I don't think diagonal movement from other move actions should count when players are using Step. If my players want to spend a whole action moving carefully on a short distance instead of moving their full speed, I don't care if they happened to move diagonally an odd number of times with previous actions. I just treat step as its own separate thing. However, I do agree if someone can step 10' in a single action, it shouldn't be two diagonals.
Am I the only one who reads this not as "oops, they made it unlimited" but as "The trigger for that free action is the witch casting the spell"? It seems like common sense. They probably should have kept the "When you cast the spell" part, but still...
Also: It's NOT in the beginner box - checked that last night.
It is. It's in the Hero's Handbook on the page Getting Knocked Out.
Quote:
Any time you gain or increase the dying condition while wounded, increase the dying condition’s value by your wounded value.
I will admit, having two sections on dying/wounded that don't agree is a tad odd. But hey, at least they didn't bring in the part where if you critically fail a recovery check with any amount of wounded you immediately die.
That is fascinating, as it does not have that wounded rider in the Gamemaster's Guide section on dying (p5).
It practically is, though.
Wounded 1 goes straight to dying 2.
Even if you succeed at a recovery check, you only reduce the dying by 1 so you’re now dying 1.
Then a crit fail would add 2 + wounded to that 1 and whoops, dying 4, bye-bye.
And that’s best case scenario.
A crit fail is never a best case scenario. But yeah, if that is true and there is no additional info or detail we're missing (I haven't read the whole thread, but has anyone actually quoted the remaster books? I've only seen paraphrase), that is scary and makes fully healing and staying safe after going down extra important.
I'd just like to add that if the elven feat you're worried about is Elven Instincts, that is not gone, but won't get reprinted, since it came from the Lost Omens Character Guide book, which is still valid, but not core.
Dude is really asking for it, using an obvious sockpuppet account. Or the original one was banned. I really think the mods should be removing all the one star, no written reviews from him, since they are so obviously in bad faith.
The new website might have a feature restricting reviews to people who actually bought the product. That could be a definite improvement.
I'm not so sure about that. If they did, people who buy their products from brick and mortar stores wouldn't be able to post reviews.
Things will be a lot easier if you can maximize your main stat and AC, but it isn't required. I would recommend only more experienced players with a good grasp on the system (or a friend who can help them) play characters with less than the maximum in their main stat, as it requires being quite careful about feat and spell choices. As for AC, while I would say melee characters should strive to have an 18 at level 1, casters can get away with a little less if they can manage to stay at range most of the time.
I also don't know where your GM got that you should only focus on damage. Using teamwork to increase your chances of landing hits and spells (increasing other player's dpr) and using crowd control to waste the enemies actions will be very useful.
In the end, the game is supposed to be fun (though admittedly a little punishing in the early levels) and should allow you to play almost anything you want.
From other posts, it also sounds like your GM is still learning some of the mechanics and may be giving opponents too many actions and buffs.
Grasp of the Deep doesnt make much sense. Shouldnt the failure entry says full damage? Is the damage in the failure entry in addition to the 6d6 or just a reference to it?
My guess is that first sentence is supposed to be in the "success" entry, since it's basically the same. Failure stating that the target takes 6d6 damage (so full damage) corresponds to what is usually done.
Taking this in a different direction : in very broad strokes, can you tell us what the elemental lords of wood are about? Maybe just edicts and anathema?
A rule of thumb is creatures (more so than characters) made to have a climb speed (or other ability) are made to use it in encounters, so I think they should be able to attack with their natural attacks unless it specifies otherwise for a given creature's attack. Of course a spider would be able to attack while clinging to a web, you know? Same goes for this elemental. If a human can let go of a rockwall with one hand (to reach for another handhold usually, but you can do other things as well, both in real life and in the game, as you could interact while clinging to something between two climb actions), a creature used to climbing absolutely should be able to let go with one limb long enough to Strike.
My group doesn't use it. At the beginning, it was because we figured we'd just try the base rules and see how it was, plus a few of us were worried it might be too powerful (I think it would be a little more powerful, but not necessarily that much). In the end, we found we don't really miss it. Sure, sometimes we wish we had a couple extra feats, but we manage to enjoy our characters and build good parties without it.
As a player, I'll take what is given to me, with or without (I'd sure have enjoyed getting all the extra barbarian feats and the more niche options from wrestler, but I don't need them).
As a GM, I would probably only offer free archetype in a game that requires everyone to fit a certain theme, with only archetypes related to that theme being allowed (plus maybe archetypes directly descended from the adventure's contents), so that the theme doesn't feel like a "tax" to the players.
In the end, I think both are possible and can be fun and balanced, but free archetype does strongly favor archetypes that have great options at every level and still leaves archetypes with fewer feats or more niche options in the dirt (perhaps even more so, as you can't just take class feats when the archetype isn't great for a given level).
Do you mind if I suggest an archetype instead of a class? I've been having a ton of fun with the Wrestler archetype (lots of moving parts to decide how to grab and debuff an enemy based on what you are fighting). It works particularly nicely with Fighter (for the feats that require a sequence of attacks), Monk and Barbarian. I highly recommend you look into that.
Unless you mean it's too big for some very tight corridors, there's actually nothing preventing you from riding a bigger mount. Contrary to 1e, in 2e, the mount action only states that the creature must be "at least one size larger" than the rider, so a small character can ride a large creature.
All of the mount companions start out as either medium or large, and some let you pick which one (like horses, so you can have a medium pony), so if you pick the more "expected" riding companions, it works. Sadly, "riding dogs" have been left out of this list, however (I just realized that as I was typing out my response and checking my information).
Also, unless you get a megafauna companion, they never get bigger than large, so reach from atop the mount should not become a problem for anyone.
I do wish the size increase for small and medium companions could be optional, though, since it does make some animal companions seem absolutely oversized for what they're supposed to be. Still, mechanically, it should be fine so long as your gm doesn't decide to annoy you with 1 square wide corridors.
Huh, I hadn't noticed I'd modified Tumble Through. In my groups, you can't claim to tumble through without actually going through an enemy's space, and if you can get the movement done with a standard step (adjacent square), it's not going "through". As long as I uphold that rule, I'll allow players to use Quick Spring. With that change, it's a very strong option, but not downright broken. I wonder if we will get official errata about Tumble Through at some point.
Sounds like you're looking for Jaidi, Erastil's wife, goddess of agriculture (with the family domain), who, in universe, has received much less attention since the fall of Azlant (somehow). I kinda wish she was given more importance, but she only has stats for worshippers in 2e, no full write-up. And yes, nature and family are the domains that would be most closely associated with concerns of agriculture and fertility.
At the moment, I'd say Strix. I love them, and I'd like more lore and feats to represent Strix that don't come from Cheliax, especially lower level feats not related to flight or hatred of humans.
control spells you have to keep them far (entangle and such)
I'd suggest Grease, Rime Slick or maybe Web, because they've completely (almost) broken Entangle in this edition for some vague reason: it now requires already existing plants covering the area. Good luck finding plants in dungeons, caves, towns or buildings.
Ah, you're right. Entangle was just one example of what I meant by control spells in this case (as opposed to, say, Command), but it does have its limitations (which also existed in 1e). I've been running a game that is largely set overland in forest and swamps, so it's the first spell that came to mind. XD The primal spell list has a lot of those battlefield control spells, so it's good to pick whichever fit the setting and expected adventure best.
In terms of defense, yes, primal sorcerer is quite vulnerable (much more than druid). It will be important to stay far from enemies, use whatever control spells you have to keep them far (entangle and such), and hope your teammates can help in the cases when that doesn't work. Whether you pick up bracers or enchanted explorer's clothing, you'll want to raise your AC. I personally prefer getting Dex as high as I can on sorcerers for this reason, but some people instead get decent AC and maximize Con for the extra hp. Also, don't forget that, while you don't have the Shield Block reaction, you can always use a shield for the AC bonus.
I'm looking forward to any non Europe-adjacent Lost Omens regional book (Golden Road, Tian Xia, Arcadia, Casmaron, mainly, but Darklands or First World would be interesting too).
As for the mechanical side of things, while new classes are always exciting, I'm most looking forward to new options for existing classes, such as witch lessons (priority to that, I want focus spell options that allow new thematically interesting choices), sorcerer bloodlines, barbarian instincts and feats for the classes, especially for caster classes.
I figure a caster vampire/dhampir would probably opt for biting willing, weak or incapacitated prey anyways, so you could use the bite mainly on weaker opponents and ones your group has managed to hinder (one grappled by the martials or stuck by your spells, for instance). And it can be a nice last-resort attack for when enemies decide to charge you. Even with lower accuracy, you should be able to bite weak or debuffed opponents. So no, it won't be the main thing, as you said, and it won't be the most efficient, but it can still be useful. You'll want to get some Strength for accuracy and might lack some in the early levels, but the stats should allow it fairly well with the boosts at every 5 levels.
The additional reach is only for casting touch spells : "During the duration, whenever you Cast a Spell, you can add an additional action to that spell's casting to temporarily extend your reach to 20 feet to deliver that spell." Reach for unarmed strikes is only ever extended to 10 feet. I think I'd allow grappling, but only with 10 foot reach.
In my case, I give them a little extra information for free.
First, whenever players run into a haunt and notice it, I confirm that this does look like a haunt, which means positive damage and religion checks are likely to help with it (generic meta knowledge), but there may be other, easier, more specific ways to deal with it.
I also give more or less complex descriptions of the haunts (what the spirits are doing or saying, what it feels like), treating it kind of like a riddle or puzzle, so that players can try to figure out what might help, and I stay open to creative and interesting solutions if they make sense for the specific haunt. So players get to figure it out themselves or have their characters figure it out through rolls.
Of course, this may not be to every group's liking (it's challenging the players rather than the characters), and if you don't like it, I recommend allowing retries like others have said.
What type of damage is the splash damage from the Scatter trait? Also does it deal damage if you miss?
Splash is only defined really in the splash trait so it can be hard to tell how it is supposed to work outside of it.
Since it refers to splash and doesn't mention differences (apart from not being a thrown weapon), I would assume it works just like splash weapons, dealing the splash damage even on a miss, but not on a critical fail.
As for damage type, while the rules don't state it, it seems logical and coherent with every splash weapon so far that the splash damage is the same type as the main damage, so a blunderbuss would deal piercing splash damage while a flingflenser would deal slashing. After all, scatter just means some of the same ammunition is spread out.
Have them make stealth checks to see if the goblin notices, otherwise the goblin may call for help or lead them to a different location, which you can use to take them to whatever encounter you'd rather have them do.
If they manage to follow, give ample warning (hearing lots of goblin voices and such). Your players might decide the information is enough for now. They might also decide that they can pick a fight with 12 goblins at once or have some clever plan. Whatever they do, unless they die, it's not going to cause much trouble to the plot, so let them try. Maybe just have the Barghest be gone somewhere when they get there, since that would be far too dangerous (I actually removed him and replaced him with a higher-level goblin, since I just didn't like the idea of a barghest being on this island and just sitting there with the goblins while other powerful intelligent beings schemed all around). 12 goblins is already a lot for a level 1 party.
If you don't want the fight, you could also have the goblin stumble into some hazard or wandering monster, likely getting killed unless the PCs save them. Then, you'd get a chance to trigger an encounter and give the players a warning that some things on the island are very dangerous, and you would delay their finding the tribe. They might still just go looking for it, though.
There are a few effects, but nothing different from what a low-strength monk would get from wearing heavy armor. Pathfinder 2e did away with the whole arcane-spell failure thing that made it terrible for only arcane casters to wear armor.
If your character doesn't have proficiency with the type of armor they wear, they won't add their level to their AC, eventually putting them in very real danger. Also, you'd have to check the bulk (to make sure the character can still walk around), and if you don't have enough strength for the type of armor, you have the armor's stated penalties to speed and to dex-based and strength-based skills.
I don't really have that feeling. Of course, there have been some weaker options (and some downright useless spells), but a lot of options have turned out to be very good, and most are pretty balanced with everything else (sometimes harder to play, but able to be just as good as core classes, and better in a specific type of situation).
The oracle is hard to play, but much better than a divine sorcerer, imo. The magus looks really good. I'd take a Forensics investigator over a healing alchemist anytime. The gunslinger is a better ranged fighter if you can convince your GM to let you have good firearms. I'll admit the witch feels "meh" to me, but it does it in the same way wizard feels "meh", by being powerful, but having little really unique and useful stuff. The witch is just a little worse because it hasn't been given extra options and it really needs more lessons to allow more variety in builds.
I feel like they are targeting the middle of the pack in terms of strength of the Core, and that's fine to me. Not everything needs to be "the best". I'll admit they hit a little lower than middle (especially in playtests) more often than they reach higher, and I'd like to see them a little more confident at times, but it's not so much that I want to keep to core options.
The thing is, they have to make something new, and when you already have the best possible to-hit (Fighter), the best possible buffing cantrips (Bard), the best possible multi-attacker (Ranger), the biggest amount of heal spells without drawback (Cleric) that you can get without breaking the game's math, it's difficult to hit that power without overstepping that niche or adding extra complications, because it needs to feel different. So new classes end up either being harder to play, being more versatile instead of specialized, or doing something weird and niche really well. Basically, all the most straight-forward, obviously good options were printed in the Core. Now, the good new content's strengths end up less obvious, which makes the bad options stand out more, but I think there is still a lot of good, cool stuff.
My players are diverting entirely from heading to Talasantri. They've decided to check out the islands just west and to the south of Ancorato to "cover their tracks and backs."
I know the following books take place on the larger island to the south, and there isn't a lot of info about the smaller center island. I've gone with a "Skull Island" parallel monster infested island there but am not sure how to approach them landing on the southern island on their way to Talasantri.
I'm not the type of GM to put up an impassable fog or wall of monsters, so I'm looking for any advice and/or trying to find out if anyone has ran into this with their own group.
As for me, since my players wanted to treat the whole adventure as a sandbox, I was very open and honest with them. I told them I'll be giving hints for things that might interest them and that I am prepared to run. If they go in some other direction just for the sake of exploration, that's fine, but (on top of me needing a few minutes to figure things out) they may run into something that's too high level for them, so they need to be ready to run sometimes.
At this point in the adventure, the players have explored the biggest parts west of Ancorato, so it's pretty safe. You could populate some of the islands based on the various adventure seeds in the books, as Ted stated, and most of them are vague enough that you can make them level appropriate (or slightly too easy or too hard, if you want extra realism). It can make for a few fun side quests, and it's a good time to add those in, since there isn't much time pressure between chapters 3 and 4.
As for the big southern island, it's been a while since I read the later chapters, but I don't believe they have any way to get into Kalas-ti, right? And the first encounters of the module won't be there since the final boss hasn't sent them to secure the island yet. So there would be a few of the bigger monsters (like the somalcygot) players will have to run away from, and you can seed a couple smaller encounters and points of interest on the island without spoiling the last chapter. Just make sure to give warnings about where they shouldn't go (near the somalcygot, there is probably suddenly no wildlife, not even the tougher monsters the players have had to fight before, something along those lines).
Of course, that leaves the matter of getting the players "back on track". Maybe give them some extra hooks and incentives to get to Talasantri or get prepared to run lots of sidequests based on what piques their interest and find a way to get them to the Tower later. What will work for that really depends on your players, though. They might hear rumors or find a half-destroyed mural showing a point of interest or impressive magic item with hints that they are in that area, for instance. Or if they are friends with the locathah, maybe one of them tells them about some terrible trouble in Talasantri that is making trade difficult (have one or a few of the bad events in Talasantri have already happened after the players ran around doing side-quests for a while).
Yes, you do get +3 AC from your proficiency. Don't forget it increases at every level.
How much Strength and Dexterity does your character have? If you have a Dex bonus, you would have one more AC with Chain mail than your current calculation, since it has a max Dex bonus of +1. If you're waiting to get enough money for a full plate and don't have a Dex bonus, though, that is understandable. Also, depending on what you needed to buy at character creation, you may want to look into Splint Mail, which would give you one more AC. It is more expensive, but if you have the gold to spare and enough Strength, there are no drawbacks to having that instead of Chain.
I'm kinda curious as to why you say you have low AC. At first level, it might not be maxed since you can't afford a full plate armor yet, but it should be pretty decent, and it will quickly become very good (considering in Pathfinder 2E, the math is made so you can't make a character that is almost impossible to hit). What does your AC look like?
As for your actual question about Retributive Strike, let's take a look at that. The trigger states an enemy has to damage (so successfully attack) an ally of yours, and they both have to be within 15 feet of you. Even if the enemy isn't within your reach, so long as they are in range, you can use the reaction and protect your ally.
As for the timing, since it says they gain resistance to all damage "against the triggering damage", it means they are protected right away, against this specific attack.
Finally, the last sentence of the description says "If the foe is within reach, make a melee Strike against it", so unless you have a reach weapon or some other means of getting reach, you can't Strike the foe as part of that reaction if they are on the other side of your ally (for now. I'm pretty sure there are feats to allow it if you want).
So in the situation you are describing, with a mefit attacking your ally while you are 10 feet from the mefit, your ally would take only 3 slashing damage from that Strike (and full damage from further Strikes if they happen later before you get another reaction), but you could not attack the mefit with your hammer.
Thanks to a post Gisher made in another thread, I now know that druids are the only full casters without Cantrip Expansion.
The thing is, almost any caster dedication is strictly better and gives these two cantrips. So now I don't see almost any value in this feat.
Even if this dedication is not based on your best stat, you could just take utility cantrips there and free main cantrip slots for something using your bonuses.
That may work, until there's an archetype you actually want for the full archetype and can't take it because you have to take two feats from the multiclass. Cantrip Expansion is certainly not my favorite feat, but it has its place.
Yeah I wonder this too because although there are lore books and rule books it also seems like there is more lore in the rule books and less rules in the lore books but I'm not sure if I'm just imagining that...
It largely depends on the books you look at. I don't have Guns and Gears, so can't comment much on that, and I really don't want to spend time checking exactly how many pages of content vs lore is in Secrets of Magic, but taking a look at the Lost Omens line, some books are almost entirely lore, like Legends and Absalom : City of Lost Omens, while others are more than 50% rules, like the Ancestry Guide. Quite a few of the smaller Lost Omens books actually contain large amounts of rules text.
I'm pretty happy with how things are, personally. I'm always happy to get more rule options both as a player and a GM, but I love reading the lore. Sometimes I wish there were a few more new player options in some of the Lost Omens books, but they're generally a really fun read. If they need to keep it rules-light to avoid things getting unbalanced or broken, I'm fine with that. As for the rulebooks line, I'm currently reading through Secrets of Magic and it seems like a great ratio to me. I'll admit the little bits of story interspersed among the spells are making it much easier for me to get through a few pages at a time without zoning out, so I end up appreciating both more.
If you want something that we know nothing about and never will, then it's the continent of Sarusan. (I've always wondered why people don't just homebrew instead, though. Genuine question.)
If you want something that you could get some information about the general region, but not about any specific landmarks, maybe make up an island in the ruined continent of Azlant? There are some islands that have been described in adventures and APs, but it used to be a whole continent, so it makes sense that some are not known, and it's a nice way to have a somewhat enclosed world.
This all looks really interesting! While I didn't have time or opportunity to participate in the playtest, I read the documents and the changes announced sound compelling. I'll be looking forward to getting Grand Archive!
I'm a little confused about the Creature Echo feats, though. Are they meant to replace a class feat in the character progression? Or are they solely intended as a sort of boon, as an extra feat?
Meanwhile here I am thinking that Attack of Opporrunity and Raise Shield should be feats anyone can take freely. Not gated behind classes. Or that it would be nice if a Witch could cast spells covertly so as to not reveal her abilities without needing to become a Wizard.
Or the fact that there are certain feats that almost every character can already pick. Ex: Sudden Charge and Effortless Concentration.
Not to mention that I would love it if Paizo were able to use the space from duplicated feats/spells for other things. Why do we need a feat to tell us to go to another part of the book for a focus spell when the feats could just tell us what it does? You would be surprised how many more items we could right with that saved space.
Your points are absolutely valid (though I'll admit I'm glad not everyone has AoO, because I think it would basically become a mandatory feat and hurt other really cool reactions, as well as make fights more static again, though not as much as PF1 fights). I'm just really confused by the shield part, considering Raise a Shield is an action anyone can do so long as they have a shield, and Shield Block is a level 1 general feat anyone can take, that some classes just get as part of their basic kit.
I don't think the "movement cost" applies to Step, since the Step action isn't based on movement speed except for requiring that you have at least 10 feet of speed. My understanding is that the feat simply gives you the ability to essentially ignore difficult terrain when it comes to the Step action.
Is Kovlar small? Lost Omens World Guide presents it as a major settlement.
Anyways, I stopped by to let you know there's a PF1 RPG Superstar module called Down the Blighted Path that details another city : Davarn. It's described as an important trade-hub between the Five Kings Mountains, Druma and Andoran, if I recall, as well as a mining town. There are a few pages at the end with a map of the city and description of a few key locations, including information about characters and organizations in the city. The first part of the adventure also details an annual event to celebrate the beginning of Spring and opening of trade routes. Might be interesting for you.
Cernunnos seems like the closest fit, although to my knowledge we don't know much about him, and he obviously doesn't have the "mother" part of the role, which is fine to me. And yes, Jaidi fits the Demeter role quite well. In fact, if you take that whole family as a sort of pantheon, it would work great : Erastil and Jaidi are the parents of Halcamora and Cernunnos.
As for gods of animals other than hunt-focused ones and Cernunnos, I recall something mentioned in Ruins of Azlant : There was a very ancient god of animals and travel at some point, but he was killed by Lamashtu, who stole his powers over animals and beasts and twisted them. Just found his name : Curchanus. It's in the description of a staff.
It's an optional rule, so by default it's not considered when it comes to builds ( unless you specifically ask for it).
Personally, I happened to see that even though a character is still bound to its 3 actions + 1 reaction per round, being given more stuff could make the game easier.
- more skills
- more spells
- better saves/attacks
- too much versatility ( everybody being able to do anything, or being able to do stuff they normally couldn't because of "choices")
But fun is subjective, so if on the one hand somebody might find not appealing playing with a party with characters too versatile, on the other hand another person might find it more entertaining.
I think you're referring to dual classing, which is much more powerful than free archetype. Free archetype just gives extra class feats. It can be used for a few extra skills or spells with the right archetype, but it doesn't affect saves and doesn't allow one to do just anything.
To answer OP, I haven't tried free archetype because my players wanted to start playing the game without alternate rules at first so they could get a feel for it. Some of them think it will be far too strong and don't even want to entertain the idea. For my part, I've been enjoying the game without free archetype, but I'll admit it is compelling.
Oh, I so want a shifter class that could fully use bestiary entries. XD
Things I'd imagine my perfect shifter to be :
- You can stay shifted basically all the time if it's a form somewhat lower than your level (no super strong constant abilities).
- Turning into your strongest forms is a focus power.
- You pick specific forms straight from bestiaries and gain their senses, base movement speeds, attacks and vulnerabilities (weakness or special vulnerability).
- To avoid people being able to turn into everything and solve every problem, you are limited to a few forms. When leveling up, you choose forms much like a spontaneous caster picks spells.
- There might also be a "sub-class" that you pick at the beginning which dictates what type of creature you can become, with feats allowing you to grab extra types of creatures. These sub-classes would also give you specific benefits from the start, so you might get better unarmed proficiencies if you select animal, a spell-casting proficiency or ability to cast cantrips if you pick fairies, etc. Initial publishing would include animal, plant, fairy, ooze and elemental sub-classes, with others like dragon, celestial and fiend coming in further books.
- You would use your own stats for proficiencies and bonus damage. That way, you keep your own skills, not the ones for whatever creature you picked, and you can build for a more caster-like shifter with shapes that grant spells or build for a more martial-like shifter with high strength and so on. This would make the class very versatile without making every shifter a perfect jack-of-all-trades that outshines everyone by just picking the right shape.
- Some feats give you extra focus powers or better regeneration.
- Some feats give you bonuses when interacting with creatures of a similar type.
- Some feats make you better at Recall Knowledge about creatures of your type (maybe you always get one extra info?).
- Some feats grant you access to turning into creatures other than your main type.
- Some feats grant you access to your creature's more special abilities, such as spell-casting, auras, unique actions, resistances and immunities, etc.
I'm probably expecting too much, but that would be amazing.
There's plenty of dark stuff in 2E, but most of it is in the adventures. I suspect it's intentional, because that's where the majority of the scary dangerous things should be.
The Lost Omens books, while they include plenty of plot-hooks and some darker elements depending on which one you read, seem to bring more of a sense of wonder and amazement at a fantasy world you'll want to take a part in (and protect from the dark stuff in the adventures), which I absolutely love. I like settings that tell me about how the people live and all the cool things you can find. It helps me care more for the world and pick out the things I think will interest players or fit with my character in game.
I'm sorry, I bristled a little when I read you tried to swap characters with a woman in this situation. Is it supposed to be easier for her because she's a woman? Actually, don't answer that, just ask yourself why you wanted to do that. Still, I'll try to be useful.
A few things to consider :
- First and foremost, respectfully and calmly talk to the rogue's player about the fact that you are uncomfortable with this and what your limits are, whether it's a hard limit on romance or just boundaries you won't cross. Not every romance has to be very showy, and not everything needs to be described. Also if the rogue's player is making you uncomfortable, he needs to know.
- You may want to talk with your group as well. In my group, while fights can be vividly described and somewhat gore, anything romance (it's rare in our group) is generally kept PG (not even PG13) as characters seek privacy for anything more than a very brief exchange or general attitude. It avoids hogging the spotlight for things that, while relevant to a couple characters, are not relevant for the whole party and for the main story. If you want to just do a brief summary of what happens without playing out the whole conversation or describing every detail, if it's not something you normally do for other situations, you can announce that you would rather keep it at that for parts pertaining to the budding romance.
- Is your character even interested? The rogue may well have an unrequited love. Manika sounds very gentle and caring, but she can still gently let him know she doesn't see him that way. Maybe she really does see the whole party as her family. Leave it to him to play the heartbroken character if he wants.
- You don't need weeks of "fade to black" down-time, just the moments you don't want to describe. Do you describe absolutely everything? Do you describe your character using the bathroom? Do you spend 24 hours irl roleplaying every conversation and action in a 24 hour in-game day? You can fade out unnecessary things even if the party is always gathered.
If you do decide to let the romance happen in game, you'll probably want to rp the initial conversation about it and there may be a kiss mentioned (with a reply letting others know whether your character responds positively or not), but you should feel free to put a stop to it when it has reached a point you don't want to go past. You can do that by describing your characters going further from the party and basically calling out "fade to black", by describing a general idea of what is being discussed/done without going into detail or full rp, or (especially if the rogue's player goes too far for you faster than you expected) just cut in and say "hey, let's put a stop to this". As rp-heavy as a group may be, it should never be so enforced that you can't respect your own limits.
Other than those key dramatic moments like the initial acceptance of romantic feelings, I generally like to make the romance show in simple, small details that don't take much time to add in. It may be a new nickname, a small attention like offering the other character a gift, a brief gesture, an exchanged look, a tendency to check on the other's wounds first when nobody is grievously injured, a comment about future plans/dreams as a couple. Little things like that can show the affection between the characters without turning into weird flirtation around the table.
*Edited to swap two paragraphs because I wrote "first" in my second one. XD
It's hard to say anything since the adventure isn't out yet, so nobody has read it, but my guess is the Occult spell-list would be very useful in a haunted house. Then again, I'm sure every class can find its chance to shine in the module. Do you know what kind of characters the other players will be making?
Wild Morph and Tiger Stance both give a specific attack, not an enhancement to pre-existing attacks. You can't use both at the same time or mix and match their traits and abilities. That would be like staying you're holding a dagger and club in the same hand and dealing both their damage with a single Strike.
It does work. Your GM won't necessarily let you keep the loop going though, not because they should rule against it, but because the enemy doesn't have to just stand there and take the hits. On top of what Thod stated, keep in my mind that if it can make you waste a couple actions (say by moving away far enough), it can disrupt the loop. It's still a very efficient build. Enjoy!
Owl people? Absolutely would love to see them (and just find out more about Arcadia in general). If they are such a big deal, hopefully, a lot of them are not villains.
I've only played lower levels so far (1 to 5), but my experience is similar. I think even at lower levels PF1 combat is slightly shorter, and it will only get better. Even with new players, it seems to be much easier and quicker. It certainly is easier and faster for me as a GM, as I have less things to track and less things to try and remember (you know, that pesky hidden info on PF1 stat blocks like what feats do and what "x creature type" means, which are now generally all written out in the stat-block).
