Search Posts
With a 7-day long day? for a species which is light sensitive? You sure they're living at the surface ^^; ? Sounds like a bad idea :P I always pictured Apostae to be barren on the surface, but with a HUGE underground network of tunnels, cities and far less room to navvigate with vehicles.
2) They do not live underground in Starfinder, which is one of the reasons the SF team have more freedom than the PF team does mayhaps. Apostae... is a barren planet... The few existing records of visits to the planetoid in the centuries prior to the Gap describe a barren, airless surface and a warren of atmosphere-filled caverns and tunnels riddling the rock through to its core. From what I've read, the surface is inhospitable, but the underground is, hence why many drow clans established themselves there.
Do you guys even need to change Drows? How about simply making them evil albino underground elves with a new name? The name and the appearance are OGL, not the concept.
If we get evil underground elves with weird magical powers, they won't be called drow or have much in common with drow as WotC have them. Yes, how they will look and/or Paizo will create underground evil elves, or an equivalent creature, will be fine... Right now the actual problem is why they are doing it...
They're still not getting any of my money moving forward.WotC caused this, not Paizo.Let's not make it about that. Remember... without WotC... there would be NO Paizo. The fact that the OGL has been so permissive in letting us play with things, the fact that WotC really helped us to transition over to Pathifnder from the magazines (the original license end date would have left the Savage Tide adventure path ending halfway through), and the fact that healthy RPG companies all around make the industry a better place is what's important. and it's still pretty scummy that WotC, if not Hasbro, is pulling the rug under so many devs' feet by essentially "shutting down the OGL". Paizo shouldn't have to remaster everything to avoid getting sued. I mean, when they have to rework the iconic DRAGONS to avoid trouble, you KNOW there's a problem... I don't mind seeing new underground elves, dwarves, gnomes and whatnot, it's the whole process that annoys me.
I assume that this book was made... before the remaster project, correct? I wonder how it will be changed after that...
My Magus is craving :P
How does "Starfinder Enhanced", which "totally revises core classes" compare to, be influenced by, or be affected by the release of PF2e "Remastered" series. It's also easier to revise classes in a new book than to errata them to oblivion :p
Please enlighten a bit: should we wait for Paizo to release a Feat that allow a Barbarian to use Concentrate actions while Raging? The Bloodrager's main gimmick is to cast spells while raging and it was similar with the Rage Prophet. Right now, there's no way to achieve this, because Casting a Spell either have the Manipulate trait (Somatic, Material, Focus) or the Concentrate trait (Verbal). Most spells have both somatic and verbal components.
A new trait for spears that mimic the utility of a Boar Spear Basically, a Boar Spear has a crossbar near the tip to not only prevent the spear from digging too deep, but also to allow the wielder to push the target and maintain a safe distance. This was used to hunt boars, literally, hence the name, and boars that were stabbed could try to rush toward the attacker, hence why a crossbar was added to prevent that. In Pathfinder, I could imagine a trait that allows the wielder and the target to make opposed Strength checks if the wielder succesfully make a reaction attack instead someone closing in. If it works, the target just cannot move further.
Yes, they're mandated to avoid the civil authority being overthrown by marauding space pirates, spellcasters, shapechangers, and the many, many, many alines that are big threats without guns. Well, many cities have law enforcers, security guards, border guards, patrolling spaceships and other kinds of people capable of defending against such threats. Licenses to carry and use guns may be a thing as well. My point is that the setting itself isn't like the Wild West where everyone had a revolver ^^;
My response would largely be the same: Please engage in Patience and Trust. Oh, I'm trusting you and your team and I'm not in a hurry. I just wish it was in a less dire period ^^;
WotC isn't above sueing businesses simply for refering the OGL the wrong way... Even then, you cannot trademark a dragon, a color and a breath weapon... HeroForge, a small miniature-making business, once introduced squid heads and tentacles for their own figures. WotC sued HeroForge over copyright infringments due to being too similar to the mind flayer (spoilers: it wasn't). While it was resolved out of court, HeroForge still had to take those assets down, as if WotC scared them off anyway. Several creators switched from 5E to P2E following WotC's new plans for the OGL. I swear, I've seen people ditching D&D altogether because it has become dangerous to even use the OGL.
If I may add to the discussion:
- PCs are not automatically law enforcers, and going all vigilante may have some consequences. You may need to "call the police" if there's trouble rather than doing it yourself. - Carrying a weapon may be subject to self-defense only. Guns also have levels to rebalance power according to situations and settings. - Exploring wilderness does allow you to carry weapons like guns, but urban environments have more limitations, be law enforcement, outlaws, civilians, collateral damage, etc.
Although it was for another comment, please understand Mr. Jacobs that many of us switched to Pathfinder because Paizo simply updated WotC's 3rd edition with tweaks, and it felt less jarring to use that system than going with the 4th edition. We saw how Pathfinder reoriented the D20 rules, and even Pathfinder's 2nd edition felt like a proper update for a 20-year old system. What's concerning is that the Remaster edition was announced just 4 years after P2E, as opposed to letting 10 years go by between P1E and P2E. What's also rather disturbing IMO is why you guys are remastering Pathfinder. There's no beating around the bush here: you need to change everything ASAP to avoid being sued by either Wizards of the Coast or Hasbro following the former's plans to monetize the OGL, despite not going through with it... yet. There's basically a sense of urgency to "change everything" or else you're gonna have to "read the rules about copyright infringements". Finally, even if you say that "the monsters will remain in Golarion"... but for how long? How long until you must remove them completely and possibly discontinue previous book sales due to that? What about the 1st edition books, which we bought as PDF on your website? I know you're doing this in good faith Mr. Jacobs, but there are concerns for players and masters alike since the announcement, and a whole rework of the Bestiaries come off as a real shock for everyone.
- Gloves that transfer weapon property runes to bombs. Essentially add the runes to pre-made bombs and quick alchemy bombsNever happening. Ever. I can stay competitive on single target damage against most Ranged Martials with just Sticky Bomb. (Depends on how lucky the GM is with DC 15 flat checks.) Add in Elemental Runes? Not happening. The issue is that Bombs are consumable, yet are scaled like manufactured weapons with striking runes. If Bombs scaled like Cantrips, there wouldn't be this conversation IMO...
I liked having the chromatic dragons for dragons deeply linked to the Material plane. Diabolical dragon definitely doesn't match this.Nor is it intended to. As mentioned above, the "classic" dragons (the metallic and chromatic) are still in the world. We just need more time to remaster them into non-OGL versions to make them even more Golarion/Pathfinder, and in the meantime are taking the opportunity to introduce more new dragons to the game that we've created and want to be our "dragon ambassadors" to the world going forward. So basically, WotC's Open Game License is no longer "open", so Paizo has to scramble for similar monsters to avoid copyright infringements? That sounds like a huge hassle more than anything else...
Please expand on Eox, Apostae and Aucturn, please ^_^ Those planets feel like great challenging runs for PCs, but aside from being a necropolis, Underdark 2.0 and inside a Great Old One's belly, there's nothing much to go with :P
Yeah, and it builds the world around it too. Right now, good luck asking GMs to send their PCs on planets where "nothing" has been laid out for them ^^; APs and modules often present NEW planets, but an AP using Eox, Apostae and/or Aucturn would be welcomed.
We still don't know how the Gap happened though... I keep thinking that Nethys found a new source of magic, tried to absorb it... and caused Golarion to vanish. I mean, how do entire neighboring civilisations (those living on the planets, including Absolom Station at the time) completely forget the Gap? If a planet imploded or disappeared, I think this wouldn't have gone unnoticed. The fact that even deities can't do a thing about it is also suspicious.
So let me get this straight: in P2ERM, Paizo will need to remove monsters due to their own removal from the OGL? I've just seen the Diabolical Dragon blog post, meaning that the 10 iconic dragons will be removed. How protective Wizards of the Coast and Hasbro have become over their IP again?
1. Highly effective class, arguably overpowered compared to others Compared to a Barbarian's Rage, a Monk's Stances, a Ranger's Styles, a Champion's Smite and/or a Gunslinger's Ways? 2. Simple and easy to play That's one reason... 3. Your character's fantasy is being legendary at wielding their chosen weapon "Look! I have TWO extra points!" That's nothing special when everyone else gets Legendary proficiency elsewhere. 4. You like fighter feats and want to get them as early as possible In what situations would one feat be helpful a few levels earlier again? 5. You have an archetype you're interested in and want it on a strong base class chassis Good thing I said the equivalent of "without using archetypes", huh? If you need an archetype to make the Fighter decently interesting, then the Fighter is plain, bland and boring to begin with. Also I think fighter is kinda meant to be class for people who WANT to play as mundane and "down to earth" character as possible. (the art of beating dragon by "hitting them really hard") Yeah... "hitting them really hard"... by NOT dealing a signficant amount of extra damage... THIS is why I would appreciate some extra firepower to the Fighter, so it can RIVAL with Rage, Sneak Attack, Flurry, Cantrips and other Focus Spells. Geez, a Fire Cleric can fire THREE Fire Rays in THREE rounds, dealing up to 20d6 points of fire damage each. Give THIS kind of power to the Fighter as a special Melee attack and you'll have something good on your hands. How about dealing "my weapon's base die times my proficiency bonus" for every single Strike I can make in 1 round? ANYTHING!
Then please provide 5 reasons to play as a core Fighter instead of another martial class or by using archetypes... I'll wait...
Fighter. No problems. Plenty of people like the feats that I don't like and it has mulitple ways to play. Oh come on, give them something unique already! Half the feats can used by other classes and archetypes, other martial classes offer fighting styles, special moves and stances and spellcasters just overtake fighters in any other situations. Give them Focus Spells! How hard can it be to give them a Focus Spell as follow?
Paizo should really take cues from D&D's The Book of Nine Swords and give flashy special moves, as Focus Spells, EXCLUSIVELY to the Fighter.
Beastkin: allow the player to select a different unarmed strike. Right now, it's only "jaws", but some animals just don't have bite attacks, or fangs :P I would allow it to select something else, such as horn, antlers, trunk, tusk, mandibles, beak or headbutt. If the animal doesn't have a head-based unarmed strike, then allow for claw, fist, hoof, talon, wing, pincer, sting or tail.
Is this cowardice or strategic deceifullness :P
"Wimpy"??? When were kobolds ever wimpy??? Boastful and proud of their draconic heritage? Sure...
They know how weak they can be and always looking for a way to counteract this. The fact that they're trappers shows how intelligent and cunning they are, especially since they have frail bodies, yet either neutral or better mental abilities. They don't face an enemy head-on, they instead lure it to a pit fall. That's smart, not dumb :P Kinda wished Kobolds were the new ancestry for P2E instead of goblins. Even a Kobold alchemist makes sense with their trapmaking hobby.
No joke, the Kobolds are filling that Dragonborn niche. They can fly, use claws and spit out breath weapons, amon other abilities. The issue is that... they still have this "cannon-fodder" image ^^; Technically, you can have any Kobold look like a miniature bipedal True Dragon, and even back in late 3.5, they even established that due to their multitude of scale colors, they can be of any alignment, matching a True Dragon's close to that color. You can have a Gold-scaled Kobold that is LG, NG or LN most of the time; it's just that their parent Deity was LE. Make them Medium due to some Giant blood and we're good to go ^_^ I've been asking for a Giant ancestry OR Versatile Heritage for a while now.
"Draconian" and "Dragonborn" are trademarked... Wyvarans are still missing, but I see a issue: Venomtail Kobolds are essentially "Wyvern-blooded". At this point, just add a Kobold feat that grants them a Medium size.
A good limb may not be "good enough", or a prosthetic may be "better" than its organic counterpart ;) ALSO, a prosthetic limb and a cybernetic limb are kinda interchangeable. If you lost an arm, nothing prevents you from getting one over the other, aside from resources. FINALLY, there are the whole philosophical, psychological and medical aspects, and maybe a prosthetic is temporary while waiting for a Regeneration effect. However, most of the patients tend to... grow attached to these and decided to keep and further augment them. See it like Cyberpunk 2077 & Edgerunner: they have TONS of cybernetic implants and limbs, but overall, it's to greatly enhance their bodies, not to replace them. On a sidenote, if a NPC loaded with cybernetics is annoying you, just cast Regenerate on them, and watch as each of them falls down as the organic body parts push everything outward XDD
Any handcuff that immobilizes the hand would suffise. If you have manacles that cover the hands AND force the prisoner to clench their fists around its shape, that would prevent a solarian from forming and holding their mote.
I like that they go out of their way to let you know you don't have to wait for an accident or lose a limb in combat, you can get rid of limbs whenever you chose. In many sci-fi settings, prosthetics define a person like tattoos or jewelry. Furthermore, many of these can be enhanced with hidden tools and weapons. Finally, it's almost inexpensive... and many religions value cybernetics. On topic, I think they restore touch and sensation, but not pain itself. If your prosthetic arm is getting dissolved by acid due to a dripping pipe, you need to feel it, or else you'll find yourself missing an arm without warning. You don't need to feel like it hurts, only that it's getting eaten away ^^;
or simply having feats that grant additional traits depending on the weapon type... How about something like "Spear Thrower", which would grant any wielded weapon from the Spear group the "Thrown 20ft" trait?
Can you normally craft custom weapons, or add traits to existing ones?No, not generally. There are a few specific options that can enable it for very narrow purposes but that's it. Sucks... I should be able to craft/enhance weapons with additional traits, or least give the Inventor such a feature.
One thing to note is that the Solarian Shield's damage is based on the character's own unarmed strike damage. You need the Improved Unarmed Strike feat to make it decent.
Like I said, to me, it was getting too long... They barely damage whatever creature they're facing, they cannot cripple / debuff them accordingly and the Legendary Resistance is just a way to piss players at this point. If it was a P2E rule, it would likely have been Flat Checks for the creature to roll.
Maybe, just maybe, CR is playing fights for kicks and story beats and not for droopy-faced nerds calculating if they did 58 or 56 damage with their attacks. Maybe. You're mising the point. Any monster they encounter are damage sponges and/or are resistant to everything they have. For instance, I don't recall ONE creature being affected by Beau's stunning strike, as it was highly resistant, downright immune or used a Legendary Resistance to shake it off. It's one thing to play for story, it's another to play "by the rules".
Another point that the DM Lair mentioned is how battles are much quicker in P2E than in 5E. Me who's following Critical Role, I always skip battles, because they takes between 60 to 90 minutes. There are 7 players at the table, and they cannot beat a monster in 2 or 3 rounds? Maybe it's because they often deal below 20 points of damage and the monster has like 200 or something. I swear, the only time battles in CR were interesting were went Grog or Vax dealt over 50 points of damage per round...
I don't dislike the idea of focus points but I am not a fan of how they are used, aka limited number and you take a short rest to recover them between fights. Not sure how I would change it but just not a fan of it, which makes sense I didn't like the per encounter powers of 4e. Then again, you can recover your points AND do something else in that short rest. It's also a bit better for the narrative, as you need to take a break in order to use your focus spells again rather than magically regaining them after a grueling battle. It doesn't "make sense" that you recover encounter powers after a 5-round fight when you just came out of a 2-round fight before that.
Oh, I thought that your point was "4E has encounter powers and I don't like them" and not whatever is the new goalpost that you set up now. Sorry! I didn't like encounter powers because they were more limiting than enticing to use, not mention that if you miss, you're screwed. I agree with you that Focus Spells are similar to encounter powers, but then again, you can rest to regain focus points or can simply stick with up to 3 points for 2 fights in a row. It's essentially just another meter to refill, while your character can use at-will cantrips, ancestral feats with their own cooldowns or simply attack with a weapon which may lead to ITS OWN powers thanks to class feats. If as a monk, you whiff your Ki Strike, you still have your stance, flurry, stances and whatnot.
PF2 is very much a spiritual successor of 4E, it too has "encounter powers", it's just that it doesn't call them so and cleverly disguises them as focus spells and 1 minute duration abilities/spells. It seems to be working well, you didn't notice. The differences are that 1) I can have more focus points as I level up (up to 3);2) those spells have a much bigger payoff (hello "1d6 x my level", how I miss thee [similar formula]); 3) and I have way more options than those (feats, spells, weapons, name it). In short, in P2E, you don't depend on focus spells, compared to 4E where most of your kit was made of encounter powers. I swear, for 1 at-will power you had, you received 9 encounter ones. Without starting an "edition war", encounter powers felt limiting like these:
I get it was supposed to look like a MMORPG, but when you forget the idea of RECOVERY TIME, there's a problem. If these had a recovery time of 1 round/power level, that probably would have alleviated a bit. Back to P2E, a Kobold with the Kobold Breath feat can use its breath weapon once every 1d4 rounds, as opposed to 4E's Dragonborn which could use theirs once per encounter, it be lasting 2 rounds or 10... and that's if you DM doesn't troll you with "one last enemy to defeat".
IIRC, 5E was a return to form after how 4E was poorly received, while P2E is seen as an updated P1E, which was an alternate updated 3.5E. I personally lost faith in WotC when 4E introduced "once per encounter" rules and nerfed the entire system, ditching the idea of "one die times my level equal your BBEG is almost dead".
Modular stuff for mech weapons, such as changing damage types
Do you need your eidolon to be this big? If you want to ride it, it only needs to be one size larger than you. A Kobold is Small and a base Dragon eidolon is Medium. Sure, it's not as intimidating, but it saves some feats :)
I've heard that if the Deities ever received stats, players will find a way to kill them, God of War style...
How about an archetype for spellcasters? A mesmerist is mostly about hypnosis, but a Bard could entrance with its music, a Cleric with an evanglist speech and so on.
Can you normally craft custom weapons, or add traits to existing ones?
Wording I swear that P2E has half the word count from P1E, because everything is written with keywords.
Basically I just need an advanced feat that grants the shield's AC bonus at all time without having to raise. If I Raise my Shield and possess that feat, there should be an additional benefit, like adding +1 or +2 to AC. To me, Shield Blocking should be used only in dire situations, because sacrificing your shield isn't a simple decision. Sure, you can repair it in a 10-minute acitivity, but... what tells you that you WILL get a time out after the encounter?
It's just JiCi doing his usual thing of moving the goalposts after his hot take made without reading the rules (such as "shields do nothing!") turns out to be untrue. Shields are worthless unless you raised them, which is an action. - You need to Raise the Shield in order to use Shield Block. - Simply Raising the Shield only adds the AC bonus, which to me sounds pretty pathetic, especially since you just cannot normally keep it raised. - Quick Shield Block allows you to Raise your Shield to then use Shield Block as a reaction, but UNLIKE Raising your Shield normally, the extra AC bonus isn't factored in. Like I said, you cannot negate an attack as a reaction if your AC would be enough for a Strike to miss with your Shield raised. Here's another thing: Shields are added in Starfinder AFTER P2E... and for some reason, it's less of a hassle to use them. Who actually complained about shields adding an AC bonus in P1E to warrant such a replacement again?
[too many people to quote] Here's my problem: You don't get the shield's AC bonus unless you Raise the shield. WHY WOULDN'T I RAISE MY SHIELD IF I HAD ONE? This is like Fighting Defensively with an item requirement. I feel like...
2) Raising the Shield should automatically grant you Shield Block, and vice-versa. 3) there should be a feat that halves the damage to your shield when using Shield Block, y'know, as if you deflected the blow instead of tanking it. 4) Quick Shield Block doesn't do anything like negating damage. If I have AC 20, the opponent rolls 21 and my shield grants +2 AC for 22, that attack is negated. Quick Shield Block blocks damage, but nowhere doe sit change the success of an attack roll. Like I said, in Starfinder, you have a base AC shield bonus, but if you align it (a.k.a. Raise it), you get a higher bonus, until the end of your next turn. Under no circumstance does your shield is subject to damage unless the opponent explicitely sunders it.
You realise that PF2 shield block prevents you from taking any damage up to the value of the shield's hardness, right? It's still a free Sunder attempt that can destroy my shield simply by Raising it. You can literally lose your shield after one or two encounters, because it tanked too much damage.
|
