Jon Otaguro 428's page

If she doesn't have the ride skill feat she would need to make a check for every command (animal companions don't need checks). Without the ride feat, it's not very useful to have a mount that isn't a companion

I would second that it's better for her to take a dedication that gives her an animal companion

You don't need dex on a magus. 12 Dex is enough for medium armor to hit ac cap and if you play high levels, you can always go sentinel to get bulwark.

We will never go back to pf1e, because pf2e is so much easier to gm. Adventures can be run in pf2e without gms needing to rebalance things to challenge players.

It's still a very good archetype. You get access to cantrips of any type, a familiar and access to life boost. It's my favorite spell casting archetype

I have done the math and the swashbuckler does better damage not doing finishers if the swashbuckler does one attack per round. It's pretty sad that their main class ability reduces their damage.

Really suggests the class needs a big redesign and not tweaks

Kind of moot since the psychic will rarely spend focus points on daze once he gets shatter mind. I agree with Hammerjack on daze damage.

I think the swashbuckler class is a mess and should be redesigned from ground up.

For my fighter with alchemist dedication, I like to start combat by drinking a numbing tonic. Getting 10 temporary hp per round makes it less likely to have to be healed in combat

You probably want to get a shootist bandolier to reduce the reload time to 2 actions

It seems like a lot of Paizo errata are focused on nerfing. I would prefer buffing weak than nerfing strong.

For Swashbuckler, I see 2 possible buffs (but certainly not both of them simultaneously):

- Grant Panache on a failed check. Panache building is painful because it's random. Granting Panache even if you fail the check would remove the clunkyness of the class. And after all, you are panachey for even trying to do it with panache.
- Remove MAP on Finishers, so they finally earn their name. It would remove the whole nonsense of making a single attack per round because your last attack needs to have no MAP as it's also the most damaging one. The class would be much more explosive: High risk high gain, which is quite expected from a Swashbuckler.

That would make the class go from crap to pretty good. A class that attacks once per round doesn't work

In the podcast I saw paizo said you can start using martial proficiency for rogues and simple proficiency for wizards. You don't have to wait for the remaster books

I think people here are expecting more changes than what will actually happen. I believe most class changes will be minor except for what is needed for no alignment and bestiary changes.

To build a STR based caster, you want full plate because of bulwark. Otherwise, your reflex saves will be bad. You will want to do boosts to STR CON WIS CHA.

To go full plate, you have two options - sentinel or champion. Sentinel has the advantage of auto scaling proficiency (champion requires you to take a L14 feat diverse armor) and opens up mighty bulwark which gives +4 bonus to all reflex saves instead of +3 to only damage spells.

Best path for sentinel is human race to start with armor proficiency through versatile heritage or general feat. If you stay with dwarf, you would need to take armor proficiency at L3, sentinel at L4. If you go with this plan, start with

S16 D12 C12 I10 W10 CH18. Don't play an oracle without 18CHA. Problem with staying with dwarf is L4 feat cost could be used for diverse access. If you are human, you use sentinel as L2 feat.

It's much easier to build a DEX based caster than a STR caster. If you want to build a STR based caster, expect to give up on some role play options such as what race you start as.

I was disappointed with singular expertise for ways that encourage melee. Why should a drifter encouraged in using a gun in one hand and a melee weapon in the other have to endure a lower accuracy with the melee weapon? The class is so underpowered as it is, that singular expertise should remove the penalty to other weapons.

nonat made a video stating that paizo can't add potency to spellcasters because they added the shadow signet. If you look at a lot of creatures, their reflex dc trails their ac by a decent amount.

Fire giant ac 31; reflex dc 26
glabrezu ac34; reflex dc 29
phistophilus ac 30; reflex dc 28
adult black dragon ac31; reflex dc 28
lich ac 31; fortitude dc 27
mummy pharaoh ac27; reflex dc 25

there are also lots of creatures that the shadow signet doesn't help you. However, this is nonat's reasoning of why paizo can't retro put potency runes for spell attacks.

The runes add to the item bonus of the armor you are wearing, then you choose the highest item bonus between the mutagen and the armor. You don't add the rune bonus to the mutagen.

Moonlight ray is a good cold for fire substitute for searing light

Sentinel is not a must have for optimizers in all situations. It's a must have if you want to dump dex. If you keep raising dex, you can go from medium to light armor to save bulk and to enable light armor runes.

If you stop raising dex and stay with medium armor you are dumping reflex saves. It is this situation that sentinel enables you to dump dex without dumping reflex saves.

If you are talking about scales of the dragon, it is +3 DEX, +2 Item bonus; so doesn't stack with drakeheart mutagen anymore.

Natural medicine is a trap feat, since you still need to increase medicine to get the skill feats and target higher DCs

Some oozes are only affected by bludgeoning. So you always want the option to do bludgeoning or you will have to avoid them

I played an orc primal sorcerer archetype champion in the slithering. I had battle medicine and was the only healer in the party. I used a greataxe.

I wasn't the highest damage dealer, but between healing and damage and some spells like fairy fire to outline invisible creatures, I was the most versatile in the party.

I played a fighter and a magus in different APs. The fighter did more damage, but the magus felt so much more durable in combat with spells like invisibility and stone skin.

I think it mostly comes down to expectations. Casters have versatility that martials don't have. For game balance, martials have to be able to do as much or more damage than casters.

Also, the game has many options. If you want to do damage, you can always play a martial.

Crossblooded evolution and greater cbe level 8 and 18 allow you to do what you want

I would change background to secular medic (dex/free attribute increase; battle medicine feat) to get battle medicine; increase medicine at level 2 with assurance medicine at level 1, continual recovery at level 2. This gives you auto success at battle medicine/treat wounds at level 2. I think battle medicine is fantastic at low levels where you need healing the most.

Other suggestion is first general feat at level 3 should be fleet to get 30' move. Speed is probably the best ability to buff; it also means your mobility works for 15' move instead of 10' at level 3.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AvMW-JqgMw

Logan Bonner says it is a normal familiar; not witch familiar. He is a game designer for Paizo, so his opinion carries more weight if you are looking for what was intended by game designers.

I still would do inexorable iron over laughing shadow. The focus spell has opportunity cost over psychic amped cantrip, so you are better off with the temporary hit points.

Mobile shot stance is only poorly written if the developers felt that bow shots worked with a baked in manipulate action. If they didn't believe that's how it works, then it's not poorly written.

The side that believes manipulate actions are baked in can't accept that their interpretation might just be not what the game developers intended.

It works as posted above by Castilliano.

If you reread the sentences you posted, there is nothing that requires you to have a lower level version of the spell.

You guys are so invested in what you think the rules say, you don't bother to read them

It ends immediately, but for home games, your gm would probably let you stay in the stance as support for thrown weapons is lacking.

Reading the rules, I believe reload is combined with strike. Reload has no manipulate trait. Taking no interact actions has no manipulate trait, because you aren't taking the interact action.

There is nothing in reload that assigns a manipulate trait. It just requires interact actions. The interact action has the manipulate trait, but if you aren't required to take any interact actions, I don't see where that assigns the attack the manipulate trait.

I know what the rules say; I believe all of you believe differently. We all have our own opinions.

Edit: And I don't really care what the developer intent is. If I knew what they intended, I would follow it. I just think all of you are making up rules that don't exist.

You can think it makes sense, but that isn't what the rules say. Swinging a weapon takes probably the same effort, but isn't an interact action.

I see nothing in the rules that supports a reload 0 weapon makes the attack have the interact action. As such, in any game I ran, firing a bow would not have to do the flat check for black tentacles.

In age of ashes, I switched from a sword and shield build to a reach weapon. Getting a possible extra attack every round on fighter is worth it in my opinion.

I think you are trying to read intention where there is none. They don't mention giving proficiency, so the intention is that there is no proficiency gained. If you disagree work it out with your GM.

They could always errata the DC

synesthesia is considered to be one of the best spells in the game (occult list)

How big a modifier is the gm going to give you? At first level, by the rules the dc to command a horse is 15; if you have +3 from trained nature with no wisdom modifier, you have to roll a 12 to command it successfully. It should be trivial imo, but by the rules it's not.

And if the gm says you auto succeed, then what's the purpose of the ride feat? The rules are broken imo.

command animal is so crippling at low levels, that i feel that if you don't have ride it's not worth using a non-companion mount. Only way to get ride is goblin rough rider or human. Since goblins are small, they are my number one choice for using a mount at first level.

I believe the Automatic Bonus Progression potency bonuses are meant to be item bonuses and this is an oversight. Potency bonuses don't exist in the game (only status, circumstance, item). Runes that have a potency level give item bonuses.

Nothing stops you from getting a large shield boss or a large gauntlet.

PF2e is sort of based on letting gamemasters make common sense decisions rather than basing rules on "RAW."

From errata, skill checks can still affect map

Page 446: Attack Rolls. There was some confusion as to whether skill checks with the attack trait (such as Grapple or Trip) are also attack rolls at the same time. They are not. To make this clear, add this sentence to the beginning of the definition of attack roll "When you use a Strike action or make a spell attack, you attempt a check called an attack roll."

To clarify the different rules elements involved:

An attack is any check that has the attack trait. It applies and increases the multiple attack penalty.

An attack roll is one of the core types of checks in the game (along with saving throws, skill checks, and Perception checks). They are used for Strikes and spell attacks, and traditionally target Armor Class.

Some skill actions have the attack trait, specifically Athletics actions such as Grapple and Trip. You still make a skill check with these skills, not an attack roll.

The multiple attack penalty applies on those skill actions as well. As it says later on in the definition of attack roll "Striking multiple times in a turn has diminishing returns. The multiple attack penalty (detailed on page 446) applies to each attack after the first, whether those attacks are Strikes, special attacks like the Grapple action of the Athletics skill, or spell attack rolls." There is inaccurate language in the Multiple Attack Penalty section implying it applies only to attack rolls that will be receiving errata.

I think if we play with sprites, we are going to just house rule encumberance to be the same as any other character when using sprite sized stuff.

you could unconventional weaponry filcher's fork

Agile, Backstabber, Deadly d6, Finesse, Halfling, Thrown 20 ft., Uncommon

The point i was sort of making is that there is no fighter build that uses crossbows. Crossbows are far inferior to bows. All ranged fighters use some type of bow.

So if you are balancing guns with crossbows, there has to be a class option that makes using a weapon about the same power as a crossbow worth using. The current gunslinger doesn't have that class option. So the class as constituted with the guns offered sucks.

Seems like in the current form, the best gunslinger takes the archer archetype and uses a bow. Given the other deficiencies of the class vs the fighter, if the gunslinger damage with a gun doesn't beat an optimized fighter damage with a shortbow by a lot, the class is a failure.

The biggest change in my opinion is tight math. In pf1e, it's very possible to do 1000% more damage than another character of the same level. In pf2e it's probably possible to do 30% more damage than another character of the same level.

This means that GMs don't have to plan for a wide variance of power possible in pf1e and every character will be somewhat useful. I have played in pf1e games where because of that variance in power, the weak characters are irrelevent.