I do have to disagree with khudzlin, though. yes, it's more important in a game design sense that the classes are balanced against each other
Not just against each other, but also against the challenges (monsters, traps, whatever) the characters face. There's no fun if things are too easy or too hard.
Yes, this could be done at a higher power level (it could also be done at a lower one).
Pounds are the same (there are 3 types of pounds, but only 1 is commonly used, so I'm assuming that one). You're probably thinking of pints (and gallons).
Or do it like Gary Gygax.
Hrothgar Rannúlfr wrote:
Also, would characters in game think in meters? What would be their in world reason for doing so? Feet, yards, miles, gallons, etc... seem like they'd be more natural, to me.
Characters would think in whatever units they grew up with (just like players), which would be neither metric nor US units, but Golarion-specific units (possibly ancestry-specific* or regional units). Using real-world units is a translation convention for the players' convenience (just like characters speaking in Common translates as players speaking their common language).
* After all, there's no reason for elves and gnomes to use the same units, absent a worldwide standardization effort.
The translated versions are in metric (and use the rough conversion @GRuzom described). That said, plenty of players still buy English versions even when a translated version is available for their language.
I've played a D&D campaign in English a dozen years ago, and the hardest part wasn't the foreign language (I'm French), but the unfamiliar units.
Also, the explanation in Create Water is necessary as written because US gallons and Imperial (UK) gallons aren't the same size (due to the UK redefining some units after the US gained independence), so confusion could arise between English speakers from different countries.
Rolling has never allowed higher stat caps than other stat generation methods. The rule about applying boosts to other stat is there to enforce the same limitation as on players who use the standard method, while still giving you options. You're asking for a free benefit by pretending you're being punished.
The probability of rolling an 18 on 4d6 drop lowest is about 1.6%. The probability of rolling 6 of them is a bit less than 1 in 50,000,000,000. You'll need a lot of gamers rolling a lot of characters for the law of large numbers to apply. And even then, a character with all 18s is already so busted it doesn't matter that you can't give it any boost.
As much as I love what you've made, I feel obligated to point out the boosts rule where if gained at same time, multiple boosts would have to go to different stats, so the three instances of Intelligence boosting from the free boosts wouldn't be legal. Probably doesn't change too much, though.
Yeah, you need to take that into account for ancestry and background boosts, too.
Free ancestry boost #2 (Human): 1d5 (skip the previously boosted ability)
It certainly can be abusive and even obstructive. "Why does your Rogue have two levels in Paladin?" "Cause saves." "But you're a thief." "A thief of Iomedae."
Use Unchained's fractional bonuses. They really cut the crap out of multiclass saves, whether they're over the top (combining good saves - like Reflex for a Rogue/Paladin) or absolutely tanked (combining bad saves). They also prevent tanking BAB when combining non full BAB classes.
Yeah, the correct formula for the variance of 1dn is (n²-1)/12, which gives 5/4 for 1d4 and 35/12 for 1d6.
One thing I would recommend is Pathfinder Unchained Fractional Base Bonuses. This prevents insane Save building (the best candidate I can think of for worrying about power gamers dipping), but in exchange, it hoses Base Attack Bonus less — on the one hand, you can’t get the starting +2 twice to the same Save, but on the other hand, 1/2 BAB really means 1/2 BAB and 3/4 BAB really means 3/4 BAB, and the fractions stack to make whole numbers (often accompanied by smaller remaining fractions).
You don't get the +2 twice, but you also don't get hosed with the fractional saves. With fractional base bonuses, a Fighter 2/Cleric 1 gets +3 FORT / +1 REF / +1 WILL instead of the +4 FORT / +0 REF / +0 WILL you get with the CRB. In short, it puts multi classed characters' saves and BAB in line with single classed characters'.
1) Power attack reduces her to-hit from 35% to 30% (a 17% decrease) [+1 BAB, +4 STR, +1 masterwork, -1 power attack], but increases her average damage (per non-critical hit) from 12.5 to 15.5 (a 24% increase) [+6 STR, +3 power attack, since a greataxe requires 2 hands]. Additionally, she can now hope to one-shot the monster without a crit (her max non-critical damage goes from 18 to 21) and is sure to one-shot it with a crit (her minimum critical damage goes from 14 to 20).
2) These questions need a clarification: how do you value rolls than can't be obtained in point-buy (3 to 6)?
Though I'd go with the point buy in both cases, because I believe 15 point buy is supposed to be equivalent to 4d6 drop lowest (though I've seen people argue that 20 point buy is closer).
David knott 242 wrote:
I like it.
Is it the case then thata spontaneous caster will need to learn spells at higher levels or can they upcast on the fly?
Apparently, spontaneous casters don't get to upcast.
Nathanael Love wrote:
Seems to me to be another way PF2 is turning into 5E in Golarian.
I'm sure there'll be plenty of differences between D&D5 and PF2... One of them being that pure Vancian doesn't exist in the former (prepared casters work similarly to the PF1 Arcanist). Another being a bigger gap between characters of different levels. Casters being toned down doesn't look like a big problem to me...
You can't get 1 on 2d6... Not to mention, you're skewing in favor of high scores compared to the old methods. Going from 2d6+6 stats to mods would give:
2-3 => 8-9 => -1
I wish they would scrap ability scores and just use mods (which mechanically they have). In this new version you could just roll 2D6 and end up with -1 up to +4. Then at levels 5, 10, 15, you could just add +1s to 4 mods. /claps dust off his hands
Rolling 2d6+6 will give you results between 8 and 18, true, but you'd still get odd scores half the time.
That sounds slow. I played Wrath of the Righteous (which I assume is one of the longest, seeing as it takes characters from level 1 to level 20/tier 10) on monthly 6- to 8-hour sessions and it only took us about 2 to 2.5 years (even though we skipped some months due to schedule incompatibilities). The GM knew the rules well and always prepared for the session (and we did too, since he always told us when we were going to gain a level or tier so we could advance out of the sessions).
A concealed Dominate might take four actions (and thus normally not allowed), but if you can split that across two rounds, you can potentially cast it in social situations where that extra round doesn’t hurt at all.
You're probably not counting time in rounds in such a situation anyway.
Gorum is far too chaotic and grim, a paladin worshipping him would need to get regular atonements, or risk falling, I assume thet the 'gods of war' mentioned in the paladin fluff means Iomedae, or the likes of Heironeous in non Golarion settings.
Since a paladin receives his powers from a deity, it certainly means that only a deity who accepts paladins would be a viable choice. A chaotic deity like Gorum (or even Cayden Cailean) probably wouldn't grant powers to a lawful character in the first place.
gustavo iglesias wrote:
There are d16s and d24s (not part of the standard set, but not as weird as d100s). The progression could go 1d8 -> 1d10 -> 1d12 -> 1d16 -> 1d20 -> 1d24 (the old progression was 1d8 -> 1d10 -> 2d6 -> 2d8 -> 3d6 -> 3d8, so it's not unreasonable). Though I doubt Paizo will do that. And flat negative modifiers on top of reduced STR scores make very small creatures not deal any damage at all.
Captain Morgan wrote:
Now I wonder how they will handle size, because the damage progression relied on multiple dice.
Also, I'd really like to see magical navigation require a skill check for success. Teleportation is a little too easy a means of transportation in the current edition of pathfinder. Why wouldn't you need to make a knowledge geography, local, or planes, to teleport?
That wouldn't slow wizards much, given they have all knowledge skills as class skills and a load of skill points thanks to their maxed INT. Other casters might have more trouble, but Knowledge (planes) is pretty useful for identifying outsiders.
Nah, sometimes just DR can make a fight nigh unwinnable, depending on party makeup. For instance, DR 5 at low levels when your party has no big single hit characters.
We had a fight against an enemy with flight, invisibility and DR at level 2. We're lucky that enemy failed every single save against my color sprays (and that we were able to track it around so I could aim those color sprays). I was out of spells after that fight (sorcerer with maxed CHA). If things hadn't gone so well, we'd have needed to come back with stuff like powder of apparition.
Yeah, that's what I'm wondering about: what you can do with TWF (keeping in mind that simply switching between weapons isn't TWF).
It appears that anyone can use a second weapon in their offhand, and freely choose between the two on each of their three actions.
It's already possible in PF1 with iteratives. TWF penalties only apply when you're making extra attacks over your BAB's baseline. No reason to change that (though I wonder how TWF will work in PF2).
Ellias Aubec wrote:
For those, the logical order would be:Psychic Power, Minor;
Psychic Power, Greater.
That is, put the feat in the order you have to take them. Those feats usually refer to the less powerful versions.
Ah, so you make the cones 60° instead of 90°.
gustavo iglesias wrote:
You swapped the percentages, though I agree wholeheartedly with the "full attack" perspective, because the measure of effectiveness is damage per round (DPR), not damage per attack.
It's not just a trick of the mind. 1d8+6 averages to 10.5, so DR 5 is about half of it; 1d6+3 averages to 6.5, so DR 5 is about 3/4 of it (also, DR 5 can reduce the latter to 0, but never the former). Also, if you normally deal the same total damage across more attacks, DR will reduce your damage more, since it's applied separately to each hit.
I think changing it to "complication" would cause more confusion than it would resolve. As an abbreviation "comp" is most commonly used to mean "complimentary", and more colloquially "computer". So you're replacing a word that's potentially confusing with a word that is at least equally capable of confusion.
In French, we use "comp" for "compétence" (meaning "skill"). And "complication" would likely stay the same, so it's guaranteed to create confusion.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
My strength 7 sorcerer spent low levels leading a horse called Handy Haversack. The only reason he did that was because of encumbrance and yet it was memorable and added to the game. At higher level he bought an actual handy haversack and routinely relied on other people in the party to cart around the treasure.
Got a horse as well, as a gift from an NPC (a rich and generous one, since he gave one to each party member). I certainly plan to rely on the other party member to lug around the treasure, though a haversack will certainly come in handy.
gustavo iglesias wrote:
I'm currently playing a Sorcerer with STR 7. I make sure I don't exceed my light load by cutting down on what I carry (it helps that I don't wear armor and that I don't need a spell component pouch). The stronger party members can carry the loot (it's a complete reversal compared to my previous character, a Barbarian who was eventually strong carry the whole party and our gear without breaking a sweat).