HidaOWin's page

If Thunderstrike is the new Shocking Grasp, it hurts Magus a lot.

Shocking Grasp is Magus's best choice for a pure damage spell at most spell ranks as bizarrely they had almost no single target attack roll spells printed in Secrets of Magic.

It was so egregious I thought it was an in-joke "Ha, its on theme that Magus just casts Shocking Grasp at every level, just like 1st edition"

I can say with authority that we will not be adding any weird dice to the Pathfinder Core Rules as part of the Remaster Project.

Glad to hear that Pathfinder won't use any weird dice, just the naturally occurring platonic solids as Gygax intended, because the probability teaching kits he got included those dice. /s

Really disliking the lack of three boosts and a flaw, they were very handy for broadening a character build and shoring up some weaknesses. Also means the two boost characters have to compete with the raw power of humans or the extra stats of the three boosts and a flaw.

Due to the Irish postal service leveling new heavy duties on importing anything labelled games/dice/mats I regretfully need to cancel several of my Pathfinder subscriptions.

Its frustrating as I've been a long term subscriber and like supporting the company but the cost has spiraled out of control and I'm paying a quarter of the total price of the package if it contains ANYTHING that isn't a book.

Pathfinder Maps
Pathfinder Pawns
Pathfinder Accessories
Starfinder Maps
Starfinder Accessories

So I was thinking about the Magus feats, namely how Raise a Tome and Spell Parry are super cool, but Magus will rarely use them because the class tends to anchor around a three action sequence of Striking Spell -> Cast a Spell-> Make a Strike.

How about if that three action sequence stays the heart of the class, but some of their one action feats gain the Synthesis trait and you can gain the benefit of one Synthesis effect when you use Striking Spell.
So if you have Slide Casting and Spell Parry, when you use Striking Spell and Cast a Spell, you can use Slide Casting OR Spell Parry.

Basically the three actions sequence is the heart of the class, but you can choose from a variety of Synthesis effects as the bonus you get on that three action sequence.

Would open up the class a bit tactically, where which synthesis effect you activate can be context sensitive and add a bit of Fighter flavour to it of getting to customize how your Magus plays.

Assuming you get the opportunity to get your magic weapons on recommended level.

+1 weapon Level 2
+1 striking weapon Level 4
+2 striking weapon level 10
+2 greater striking weapon level 12
+3 greater striking weapon level 16
+3 major striking weapon level 19

Potency gets you
+1 weapon Level 1 1 level early
+1 striking weapon Level 5 1 level late
+2 striking weapon level 7 3 levels early
+3 greater striking weapon level 15 1 level early
It doesn't do +2 greater striking or +3 major striking.

Ironically this means level 8 is when you get Runic Impression which means you'll spend 2 levels of fights debating which one to activate just as you get your shiny new feat.

9 items in my order and the charge has hit my credit card. I can but hope now.

“It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand."

"The first transport is away!"

Lethargic cheers everyone!

If you specifically state and demonstrate that an example police force is based on something akin to the Peelian principles of policing by consent, rather than some sort of quasi-military repression arm I think you are making enough of a distinction to be separate and distinct from American policing methods.

Given the current success chance of Study Suspect, the Investigator ends up being a high variance class.

The first thing that is frustrating about that is that a lot of Investigator combat feats become relevant when you can do Studied Strike damage which requires you to succeed at the Study Suspect check. If you fail that as your first action, a player is going to be deflated, the rest of their turn is diminished by that failed roll. That's going to lead to dissatisfaction with the class unless they feel its a high risk/high reward situation, then a player can rationalise it as "win some/lose some"

Lets look at the reward now.
While Studied Strike is often higher damage than Sneak Attack by 1d6, I'm not sure the extra damage is commensurate with the failure chance of Study Suspect. Additionally the triggering condition for Sneak Attack is all over the core game, often the cost is positional but its such a big bonus that any two melee classes are happy to spend an action each to get it. In play Sneak Attack is much more reliable than Studied Strike.
So I suppose the intent of the class has to be looked at; is Investigator a high risk/high reward class or should it have similar reliability to Rogue?

If it's high risk/high reward, Studied Strike damage needs to increase, either more dice or increase to d8s or something tangible.

If it's meant to have similar reliability to Rogue you can do several things.

You can add Study Suspects success and critical success effects to Recall Knowledge checks so you can spend additional actions to try and activate Study Suspect, this leads to additional synergies for feats like Known Weakness.
You can remove the once per turn limit on Study Suspect and clarify you only get the free action once per turn.
You can add a Calculate Trajectories class feat that lets you Study Suspect off Reflex DC instead so Investigators can target all three saves.
Both of these solutions only help a bit with high level opposition.

You could also do something radical as follows. Scale down Studied Strike damage to Sneak Attacks progression. Probably remove the free clause from Study Target.

Critical Success On all your attacks against the target until
the end of this turn, you gain a +1 circumstance bonus to
your attack roll and increase Studied Strikes precision damage by 1d6.
Success On your next attack this turn against the target, you
gain a +1 circumstance bonus to your attack roll and increase Studied Strikes precision damage by 1d6.
Failure: On your next attack this turn against the target, you are considered to have succeeded on your check to Study Target.

That way you can always trigger Studied Strike.

Erk Ander wrote:

I didn't say merely situational, I said REALLY situational. The really part matters.

Here is the thing. PAthfinder first edition had a ton of useless and very situational feats. This edition should imo aspire to avoid that. From the very start.

Hot Take: Pathfinder 2 already has a ton of useless and very situational feats.

A slightly more nuanced take.

There are few totally useless feats, if useless means does nothing. I think just about every feat in the game does something.

There are a decent amount of situational feats, which isn't a bad thing and most of the highly situational ones are in archetypes instead of core class feats. Given that this edition has prioritised choice existing for players and that feats should not habitually increase raw numbers this means some feats will end up more niche than others. That's working as intended.

Instagram cover is great, I love the creepy panel of the skeletons reaching for the star stone at the top.

I mean seems like all the martially inclined characters would find a way to grab Attack of Opportunity if bad guys all persisted in this behaviour, at which point they will cut it the hell out as a full accuracy extra attack in a turn is a pearl without price.

Also adding official clarifications to how sightless characters now magically perceive the world with hearing takes additional text space because you have to explain the ways in which it would be different in a way that's more involved than a monster ability because you as the GM have to reframe the PCS experience of the entire game.
Then to cover deaf and blind characters you have to do magical touch.
Then to cover deaf, blind and numb characters you have to do magical smell.
Then to cover deaf, blind, numb and anosimic characters you have to do magical taste.
Then to cover deaf, blind, numb, anosimic and ageusic characters you have to do navigation via a magical vestibular system at which point its better off just saying

"If you as a player want to play a character with specific disability(s) that's ignored by a fictional magical ability, talk to your GM who may assign a cost in ancestry to access that ability"

Not covering every situation that a person might exist in is not bigotry, its a fact of word count and evidence of the diversity of the human condition.

Also, the flickmace could look like a ball and chain flail with some cunning self retracting mechanism. Or look a bit like a meteor hammer. It could definitely look cool.

Also despite being uncommon its possible a ranger might get their mitts on an alchemical crossbow. On demand access to different elemental damage to hit opponents right in the weaknesses is very on brand for a ranger.

Eh, if you are Strength 14 or better you can ignore speed penalty from hide armour, but I understand what you mean.

That seems an pretty low AC even with the -1 penalty.

Your barbarians level 1 AC should be 10(base) + 2 (trained in armour) + 1 (level) +3 (hide armour if your dex is bad) +1 (dex) = 17 AC, 16 with Rage, you could also be 14 dex which pumps that up one higher.

It’s a potentially tough fight alright and your AC being lower than expected can really sting especially against the tougher foes in it.

Master Spell Proficiency is the rough equivalent of Expert Weapon Proficiency in number terms because Spells don't get an item bonus to attacks or Save DCs. That's why multiclass feats get to Master Prof at level 18 if you invest 4 class feats.

Getting a Master prof in weapons/armour or Legendary prof/10th level spells is something that really has to be restricted to your main class in standard games as otherwise you encroach too much on the main classes core strength.

Corvo Spiritwind wrote:

You get X and Y by paying Z.

Getting X via another resource Ø, but not getting Y for the same resource Ø. Now that's dishonest.

Except that's incorrect. Martials do not get only increased mastery in spells, they also receive spell slots via those feats.

Spellcasting is the CORE of the casters. This is what martials get when they archetype into casters. EXPERT Weapon proficiency alone is not the core of Fighter. It is all the other feats that Fighter gets access to that makes the core of Fighter.

We are not asking for Master or Legendary proficiencies in weapons, which makes you dishonest when you phrase your arguments as if we are asking for that.
Even if a caster takes Martial archetype, they will only receive MATCHING proficiency to weapons they get from class. They do not get to improve proficiency in something they did not have.

But casters can get Expert proficiency in the weapon of their choice, it just costs 2 class feats.

You're not arguing for options for casters to get expert proficiency, you're arguing they should get it much much cheaper.

The Gleeful Grognard wrote:

Spending a more important feat (thanks to feat chains for martials) and disabling fast movement for yourself, as well as that increased armour check penalty that cannot be gotten rid of.

Forgive me if I am not seeing it as a shining example of where you could do it core in PF1e without a downside :P

It's quite different. You don't get a -5 AC penalty (rough equivalent to -2 in P2E) once you hit level 13th.

You don't get that big a penalty in real terms. Lets say you are a Wizard wearing + 2 Plate with 10 dex at level 12. Why do you have 10 dex? Because you are raising your Int, Str, Con and Cha at levels 5 and 10. Could you focus on Dex instead? Sure, but then you shouldn't wear plate.

At level 12 you would be:
Unarmored = 10 (Base) + 12 (level) + 2 (Trained) + 0 (Dex) + 2 ( 2 Potency Explorers Clothing) = 26 AC
Plate = 10 (Base) + 12 (level) + 2 (Trained) + 0 (Dex) + 8 ( 2 Potency Full Plate) = 32AC

At level 13 you would be:
Unarmored = 10 (Base) + 13 (level) + 4 (Expert) + 0 (Dex) + 2 ( 2 Potency Explorers Clothing) = 29 AC
Plate = 10 (Base) + 13 (level) + 2 (Trained) + 0 (Dex) + 8 ( 2 Potency Full Plate) = 33AC

At level 14 you would be:
Unarmored = 10 (Base) + 14 (level) + 4 (Expert) + 0 (Dex) + 2 ( 2 Potency Explorers Clothing) = 30 AC
Plate = 10 (Base) + 14 (level) + 2 (Trained) + 0 (Dex) + 8 ( 2 Potency Full Plate) = 34AC

If you choose to grab the Champion Multiclass feat you pump your AC by 2 while wearing armour at level 14, but assuming you are Dex 10, just being trained in armour is still better than unarmoured.

Lanathar wrote:

If Heavy armour is that important to the RP then the hit to AC should be considered acceptable just like all sub-optimal RP related choices in any version of Pathfinder

Maybe, but why is that something that we should be celebrating? Why is "Let's punish people for wanting to play something different!" a good thing?

It’s not punishing people for playing something different, its putting higher costs on something that has advantages, If you wear full plate you can drop dex and focus on your strength instead and get benefits to help out your reflex save and be generally higher AC than if you didn’t take the feat.

Again, why is it okay for these feats to function perfectly fine from 1st to 12th level, only for 13th level to be the expiration date?

What makes the math at 13th level demand that these feats become obsolete?

Hang on, the feat works fine after 13th, it doesn’t stop working, however if you want 2 more AC while wearing your full plate, you just take the 14th level feat that raises your proficiency to expert. Or not and live with being 2 lower AC.

I'd disagree pretty strongly. If you want your wizard to swing a greatsword you can just spend a level 2 class feat on Fighter multiclass and if you want it to scale fairly well grab the level 12 feat or if you want it more for flavour spend a General Feat to grab martial weapons. Do either of those and you'll fight acceptably well with a melee weapon, not to the same level of a martial but you'll usually be only 2-3 points behind most of them if you keep your Strength or Dexterity up there. (Fighter is the exception but Fighter is 2 points ahead of everyone)

In comparison in first ed, a Wizard couldn't come close to that, you could get proficiency through shenanigans or a dip but your BAB was miles behind the martials so your hit rate would always be much lower and you'd lose some casting power.

This is much more flexible than most D&Desque games because you can easier take a multiclass to add some new options to your character without compromising core strengths.

HidaOWin wrote:

If its core to your concept you can spend the two class feats and get plate to expert on your wizard. If the champion multiclass is a deal breaker on that, I'd wait a little, I'm sure another archetype that does something similar will come along.

By two feats, do you mean one on the Dedication and then one on the Armor expert feat?

Yeah, with a bit of retraining that should be doable at 10th level after putting a 5th level and 10th level boost into your Strength and Charisma.

If its core to your concept you can spend the two class feats and get plate to expert on your wizard. If the champion multiclass is a deal breaker on that, I'd wait a little, I'm sure another archetype that does something similar will come along.

I think proficiency is being undervalued for legacy reasons. Getting to master in a weapon or armour is actually a big deal on a level with PF1s Full BAB or 9th level spells, it's not like dipping a single level to get a PF1 weapon or armour proficiency. Look at how many feats you spend for some spell access, having higher levels of proficiency gated behind some feats is actually pricing the strengths of some classes at an appropriate level.

You can just retrain if you don't want to continue investing feats to use that type of armour. The core book supports using a feat for a while, then changing it out for something more appropriate later on.

Explaining to a new GM that they are free to change the DC and a small note about the realities of multiple PCs making a check seems like good advice for a corebook. I think you might be taking a less charitable reading of the text but I wouldnt agree with that take.

Well having all NPCs/Monsters have identical skills by formula would probably be a little too predictable for players, so some skills being higher or lower than the theoretical max seems a good use of design space.

The 13th Level Dryad Queen does have exceptional Deception and Diplomacy, but that's probably the challenge with her, you are more likely to bandy words with her than fight knowing most PCs.
If you Recall Knowledge about her you'll probably learn that they are deceivers and charmers beyond mortal ken, at which point the sharpest member of the party had best equip some gear to help out and get a useful buff spell and that's the difficultly of the encounter.

Yeah she's higher than a PC, but that helps with variance of multiple PCs rolling against her. Given Perception is also initiative I expect a lot of PCs to be at least decent at it.

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.

<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.

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.

Gentlemen and ladies, it’s been an honour.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.