Jinjifra's page

Remember that Quickened Heartbeat still costs an action -- its effectively trading an action this round for an action next round. So it's not a 'you have four actions every turn" unless you're counting one action to Quicken Heartbeat each round, in which case it's still only 3 effective actions a round.

The idea is you would use act together when the eidolon attacks to activate Quickened Heartbeat. So the eidolon would get 4 actions per turn.

There is the point though that it's two feats to get an all day worse version of haste 4 levels later. I was looking for a good eidolon for it but didn't see any fun combos yet.

I wonder if this works. If you take the Golem Grafter archetype with quickened heartbeat a summoner. Can you act together and quickened heartbeat to essentially get 4 actions for you eidolon every turn but the first one?

I don't see why not. Occult spellcasting is occult spellcasting. The only downside is your sorcerer spells still key off of charisma, while your monk powers are wisdom.

As a monk it looks like yours DCs are keyed off of strength or dex. There isn't any language that I've found like paladin had to change it to a different state. It might be a mistake though.

Jinjifra wrote:

Do we know if a 10 minute rest recovers all focus points or just one point?

We know it's a single point per 10 minutes.

Thanks!

Do we know if a 10 minute rest recovers all focus points or just one point?

Agyra Eisenherz wrote:

So, how does Painful Injection now stack or not stack?

As far as I can tell, a creature can be the subject of 1 Painful Injections per Biohacker, period, forever.

It isn't clear, though. Damage "stacking" is not a term that is commonly used.

I don't think it would be very overpowered if it were 1 painful injection per biohacker per round. A slight discouragement to full attacks, but not a serious damage reduction in boss fights, either.

The wording is really weird. The word it uses is stack which is normally used for adding up damage for the result of a single role which doesn't make that much sense for multiple attacks, but I have no other idea what it could mean. There is more standard language for "it can only happen once per turn". I wonder if this specific wording is to work with a new type of weapon or feat that we haven't seen yet.

Jinjifra wrote:

Another trick worth looking at is https://www.aonsrd.com/MechanicTricks.aspx?ItemName=Tech%20Tinkerer

It looks like it adds a lot of versatility especially when you have the upgraded version
https://www.aonsrd.com/MechanicTricks.aspx?ItemName=Mobile%20Armory

The other thing worth thinking about is taking sniper rifles instead of longarms. If you are using overcharge you don't have to worry about unwieldy and if you are using the Diasporan Rifle it seems to just have better base damage. Am I missing something about that rifle it seems to just be good.

The problem with this weapon is its illegal charge capacity, most models don’t match any existing battery. I guess by the rules you’re allowed to put a 20 charge battery in when it has a nonexistent 30 charge max.

That makes sense about the diaspora rifle always seemed like something that needs to errated. Especially 4d8 at level 10 is better than any other level 10 weapon.

Another trick worth looking at is https://www.aonsrd.com/MechanicTricks.aspx?ItemName=Tech%20Tinkerer

It looks like it adds a lot of versatility especially when you have the upgraded version
https://www.aonsrd.com/MechanicTricks.aspx?ItemName=Mobile%20Armory

The other thing worth thinking about is taking sniper rifles instead of longarms. If you are using overcharge you don't have to worry about unwieldy and if you are using the Diasporan Rifle it seems to just have better base damage. Am I missing something about that rifle it seems to just be good.

Sorry to thread necro, but this is confusing me too and I wanted to put down my reading of it. Here is the relevant text to hovering with perfect manueverablity

If you have perfect maneuverability, you can hover automatically without attempting a check, though you can hover as a swift action instead of a move action if you succeed at an Acrobatics check (there is no penalty for failure).

Its a little bit confusing and I feel like there are two valid readings of it:

1st is if you have perfect maneuverability you can hover indefinitely without any action or check. If a check is required for dangerous winds or extreme conditions it takes a swift action with no penalty for failure.

2nd reading is that if you have perfect maneuverability you can hover with a swift action. You have to make an acrobatics check to do so but it doesn't matter if it fails.

I think both are valid readings of the rules and I keep going back and forth in my head over which one is implied by the text. For me RAI for the drone at least is the 1st reading.

Maybe you could try something where if the enemy crit successes their demoralize save they either get a small buff or the character gets a small debuff. That way if you are just crit fishing their is also chance of a real consequence.

Rob Godfrey wrote:

Ranger suffers from being focused on a junk weapon... The crossbow, seriously they are so bad right now. Focus them on bows, and have a look at snares and we may get somewhere.

While snares do need a buff.

Bows are pretty functional out of the box. They don't have a reload speed. While Volley can be a bit of a hit, outdoors Volley is no issue at all (use your longbow outdoors, shortbow indoors). Send forth your animal companion to run interference.

Bow using rangers are pretty rad.

I think one of the issues though is that with bows being pretty good out of the box, is there is nothing to really get excited about when you are building/levelling up your ranger. They have a bow and a solid chassis in terms of weapons/saves/skills, but then what. Snares have major issues with cost, bulk, and action economy. You have an animal companion, but its a bit squishy and doesn't work well with hunt target at all. Hunt target works out well mathematically, although it is not exciting.

I don't feel like it would take much to make the ranger a fun and interesting character. There is a lot of potential in this version of the ranger and I think its one or two tweaks off working.

One use for assurance is for anything that isn't one your major skills. If you have little investment or even a penalty in the skill attribute assurance just makes it go away.

Can you tell us about heuristic programming, and cybernetic bridge from the mechanic?

Hey I think we may have established that PFS analytics, might not be legit.

But I'm going to get back back wild speculation about the PF2 ranger! My previous guess about critical rolls on initiative seems like it won't pan out on closer inspection of game mechanics.

What do you think the Rangers reactions will be? It seems like each class has a unique one. I know there is basically no information to go on about it, but I enjoy this kind of thing.

With stealth and perception being iniative rolls I wouldn't be surprised if a critical success on initiative is what determines a surprise round.

I also wouldn't be surprised if the ranger has a couple of feats that trigger on a critical success for iniative.

Jinjifra wrote:

Thanks, I see what I did now. I left out the crits and screwed up the probability rolling 10 - 20 is 55% not 50%.

So if I was going to use a monk using dragon tail for 1d10 you would get

+5/0/-5 for 1d10+4 damage. Subsequent turns would be +5/0/-5/-5

and the 3 turn average is 28.975 which is pretty close to the paladin. If there is a d12 style the monks comes out at 32.025

Yeah, that all looks about right. Though I believe Dragon Tail has the property where it adds additional damage to subsequent attacks, which would add to damage

Elleth wrote:

Where can I look to find the gnome ancestry feats as revealed, again?

They're shown on-page in the PaizoCon Banquet video.

Elleth wrote:

I'm still mostly new to pathfinder and the default lore so I'd like to know what to expect from ancestral weapons (so I can start spitballing lore).

Gnomes have kukri and glaive as martial weapons. Their Exotic Weapons are speculative at the moment, but you can probably guess them to include the gnome hooked hammer (for legacy reasons) and almost certainly the gnome ripsaw glaive (since that makes glaive as one of their martial weapons make sense). Other PF1 possibilities include the battle ladder, flick mace, pincher, and piston maul.

I just looked it up and dragon tail has backswing which increases accuracy after a miss. Which if it means you get a plus one to hit if you miss the previous round means it brings his DPR up to 29.6875, which isn't much.

If you lower it to an ac of 15 though you can see the backswing come into effect a lot more of 31.825 DPR without it calculated in and 34.30200625. Basically when backwing allows you to hit on 19-20 instead of just a 20 for the last hit the DPR improvement is a bit more dramatic.

To calculate the new percentages for this I just multiplied the chance of missing the previous round with .05 and added to the chance for hitting. So for AC 15 you get

(9.5 * .55) + (9.5 * 0.3225) + (9.5 * 0.083875) + (9.5 *.05) * 3

and

(9.5 * .55) + (9.5 * 0.3225) + (9.5 * 0.083875) + (9.5 * 0.09580625) + (9.5 *.05) * 4

Its kinda cool to see how much a single point of accuracy effects your overall damage when its only there around half the time.

Jinjifra wrote:

What was the math you used to generate the DPS? I was trying to recreate your numbers and I must be making some mistake, I wasn't factoring in crits, but my numbers still looked too low...

As KingOfAnything notes, I just did three rounds.

Bear in mind that crits are a bigger amount of the DPR in PF2 because there's no confirmation rolls. You can actually just add the chance of a crit directly to the chance of hitting at all, because the DPR works out the same that way (I personally find this a time and effort saver).

For example, the Fighter is 10.5 x (.6 + .35 + .1), so 10.5 x 1.05 = 11.025, and then multiply that by three.

Thanks, I see what I did now. I left out the crits and screwed up the probability rolling 10 - 20 is 55% not 50%.

So if I was going to use a monk using dragon tail for 1d10 you would get

+5/0/-5 for 1d10+4 damage. Subsequent turns would be +5/0/-5/-5

and the 3 turn average is 28.975 which is pretty close to the paladin. If there is a d12 style the monks comes out at 32.025

Captain Morgan wrote:

(Presumably other martials get other class features to keep their DPR competitive despite lesser weapon proficiency.)

So far this appears to be exactly correct. Barbarians have Rage, which is a flat damage bonus, Rangers have reduced iterative penalties, and Rogues have Sneak Attack.

So looking at all of those first three using a Greatsword at 1st level for three actions, we have the following:

Fighter: +6/+1/-4 for 1d12+4 damage. Subsequent turns identical.
Barbarian: Rage Action, +5/+0 for 1d12+6 damage. Subsequent turns +5/+0/-5.
Ranger: Action to Target, +5/+1 for 1d12+4 damage. Subsequent turns +5/+1/-3.

So, vs. AC 16, DPR on those three over three rounds is as follows:

Fighter: 33.075 damage
Barbarian: 33.125 damage
Ranger: 30.45 damage

So Ranger is a bit behind Fighter using a two-handed weapon, but Barbarian is right on par (TWF DPR will favor the Ranger more heavily due to the synergy between their trick and Agile weapons). Rogue almost certainly can't sneak attack with a two-handed weapon, which is why I left them out (and their DPR probably lags a bit, but they have skill options to balance that out).

What was the math you used to generate the DPS? I was trying to recreate your numbers and I must be making some mistake, I wasn't factoring in crits, but my numbers still looked too low...

Just to let you guys know, the designers are all off for a long holiday weekend. I came in for a partial day today specifically to reply to this thread just in case, but I'm not going to be watching it as closely from now on. For all other Pathfinder fans from the USA, have a great Independence day!

Thank you for coming in and answering questions!

Jinjifra wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Jinjifra wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Bruno Mares wrote:

Snares/traps can be an ok/nice/interesting option, but as a permanent/common/fixed/main class feature, you're doing totally wrong...

They are a nice/interesting option. They are not a fixed class feature.

How does the DC work for the snares? You mentioned that quick snares have a lower DC and that a ranger can use a scaling DC instead of the fixed one for their traps.

Thanks for answering all of our questions!

It depends; is this just some random guy or gal who spent a single skill feat on snares, or is this a ranger who's actually sinking class feats into snares? For the former, you use the DC in the snare, but for the latter, you can use a strong scaling DC. The lower DC is for the no-cost snares; setting them quickly does not decrease the DC.

Oh okay, that sounds pretty solid. Is it a two or three feat investment to be able to quickly set snares at the scaling DC? IT seems like if you are focusing on it you could be build a pretty interesting character based around traps.

And this is how I would build my Ranger for the playtest. I've never been big on Animal Companions or Ranger Spells, so this is definitely what my Ranger will be investing in. Also, I want to see if snares suck or are awesome, since, well, isn't that the kind of thing that the playtest is for?

The idea of a long range scout that drops traps sounds like a interesting concept to me too. It will be fun to see if you can pull it off.

Jinjifra wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Bruno Mares wrote:

Snares/traps can be an ok/nice/interesting option, but as a permanent/common/fixed/main class feature, you're doing totally wrong...

They are a nice/interesting option. They are not a fixed class feature.

How does the DC work for the snares? You mentioned that quick snares have a lower DC and that a ranger can use a scaling DC instead of the fixed one for their traps.

Thanks for answering all of our questions!

It depends; is this just some random guy or gal who spent a single skill feat on snares, or is this a ranger who's actually sinking class feats into snares? For the former, you use the DC in the snare, but for the latter, you can use a strong scaling DC. The lower DC is for the no-cost snares; setting them quickly does not decrease the DC.

Oh okay, that sounds pretty solid. Is it a two or three feat investment to be able to quickly set snares at the scaling DC? IT seems like if you are focusing on it you could be build a pretty interesting character based around traps.

Bruno Mares wrote:

Snares/traps can be an ok/nice/interesting option, but as a permanent/common/fixed/main class feature, you're doing totally wrong...

They are a nice/interesting option. They are not a fixed class feature.

How does the DC work for the snares? You mentioned that quick snares have a lower DC and that a ranger can use a scaling DC instead of the fixed one for their traps.

Thanks for answering all of our questions!

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Dragon78 wrote:

Is signature skill like a class skill?

It's a Skill you can get to Master level or above, all others cap at Expert.

There are a variety of non-Class ways to get more of them (the Pirate Archetype Dedication gives Acrobatics, the Pickpocket Skill Feat gives Thievery, presumably etc. etc.), but they're still relevant. They also seem tied to the number of skills you get, which is interesting.

Do we know that the only thing signature skills do is raise the cap? It seems like they ought to make some difference even before you get high enough level to Master anything.

I'm pretty sure they are used as feat requirements too

For a consumable or charge item do loose the use if you fail the spent all resonance for the day roll?

Sad that Wand weren't shown

Also, why weapons get a free pass on investment?

Probably to not screw over TWP fighters or make it feasible to have multiple weapons on you in to overcome DR

Mark Seifter wrote:

Malk_Content wrote:

I assume part of the "Indestructible" shield is that it is indestructible.

This is a good assumption. And that's a big perk in terms of how you can use the shield. If you have the feat Captain Morgan mentioned, that's a worry-free -13 damage twice per round, as many rounds as you need without a breather to repair it (by that level, you can probably fix it in a matter of seconds, but a few rounds is more than you can afford in combat). You could also have a significantly higher hardness (up to around 25, which is quite a substantial reduction), but then you risk taking dents and the shield being broken if the fight drags on or you take a lot of hits.

It does seem a little counter-intuitive that the indestructible shield has less hardness than a shield you can destroy. I get why it might be necessary for balance purposes, though.

I Guess from a physics perspective it makes sense that an indestructible shield would hurt you more. Less of the energy of the blow is getting absorbed by the shield. Kind of like the crumble zone on a car.

I will playtest these rules - I may even come to like the system, but from all evidence presented this really seems like a whole lot of rules and system for something that could be solved by simply saying 'you can no longer buy magic items'.

I think you would also have to say you can no longer craft magic items as well. Which a lot of people like to do.

In all honesty I'm looking forward to some of the old prestige classes getting reborn in a way where they don't completely wreck your progression of you main class. I feel like Horizon Walker, Shadow Dancer, Dragon Disciple, etc could be really new and interesting

Jinjifra wrote:

Do we know how bracers of armor work with resonance vs armor? I could see one downside to the monk being that they get resonance taxed for their armor, although it's not a major one.

As far as we know both armor and bracers of armor will take Resonance to use. It's only 'wielded' stuff like weapons that provide an effect without using Resonance.. and even then they may have stuff that activates with Resonance (like shooting sword beams).

Thanks! So from what I see here it looks like the monk is a balanced and interesting class. It seems like there one weakness right is a situation where either can't or don't want to touch your opponent, but we haven't seen the whole class yet.

Do we know how bracers of armor work with resonance vs armor? I could see one downside to the monk being that they get resonance taxed for their armor, although it's not a major one.

I'm assuming that by the time flying enemies become common, monks will be able to leap sufficiently high in the air to kick or tackle them.

It's going to be something like this. The game designers are smart and good at there jobs. There is no way the question of what does a monk do against a flying monster never came up.

Jinjifra wrote:

Fuzzypaws wrote:

Captain Morgan wrote:

What is there to actually say about humans though? We all seem to have a pretty good idea on how they will work, don't we?

I was hoping for humans to get an actual identity this time, and not just be the Generic Master Of Genericness like always. I know Varisian etc etc etc are things but they certainly won't be in the CRB.

Also, that same blog would be Half-Elf and Half-Orc, which people do want to know about. And could potentially be Surprise Aasimar Tiefling if those turn out to be ancestry feats.

What Identity were you hoping for?

TBH, I see humans as +Con, +Cha, +any, -Wis. Weak-willed and short-sighted but also extremely social and interconnected creatures on the whole, to the point that we are hard wired to recognize faces even in random patterns of paint on a wall or clouds in the sky. Humans have more stamina and endurance than virtually anything else on planet Earth, matched or exceeded by only a small percentage of creatures like wolves, ants and so on; while a human cannot run as fast as a horse, it can certainly run /longer/ than a horse. Humans have a "religious impulse" so strong that even in the absence of actual religion, atheist humans still often form religious-like attachments to things like nations, fandoms or individual leaders.

I could go on but I think that establishes a starting point? You lay down a base, core identity, which is then layered on top of by ethnicity / national origin to create a huge variety of actual manifestations of humanity.

I always find the biology angle kind of hard to work with, because for the most part it seems like all of the playable races would fit under social primates. They would likely have very similar biological artifacts and quirks. If you try and model them off of some other biological order I feel like it just gets too hard to explain the parallel evolution of language and throwing things, which I think are the other big biological advantages humans have.

For the ancestries I usually try and fit them into the literary version of humans in, either modern fantasy or myth. Where they are the blank slate that is used to launch off and explain how the other races are different and alien. So in short I am a fan of the PF1 style humans.

Stunning Fist should be renamed because its titular effect occurs only on a critical hit/crit save fail combo. I understand the legacy aspect of keeping the name, but imagine new monk players discovering how rarely it actually lives up to its name.

Does stunning fist look like it has some weird potential now? It looks like you can use it all day, but costs 2 AP and probably wont' stun. I was not impressed on the first glance then I realized that with flurry of blows being two attacks for 1 AP and can be used any point in your turn means if you want to just stand there and slug it out you can get three attacks at 0/ -2/ -6 somewhat reliably, make any rogue in your party very happy, and possibly set up a much nastier debuff.

Captain Morgan wrote:

What is there to actually say about humans though? We all seem to have a pretty good idea on how they will work, don't we?

I was hoping for humans to get an actual identity this time, and not just be the Generic Master Of Genericness like always. I know Varisian etc etc etc are things but they certainly won't be in the CRB.

Also, that same blog would be Half-Elf and Half-Orc, which people do want to know about. And could potentially be Surprise Aasimar Tiefling if those turn out to be ancestry feats.

What Identity were you hoping for?

Any Anathema for monks?

Possessions?

Its the barbarian!

I think the should do a hard curve and go full Franciscan. Just copying books, drawing stuff in the margins, nailing large numbers of thesis to doors, just go the full nine yards on em.

Do you think they are going to very the casting rules very much be source, in the way that psychics have different concentration rules PE1?

Jinjifra wrote:

necromental wrote:

Jinjifra wrote:

How does the new double slice compare to the new power attack? They both seem pretty similar where power attack is 2 actions for 2X damage dice + str mod and double slice is 2 actions for weapon 1 dice + weapon 2 dice + 2X(?) Str mod. Am I missing anything there?

And double the chance for a crit. Yes, PA and two-handing really are looking like losers here.

Well the 2 handers get 1.5X str and have higher damage dice than anything you can dual wield with so I bet the match comes out pretty close.

Has anything said that 2 handers get 1.5x STR bonus in PF2?

Regardless, you also need to consider that a 2 hander means you only need to buy one weapon. That's not a trivial difference.

I'm not sure I have seen anything that says one way or the other if two handers get 1.5, so I guess that was an assumption on my part.

Also I don't think PA gets a -10 on the second attack so that is another area where PA is clearly better.

Jinjifra wrote:

How does the new double slice compare to the new power attack? They both seem pretty similar where power attack is 2 actions for 2X damage dice + str mod and double slice is 2 actions for weapon 1 dice + weapon 2 dice + 2X(?) Str mod. Am I missing anything there?

And double the chance for a crit. Yes, PA and two-handing really are looking like losers here.

Well the 2 handers get 1.5X str and have higher damage dice than anything you can dual wield with so I bet the match comes out pretty close.

How does the new double slice compare to the new power attack? They both seem pretty similar where power attack is 2 actions for 2X damage dice + str mod and double slice is 2 actions for weapon 1 dice + weapon 2 dice + 2X(?) Str mod. Am I missing anything there?

thflame wrote:

Double Slice is a glorified +5 on your second attack with no DR. I was hoping for something like, "take a -2 to attack with both weapons as part of one action."

Why would you want it to be weaker?

I think he means per 1 action instead of the 2 that this version costs.

I would bet Paladin and Monk are going to be two of the last classes we get. Not the very last because I bet Paizo wants to end the blogs on a high note, but those two classes are the ones that no matter what they do some people are going to be really unhappy.

I think a lot of it will also be determined by other factors as well. For now we know that power attack will use two actions to add damage dice, we know there is a special charge ability that fighter gets and that there is an ability to have melee weapons do minimum damage (I don't remember whether that is fighter/str only). So if melee weapons simply get better options that would do a lot to fix the balance in and of itself.

I'm surprised no has brought up the changes in how weapons works. So now the weapon stats matter beyond crit range and threshold.

Do they pick from the wizard list? I thought they had there own, which wasn’t very good.

As for feats, Phantom blade one count there level as a fighter level for those feats.

That’s not to say there is balance between them.

The spiritualist has issues regarding thought components makingconcentration checks hard and not having a touch cantrip for a free second attack. Like Arcane mark.

I like the phantom blade but I don’t think they really work till level 4.

Can you use Grave Words as a free touch attack? It seems about as legit as arcane mark.

They've started shipping.

** spoiler omitted **

Could you tell me about what the spiritualist got? I'm pretty curious about how this class is going to expand.

I think it does nothing. My reasoning being that you don't make damage rolls while using grapple.

christos gurd wrote:

so about that monk archetype...

It adds sneak attack in exchange for a monk's bonus feats, adds some status effects which take place after stunning fist, with a late in the game ki ability to extend these effects, and can use quivering palm to k.o. as well as kill. It includes notes on how to modify Unchained monks with the archetype.

That archetype sounds pretty solid, because the monk feats have always been somewhat lackluster. What kind of sneak attack progression does it get?

I'm not sure why you say that phantoms aren't viable in combat.

A level 1 anger phantom has slam +3/+3 1d8+3, or using the free Power Attack +2/+2 1d8+5. Not bad for first level

And they advance fairly well. That damage die goes up to 2d8 by level 10, with Str 20. They have effectively 3/4 BAB, have that trade AC for accuracy aura, and 1/day can rage and enlarge.

They aren't PC level strong, but they can make an effective combat companion. By lvl 10 you can have Cornugon Smash to add Intimidate to your attacks. That's a baseline slam +13/+13 2d8+9 with -2AC.

What is the "acceptable level"?

Also, can an anger phantom take Improved Natural Attack, or will that not stack with its Powerful Strike?

One interesting thing I noticed about the anger Phantom is that his Aura effects all creatures with it(not just friendly creatures). So you can activate it at the beginning of its turn make your attacks then turn it off as a free action, basically giving you a +4 to attack and never hitting the -2ac. You have to be willing to give up the phantoms swift action though.