paizo.com Favorited Posts by HeHateMepaizo.com Favorited Posts by HeHateMe2024-03-28T07:30:47Z2024-03-28T07:30:47ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe&page=4?Remastered-Barbarian#2002024-03-28T03:47:07Z2024-03-27T02:15:01Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Captain Morgan wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">exequiel759 wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Demorome wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">HeHateMe wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
As you mentioned, that shrugging off attacks fantasy no longer works cuz lowering AC opens Barbarians up to eating more crits. When I played a Barbarian I didn't feel tough at all, I felt extremely fragile. Not at all the experience I was expecting. Hopefully they dump the AC penalty in the Remaster, or if they want to keep it then Barbs need damage resistance from lvl 1. Temp HPs don't even come close to making up for the AC penalty. </blockquote>Yup, I think another solution could be that enemies now have to beat your lowered AC by +11 instead of +10 to crit, but that might be tricky to remember... </blockquote>If we have to jump through so many loops to solve the -1 to AC, why don't remove it? As we already discussed the -1 AC goes against the basic idea of barbarians being tanks that shrug off blows as they get hit and crit more often. </blockquote><p>.
</p>
You keep saying this like this is a universally held consensus. It is not. Not getting hit is diametricly opposed to how barbarians are supposed to tank hits. Not getting crit, sure. Not going down super quickly, sure. But getting hit is part of the basic idea. See: Wolverine, Ultra Ego Vegeta, Metal Bat, and various other berserker types. </blockquote><p>Ummm...Conan is THE ORIGINAL Barbarian, and in the Robert Howard stories he was described as having the reflexes of a cobra, or a panther, when he went berserk. He hardly ever took a hit, bad guys would end up hitting each other cuz he was so fast.
<p>I wasn't as big a fan of Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser, tho I read a couple of their stories and I recall Fafhrd being fast and an excellent swordsman, not someone who stood around and got stabbed alot. </p>
<p>The whole "face tanking" thing has nothing to do with Barbarians in literature. As far as I know, it was a D&D invention that Barbarians were too stupid to duck a hit.</p>Captain Morgan wrote:exequiel759 wrote: Demorome wrote: HeHateMe wrote:
As you mentioned, that shrugging off attacks fantasy no longer works cuz lowering AC opens Barbarians up to eating more crits. When I played a Barbarian I didn't feel tough at all, I felt extremely fragile. Not at all the experience I was expecting. Hopefully they dump the AC penalty in the Remaster, or if they want to keep it then Barbs need damage resistance from lvl 1. Temp HPs don't even come close to making up for...HeHateMe2024-03-27T02:15:01ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe&page=4?Remastered-Barbarian#1692024-03-26T02:51:35Z2024-03-26T01:49:15Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">PossibleCabbage wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I mean the AC Penalty is mostly because the quintessential barbarian fantasy involves "you shrug off blows that would end lesser warriors and laugh in the face of your enemies" or something like that.</p>
<p>Though they might want to get back to the drawing board to figure out a way to better represent this since the Barbarian's other defenses like resistance and more HP aren't actually as good as "AC" because lower AC means you take more crits.</p>
<p>I think the "no more concentration restriction" seems plausible. </blockquote><p>As you mentioned, that shrugging off attacks fantasy no longer works cuz lowering AC opens Barbarians up to eating more crits. When I played a Barbarian I didn't feel tough at all, I felt extremely fragile. Not at all the experience I was expecting. Hopefully they dump the AC penalty in the Remaster, or if they want to keep it then Barbs need damage resistance from lvl 1. Temp HPs don't even come close to making up for the AC penalty.PossibleCabbage wrote:I mean the AC Penalty is mostly because the quintessential barbarian fantasy involves "you shrug off blows that would end lesser warriors and laugh in the face of your enemies" or something like that.
Though they might want to get back to the drawing board to figure out a way to better represent this since the Barbarian's other defenses like resistance and more HP aren't actually as good as "AC" because lower AC means you take more crits.
I think the "no more...HeHateMe2024-03-26T01:49:15ZRe: Forums: Product Discussion: Pathfinder Howl of the WildHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/products/btq02f09/discuss?Pathfinder-Howl-of-the-Wild#382024-02-03T00:09:08Z2024-02-02T23:08:18Z<p>Hopefully there will be some goodies in this book for Kineticists</p>Hopefully there will be some goodies in this book for KineticistsHeHateMe2024-02-02T23:08:18ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Top five things that need to be fixed for KineticistHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43urb&page=3?Top-five-things-that-need-to-be-fixed-for#1072023-08-08T00:58:51Z2023-08-08T00:07:54Z<p>Metal Carapace is hideously bad, no doubt about that. I was so excited to play a Metal Kineticist until I saw how bad alot of their abilities are.</p>Metal Carapace is hideously bad, no doubt about that. I was so excited to play a Metal Kineticist until I saw how bad alot of their abilities are.HeHateMe2023-08-08T00:07:54ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: GenCon Class Playtest SpeculationHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43umd?GenCon-Class-Playtest-Speculation#362023-07-26T19:51:03Z2023-07-26T19:42:33Z<p>Personally I'd be very surprised if there's a new class to playtest considering they're currently busy revamping the entire system. I enjoy playtests, but that seems like alot to ask right now. Then again, maybe I'm wrong?</p>Personally I'd be very surprised if there's a new class to playtest considering they're currently busy revamping the entire system. I enjoy playtests, but that seems like alot to ask right now. Then again, maybe I'm wrong?HeHateMe2023-07-26T19:42:33ZRe: Forums: Product Discussion: Pathfinder Player Core 2HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/products/btq02ej5/discuss&page=2?Pathfinder-Player-Core-2#582023-07-29T00:04:44Z2023-07-21T20:32:05Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">David knott 242 wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Applied_People wrote:</div><blockquote> I predict no more easy dipping into Champion for heavy armor and the champion's reaction. </blockquote><p>We really need a better way to add heavy armor proficiency to a character than "getting religion" anyway.
</p>
</blockquote><p>"I'm born again, time to strap on my Jesus Armor and smite some heathens!"David knott 242 wrote:Applied_People wrote: I predict no more easy dipping into Champion for heavy armor and the champion's reaction.
We really need a better way to add heavy armor proficiency to a character than "getting religion" anyway.
"I'm born again, time to strap on my Jesus Armor and smite some heathens!"HeHateMe2023-07-21T20:32:05ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: What are some small changes you'd like to see in the Remaster?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43tsr&page=7?What-are-some-small-changes-youd-like-to-see#3242023-07-21T19:02:55Z2023-07-19T21:55:49Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rysky wrote:</div><blockquote><p> From a thematic and narrative standpoint, setting up traps and ambushes are really cool and satisfying where you have time, or a montage, to get it set up for an approaching opponent.</p>
<p>Which is why it doesn't gel with Pathfinder at all, where the players are the ones exploring, advancing, and chasing, not the other way around, they deal with traps, not set them up for opponents to stumble into.</p>
<p>Traps/Ambushes only work in certain niche scenarios <b>personalized for said traps/ambushes</b>, which probably aren't even fun or rewarding enough even if you do set them up right.</p>
<p>From a gameplay standpoint they'd have to work like WoW's Hunters' traps where they just yeet them and they deploy. Is that realistic, depending on the trap no but realism doesn't matter as much as consistency. More importantly, they would actually get used. </blockquote><p>This is an excellent explanation. I think traps/snares have their place, mostly for a prepared ambush or if the party is resting in a location where ingress is restricted and can easily be trapped. As an in-combat tool tho, it's too difficult to pull off.Rysky wrote:From a thematic and narrative standpoint, setting up traps and ambushes are really cool and satisfying where you have time, or a montage, to get it set up for an approaching opponent.
Which is why it doesn't gel with Pathfinder at all, where the players are the ones exploring, advancing, and chasing, not the other way around, they deal with traps, not set them up for opponents to stumble into.
Traps/Ambushes only work in certain niche scenarios personalized for said...HeHateMe2023-07-19T21:55:49ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: What are some small changes you'd like to see in the Remaster?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43tsr&page=5?What-are-some-small-changes-youd-like-to-see#2302023-07-11T20:38:38Z2023-07-03T16:03:44Z<p>I'd like to see Uncommon and Rare take a hike, personally.</p>I'd like to see Uncommon and Rare take a hike, personally.HeHateMe2023-07-03T16:03:44ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: What are some small changes you'd like to see in the Remaster?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43tsr&page=4?What-are-some-small-changes-youd-like-to-see#1532023-07-04T23:47:01Z2023-06-18T18:04:06Z<p>Personally, I dislike the fact that to get from 18 to 20 in an ability, I need to invest two ability boosts into it, but the first one provides me no benefit at all. I would prefer if the rules just said you can't reach 20 in an ability until 10th lvl, and allow us to use that 5th level ability boost somewhere else rather than being forced to waste it.</p>
<p>It's also the only time an odd ability score is used in 2E, which is strange.</p>Personally, I dislike the fact that to get from 18 to 20 in an ability, I need to invest two ability boosts into it, but the first one provides me no benefit at all. I would prefer if the rules just said you can't reach 20 in an ability until 10th lvl, and allow us to use that 5th level ability boost somewhere else rather than being forced to waste it.
It's also the only time an odd ability score is used in 2E, which is strange.HeHateMe2023-06-18T18:04:06ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: What are some small changes you'd like to see in the Remaster?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43tsr&page=3?What-are-some-small-changes-youd-like-to-see#1342023-08-02T00:36:52Z2023-06-17T16:52:53Z<p>Personally, I'd like to see better options for gaining armor and weapon proficiency. One Feat should get you Trained proficiency, and depending on your class, get you Expert proficiency later on. It's very difficult in the current system to gain proficiency with armor and weapons that you don't start out proficient with. Just my .02.</p>Personally, I'd like to see better options for gaining armor and weapon proficiency. One Feat should get you Trained proficiency, and depending on your class, get you Expert proficiency later on. It's very difficult in the current system to gain proficiency with armor and weapons that you don't start out proficient with. Just my .02.HeHateMe2023-06-17T16:52:53ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Overall Remaster impression?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43tr8&page=4?Overall-Remaster-impression#1982023-06-11T00:49:10Z2023-06-10T23:23:20Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Perpdepog wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">HeHateMe wrote:</div><blockquote> I'm interested to see what changes Paizo has in mind for Cleric and Oracle. As someone who loved playing divine casters in 1E, I was very disappointed with both Cleric and Oracle in 2E, and the divine spell list in general. </blockquote>I'm hoping that spirit damage goes a long way to fixing that. That was my main issue when trying to build a divine caster. I'm not super big on always healing and enjoy being divine blasty, but that was hard to pull off in a satisfactory way until now. </blockquote><p>Yep, what I really liked about Clerics/Oracles in 1E was their versatility. You can heal\buff, you can blast with an attack spell, or you can crack skulls with a mace. In 2E, that versatility is gone. Cloistered Cleric walks around in robes, has no weapon skills and doesn't even have a decent attack cantrip, while the Warpriest unfortunately has accuracy issues with spells AND with weapons. I'm cautiously optimistic that at least a few of those issues will be addressed.Perpdepog wrote:HeHateMe wrote: I'm interested to see what changes Paizo has in mind for Cleric and Oracle. As someone who loved playing divine casters in 1E, I was very disappointed with both Cleric and Oracle in 2E, and the divine spell list in general.
I'm hoping that spirit damage goes a long way to fixing that. That was my main issue when trying to build a divine caster. I'm not super big on always healing and enjoy being divine blasty, but that was hard to pull off in a satisfactory...HeHateMe2023-06-10T23:23:20ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Overall Remaster impression?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43tr8&page=4?Overall-Remaster-impression#1962023-06-11T00:49:40Z2023-06-10T20:44:40Z<p>I'm interested to see what changes Paizo has in mind for Cleric and Oracle. As someone who loved playing divine casters in 1E, I was very disappointed with both Cleric and Oracle in 2E, and the divine spell list in general.</p>I'm interested to see what changes Paizo has in mind for Cleric and Oracle. As someone who loved playing divine casters in 1E, I was very disappointed with both Cleric and Oracle in 2E, and the divine spell list in general.HeHateMe2023-06-10T20:44:40ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: "Barbarians Are Already Bloodragers" - Making a "Bloodrager" within the existing rulesHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43tk2?Barbarians-Are-Already-Bloodragers-Making-a#292023-05-21T20:51:49Z2023-05-21T19:20:39Z<p>For me personally, 2E Barbarian Instincts feel like a poorly-conceived attempt to recreate the bloodlines of Bloodragers. There are so few Instinct-specific feats that the different instincts don't really feel much different from each other. Bloodrager bloodlines had much bigger differences between them. As a fan of the Bloodrager, I was bitterly disappointed with how samey all the Instincts felt. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, the result is that we'll never see a 2E Bloodrager, since that concept has already been implemented, albeit in a very superficial way, in the 2E Barbarian.</p>For me personally, 2E Barbarian Instincts feel like a poorly-conceived attempt to recreate the bloodlines of Bloodragers. There are so few Instinct-specific feats that the different instincts don't really feel much different from each other. Bloodrager bloodlines had much bigger differences between them. As a fan of the Bloodrager, I was bitterly disappointed with how samey all the Instincts felt.
Unfortunately, the result is that we'll never see a 2E Bloodrager, since that concept has...HeHateMe2023-05-21T19:20:39ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Your burning kineticist questions for Paizocon!HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43tf9&page=2?Your-burning-kineticist-questions-for-Paizocon#522023-05-12T12:28:12Z2023-05-11T22:13:10Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Tactical Drongo wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I missed the Part about the blasts being more like cantrips
</p>
I would really live to keep them as unarmed attacks for a Brunch of reasons</p>
<p>And 'caster Martial Prophiciency' would be a total dealbreaker for me</p>
<p>A few of the Posts here do really dampen my hopes </blockquote><p>Meh, at this point everything is speculation. I wouldn't get too excited or disappointed by anything right now. Wait until the final product and then make up your mind when you have all the information.Tactical Drongo wrote:I missed the Part about the blasts being more like cantrips
I would really live to keep them as unarmed attacks for a Brunch of reasonsAnd 'caster Martial Prophiciency' would be a total dealbreaker for me
A few of the Posts here do really dampen my hopes
Meh, at this point everything is speculation. I wouldn't get too excited or disappointed by anything right now. Wait until the final product and then make up your mind when you have all the information.HeHateMe2023-05-11T22:13:10ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Potential Changes to Core 2 ClassesHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43t7p&page=5?Potential-Changes-to-Core-2-Classes#2082023-05-20T17:16:34Z2023-05-10T05:20:56Z<p>A few other changes I'd like to see:</p>
<p>I mentioned this in a different discussion, but I'd like to see Barbarians lose Anathema. For me personally, imposing a code of conduct on a class known for violence and chaos is a bit jarring, I don't feel it fits.</p>
<p>Also, I'd like to see the Linguistics skill make a comeback. I love having characters that speak multiple languages, probably because I only speak one. Maybe I've missed something but I haven't found any way to learn new languages as you level up in 2E.</p>A few other changes I'd like to see:
I mentioned this in a different discussion, but I'd like to see Barbarians lose Anathema. For me personally, imposing a code of conduct on a class known for violence and chaos is a bit jarring, I don't feel it fits.
Also, I'd like to see the Linguistics skill make a comeback. I love having characters that speak multiple languages, probably because I only speak one. Maybe I've missed something but I haven't found any way to learn new languages as you...HeHateMe2023-05-10T05:20:56ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Potential Changes to Core 2 ClassesHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43t7p&page=4?Potential-Changes-to-Core-2-Classes#1712023-05-12T16:10:44Z2023-05-09T02:05:50Z<p>This is just me, but I'd like to see Monks start off with Expert proficiency in Unarmed Attacks. Personally, I find it bizarre that Fighters make better unarmed combatants than Monks in some ways.</p>This is just me, but I'd like to see Monks start off with Expert proficiency in Unarmed Attacks. Personally, I find it bizarre that Fighters make better unarmed combatants than Monks in some ways.HeHateMe2023-05-09T02:05:50ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Thaumaturge First ImpressionsHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43suj?Thaumaturge-First-Impressions#212023-04-10T05:06:29Z2023-04-09T19:25:17Z<p>For my part, I find Thaumaturge too complex and fiddly, like most of the non-core classes. I feel like Paizo went too far nerfing anything non-core to avoid a certain crowd screaming about power creep. The result is that players need a great deal of system mastery to make non-core classes anywhere near competitive with core. Thaumaturge, Inventor, Swashbuckler, they just seem meh to me. I'm hoping they avoid continuing this trend with the release of Kineticist. I hope Kineticist can actually be competitive with the core classes. </p>
<p>Just my own perspective.</p>For my part, I find Thaumaturge too complex and fiddly, like most of the non-core classes. I feel like Paizo went too far nerfing anything non-core to avoid a certain crowd screaming about power creep. The result is that players need a great deal of system mastery to make non-core classes anywhere near competitive with core. Thaumaturge, Inventor, Swashbuckler, they just seem meh to me. I'm hoping they avoid continuing this trend with the release of Kineticist. I hope Kineticist can actually...HeHateMe2023-04-09T19:25:17ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Thaumaturge is Everything I Wanted It to BeHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43na6?Thaumaturge-is-Everything-I-Wanted-It-to-Be#382022-07-28T12:17:57Z2022-07-27T16:05:51Z<p>I love that with all their implements, the Thaumaturge is basically a "Murderhoarder".</p>I love that with all their implements, the Thaumaturge is basically a "Murderhoarder".HeHateMe2022-07-27T16:05:51ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: What class paths do you want to see?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43kbj&page=5?What-class-paths-do-you-want-to-see#2062022-03-25T01:24:47Z2022-03-20T18:41:58Z<p>Personally, I'd love to see an Undead Instinct for Barbarian. I was hoping that would be included in Book of the Dead, but I suspect I'll be disappointed.</p>Personally, I'd love to see an Undead Instinct for Barbarian. I was hoping that would be included in Book of the Dead, but I suspect I'll be disappointed.HeHateMe2022-03-20T18:41:58ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Your vote for the actively worst feat of pathfinder?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43j8x&page=2?Your-vote-for-the-actively-worst-feat-of#782021-12-21T20:30:26Z2021-12-15T05:00:59Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rysky wrote:</div><blockquote> It's a feat tax, everyone has to have it or you fall behind, especially if someone else in the party has it. </blockquote><p>Yep, understood. I personally am of the belief that Power Attack should be a combat option like Fight Defensively, rather than a feat. Also, I think combat maneuvers like Trip and Bull Rush shouldn't require a feat to use without provoking an Attack of Opportunity. I certainly don't think Combat Expertise should be a pre-requisite for anything either. I hate feat taxes in general.Rysky wrote:It's a feat tax, everyone has to have it or you fall behind, especially if someone else in the party has it.
Yep, understood. I personally am of the belief that Power Attack should be a combat option like Fight Defensively, rather than a feat. Also, I think combat maneuvers like Trip and Bull Rush shouldn't require a feat to use without provoking an Attack of Opportunity. I certainly don't think Combat Expertise should be a pre-requisite for anything either. I hate feat taxes in...HeHateMe2021-12-15T05:00:59ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Your vote for the actively worst feat of pathfinder?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43j8x&page=2?Your-vote-for-the-actively-worst-feat-of#762021-12-18T08:30:54Z2021-12-15T04:29:51Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rysky wrote:</div><blockquote> Power Attack. </blockquote><p>Not sure I understand. Are you saying Power Attack is a bad feat because everyone should be able to do that without spending a feat on it, or are you saying that trading accuracy for extra damage is bad in general?Rysky wrote:Power Attack.
Not sure I understand. Are you saying Power Attack is a bad feat because everyone should be able to do that without spending a feat on it, or are you saying that trading accuracy for extra damage is bad in general?HeHateMe2021-12-15T04:29:51ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: How does a Liberator Champion Deal with Slavers?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i49&page=2?How-does-a-Liberator-Champion-Deal-with-Slavers#722021-11-15T11:33:22Z2021-10-27T03:39:08Z<p>How does a Liberator Champion deal with slavers? With extreme prejudice.</p>How does a Liberator Champion deal with slavers? With extreme prejudice.HeHateMe2021-10-27T03:39:08ZRe: Forums: Advice: Inventor low attack roll becouse of IntellienceHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i1y&page=2?Inventor-low-attack-roll-becouse-of-Intellience#632021-10-23T18:30:22Z2021-10-22T22:48:28Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Squiggit wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">HumbleGamer wrote:</div><blockquote>Also, in addition to the action failure ( you lose an action because you tried )</blockquote><p>No you don't. You make the check after resolving the action's effects and you can't attempt a second one at all if you fail that check.
<p>You never lose actions, although sometimes you'll take fire damage. </blockquote><p>"Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes you're on fire."Squiggit wrote:HumbleGamer wrote:Also, in addition to the action failure ( you lose an action because you tried )
No you don't. You make the check after resolving the action's effects and you can't attempt a second one at all if you fail that check. You never lose actions, although sometimes you'll take fire damage. "Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes you're on fire."HeHateMe2021-10-22T22:48:28ZRe: Forums: Advice: Inventor low attack roll becouse of IntellienceHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i1y?Inventor-low-attack-roll-becouse-of-Intellience#332021-10-24T21:45:28Z2021-10-20T23:51:49Z<p>I think the biggest flaw with Inventor is that Intelligence really doesn't do much for them. There's Overdrive, and that's basically it. To me, Overdrive isn't nearly as good as a maxed out Strength would be. </p>
<p>Of course, that's another issue with Inventor: why do they need to be so strong? They're basically using machines to fight for them, whether it's power armor, an uber weapon, or a robot buddy. I really think they should've used Int for attack and damage, and linked Overdrive to some other skill/ability, or even dumped Overdrive altogether. </p>
<p>I still think Inventor is very cool, but I do question some of these decisions.</p>I think the biggest flaw with Inventor is that Intelligence really doesn't do much for them. There's Overdrive, and that's basically it. To me, Overdrive isn't nearly as good as a maxed out Strength would be.
Of course, that's another issue with Inventor: why do they need to be so strong? They're basically using machines to fight for them, whether it's power armor, an uber weapon, or a robot buddy. I really think they should've used Int for attack and damage, and linked Overdrive to some...HeHateMe2021-10-20T23:51:49ZRe: Forums: Advice: Inventor low attack roll becouse of IntellienceHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i1y?Inventor-low-attack-roll-becouse-of-Intellience#122021-10-24T21:42:25Z2021-10-18T23:39:57Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Watery Soup wrote:</div><blockquote><p> This thread is just going to end up like the Great Alchemist Debate threads.</p>
<p>Inventors sacrifice power for versatility, and not everyone's going to understand/appreciate versatility. Just go back through the past 2 years of alchemist threads and Ctrl-H "alchemist" into "inventor". </blockquote><p>No way, Inventor is designed far better than Alchemist.Watery Soup wrote:This thread is just going to end up like the Great Alchemist Debate threads.
Inventors sacrifice power for versatility, and not everyone's going to understand/appreciate versatility. Just go back through the past 2 years of alchemist threads and Ctrl-H "alchemist" into "inventor".
No way, Inventor is designed far better than Alchemist.HeHateMe2021-10-18T23:39:57ZRe: Forums: Psychic Class: Yet another SorcererHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ha0?Yet-another-Sorcerer#252021-10-19T13:28:26Z2021-10-13T05:47:56Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">HeHateMe wrote:</div><blockquote> I think a major part of the problem is Psychics just use the Occult spell list, which doesn't make them much different than certain Sorcerer bloodlines. There's no list of "psionic powers" or anything like that.</blockquote><p>I mean...yeah..
<p>Why wouldn't they use the mechanics they built the system upon? In that same way, is a bard just a sorcerer as well? </blockquote><p>Bards were never hyped up as being "different", like Psionics have traditionally been. They were always spellcasters. Psionics have had a very different system in the past, which is what people seem to want, based on the hate that Occult spellcasting received in 1e.Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:HeHateMe wrote: I think a major part of the problem is Psychics just use the Occult spell list, which doesn't make them much different than certain Sorcerer bloodlines. There's no list of "psionic powers" or anything like that.
I mean...yeah.. Why wouldn't they use the mechanics they built the system upon? In that same way, is a bard just a sorcerer as well? Bards were never hyped up as being "different", like Psionics have traditionally been. They were...HeHateMe2021-10-13T05:47:56ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Is it just me, or is it way too easy to get hit in this edition?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43hhf&page=13?Is-it-just-me-or-is-it-way-too-easy-to-get#6112022-10-07T19:03:40Z2021-10-12T02:27:22Z<p>In all fairness, I've heard that the more recent APs like Abomination Vaults and Ruby Phoenix don't have the plethora of brutally lethal encounters the early APs are known for (especially Age of Ashes and Agents of Edgewatch). That alone makes me more likely to give 2e another try.</p>In all fairness, I've heard that the more recent APs like Abomination Vaults and Ruby Phoenix don't have the plethora of brutally lethal encounters the early APs are known for (especially Age of Ashes and Agents of Edgewatch). That alone makes me more likely to give 2e another try.HeHateMe2021-10-12T02:27:22ZRe: Forums: Psychic Class: Yet another SorcererHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ha0?Yet-another-Sorcerer#212021-10-19T13:27:32Z2021-10-11T22:32:27Z<p>I think a major part of the problem is Psychics just use the Occult spell list, which doesn't make them much different than certain Sorcerer bloodlines. There's no list of "psionic powers" or anything like that. </p>
<p>The Thaumaturge suffers from a similar problem: I don't see much difference between that class and the Investigator with the exception of the odd choice of Charisma for the key ability. It certainly bears no resemblance to a 1e Occultist, which is what I thought it would be.</p>I think a major part of the problem is Psychics just use the Occult spell list, which doesn't make them much different than certain Sorcerer bloodlines. There's no list of "psionic powers" or anything like that.
The Thaumaturge suffers from a similar problem: I don't see much difference between that class and the Investigator with the exception of the odd choice of Charisma for the key ability. It certainly bears no resemblance to a 1e Occultist, which is what I thought it would be.HeHateMe2021-10-11T22:32:27ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Is it just me, or is it way too easy to get hit in this edition?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43hhf&page=13?Is-it-just-me-or-is-it-way-too-easy-to-get#6032021-10-11T23:32:13Z2021-10-11T16:25:42Z<p>My experience with PF2 is limited, my old group started an Age of Ashes campaign but everyone ragequit at 6th lvl because of exactly what's being said in this thread: the default game difficulty is just tuned up too high to be enjoyable (at least for that group). I was willing to keep going but I wasn't having fun either. We all went back to 1e.</p>
<p>Issues I saw: 1. Monsters never miss, at least on a first attack. In 6 levels I don't think I ever saw a monster miss it's first attack. They didn't miss too many second attacks either. 2. With the exception of healing, which is invaluable, I found casters to be a total liability. Monsters seem to make the vast majority of their saves, so attack spells are generally worthless. 3. Monsters almost never miss, but PCs sure do! The "whiff factor" is pretty high in 2e and I never did notice much improvement in that. Maybe at higher levels. </p>
<p>2e definitely wasn't for me, though I'm willing to give it another shot. Between getting hit every single time and missing at least half (if not more) of our attacks, combat became a long, boring slog. We depended way too much on our Cleric to keep us alive. I think really challenging combats should be rare and memorable, not the default setting. 1e is definitely more my cup of tea at this point.</p>My experience with PF2 is limited, my old group started an Age of Ashes campaign but everyone ragequit at 6th lvl because of exactly what's being said in this thread: the default game difficulty is just tuned up too high to be enjoyable (at least for that group). I was willing to keep going but I wasn't having fun either. We all went back to 1e.
Issues I saw: 1. Monsters never miss, at least on a first attack. In 6 levels I don't think I ever saw a monster miss it's first attack. They didn't...HeHateMe2021-10-11T16:25:42ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Guns & Gears AMAHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43hih&page=8?Guns-Gears-AMA#3512021-10-10T07:59:01Z2021-10-10T04:24:45Z<p>Inventor is starting to sound pretty cool!</p>Inventor is starting to sound pretty cool!HeHateMe2021-10-10T04:24:45ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Guns & Gears AMAHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43hih&page=7?Guns-Gears-AMA#3462021-10-11T14:54:36Z2021-10-10T01:52:57Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">keftiu wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">HeHateMe wrote:</div><blockquote> What is the Inventor's niche? They must be good at something, but from what I'm reading, it just seems like they're worse than every other martial. I'm sure they must have a strength though, what are they good at? </blockquote>They offer a unique class fantasy. That’s enough for most players, who are not terribly plugged into optimization. </blockquote><p>I don't see how that's relevant. Just because a class is "unique" doesn't mean it can't be balanced with other classes.keftiu wrote:HeHateMe wrote: What is the Inventor's niche? They must be good at something, but from what I'm reading, it just seems like they're worse than every other martial. I'm sure they must have a strength though, what are they good at?
They offer a unique class fantasy. That’s enough for most players, who are not terribly plugged into optimization. I don't see how that's relevant. Just because a class is "unique" doesn't mean it can't be balanced with other classes.HeHateMe2021-10-10T01:52:57ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Interesting Time for PF2 with D&D 5.5/6th coming 2024HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43hik&page=3?Interesting-Time-for-PF2-with-DD-556th-coming#1052021-10-30T19:02:27Z2021-10-05T00:55:33Z<p>Color me curious. PF 1e is still my favorite fantasy rpg. I've played 2e and D&D 5e, and they're both fine, but 1e is my first love. Still, I'm quite happy to try out a 5.5/6e, just like I was happy to try out PF 2e and D&D 5e.</p>Color me curious. PF 1e is still my favorite fantasy rpg. I've played 2e and D&D 5e, and they're both fine, but 1e is my first love. Still, I'm quite happy to try out a 5.5/6e, just like I was happy to try out PF 2e and D&D 5e.HeHateMe2021-10-05T00:55:33ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What is your favorite main frontline combat class?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43hmj?What-is-your-favorite-main-frontline-combat#122021-10-10T09:34:46Z2021-10-04T23:33:08Z<p>Personally I like Warpriest, Inquisitor, and Occultist. I also love Druids once they get Wild Shape. Prior to Wild Shape, Druids are really dull (I hate hiding behind an Animal Companion). After 4th lvl though, they are alot of fun. Hunter with the Feral Hunter archetype is quite fun too, for the same reason (I love Wild Shape).</p>Personally I like Warpriest, Inquisitor, and Occultist. I also love Druids once they get Wild Shape. Prior to Wild Shape, Druids are really dull (I hate hiding behind an Animal Companion). After 4th lvl though, they are alot of fun. Hunter with the Feral Hunter archetype is quite fun too, for the same reason (I love Wild Shape).HeHateMe2021-10-04T23:33:08ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Is it just me, or is it way too easy to get hit in this edition?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43hhf&page=5?Is-it-just-me-or-is-it-way-too-easy-to-get#2202021-10-06T10:25:33Z2021-10-01T03:33:16Z<p>It's extremely easy to get hit in this edition, at least from what I've seen. I don't even think armor serves a purpose beyond maybe avoiding a crit. </p>
<p>I think there are 2 core issues contributing to this: first, monster stats are too high. They're hard to hit, they hit PCs the vast majority of the time, and they make most of their saves. The other issue is encounter balance in the early 2e APs seems to be way out of whack. Too many high difficulty encounters too close together. Just my own observations.</p>It's extremely easy to get hit in this edition, at least from what I've seen. I don't even think armor serves a purpose beyond maybe avoiding a crit.
I think there are 2 core issues contributing to this: first, monster stats are too high. They're hard to hit, they hit PCs the vast majority of the time, and they make most of their saves. The other issue is encounter balance in the early 2e APs seems to be way out of whack. Too many high difficulty encounters too close together. Just my own...HeHateMe2021-10-01T03:33:16ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So Does Anyone Play The Shifter Class?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43fb7?So-Does-Anyone-Play-The-Shifter-Class#342021-09-24T05:35:53Z2021-09-24T01:10:26Z<p>You also need to look at the Aspects themselves. For the most part, they give you less than you would get if you had regular Wild Shape or cast the appropriate spell. Take Deinonychus. A 4th lvl Druid wild shaping into that form gets 5 attacks. A Shifter has to wait until 8th lvl to get all 5 attacks. Giant Scorpion is another example. Someone casting Vermin Shape to turn into a Giant Scorpion gets 3 primary attacks. A Shifter turning into a Giant Scorpion gets 2 primary and 1 secondary attacks. By RAW, a Shifter turning into a Giant Wasp doesn't even get an attack! They have to wait until 8th lvl to get the Sting attack, which is ludicrous and was probably an oversight. </p>
<p>There are alot of similar examples. They really went out of their way to nerf the class into submission for some reason.</p>You also need to look at the Aspects themselves. For the most part, they give you less than you would get if you had regular Wild Shape or cast the appropriate spell. Take Deinonychus. A 4th lvl Druid wild shaping into that form gets 5 attacks. A Shifter has to wait until 8th lvl to get all 5 attacks. Giant Scorpion is another example. Someone casting Vermin Shape to turn into a Giant Scorpion gets 3 primary attacks. A Shifter turning into a Giant Scorpion gets 2 primary and 1 secondary...HeHateMe2021-09-24T01:10:26ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So Does Anyone Play The Shifter Class?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43fb7?So-Does-Anyone-Play-The-Shifter-Class#332021-09-24T05:36:03Z2021-09-24T00:35:22Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Derklord wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">HeHateMe wrote:</div><blockquote>I think that house rule is the only thing keeping my character competitive.</blockquote><p>I have a hard time believing this - not only because Shifter isn't actually underpowered unless you make bad choices, but also because the effect of the minor forms isn't that big (not enough to compensate for picking a bad major form).
<p>What level are you talking about here, and what major form are you fighting in? </blockquote><p>Remember you can only wild shape into a form provided by one of your Aspects, and you only get 1 Aspect every 5 levels (unless they changed this in errata). Compare that with a Druid, who can turn into any Animal, Elemental or Plant form, has full spellcasting, AND an Animal Companion on top of all that. Yes, Shifters are absolutely putrid.
<p>To answer your questions, my party is 8th level. My main land combat form is Deinonychus, my aerial combat form is Giant Dragonfly, and my water combat form is Crocodile. Like I mentioned, due to my GM's generous house rule, I have 8 aspects/major forms.</p>
<p>If we were using the rules as written, I'd have all of 2 forms/aspects. For a class named Shifter, that's really pathetic. If I had known about the Legendary Shifter, I would've recommended that from the beginning, but we were already well into the AP by the time I discovered it.</p>Derklord wrote:HeHateMe wrote:I think that house rule is the only thing keeping my character competitive.
I have a hard time believing this - not only because Shifter isn't actually underpowered unless you make bad choices, but also because the effect of the minor forms isn't that big (not enough to compensate for picking a bad major form). What level are you talking about here, and what major form are you fighting in? Remember you can only wild shape into a form provided by one of your...HeHateMe2021-09-24T00:35:22ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So Does Anyone Play The Shifter Class?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43fb7?So-Does-Anyone-Play-The-Shifter-Class#312021-09-25T20:43:31Z2021-09-23T03:19:19Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">catman123456 wrote:</div><blockquote> I play this one<a href="https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/232988/Legendary-Shifters?src=hottest_filtered" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> Legendary Shifters</a> but it's 3rd party </blockquote><p>I highly recommend that as well. My next Shifter character will use that product.catman123456 wrote:I play this one Legendary Shifters but it's 3rd party
I highly recommend that as well. My next Shifter character will use that product.HeHateMe2021-09-23T03:19:19ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So Does Anyone Play The Shifter Class?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43fb7?So-Does-Anyone-Play-The-Shifter-Class#302021-09-23T05:52:06Z2021-09-23T03:14:34Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Dragon78 wrote:</div><blockquote><p> So does anyone play as the shifter class?</p>
<p>Do you play the class as is, archetypes only, or both? </blockquote><p>I just saw this thread, apologies for the late response. I'm playing a Shifter in a Jade Regent campaign currently. No archetypes, but my GM agreed with me that the class is massively underpowered, so he made a house rule that allows my character to learn a new Aspect every level. I think that house rule is the only thing keeping my character competitive.
<p>Legendary Games came out with a product called Legendary Shifters. It's a redesign of the Shifter class and it's fantastic. I highly recommend using that if you're planning to play a Shifter. As written, the original class is really just awful.</p>Dragon78 wrote:So does anyone play as the shifter class?
Do you play the class as is, archetypes only, or both?
I just saw this thread, apologies for the late response. I'm playing a Shifter in a Jade Regent campaign currently. No archetypes, but my GM agreed with me that the class is massively underpowered, so he made a house rule that allows my character to learn a new Aspect every level. I think that house rule is the only thing keeping my character competitive. Legendary Games came out...HeHateMe2021-09-23T03:14:34ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Casters in severe and extreme encountersHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43g9i&page=3?Casters-in-severe-and-extreme-encounters#1152021-09-09T15:23:55Z2021-08-30T18:02:07Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Exocist wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Wizard is a mirror to cleric. It’s strong (once it gets enough levels at least) but incredibly boring. There’s no flash or pazazz - you just have the most high level spells. If your high level spells are strong (which once you get to level 9-11, they are) then the wizard is strong. If they aren’t, then the wizard is weak. Simple as that.</p>
<p>But I get why there’s this perception that casters are weak. People are almost exclusively playing level 1-6 or 8 and basing their perceptions on those. Debuffs are still a scaling factor in this game. Objectively, the value of frightened 1 is the same at level 1 as it is at level 20. But when you’re moving from hitting 1 target to frighten, to hitting 5, to hitting everyone every round (mask of terror) your power is actually increasing vs level appropriate encounters - at some point the level of buff/debuff you inflict to a number of targets becomes broken. Outside of reaction spamming, martials’ power <i>never</i> increases relative to on level threats - in fact it decreases. It plummets hard from level 1-4 and stabilizes (but slowly goes down) around level 5 - going from on average about 25% of a level+0 monster’s health (accuracy considered) on a 3 strike routine to approximately 22.5% by level 20. </blockquote><p>Casters do start to rip it up past lvl 11. I figure not many get to that level. I've been extremely happy with caster progression once I've picked up more experience. They have some real nasty effects.
<p>Still don't think much of the arcane spell lists. For me the power of a spell list is based on roles you can feel. The arcane spell list feels like the most limited role wise in the game. </blockquote><p>The biggest issue I've run into is keeping a group together that long (11th level). Groups I've been part of have fallen apart by 7th level cause the players who are playing casters say they're not having fun and they quit. It's also not fun to constantly hear complaints about how weak spells are, how often the bad guys make their saves, etc.Deriven Firelion wrote:Exocist wrote:Wizard is a mirror to cleric. It’s strong (once it gets enough levels at least) but incredibly boring. There’s no flash or pazazz - you just have the most high level spells. If your high level spells are strong (which once you get to level 9-11, they are) then the wizard is strong. If they aren’t, then the wizard is weak. Simple as that.
But I get why there’s this perception that casters are weak. People are almost exclusively playing level 1-6 or 8 and...HeHateMe2021-08-30T18:02:07ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Casters in severe and extreme encountersHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43g9i&page=2?Casters-in-severe-and-extreme-encounters#872021-09-09T15:19:55Z2021-08-30T03:37:07Z<p>There are two problems as I see it: First, monsters have crazy high saves in 2e for some reason. They almost never seem to fail saving throws. Second, spells r really weak in 2e compared to their 1e counterparts. So, because monsters have such high stats, they rarely fail, and when they do, the spells are so weak, the effects are underwhelming to say the least. It's a toxic combination for anyone that likes playing casters.</p>
<p>For martials, I think 2e is a very good system. For casters, it's terrible. I've never seen someone actually have fun playing a caster in 2e. They're typically frustrated and unhappy, at least the ones I've seen.</p>There are two problems as I see it: First, monsters have crazy high saves in 2e for some reason. They almost never seem to fail saving throws. Second, spells r really weak in 2e compared to their 1e counterparts. So, because monsters have such high stats, they rarely fail, and when they do, the spells are so weak, the effects are underwhelming to say the least. It's a toxic combination for anyone that likes playing casters.
For martials, I think 2e is a very good system. For casters, it's...HeHateMe2021-08-30T03:37:07ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Casters in severe and extreme encountersHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43g9i&page=2?Casters-in-severe-and-extreme-encounters#852021-09-09T15:19:34Z2021-08-30T03:02:30Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Guntermench wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>As a player I greatly enjoy challenge but I've seen more than one TPK where the GM ran it through and deadly and what usually happens isn't "ok let's remake a party and go back at it" it's "f+•# this thing let's play something else" and that's a loss of sunk time, prep work enthusiasm and fun.</blockquote>And then there's my 5e group who have had 3 or 4 TPKs and a total of something like 17 character deaths going through Curse of Strahd and just keep going back to finish it out of spite at this point. </blockquote><p>Huh. I didn't even know TPKs were possible in 5e. That game is ridiculously easy from my experience, unless the GM goes out of their way to kill the PCs.Guntermench wrote:Quote:As a player I greatly enjoy challenge but I've seen more than one TPK where the GM ran it through and deadly and what usually happens isn't "ok let's remake a party and go back at it" it's "f+*# this thing let's play something else" and that's a loss of sunk time, prep work enthusiasm and fun.
And then there's my 5e group who have had 3 or 4 TPKs and a total of something like 17 character deaths going through Curse of Strahd and just keep going back to finish it out...HeHateMe2021-08-30T03:02:30ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Any other fans of Pathfinder’s sci-fi elements?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43g56?Any-other-fans-of-Pathfinder-s-scifi-elements#412021-08-26T15:21:40Z2021-08-26T02:18:27Z<p>Personally I'm not a fan. I don't even like guns/steampunk stuff in my fantasy (although I LOVE Psionics). The funny thing is I go target shooting recreationally all the time but I'm still not a fan of guns in my fantasy. Sci-Fi/Superhero games hell yea, bring on the guns. Just not in fantasy. My .02.</p>Personally I'm not a fan. I don't even like guns/steampunk stuff in my fantasy (although I LOVE Psionics). The funny thing is I go target shooting recreationally all the time but I'm still not a fan of guns in my fantasy. Sci-Fi/Superhero games hell yea, bring on the guns. Just not in fantasy. My .02.HeHateMe2021-08-26T02:18:27ZRe: Forums: Homebrew and House Rules: Tenets of Neutrality?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43g26&page=2?Tenets-of-Neutrality#762021-12-04T00:05:29Z2021-08-16T16:36:21Z<p>What makes a man turn Neutral? Is it money? Lust for power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality??</p>What makes a man turn Neutral? Is it money? Lust for power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality??HeHateMe2021-08-16T16:36:21ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Battle Form Stuff, When?HeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43fyy&page=2?Battle-Form-Stuff-When#702021-08-15T15:47:42Z2021-08-11T20:33:58Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Guntermench wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Abyssalwyrm wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Guntermench wrote:</div><blockquote>I don't see this as a problem. They're temporary power boosts to get casters close to martials. I fail to see the problem with a permanent version not doing that. When not transformed you're still a full caster. </blockquote><p>And yet it is a problem.
</p>
And one thing where core system is flawed and you can't really do anything about it. Other then very heavily homebrew it (which likely cause myriad of other unexpected issues), like with D&D 5e.
<br />
But with PF2e you actually CAN quite easily "reverse-engineer it" and see that base mechanics DOES allow more "fluid" polymorph rules.
<br />
And once again, unlike nowadays WotC, Paizo still are often publish new materials. So all they need to do is give a little bit of room for optional extended polymorph rules in future books. </blockquote>It's not a problem that casters can't tie martials in beating things to death. Temporarily getting pretty close, sure. Tie permanently with the option to just become a full caster again at will? No. </blockquote><p>It would be nice if there was an option to dump spellcasting entirely in exchange for longer lasting, more powerful wild shape. Ppl who play Wild Order generally do it for the Wild Shape, not the spells. Maybe if spells were better in 2e, that would change, but most spells in this edition are underwhelming at best. Just my own opinion.Guntermench wrote:Abyssalwyrm wrote: Guntermench wrote:I don't see this as a problem. They're temporary power boosts to get casters close to martials. I fail to see the problem with a permanent version not doing that. When not transformed you're still a full caster.
And yet it is a problem.
And one thing where core system is flawed and you can't really do anything about it. Other then very heavily homebrew it (which likely cause myriad of other unexpected issues), like with D&D 5e.
But with...HeHateMe2021-08-11T20:33:58ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Secrets of magic hypeHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43e1o&page=16?Secrets-of-magic-hype#7672021-08-12T08:57:28Z2021-08-08T17:54:45Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Guntermench wrote:</div><blockquote> It's not Warpriest that's the problem, it's that Cloistered just gets the same stuff as every other caster gets baseline. </blockquote><p>Warpriest is also an issue, it's horribly designed. You only get increasing Proficiency with one weapon; your deity's favored weapon. So basically, you have to choose your deity based on their favored weapon, which is ridiculous. Warpriest is light on the "war" part.Guntermench wrote:It's not Warpriest that's the problem, it's that Cloistered just gets the same stuff as every other caster gets baseline.
Warpriest is also an issue, it's horribly designed. You only get increasing Proficiency with one weapon; your deity's favored weapon. So basically, you have to choose your deity based on their favored weapon, which is ridiculous. Warpriest is light on the "war" part.HeHateMe2021-08-08T17:54:45ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Secrets of magic hypeHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43e1o&page=15?Secrets-of-magic-hype#7502021-08-07T21:53:29Z2021-08-07T19:27:16Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Guntermench wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Lanathar wrote:</div><blockquote>I am starting to think they have jammed themselves into a corner over doctrines and have no way of adding more. What they offered was so limited (and poor to be honest) that they aren’t that solid a structure for new ones</blockquote>I does seem that way. <a href="https://youtu.be/5XiRjPMBrWA" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">This video goes over it pretty well I think.</a> They basically made the baseline Cleric in Cloistered and then Warpriest for people that want something a little different, but this doesn't leave a whole lot of room for additional doctrines. Especially since they basically get caster baseline proficiency from going Cloistered, so in order to do anything else they're going to lose something that full casters generally get. </blockquote><p>Just like in 1e, Cleric is a poorly designed class with not many options for expansion in 2e.Guntermench wrote:Lanathar wrote:I am starting to think they have jammed themselves into a corner over doctrines and have no way of adding more. What they offered was so limited (and poor to be honest) that they aren’t that solid a structure for new ones
I does seem that way. This video goes over it pretty well I think. They basically made the baseline Cleric in Cloistered and then Warpriest for people that want something a little different, but this doesn't leave a whole lot of room for...HeHateMe2021-08-07T19:27:16ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Secrets of magic hypeHeHateMehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43e1o&page=15?Secrets-of-magic-hype#7432021-08-09T12:11:17Z2021-08-07T07:12:07Z<p>I understand we're getting two new classes with this book, but will there be any new builds for existing classes? Like Cleric Doctrines or Barbarian Instincts or Druid Orders, etc?</p>I understand we're getting two new classes with this book, but will there be any new builds for existing classes? Like Cleric Doctrines or Barbarian Instincts or Druid Orders, etc?HeHateMe2021-08-07T07:12:07Z