| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, justice for Grex
Yes, in the same way the PF2e remaster is compatible with legacy content. Everything we've heard says core mechanics will be the same. There will probably be a few odd edge cases but legacy material can probably be plugged in just fine
Now, I'm just imagining Cayden Cailean and Lamashtu trying to awkwardly co-parent some sort of divine monster (They each get the little terror on alternating centuries).
Ruffian Rogue and Wrestler.
I've never really seen smoothing differences between editions over as necessary and in the case of the Remaster, it feels even less so. All of the changes to lore are fairly niche and can be wiped away with pretty much a single sentence. Where did the drow go? Turns out letting a bunch of wickedly powerful and xenophobic elves run around unmonitored had some consequences. Why are the types of dragon changing? Draconic taxonomy has already been shifting for decades and scale color is far less important to classification than other physiological similarities. Alignment? Mortals stopped projecting flawed systems of ethics onto the multiverse and supernatural forces stopped molding themselves to it. Magical schools? Nex has been pioneering new systems of magical organization for centuries and they've finally started being adopted outside Nex. Here's the thing though, I fully expect that by bringing it up in any published material, Paizo would be preserving some aspect of what they were trying to get rid of for legal reasons and providing WotC a foothold for legal action.
Considering Owlcat managed all of that with their two fairly successful Pathfinder CRPGs based off of PF1e and Larian managed it with a D&D 5e CRPG, I think someone new could handle it with PF2e considering it's much more tightly tuned than either PF1e or 5e. The math is tighter than in PF1e and the system is far less reliant on GM fiat than 5e.
I'm sorry, but your GM is being profoundly dumb. A) All it takes is a quick trip to the 2e AONPRD and typing either 'manipulate' or 'raise a shield' into the search bar. The page for the 'manipulate' trait does not list raising a shield as a manipulate action. The page for the 'raise a shield' action does not list the manipulate trait. That really should be the end of it. B) It makes no sense for raising a shield to have the manipulate trait in the first place. It is an action you are very likely going to be taking while standing in the melee range of enemies frequently. Giving it the manipulate trait would strictly be bad game design and if it did have the manipulate trait someone logging on to these boards to question or yell about it would be a bi-annual occurrence that has generated a paper-trail. C) Chat GPT? Really?
Hot take: killing prisoners (no matter what they've done or plan to do) is not a good thing. I'm not talking about an alignment argument here, I'm talking ethically. There's a reason capital punishment is largely on its way out despite the best efforts of some. The way people treat those they have power over says a lot more about their morals than any number of proposed trolley problems. The reasoning of Trip.H and sanityfaerie leads to some very, very dark places.
Cut and dry yes. They were bound and helpless, no longer a threat, and your group clearly had the means and ability to transport them somewhere where something akin to justice could be done. Killing in overt self-defense is fine and I'd even give grace for not bothering to stabilize and heal them after the fight so that nature takes its course.
The hold-overs from DnD were a crutch, the OGL crisis took away that crutch but it turns out Pathfinder is fine on its own.
Yeah the process of transferring has been a hot mess and poorly managed but the site itself is solid.
Just a planet-sized Cthulhu plush
LOL! Now, how do I pronounce zjahn?If conspirator dragons were an option when I came up with Deyrubrujan I would have totally made her one rather than the blue I had available at the time.Hi Adam. You are the one who created Deyrubrujan in Dragons Unleashed? If so, I wish to ask this: How should I pronounce Deyrubrujan and Mierusildas? The same way a Bostonian would pronounce 'John' but put a little zest in front of it.
I hope the SF2E 2handed melee weapons have limited AOE so that melee soldiers can benefet from their class mechanics as much as a shooting one Yeah, I fully expect there to be some way of applying soldier class features to melee weapons. It might not be as straightforward as having area melee weapons, but a way to treat melee weapons *as* area weapons seems in the cards
I mean, if you specifically want something other than what the class is intended to do, you're going to have a rough time. SF2e soldier is intended as a con-tank specialized in area weapons. They don't need fighter's proficiency progression because they primarily force enemies to make saves against their class DC with area weapons. If that does not suit you, then just pull PF2e's fighter or champion and plug it right in. They'll give you the melee proficiency or high AC you seem to want. Paizo is specifically trying not to waste everyone's time by just reprinting old classes with a sci-fi coat of paint and some greebles bolted onto their gear.
Denny's in Space... The one place you can to get a full ysoki-style breakfast with your grandma and then come back at midnight to see a drunk vesk puke in the lap of his pahtra buddy.
We love to see someone leading from the front.
I have absolutely no use for media generation algorithms in my games. Character Generation: for PBP, I prefer a level of intentional theming and narrative construction that an algorithm is strictly incapable of. For RL games, I just throw together whatever seems fun at the time. Character Art: I find algorithmically generated images quite ugly and often nonsensical. Regardless, I can rummage through Pinterest for a suitable representation for PBP games and never really need them for RL games. Rules Reference: I am perfectly capable of checking rules by myself and interpreting them. AON's search functions can be a bit esoteric but not so much that I require an algorithm with a worrying habit of lying to me to reference things for me. I've considered the options, listened to voices on both side of the debate, and can only come down hard against its use. Ethically, the current media generation algorithms are a nightmare but ultimately an intensely mundane and flawed one. I refuse to assist in making a space for the technology in any of my hobbies as everything I've seen indicates that bad actors and corporate interests are eager to flood markets with minimum viable product and choke out actual creatives who want to earn a living making art. There are reasons that the WGA made restrictions on AI a major point during their strikes. I'm not really here to argue any of these points but rather in an attempt to answer your question in good faith.
I should also note that AI art gets actually pretty bad when using open databases, as AI images generally get worse the more AI art they sample. Kind of like how recording a song on like a phone, then playing it back and recording it again will lower the quality. So it's ultimately without a proper database that has been curated (which most people big on AI don't want) it's ultimately a parasitic technology as it needs non ai art to stay high quality. The ability for these algorithms to effectively poison themselves is part of what makes me moderately hopeful about the near future. Things are going to get worse before they get better though.
A quintessential example of an archetypal sci-fi operative is Murderbot, of M. Wells' Murderbot Diaries. You know, I was about to argue that point but considering how much time Murderbot spends disguised and lurking before enacting incredible violence, it actually tracks.
I'm just curious that since the release of CRB, negative views on wizard have appeared in everyone's eyes almost a few times a month. How do the designers at Paizo view the shortcomings of this profession? In what areas will players' experience be improved in the futureThe developers do not recognize the shortcomings of the Wizard as shortcomings, and instead as functioning as intended. We've been told that, for us to come to a consensus on what a Wizard's functionality is, that we need to "change our definitions" of what a Wizard is and can do. Time and time again, that definition from the people dissatisfied with the direction wizard is taking seems to have been "do everything everyone else can do but better... except healing". Wizard is not the only class and the developers are trying to build a relatively balanced ecosystem of classes with some overlap but also interesting niches. I, personally, have little interest in returning to the days of struggling to find a way to make my character interesting and relevant while the party's caster nuked every single problem immediately. Having a specialist build feel like the back-up option when a wizard is in the room ain't a great feeling.
In addition to Kishmo's points: I've said it before and I'll say it again, the advent of item levels means that raw wealth is no longer a major balancing factor. Additional equipment limited to close to character level will provide only a minor vertical bump in power initially but tend more towards horizontal improvements. There is nothing to stop you from showering your PCs in cool gear and extra cash and I'd argue that this is a much more fun way to play.
A very charismatic bout of nearly contextless violence.
Damn, still going to be at work. I expect you nerds to take copious notes for me.
Is there any way to confirm the ban evasion? Surely that's a banable offense. It might not truly put an end to him but there's no reason to make it easy.
There is a difference between 'actually legally actionable' and 'not truly legally actionable but could still be the subject of a long and expensive court battle'. I'm pretty sure WotC does have the IP for spell schools but even if they didn't, they might still decide that it's worth the money to knock one of their biggest competitors down a peg. WotC's control of the market share is larger by an order of magnitude. Using that kind of disparity to bully smaller companies is a time honored corporate tactic.
There's a direct conceptual line from SF1e soldier to the current iteration. 1e soldier was often the go to choice for anyone wanting to use heavy weapons as one of the few classes that got proficiency with them from the jump and now 2e soldier is further specialized in their conceptual descendants. Besides, what would be the replacement name?
My favorite example of a horribly destructive 'archaic' weapon is the explanation for why you don't see as many battlefield amputations these days as you did as... say... at Waterloo. Compared to modern bullets, musket balls were stupidly high caliber which meant more of the energy was directly transferred into the target. This resulted in much larger cavitation waves hitting soft tissue and, more importantly, bones. If you got hit ANYWHERE near a large bone, it was often reduced to shards in a way that there was simply no healing from. The analogy I've heard is that the difference between getting shot with a 9mm and getting shot with a musket is the difference between getting stabbed with a knife and getting stabbed with a fist.
The only weapon here close to directly comparable to something in PF2e is the laser pistol and that is still more of an upgrade than anything. Compared to a hand crossbow, it has shorter range but it does fire damage and can be fired 5 times before reloading. Everything else is an area of effect weapon or has an area of effect option and those are always slightly behind on damage to compensate for their ability to target multiple enemies... something no weapon in PF2e has really been able to do. Additionally, these are still the lower level weapons. Of course they are going to be relatively tame.
This sounds like an option for some play styles and maybe there could be a way of supporting it through feats or archetypes. There are many many more shows where the main character has their 'ol' reliable' or their favourite big gun that they have named. Stargate, Babylon 5, and Star Trek are all centered around fairly standardized military or military adjacent forces. Firefly has Vera but also Mal's signature pistol, and Zoe's signature mare's leg.Both Han and Chewie have signature weapons, Han's blaster and Chewie's bowcaster. Outside of your examples, Farscape has D'Argo's Qualta Blade, Stargate Atlantis has Ronon's particle magnum, the crysknives from Dune... They might not have names and might even come from a standardized run of weapons but you cannot argue that they do not give the impression of being purposefully selected and that they do not form part of a character's identity.
You all are clearly missing the forest for the trees here. The most important trait of a wizard is a big pointy hat. No big pointy hat, no wizard. Simple as.
Same, actuallyI currently am, and it's the most fun I've ever had at a table playing Pathfinder.Do you have some kind of vendetta against Paizo or something? The Kineticist is great.Play it 100% RAW and tell me that. Same
Adding meta tags to spells is something that you could automate in Excel. If Paizo is so bad at tech they can't automatically append new class tags onto existing spells that's not a me issue.Class-specific spell lists are a nightmare to create and to maintain.So, you want to play a caster who is as effective as a Fighter using their favorite weapon but who also benefit from variety in their casting ?No. I want Paizo to go back to making each caster have their own distinct list of spells because traditions are a mess. Then we could have a caster that gets limited to no utility in exchange for blasting spells and other interesting class features that enable the desired gameplay. Killing bespoke per-class spell lists was a mistake and it makes good game design harder than it needs to be. It would also involve attempting to balance one or two dozen individual spell lists and avoid unintended interactions. Having four discreet spell lists is cleaner and reduces workload both before and after publication.
So, you want to play a caster who is as effective as a Fighter using their favorite weapon but who also benefit from variety in their casting ?No. I want Paizo to go back to making each caster have their own distinct list of spells because traditions are a mess. Then we could have a caster that gets limited to no utility in exchange for blasting spells and other interesting class features that enable the desired gameplay. Killing bespoke per-class spell lists was a mistake and it makes good game design harder than it needs to be. Profoundly unlikely to ever happen. Sorry.
Where exactly did I say I wanted to solo a boss? I just want to be as impactful against single-target fights with discrete single-burst damage spells as a Fighter is. I'm happy even if that means I don't get access to certain spells. Sadly for me, Paizo gave all casters full access to entire traditions and made it so PF2 can't and doesn't support narrowly focused casters that still cast slotted spells.My guy, if your benchmark for 'functional' is soloing what should be a challenging boss encounter, your expectations are entirely at odds with this game.If you want to solo a boss then PF2 is not a system that will work for that. Not for any class. PF2 is a team game. But if you want to be part of killing a boss, then any caster will work. My Reign of Winter's party witch killed a boss with a Hideous Laughter because the boss didn't realize he didn't have reactions and jumped out a window expecting to feather fall.So casters need GM fiat to work. Noted. 'I want to be a boss-killing caster'. That was your leading statement. Even taking into account your somewhat more reasonable stated intent, you seem to strictly be at odds with what the system is designed for and balanced around. What you want is something that leads to a paradigm of a 5-minute adventuring day because the caster has blown all their spells nova-ing a single target and now needs to go rest.
If you want to solo a boss then PF2 is not a system that will work for that. Not for any class. PF2 is a team game. But if you want to be part of killing a boss, then any caster will work. My Reign of Winter's party witch killed a boss with a Hideous Laughter because the boss didn't realize he didn't have reactions and jumped out a window expecting to feather fall.So casters need GM fiat to work. Noted. My guy, if your benchmark for 'functional' is soloing what should be a challenging boss encounter, your expectations are entirely at odds with this game.
The old E6 rules system would not be all that hard to adapt to 2e and sounds like it would address your needs nicely.
Int is also skill access. The higher your Int, the more skills you are trained in. This, in turn, opens up more options in and out of combat.This is okay at low levels but at higher levels it requires a GM to give you checks that you can succeed on with skills that you've placed zero investment in. High Int doesn't make you a proper skill character in PF2. So... your GM only gives you skill checks with absolutely maxed out DCs? Man that sucks.
I thought archaic weapons like black-powder guns were supposed to take massive penalties against modern armor.We played the game with the assumption that magically-enhanced equipment would bypass the Resistance. Right now, the team is heavily considering just moving the archaic rules more into an optional thing for groups who want that realism. If I can offer some insight as someone running a game with a bunch of Starfinder 1e characters making their way through Pathfinder 1e adventures, this is exactly how I settled things. It does a good job of letting them feel like their fancy sci-if gear meant something at the lower levels against enemies wielding nonmagical archaic weapons while still allowing higher level threats to be serious threats.
Int is also skill access. The higher your Int, the more skills you are trained in. This, in turn, opens up more options in and out of combat.
Please don't take this as being snarky... but yeah, maybe you should try a different game. If what was keeping you invested in Pathfinder was a set of specific signifiers that harken back to the cultural cache of D&D and not the actual mechanics and feel of the game, then OSR games might really be a better fit. Pathfinder is a very different beast from the games you seem to be longing for.
Definitely interested in seeing Operative follow in Soldier's footsteps and forge a new identity outside of just 'Space-Rogue'.
Conversations like this are why I am exceptionally happy 2e is doing away with alignments.
The quick return of my beloved Apocalypse Beam and Singularity Cannon
Not going to lie. It'll make it easier for me to switch-hit when writing between the two systems. And man, I cannot wait to bring thaumaturges to Starfinder and solarians and vanguards to Pathfinder. I'm looking forward to being unbelievably annoying about asking all of my PF2e GMs if I can play a solarian
Really enjoying the aged up looks of Obo and Navasi. They're really rocking the 'grizzled adventurer' aesthetic.
I don't think that was quite what happened, honestly. It really feels like this is still fallout from the OGL debacle Also, really excited to see this get built out more. I really want to see some power armor rules soon.
There are people on this site that I would not even want seeing my posts. I entirely wish to not interact with them or have them engage with anything I put out. I don't even want to see it if they favorite one of my posts. I understand that might not be entirely feasible but I feel my point stands. I do not consider them to be any part of a community I wish to interact with. More feasibly, the only way I want to see one of their posts is if I actively check their profile.
|