Hikash Vinzalf's page

What I love
- 3 Action system. Wonderful setup to provide endless feats to combine various actions into activities.
- Skill Feats potential. I can see this becoming great, they are a bit limited right now though.
- Weapon/potency design. I love how choosing your weapon is more than picking the 18-20/x2 option. Could be better, as the d4-d6 weapons are fairly useless, but its much improved.

What I hate
- UTEML difference in skill level. I'm OK with +level, provided it only works while trained. Expert should give +2, Master +5, Legendary +8. As it is, whatever you keep maxed out seems to result in a 50% chance of success.
- Certain classes don't feel fleshed out. Ranger seems to run out of meaningful feats at 10. Sorcerer seems like a wonderful multiclass base, purely due to having nearly no feats you want to take.
- Armor. Heavy armor feels like such a tax to ignore dex. Its hard not to try to get 16 dex to avoid the penalties of medium/heavy armor. On top of that, dex is a useful stat for nearly anyone anyways. So far one guy tried heavy armor in Pale Mt and felt like he was slowing the group down tremendously.

What I'd houserule
I've avoided houseruling anything yet, so none of these have actually been tested yet.
- Multiclass feats being available at level -2(maybe -4, testing would be required). 1/2 level feels too restrictive, opens up more options and getting a third class doesn't feel as bad.
- I despise goblins as a playable race in most campaigns. They occasionally have a place, but in general they are a fun monster, not a player. Especially since their stat layout makes them the best at odd things. Goblin Paladin shouldn't be a thing.
- Demoralize bonus to things higher level/larger than you (or possibly immune to critical success). I feel like it's silly that a character can glare at a Manticore that is pelting you with spikes and make it run away. That thing could kill you in 1 round if it focused you.

I'm so confused. My group has been playing it as 10 minute cast time. I was certain I saw it in the rulebook but I searched through it and its definitely 2 actions. Dang.

One thing to remember as well: Detect Magic has a 10 minute cast time.
In my head the visual magical effects build up over time, mechanically its not specified, but that's how I'd play it. That being said, you have more than enough time to poke/prod him before it's finished being cast.

You effectively remove his last 7-9 levels of damage. You can easily equate this to removing the highest 4-5 spell levels of a caster. Fairly neutered but still better than an empty space.

Not sure of the relevance, other than looking at the effects of disarming a character. If the goal is to take them out of the fight, other CC feels more fair then taking away their weapons. If you simply are playing "low magic", than there isn't much point playing a fighter in 2e at higher level.

I plan on running my game like this:

-Monster rolls Stealth check when in line of sight of a player and within ~30ft. If failed, players notice it and initiative is called. Otherwise:
-Player gets X distance away from enemy, however close the monster specifies the player needs to be to attack (10ft for the slime).
-Initiative is called since the slime is ready to be hostile.
-If a player wins initiative, they'll be told they sense something is off, Monster would be considered Unseen. They can (and almost have to) use Seek. I suppose they could attack the Darkness as well.

My biggest question is how far away to call initiative and/or roll Stealth checks. As soon as Initiative is called, its very difficult not to metagame that a monster is near. But I believe the rules expect the players to play as if nothing is wrong, and I intend on running Monsters as if they didn't know the players were there. I think the players need to roll stealth each time they try to move though, so it gets hard to get close to them without alerting the monsters.

Oh that's nice then. I assume it's basically considered a Drop action? At least this way you can get a Strike in as well.

Just a note on Cleric. He needs to use 3 actions total to cast Weapon Surge. 1 action to adjust to 1h grip, 1 action to cast Weapon Surge, 1 action to shift back to 2h grip. He can get around this once he gets the Emblazon Symbol feat though.

I'll use the same format for my thoughts.

D20 System/Everything is modular, and based on feats: I like these as well, nothing to really add other than excitement.

Different Modes of Play: It will be interesting to see how this actually plays out. I feel like most tables loosely ran like this it just gives actual rules to it. It will probably require fine tuning so players can actual make money and/or items of value. Could remove the need to find piles of gold everywhere you go.

Action System: I personally am excited to see what they do with this. I expect feats to play greatly into what you can do with the actions allowed. Sudden charge combining 2 strides and an attack into 2 actions is a nice starting place. I'm also curious to see how this plays with haste, as in, can you sudden charge twice now or does the bonus action have to be exactly a stride or attack. This system gives the building blocks to make some fancy maneuvers.

Class Design: I think the classes are pretty solid where they are. I honestly think they may make it difficult to add many more of meaning. I'm the opposite on Paladin, for the most part. I disagree with their choice of LG only. I really like the Righteous Ally ability line though, I believe this can make some pretty interesting characters and adds an additional RP element to play with. The Litanies can make a pseudo support caster paladin, possibly able to stand back and guard their allies to make use of Retributive Strike (which I'm not crazy about but we'll see how it actually looks). I think it's important to look at all the abilities a class has and realize that feats will probably be able to enhance any or all of these. So you could ignore a feature you don't like to further enhance the ones you do.

Martial Combat: I personally prefer Martial characters over Casters, even if its a Cleric I know I'll be wading into melee. The 3 action system section talked about how I felt about feats affecting action economy and I'll re-emphasize that here. I think early on, I agree, you don't have a large amount of options to actually do. But as you progress your feats will open up tactical options. Sudden charge spares you a feat to get you into melee, Pirate Archetype gave a similar one with a few more requirements. I'm hoping each Martial class will have a few things only they can do to adjust their action economy that is accessible via multi-classing. I think that is the only way for martial to martial multi-classing will be competitive with Martial to Caster multi-classing. For instance, maybe Rangers get an upgraded Double Slice to use as their 3rd action to do 4 total attacks, 2 with each of their weapons, in melee. Or combine Sudden Charge and Double Slice for a 3 action activity to get them into the action with reduced penalties.

Spellcaster Combat: I initially thought Spellcaster combat seemed bland in purely moving, or raising a shield, and casting with the only choice being which spell. But the ability to adjust how many actions you can cast a spell with does open up more options beyond that. Hopefully some buddies pick pure casters so I can see it in action but they are generally in short supply in my group.

Equipment: I'm mildly excited about the new item system. I don't think I've seen enough info to make any judgments though. Just hope Trinkets aren't overly expensive because they don't see too exciting yet.

Archetypes: I'm very interested in seeing how Archetypes play out. I think they need a separate Dedication than Multi-classing, but the Playtest will decide that. I feel like Archetypes will be very hard to balance and be desirable by more than a few classes. I hope they can make it more than an RP decision. I also hope some will be acquired by Skill feats and others by Class feats. Could allow it little more variance and strength and make some otherwise obscure ones more desirable.

Overall, I am very glad they are updating to second edition and am pleased with their method to do so. I think most games need a new edition every so often to condense the amount of material needed and put their experience to use to make a better system.

I could see this being an archetype purchased with a skill feat. I don't think we have a good grasp on how strong those are but Pirate seems like it'd fit in nicely there.

I personally think the Magus has a place as a class in PF2, but the traditional Magus would be one of a few variants. They could have 3-4 "Orders". One being the traditional spellsword, another the arcane archer, a third focusing on magically enhanced armor (Eldritch Knight), and the final directing their power into their shield (Captain America). Another option could be a Sacred Fist type.

Each type could come with a different spell list as well, akin to the Sorcerer. Or it could be a completely separate choice. I almost think they'd work better as a Spell Pool based caster instead of Spell list though.

I think Magus would could easily offer enough choice, flavor, and mechanics to warrant being its own class over being offered via feats. Also I think it'd be easier to balance over having a feat any caster/martial could scoop up.

Edit: The more I've thought about the Eldritch Knight style, the more I like making them into a legitimate magic tank. Taunt style spells that promote swinging at them with penalties for swinging at anyone else. Thorns style buffs or triggered spells to go off upon getting hit.

I think what most people need to realize is that balance is going to be weighted more than the narrative behind the characters. Allowing you to dip into 4 different classes across your career while allowing each class to gain its key features immediately is nearly impossible to balance.

The rules are set for PFS use to level the playing field so one player won't easily outshine another. For general play, the rules are more of a guideline that the GM can adjust. You can allow multi-class and archetype dedications to be separate or remove dedication entirely with the knowledge that your players will tone their characters down if/when necessary.

The rules also allow easy use of the gestalt system. Giving your players bonus multi-class feats is super easy to implement in your game.

Finally, it should be remembered we are still in the playtest phase of things. Give the existing system a chance and try to give feedback based on the strength of your characters. If multi-classing feels weak, let them know. I could easily see dedications being separated into archetype and class, especially since the Pirate archetype really felt weak in comparison to Wizard multi-class. But they could also simply boost the archetypes up a bit. We'll have to see.

I don't understand how someone with pathfinder background found the 3 action system complicated. I have 2 players who were unwilling to try pathfinder because it was too much willing to give 2nd edition a shot because of simplicity.

Giving someone an entire page worth of info as a cheat sheet to show what they can do each turn, and thats without feats, was crazy. This system brings in new players easily and allows feats to combine multiple actions into a new activity that overall costs less actions allows customization.

After reading through all this, I am kind of excited to try a support Ranger. If your Hunt can be buffed to apply to allies (and buffed in other ways beyond that), Monster Hunter boosting allies as well, and 2 ranged attacks can make something flatfooted, you can get a significant boost to your allies' attacks. If you can use any shenanigans to boost Perception to ensure you go first, you can really set up something to die each turn.

I'm worried most about Ranger. There doesn't seem to be anything special aside from Hunt and Snare. Snare is something I personally will ignore, while Hunt seems alright but by no means anything crazy.

I'm hoping ranger will get weapon style again to choose ranged, two hand, or dual wield, maybe even sword and board. Dual wield is my preferred ranger and what we know about Animal Companions I could enjoy double slicing something then having my AC do the same. We'll see how it plays out though.

I'm least concerned with Druid. I have no interest in a Storm Druid, but every other Order sounds amazing. Most excited for Wild Druid, I think this could be a great take on a Shifter for PF2.

On feats in general, I'm excited to see where they go. They combine 3 actions into two with Sudden Charge at Level 1. Continuing that line of progression, combined with skill feats, I'm excited to see what crazy things you can do. In my mind atm, I see a bear sprinting up a tree to do a leaping charge at a flying wizard, possibly even getting a bear hug off. If this comes true, PF2 will be a success.