Jon Otaguro 428's page

The rules state:

Once you take a dedication feat, you can’t
select a different dedication feat until you complete your
dedication by taking two other feats from your current
archetype.

Yes - you couldn't take another dedication feat, but you can take druid archetype feats.

I think expectations from some posters for the remaster exceeds the amount of resources paizo had for the project.

The end result is not perfect because they were trying to fit all the changes in with limited resources. Most of us think what we got is fine, while some think because there could have been a better solution, that's what paizo should have done.

If you don't like the end solution, then make your own home brew rules

I don't see a big issue with schools. They put in the game the unified magical theory school which gives you one less spell per day but more flexibility and an extra feat. And if you don't like that option, you can always take spell blending and blend away all your school slots.

I also like some of the new feats like explosive arrival and secondary detonation array. The biggest thing the developers could have done for the wizard is improve the wizard focus spells to the same power as the better focus spells in the game. I think that was a missed opportunity.

I still think the remastered wizard is a class I would play; where the old wizard would have been much lower on my list of classes to play.

I'm confused about Martial Performance. It says that

Quote:

Your muse has taught you how to handle a wider variety of weapons than most bards, empowering you to effortlessly blend your performance into combat tools.

but I don't see which additional weapon proficiencies are granted.

Probably copied from the apg when warrior bards got martial weapon proficiencies.

nicholas storm wrote:

For a GM to pick out the familiar seems like metagaming. Why would all monsters attack the familiar hissing at them, ignoring the guys actively attacking them

A lot of attacks hit multiple creatures and being within 15' means they are close/far enough for both ranged and melee versions. Add to that, when you can tell a creature is actively engaging in a fight [you have to see it as a threat/a distraction for it to flank for instance], it doesn't seem odd for it to be a valid target. There is also the fact that smarter foes might actually know of familiar abilities and how they work.

Not saying the familiar should never be targeted. Just saying that if the GM's solution to the resentment familiar is just to kill it all the time, that seems metagamey.

For a GM to pick out the familiar seems like metagaming. Why would all monsters attack the familiar hissing at them, ignoring the guys actively attacking them

I view the swashbuckler as the second worst martial in the game (investigator is the worst). In agents of edgewatch, I was playing a ranger which is considered to be a weaker martial, and I was still doing a lot more damage than the swashbuckler.

It's my opinion the swashbuckler needs major changes.

To change the swashbuckler, I would:

Change the maximum panache to 3; gain 3 on critical, 2 on success, 1 on failure, zero on critical failure. Allow you to add the extra damage to having panache onto the finishing strike if you started strike with 2 or more panache.

I would remove the finisher restriction prohibiting more attacks after finisher.

Add dex to damage for at least one of the styles

Allow STR as the class attribute for gymnast.

The comparison between swashbucklers is very alike; only change is one elemental rune for a speed rune and the no finisher swashbuckler outdamages the finisher one.

The point I was trying to make is that the limitation on the current class is debilitating and can't be fixed. They need to remove the limitation on finishers that allows no further attacks in the round.

At high level +3 to hit is very easy to attain and applied to both swashbucklers; 4 actions is speed rune.

The comparison was a swashbuckler using finisher vs one not using finisher vs a highly optimized fighter. Doing 40% damage vs the top end is pretty bad in my book. But not even doing as much damage using your main class ability as not using it is worse.

Comparison high level based on a recent combat I had at level 17; this is comparing same enemy at level 18

Weapon +3 major striking, speed, +2d6 elemental
+4 strength, +2 hit circumstance, +1 status

Swashbuckler
TH 36
AC 42
Damage 55.5
Critical 0.25 0.4375
Hit 0.75 0.9375
1.375
Damage 55.5 76.3125

TH 36 32 28 28
AC 42 42 42 42
Damage 37 37 37 37
Critical Damage 74 74 74 74
Critical 0.25 0.05 0.05 0.05
Hit 0.75 0.55 0.35 0.35

Damage 37 22.2 14.8 14.8 88.8

With confident finisher swashbuckler does 76; same finisher without confident is 55.5

Without finisher attacking 4 times swashbuckler does 88.8

Fighter does 197; flurry of blows, agile grace, feral mutagen

Finishing strike extra damage is so bad, that a swashbuckler does more damage full attacking than doing finishing strike in many high level real combats. If a class using it's key ability is worse than not using it's key ability - this proves the class is broken.

As I said earlier, the only way to fix swashbuckler is to remove finishers from the class.

One attack per round makes swashbuckler damage awful; even after confident finisher. Saying the swashbuckler contributes when their damage at high level using confident finisher is still like 40% of an optimized fighter.

Easiest remake of swashbuckler would remove finisher from the class. They could easily reword finishers to something else and just put the flourish tag on it.

I believe they are going to add spell attack items like the gate attenuator to casters (capped at +2). They could add in text to say that it only works if targeting ac, so as not to interact with the shadow signet.

For me it's not close that spontaneous casters are better than prepared casters. Spontaneous casters never waste spell slots and in pf2e slots are much more precious than in pf1e

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.