LiquidLeoc's page

This has been an awesome ride for me. My group hasn't finished yet and I am about to start them part 6 but we will most likely finish before end of December.

The whole process has been really engaging and seeing both appreciation and the engagement of how things developed has me really hopeful. Even the wizard in our party who was the most pessimistic has turned a bit around.

As someone whose first ever tabletop was pathfinder I wish this becomes a sucess and an awesome product everyone can enjoy.

I thoughts the update was coming next Monday not today, good to know I was wrong.

Dante Doom wrote:

With this the difference between someone legendary and untrained is gonna be around 10 points.

If you keep the same DC table you shouldn't need soo many items to keep succeeding in your tasks.

I don't like this proposal.

The cool thing about PF2 is a person who's trained in a skill, without items, and a small bonus in the ability score has a chance to succeed against a specialist (albeit a small one)

So let's look at a level 15 character with legendary, a 23 in the ability (21 with a +2 item) score and a +2 skill item.

Vs a character with trained, a 14 in the ability score and no skill item.

Under the current:

Character 1: +26 (15+3+6+2)
Character 2: +17 (15+0+2+0)

Sure, character 2 isn't likely to beat character 1, but it can happen if character 1 rolls a 9 (35) and character 2 rolls a 19 (36)

Under your proposal:

Character 1: +29 (15+6+6+2)
Character 2: +17 (15+0+2+0)

It is still possible, but it's even more unlikely, Character 1 has to roll a 6, while character 2 has to roll a 19 still.

It gets worse - Under the current system a person untrained still has a chance even with a +0 ability score bonus.

+11 (15-4+0+0) vs +26

Requiring the +26 to roll a 2 (28), and the +11 to roll an 18 (29)

Under your proposed system?

+11 vs +29?

If the +29 rolls a 2 (31) the only chance of success is if the +11 rolls a natural 20... To tie them.

Specifically Paizo wants to avoid the possibility for a player to have no chance aside from a freak crit.

I think that should be the main point.

A legendary sneaking rogue shouldn't be able to be seen by your average threat. He should be winning it par freak accident.
When you reach legendary in such things you should only be found with sucess by someone of equal legendary tracking status. With master having some chance at it.

oof that was big, finished the first survey will do the rest tommorow and tell me group to do them as well.

For the record about the comment above me I do not think they are trying to be 5th DnD, I do not feel the playtest plays at all like it.

I do think proficiencies should become more meaningful by a significant margin over the level progression(+2/+4/+6 which would reduce mandatory item need) and perception should have a way to be raised to at least master by all classes. A wizard can be very attentive in character and I do not see why this is locked.

I kinda agree with john about the archetyping/multiclasssing but I also like the new system, they just need to be a little stronger, Alternativly I think it might be a good idea if you could take the dedication with a class feat but the rest with a general feat, this way it would free up a lot of options without neccessarly making them too overpowered. I might be wrong here though.(It might make other general feats obsolete? maybe? possibly.)

@Jason

Magic needs love :( It really saddens me as a GM to see all of my table having fun except for the wizard who feels meh and just there to finish doomsday and help with the playtest surveys, he would have left but says he wants to stay in order to help. Imo they need more spell slots preferably from the specilisation school to make the choice more meaningful.

LiquidLeoc wrote:

Us Europeans though :(
Currently 1am

That was meant to be sarcastic, it's indeed already 12.00 a.m. where I live.

Oh oops xD

Terrordactyl wrote:

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Soon...

Will this be within the hour or should I just check on it tomorrow morning?

I'm pretty sure "Soon" actually means: "We're hoping it be within the next hour but have no idea if it's not going to be within the next week instead". :P

In short, no one knows, could be in a few minutes, could be tomorrow.
It's not like it's already midnight here anyway, I can wait a few more hours. ^^

Us Europeans though :(

Currently 1am

Soon can't be fast enough Dx

My player just finished the same fight yesterday. Rogue experienced the exact sand thing with Perception.

Now granted my party is 7 people.

Monster played first instantly swallowed the barbarian who had no means of escaping par escape which he need a natural 20, our rogue was hitting on his first hit rarely on second, they got lucky with a lighting bolt from our mage that the monster rolled 1

Cleric was healing while two paladins were supporting rogue via retributive strikes till one of them also got gulped. At this point the monster was low and did instinctively swim deep.

Rogue asked if he can grab on it which I allowed, thankfully for him, he was the only one that had drunk a potion for water breathing.

He almost died after that but he got lucky with the monster missing with 1 and 2s he, barbarian and paladin almost died, paladin only making it cause the rogue had a spare potion. (they knew water combat would be a thing cause of dryad)

I can attest they would be dead without a cleric even though they were above 4 people.

Cleric has build up pure healing, with healing hands, healing domain, communal healing and improved. All healing.

I admit luck was on their side since had it actually rolled above 6 which is what it needed to hit the rogue he woukd have died and so the other 2 people with no way fir the rest of the party to reach it par extremely risky diving shenanigans.

Like the changes in a vacuum, but.

Lowering the floor of untrained instead of increasing the bonus for higher specialization while lowering skills CD shows that they are tring to increase the 50/50 chance homogeneously instead of rewarding specialization, keeping the adherence to the 4e philosophy of "everyone is decent, no one really shine". As is also shown by the ranger rework, there still is lack of willingness of tacking on a more serious rework to the current system of tying general stylistic choice (i'm talking about combat styles, armor specializations ecc.) to specific class feats instead of generally available feats.
Resonance, everyone knew it had to go. But they are still refusing to lay it to rest. Let's see what they come up with.

All in all, the changes are nice, but the general trend they show to me is the lack of willingness to make big changes to the "4th ed" style of "Compartmented class roles. High floor but chockingly low ceiling. 0 narrative power on feats and spells, everything is there only for combat"

At least they put their s*## together for that damn question about shield dents.

In the stream Jason specifically said that they dont want the 50/50 dice power and want to make people that specilise have a higher success rate than not. So I don't see how you got that from these changes.

Pretty solid change imo, I wonder though if we will hear anything about magic getting a buff at any point. Though I kinda understand that's a too big of thing for an update.

All and all I really enjoy the changes coming.

I believe what casters need is a middle ground. Raise spell durations again give two extra school spell slots(to emphasise specialisation) and buff quality of life spells again to what they were.

Also a neat idea imo would be an extra spell school DC/spell roll buff (with the universalist getting a lesser one in everything)

Remy P Gilbeau wrote:

Well, because Drow isn't a race. There's not going to be a Race of Drow, because Drow is a Heritage. Unless Heritage feats get ripped from the game in their entirety (which I don't want to see, because I'm excited to see what Human Heritage feats for the different ethnicities like Ulfen and Varisian look like) then when you want to play a Drow, you'll take the Drow Heritage feat on an Elf.

I would be vehemently opposed to this course of action, I already loathe it in regards to Halves. Having to pay a Feat Tax to play a semblance of a Ancestry you want is rather disheartening.

Honestly I think they should have it that when you pick the heritage feat you are allowed to immidiatly pick another one from the list for the heritage.

Indeed. The open surveys are where you can tell Paizo whatever you want. For instance, I repeated my incessant requests that Half Orc and Half Elf no longer be limited to Half Human (this wasn't a category in the other survey). I also asked for Half Gnome, Half Dwarf, Half Goblin, and so on... But not Half...half...ling...because that's weird?

8 forgot to mention that as I was answering >. <

I think the idea is for this to open up, it's just hasn't yet to make the playtest simpler.

LiquidLeoc wrote:

This is my first time posting here, just to endorse this idea. This needs to reach dev ears.

Thank you for making your first post here! I saw someone (not me) bring it up on the developer's twitch stream on Friday but it was one of the questions they missed. I'm thinking of creating a twitch account so that I can ask myself.

Neat that people try. It's a perfect lore friendly idea with a lot of options for good story telling without forcing people to go back each 15 minutes. Even in a party with a cleric it adds the element of, do we want to keep the slots for in combat, can we spare the time and all kind of neat things.

Let alone the potential risk of the ritual failing and all the neat ideas that can be added there.

As a person that is gming 6 people that have currently reached halfway part 4 I will throw my hat here.

Love
1. 3 action economy, just plain amazing.
2. Monsters, I love the uniqueness each monster,my players have loved the difficulty as well, granted they are 6 instead of 4.
3. Crit system, Really fun.

Hate
1.Magic, it took a big hit and it pain me that my wizard player is the only one not enjoying himself.
2. Resonance whe I don't hate I find unnecessary, I liked the slots.
3. Power of dice, I think the dice is too defining this time around. I believe it would be a good idea for the untrained - to be bigger are -4 and Expert Master and Legendary to rise in +2/+4/+6 respectively.

This is my first time posting here, just to endorse this idea. This needs to reach dev ears.