Keydan's page

This sounds good; I'll be interested in seeing how the reincarnation feat gets developed! As for a focus spell, how about a reaction that triggers when a creature hits 0 HP and lets you output a powerful heal? Thematically, you'd be tapping into this cycle of renewal to turn a creature's imminent death into life, and mechanically it could work both as this really effective anti-death measure for allies, and a nice reward for bringing an enemy down to 0 as well.

Did exactly that.

Ok, so I will keep some of it as is, but make auto reincarnation work differently, allowing the druid to pay the cost and roll reincarnation in advance, so that in case of death they can reincarnate, basically as a contingency. And at level 20 this will come with extras with another feat...

The focus spell is now a feat, which allows to prepare an appropriate communication spell after 10min of meditation instead... And I need ideas for a focus spell...

This looks really good! While I do think some of the wording and balance could be adjusted on some of these effects, I think this also does a good job of translating the Reincarnated Druid from 1e to 2e. My thoughts on the brew as presented:

Glimpse of a Past Life I think gives a bit too much for a 1st-level class feat. I'd compare it to the Ghoran's Ancient Memories ancestry feat and make the class feat slightly above that, e.g. two trained skills or just expert in one skill, without needing Assurance at 12th level.

The divination trait got dropped with the remaster, but you can still use the scrying and detection traits for Mysterious Stranger. Changing the results by an entire degree may be a bit much, but something like a +4 circumstance bonus to saves and DCs against detection and scrying effects, plus attempts to Sense Motive or Recall Knowledge against you, would help in many circumstances.

While it's certainly relevant to the order's theme, auto-reincarnating on death is an ability I'm a little iffy about having at 10th level, as that's typically reserved for 20th-level feats, such as the Psychic's Become Thought or the Animist's Eternal Guide. Though this may not feel as satisfactory, I feel it may be better to make this a 20th-level feat, with perhaps some other benefits like being able to reincarnate without dying just to retrain really quickly. The part about getting better results on recovery checks I think can be kept as part of a different 10th-level feat, along with other bells and whistles.

Tongue of the Sun and Moon I think unfortunately breaks a fundamental rule of focus spells, which is that they mainly serve a function in or around combat and aren't meant to be great for exploration. What is currently a focus spell I think would probably be better-served by a class feat (you could be permanently under...

Thnaks! Will adjust!

Need comment and critique on this. A little backstory, I am slowly trying to transition all my games to 2e, one of them being Giantslayer. One of the players is a Reincarnated Druid. There is more than flavor to this choice, so I thought I'd make an order to fit the basic themes in 2e.

Here's the link

English is not my native language, BTW.

On resistances from level 1:

The problem here is that for the Eidolon use its 'cool thing', the GM needs to break the encounter building in ways that can be very lethal or dissatisfying at low levels.

Option 1. Offset resistance by addign a weakness.

Option 2. Common elemental resistances aren't overpowered because there are common. In havign 5 resistance to fire may negate some lower level specific encounters, but have zero impact on many other. It's not like AC that has an important role in every combat.

+2 to attack and AC would make you as good as a fighter offensively for almost all levels, and +2 to AC would make you better than a champion defensively for many.

Thats way way too much.

But you spend an action and cast a spell to get it, forgoing a possible 3rd attack and some other 3-action combos. Ideally, +1 may also work.

How about synth Boost of +2 applies not only to damage, but also attack and AC? It's also positively feeds back on the concept of gaining a summoner focus. You can introduce summoner feats just for synths, that give them access, albeit a few levels later than most, of, say, some fighter or barbarian class feats. Later even pump the synth side to 11, add some wacky synth abilities, go Prototype and change your form on the go, to an extent with some powers.

Synth has to be one of the most fun option, and should also be dome justice to be a viable option. In X ears when there's an inevitable eidolon option, grab synth focus, become a mechanical iron-man like warrior, or, something I wanted to do in P1e, a pirate who calls forth the soul of his formal captain to inhabit his body, becoming becoming a walking ghost captain. This is rad as hell. This should work. This should have a focus.

Once again, a disclaimer. Been playing P1E and summoners for a very long time, been GMing for a very long time. I am still not too deep in P2e, and it will take years for me to develop the same level of system mastery I have with P1e... but to me this is how I'd try and settle some aspects I dislike and some that are generally disliked, and trying to meet some people half-way.

1) Introduce a focus for the summoner as a class. I really think summoners need a focus that definds what kind of summoner they are, gives them a more tangible role and more tropes to fill. Let's call it Conduit Focus. The three I think could work:

a) Eidolon Caller - default choice. You focus on strengthening the bond between you and the outworldly eidolon. These guys get the most out of an eidolon, and have the most unique eidolons.

- At level 1 Gets Act Together action. No one else gets Act Together, maybe with a higher level Class Feat.
- Introduce "Eidolon" feats (more on the later). Eidolon callers shyck - he get more of them, that's it. There are similar precedents for this and few classes get more than 1 feat per level.

b) Master Summoner - being great at summoning monsters in general. You focus on the conjuring and bringing forth beasts from different planes of existence, bolstering them with your personal connection to them.

Addresses the point everyone forgot, summoners can actually summon and should be at least as good if not better at summoning that other casters, this is an option for those who want to focus on summoning!

- diminished eidolon, largely because it doesn't get the benefits of things the Eidolon Caller gets, but with a revamped evolution system can still fill specific niches. That and introduce the higher level ability, similar to how druids can take multiple orders, to get some of the eidolon edge back with Class Feats, or by taking Class Feats that give Eidolon Feats.

- Conduit cantrips/spells that boost your eidolon can target summoned monsters instead. Alternatively - they get a spell slots that they can fill only with summon spells of their tradition.

- Gain focus pool with a focus spell that mimics any of the conjuration summoning spells available to your tradition, but is a 2 action spell. Otherwise with the limited spell list - hard to imagine summoning anything but the eidolon. Can add feats that expand on the summons and augment them, similarly how druids have an options to bolster their wild shapes.

c) Synthesist - for your front-liner "I am the monster" approach. You allow a specific outsider to fuse with your body, taking on traits of both. Can go ghost-rider here, can go iron-man or venom vibes, this will be super fun if made as a separate focus.

- Diminished eidolon, as above.

- Synthesys manifestation action. Should work similar to how it works now but with less limitations, since this is our focus.

- Your Conduit cantrips/spells that boost your eidolon now target you, and maybe, work a bit longer, since we fill a different role now and don't have a back-up dude to boost us every round.

- Synthesysts, however should, in my mind, have an easier time of modifying the eidolon's form...

2) Eidolon. I do think that with the nature of P2e - we should prepackage eidolons, but more like it was done with the Unchained Summoner back in the day. You pick your kind of eidolon, having an overall vector and theme for your outsider dude is good. Good for the master summoner for whom this changes what summons he can cast, good for the synthesyst "I am the monster" shtick, good for Eidolon Caller.

Now, the eidolon by itself should be, like the fighter or rogue or barbarian, be a self-sufficient unit when it comes to its role in combat. That way we negate the P1e pitfall of how easy it was to optimize your eidolon for combat. The game should do it for you. Just liek it does for just about every other chassis.

Pre packaging can stay thematic and open tangible vectors for cool evolutions and eidolon feats.

3) Eidolon Feats. Summones can spend summoner feats on eidolon feats. Can be taken by ANY summoner focus but they apply differently, obviously. You get 1 eidolon feat on 1st level to add some spice to your eidolon. Eidolon callers get 1 extra at level 1, and one every few levels after that.

Eidolon feats are there to give options, to vector HOW your eidolon fights and what abilities it gets. They are there to make the action economy flow better for your specific approach, they are there to add more in and out of combat options, give eidolons access to dedications, some fighter moves, maybe even skill feats, limited casting, more mobility options, change up some dichotomies if we are feeling daring. They could key off of eidolon tradition even... I will ponder this more.

And I am sorry but this fluff/crunch dicottomy is real and important for many players and GMs. Not because we don't have imagination to think of our barbarians as John's Whicks, our alchemists as Mr.Hydes, or that pointy stick is also stick that is pointy, but because we want our choices to have a mechanical impact on our characters, so when numbers add up your imaginary character and his numerical/rule interpretation both feel unique. And the more seamless this transition iss the better. Not just how you imagine it, but also how it flows, comes online, works and, well, crunches.

In this game famous for satisfying crunch. Eidolons. Don't. Crunch.

(This is the exact reason why many 5e players try pathfinder, when you can only play so many fighters before you can stop pretending that in this tactical bate simulator part of the game - they are all the same)

It's a bit of disingenuous, really, when we both know that to make a level 1 barbarian with a greataxe to be like JW, and making a barbarian like, say, Randy Savage, then give these sheets to a 3rd person - everything on the character sheets, rage powers, backgrounds, feat and ancestry choices will all be different, except the greataxe, and the 3rd person will immediately see that these are different dudes. In my case we both made 1 choice and that's it, when in 1e that'd be like making 2 different barbarians.

I understand not everything can have perfect 1 to 1 mechanic transition. That's why I said balance of fluff and crunch. But look me in the eye and say that you have even 1/3 as much of say in what your eidolon can do and how he does it at level 1 as you did in vanilla pathfinder 1e. You know this is no barbarian character sheet comparison.

(I may even argue JW is a ranger with hunt pray)

(And sorry that current itteration of the game and it's current mechanical feedback can't facilitate a specific trope at this point in time, pathfinder 1e had a killer instinct cold hearted barbarian for that.)

(Lastly, there are games that are like your little barbarian experiment, they don't have crunch. Like dungeonworld. No crunch, still fun, everything is about the flow and consequences and abilities are more of if x the you can y. You can fight with pretty much whatever, monsters are obstacles and GMs don't roll any dise most of the time)

Core idea of a magus, borrowing from 1e ethos, is in essence a hybrid of a fighter and a Wizard, a unique kind of arcane warrior who seamlessly bended martial prowess with arcane casting. Current magus isn't really all that.

Magus had an arcane pool, pool that was mostly used to make his weapon even more magical. Easily becomes focus powers and feat options.

Magus had spell combat, the ability to cast a spell and attack at the same time, but with a penalty. Current irrigation appears to be very offense focused and with few spells per day you won't be doing all that much spell combating.

Magus could also deliver touch spells though his weapon. This you can do, but the need to hit twice is weird.

Magus arcana are just magus feats.

Later he could spend his limited resources on recalling some of the used up spells. Magus feats.

This is the 1e magus experience most of us loved. How do we translate some of this into p2e?

It does because that's how the greataxe works and it's a great opportunity to add crunch to fit with your use of this mechanical implement.

What I am saying is, and I repeat myself, you can imagine ANYTHING, but there aren't many games that give your choices meaningful mechanical feedback. And even in your case, pathfinder is the kind of game that will or should give you mechanical satisfaction for that idea. The argument of "well what if I don't wanna" is exactly my argument, you should have the option to make a chocolate cake that taste like chocolate, but also a chocolate cake that tastes whatever you want and vice versa. Btw pathfinder 1e had that kind of cold quite scary barbarian as an option.

Put it this way, if you and me are taked with making an eidolon for a level 1 summoner, print them out... we both pick angel, and then we give them to a 3rd person without describing what we imagined. Say he knows the rules of the game, will there be any difference? He may even mistakenly give you my cheatsheet back. Because that's the whole lot of mechanical feedback he eidolon has for the most part, as far as what they do goes, they are the same. In pathfinder 1e? Even with unchained summoner, the amount of weird and fun stuff, with just base choices, was staggering. It was your eidolon, not only in the theater of the mind, which is all the rage these days, and more power to you, but also mechanically.

I am sorry if I sound to direct and blunt, but, for me one of the reasons pathfinder is a great game is because it had a great balance of fluff and crunch.

Because every RPG ever has you use your imagination to describe things and effects. But some, like pathfinder, has good balance of fluff and cosmetics having good mechanical feedback. You can imagine whatever you wish. But good, solid mechanics with good solid crunch and custamisability to give you mechanical satisfaction of your choices are not a given.

When you take a greataxe it has statistics of a greataxe, making it not only a greataxe in image but also unique in how it performs as a greataxe. Making you want to use a greataxe and not a maul or a greatsword. Because mechanically, not only is it a cool 2-handed axe, but also has a big die to roll for damage to represent it being a big heavy chopping weapon you swing around recklessly. And that is why I play and run pathfinder. This kind of mechanical feed back to your choices.

people have already noted that a good point to start is figuring out what treatment the summoner should get and what people want from the summoner.To understand what is its direction.

Right now:

- it's not good at summoning despite its name. 1e summoner was very good at summoning.

- it has an eidolon but it's not as good as 1e eidolon, mostly in the vagueness of the role current eidolon fills in the 2e playtest. 1e eidolon could fill a multitude of roles determined by the player, and was good in them, no great, but very good.

- it isn't good at spellcasting. Until unchained version summoner 1e was bonkers good 6/9 caster. After unchained, summoners were still very good.

It also had a lot of cheese and was extremely easy to optimize, to the point that in a sub-optimal party - they stole a lot of the spotlight.

Should 2e summoner still be as good at everything as 1e summoner? I don't think so. Nor should it be this underwhelming jack of all trades.

That's why I believe it's a good idea to allow players a way to focus into some one aspect and be good at it. A subclass system for a eidolon-focused summoner, a summoning focused summoner and a synthesyst focused summoner. Allowing them to fill most niches and tropes.

I never played a summoner so I don't feel as strongly about the eidolon pool of features. But the eidolon changing feats aren't enough to cover for that?

Depends. To me it's more about eidolons feeling static and very pre-determined compared to what they were in 1E. One of the strength of 1e Summoner was that you could be a great secondary support caster and have a powerful, customizable ally on the frontline.

2e pets are gone and don't get nearly as many features they got in 1e, most of what they get comes out of your pocket and that's fine, that's how 2e rolls. But even compared to Familiars - they are quite limited. Which is weird, since when I saw how familiars forked the first time I already had a hunch this will be later used for summoner, but no.

Can I just pop in and say that as is the Summoner isn't actually all that good at doing the thing its name suggests its supposed to be good at, unless Paizo plans to expand on it later?

Summoner is not better at summoning than any other caster with access to summoning spells. Defiantly worse than a conjuration Wizard.

Had the exact same thoughts in the next thread over. No focus. With respect to how P2E tried to deconstruct many classes in to a base chassis with giving the players the tools to select what you want to focus on, like the druid focusing on casting or wildshape, or alchemist into mutagens or bombs - the summoner is a bust. There should be several subclasses that focus on what you personally want your summoner to be about:

- An Eidolon Caller with a set of outsiders and monsters to choose from, each with their set of quirks and eidolon abilities to choose from. Can always add more weird options here.

- A Spiritualist with a set of emotion-based spirits and emotion based abilities to choose from. Can add more weird spirits and ghosts here.

- A Syntheists, who is your "mutagenist" to your alchemist, you can also roll in the shifter angle here. You gain the offensive form, can be a back-up front-liner like the mutagenist alchemist with a set of abilities lifter from the eidolon caller. Piggybacks on Eidolon Caller.

- A Master Summoner, gets a smaller pick of abilities and eidolon, can't use the Act together thing, for example, gets its increased attack and defenses slower, but you are actually better at using your everyday summoning spells. Can evolve summons, have access to all/most summons, focus spells that make summons more powerful instead of the 7th and 17th level eidolon boosts, for example. You basically focus your eidoon to to a few thigns good to be your go-to aid, but in combat summon other creatures and be a an actual summoner. Piggybacks on Eidolon Caller.

Basically. How I see it. Add a subclass focus, that can be expanded upon with class feats if you wish, like druids and their orders. You pick what kind of Summoner you are at level 1, for example:

- An Eidolon Caller with a set of outsiders and monsters to choose from, each with their set of quirks and eidolon abilities to choose from. Can always add more weird options here.

- A Spiritualist with a set of emotion-based spirits and emotion based abilities to choose from. Can add more weird spirits and ghosts here.

- A Syntheists, who is your "mutagenist" to your alchemist, you can also roll in the shifter angle here. You gain the offensive form, can be a back-up frontliner like the mutagenist alchemist with a set of abilities lifter from the eidolon caller. Piggybacks on Eidolon Caller.

- A Master Summoner, gets a smaller pick of abilities and eidolon, can't use the Act together thing, for example, gets its increased attack and defenses slower, but you are actually better at using your everyday summoning spells. Can evolve summons, have access to all/most summons, focus spells that make summons more powerful instead of the 7th and 17th level eidolon boosts, for example. You basically focus your eidolon to to a few things good to be your go-to aid, but in combat summon other creatures and be a an actual summoner. Piggybacks on Eidolon Caller.

This gives you options to add more possibilities later on.

Rework evolutions to be more like familiar abilities. Some 2-3 at level 1 and extra abilities every few levels at least. If daily ability changes are too much - make changing evolutions a ritual with a cost. You get your base form and 7th and 17th level abilities to make them feel mechanically different, everything else is a pool of abilities that allow us to make unique companions. Eidolon callers can spend their feats to give eidolons more abilities or some abilities lifted from other classes, kinda like giving dedication feats to eidonons. It's Pathfinder, some crunch is good, and a side sheet for a pet class is OK.

A small disclaimer. I played a lot of Summoner, both chained and unchained in P1e. Summoners were bound by some 3.5 rule inheritance but were an original paizo creation. For me a summoner should give me the capability to at least have the same base feel/capability as the P1 summoner had, at least 50% of it. As is, its kind of doesn't work for me.That said I try to keep an open mind and understand the new dichotomies of P2e, and how most classes are just chassis that hold sets of abilities for the player to choose. That said... different isn't bad, but oh boy, summoner isn't a great chassis. The main 2 problems I see:

1) Summoners aren't that good at summoning.

The only accented summoning part is their eidolon. At least make it one of the "options" to be more of a summoner than a dude with an extra-dimensional animal companion. As is, you don't even get the option of Augment Summoning (that's a wizard exclusive thing now), or a better list of summons, or earlier access to summons, a pool of summons, ability to make summons better. Be in any way or form the thing your class is named after any meaningful way better than any other caster. Might as well rename summoner into Eidolon Caller or something, because that's the only thing your good at.

Adding 2 action focus power for a quick summon, would solve this quite well, and give the summoner an actual summoning edge. Later the ability to apply some conduit spells to summons. This is a nice ability to have in a pinch when you don't have 3 actions to summon your eidolon, or you don't feel that you need the particular set of skills you trained your eidolon into.

2) Evolutions and eidolons.

I am not talking about P1e cheese, with balls of tentacles and 20-armed gunslinger eidolon combos... But P1e gave you tools to make your eidolon unique since level 1.

Like how I love how P2e gives you tools to make your fighter or rogue unique with that abilities you choose. Your eidolon should be less rigidly defined with specific feat selections for specific niche abilities.

Making eidolons base chassis capable, as the base fighter/rogue/ranger chassis is, no matter what you pick - is a good idea. But leave the specifics to imagination. I liked how Unchained summoners got to pick a specific kind of eidolon but the evolution pool was still there to make it any kind of angel/demon/elemental.

What it to be a fire snake - do it, but you can also give it arms and weapon proficiency, make it focus on grappling, or skillful from day 1. I think looking at how familiars gains abilities is a better example, leaving summoner class feats for adding new options to the pool of what abilities we can add to the eidolon at any given day. Also gives an option to add a focus spell to transmogrify properly your eidolon for a short period of time.

I mean, this is like a 1e hunter with its abilities to boost 1 kind of animal with some special nature mumbo jumbo, only worse since it's mostly semi-permanent and doesn't add to the uniqueness of each eidalon. This is not what eidolons were.

Right now I see four level 3 summoners meet up, they are unique, have different feats and weapons, and gear, ancestries and experiences... their dragon eidolons? Same, but different color.

So far we are 1/4 into Book 3. The original party is still preserved.

Kowa Rivers - Human Ranger 8, switch-hitter, with her pack animal trusty steed Toursan (the horse from book 2). A native of Trunau. A hereditary guardsman, her father, and his father were in the patrol too. Big family. She has things to protect... She's in the Trunau militia, was promoted after book 1, and is a sargent now. She took Omast as her cohort, the middle aged (now sober) coot was happy to help out his patrol buddy.

Vrun Laringfas - Halfling Vexing Dodger Rogue 8. Brother to the Laringfas household that own the largest tavern in Trunau. Was exiled a few year back for shady dealings, spend a few years in Barter Town, now he's back and... well, he's there for a bit of fame, a bit of glory, a bit of money and a bit of clearing out his name... and a lot of "way in over his head".

Kelkard and Felkard - Reincarnation Druid 8 and his Ferret animal companion. Many years ago, Kelkards father was saved by a Nidalan Uskwood druid, and had to give his son to serve the circle. Nearing his late years Kelkard had visions, a change of fate, he renounced his connection to Uskwood and sought forgiveness int he light of Sarenray for all the things he did in life, serving the Uskwood circle... his visions led him home to Trunau.

Erin the Kid. Half-elf Evoker Witch 8. A young half-elf and protege of Silvermane, who looked after the kid once his father left him with the old Elf. He doesn't remember much beyond his life in Trunau... but his connection to the plane of negative energy is uncanny, and has weird connotations for certain events to come.

Iobaria is technically in Casmoron. So I'll cross-post my long-in-development campaign idea. Heavily inspired by Slavic folklore and dark fantasy. What little Slavic themes in the game are greatly appreciated, but as is it's mostly standard European fantasy with a different color pallet. May as well start translating it into P2e. Working title:

Winter of Anarchy

Book 1: Buran's End (Levels 1-4). Adventurers find themselves stranded in a small town of Buran's End, at the edge of wilderness, surrounded by harsh, unnatural weather. Paranoia, fear and despair sets in as monstrous humanoids and sabotage pushes the town to search for alternative means of survival.

Book 2: Winter's wife (Levels 4-7). Adventurers are urged to explore infamous Finadar Forest, in search of a bound spirit, who may be connected to the mysterious weather. Their path and choices will be swayed by the secrets they uncover and new evil, bestirred by ancient Omens coming into life.

Book 3: Feast of adders (Levels 7-10). Old allies and friends will show their true faces as Adventurers fight in a race against time against an army of savage marauders, led by mad cultists, to stop a ritual that can signal their doom.

Book 4: Sea of holly (Levels 10-13). Signs and omens point the party towards an unsettling deal with ruinous powers, for a chance to strike against one of the orchestrator of current events, by entering a shattered demiplane, once a part of the First World.

Book 5: Secrets of Kask-Kirrulthar (Levels 13-16). All plans revealed - adventurers learn they stalled the disaster for but a moment. The party has very little precious time to plan and prepare an assault on Kask-Kirrulthar, knowing very little of what waits them beyond the colossal walls of the greatest of Cyclopean watchtowers in the region, if not whole of Golarion. Faltering may push all Iobaria into a an endless Winter of Anarchy.

Also, a thing I've been pondering, giving the fighter a floating stack of semi-permanent combat feats. Just a few. They can't count as prerequisites for any other feat besides others in this floating stack, but can be changed daily with a 1h workout. Plus add built-in retrainability of the last combat feat taken with bonus feats he gets, akin to Inquisitors being able to change the last bonus teamwork feat.
Throw in the ability to ignore attribute prerequisites or give them the ability that counts as having 13 int and 15 dex for prerequisites, and as combat expertise, and we don't increase the fighters ceiling, but we sure make his room a lot bigger.

One day he can be switch hitter, another he's a brawler, third he speck out for a covered op. Basically the same fighter but the 3-4 floating feats will help in a pinch, like they do for a brawler.

Well, I also think that the difference between trained and legend being just a few points is pretty ridiculous, specially with 1/3 of skill feats being "permuting things that shouldn't be a feat", 1/3 being lackluster/bad and 1/3 being ok/good, all for different skills. Making a Skill level up at least so it's -2/0/+2/+4... instead of -2/0/+1/+2... with a +1 for signature makes them more special.

I'd argu an unchained fighter should be tweeking what there already is, addimg, instead of remapping and substracting from him, so that old archetypes and existing options still apply to him. Make him like unchained Rogue instead of Fighter, if you will.

4 + Int should be default for all, but I don't think fighter needs any extra class skills, except for, maybe, perception, whatever 1-2 skill he needs as class skills - can be taken with traits.

Leaving 1 save good is fine, later on options with AWT boost fighter saves considerably.

Making bonus feats any kind of feat doesn't make sense for a fighter, an iconic battler. Maybe add a chosen set of thematic general feats.

1/2 level into heal and local also isn't too intuitive for the base model of Fighter. Giving 1 + 1 ever few levels to one of few fighter non-mental skills as a choice would flavor him better and allow to specialize in something.

Endurance for free is thematic, I approve of that.

Removing bravery removes everything that uses bravery. The above mentioned choices are a bit better IMHO, but'd argue it's better to make fighter not immune but able to reroll saves vs fear, he's not divine-infused unshakable paladin, but just a real tough bad-ass who can get himself together. Later, around 14, become immune to shaken vs those of his level or lower, and make him immune as a capstone.

Inquisitors stalwart ability but without armor restrictions is also thematic.

Anyhow, I think Advanced Weapon Training and Armor Training made the base fighter one of the better martial in the game, those were his "Unchaining". He's be great with just 2 extra skill points really.

Skills feel like the weakest part of P2 for me right now. Not only does being Legendary mean you are only a few points above someone who's just trained, it also means that even at high level raw "talent" which comes from attributes is still more important than training. A burly barbarian will sometimes be better at athletics than a monk who's a legendary athlete. Doesn't sound legendary, doesn't sound like his sill is legendary even if he has some coll stuff to do with it. Sounds like he's trained +3.

In the end, what signature skills even do until one have to pick your first skill mastery? Nothing. It's like making a fighter proficient with rubber ducks, but saying he can buy one only at level 7.

I realy feel, unless Paizo plans something more for signature skills, something which isn't in the scope of the play-test, essentially making a stopgap for some other features in the future, their only function is to limit skill growth, while sounding like a feature.

Now if Signature skill added at least another +1 when applied to trained skills, with maybe some other benefits - then it would be a lot more useful and would be a feature instead of a stop sign you need to mind when you reach level 7.

They have a very different style and mode of play. Playing pathfinder in shadowrun is akin to watching Godfather but it's Honk Kong Jackie Chan movie. Fun? Probably, but that's not the award winning crime drama with stellar acting and tension, same as godfather isn't a gun-ho action film with great fight coriography and slapstick humor.

Pathfinder heroic high-fantasy hack & slash action doesn't really work well with everything, certainly not with class-less grimdark cyberpunk heist, crime and shopping simulator like Shadowrun.

Another simple comparison how they heavily contradict each other. In Pathfinder half the time you are in combat, because you are good at it, while in Shadowrun, half the time you are thinking of a plan and actively trying to avoid as much combat as possible, because bullets are deadly and you ain't going to spend your nuyen on a botchy streetdoc.

Get the gaming rights to this, Paizo. I'm tellin' ya.

Bright is largely inspired by Shadowrun. Minus all the hi-tech stuff. So I advise checking that out.

Still a better class than the Shifter. /s

I clearly see why adding mechanics to this is a bad tone... but, as I see it, I find that statement weird. Because Pathfinder always had child abuse.

Multiple evildoers in multiple APs/modules point towards child abuse done by themselves or to them. As well as non-evil characters. You see states run by despots and tyrants, where negligence and social-economic reality begrudgingly leads to child abuse along with all the other sins and horror. You see monsters that are taken from folklore whose main or secondary trope is being child predators or worse...

It was always there, we just got a face for it now, but it appears that portfolio is left to other evil outsiders.

I understand why many if not most would scoff, disdain and distance from discussing "why that should be the line", but I believe that this discussion is in fact where we can see the bigger picture. I'd like is to know the trail of though. The fact that "Line in the sand", an expression originally used here, has a complete and opposite meaning in my native language doesn't help either. (A line in the sand is arbitrary, as rain, wind or people can easily destroy it)

But alas, I know this isn't the place for it, really, as such discussions are loaded with triggering emotions, and will lead to nothing but alienation by multiple sides, which hold differing opinions. As for many - the meta is concrete and set in stone, with their own lines.

With all due respect to Paizo's right to do whatever they want with their setting and as the issue and its resolution is pretty much settled...

I am just genuinely interested as to why, with all the twisted horror, the violent savagery, the deprivation, the hedonism, the monstrous deviancy, the torture, the slavery, perverse morality etc., etc... we have seen from the lineup of pathfinders evil and damned over the years, with parallels to real life existing world problems and suffering, which may or may not be as bad/evil as child abuse, why Folca was the place to draw the line? And, if I may ask, are they sure the line should have been drawn where it is?

And with all of these updates the fears were swept away. As I said, people should jut wait before trying to nitpick 1 page with 4 pictures.

So it's a wholly-owned subsidiary formed specifically to create this game? How did that happen? Did the game come first or was the studio formed and then Paizo approached?

All I know is that the guys that make it made a lot of solid games this side of the globe in the 00s, including one of my personal favorites HoMM5 and Silent Storm. The the company was bought and made mostly freemium stuff. They never made a game I would rate below a 7/10 in their times, though most were strategies and turn based tactical games. I am well convinced they can make a decent game.

But isn't that your main character you make yourself? These types of games are rarely about the story of this 1 specific dude and his specific single-line story. You make a custom dude and project onto him, make choices, and, sometimes, there are fun party members/NPCs that fill this or that trope scattered over the quest-line for you to connect with in addition to that. But again, sheesh, it's 3 art works one a single page for now.

there are two kinds of idealists: The first always compares reality to how it could be and focuses on the shortcomings. The second does the same, but appreciates any change towards an ideal world. Belonging to the second group helps to avoid frustration and to be more accepted among the 'normal' people.

I'd drink to that.

Honestly, I probably have my hopes too high since I both like Kingmaker and most games Nival made over the years. Have most of them in CDs and on Steam. I'll be happy if it's as good as their better games, they always had a knack for good strategy and made one of the best, imho, turn based tactical games in the 00s. I also liked the overall art style they usually went for, HoMM5 was great and Allods had a fun style too. The problem I have - they haven't released a conventional RPG in more than a decade, but they do have experience.

My favorite part about "don't judge the book by its cover" arguments is when the game comes out and the cover ends up being pretty indicative the game.

But we don't have a cover. We have a few concept and promotion arts for a game, which is early in development. If this isn't jumping to conclusions - I don't know what is.

Also I am not a big supporter of token diversity. At least for me - it spoils immersion. Now if we ever get a game set in, say, Absalom, literally the center and melting pot of all of the inner sea, I'd find it weird there isn't more diversity. Also am pretty sure games like this allow you to play pretty much anyone you want.

Or... we can set it in Cheliax, a place know for it's whiteness, racism and devil worship... which, arguably, has the most interesting lore in the region, right after Varisia.

Then again, as I said, this is early info but people jump to conclusions (me included) and try to push some narratives and agendas.

a) there were twice as many men as women (just in the main party - add in the brigands and the ratio gets even further off) and b) literally everyone in the image is white or white-coded. It's jarring when you compare it to pretty much every other major piece of Pathfinder art. I mean, I'd...

I beg your pardon but the second artwork the have shows a female warrior, a dark-skinned male ranger, a male knight and a half-elf wizardy lady. First artwork has two females and we have no idea about the halfling... And I can name quite a few APs that had few people of color, simply beacuse the region doesn't have many of those. River Kingdoms, Galt, Brevoy... main nationalities for humans here are kellid, taldan, ulfen and varisians. A bit of Tien here and there because of proximity to the northern trade routs. Also pretty sure half-orcs can have any nationality. Centaurs of the region are heavily mongol inspired too.

Plus, not all iconics make sense in this region, and as devs and director told us - a lot is still in the works and discussions. The iconic brawler makes a lot of sense for me, Kess the "Bull" is from River Kingdoms. Quinn is from Galt, so he could be a possible choice for a character imho, but he's more fit for an urban campaign.

I feel you are reeeealy-reaaaaly trying to judge the game from cover art... and we don't even have a cover art yet. And you haven't experienced the book it's based on. I fell you are nitpicking something that doesn't qualify for nitpicking yet.

River kingdoms as a whole have a West-Central European feel to it, as a whole but the region in question only has 2 powers in play. Mivon, a meritocratic semi-eastern-european city state with an interesting system of power based on duels and martial prowess... and Pitax which is pretty much a kleptocratic state rulled by mafia-esque noble families, with most notable features being drugs, trade and art, with a distinct Italian feel.

My point was - there is a lot ob blanks that can be filled with any kinds of fun side quests that can scratch any itch.

Linear stories can be fun, games like these shine hte msot with an open world to explore and paint your own adventure. Also boosts their replayability.

So again... Western & Central Europe, which is not exactly a unique RPG setting.

More like central and eastern Europe. Name a CRPG with Slavic themes from the last 10 years that isn't Witcher.

Also, about the AP. As far as I understand it, why so may people like kingmaker and praise it, isn't for the story or the uniqueness. It wasn't so much a good AP because it was good the way Crimson Throne was, so much as it was a great sandbox with enough space to form it into anything you want, tweak what you want and add anything you want without breaking it. For a DM it was an a AP that you could make your own just by using it as a template, and if you read Kingmaker section on forums - that's exactly what many people did. War, intrigue, general murderhobo adventures, high stakes, west march... it has space for any kind of game. Play up the pending civil war in brevoy, the Mivon-Restov confrontation, the Pitax power game, the barbarians, the centaur invasion, the dragon-riddled mountains, the creepy cyclopean ruins and old ones mythos, the old taldor expansion, the crypts of first men in the region, the remnants of elven presence, the prevalence of the first world, the mendev crusaders that pass through, the galtian revolution seeding into new countries. There is plenty of space and hints for all of this in the AP by itself... One of few Paiso APs that give this freedom to the DM from the get go, and from what I read - devs are scouring the forums for ideas as we speak.

For one, what is this fixation with the River Kingdoms? IMO it's one of the least interesting parts of the setting.

For one it's not just River Kingdoms, it's Stolen Lands, right between the Slavic-esque Brevoy, the Barbaric Numeria and River Kingdoms. Also River kingdoms are very different from one another. Not to mention this is a good chance to flesh out a region which arguably gets the least love from paizo. Nethys knows when we will be getting a new book on Brevoy, not even mentioning poor, poor old Iobaria.

Real time with pause is great. Pillars of Eternity is one of the best games to come out the past few years, IMO, and if it is a similar RT combat like it then I'll be happy as a hippo. Divinity Original Sin's combat turns were fine and all, but it was a bit more of a timesink to get through combats.

Aye, if there's a system like in pillars that allows to fast forward or slow down to 0.5 speed, plus the active pause system, and maybe a visual representation of "virtual rounds" - then it's just Turn-based on crack.

Ok this has awesome potential, I just have to hope it has a console release otherwise it's going to really hurt my wallet.

Publisher and developer aren't huge and influential, and let us be fair, these types of games are a niche market compared to AAA companies and their titles... so I doubt there will be a console release, as it usually involves extra fees for dev kits and other licenses to the console makers, which is extra resources and time, no to mention development and porting. In other words, I think we'll see kingmaker on PS and XBox only if it's successful on PC and there will be a market for it on consoles.

Now, I do hope it will get to steam at least.

This is good. Nival made some of my fav games back in the day, and a lot of staff are Russian, so the Slavic feel of the setting won't be overlooked. Their portfolio is mostly strategy games with some RPG elements, though good - I am not sure how well they will translate their skill in into RPG.

Also I don't think Paizo guys can do a Slavic-themed survival and suffering Iobaria adventure the way I'd do it. Heck they pretty much forgot Iobaria exists. And if they do, heck, more love for Iobaria.

Been writing this up for a while now... 25+ pages of notes, encounter ideas, a player's guide, a bunch of new monsters and items. So far, notes cover most of first 3 "books" out of 5.

(working in progress)

Winter of Anarchy

Themes: survival, isolation, exploration, dark fantasy

Inspirations: History, Slavic Folklore, dark fantasy novels.

Location: Iobaria

Background

Long droughts, poor trade, due to war in Brevoy, as well as a series of long winters has pushed the population of northern Iobaria to extreme poverty, to the edge, beyond which is chaos and death. As a threat of another long winter looms, several dark figures put in motion a plan, that would plunge all of Iobaria into an age of cold, hunger and death, where they shall rule.

Summaries

Book 1: Buran's End (Levels 1-4)

Adventurers find themselves stranded in a small town of Buran's End, at the edge of wilderness, surrounded by harsh, unnatural weather. Paranoia, fear and despair sets in as monstrous humanoids and sabotage pushes the town to search for alternative means of survival.

Book 2: Winter's wife (Levels 4-7)

Adventurers are urged to explore infamous Finadar Forest, in search of a bound spirit, who may be connected to the mysterious weather. Their path and choices will be swayed by the secrets they uncover and new evil, bestired by ancient Omens coming into life.

Book 3: Feast of adders (Levels 7-10)

Old allies and friends will show their true faces as Adventurers fight a race against time and an army of savage marauders, led by mad cultists, to stop a ritual that can signal their doom.

Book 4: Sea of holly (Levels 10-13)

Signs and omens point the party towards an unsettling deal with ruinous powers, for a chance to strike against one of the orchestrator of current events, by entering a shattered demiplane, once a part of the First World.

Book 5: Secrets of Kask-Kirrulthar (Levels 13-16)

All plans revealed - adventurers learn they stalled the disaster for but a moment. The party has very little precious time to plan and prepare an assault on Kask-Kirrulthar, knowing very little of what waits them beyond the colossal walls of the greatest of Cyclopean watchtowers in the region. Faltering may push all Iobaria into a an endless Winter of Anarchy.

Now if we want to be objective... the world of Pathfinder is a powder keg of some impossible proportions, where, if we assume all modules and APs are canon, each 5-6 months some thing tries to conquer/destroy/pillage the the world, or at least a part of it. And if it wasn't for specific groups of social awkward murderhobos, the world would have been destroyed 5 times over.

I is my choice to believe - Aroden was killed by mythic level murderhobos for his loot.

I'm not interested in setting a precedent for being the go-to guy for doing end runs around FAQs that haven't yet been replied to. I get it that it's frustrating to have to wait or to endure the impression that the rules team is ignoring a FAQ or whatever, but I also ask you to understand that it's also frustrating for me at this end to see those questions languish. On top of that, it's frustrating when I do provide my answers only to see someone somewhere else use that answer as an official answer and then get PFS stuff all worked up and confused and then it ripples back to me when posters complain "Paizo doesn't have its house in order" and so on. Even if the answer I provided was the one that the design team would have provided, it causes too much headache and frustration all around. Especially for me. I'm not interested in having PFS players complain about me in that regard.

If you're asking for a home game, go with your GM's decision.

If you're asking for PFS, then my only real advice is "Don't play a summoner."

Thanks, there's no problem. It's nothing grand or too important.

Hello James!

Quick question, this was marked for FAQ long ago, but kinda never got anywhere, at least no my knowledge, at least I'd like your opinion on this.

APG and Unchained rules say eidolons "...cannot wear armor of any kind...", does this include shields?

Thanks in advance!

My 2 cents... did everyone know that Iobaria sounds almost like "f***-land" or "Land of f***ers" in Russian? If 1st letter was "Y" instead of "I", it would be uncanny...