Winter-Touched Sprite

Ilorin Lorati's page

67 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 67 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

1) Lore Warden Fighter. Even after the "redesign", the conceptual space of the non-armored fighter is one I've always loved.

2) Archaeologist Bard. Conceptually fun, even if the implementation needed some cleaning up.

3) Feyspeaker Druid. While it traded a way a little much for slightly too little (in my opinion), a pure caster druid is something I've always wanted.

4) Chosen One Paladin. This one was always super fun to roleplay, and seeing a version of it in PF2 would be awesome.

5) Promethean Alchemist. This is what I think of when I think of an Alchemist, full stop. Doctor Bleedin' Frankenstein and his monster.


Bardic Dave wrote:
Ilorin Lorati wrote:
*snip*
I think there's a pretty easy answer to this. What your ancestry does mechanically is largely defined by which ancestry feats you select. I feel confident that Paizo will include many feats that don't reinforce stereotypes, and even some that actively play against them.

This is fair, but I'm afraid that would end up needing a lot of extra complexity for something that can simply be sidestepped to begin with. First, you have the multitude of Ancestry feats to begin with to match the concept - more than you need for a given character, otherwise what's the point - then you need enough anti-stereotype feats for each ancestry that they aren't all the same.

Even assuming a certain amount of overlap (no point in giving numbers) and that even characters being played against type will likely have a small number of feats picked from their ancestry because some things will still make sense, that's still a lot of feats to cover.


There's a few things I'm worried about:

Ancestry, such as it is, seems like it's strongly tired to the mechanics of the character - possibly leading to having a harder time for characters to escape/defy/shirk their ancestry. Since this is an important part of fiction and roleplay, I feel like the game will need some reliably way around it. And... if it does, then what's the point of having it so tightly bound at all?

I also have some concerns about tying class features so tightly to odd levels, especially for things like the 4- and 6-level casters, who both currently have alternating even/odd levels at which they gain their spells.

While not a worry, per se, this also seems to mean that the Sorcerer is going to be getting its spells at the same rate as the Wizard unless it's pushed *back* another level. Hm.


QuidEst wrote:
Ilorin Lorati wrote:
I'm not seeing any sort of additional information for extra stuff related to a phantom with the Suffering emotional focus, such as Spirit-Bound Blade, Emotional Conduit, and Fractured Mind. Am I missing it or is it simply missing?
It's simply missing.

Just lovely.


I'm not seeing any sort of additional information for extra stuff related to a phantom with the Suffering emotional focus, such as Spirit-Bound Blade, Emotional Conduit, and Fractured Mind. Am I missing it or is it simply missing?


If it's going to get done one way or another and the only question is one of time, Indie Gogo with its flexible goal would be a good happy medium between Kickstarter and 12+ months, in case you don't get enough immediate interest for a full release.

If you're open to ideas for other options, you can also do what a couple other companies do: focus on doing independent sections of the book sequentially, releasing them both independently for people that just want one section as well as with a subscription that works as a preorder for the full book, and use funds from the earlier sales to accelerate later sections of the release.


It does, yes. Thank you!


Ilorin Lorati wrote:
Is the Assimilation Strain going to get ported to Starfinder, or was it not considered needed because there's no need to introduce SF characters to sci-fi?

Mr. Nelson, you never answered this question from earlier threads on this product; it's something I really need to know for my own plans.


Since this wasn't changed in the updated version, could I ask what the intended behavior of Cleric domain spells are? My earlier comment is quoted below for reference, with some added text for clarity.

Ilorin Lorati wrote:
Cleric gets an additional spell prepared per day from their domain and the ability to prepare domain spells as if they were on the character's spell list. However, since they only have one domain and cast spells as an Arcanist, the latter portion of the ability is useless since they already have their domain spells prepared at all times. I get the feeling they're only supposed to be able to cast from their domain spell slot once, but I don't see anything providing that limitation.


Alexander Augunas wrote:
Counterpoint: Litanies weren't part of the paladin class until Ultimate Combat, which came out four years after the Core Rulebook.

Ultimate Combat (2011) was 2 years, not 4. It's been part of the class identity for much longer than it hasn't, to the point where I posit that it doesn't matter that it was ever not part of the class. This is a point we'll never agree on though, so I'll drop it and move on to other things.

Alexander Augunas wrote:
Ah, so you were talking directly about the paladin then? I had gotten confused when you said that "all the SF classes had too many day/use abilities," since as far as I recalled that was a paladin gimmick.

I don't remember saying that; I pointed out that there were too many in the book, which is to say I saw them in Paladin, Bard (which is less of a problem with a closer look, as its per day also has a resolve extension), Magus (Counterstrike and a number of Arcana, though many of them also have resolve extensions), Wizard (for low level abilities, granted). If I led you into the assumption that I felt like every class was built around them, I apologize.

Paladin is the biggest offender, and the one that I felt (and still do feel) was the most anemic of them, so it's been the focus of my poking and prodding. Limiting it in so many ways with per day abilities concerns me just as much as lacking reaction abilities does, even if as you say that's the legacy of the class.

Alexander Augunas wrote:
Comparisons.

All noted; you have obviously put a lot of thought into this. I'll be sure to take notes when I hand it off to my players early next month when I start my campaign, if any of them take Paladin.


Actually, what's the math on Paladin with Smite Evil look like? I'm too tired to look into the measurement, but looking at the basics it feels like they'd be beneath a baseline (read: no Gear Boosts or Specializations) Soldier at level 20, even after using their Smite, simply from the Soldier's extra attack and the improved action economy.

Even considering the paladin's spells and support abilities, I'm still worried about the class looking at that. Soldier, after all, can have a suite of support abilities all on its own through Guard and Gear Boost, not to mention the extra combat feats giving them much easier access to all their feats, including what non-combat support ones exist, because of how much easier it is for them to fill out their combat feats.

Is Aura of Justice meant to offset this? I can certainly see that being the case, especially if, as you say, combats last longer. It's always been hard to use though.


I had missed the AoO clauses on specific spells, so you have my apology there.

As far as the action economy change goes, was this playtested?

I hesitate to let that one go by, since the original magus had its Arcane Pool mechanic as a swift action so they could activate it, close the gap, and attack in the same round. The way it's setup now that won't be possible; the Magus will either need to have a ranged weapon ready (quite possible) or not attack at all in the first round.

Edit: I cut out a section that was here because I'm at work and combined Arcane Weapon and Spellstrike in my head. My concern still applies.

Edit 2:

Alexander Augunas wrote:
Paladin reactions / litanies

Flight 1 is weird because it stops you from using standards, though it is still just a reaction. Aside from that your statement is true, but my point of how Paladins having access to immediate action spells was a major selling point of the class remains. The closest things they have in that niche are a critical strike punishment and a very expensive way to quicken a 1/day ability. If each oath had something similar to Retributive strike my concern would be void.

Alexander Augunas wrote:
per day abilities

I wasn't even really concerned about the Cleric in that situation; every single Paladin oath has a one/day ability that can't be used with Resolve points instead (although one can be enhanced with it). Smite Evil is the biggest offender, with up to 7 uses per day and no method of resolve use. The only consistent Resolve use that I see Paladin as having is with Lay on Hands and Channel Divinity, and some Oaths don't have any resolve spender other than them.


Ilorin Lorati wrote:
Is the Assimilation Strain going to get ported to Starfinder, or was it not considered needed because there's no need to introduce SF characters to sci-fi?

You missed a question; I would really like to know this for my own plans.


Is the Assimilation Strain going to get ported to Starfinder, or was it not considered needed because there's no need to introduce SF characters to sci-fi?

Fabian Benavente wrote:

Is there a Player's Guide to this AP?

I understand that only the first chapter is published for Starfinder but have all the chapters been published for Pathfinder?

Their website says the SF version of the player's guide will be out next week.

It looks like the Depths of Desperation, the 5th of 7 books, is out for Pathfinder and 5e.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
IonutRO wrote:


The bard is so good at basically everything it does that it completely overshadows and invalidates the envoy, not only being a better buffer and a good skill monkey, but also having spellcasting on top.

To be fair, this says more about the Envoy than the Bard.


Another selection of things I've noticed. First, stuff I like: Bard. Despite my more systemic issues with your book (MORE PER DAY ABILITIES!), you added more flexibility and flavor to what was already one of my favorite pathfinder classes. There are issues, but as a whole I really like it.

Thank you so much for giving Rangers (where appropriate) and Paladins access to cantrips and full CL.

The picture on 196. Heh.

Onto the issues.

In Bard's Muse ability, it says the Muses you can select from are on page 51 (they're actually on the next page, 52). Additionally, it says you gain a free rank in the muse's associated skill at each level; considering Versatile Performance still exists, I assume you mean key skill.

Back in Cleric, several Channel Divinity options are based on Wisdom, when (in my opinion) they should be based on Charisma since the ability is otherwise Charisma-based. Specifically, I saw the Luck and Plant options. The Luck one is weird because of the sheer number of individual bonuses allowed; does anyone really need 13 separate +1's over the course of a minute or so? Combat almost never lasts that long. Personally, I would recommend rebalancing it so it was a shorter duration with a somewhat higher set of bonuses.

I notice there are no litanies (or otherwise reaction-timed spells) in the Cleric (and, by extension, the paladin) list. These might have been a hidden aspect of the Paladin class, but they were an incredibly important one, and losing them is major. One of the major parts of the paladin class was having this suite of abilities they could use as an immediate action by using a spell slot, and not having anything in that part of their niche leaves the whole class feeling a bit anemic.

In Paladin's Divine Bond, the last paragraph says "the mount gains a +2 divine bonus against spells and abilities created by evil creatures." I assume you meant it to apply to saving throws?

In Ranger Methodologies, the Animal Companion one mentions level-2, and then later says level-3.

In Wizard, please state what page the Familiar rules are on (p.126), because they're not "at the end of this section".

In the Spellslinger Tradition, does Spellsling get the Focused Power bonus to attack rolls?

Was there any reason why you added in the Bonus Spells section to every single class? They all look the same, surely you could have just posted one 9-level table and let people extrapolate from there.

Although I'm reasonably sure it doesn't, Storied Background should call out specifically if you get the bonus to ability scores or not. I would recommend not.

Storied Continuation feels like it will be problematic, if for no other reason than the ability to have two separate resolve recovery methods.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Errors in need of an errata are sort of inevitable when you are working with a brand new game system with the level of speed we needed to get the book together for you

I feel like this attitude is part of the problem. You didn't need to get it out this quickly, and instead of being something that made us want to buy your upcoming supplements I'm turned off from them.

That said, for better or worse I already went out on a limb and bought it, so I'm going to point out issues where I see them even for the ones I'm sure won't be fixed.

For example, there are way too many per day abilities in this book. So much more could have been done with Paladin by making smite a Resolve spender instead of filling out levels with an extra use per day. Wizard is another one with per day abilities that I'm not sure really needs them.

Cleric gets an additional spell prepared per day and the ability to prepare domain spells as if they were on the character's spell list; however, since they only have one domain cast spells as an arcanist the latter ability is useless since they already have their domain spells prepared at all times. I get the feeling they're only supposed to be able to cast their domain spell once, but I don't see anything providing that limitation.

I would highly recommend explicitly not allowing Icon's Megacelebrity and Priest of the Faith to stack.

Magus is alright, I guess, although I personally really dislike ability score replacers. I also see no way for the Magus to avoid provoking AoOs, which with the way guarded steps (read: 5-foot steps) work and how reliant on 5-foot steps the class was in PF, may pose a problem for class's ability to function in melee.

I'm also not sure why "Arcane Weapon" was moved up from a Swift to a move action, though that's just a quibble.

Still looking through it.


Nabbed it off DTRPG.

The spells per day fields (all of them, as far as I can see) don't have class level listed with them; the header column (as judged by the background color) is simply the level 1 spells per day.

The top right of the Wizard section says Ranger.

Paladin's Reflex save background doesn't match the rest of the table.

David knott 242 wrote:
The most surprising thing I saw in the preview was that the Bard is a full BAB class.

So does Cleric, and I'm not sure why. I'd really like to hear the designer's thoughts on this class specifically.


No class is proficient with bows, though anyone can take the "Special Weapon Proficiency" feat to be as long as they otherwise meet the (easy) prerequisites. As they are ranged weapons that are not small arms, they cannot be used with Operative Trick Attack.


Pax Rafkin wrote:
Caster with average attack bonus? That's odd isn't it?

They're a 6-level caster so... not really?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you're still trying to figure it out, you could try messaging the devs directly on Facebook, or in their FAQ thread on GiantITP. You will probably get a direct answer from them.


9 people marked this as a favorite.
Rhedyn wrote:

Fanatical materialist xenophile. Neat.

What's this about subspecies?

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ubv9?Enworld-Exclusive-Planet-Castrovel-previe w#32

Crystal Frasier wrote:
Mark Moreland wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:
1) A Lashunta is born male or female and then chooses to become Damaya or Korasha later on. In the distant past, males were expected to become Korasha and females were expected to become Damaya and rarely made the opposite choice, but nowadays all four combinations are relatively common. This option leaves open the possibility of families that are all Damaya or all Korasha.
It's this option, as far as I understand it (as a non-member of the Starfinder team). There would certainly be a lot of pressure in a Damaya family for all the kids to be Damaya, just like a family of doctors might pressure their kids to also be doctors. But ultimately, the kid gets to choose his or her own path when the time comes.

If we're looking at getting into specifics—and I'm happy to having helped rework this aspect of lashunta biology—the lashunta evolved two distinct types of adolescent developments as a response to the severe swings in environmental pressures of their homeworld. Depending on the pressures they faced at puberty, they would either mature as hardy, combative korasha, or they would mature as adaptable, observant damaya. When their culture later developed a tradition of strong gender roles, the kinds of pressures that triggered development as a korasha fell almost entirely on males, while the pressures that trigger damaya development fell almost wholly on women.

As lashunta have move towards leaving their sexism in the past and opening social roles, education, and careers up to everyone regardless of gender, the distribution has become much more even, and many city-states even allow a child to choose how they will develop (by way of meditation and/or medication) rather than just relying on ambient environmental pressures. There are still a few conservative city-states where the gender divide exists and the subspecies are still largely divived by gender, but these are increasingly rare.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gisher wrote:
I did miss them. I just went back and found three archetypes that made changes. Do you think that I got them all?

Those are the ones I know about.

I really don't think that the Medium should be listed the way it is, since the flexible casting method is a basic focus of the class and they're only that way for the sake of requirements, not prerequisites.

Adding it up onto the main Mesmerist line would be too crowded and wouldn't help, maybe you should nest them inside a bullet point that says "Base Class Features" or something similar?

Furthermore, this list could certainly do with further listing any major changes to spell lists, since they're just as important as important as the casting method and stat.

Edit: With this, you would add in things like Unlettered Arcanist, which uses the witch list, and Puppetmaster Magus that adds Bard spells to its list - while adding much needed context to archetypes like the Fey Trickster, which uses the Druid spell list of being a straight type swap.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You missed Spiritualist's archetypes in that list.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bloodrager has the Id Rager psychic casting archetype.

Edit: Blood Sanctuaried.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Spiritualist also has two Divine archetypes in the Onmyoji and the Involutionist, and a Charisma archetype in the Fractured Mind.

Rogue has an Int caster in the Eldritch Scoundrel.

Ranger has a Charisma archetype in the Dandy.

Druid has Charisma in the Feyspeaker.

Witch has a Spontaneous caster in the Ley Line Guardian.

Mesmerist has a Divine archetype in the Fey Trickster.

I think there's a few others. In particular, I remember a spontaneous druid but I can't for the life of me find it so I'm probably remembering wrong.


Thursday, July 12, 2017? :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cellion wrote:
CMB meant you would generally be fairly competent with a whole group of maneuvers, as long as you invested one feat (improved maneuver) for each maneuver.

Or just Dirty Fighting and good positioning.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:


I'd be happy to answer this for you, but I feel like I also need to talk about what made the old LW problematic from a design standpoint.

Okay, I have to ask...

Why in god's name did you all think it was acceptable to change (or, more specifically, make *larger*) the footprint of the archetype? Nerf it all you want, bring it in line with other archetypes, but seriously... why?


Ring_of_Gyges wrote:
I don't know what goes on in any of your home games, but what percentage of Paizo's published adventures are things you should take an infant to?

None, but two things:

Several sci-fi shows included "family" ships that were put into dangerous situations on a regular basis (most notably STTNG)
He's not in an AP for this story blurb.


Lady-J wrote:
Redelia wrote:
The ninja. The ninja was a too-big-to-be-an-archetype archetype of the core rogue, and so it's too weak compared to the unchained rogue. I would like them to go back and adjust it to be based off the unchained rogue.
didnt they make a ninja archetype for the unchained rogue?

There's a 3pp Unchained Ninja, but I don't remember any archetype.

I'd like to see...


  • updated Stealth rules
  • The Unchained Cavalier they wanted to do if they had room in the original book,
  • Unchained Cleric
  • Another Skill Rework that goes the OTHER way, greatly granularizing skills and multiplying the number of skill ranks everyone gets - including things like weapon and armor proficiencies and abilities similar to Skill Tricks from 3.5.


UnArcaneElection wrote:

Good luck fleshing out a whole star system in 1 day, since Golarion (never mind Golarion's solar system) isn't even finished.

Most of them are empty or would be barren of life, so maybe the people that finish early can help the others?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It was pointed out to me by a friend when I was discussing this that Lashunta women were actually a little bit sexist considering how the dimorphism made them super attractive to human standards, which I can agree with thinking back on it, so I'll concede that point.

That having been said, there's nothing new under the sun, and pretty much every trope has been played to death if they're put together in the same old tired ways.

In PF - at least for me - I think the dimorphism, ignoring the whole "the women are super attractive to human men because of it" aspect, adds the opportunity for some stories that the typical neutral/good races in pathfinder have a fairly hard time doing. Exploration of sex and gender roles, especially in regards to stories about escaping them, is important. Fortunately, the way the game world is setup, there's not the risk of needing to go through it with every single game, but unfortunately that also makes it difficult to have that story without using either an evil god or Erastil as a stepping stone.

With the gods being less important going into Starfinder, I think being able to have that story in some way, shape, or form, is important - which is to say I hope by "fixing problematic elements" you mean "the women don't wear clothing" and not "the ability score differences".

(Edit: Please note that Desril doesn't speak for me. >>)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Far more extreme sexual dimorphism is happens in nature than what's being portrayed here, and this is a single (fairly subdued, considering it's only 2 points difference) option and not a whole system of it. With how wide a spread of races we're getting with the game, I personally don't see how this is a sexist example of the trope.


So, there are pictures mentioned at several placed in this interview. ... I don't see them. I see a Mesmerist picture and a Warlock picture, but not a Magical Child and Dandy as the text suggests.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:

That is not dead which can eternal lie.

And with strange aeons even death may die.

- HP Lovecraft, The Nameless City


Kalindlara wrote:


** spoiler omitted **

Hope that helps. ^_^

Spoiler:
Well, that's unfortunate. I knew about the Investigator archetype, was hoping for something a bit more native to the book.

No reason to shoot the messenger, though:

thanks for the info!


Do any of the psychic classes or their archetypes get Trapfinding as an option? I'd imagine Medium would if any of them, using Dex, but I've got a game coming up where I'm going to need to be the party trapfinder and I've got plans...


Throw Mind Blade still means it's a valid question - just with minor changes.


DHAnubis wrote:


Telekinetic Blade/Bolt are interesting skills as well. The first thing that comes to mind is, could a Soulknife with the Mind Blade Finesse skill (which allows them to use Weapon Finesse on their Mindblade no matter the form), get a Mind Bolt, and then use Deadly Agility from Path of War? The feat says "any light weapon or weapon that benefits from Weapon Finesse." I wouldn't mind a Dex to damage psionic archer.

It shouldn't, since it's granting the Mind Bolt class feature, and you're using that - you're not using your mind blade anymore. By strict RAW though, there may be something there when using the Throw Mind Blade class feature.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

An AoO is caused by letting your guard down, not the actual act of casting a spell. Body language will still change, because it's still a standard action of intense concentration.


I have a quick lore-based question: How prevalent would you say homelessness, hunger, and starvation are on Golarion? How about just in Absalom in particular?


21 people marked this as a favorite.

Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Numeria and other planets would be my first options.

The Starstone idea... it's sitting in the middle of a giant maze, who would know it's gone missing?


Alexander Augunas wrote:


Racial Archetypes wrote:
Typically, only members of the section's race can take the listed archetype, bloodline, or order, though such options rarely interact with the racial traits or alternate racial traits of that race. An archetype usually features a thematic link to the race, granting it class features that complement the abilities and the background of the race. Because adventurers are often social outliers, sometimes these archetypes feature a theme that is an exception to the norm for racial tendencies.
I especially hate the the last sentence I quoted here; it basically says "screw the race's flavor and mechanics, this is a racial archetype for the race because we say it is."

In some cases that like makes sense. Things like the Redeemer obviously go directly against the theme of the race.

Still don't think they should be limited to specific races though. There's room for a Human Redeemer same as a Half-Orc one within narrative space.


The ARG has an expanded description of the Construct eat/drink/sleep quality:

Quote:
Constructs do not breathe, eat, or sleep, unless they want to gain some beneficial effect from one of these activities. This means that a construct can drink potions to benefit from their effects and can sleep in order to regain spells, but neither of these activities is required to survive or stay in good health.

Emphasis mine. Should clear up any questions.


MukkBarovian wrote:

I think the Cleric is out of place as it is. I feel it should be:

Full Base Attack - 4th level spells
3/4 Base Attack - 6th level spells
1/2 Base Attack - 9th level spells

That gives a sliding scale between combat characters with a bit of casting ability, and full casters. Given how powerful full casters are, I don't have a problem giving them a mediocre chassis. But they didn't come in 3E with that thought so its a bit late now.

Put me at +1 for the priest idea, but he would have to have some nice abilities to draw people away from the 3/4 BAB and armor proficiency.

I think there's some merit to that (emphasis on some), but there's far greater emphasis on the power of the spell list itself than inherent power with 9th level spells.

I think it'd be exceptionally difficult to have a 9th level spellcaster with full BAB balanced, but blanket logic doesn't do anyone favors.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Prince of Knives wrote:
...I love you, Renegade Paladin. With all of my heart do I love you.

When should I schedule the wedding between the two of you?

I'm sure there's a warpriest around that would be happy to perform the ceremony..


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lo&beholder wrote:

Oh that makes sense in my head.

MAKE THE ARCANIST WORK OFF WISDOM.

The arcanist sounds like more than a force of personality and the sum of knowledge as opposed to experience and sheer will.

Yeessss, make it the best class to Theurge with a Cleric.


I can't wait to rip this one apart. >:D

1 to 50 of 67 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>