</p>
<p></blockquote>It is still a sponge and still can grapple. </blockquote><p>I have not found this to be true. If you build a strength based AC, it will get hit far more often and pretty much destroyed by AoE effects.
<p>If you build a dex-based AC, it doesn't grapple very well at all. </blockquote><p>You have to go Indomitable Companion to get Expert Barding proficiency. Yes it still comes undone at level 19. But up till then you are no more than 2 AC behind a typical martial like a Ranger. Your Athletics check will be somewhere between 0 to -3 that of a maxed strength PC, except at level 20 where you are 4 behind - the numbers jump around a lot level by level.
<p>Obviously it is not as good as a PC doing it, but you have to evaluate an Animal Companion like it is a second attack. It has enough HP to take some hits even crits. It will get crit. Healing out of combat is cheap. It is more effective than your grapple with a MAP penalty.</p>
<p>I do think very high level does need to be looked at again. I would like some more item options. But they do work.</p>Deriven Firelion wrote:Gortle wrote: Deriven Firelion wrote:Animal companion becomes fairly useless after level 16. Can't breach DR. Doesn't do much damage. Attack roll is ok and AC not bad on a nimble companion. Saves are fine. Hit points fine.
Damage too low and lack of ability to penetrate DR or move in three dimensions if not choosing a bird makes them feel like a sort of tacked on useless bunch of feats.
It is still a sponge and still can grapple. I have not found this to be true. If...Gortle2024-03-23T06:58:20ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe&page=2?Remastered-Barbarian#822024-03-23T06:00:46Z2024-03-23T05:50:52Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ferious Thune wrote:</div><blockquote> For those who've brought up Cleave, Swipe is essentially what Cleave should have been. </blockquote><p>I see Cleave as the Barbarian equivaent to Reactive Strike. That is what it is really competing with. Yes Swipe is a nice power and it give Barbarians a role versus hordes. But I'm much more concerned about giving Barbarians a reaction that is not AoO so the martials actually play very differently.Ferious Thune wrote:For those who've brought up Cleave, Swipe is essentially what Cleave should have been.
I see Cleave as the Barbarian equivaent to Reactive Strike. That is what it is really competing with. Yes Swipe is a nice power and it give Barbarians a role versus hordes. But I'm much more concerned about giving Barbarians a reaction that is not AoO so the martials actually play very differently.Gortle2024-03-23T05:50:52ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe?Remastered-Barbarian#402024-03-25T05:25:01Z2024-03-22T05:14:54Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ezekieru wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
2, Luis Loza said this on Discord back in January:</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Luis Loza wrote:</div><blockquote>Rage is going to be better.</blockquote>No details on how it'll be better, of course. But that has been said. </blockquote><p>My guess is the no concentrate limit being changed.Ezekieru wrote:2, Luis Loza said this on Discord back in January: Luis Loza wrote:Rage is going to be better.
No details on how it'll be better, of course. But that has been said. My guess is the no concentrate limit being changed.Gortle2024-03-22T05:14:54ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe?Remastered-Barbarian#392024-03-27T19:16:30Z2024-03-22T05:11:49Z<p>Well the problem with the barbarian not raging is they are mechanically required to by their class. Or they have no abilities.</p>
<p>Which brings us back to the point that the class should be called Berserker. Just so we can have non raging barbarians.</p>
<p>Typically I don't even bother to count rounds up to ten. I guess or trust a player if it is relevant.</p>Well the problem with the barbarian not raging is they are mechanically required to by their class. Or they have no abilities.
Which brings us back to the point that the class should be called Berserker. Just so we can have non raging barbarians.
Typically I don't even bother to count rounds up to ten. I guess or trust a player if it is relevant.Gortle2024-03-22T05:11:49ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Hand of The Apprentice + SpellstrikeGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yi1?Hand-of-The-Apprentice-Spellstrike#22024-03-22T01:36:47Z2024-03-21T23:46:52Z<p>It does work.</p>
<p>Is it any better than a cantrip like say Gouging Claw?</p>
<p>At level 10 a d12 weapon is 2d12+2d6(from two energy runes) + INT , where as Gouging Claw is 6d6 + 6 Bleed.</p>
<p>Seems like a wash to me even without going to Amped Imaginary Weapon</p>It does work.
Is it any better than a cantrip like say Gouging Claw?
At level 10 a d12 weapon is 2d12+2d6(from two energy runes) + INT , where as Gouging Claw is 6d6 + 6 Bleed.
Seems like a wash to me even without going to Amped Imaginary WeaponGortle2024-03-21T23:46:52ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Making a killer with rewrite memoryGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yh5?Making-a-killer-with-rewrite-memory#142024-03-21T22:10:47Z2024-03-21T22:03:23Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Claxon wrote:</div><blockquote>We don't care about the first option of what happens at all. But the second option says "have that creature's aura appear as if it were under the effect of a spell you know". So it doesn't seem like you can give it no aura, which would definitely be preferred. And it only lasts as long as you keep preparing it. So eventually chances are you would forget, although whether or not that would be still be relevant is a good question, people may no longer be interested in investigating. But the issue to me is that the creature would still have some sort of magic aura on them, a creature that just killed someone that is supposed to be an ally. </blockquote><p>Personally I think that is just sloppy wording and you should be able to surpress the aura completely on a creature too. I don't see that omission as deliberate. So as a GM I would allow that to happen, however if your GM doesn't who can at least try to hide is as something innocent and mild, like for example the aura of a detect magic spell? That might work.
<p>Yes having to keep preparing it is a pest, but at least that is doable.</p>Claxon wrote:We don't care about the first option of what happens at all. But the second option says "have that creature's aura appear as if it were under the effect of a spell you know". So it doesn't seem like you can give it no aura, which would definitely be preferred. And it only lasts as long as you keep preparing it. So eventually chances are you would forget, although whether or not that would be still be relevant is a good question, people may no longer be interested in...Gortle2024-03-21T22:03:23ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe?Remastered-Barbarian#352024-03-22T14:31:38Z2024-03-21T20:40:01Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Secret Wizard wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I've said my piece before, to some controversy:</p>
<p>- I hate the -AC penalty in Rage. I don't think it serves any real purpose and you become an HP piñata early on. Very counter-intuitive for new players. I get it that very experienced folks rage when lower in HP, but I want to allow my players to play intuitively out of the box... this was the same problem that +CON had with the 1E Chained Barb.
<br />
</blockquote><p>A penalty is counter intuitive?
</p>
I like disadvantages on classes. It makes them unique.
<br />
I don't want a game so simple that Rage is looked on as difficult.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Secret Wizard wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
- I think they should smoothen Fury Instinct to be comparable to the others. No reason why roleplaying railroads should give you power. I think we've left that design principle by the wayside.
<br />
</blockquote><p>Fury definitely needs work.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Secret Wizard wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
- I honestly believe the class / playerbase is disserviced by forcing Edicts on them as Barbarians. Less roleplaying railroads, please.
<br />
</blockquote><p>As it is written it is too tight and crippling on the party. So it needs to change. I'm OK with some codes though.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Secret Wizard wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
- I think that things like Cleave should be General Feats, and Class Feats saved for things that really really tie to your class. Why can't any class Cleave? I want my Barbarian feats to be very unique to what my class does.
<br />
</blockquote><p>I see it as something that suits the berserker mentality. So happy to have it be Barbarian only. It would be nice if there was a few more things like this in the class aside from rage. The main problem is it is non functional as written. But other classes might like it. EG a Flurry Ranger might actually like the feat as an extra attack is much more useful to them - as opposed to Barbarians who lose features with agile weapons.Secret Wizard wrote:I've said my piece before, to some controversy:
- I hate the -AC penalty in Rage. I don't think it serves any real purpose and you become an HP piñata early on. Very counter-intuitive for new players. I get it that very experienced folks rage when lower in HP, but I want to allow my players to play intuitively out of the box... this was the same problem that +CON had with the 1E Chained Barb.
A penalty is counter intuitive?
I like disadvantages on classes. It makes them...Gortle2024-03-21T20:40:01ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Making a killer with rewrite memoryGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yh5?Making-a-killer-with-rewrite-memory#102024-03-21T23:53:13Z2024-03-21T04:41:17Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Claxon wrote:</div><blockquote><p> One thing to keep in mind is the spell duration is unlimited.</p>
<p>This means if someone competent investigates they will discover that the guards memory has been tampered with (from the magical residue). It's relatively trivial for someone to find the guard has magic on them, which in a competent organization would lead to a investigation of what it is.</p>
<p>Now, you could have a situation where there is no one to detect the magic, or no one competent enough to investigate. But my point is that your actions wouldn't hold up to real scrutiny. </blockquote><p><a href="https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=178" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Magic Aura</a> can hide this. Providing you cast it at a high enough level it should plug this gap.Claxon wrote:One thing to keep in mind is the spell duration is unlimited.
This means if someone competent investigates they will discover that the guards memory has been tampered with (from the magical residue). It's relatively trivial for someone to find the guard has magic on them, which in a competent organization would lead to a investigation of what it is.
Now, you could have a situation where there is no one to detect the magic, or no one competent enough to investigate. But my point...Gortle2024-03-21T04:41:17ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe?Remastered-Barbarian#192024-03-21T01:36:52Z2024-03-21T00:16:14Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Bluemagetim wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Gortle wrote:</div><blockquote> My biggest wish is for Cleave to be a reasonable option that people will take. At the moment only newbies do and they always regret it. </blockquote><p>i wouldn't mind it if they reimagined cleave all together.
</p>
It is supposed to be an reaction that helps a martial do better at dealing with grouped up foes.
<br />
Right now its conceptualized as you swing through one foe taking them out them and follow through into an adjacent foe. This concept is a bit limiting and applying map limits it further in ways reactive strike doesnt have to worry about for the same use of your reaction for the turn.</p>
<p>But how would it be conceptualized to give the sense its going for in a way that puts in on par with other reactions at its level? </blockquote><p>Simply have it ignore and not contribute to MAP. (Or perhaps fix a small specific penalty to it if you must). If it gives you a free MAP less attack 1 in 2 or 3 rounds then it is somewhat comparable to Reactive Strike. Which the Fighter got for free.Bluemagetim wrote:Gortle wrote: My biggest wish is for Cleave to be a reasonable option that people will take. At the moment only newbies do and they always regret it.
i wouldn't mind it if they reimagined cleave all together.
It is supposed to be an reaction that helps a martial do better at dealing with grouped up foes.
Right now its conceptualized as you swing through one foe taking them out them and follow through into an adjacent foe. This concept is a bit limiting and applying map...Gortle2024-03-21T00:16:14ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe?Remastered-Barbarian#142024-03-21T23:57:12Z2024-03-20T22:40:32Z<p>My biggest wish is for Cleave to be a reasonable option that people will take. At the moment only newbies do and they always regret it.</p>My biggest wish is for Cleave to be a reasonable option that people will take. At the moment only newbies do and they always regret it.Gortle2024-03-20T22:40:32ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe?Remastered-Barbarian#132024-03-21T20:29:23Z2024-03-20T22:38:49Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">SuperBidi wrote:</div><blockquote> Mechanically, there are issues with the Superstition Instinct. Thematically, it's pretty unique. </blockquote><p>I would instead say that there are party issues with the Superstition Instinct, that require the GM to reinterpret their anathema. Yes I want it to be fixed and to stay.SuperBidi wrote:Mechanically, there are issues with the Superstition Instinct. Thematically, it's pretty unique.
I would instead say that there are party issues with the Superstition Instinct, that require the GM to reinterpret their anathema. Yes I want it to be fixed and to stay.Gortle2024-03-20T22:38:49ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Dread wraith and good damageGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ygp?Dread-wraith-and-good-damage#52024-03-20T04:20:27Z2024-03-20T04:12:01Z<p>Get a Ghost Touch rune or you probably can't deal with it. Legacy PF2 can be very tough , especially with the wrong GM like myself who reads the rules literally.</p>Get a Ghost Touch rune or you probably can't deal with it. Legacy PF2 can be very tough , especially with the wrong GM like myself who reads the rules literally.Gortle2024-03-20T04:12:01ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Traversing a Wall of WaterGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yfb?Traversing-a-Wall-of-Water#52024-03-19T08:04:53Z2024-03-17T22:17:24Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ravingdork wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I hadn't considered walking along the bottom. Is there anything preventing that?
</p>
</blockquote><p>It is a GM call in the <a href="https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2345" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">movement rules</a>
<p>I wouldn't do it but over to you.</p>
<p>This is the whole point of a Wall of Water. It takes a spell slots and 3 actions from the caster. It really is just a one round delay tactic. A spell that is unpopular as it is and you want to nerf it? Doesn't really make any sense from a balance point of view.</p>Ravingdork wrote:I hadn't considered walking along the bottom. Is there anything preventing that?
It is a GM call in the movement rules I wouldn't do it but over to you.
This is the whole point of a Wall of Water. It takes a spell slots and 3 actions from the caster. It really is just a one round delay tactic. A spell that is unpopular as it is and you want to nerf it? Doesn't really make any sense from a balance point of view.Gortle2024-03-17T22:17:24ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Traversing a Wall of WaterGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yfb?Traversing-a-Wall-of-Water#32024-03-17T21:10:47Z2024-03-17T20:55:36Z<p>I agree. The Wall of Water is basically an action sink. If you want to crosss it it is going to take 3 actions. Move, Swim, Move.</p>
<p>The Swim check DC doesn't really matter unless they fail - which will cost them another action. The spell works fine even if the GM just sets it at 10. If it is a moderate DC, then someone trying to pass through keeps wasting an action till they succeed.</p>
<p>If the players set up with the right attacks to take advantage of it, it is a very effective spell.</p>I agree. The Wall of Water is basically an action sink. If you want to crosss it it is going to take 3 actions. Move, Swim, Move.
The Swim check DC doesn't really matter unless they fail - which will cost them another action. The spell works fine even if the GM just sets it at 10. If it is a moderate DC, then someone trying to pass through keeps wasting an action till they succeed.
If the players set up with the right attacks to take advantage of it, it is a very effective spell.Gortle2024-03-17T20:55:36ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Do incorporeal entities ignore armor?Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ydl?Do-incorporeal-entities-ignore-armor#322024-03-17T03:00:48Z2024-03-17T02:54:28Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Elfteiroh wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
3- And can still somehow hurt you
<br />
doesn't really make <i>physical</i> sense. </blockquote><p>Because they are not physical.
</p>
Realy what should happen now is that Paizo should change most damage from ghosts to be Spiritual damage.</p>Elfteiroh wrote:3- And can still somehow hurt you
doesn't really make physical sense.
Because they are not physical.
Realy what should happen now is that Paizo should change most damage from ghosts to be Spiritual damage.Gortle2024-03-17T02:54:28ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Do incorporeal entities ignore armor?Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ydl?Do-incorporeal-entities-ignore-armor#292024-03-16T12:30:47Z2024-03-16T12:17:50Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Captain Morgan wrote:</div><blockquote>I think the truth is touch AC was deemed unnecessary complexity, in much the same way CMB/CMB was more complicated than it needed to be. Of course, they had a really easy replacement for that with athletics and fort/reflex DCs, which allowed some mechanical distinction between "big and tough" vs "lithe and nimble" defenses. AC didn't get that treatment and uses a one size fits all number. </blockquote><p>AC being the way it is - part of it is being hard to hit, part is being hard to hurt - is very simplistic. But it is also a long held tradition of the game. I doubt there is the will to change.
<p>If you want to simulate touch AC then simply give out a +2 to hit circumstance bonus for "Touch" attacks versus enemies in heavy or equivalent armour. You could even put it on attacks as a trait.</p>
<p>Something like that is the way to do it in the PF2 system.</p>Captain Morgan wrote:I think the truth is touch AC was deemed unnecessary complexity, in much the same way CMB/CMB was more complicated than it needed to be. Of course, they had a really easy replacement for that with athletics and fort/reflex DCs, which allowed some mechanical distinction between "big and tough" vs "lithe and nimble" defenses. AC didn't get that treatment and uses a one size fits all number.
AC being the way it is - part of it is being hard to hit, part is being hard to...Gortle2024-03-16T12:17:50ZRe: Forums: Advice: Achieves of Nethys & RoguesGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ycy?Achieves-of-Nethys-Rogues#212024-03-16T19:25:50Z2024-03-15T23:10:34Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote> It gets pretty insane.</blockquote><p>Yes and this is where Paizo stuffed up with the balancing of the Rogue Rackets. Scoundrel and Mastermind only give you an alternative way to get Off-Guard. But from mid level that is 99% automatic anyway without a roll. (Improved Invisibility, Dread Striker, Gang Up etc etc) so the Rackets Scoundrel and Mastermind become largely pointless. Given that Eldritch Trickster RAW doesn't work and is not a unique benefit anyway, there are only 2 Rogue Rackets mechanically worth taking Ruffian or Thief.Deriven Firelion wrote:It gets pretty insane.
Yes and this is where Paizo stuffed up with the balancing of the Rogue Rackets. Scoundrel and Mastermind only give you an alternative way to get Off-Guard. But from mid level that is 99% automatic anyway without a roll. (Improved Invisibility, Dread Striker, Gang Up etc etc) so the Rackets Scoundrel and Mastermind become largely pointless. Given that Eldritch Trickster RAW doesn't work and is not a unique benefit anyway, there are only 2 Rogue...Gortle2024-03-15T23:10:34ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Archives of Nethys is now remastered, yay!Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yct?Archives-of-Nethys-is-now-remastered-yay#262024-03-14T11:10:47Z2024-03-14T10:59:40Z<p>Bless doesn't scale so Eternal Bless is OK and very action friendly. I see it as compensation for not getting Effortless Concentration. </p>
<p>Inviolable is cool. I'll be taking that.</p>
<p>The level 20 feats seem OK to me.</p>Bless doesn't scale so Eternal Bless is OK and very action friendly. I see it as compensation for not getting Effortless Concentration.
Inviolable is cool. I'll be taking that.
The level 20 feats seem OK to me.Gortle2024-03-14T10:59:40ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Archives of Nethys is now remastered, yay!Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yct?Archives-of-Nethys-is-now-remastered-yay#242024-03-14T10:10:47Z2024-03-14T09:15:12Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Did anyone look at the Remastered Cleric? </p>
<p>What a power boost for that class.
<br />
Better feats.</blockquote><p>Yes some of them are very good.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote>Don't have to worry about Charisma now.</blockquote><p>I dislike that. I really would have prefered if they had left them with a reason to have some Charisma. Maybe a later feat with some extra benefit at least. To my mind priests should have charisma.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote>Spirit damage hits everything except constructs and creatures without souls or spirits</blockquote><p>Yes it is massive. One of the better damage types. Which really improves the potential for direct damage in the class. Immunity is going to be fairly easy to predict. I think it eats into the Primal and Arcane niche a bit too much. Not having good direct damage in class was a known weakness of the cleric list that you could build around. Now they can all have it.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote>Warpriest can get master proficiency in deity with weapon as well as master casting.</blockquote><p>Yeah not really a big deal but still nice.
<p>To my taste the cleric is verging on too strong now. I wouldn't have gone as far as they did. I suspect they really wanted to silence the 'Warpriest sucks crowd'. Still it is not going to be a problem. So I'm pretty happy.</p>Deriven Firelion wrote:Did anyone look at the Remastered Cleric?
What a power boost for that class.
Better feats.
Yes some of them are very good. Deriven Firelion wrote:Don't have to worry about Charisma now.
I dislike that. I really would have prefered if they had left them with a reason to have some Charisma. Maybe a later feat with some extra benefit at least. To my mind priests should have charisma. Deriven Firelion wrote:Spirit damage hits everything except constructs and creatures...Gortle2024-03-14T09:15:12ZRe: Forums: Advice: Achieves of Nethys & RoguesGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ycy?Achieves-of-Nethys-Rogues#62024-03-14T01:30:46Z2024-03-14T01:21:07Z<p>That Rogues and Fighters are ridiculously strong in PF2 seems to have been a design goal.</p>That Rogues and Fighters are ridiculously strong in PF2 seems to have been a design goal.Gortle2024-03-14T01:21:07ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Archives of Nethys is now remastered, yay!Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yct?Archives-of-Nethys-is-now-remastered-yay#182024-03-13T23:07:11Z2024-03-13T23:00:21Z<p>Archives of Nethys is the reason I play PF2.
<br />
Thank you.</p>Archives of Nethys is the reason I play PF2.
Thank you.Gortle2024-03-13T23:00:21ZRe: Forums: Advice: Animal Companion Attack Bonus too low?Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ybh?Animal-Companion-Attack-Bonus-too-low#302024-03-13T00:15:12Z2024-03-13T00:10:20Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Animal companion becomes fairly useless after level 16. Can't breach DR. Doesn't do much damage. Attack roll is ok and AC not bad on a nimble companion. Saves are fine. Hit points fine.</p>
<p>Damage too low and lack of ability to penetrate DR or move in three dimensions if not choosing a bird makes them feel like a sort of tacked on useless bunch of feats.</p>
<p></blockquote><p>It is still a sponge and still can grapple.Deriven Firelion wrote:Animal companion becomes fairly useless after level 16. Can't breach DR. Doesn't do much damage. Attack roll is ok and AC not bad on a nimble companion. Saves are fine. Hit points fine.
Damage too low and lack of ability to penetrate DR or move in three dimensions if not choosing a bird makes them feel like a sort of tacked on useless bunch of feats.
It is still a sponge and still can grapple.Gortle2024-03-13T00:10:20ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Is "Reducing Hitpoints" the same as "Taking Damage" Shield block and resistances.Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ybm?Is-Reducing-Hitpoints-the-same-as-Taking#302024-03-12T23:44:47Z2024-03-12T23:32:39Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">The Raven Black wrote:</div><blockquote> Resistance applies after Shield block not before. Otherwise, it would mean that your shield benefits from your resistance, which makes zero sense. </blockquote><p>I don't agree. It is all natural language. You just can't even be sure resistance is different from hardness.The Raven Black wrote:Resistance applies after Shield block not before. Otherwise, it would mean that your shield benefits from your resistance, which makes zero sense.
I don't agree. It is all natural language. You just can't even be sure resistance is different from hardness.Gortle2024-03-12T23:32:39ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Unanswered Eidolon QuestionsGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ybw?Unanswered-Eidolon-Questions#502024-03-12T22:54:47Z2024-03-12T22:44:17Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">YuriP wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Gortle wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">YuriP wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Honestly I think that clear condition when your Eidolon unmanifests is TGTBT. This easily would end in "Oh! My Eidolon was debuffed. Let's unmanifest it to clear it without any checks".</p>
<p>That's why I consider that's all effects are ongoing no matter if the eidolon is in the field or not. </blockquote><p>It is abusable either way. If conditions don't clear then you can precast as well.
<p>The rules don't say - they need to. </blockquote>I'm not saying that these condition freezes when the Eidolon is in its home plane. If you precast their duration still counts while it's unmanifested. </blockquote><p>Yes but spells like TailWind and Invisibility 2 are easy to get out of low level items and last a long time. The Eidolon becomes very different if long term buffs are available.YuriP wrote:Gortle wrote: YuriP wrote:Honestly I think that clear condition when your Eidolon unmanifests is TGTBT. This easily would end in "Oh! My Eidolon was debuffed. Let's unmanifest it to clear it without any checks".
That's why I consider that's all effects are ongoing no matter if the eidolon is in the field or not.
It is abusable either way. If conditions don't clear then you can precast as well. The rules don't say - they need to. I'm not saying that these condition freezes when...Gortle2024-03-12T22:44:17ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Unanswered Eidolon QuestionsGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ybw?Unanswered-Eidolon-Questions#442024-03-12T21:52:41Z2024-03-12T21:34:35Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">YuriP wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Honestly I think that clear condition when your Eidolon unmanifests is TGTBT. This easily would end in "Oh! My Eidolon was debuffed. Let's unmanifest it to clear it without any checks".</p>
<p>That's why I consider that's all effects are ongoing no matter if the eidolon is in the field or not. </blockquote><p>It is abusable either way. If conditions don't clear then you can precast as well.
<p>The rules don't say - they need to.</p>YuriP wrote:Honestly I think that clear condition when your Eidolon unmanifests is TGTBT. This easily would end in "Oh! My Eidolon was debuffed. Let's unmanifest it to clear it without any checks".
That's why I consider that's all effects are ongoing no matter if the eidolon is in the field or not.
It is abusable either way. If conditions don't clear then you can precast as well. The rules don't say - they need to.Gortle2024-03-12T21:34:35ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Unanswered Eidolon QuestionsGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ybw?Unanswered-Eidolon-Questions#142024-03-12T16:05:21Z2024-03-12T11:21:03Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Thod wrote:</div><blockquote><p> 1) Where does it state that an Eidolon can't use mundane items?</p>
<p>P.53 says:
<br />
Gear and your Eidolon
<br />
Your eidolon can’t wear or use magic items, except for items with the eidolon trait. An eidolon can have up to two items invested. Your eidolon’s link to you means it can benefit from certain magic items invested by you. </blockquote><p>That is not it. If fact this rule only stops magic item use by the eidolon.
<p>Instead look at </p>
<p>P51
<br />
Key Terms</p>
<p>Eidolon: A creature with this trait is an eidolon. An action or spell with this trait can be performed by an eidolon only. An item with this trait can be used or worn by an eidolon only, and an eidolon can't use items that don't have this trait. (An eidolon can have up to two items invested.)</p>
<p>Honestly I think the intention is only prohibition of magic items. They just have worded it poorly. There are of course non magical items like alchemical ones.</p>Thod wrote:1) Where does it state that an Eidolon can't use mundane items?
P.53 says:
Gear and your Eidolon
Your eidolon can’t wear or use magic items, except for items with the eidolon trait. An eidolon can have up to two items invested. Your eidolon’s link to you means it can benefit from certain magic items invested by you.
That is not it. If fact this rule only stops magic item use by the eidolon. Instead look at
P51
Key Terms
Eidolon: A creature with this trait is an eidolon. An...Gortle2024-03-12T11:21:03ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Unanswered Eidolon QuestionsGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ybw?Unanswered-Eidolon-Questions#122024-03-12T21:18:21Z2024-03-12T07:51:37Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">graystone wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ravingdork wrote:</div><blockquote> If an eidolon is unable to use mundane tools, then that severely limits its ability to make full use of feats like Dual Studies and Skilled Partner. Several skills (like Medicine and Thievery, for example) don't do a whole lot for you without the appropriate tools. </blockquote>"severely limits" is quite the overstatement: every skill has uses that do not require tools. </blockquote><p>Yep but still clearly a reasonable candidate for TBTBT.graystone wrote:Ravingdork wrote: If an eidolon is unable to use mundane tools, then that severely limits its ability to make full use of feats like Dual Studies and Skilled Partner. Several skills (like Medicine and Thievery, for example) don't do a whole lot for you without the appropriate tools.
"severely limits" is quite the overstatement: every skill has uses that do not require tools. Yep but still clearly a reasonable candidate for TBTBT.Gortle2024-03-12T07:51:37ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Unanswered Eidolon QuestionsGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ybw?Unanswered-Eidolon-Questions#112024-03-12T12:17:01Z2024-03-12T07:49:14Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">graystone wrote:</div><blockquote><div class="messageboard-quotee">YuriP wrote:</div><blockquote>Now. The Eidolon shares the HP with the summoner. The Eidolon died and its hit points are automatically reduced to 0. What's happens to the summoner when the Eidolon dies!? The summoner dies too!!!</blockquote><p>No, the player goes to Dying 1 because it's hp are 0. As they share hp, and the dead can't raise their hp above 0, you can at best make them unconscious with 0 Hit Points: this means that you can prevent death but they can't ever do anything until the Eidolon is brought back to life.
<p>So, no it doesn't kill the summoner but it's mighty close. </blockquote><p>I don't think that is all clear. I can argure the reverse. The Summoners HPs were reduced to zero by a death effect (which damaged it's Eidolon). You only have one pool of hit points. It is not like there is a disconnect or level of indirection here. I'd just as easily have the death effect apply to the Summoner.graystone wrote:YuriP wrote:Now. The Eidolon shares the HP with the summoner. The Eidolon died and its hit points are automatically reduced to 0. What's happens to the summoner when the Eidolon dies!? The summoner dies too!!!
No, the player goes to Dying 1 because it's hp are 0. As they share hp, and the dead can't raise their hp above 0, you can at best make them unconscious with 0 Hit Points: this means that you can prevent death but they can't ever do anything until the Eidolon is brought...Gortle2024-03-12T07:49:14ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Double Slice and HardnessGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ybe?Double-Slice-and-Hardness#102024-03-12T10:39:33Z2024-03-12T07:36:51Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ascalaphus wrote:</div><blockquote> Yeah, shield block happens very late in the damage sequence, after the damage has already been merged for processing weaknesses and resistances. At that point it makes no sense to split it up again into separate pools to use shield block against one or the other or both. </blockquote><p>Paizo have not provided a tight damage procedure. The definitions are just not precise. Damage Type is complex even though the damage procedure is written for a singular damage type. Nothing is said about additional damage. It is all a little fuzzy.
<p>I don't think you can infer the sequence precisely from the trigger condition for Shield block <i>you would take damage from a physical attack</i> is IMO also satisfied by a successful hit at the start of the damage procedure, as well as step 4 of the damage procedure.</p>
<p>I think "unclear it is GM's choice" is the best answer to the original question.</p>Ascalaphus wrote:Yeah, shield block happens very late in the damage sequence, after the damage has already been merged for processing weaknesses and resistances. At that point it makes no sense to split it up again into separate pools to use shield block against one or the other or both.
Paizo have not provided a tight damage procedure. The definitions are just not precise. Damage Type is complex even though the damage procedure is written for a singular damage type. Nothing is said about...Gortle2024-03-12T07:36:51ZRe: Forums: Advice: Advice on Character Idea.Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yal?Advice-on-Character-Idea#42024-03-10T05:40:48Z2024-03-10T05:33:56Z<p>No. You'll be fine without it.</p>No. You'll be fine without it.Gortle2024-03-10T05:33:56ZRe: Forums: Advice: Help building a rogue sprite?Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43y9n?Help-building-a-rogue-sprite#42024-03-08T03:20:49Z2024-03-08T03:10:33Z<p>Because of your reach penalty and your desire to be low strength (you can have max strength if you want but that may not be the character vibe you are after) My recommendation would be to take a reach weapon like a <a href="https://2e.aonprd.com/Weapons.aspx?ID=273" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Bladed Scarf</a>
<br />
That way you can provide flanking for your allies and you don't have to enter your enemies square to attack them. Thief racket is strongly recommended.
<br />
If you want to attack at range a short bow works fine. But getting your sneak attack in is difficult so something like points into charisma and maximise your Intimidation skill so you can Demoralise your opponents. Then take the Dread Striker feat level 4. I'd still be going Thief Racket because you can do everything I suggested, but Mastermind can work for ranged if you invest in it.</p>Because of your reach penalty and your desire to be low strength (you can have max strength if you want but that may not be the character vibe you are after) My recommendation would be to take a reach weapon like a Bladed Scarf
That way you can provide flanking for your allies and you don't have to enter your enemies square to attack them. Thief racket is strongly recommended.
If you want to attack at range a short bow works fine. But getting your sneak attack in is difficult so something...Gortle2024-03-08T03:10:33ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Eidolons and AttributesGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43y83?Eidolons-and-Attributes#152024-03-06T21:30:46Z2024-03-06T21:18:31Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Finoan wrote:</div><blockquote><p> And before anyone asks:</p>
<p>Eidolon Spells - "An eidolon that has spells also gains the Cast a Spell activity. It doesn't have its own spell DC or spell attack modifier; if it needs to Cast a Spell, it uses your spell DC and spell attack modifier." </blockquote><p>Yes which means now they have taken attributes off damage for most cantrips, the only mechanical reason to give your Eidolon Charisma is to use the Charisma skills. Which is annoying as the caster Eidolon was the high Charisma option.Finoan wrote:And before anyone asks:
Eidolon Spells - "An eidolon that has spells also gains the Cast a Spell activity. It doesn't have its own spell DC or spell attack modifier; if it needs to Cast a Spell, it uses your spell DC and spell attack modifier."
Yes which means now they have taken attributes off damage for most cantrips, the only mechanical reason to give your Eidolon Charisma is to use the Charisma skills. Which is annoying as the caster Eidolon was the high Charisma option.Gortle2024-03-06T21:18:31ZRe: Forums: Advice: Nimble Strike vs Opportune BackstabGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43y75?Nimble-Strike-vs-Opportune-Backstab#242024-03-05T08:20:47Z2024-03-05T08:07:58Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote>I can't see many groups not having a martial for a rogue to key off of. If that group did not coordinate with the rogue, it might make playing the rogue very unpleasant. Nimble Strike with no sneak attack would not greatly improve that.</blockquote><p>I see the the main use case being an independent skirmisher or ranged attacker. Yes it might be a better choice if your group is terrible at coordination. Many players are pretty random in their coordination.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote>I made a rogue archer because I wanted to see if I could make it work. It did not come online consistently until I obtained Parting Shot and Precise Debilitations without assistance from a tripping martial. I did use Feint at times early on, but an action economy rogue archer took a bit to do well. Once it came online, it was pretty fun from the last half of the levels. </blockquote><p>In order to play a ranged Rogue you have to have a couple of methods of getting sneak attack from range. So Intimidation plus Dread Striker, MasterMind Racket, an ally who likes to prone or grapple or is otherwise helpful. Somewhere down that road. To do a ranged Rogue with Nimble Strike then you probably want a d6 finese natural attack, say a Tengu's beak.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote>Maybe someone could build around Nimble Strike into something interesting for fun. This offers that option. It may not be as effective as the clear Gang Up with Opportune Backstab path, but may be more fun for the player. </blockquote><p>The bonus to your AC and Reflex saves is nice too.
</p>
I'm just happy it is in the same ball park.</p>Deriven Firelion wrote:I can't see many groups not having a martial for a rogue to key off of. If that group did not coordinate with the rogue, it might make playing the rogue very unpleasant. Nimble Strike with no sneak attack would not greatly improve that.
I see the the main use case being an independent skirmisher or ranged attacker. Yes it might be a better choice if your group is terrible at coordination. Many players are pretty random in their coordination. Deriven Firelion wrote:I...Gortle2024-03-05T08:07:58ZRe: Forums: Advice: Nimble Strike vs Opportune BackstabGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43y75?Nimble-Strike-vs-Opportune-Backstab#62024-03-04T18:58:18Z2024-03-03T21:57:21Z<p>Depends on party composition and tactics. If you have 2 other melee allies and you are up against a major combatant then Opportune Backstab is more reliable. If you are more often skirmishing without much support as your allies are erratic then Nimble Strike is clearly better. It also might be better against a horde.</p>Depends on party composition and tactics. If you have 2 other melee allies and you are up against a major combatant then Opportune Backstab is more reliable. If you are more often skirmishing without much support as your allies are erratic then Nimble Strike is clearly better. It also might be better against a horde.Gortle2024-03-03T21:57:21ZRe: Forums: Advice: Looking to get enemy aggroGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43y4c&page=2?Looking-to-get-enemy-aggro#972024-03-01T23:10:45Z2024-03-01T23:05:20Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
I'm talking about 1st and 2nd edition D&D. The old, old days.
<br />
</blockquote><p>Bards did not exist in the base game. They were an option in the DM's guide.
</p>
</blockquote><p>You set the parameters of this discussion as 1st and 2nd edition, so you are now shifting the goal posts.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote>No one called a rogue a skill monkey. The rogue is the only one that could do what the rogue did. They just called it a rogue. I think Rangers and Assassins had lesser rogue skills or a handful of them.</blockquote><p>Original Bards had some too. The discussion was did class X and race Y give us a reasonable coverage of the skill that we needed or could we cover it with a spell caster.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote>No. There were not skills. They were part of the class abilities. There were no skill monkeys. No one could take skills. You had such abilities as part of your class or not at all.</blockquote><p>There were racial modifiers as well
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote>No. I'm not getting caught up in nomenclature. </blockquote><p>Really? Is is called a skill or not?
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote>The structure of the game was very different from what it is now.</blockquote><p>True
</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote><p>Party construction wasn't particularly interested in the same things as now.</p>
<p>Abilities between classes differed greatly. From what I recall the only class that was really a must have everyone wanted was a cleric for the healing.</p>
<p>Customization was extremely limited to non-existent in 1st edition. It expanded some in 2nd edition with kits and such.</p>
<p>Very different game from what it is now. </blockquote><p>My groups were interested in balance and covering all the roles. So it very much was. Of course I played a lot of different systems early on so I was exposed to concepts outside of D&D.Deriven Firelion wrote:I'm talking about 1st and 2nd edition D&D. The old, old days.
Bards did not exist in the base game. They were an option in the DM's guide.
You set the parameters of this discussion as 1st and 2nd edition, so you are now shifting the goal posts. Deriven Firelion wrote:No one called a rogue a skill monkey. The rogue is the only one that could do what the rogue did. They just called it a rogue. I think Rangers and Assassins had lesser rogue skills or a handful of them.
...Gortle2024-03-01T23:05:20ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Take cover action without cover....(sorta)Gortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43y27?Take-cover-action-without-cover#432024-03-01T22:50:45Z2024-03-01T22:39:11Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">lordcirth wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Seravix wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Example 1) A character is in a room with his back to the wall, surrounded by thugs. Player says, I am by a feature that can provide cover (tech he is right, it can provide cover to someone on the other side of the wall), so that allows him to take cover. And the take cover action states, if he doesn't have standard cover, then he gains it "Otherwise, you gain the benefits of standard cover (a +2 circumstance bonus instead)".</p>
<p>Question 1) As a dm, would you allow him to have the standard cover +2 bonus to ac verse the thugs because he was "hugging" the flat wall for cover? </p>
<p></blockquote><p>He gets greater cover against anyone the wall would give him standard cover against, which is nobody in this scenario. Putting your back to a wall means only 5 enemies can be adjacent to you, and only 2 of them can flank you; that's it.
</p>
</blockquote><p>Some GMs may give you a cover bonus against enemies that were strictly along the line of the wall. I can't see them being any more generous than that.lordcirth wrote:Seravix wrote:
Example 1) A character is in a room with his back to the wall, surrounded by thugs. Player says, I am by a feature that can provide cover (tech he is right, it can provide cover to someone on the other side of the wall), so that allows him to take cover. And the take cover action states, if he doesn't have standard cover, then he gains it "Otherwise, you gain the benefits of standard cover (a +2 circumstance bonus instead)".Question 1) As a dm, would you allow...Gortle2024-03-01T22:39:11ZRe: Forums: Advice: Looking to get enemy aggroGortlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43y4c&page=2?Looking-to-get-enemy-aggro#922024-03-01T22:40:45Z2024-03-01T22:36:37Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Claxon wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Finoan wrote:</div><blockquote>But yeah. Aggro mechanics don't work well in TTRPG games because the GM should also have agency for their character's actions just like the players do. </blockquote><p>Agree.
<p>However, if a taunt mechanic of some sort was introduced I would be fine with it as long as it was a choice the character could make. For example, all of the Champion abilities which have a do this thing or take this penalty are a perfect example.</p>
<p>Anything that is a make this save/roll or you are forced to do a think is only acceptable for spells or things that have a limited quantity of times that can be done (like 3 to 5 times per day max). </blockquote><p>There are a number of spells that take complete agency away from players In fact you can fill out a spell list with them. Most of them are hidden behind a critical fail result so that is OK.
<p>A few aren't like Calm Emotions.</p>
<p>Anyway we discussed this before the proposals made were for a cool down immunity type effect. So we do agree. It shouldn't be easy to force this on characters repeatedly. Doesn't mean the ability shouldn't exist. This over concern about player agency is out of proportion. There are heaps of abilities in the game that take away player agency.</p>Claxon wrote:Finoan wrote:But yeah. Aggro mechanics don't work well in TTRPG games because the GM should also have agency for their character's actions just like the players do.
Agree. However, if a taunt mechanic of some sort was introduced I would be fine with it as long as it was a choice the character could make. For example, all of the Champion abilities which have a do this thing or take this penalty are a perfect example.
Anything that is a make this save/roll or you are forced to do...Gortle2024-03-01T22:36:37Z