Liegence's page

Organized Play Member. 361 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.

1 to 50 of 108 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:
Liegence wrote:
Wheldrake wrote:

No human sacrifices to an evil god? No cannibalism? No gratuitous infliction of suffering on helpless kitten-analogues?

Can't be *that* evil.

She keeps a sentient creature gifted to her as property magically bound to a talisman that she proudly displays, and considers that saving her?

Maybe I misread but that sounds pretty egregious to me.

And I take it you're one of those folks who thinks we should abolish prisons too?

Some people are unquestionably evil and need to be locked up for the safety of themselves and others. This scenario is really just an extension of that. In any case, what is she to do? Smashing the amulet would just kill the prisoner. Using a freedom ritual would be dedicating resources towards releasing a most dangerous evil upon the world. Only the most naive fool would ever consider condoning such an action.

She displays it not as a matter of pride, but as a means of personal protection, much like how some prisoners get prison tattoos for the same purpose.

What? No. Why would you think that?

Your description did not indicate she was a warden of any kind. She traded an object of power to possess a person through negotiation with that persons clearly evil mother. This was not described as a crime and punishment event! She isn’t a caretaker, she holds her against her will and by her own judgment for what is only described as personal reasons. If there’s more to it I don’t see it in the provided background.

Under what jurisdiction is she an apt warden - her own? By what right, other than she traded a sphere of annihilation for, does she hold jurisdiction over this persons fate? What social violation warranted the incarceration, apart from suicide and heir to a probably evil house? Was she found guilty and judged by her peers, or does the Pc have sole authority to judge, jury and imprisonment?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wheldrake wrote:

No human sacrifices to an evil god? No cannibalism? No gratuitous infliction of suffering on helpless kitten-analogues?

Can't be *that* evil.

She keeps a sentient creature gifted to her as property magically bound to a talisman that she proudly displays, and considers that saving her?

Maybe I misread but that sounds pretty egregious to me.

13 people marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
Ventnor wrote:
In response to one of the response videos, the Taking20 guy unironically tweeted the "destroy them with facts and logic" meme.
It's wild to me that a guy can complain about his group getting continuously TPK'd while also being absolutely certain that they have full mastery of the system

Especially when he insists his Druid player was only taking the optimal path by always wild shaping into specifically a T-Rex... did he perhaps try casting other spells? This is a full caster and going Dino does limit your options.

19 people marked this as a favorite.

Complete opposite experience tbh. Playing three games a week, I’m seeing a huge diversity of character types, class progression and even turn-by-turn combat actions and variance.

To say a system (any system really) is not a system for 1st person narrative is honestly a ridiculous proposition. Also not sure why any content producer would feel the need to actively disassociate with a product in their genre, and not the first time for this guy (essentially wrote a breakup letter with roll20 as well)

It’s honestly just weird - I guess he’s just dropping flashy tag line for views.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You can’t use Dex to modify maneuvers with finesse weapons? Aw man. That makes the Witch prehensile hair even worse - as if it wasn’t basically a waste already. At least with Dex as maneuver I could use it to trip with some success in a bind, and Dex was still a relevant stat.

So wait you can’t even Disarm with a Rapier using Dex? How does that make sense at all?

2 people marked this as a favorite.
YawarFiesta wrote:

Definitely Standard DCs by level, they follow an unintuitive progression and are required for Recall Knowledge checks.


If I recall correctly, standard DC is 14+level +1 for every 3 levels. So for example, level 16 standard DC is 14+16+5 (1 for 3rd, 6th, 9th, 12th and 15th)

Once you figure the formula out it’s easy to calc on the fly without the chart. Hope that helps!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I very much disagree that Warpriests fall off at higher levels. They remain a very strong class at any level; yes, you won’t be dealing as much melee damage in combat as a straight martial, but you bring so much to the table. If you’re built well, you can very well foundation the whole party.

But, I digress as this is a cloistered Cleric to be discussed. Forbidding Ward, Bless/Bane, Guidance, Protection are all good starter buffs. You don’t want to go too deep in sustains, though. 2nd is kind of weird because it doesn’t have many buffs but does have some restorative powers; Dispel Magic is generally a pretty safe slot. At third Heightened Disrupting Weapons can be excellent if you know you’re up against undead. Circle of Prot (uncommon) is a pretty reliable AoE AC boost - both of those are touch an ally and then they move in and the spell stays with them so not putting you in the front. Heroism gets put down a lot but I still like it if you’re Bardless - 10 minutes may cover multiple combats, it’s ups quite a few abilities (attack, saves, perception = initiative) and you can typically land it before combat starts. At 4th plus the buffs become more evident with like Air Walk, Freedom of Movement, Death Ward etc

Check your deity bonus spells too some give solid spells like Haste. If he’s ranged he probably wants Bane over Bless (also tip because people tend to miss this - you do not have to sustain Bless or Bane to keep it up).

I should add that until your martials get striking runes, magic weapon is probably the best buff spell

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Honest question - where is the rule that you roll each round? Just couldn’t find it.

6 people marked this as a favorite.

The irony here is that you're expressing frustration with what are essentially the three best full casters in the game...

If you expect your Bard to be as good as a fighter in combat, your expectations are too high. It would be completely imbalanced for a full caster to be a martial equivalent - and I know that's the case b/c I played PF1.

The other problem here is that you are probably facing threats too high. Fighting a boss should be like once a story arc, and by the very rules of the game it should be an encounter that you are not only fully prepared for, but that you know is a boss encounter and are encouraged to throw everything you have at the enemy. The average combat in PF2 is a number of enemies equivalent to the party at CR -2.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The most obvious use of Shove is when if it succeeds it outright wins the battle, as in off a cliff, etc.

Shove can be used defensively to push back an enemy that threatens AoO particularly if the threatened character is like a Wizard or other that is squishy and needs to manipulate. If you aren’t in range to kill it you can play defense.

Lastly, getting Shoved forces a grapples end. That might matter more than raw damage in the moment. Actually a few games back I shoved a vampire off our Bard and then slapped it with a ranged heal. Turned out to be pretty clutch.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

One thing I like about the power scale is that system manages to keep combat at about the same pace because damage scales so high and bonuses to hit don’t make it a miss-fest. Even at high levels combat can be quick, deadly - and well gritty.

One problem I have with bounded accuracy systems is that high levels just pile on a ton of hit points. Even if ability to hit is consistent, you have to hit much much more. And while casters can get potentially combat ending one save and done spells, martials get stuck in a quagmire of having to hit more and more.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

From my perspective, I do note that there are currently no item bonuses to spell attacks or saves. If you truly feel spellcasters are underpowered, you could always homebrew an item bonus as an easy non-disruptive way to gauge the impact on power. Easier than re-inventing the wheel and trying to teach it to all players

1 person marked this as a favorite.
SuperBidi wrote:
Liegence wrote:

“Conditions are persistent. Whenever you’re affected by a condition, its effects last until the condition’s stated duration ends, the condition is removed, or terms dictated in the condition itself cause it to end.“

Can’t find any reason why the Frightened condition would end immediately upon choosing not to sustain the spell.

If you want, you look for Dirge of Doom duration and you have pages of endless debate to fuel your curiosity.

Don’t see the need since the RAW here seems so clear...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hostile Actions
Source Core Rulebook pg. 305 1.1
Sometimes spell effects prevent a target from using hostile actions, or the spell ends if a creature uses any hostile actions. A hostile action is one that can harm or damage another creature, whether directly or indirectly, but not one that a creature is unaware could cause harm. For instance, lobbing a fireball into a crowd would be a hostile action, but opening a door and accidentally freeing a horrible monster would not be. The GM is the final arbitrator of what constitutes a hostile action.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, but Triple Shot is -4 to each attack, or -2 in the stance (which is two feats and an action to take stance). This is no penalty to any attack.

Also, I know this generally falls under “too good” but worth noting, the action only states Strike. A strike is from either a melee or ranged weapon - there’s no requirement that the strikes are melee RAW. So as written, compared to triple shot, this is stride and make three strikes without any MAP, and all movement doesn’t provoke reactions

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am definitely not saying it’s three full strides, just that it allows move/attack/move, etc. I realize it does not provide a bonus to movement. But in PF2, moving even 5ft is an action. With the ability to ignore reactions, it is more like step, attack, step etc except those steps could be more than 5’ each

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The best is when you’re in a group with other devotees - I’ve even had other players have their PCs sing hymns with me in games past.

And I’m not a religious person - I just play one in a game. But there’s something incredibly fun about screaming “For X god!!” and it’s even better in PF2E because that’s how I demoralize in combat - a shouting, zealous nemesis bringing doom as the hand of a deity!

Also really enjoy the character development - growing with your other PCs in or out of faith, converting the repentant, inspiring the faithless, and weighing your own actions against that which you serve.

And ofc, when I role play I try as best as I can to fit into a role that’s not me.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bon Mot being the obvious one.

I personally think the Catfolk and Kobold both push the strength of ancestries, but not enough play experience yet. And it’s not like they’re way overbalanced they just seem a bit overturned compared to what ancestries typically get

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Draco18s wrote:
The Gleeful Grognard wrote:
The familiar is also a part of what differentiates the witch from the bard (along side prepared casting), not a direct combat option for the most part, but worth mentioning none the less as it can have a large impact on how events proceed in games.
"Familiars" as a mechanic almost don't exist. They barely existed in PF1 and in PF2 they squished them all together into a formless blob, removed individual animal bonuses, gave a few "pick whatever" options that are mostly junk, and said "oh if you want your animal to be specific again you have to pay for it. Ah I see you like bats, you're now permanently locked into flying and darkvision. Oh that was all the perk points you had? Sorry, too bad."

To be fair - non-Improved families in PF1 barely existed. There are some absolutely broken AF improved familiars in PF1.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You cannot. You have to use spell slots to power a staff, and you can’t use a staff powered by anyone else.

Innate spells do not come from spell slots.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I guess I’ll just vent here on my latest Balance issue: the Witch.

Am I just missing something? This class is basically a worse Bard. Imagine being a Bard, but having less HP, no armor prof, and instead of your abilities affectIng a wide area and possibly all allies or all enemies (with no save for dirge even), they affect one target at a time and enemies get a save, and the way Hexes work you can’t use them again on the same target. And most of them don’t heighten. But hey at least you can take three feats to give your familiar six extra abilities if you’re into that...?

Hate to vent, but this was my favorite PF1 class. It seems explicitly worse than a Wizard - please tell me what I’m missing here.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

“Casters” is too general. I would not consider Druids or Clerics to be weak by any stretch.

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Just wanted to add another thought - do people really find dominating encounters, crushing enemies with OP abilities, winning outright on a mobs failed save, etc to be heroic?

When I think of heroic, I think of allies in peril, lives on the line, fighting through doom close to death, choosing to fight to the end instead of leaving a man behind. Those kind of nail-biters where there is resolve, or regroup rally, a clutch tide-turner, facing death and overcoming - that feels heroic to me.

Moving into next dungeon room and winning an encounter outright with a single CC spell, or downing the boss with a full attack or two, or winning by BBEG failing a 40-60% chance save or suck... I don’t see how that feels heroic, y’know?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Liegence wrote:
In PF1 though, allowing players universal access to the Trap Finder trait was the most fun =P

That was largely because (and this is I suspect the reason that trait existed to begin with) in PF1 the rogue class was kind of a bummer compared to other options.

We now live in a world where Rogues are *awesome* so that's not necessary.

Agree! Rogues are great!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

“ Instead of taking persistent damage immediately, you take it at the end of each of your turns as long as you have the condition, rolling any damage dice anew each time.“

Reroll each time RAW

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

2E's 3-action system speeds up play dramatically and is in nearly every way the better system.

About the only thing I miss is being able to change weapon grips or drop prone as a free action.

Salamileg wrote:
One small but noticable about 2e's action system that makes combat run very smoothly. I never have to ask someone if their turn is over. It's a small time saver, but it really adds up over time.
My GM will hold the game up for 5 minutes if thats how long it takes you to say "My turn is over" or some equivalent. *sigh*

I had this problem with the latest edition of the world’s oldest RPG, mostly due to the fact that you could break up movement. They would move and do a thing ... there’s a long pause... “are you done?” “Oh no - I use my bonus action”. Cool, that resolves... long pause... “are you done?” “Oh wait <makes small movement adjustment> done!” Every freakin turn it seems like. I had to expressly require players to say “End Turn”, because more often than not if I assumed they were done they’d pull some kind of bonus, free, interact or movement out of seemingly nowhere like I should’ve expected it.

That’s all to say, this is a very valid point :)

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ubertron_X wrote:
NECR0G1ANT wrote:
Liegence wrote:
1) 10 Dex and Champion proficiencies suggest you want to wear full plate, but just a heads up - you lack the Strength to wear it without penalty. So you’ll have armor penalties and -10 speed. And you may not even have the bulk to carry it all, especially if you want to use a shield. Hefty Hauler is basically a must. You won’t be out of armor penalties till at least 10th level.

I had originally plnned to go full plate at level 2 and just eat the penalties until level 10, when I hit STR 18, but now I’m thinking Chain Mail until level 10. That will decrease the ACP penalties, keep the Speed penalty to -5 and hopefully avoid Bulk issues altogether.

Thanks for the great comment, btw!

My Warpriest also started with STR14, is using a Breastplate since level 5 and will also consider upgrading to Full Plate at level 10.

Two comments:

1) Use the Breastplate over the Chain Mail unless you don't mind the noisy trait.

2) Starting with STR14 your max strength will be 20 only at level 20. If you ever plan to use a Fortification Rune mind that this will up the strength requirement for any medium and heavy armor by 2.

So Breastplate will go 16 => 18 and Full Plate will go 18 => 20.

This means if you are using Full Plate and Rune you can only escape the armor penalties at level 20.

Which means that you carefully need to consider if the 1 AC you gain via Full Plate is really worth it in comparision to a Rune equipped Breastplate (which will also require DEX12 of course).

One point of AC is 5% less hit and 5% less crit. Fortification is 20% less crit and Fortification, Greater is 35% less crit.

At high level, couldn’t you offset that at item level 12 with Mithral?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Sarenrae is probably your best option. But some observations if I may:

1) 10 Dex and Champion proficiencies suggest you want to wear full plate, but just a heads up - you lack the Strength to wear it without penalty. So you’ll have armor penalties and -10 speed. And you may not even have the bulk to carry it all, especially if you want to use a shield. Hefty Hauler is basically a must. You won’t be out of armor penalties till at least 10th level.

2) 14 Con and 14 Cha versus 12 Con and 16 Cha... I don’t think it’s even close. Getting an extra divine font cast will payoff more than a + to Con. Divine Font is what makes Clerics really really good

3) Continual Recovery is on par or maybe even better than Lay on Hands out of combat - just something to consider. Continual Recovery + Ward Medic is a really strong short rest combo for healing. Lay on Hands does shine in combat for the fact that it’s one action, doesn’t require manipulate, and gives AC bonus, but Heal is where the true healing throughput in combat comes from. LoH is really solid as a self heal, but it’s not worth a dedication unless you’re getting more use out of the dedication

4) Heads up - Champion Resilience is kinda hard to layer into a Cleric dedication; you dedicate at 2, you’ll want LoH at 4, you’ll want Divine ally or reaction by 6, and then ranged reprisal or a bonus focus spell, etc. if you think you’re going be tanky in combat, I will advise you that your poor Fort, low HP and not getting expert armor until 14th is going to be a big problem.

Just some thoughts from someone who plays a lot of Clerics. Hope that helps - not trying to discourage you, just pointing out some things you will come to realize but maybe haven’t considered

If you wanted to go Warpriest with some Champion action, Ragathiel is SSS tier.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ubertron_X wrote:
Liegence wrote:
If Champions reaction only applied at point of trigger, what you say would be true. But it doesn’t - it actually explicitly states the opposite - it applies to “all damage” from the triggering attack.

The thing is, imho persistent damage is not part of the triggering damage because it does not occur at the same instance as the triggering damage.

So if you get hit by an attack that deals 10 acid damage now and that attack also inflicts the condition persistent acid damage d6 that very d6 acid damage are not part of the triggering damage because they only happen at a later time.

How can damage that has not happened yet be part of the triggering damage?

Liegence wrote:
Denying resistance against the persistent damage is in direct opposition of the RAW text: “Immunities, resistances, and weaknesses all apply to persistent damage. If an effect deals initial damage in addition to persistent damage, apply immunities, resistances, and weaknesses separately to the initial damage and to the persistent damage.“

Nobody is denying resistence against persistant damage. If you cast Resistance (Acid) as per the spell on yourself you will receive 5 damage less from any initial acid damage and 5 damage less from any persistent acid damage.

However as per the above line of reasoning at the time the persistent damage is happening any resistance granted from Champion's reaction is long gone.

And my question is - where does it actually say that in the book? Because from what I can tell, it doesn’t. In fact, it seems to clearly state the opposite.

Acid Arrow says you do the persistent damage. The acid damage is x damage + x persistent damage, to which the sidebar seems to explain quite clearly that for damage with both initial damage and persistent damage resistance is applied to both the initial damage and the persistent damage. That’s what the words in the book say!

So if conditions are what do the damage, show me where it says that, because it clear as day says in acid arrow that you do the persistent damage.

I am not here for RAI. Cite the text.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:
Liegence wrote:
I actually just noticed per the rules if you apply resistance on the initial attack the resistance applies to the persistent damage as well... that’s actually really solid. Am I reading that right?
No. It applies only against the triggering damage. Not against later damage.

Here is the RAW:

“Immunities, Resistances, and Weaknesses
Immunities, resistances, and weaknesses all apply to persistent damage. If an effect deals initial damage in addition to persistent damage, apply immunities, resistances, and weaknesses separately to the initial damage and to the persistent damage. Usually, if an effect negates the initial damage, it also negates the persistent damage, such as with a slashing weapon that also deals persistent bleed damage because it cut you. The GM might rule otherwise in some situations.”

“You protect your ally and strike your foe. The ally gains resistance to all damage against the triggering damage equal to 2 + your level.”

Again, no timeframe. It says you get resistance against to all damage against the triggering damage. RAW states if you resist initial damage you apply resistance separately to persistent damage and if you negate damage it negates persistent damage.

Are we saying now that persistent damage from an acid arrow is no included in all damage from the acid arrow?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Woods wrote:

As we go down this rabbit hole, let's dig a little deeper, shall we?

Does damage caused by poison that was inflicted by an enemy, (say, from a poisoned dagger) then trigger it? It's still an effect inflicted by an enemy.

If with poison, how about Disease inflicted? Plenty of those come from things like Giant Rats etc

I’m not interested in going down the “is a dead creature an enemy” question, but it’s not exactly an invalid point. Back to the topic at hand, though... as you dig deeper, I’m not actually sure you’re making unrealistic or absurd scenarios. If you can channel the power of your Deity to abate the damage on a nearby ally who is being injured (taking damage by rule) then why is it absurd that you wouldn’t have this power if the damage was poison?

If the enemies weapon deals non-persistent poison damage, I think it’s absolutely clear you can use your reaction to give poison resistance.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

TBH, the “not showing up” issue is any RPG. I find it to be more disruptive the more role play intensive the game is, and nothing to do with the difficulty of the encounters. Encounters are easy to change on the fly (see post above), but story cohesion and realism is incredibly difficult to change in narrative-focused games.

That being said, I think this might be the easiest edition of Dungeonesque RPG style to adjust on the fly that I’ve ever played. It’s mechanically simple to alter encounters to meet a modified XP budget.

Also, if you’re playing on roll20, using an absent players character sheet either as GM or share it with another player to roll - also very easy. I’m not sure why you feel like you need NPCs...?

Regardless, I can’t see how the issue with players not showing or how it was handled is a PF2 specific issue.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

With the weapon and the runes, I think it’s clear that this is a very specific scenario. The PC custom built a very expensive weapon, and is a level 18 ranger, and can only perform this as a three-action in the round (it’s the only thing he does)

In roll20, it is not difficult at all to write in your additional damage. In almost any scenario at 18+, the Most likely effect of the resistance is just ignore the dice roll from the resisted element which is separately listed. This doesn’t require a macro - should take about less than a minute to setup on the character sheet as is.

Also this kind of complexity is prevalent in high level games in just about any setting. I find PF2E does a good job to mitigate these issues, but it can still exist.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

As someone who routinely juggles a party from 4-7 players, I have a suggestion. Instead of writing an encounter for X players, and hoping that’s who comes, what you can do (and is recommended in the book) is writing the encounter for the core 4 players, and then each additional player adds XP to the Budget. It doesnt change the encounter XP, just the budget.

For example, a moderate encounter gives 80xp. Regardless of the number of players, it will give 80xp. The core encounter will be two even level PL creatures. Now each additional player adds 20xp to the budget, but that should relate to additional creatures per additional player. So for each player beyond 4, you have 2 PL-4’s or an additional PL-2. It could be a relevant creature or a trap. Alternatively, you can increase the budget by applying the elite template to a creature for an additional player. Same encounter above, except you get 6 players instead of 4 - they’re now the same monster but each is elite. xp remains 80 as the encounter is still moderate. Simple enough :)

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I’ve never played one, but I have GM’d multiple groups with Wizards and I have to say they’re fairly useful. If you put them side-by-side against a Fighter in combat against a solo creature with no real exploitable weakness, you will do less damage and contribute less if you just go by the numbers. But where a wizard thrives, it does extremely well - mostly in AoEing mobs of lesser foes. Fighters just can’t do that well - they want to put damage on the big bad, and spending action after action moving and chopping lesser foes consumes turns. Wizards deal with lesser for mobs very efficiently. Out of combat, Wizards generally provide far more utility - to discredit that in favor of a combat-only comparison isn’t fair IMHO.

All that being said, I think the Druid is just a better class overall than Wizard. The focus spells for Druid are among the best and they can start with two focus points, and primal has all the feel good evocations: fireball? Check. Chain Lightning? Sure! We’re good here. Higher HP, weapon/armor usage out of the box, Electric Arc cantrip, and options like Animal Companion (level-by-level the best companions). Wisdom is arguably a better prime stat in PF2E, and skill wise they get a bonus base skill over wizards. Access to all spells automatically - no need to find or buy spells, no gp investment no spellbook. Spell casting proficiency on par. Honestly, it doesn’t even feel close. The Druid in the game I run is an absolute powerhouse, and her Bird companion is literally one of the best melee combatants.

Have yet to play or see a Sorceror played :(

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I did find this to be a big problem in 5E, but not so much in PF2. Allowing everyone to roll anything for funsies is how 5E was written. Required trained or higher proficiency does an excellent job of gating most of the common skill dogpiling. Aid versus multiple rolls generally favors aiding by less practiced team members when the DC is an unknown.

If players want to skill dogpile, rolling as a secret check then reveal what each character learns based on their roll and proficiency. Can then lead to some “well who got it right” moments which are always fun. A couple of those and they may just realize deferring to the highest proficiency with others attempting an aid is probably the best bet

8 people marked this as a favorite.

I love Delay. Having played a lot of 5E before PF2, I am more than happy it is finally back.

As for the effort it takes to track initiative with delay, if you’re using a magnet board or a virtual initiative counter it’s as easy as drag and drop - never felt like delay was an issue.

Ready an action though? Tracking that is always a drag IMHO.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

You can not shield block and still get pretty nice benefits out of the magic shields - let’s look:

1) Arrow-catching Shield: ok, this one is clearly lackluster for an item level 11. If 1d8 arrows with hunt prey go towards the intended target, you can pull them to you and they lose hunt prey damage and you’ll likely absorb the arrow or take small shield damage. Not great, for sure
2) Dragonslayers Shield: If you’re not blocking with it, you still get +2 AC and reflex saves (all AoE) and all dragon frightful presence saves. Shield block against a dragon of the type (or other element attack of that type) raises hardness to 18 which is significantly higher than a sturdy shield. It does what it says it does if you’re bringing it to a fight against the appropriate element. Not bad for level 9, could be made to order during planning for a pretty substantial advantage
3) Floating shield: 1 action get free raise a shield for a minute and frees up a hand. You can’t shield block when it’s used for its intended purpose so it’s BT is moot anyway
4) Force Shield: like number 3, the primary ability is using it for the +2 AC and 5 physical resist for a minute. That’s 3 less than using a reaction for 1 block, but doesn’t take a reaction and applies to all incoming physical attacks. Clearly, shield block is not the primary function. Pretty solid for item for level 9 tbh
5) Force Warden: Useful only against low level mooks. Lackluster, but it’s a free action 2d6 to anyone that can block. Could get more mileage as a divine ally
6) Indestructible Shield: High item level, but clearly this shield is not the subject of these complaints. Super high item level though.
7) Lion’s Shield: as an item level 6, it’s not bad . The real advantage is the attack you get when you raise a shield. If you want to preserve this action economy, you’re not going to break it but it’s still there if you want to shrug a glancing blow. Free attack on raise a shield is pretty solid; bonus actions in the PF2E economy are really strong.
8) Reflecting Shield: clearly you’re not blocking with this, you’re turning spells with it.
9) Spellguard Shield: same as 8, you’re in for the +2 saves. Another pretty solid shield just to raise - we can agree +2 save versus spells is pretty good at item level 6 right?
10) Spined Shield: so long as it has one spine it can attack, which isn’t strong. The shield can defend an alpha strike of up to 36 damage which is actually pretty nice - that would likely prevent death which is a worse outcome. Think of it as 5 talismans that reduce damage 6 each (but effectively 12 a pop because it combines hardness) and it really gives you some nice survivability. Can be good with a crafter and more useful if you get downtime. It’s item level 7 and it seems balanced around that level.
11) Sturdy Shield: people seem to agree this is pretty balanced

Honestly, going through them one by one it seems to me that a fair few are clearly not intended to be for blocking and have solid utility outside of just that function.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

While ideally that’s true, even a cursory review of real historic leaders will quickly reveal that’s just not the case... inept leaders abound. Like chronically inept leaders put on their respective thrones for reasons that have nothing to do with their ability, strength, intelligence or charisma.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Glad to hear, OP!

I’ve had a few sessions, but I kick off my PF2 campaign tomorrow and I’m anxious about it. We are transitioning from a very well liked 5E game, and I have a handful of players that are going to be super critical (they even made me promise to go back if they’re, subjectively, not having fun - or they wouldn’t play). I’m hoping everything goes off without a hitch, everyone adapts to the rules quickly and easily and the system plays smoothly and posts like this give me confidence.

I’m prepped and ready to go - hoping this works out well!

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Without getting too deep into politics and ... uhhh ... ability... suffice to say certain powerful world leaders are not the smartest, or the best fighters y’know?

Why would we think levels and magic would change that?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Found a nifty combo: Dread Striker Rogue + Dirge of Doom. Unless your opponent is beyond 30ft or immune to fear, enchantment, emotion or precision damage every strike will be a sneak attack. Plus the benefit of enemies at -1 to checks

Comes online late, but rogues already get a lot out of Charisma and all the other discussed benefits are great as well.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think of it more as 9 degrees of failure before crit failure, and 9 degrees of success before crit success BUT you also win ties. 9 + you win ties seems like it’s favorable, not unfavorable (really depends who’s rolling).

1 person marked this as a favorite.

As a Mondo main in Battle Arena Toshinden, I approve of monks with spears.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It bothered me at first, but experience tells me it’s needed. It’s better fantasy than infinite wand pokes, and stretches out rest periods where others are contributing with Medicine, etc. Plus, having a tense hour period of watchful rest and wound tending plays better than having to take 8 hour breaks IMHO.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The weird thing to me about Chirugeon is that a Champion with lay on hands is just a flat better downtime healer - over the course of an hour, a Champion can heal 36, which would be a significant number of infusion uses to match. And those lesser healing elixirs don’t really heal enough to be super useful in combat outside of the guaranteed stabilize. What are you really getting?

And comparing healing elixirs to a cleric - like not even close. Heal, especially at higher levels, is really strong for Clerics

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If there’s one saving grace to Alchemists, it’s that you can make poisons and apply them to the melee weapons of PCs that can actually function in melee. As far as I can tell, there is nothing that can undo applied infused poisons outside of 24 hours, daily prep, or getting a crit fail on an attack - otherwise it should go off. It’s an advance on the action economy, and poisons can be quite nasty.

The irony is not lost to me that there is no poison research field, even though passing out the poison may be your best utility

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Pg 157 under Stance “you can only be in a stance in encounter mode”. They end at the end of encounter mode. It definitely hurts Mountains Stance’s utility.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

The whole class needs repair, but the mutagenist is really suffering. I’m glad I’m not the only person that noticed that the research field basically gives you nothing.

The chirurgeon is pretty bad too IMHO. Your research is basically Int to Medicine at the price of two skills for one and with limitations.

It’s like the common theme of the class is that you get less than everybody else, and if you get an ability or feat that puts you on par (or just close to it) there’s a penalty.

It’s the only class (other than Warpriest Cleric) that gets nothing at Legendary.

It can’t even use the normal function of craft alchemy better than anyone else, except by a feat that just doubles your potential batch size (at no price discount).

I think there’s some merit to the bomber, but even at its optimal it feels like a poor version of a blast focused caster

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Agree to disagree. I personally find roleplay to be the most important aspect of tabletop role playing games. If a player is unhappy with their build, I will totally help them, but if they want to build something less than optimal for character reasons that’s totally acceptable as well.

You cannot win the game. The outcomes, both positive and negative, are part of the story. Besting every challenge can be as unfun as never winning. Characters can be weak or strong, someone can be Legolas and another player can be Samwise - their contributions to combat are not an indicator of entertainment value to all players.

However, when you demean other players and criticize them for not building meta or making their own design choices based on something other than the mathematically optimal choice - that, to me as a GM, is a problem.

Any character with a comparative -2 to his peers in whatever stay in the Pathfinder 2E RPG is still 100% absolutely completely viable, valid, and can be equally entertaining to play with either as a player or his ally. If you suggest otherwise - in generalities - I humbly disagree.

1 to 50 of 108 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>