HidaOWin's page

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber. Organized Play Member. 79 posts (80 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Organized Play characters.


1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Lantern Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Arachnofiend wrote:
Erm, wasn't it determined during the playtest that power attacking with a d12 weapon was just worse than attacking twice on average?

If the striking enchant caps at 3 extra dice at the highest level, it narrows the gap on Power Attack versus 2 attacks, you’ll usually be rolling the same amount of dice, with a bigger Crit on Power Attack and more normal damage at lower accuracy on the second roll.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

<Attack> Proficiency is a top tier feature in PF2, I think they will avoid it being a class feat and instead be a class feature mostly. Multiclass feats will probably get you limited slower access to it, but through specific feats instead. The design intention seems to be feats give you options in combat, not increasing numeric bonuses. This is good as it means a GM could if they wished, hand out a feat as a reward and the game won't break through escalation of numbers.

Lantern Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

Champions already can do it. This was exactly what happened in the Oblivion Oath episode. Karinna did some stuff with dead bodies, focus point back. Boom. Also, how is this a slippery slope? Clerics and Champions get their focus back because these specific activities are synonymous with praying and their powers come from a god. All that is flavor justification, but the real reason they can regain focus this way is because the rules say so. If the rules don't say the wizard can multi-task when they refocus, then the wizard can't multi-task.

If you want to ask why the rules shouldn't let the wizard get it back that way, then you can refer back to wizards having to study their spellbook to get magic, rather than show devotion to a god.

Druids are a weird edge case because "getting magic from nature" has never felt nearly as well defined. But I'd hazard a guess that if druids DO get this, it will be order specific. So a druid of the animal order might refocus while tending to or playing with their animal companion. The leaf order might be able to refocus by gathering herbs. And a druid of the wild order would refocus by being a ruff boi. None of them can just do "nature stuff" and call it a day.

Well, first i’ll point out that i mentioned the discussion can devolve if the mechanic isn’t understood in its full context; this is kinda proving that.

All i was pointing out was the slippery slope of combining actions during 10 min rests. A Champion or a Cleric refocusing via prayer; cool. A Wizard refocusing by reading his book or something; cool. A Cleric refocusing while using treat wounds or a Wizard refocusing while identifying recently obtained magical loot; kinda cheesing.

Interestingly enough, you even quoted all of the comments that lead to this as well so i’m Not sure where the hang up is. Fluff wise refocus can be done any way the player imagines; combining refocus with another task is cheesy slip and slide. Until we have the full restrictions on how...

Life is full of kinda cheesing things.

"You need to take two trips in your car today, one to pick up milk, one to meet your brother at the bus stop"

"Cool, I'll grab the milk at the shop beside the bus stop and just make one trip"

"I feel you are kinda cheesing things by doing that..."

If its expressly within the purview of both things, I think little synergies are fine and make players feel smart for thinking of them.

Lantern Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Gentlemen and ladies, it’s been an honour.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Jason will never crack, but what about his co-workers? Anyone there look like a squealer?

Jason wrote out the cards on his own and I think printed and cut them on his own, but who helped Jason collate and distribute the cards?

Were there any cards left over?

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Also, they will innately spend more time explaining the changes they made, rather than the changes they didn’t make.
They might mention in passing why they kept levels or d20s. But they are unlikely to explain why they didn’t make it a solo game, or kept character sheets or the concept of combat. Some questions might occur to people but probably don’t get asked enough to be worth explaining everything.

Again, check their streams and interviews, many of the Paizocon panels deliver some insights.

Lantern Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Was just looking at Grapple in the PF2 Playtest book. Making a target up to two sizes larger than you flat footed and immobile isn't a bad deal, but I was wondering.
A classic visual in fantasy is the warrior or rogue climbing up a huge adversary to deliver a blow to a vulnerable spot or hang on while the beast takes the skies. I've also had many a player ask how can they do it when taking on a flying adversary or something really large and I can usually fudge something but it'd be nice to have something official to do it with.

But how about if instead of grappling the monster to immobilise it, you could grapple on to the monster to hang on to it.

So a skill feat like this would be appreciated

Involuntary Mount
Skill Feat 4
Prerequisite: One Handed Climber
You gain access to the following action
Scale Foe <Attack> <1 action>
Requirements You must have one hand free. Your target must be at least two sizes larger than you.
You attempt to scale your foe. Scaling requires you to roll an Athletics check against the opponents Reflex DC. This is considered a Grapple.
Success: Your opponent is flat footed until the end of your next turn unless you move or your opponent Escapes using Acrobatics or Breaks the Grapple with Athletics. While your foe is scaled when they move you move along with them ignoring restrictions.
Critical Success: Your next attack this turn ignores the MAP.
Failure: You fail to scale your opponent. If you were already scaling your opponent you fall off ending the scale.
Critical Failure: As above and your opponent can grab you as if they succeeded at a Grapple action or make you fall prone.

Lantern Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Dekalinder wrote:

No multiclass gives armor proficiency aside from champion. No multiclass gives weapon proficiency aside from fighter. No multiclass at all gives higher proficiency than what you get in your primary class.

Means, multiclassing fighter does not makes you any better at hitting that what your primary class allows.

I came out from hiding just to say that a multiclass system that doesn't allow you to trade spell proficiency for more weapon proficiency or weapon proficiency for armor proficiency is not an actual multiclass system for me.

Yes multiclassing is a very dear argument for me.

I'll go back to my cave now, bye.

a) As you first acknowledged and then oddly ignored, you do get an improvement in proficiency from the 12th level Fighter multiclass feat.

b) It's not inconceivable that there are class feats to improve proficiency that you can take with multiclass dedications.
c) If you want to be a Wizard that gives up significant amounts of casting to be more like a Fighter, I'd suggest instead being a Fighter and multiclass as a Wizard.
d) You are undervaluing weapon and armour proficiency as a class feature. These aren't small bonuses, they are the largest and most applicable bonuses in the game for their respective class and incredibly important. Legendary proficiency in your gear of choice is probably equivalent to 9th level spells in power during play, hell we aren't even sure if all classes get legendary proficiency in a single relevant weapon, Monks might top out in Master in unarmed.

We will have a fuller picture when the game is actually out. ATM we are missing some key pieces of information.

Lantern Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Once we see the revised condition list for PF2, I'm sure we'll have a set of condition cards in no time which will summarise all that information for any player.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

1) Let anyone pick whatever class they want. Then if they pick Sorcerer let them take any dedication feat they want, if they pick another class they get Sorcerer dedication feats for free. This way you get a wide range of build diversity at the table but you also hang on to your games theme.
2)Let them pick whatever bloodline they like, you don't want everyone stuck with the same bloodline spells.

Lantern Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

One very cool thing about this system is you can run a pseudo gestalt home game by going “Everyone gets a bonus dedication feat every second level”

I think the main thing casters lose out on when multiclassing into martial will be the bonus accuracy and damage that a primary martial get with higher proficiencies. Given the new crit system I think accuracy cannot be underestimated in this edition.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I have screenshots of most of the stat block of the Young White Dragon that might be Level 5 monster.

We have all the level 10 Adult and level 15 Ancient White Dragons.

Young White: AC 23, HP 115 Bite and Claw are both at +17

Adult (10): AC 29, HP 215 Bite and Claw are both at +23

Ancient (15): AC 36, HP 330 Bite and Claw are both at +31

Lots of interesting action use and attack options in the stat block.

Lantern Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Thrash looks great as your third action attack on a turn once you've got your opponent in headlock, you've got a poor chance of hitting with that third punch but your deathlock noogie should do some damage.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

In the Treerazor statblock they have his Blackaxe which is a +4 greater corrosive major striking great axe that grants a +4 item bonus to attack rolls, deals an extra 2d6 damage to plants and has the properties of adamantine.

That implies the +4 item bonus is not directly linked to the +4 part of the weapon.

In his stat block
Melee: Blackaxe +47 (acid, chaotic, evil, magical, reach 15 feet, sweep)
Damage: 4d12 + 15 slashing plus 1d6 acid, 1d6 chaotic and 1d6 evil and 2d6 slashing vs plants.
Melee: Jaws +45 (agile, chaotic, evil, magical, reach 15 feet)
Damage: 4d10 + 18 slashing + 2d6 chaotic and 2d6 evil.

It’s the best other information we have.

Lantern Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

The Future of Pathfinder Panel:

Everyone volunteered some spoilers

First World Guide: Has a bunch of backrgorunds and archetypes. One of those archetypes is the Hellknight Arminger. It’s an archetype that lets you enter another Hellknights Archetype before you get the dedication. Has an access entry, if you satisfy the clause it becomes common rather than the default uncommon. Anyone in the old Cheliax region is entitled to take the archetype at second level.

Fall of Plaguestone: First stand along adventure. Is about how your group came together. You start in a wagon with a half deaf one eared elf named Cookie, heading to Plaguestone, a rural village known for its turnips. Can become a turnip cop. Adventure will get you access to rewards you can’t get otherwise. Have to play the adventure to get the reward, this ties into the rarity system.

In the games mastering chapter, has content about creating a safe welcoming game for everyone. Simple social contract advise for base Pathfinder like no torture, have adult conversation about boundaries.

Bestiary: Axiomites are a type of Aeon.

Lantern Lodge

15 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I know some people have noticed the smaller physiques in Pathfinder 2, but the Pathfinder Society brought in mandatory testing for a reason and if physiques are smaller now that pretty much paints a clear picture of what was going on behind the scenes with potions of Bulls Strength.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Sajan has lost a lot of muscle mass, probably from becoming a dex based monk rather than a strength based one.
His hips are now identical girth to his upper chest which indicates he's a lot leaner even covered up. Traps looking much smaller as well, guess PFS put in mandatory drug testing.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

War Razor
Uncommon simple melee weapon
1d4 S
Agile, finesse, deadly d8, dangerous

New quality: Dangerous: attacks with this weapon deliver a critical hit when it exceeds the targets AC by 9.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
dirtypool wrote:


Then what was the point about pushing up your glasses and making sure we all knew that the success of 5E wasn't about it's design but about the fact that it appealed to a different type of player who watches games get played but doesn't play them?

Because I don't like 5Es design and I think attributing its success to its design rather than it reaching a new market through streaming is incorrect. I don't judge people for watching games being played, consume whatever media you want. 5E was better suited to being watched than a more tactical game so I thought that was the reason the streamers switched to it. Hearthstone put in a lot of LOLRandom cards because they streamed better and Battle Royale games do great as they also stream well.

Quote:
Then again what was the point of wading into this conversation which, ostensibly, was about the current playtest iteration's low barrier to entry compared with 5E's low barrier to entry with a dash of sales talk thrown in? No one was arguing that the PF2 should throw the baby out with the bathwater and become a 5E clone. You invented that notion whole cloth.

Because when you are discussing how great 5E is doing, the implication is PF2 should be more like 5E. People arguing for squashing the math to be more like 5E is a similar argument and the root of it is the concept that 5Es dominance is due to its superior design to all other RPGs which I think is bunk. I think it was the right game at the right moment, which is not lightning I'd try to recapture.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I enjoyed the Monk a lot in the playtest.
I actually try to play a Monk at least once in every iteration of D&D/Pathfinder and this was the first Monk that operated and felt unique from core content which I was really pleased by.
The highly mobile hard hitter concept was actually realised in the new three action economy and it felt good.
I also multiclassed rogue and it was handy, though my hopes are for some more tempting Class and Skill feats in the full second edition.

Lantern Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Gorbacz wrote:

> be a fan of D&D/Pathfinder, the most conservative RPG game design in existence which, in 2019, continues to ignore 90% of advancements in RPG design that came in since 1978
> talk about advancing and improving design

Choose one.

I enjoy aspects of Pathfinder 1e's design even if its not my favourite RPG, which is why I was such a fan of the bold steps taken in the Playtest, a genuine effort is being made to balance and improve the game. I think that should be encouraged and a retreat back towards 5E is not how I'd go.

Lantern Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Just for clarities sake as I've been accused of trying to gatekeep RPGs and hating newbies, I don't care a bit who plays what game, let anyone play any game they like.

What I don't want is for any game to cargo cult 5Es design decisions in the hope it'll lead to a vastly bigger audience because I don't think it will and I don't think 5E is a terribly good RPG. 5E was the right game at the right time, but then so was Settlers of Catan which helped launch the boardgame revolution which has thankfully steadily increased the quality of boardgames to the point that Settlers is a very mediocre game in comparison to more recent offerings.

Basically I don't want retrograde steps and copying the current big game only works if you can outdo the current big game in prominence. I'd also like RPG design to keep advancing and improving.

Lantern Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Gorbacz wrote:
HidaOWin wrote:
Then it caught on in streaming and exploded. Take away streaming and people would be asking about 6th ed right about now.
Who would ask? All the new people who came into the hobby and who really don't care what edition are they playing, how are the other editions, which one is superior, what are the merits of magic missile hitting automatically as an expression of Respect and Honour for True Traditions and Staying True by Real Fans as opposed to 4th ed's PHB magic missile requiring a roll to hit and thus NOT RESPECTING THE FEELINGS OF ACTUALLY TRUE FANS *cries, hyperventilates*

Without streaming making 5e super popular, they never would have done the books they are currently doing. Look at its release schedule, what other RPG in history has had its release schedule massively accelerate 3 years after release? Usually its front loaded or consistent.

Lantern Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

To take this back to scaling a little, the virtue of the +1 level system, means that an Ogre at 1st level is a dangerous threat, but at 7th you'll mill through a large number of them demonstrating your characters increasing power. This ties into the new critical hit system, where despite their substantial hit points, you'll reliably crit them making them faster to take down turning them into just big mooks.

Thats a virtue narrowly bounded accuracy misses out on and while some people find treadmilling "silly" it has advantages in the rules and provides valuable tangible rewards for leveling triggering that old dopamine hit.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

3rd edition D&D actually brought a ton of new gamers in and the d20 glut was a real force in early 2000s. Now that eventually crashed but Pathfinder dominated the late 2000s/early 2010s for a reason and that was appealing to that large demographic. However 5th ed hasn't crashed yet, so going after the 5e playerbase seems premature.

The reason I link the rise of 5e to streaming is that the initial 5e launch was tepid with a very small publishing schedule and a greatly reduced team (they had to delay a book nearly a year because a staff member got jury duty). It was intended to be a low key edition to keep things ticking over. Then it caught on in streaming and exploded. Take away streaming and people would be asking about 6th ed right about now.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Typo in the article, the plural of Tooth Fairy is Teeth Fairy.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

90% of Monsters/NPCs live for 6-30 seconds of in game time, I think the core game making the opposition simpler to build and run is just a good thing.

The remaining 10% is fertile ground for a some sort of enchanced foes supplement, where you can custom build your more rounded NPC. However in the core, streamlined monsters/NPCs is only a boon.

Lantern Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I'm a big fan of the new critical system for weapons, I think the 10 over target number makes to-hit bonuses incredibly valuable and results in crit city when you take on lower level bad guys, which feeds into player power fantasies nicely.

However I'm a little disappointed with the lack of weapons that can crit more often, weapons with some inherent attack bonus beyond the normal would clearly be overpowered but I was very interested in examining how the keen rune interacted with it. I was quite disappointed as the design of "Crit on a 19 or 20 so long as the attack hits" was quite clunky and sidestepped the 4 degrees of success rule.

Additionally once again daggers are the poor cousin of short swords, while you can throw them, they are otherwise inferior. The archetypical knife wielding class, the rogue has almost no reason to use them. Many new players would logically choose their rogue to wield daggers as it fits the class fantasy, but the lower damage becomes increasingly notable as the damage scales.

So I was thinking about a new weapon trait, Lethal which would make weapons crit more often.
A Lethal weapon would either give you +1 to hit on an attack that successfully hit, so upgrading your attack to a crit, or if this makes wording easier, critical hit on an attack that hits by 9 over AC/TAC rather than 10. This makes crits with the weapon 5% more likely while not altering the hit rate.

The humble dagger could then become
1d4 P Agile, finesse, thrown 10ft, versatile S and lethal
This way, there is an argument to use it over a shortsword.
I know its late in the playtest, but the idea has been rattling around for a while and I wanted to throw it out there.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Nothing in the text about that Star Spawn flying out, start making those climb rolls.

Lantern Lodge

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

This playtest has been doing a very encouraging job of looking for actionable specific feedback from players.
It's been great to see the genuine effort made by the designers to adjust the game within the framework possible in the face of responses that have ranged from insightful commentary to unreasonable demands.

Is it running at a demanding rate, absolutely. However I remain hopeful that the game will live up to the effort they are making and I think the badgering the designers is unhelpful. They are certainly more aware and invested in the available time than we are.

Lantern Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
D@rK-SePHiRoTH- wrote:

"they try to propose us a more "Dark Souls" game"

Except in Drak Souls you win if you're actually good, while in PF2 it's down to randomness and player ability is minimized both before combat (optimization is no longer possible) and in combat (tactics are weak and unlikely to work, positioning is less relevant, CC is ineffective etc)

It's actually the opposite of a game like Dark Souls that rewards you for good play

I'd disagree very strongly with that point about combat strategy not mattering, in PF1, I could optimise enough that I'd hit almost regardless of dice roll and could alpha down almost any problem I encounter in a turn or 2, positioning for a flank or someone spending a turn to give people a +1 to hit bonus usually wasn't worth it.

In PF2 due to such strongly bounded accuracy most of the abilities that give +X to hit are very valuable. Against equivalent level foes, +1 to hit is 5% more hits and 5% more crits on your first attack, making your opponent flat footed is 10% to both. Higher hp pools and better in combat healing on the PC side, mean fights are longer, which mean spending time adjusting the odds in your favour matter more, you're more likely to roll an attack 10-20 times than you are to make 2-5 attacks so percentage adjustments start to really become significant. I've noticed DOTs (Damage over time) effects like acid or bleeding are actually really significant tools in equivalent level fights, whereas in PF1 they were an insignificance.

It's a very different metagame in PF2, people who learned the "correct" way to play in PF1 could well be experiencing shock at the lower hit rate and large health pools of the bad guys, but its worth trying to modify your play a bit and see if the experience changes itself for you.

I definitely feel their are issues with the new system, but the core chassis feels solid and the updates have all been very positive.

Lantern Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Mark Carlson 255 wrote:

I think you have valid points especially 1 and 2.

After reading the survey Q's I was very surprised to not see a simple question, "Did you have fun in this section?"

MDC

"Fun" is not a terribly useful metric, one player might only find combats which are never challenging fun, while another player might find ones where the party TPKs fun. Fun is so variable that its almost impossible to have something that is found universally "fun". You're better off striving for a particular approach for your game and letting the audience for that game find it.

Lantern Lodge

14 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I think some of the issues people are experiencing are due to mistaken assumptions about the playtest.

Some people wanted the playtest to be a promotional exercise. We'd all play some adventures in a new tweaked system, nothing was really going to change and the only goal was to have fun with our sneak peek.
However that's not what the playtest is, it's actually more like tedious stress testing, where we test deliberately narrow targeted elements of the system and parts of that system are regularly changed and new responses checked. This isn't fun, but its not being put together to be fun, its to stress test things so the game is a better game after the playtest. It's why they've stressed its not intended to be fun and to run the game as close to the RAW presented as possible.

Some people want to co-design the system. They'd like if any suggestion they make be implemented as a priority. They view this playtest as an opportunity to make sure the game is designed in accordance with their preferences.
This also isn't what the playtest is for, Paizo don't need 500 extra designers making suggestions which range from deeply insightful, clever ideas to half baked suggestions which fix one problem while creating a dozen more. The point of the playtest is to stress test the scenarios we are presented with and fill out surveys that accurately model our experience. Paizo are trying to get enough data that they start to discern patterns of experience and can modify the playtest to better achieve what they want.
I'm sure Paizo would like to carefully read every topic and try every idea but there isn't the time and as designers they need to trust themselves when the feedback is as expected and root for answers when it isn't.

Some people are disappointed by the lack of content.
While it's definitely got less options than a 12 year old RPG line with 100s of books I think people need to be realistic about how much can be fitted into the core book.

This is the most authentic RPG playtests I've ever seen, they have made significant changes in response to issues that have cropped up and the game has noticeably improved from version 1.0 to version 1.4
I'm very optimistic about how it's going and while I'm not sure the game will be to everyones taste, I think it's still going to be the options heavy crunchy game PF1 is at heart.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I'd actually love if some of the weaker class feats got the general tag so you could grab them with a general feat. Some of the monk movement ones are of similar strength to a skill feat so it'd be nice to have that as an option.

Lantern Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I think cantrip damage should land above a wizard using an appropriately potent runed crossbow. That might mean making a few weapons for wizards that boost cantrips or lower level spells.
If you had a Staff of Flame that added +1d6 fire damage to a fire cantrip and +3d6 fire damage to a fire spell of level 3 or lower, that’s one way to give casters an additional loot option and make the lower level damage spells a little more competitive.
It’s a fact that some players want to play blaster casters, its a common power fantasy, so putting a few tools in there to make it work well is probably a good idea.

Lantern Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Have the Crossbow Ace feat let crossbows target TAC and give the crossbow Fatal d12 against Hunted Targets. Make the Crossbow Ace the one giant dangerous attack ranger as a different playstyle.

Lantern Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I think running monsters specifically targeting downed PCs rather than attempt to win the fight is a good tactic if the monsters goal is to weaken the PCs at the expense of their own lives, treating themselves more as RTS units, weakening an advancing force rather than individuals with goals of their own.
I have no doubt tactics like that are effective given NPCs offensive bias, but its very much winning through the metagame in which NPCs are disposable tools to weaken then defeat the PCs. Players will develop a hostile OOC reaction to those tactics unless rules enter the metagame that punish tactics like that from NPCs.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

It's a point worth considering that if a GM is playing an encounter without holding back NPCs have a number of advantages.

1) They are controlled by a single mind, so don't need to discuss any plans and can co-ordinate for maximum effectiveness.
2) Their turns are often simultaneous which means co-ordination is easier and harder for players to disrupt.
3) Environmental factors often suit them better, darkness, underwater, cliffs. NPCs in these areas often have abilities that ignore these factors players have to deal with.
4) Higher attack numbers makes focus fire easier and lower defenses matter less when you can whittle down your opponents quicker.
5) Focus fire can often target the characters capable of healing or dealing with larger numbers of foes leaving the players without valuable tactical options.

Points 1 and 5 are probably best dealt with by GM advice, restricting focus fire like that as an advanced tactic to particularly brilliant or coordinated foes.
On Point 2 I think hero points are a great idea but their use could be expanded, such as spending 1 to change your initiative to act immediately if you have not already acted this turn which could help disrupt these gang ups and unfortunate initiative orders.
On Point 3, I think abilities and equipment to help deal with these unusual encounter factors need to be checked for specifically, is Light the cantrip good enough at dealing with foes in Darkness and so on. Shold it be one action to cast, with the option to add a second action to cast it at range?

Lantern Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I'm a huge fan of this system, in it in exchange for a decent stat commitment and a significant number of your fests you get to import additional flavour and capability from another class. It's powerful but with steep costs and it's both more forgiving and more open than PF1 multiclassing.

If we were to be fair to PF1 multiclassing it was something that could yield massive payoffs with sufficient system mastery but significantly more often was a terrible idea. Someone going "My new character will be a even split Oracle/Druid!" was setting themselves up for a disaster. The new system is easier to use, less prone to insane backfires and sidesteps a lot of the dip issues that made very low level characters samey and boring and kept them from doing their thing until level 3.
How many people have played a class that didn't start working until then to avoid people dipping in for core class features?

This is just a huge step forward.

Lantern Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Could the ranger get a feat where when they roll initiative using stealth or survival at the start of an encounter the choose one square to set a snare in or something?

Traps in nearly every game suffer from action economy issues or not getting to chose the battlefield so even something small like this would be a nice option to have.

Lantern Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

If you want Staves and Wands to occupy a different design niche than each other you could try the following.

Staves are expensive, provide a numerical buff to some spells, grant you extra spells and you can use Resonance to cast those spells.
So pretty much as currently designed just deleting the spend charges/spell slots.

Wands are cheaper, have a power level between 1 and 9, provide 1 spell and let you convert your spell slots into that spell.
A wand will let you convert the equivalent spell slot you spend into the spell in the wand. You can spend a Resonance Point to heighten the spell to the power level of the wand.
So if you have a Power Level 3 Wand of Magic Missle, you can spend a level 1 spell slot to cast a level 1 Magic Missle or you can spend a level 1 spell slot and a Resonance Point to cast Magic Missle heightened to level 3.

Lantern Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
thflame wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
an item with charges (which seem common, Wands and Staves seem to all fall into this category)
Wands and staves, and only wands and staves, fall into this category. Staves are almost certainly the most complex item type in the game right now.

This is good to know, and if it were only Staves I'd be less concerned. Wands are super common and gonna continue to be so, though, and by far the most logistically difficult item to keep track of in PF1. Adding Resonance costs just makes that worse.

I mean, lower number of charges would help (and seems likely based on stuff you said in another thread)...but I still remain very concerned about the specific Resonance/Charges interaction.

I think as long as wands remain a multi-use consumable, it's definitionally and tautologically going to have charges, or at least a synonym for charges (I mean, they are basically similar to scrolls in bulk, like in PF1). Staves could lose their charges in their current incarnation and still function just fine, though.

Perhaps just don't make wands consumable?

Here's how I would handle it:

-Spend 1 RP to attune a wand.

-Spend 1 RP to cast the spell from the wand. (And any required actions for the spell.)

From your earlier response to my post, I assume that these items exist, they just aren't "wands". I guess what I am suggesting is that those items SHOULD be wands, and "wands" as they are(or "charged items"), just should not exist.

This is all coming purely from a ease of use stand point. I don't want to have to track Resonance AND charges simultaneously. I feel like doing so defeats the point of having Resonance in the first place.

If so, a wand of invisibility is going to cost more like 1,000 gp and be something you find/buy/get closer to 10th level than to 4th. And it would invert the relationship between staves and wands, insomuch as...

What breaks if I can use a Wand of Invisibility (Resonance -1) times a day?

If wands are meant to be "scrolls but in in bulk and a bit cheaper" I mean, does that deserve it's own system?

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Cellion wrote:

Here's the attempt:

CLOAK OF ELVENKIND wrote:

CLOAK OF ELVENKIND ITEM 10+

Descriptors: Illusion, Invested, Magical

Method of Use worn, cloak; Bulk L

This cloak is deep green with a voluminous hood, and is embroidered with gold trim and symbols of significance to the elves.

Investment: When you invest into the Cloak of Elvenkind, the cloak transforms to match the environment around you and muffles your sounds, giving you an item bonus of +3 to stealth checks. Additionally, you gain the use of the following abilities.

Activated Abilities:
[[A]](vocal), [[A]](somatic): You cast the ghost sound cantrip as an arcane spell.

[[A]](interact), [[F]](focus), Pay 1 RP: Your interact action draws the hood of the cloak over your head while your focus action triggers the magic of the cloak. You are affected by invisibility for 1 minute or until you pull the hood back down, whichever comes first.

Type standard; Level 10; Price 1,000 gp

Also just quoting this for emphasis, the items should all be formatted as clearly as this and hopefully printable either by your good selves at Paizo or online. Being able to give a player a card with their new magic item is just a boon to both player and GM.

Lantern Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Just no to Wands and Staffs using charges and Resonance. It's just extra book-keeping without any real management choices. If Resonance is the resource you are managing, that should be the opportunity cost of the using the staff or wand.

Like, how many times are you going to use that staff or wand in your games lifetime? Are you going to use it for an adventure, then toss it for a better version to make more efficient use of your Resonance.

Pathfinder 2e should be looking for places to jettison the fiddly book-keeping of 1e in favour of more interesting decisions.

Lantern Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

A lot to digest from the preview but I want to raise one thing about Ki Strike.

"ki power feat, Ki Strike, which gives you a pool of Spell Points equal to your Wisdom modifier, which you can spend to cast ki strike. This power is a Verbal Casting free action you can use when making an unarmed strike to get a +1 bonus to your attack roll. So you let out a shout and hit better!"

First off I'm assuming you have to use Ki Strike before your attack roll.
If so it's terrible, even with more restricted accuracy +1 before a roll say 3 times a day is awful, games are interesting when you are making informed choices about the use of limited resources, shifting the odds 5% in your favour before you determine RNG is beyond frustrating, given this power will only effect 2 rolls out of 20 (missing by 1 and missing a crit by 1)
What's worse this is a feat nearly all monks will take to get access to Ki powers and shouldn't be a total lemon.
Please change that to be usable after hitting or missing has been determined, that way 3/4 times a day you can use up a resource to turn a miss to a hit, or hit to a crit when you determine it really matters.

Lantern Lodge

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Ok so riddle me this.

Why is it bad and stupid for a Str 8 Level 20 Wizard to have a better Athletics modifier than a Str 18 Level 1 Fighter

But a Con 8 Level 20 Wizard having more hitpoints than a Con 18 level 1 Fighter is acceptable?

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

1) What rules are preventing you from converting Masks of Nylarthothep to Pathfinder 1e? I genuinely don't see any rules that would prevent you converting an adventure to another system.

2) If maintaining backwards compatibility to Pathfinder 1e, would make Pathfinder 2e a weaker game, then backward compatibility should be sacrificed. There are eleven years of mechanical content for PF1, there is plenty of game in there and making PF2 less good to satisfy people who wont buy it seems foolish.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Currently Capstone Abilities are unique class features each class receives at level 20. They represent a significant power upgrade for the class, often the ultimate expression of that class. They also almost never come up in play, unlike an MMO or other video game with "Ultimate" abilities, Pathfinder has almost no official content aimed at 20th level characters. Even games that get to level 20, will in the vast majority play a few sessions at that level and then finish. Capstone abilities are on the page to tempt you, but you never get to use them.

Proposal: Move capstone abilities to a lower level, maybe 15 where you might actually get to use them. If need be require someone using a capstone to be a single classed character.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

For some players, Pathfinder is a game of tactical RPG combat, where resources must be used carefully to achieve victory. The groups who play like this want robust rules. The question that must be asked about healing in this context, is how are encounters "meant" to challenge players?

Is it
(a) Each encounter should be an extremely hard fight, where death is always on the line and combat is punishing.
(b) Some encounters are extremely hard, but most are intended to only drain some resources to make the final encounters harder.

In (a) you can generally only do a few encounters in a day as you will need to burn resources like mad. In that format healing is more of an in combat tool as the fights are often brutal. These fights can end in TPKs and if every fight is this stressful it can make the game more like work.
In (b) you tend to be able to do more fights, but any way you have to get undercosted healing becomes very valuable. The CL 1 Wand of Cure Light Wounds is disproportionately valuable, extending adventuring time and often trivializing these encounters. Without it though players run out of healing and look to rest more often, which puts GMs in a pickle. Force them to go on and they may fail and usually die or let them rest which means they recover their resources and trivialize a new set of tyoe b encounters.

It's a difficult problem, I look forward to see how 2E handles it.

1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>