Lockewood's page

Instead, you could try using Tailblades if everyone around you is giving you guff for killing people with a fluffy tail. (Though I must admit it's funnier that way. I would personally allow it so that my player could build around the concept of fluffing enemies to death.)

Racial Heritage (Ratfolk) and you can treat these things as Natural weapons as well as manufactured. This is very useful because something like an Amulet of Mighty Fists applies to all of them and you can enchant them individually.

They're all secondary natural attacks, as such, they 'all' only ever take a -5 penalty to your highest attack.

Also, if you use something like Martial Versatility+Ascetic style on your unarmed attacks, you can try to apply monk/ninja unarmed damage to the things. Though this one is difficult because of the required Fighter levels.

Furthermore, stuff like Strong Jaw, Greater Magic Fang, Enlarge Tail, etc. work on it.

So there are many different ways to effectively use these things...

http://www.aonprd.com/EquipmentWeaponsDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Tailblade,%20ra tfolk

It should be noted, this is really an overpowered tactic if you're a Rogue so play nice and try not to outshine the other members. Though, as a Rogue you will use almost all your feats on this tactic so it kind of balances out.(Remember to use your favored class bonus to save some feats)

As a Fighter, Bloodrager, Druid, Warpriest, etc. it's still powerful and more affordable, but isn't in the level of "Solo the boss by sneak attacking twenty times from behind!!!"

Lockewood wrote:

Rajnish Umbra, Shadow Caller wrote:

Lockewood wrote:

Requires you be a Teifling or have undergone the demon ritual to become a half fiend

Demonic/Improved Posession requires "Demon or half-demon".

As far as I know, tieflings don't count as either. Maybe there is a way to make them count as such, but not by default.

Thank you for your critique! I must respectfully disagree though.

A Teifling is, in a very literal sense, a half demon. One parent was a demon after all. (Unless they came from a devil or something.)

There exists nothing in the rules called a "half demon" but there are Teiflings and half fiends which fill that design space and are, if you read the flavor text, half demon....

Where do you get your flavor text from? According to Archive of Nethys, which is now the official SRD, "Most tieflings never know their fiendish sire, as the coupling that produced their curse occurred generations earlier."

The Pathfinder Wiki (not really official, but still useful) says "Though tieflings have the blood of fiendish beings, their ancestry is at least one step removed from the original introduction of that blood; the child of a union of a mortal with a fiendish being is a half-fiend, not a tiefling."

This is apparently from Book of Fiends, but I'm currently away from my books.

And I was... not ninja'ed, since I just didn't notice that literally every post between this and Lockewood's says the same. Badly failed perception there.

I stand corrected.

As for where I get my flavor text...I'm not sure??? I remember somewhere stating something to that effect but I'm now more inclined to think that was just an error, inconsistency, or typo...

Anyway, thank you for pointing that out! I hadn't noticed that.

Good night!

Lockewood wrote:

Requires you be a Teifling or have undergone the demon ritual to become a half fiend

Demonic/Improved Posession requires "Demon or half-demon".

As far as I know, tieflings don't count as either. Maybe there is a way to make them count as such, but not by default.

Thank you for your critique! I must respectfully disagree though.

A Teifling is, in a very literal sense, a half demon. One parent was a demon after all. (Unless they came from a devil or something.)

There exists nothing in the rules called a "half demon" but there are Teiflings and half fiends which fill that design space and are, if you read the flavor text, half demon....

Since I seem to have been pooh-poohing other people's comments in this thread, I'll add a suggestion of my own:

The various shadow spells such as shadow conjuration and shadow evocation.

At first glance they seem really powerful for spontaneous casters. "OK, shadow evocation is a 5th level spell but it can duplicate any evocation spell of 4th level or lower? Ditto for shadow conjuration as a 4th level that can duplicate anything 3rd or lower? The higher spell slot kinda hurts but that's a whole lot of other spells I can learn!"

Then you start digging in: "Hang on, they get two saves instead of one? Shadow creatures only have 20% of the hit points? Objects automatically succeed?"

Don't get me wrong, they're still useful spells. And the higher level (greater) ones that have a greater effect even on a save are pretty good. Especially with classes/races that get bonuses to that effect. But the base spells aren't as powerful as they appear at first.

They take some experience to use properly but are very potent when used by someone experienced! (Which is what you were getting at...)

If other people are interested in learning some basic tactics, then some guy made a guide for those spells.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5kvBvq2DEHjR1dOeEVkRUU4WlU/edit?pli=1

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5kvBvq2DEHjTVF4NEY4SXpSTUU/edit?pli=1

You won't be a master with them just from reading but you'll have a much better idea how to use it and how to think outside the box...

..

Just in-case someone wanted to learn something!

Good Evening!

avr wrote:

Those are still good and fun spells. Don't underestimate them.

A few major problems:

- I cannot make a threatning body jumper-esque creature, such as a fiend or a ghost, that can literally usurp a creature's arsenal against the PCs. That "weak and innocent" imp wouldn't be treated lightly if it could possess creatures and use every ability in wild abandon.
...abbreviated...

It would be more fun if it allows the full range of options that the possessed creature can use. I cannot possess a hill giant to catch rock, so good luck selling me the idea that you only need to use it for the extra muscles...

Good Afternoon!

You actually can make such an antagonist...I have used that very method to make an extremely overpowered Ghost Medium. (A hilarious build where a spirit possesses the body of someone else, then calls a spirit of an ancient hero to possess itself just to add to the confusion)

Requires you be a Teifling or have undergone the demon ritual to become a half fiend...But look into the feat Demonic Possession -> Improved Possession.

http://aonprd.com/FeatDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Demonic%20Possession

http://aonprd.com/FeatDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Improved%20Possession

I have always had a temptation to mention this on the Fighter Vs. Wizard threads to see how they react to the fact that even a commoner can beat them...

(Note, you can actually pull this off with any commoner. Have him take Spirit Ridden for the Knowledge checks then undergo the Ritual described in the Book of the Damned...That's how I made a commoner who could beat Wizards anyway.)

Lockweood, I feel like what you are describing lines up pretty perfectly with dexterity applying to hit, not to damage. I don't really have a huge stake in this, but what you are basically saying is you just need to be quick enough to land a hit and the sharpness of the blade does the rest of the work for you.

But if a strong person and an agile person hit the same spot on the same target, it seems unlikely that the agile person's rapier will penetrate further. (And if it does, it is probably based on technique, but that's better represented by proficiency not attributes.

You present a good point Mr. Morgan! (Pun not initially intended)

Allow me to present an appropriate riposte!

Think of it like Sneak attack dice dependent on speed rather than surprise.
A dexterity bonus to hit just means you actually connected because the guy couldn't dodge in time and you got under his guard.
A dexterity bonus to damage means you slashed the guy across the stomach and disemboweled him. (Sorry for the gory picture)

Your increased manuel dexterity allowed you to flick the sword downwards across his belly rather than bounce off his ribs.

Contrast this with Strength.
A strength bonus to hit means that you ploughed through his guard and reached his skin.
A strength bonus to damage means that your axe bit deeper into his skull.

Your increased might allowed you to quickly smash the guy with an overhead chop, overpowering his shield arm and biting into his head.

...

Do you see what I mean?

I came back to this after making dinner so I would like to say something...
Sorry everyone....I kinda derailed the thread in a different direction...Wasn't my intention.

We can borrow from real life in order to make the themes of the game make sense...But if you take it too far you risk making the fantasy game loose it's charm.
Find the balance if you can...

...

...

Also, you fight like a Dairy Farmer!

Good Evening

I don't know if modern fencing is really an appropriate model for everything in fantasy swordfighting because, unless things have changed a lot since I last fenced, we are not actually pushing our blades through people hopefully penetrating armor and puncturing vital areas like someone in a life or death situation would.

Which is to say I think a general dex-to-damage option would be fine if it had a prerequisite of, say, 14 strength.

Thank you for responding Mr Cabbage!

There are still duels in some places...Spain and France I think though I don't remember the details to well.

Anyway, rapiers never really go through armor, they are narrow enough to hit the joints around it and you trust to the extreme sharpness to do the cutting job rather than Strength...It's not the most effective method in the world but it's interesting!

Look it up and you'll find some entertaining stories about ugly duelists who intentionally try to mar the faces of the pretty boys! (Actual story)

Anyway, I'm just saying that Dextarity based fighting is based off the same principles as fencing rather than traditional warfare. Therefore, it might be useful to look to it as a reference.

Hello everyone!

I just wanted to make a note to all the people who think Dex to Damage is completely "unnecessary, stupid, doesn't make sense, etc.

As someone experienced with Fencing, I can tell you that physical might (Strength) doesn't really come into how much damage you can do when your weapon is a rapier or a dagger....

How well you fence is more dependent on your technique and agility...And both of those things are rolled into the Dexterity stat in this game.

Dueling Saber's are sharp...They can cut your nose and ears off without any resistance... If used right they are a deadly weapon.

Now someone mentioned that this damage, that is coming from quickly getting under someone's guard and stabbing them in interesting places, should be expressed with sneak attack or precision damage. My only problem with that, is that it doesn't reflect the increased benefit of being quick and agile.

Now...Realistically, I can do more damage by smashing through shields with a greatsword like Willam Walace then by precision stabbing/slashing with my Saber...But that is reflected in the things greater damage dice which gets even better as it's enchanted.

I've wielded an axe and felled tree's and I've wielded an epee and annoyed my fellow fencers...

Both are dangerous weapons if used right and both are used differently.

...

Anyway, all I'm saying is I think there is a place for a weaker, more agile fighter.

Have a good day!

Edit: Also, I someday dream of Charisma based fighting like Guybrush Threepwood. :) I want a Swashbuckler Insult Sword Fighting Module.
I'm only half kidding. I managed to pull it off in the first edition and found it greatly enjoyable.

Lockewood wrote:

nick1wasd wrote:

I do think that making spell turn into other spells at different levels would clutter thing up like Words of Power, unless they did it in progressive steps like in Ars Magica 5 (one of my favorite systems to read, haven't had the chance to play in it though), then it might just be a wonderful thing that would also be n00b friendly.

That sounds promising! If I may ask, how did Ars Magica 5 do it? I might see if I can ste- I mean borrow some of their ideas! Thank you for posting and have a good day!

Well the first thing to understand is that Ars Magica doesn't have "health" in the traditional sense, you take "wounds" that apply a cumulative penalty, and you get knocked out if this total reaches a certain number (light wounds are -1, med wounds are -3, heavy wounds are -5. Reaching con*blah in negitives makes you go sleepy-bye). Second is that spells are cast from 2 components (Form/Technique. Hows it's used and what you're using, example: Creo Igni: make fire: FIREBALL; Perdo Vis: remove magic: dispel magic; rego terra: control stone: pick up a rock and chuck it at someone) and casting them uses skills. Thirdly... EVERYTHING IS A SKILL! Skills, skills, skills. Skills for swinging a sword, skills for dodging, skills for casting fire magic, separate skills for ice magic. And within this paradigm, there exists a mechanic called "magnitude", essentially spell level, but not quite (proper "spell level" is the total you need to roll with your magic skills to make the spell go off) and you have this little table that denotes range and target amount and it goes like "Range:self +0 mag; range poke +1 mag; range throw 30' +2 mag; range literally across the country +5 mag" and "target 1 +0; target few people +2; target 100s +4". I hope you get the idea. With that exposition out of the way, you have Ars' version of Cure/Inflict: Creo/Perdo Corpus (make/remove flesh respectively), so you have in "Creo Corpus" (each combination of magic has it's own section with...

.... I may need some time to digest all that...

By- Lockewood the Overwhelmed :)

Happy to share. Confession: I was VERY intoxicated when I posted that last night, and looking at it today I can see why it would need clarification.

So the average PF1 spell had several points you had to calculate things based on your caster level, CL: duration, range, and damage being the most obvious. PF2 does not have these things. It has the spell, and it has its heightened entry(s). (H)

Adding Proficiency (P) seems like it would take the place of CL, but we then basically have P and H in the same entries and you've combined some of the complexity of both versions. Now, you could make P apply to less things than CL did, but the more variables you enter, the harder to balance, use in play, and pick between.

That makes sense, though I'm hoping that, for the reasons I wrote above, this won't be as much of a problem as Caster Level..

Captain Morgan wrote:

So in a words of power type system, as I understand it, you have spell building blocks. Instead of having spells like fireball, burning hands, and lightning bolt, you have a fire and a lightning component, either of which you can plug into a line, cone, or burst shape.

Which is a pretty cool idea, but is pretty separate from how casting has always worked. I think...

Yeah, Words of Power wasn't exactly new player friendly...

I figured, if Burning Hands, when Heightened to level 3, would gain the option of being cast as a burst rather than a cone then that wouldn't over-complicate things... Hmm... I'm going to ask you and Mr. Loreguard a question in just a minute so stick around. :)

Loreguard wrote:

I have to say, I'm not certain I like the idea of Fireball being the heightened version of burning hands. It is easy to see they are likely in the same 'extended family' but it is too easy to draw similarities to whole tree's of different spells that two spells on opposite ends are probably easily viewed as being too different to be part of the same spell.

... I'm sorry, I hate to keep asking people to do this, but could you please expand on this thought?

...

Now, a couple questions for the both of you! (And anyone else who thinks they can help)

How would you improve on this design to alleviate the problems you see? What would you change? Which parts did you like or dislike?

Thank you both for posting!
Good Day.

A note to the developers:
Sorry that we all are only throwing negative comments your way...That is the nature of a Playtest, constructive criticism.
I have striven to be polite about it though and hope that we can patiently and calmly hear out each others arguments before coming to a solution.

That said, lets get on to the topic at hand! The main focus of this post will be Blasting...But the changes I'm suggesting are far more broad then that. Many people have approached this problem and argued over minor parts...I'm going to try not to.

A couple things to note first before I address my suggestion:

1: Proficiency doesn't do much in regards to spells apart from increasing the DC.

2: Heightening has replaced a spells ability to grow more powerful with Caster Level

3: Heightened spells are made to not be as powerful as a spell of the level they are Heightened to.

Now, I'm not going to ask you to remove Proficiency or Heightening as I see potential in them...But I will be asking, not demanding, for some small tweaks if it is possible.

Let's talk about number 2: I liked spells advancing with caster level and I will explain why. (remember, I'm not asking you to change it back)

First of all, I liked that spells improved as you leveled because lower level spells weren’t strictly inferior to higher ones, just different. (Note that this was true of non-blast spells as well. Things like Jump, True Skill, and Enlarge Person stayed useful even after stronger spells came around)
Blasts were a special case because lower leveled spells can achieve greater damage through metamagic, even considering the level increase.

So while Fireball was the go-to damage spell, Fire Snake could do interesting things like curving around walls and people and Delayed Fireball can do yet another interesting thing.
It was a higher level spell for a reason; while you could buff a Fireball’s damage into the skies it was still just a Fireball. A higher level spell has something intrinsically more complicated than just more intense damage.

The problem that occurred, was that the damage of lower leveled spells started far outstripping the utility of the higher spells. In part this was because Metamagic Rods work best on spells below level three, the other part was that metamagic just added so much damage to a spell.

Notice, the problem wasn't that it did more damage, just the extent of the difference. Thus, higher damage is not the problem.
For instance, Intensified Shocking Grasp may do more damage than Scorching Rays...But you have to touch the guy... Scorching Rays is still valuable because it can attack multiple targets at a distance.

The problem with Heightening, is that the current system has, basically, the same spell with a bit more damage at each level. Nothing terribly interesting happens when it becomes a higher level spell. This also makes lower leveled versions of the spell just seem like an inferior replacement.

...

So what do I suggest?

I advise a sort of hybrid system. I suggest that individual spells get a little more powerful as your spellcasting proficiency increases. (This addresses notes 1 and 2)

So, in the case of blasts, when you reach Expert Proficiency your spells will gain a bit of a damage boost to keep them relevant over cantrips. Then, you can heighten them to gain, not only further damage, but also something worthy of a higher tier.

For instance, Fireball gaining the option of being Delayed once it’s been heightened past a certain level. Or maybe, Scorching rays can add additional rays and become Contagious, then have the option of merging them all together into a Fire Snake?

This has what is, in my opinion, the added benefit of reducing the amount of necessary fire spells. Only a handful of each type of spell is needed. Each spell is just a chassis for a Mage to learn and improve on. The same chassis will be used for a higher spell but overhauled.

Now it might be best if higher options, like upgrading Scorching Rays to Fire Snake, did a bit less damage then using it the normal way in exchange for the versatility in targeting added to the new form. But don’t overdue this or people won’t us it. The math part I will leave to you guys because only you can make that part work.

One last thing, I would also advise that a 5th level Fireball be equal in power to a normal 5th level spell as opposed to the current model. This was done intentionally because you wanted to incentivize taking higher level spells instead of just reusing your old spells.

In my opinion though, at least for a spontaneous caster, a 5th level Fireball already is a higher level spell of its own. After all, you have to learn it as a separate spell anyways. Therefore, it should be treated as a 5th level spell in all ways.

Of course, if you’re worried that Wizards learning all levels of a spell would make this overpowered, then just make them learn it individually like everyone else. Each level is unique now so it actually feels like a new spell!

Good Evening

P.S. If someone has further insight, questions, or clarifications then please do not hesitate to write. It feels as though we argue so much that we aren't willing to come up with any solutions or new ideas...

Well, no one else brought it up and I haven't had time to make a thread on it....So I'll mention two major things here.

1: Tight math.
I think the math needed tightening up from the first edition...But, for your own sake, it might be best to loosen it somewhat.
As it is, you have no wiggle room. If you release one item or class ability that gives a superior bonus then it could completely break the math.

2: Utility magic.
There are a lot of things I would like to request about magic...This is first on the list though.

First, an explanation.
I will divide Utility magic into three parts so we can more easily understand what I am talking about.

1: REALITY CREATING, WORLD ENDING, ARMY MAKING MAGIC!!!!
This is what makes people think Wizards are overpowered. Cause they have things like Create Demiplane, Animate Dead, Simulacrum, etc.

2: Magic that replaces the use of a skill or class feature.
This category includes things like Knock or Invisibility that, theoretically, makes mages able to work without any of those pesky skills...And also completely undermine the person who specializes in them.

3: World-building/creative magic as I like to call it.
This includes things like Shrink Item, Prestidigitation, Unseen Servant, and other useful magic spells that let you interact with the world.

Three types and three separate problems... Now for my Plea.

1: Make most of the MIGHTY MAGIC!!! spells into Rituals so that such world changing things are: Less available to anyone at a university, more available to the evil peasant/non-caster who studied dark Tomes he found, have horrific costs and backlashes if done wrong.

2: You guys already have tried to address this problem, but I would like to add some additional insight. The problem with things like Knock, was never the spell...Wizards didn't replace Rogues by 'casting' Knock... Wands are what replaced the need for that.

If only a mage has the spell then, once in a while, he'll cast it in an emergency when they don't have the Rogue. Otherwise he will just save his slots, he's not a door opener he's a scholar!

But wands....I don't like them too much. Raising the level of Knock would help make it less economically feasible...but I'll leave solving this one to you guys.

3: And here is one of the few things that truly disappointed me...The nerfs to creative spells. Lets use Shrink Item as an example. It is a very powerful utility spell to a creative person with a mind to find all the unintentional uses for such a thing.

All it does, is shrink stuff. At first people were only using it to carry more luggage or shrink down a door to get in...Then they started slinging boulders at people, dropping shrunken lava patches on their heads and carting around trebuchets.

The nerf for this spell in question..."The object cannot be used to attack or damage when it returns to normal size."

...You remember games like Skyrim? Where you hear about people using the Invisibility spell to turn other people or objects invisible? But no matter what you do you can't do that cause it only targets you? Even when it should be able to do soooo much more?

Tabletops don't have this problem..Because you are designed to interact with the world and you can just tell your GM "I attempt to blow myself out of the cannon with the Fireball"

I don't believe that it is the best idea to nerf creative spells so that: Enemies are magically force fielded against damage cause it's not supposed to deal damage regardless of the logical consequences of a falling boulder, or it's not open ended enough to use in any other situation other than the one described in the spell, or it's duration is so low that it can only be used for combat and nothing else...

Please forgive my rant but I do feel strongly about this...Let us be clever, let us interact with the world, and let us play the open worlded game!

Good day

P.S. (to the developers) I really do like what you've done with a lot of things and mean no insult. Though the execution has been a bit rough during the playtest I'm quite hopeful that you guys will smooth things out for the final product. I hope I have given you some useful feedback.

ryric wrote:

Chance Wyvernspur wrote:

With skill success rates around 50-60% the game feels more like Savage Worlds than Pathfinder.

Savage Worlds success rates start at 62.5% for a minimum level of skill, and get up to 87.5% for non-legendary PCs. Only an unskilled roll in SW or one with penalties gives you success rates like you see in PF2e.

Funnily enough, Savage Worlds had a pretty big impact on 4th Ed design, many of the team were into it at the time.

You should probably avoid that topic to prevent starting an edition war and getting the thread locked...

I would like to add my two cents here...

The knowledge skills aren't just knowledge skills anymore...This is because they also give you access to Rituals. The developers haven't gone into the Ritual system much but I'm going to make a post of 'Magic' suggestions soon that will encourage them to do this.

Now, onto the topic at hand... (Side note, I also agree that Int could use a boost...But I don't think this is the way.)

Like many people have said, Religion is more of a Wisdom based activity than Intelligence. Doctrine isn't so much known as understood. (I could go into this in depth but I'll refrain to save you guys time.)

Arcana is based on Vancian magic which, to those who don't know, is like high grade math and requires Logic and Intellect. (Same as above. If you are interested in Vancian magic then read the Dying Earth series.)

Occultism, as opposed to Religion which is based on Doctrine and following God's Laws, is based on 'cults', demon worshipers, and pagan practices. I would put it as Charisma.

In real life, cults and pagans aren't relying on knowledge or understanding...They sacrifice, preform a rain dance, and utter some dramatic chant to some spirit...Why? Because it asked.
Now some scientist could come up and preform the same dance and chant in a monotone...But that wouldn't really fulfill the requirements. The idea of these practices is to appease the spirit, therefore it isn't the chant that's important but how well you preform it.
It's not a science like Arcana, it's an art...This inclines me to vote Charisma.
In Golorian, Occult rituals follow the same pattern. It's not knowledge or understanding that makes it work...It's how well you 'preform' a bunch of skill checks.

Good day!

I am a little tired of RPGs making Dexterity the super do-anything skill, just because highly skilled non-musclebound real people seem to be able to do amazing things - expertise (muscle memory) is what they are leveraging, not superior agility/reflexes!

I would like to note, that muscle memory is considered a part of agility.... Also, most higher intensity agility training involves jumping in some way....Just a thought.

Let's take a look at the Core Rogue or more specifically, at the Core Rogue's Talents. Compare them to their upgraded Unchained Rogues Talent equivalents or even the Vigilante's...Notice anything?

Most of the Core Rogues Talents that were changed are either, extremely situational, only usable once or twice per day, or generally aren't very applicable or strong. When Unchained came out, you guys added more uses per day, generally strengthened the talents, and most importantly...
You consolidated the extremely situational talents so that they would be useful over a broader spectrum of similar activities.

And that, is what I want to talk about for today, consolidating Skill Feats.

When I go through the Skill Feats for the Playtest, I am reminded of many of the Core Rogue Talents. Mainly, many of the noncombat based Skill Feats are rather situational.
Take for instance, the social skills. The in-combat feats like Cruel Deceiver will generally get used because you can build your combat tactics around them but the out of combat feats like Confabulator, Hobnobber, and Charming Liar are used far more scarcely.

No one, that I know anyway, wants to spend a tenth of their skill feats on something that doesn't come up very often. So these feats need a little extra incentive...

I know of two ways to incentivize taking a situational feat.
1. Make it extremely good at what it does so that it completely eliminates a problem. (I don't suggest this one. Take the Unchained Rogue Talent Kip Up, especially when combined with the skill unlock. If faced against someone who specializes in tripping, then the Rogue can repeatedly be tripped and come out unscathed. It makes someone who takes it awesome in a rare situation but doesn't help them the rest of the time.)

2. Make the feat help in a variety of similar situations.
(I recommend this one. Look at the Unchained Rogue's Quick Disable and Expert Leaper, or the Vigilantes Sure Footed. They help you often enough that you might consider spending a tenth of your talents on it.)

So my suggestion is that each situational Skill Feat be expanded to more, similar, situations so that it's more generally useful.
Please consider it.
Good day!

P.S. If more skills advanced with proficiency level then proficiency would feel more important and less like a Prerequisite Tax.

I, personally, believe that jumping should go with acrobatics.

As Mr. Fennris above me stated, free climbing does take raw strength to pull your own body weight upwards. Jumping also takes Strength...But is that really what makes the jump work?

Part of the problem is that, in this game, Dexterity is also Agility.

There are three types of 'Strength': Endurance, Strength, and Force.

Put simply,
Endurance is how 'long' you can do something.
Strength is how 'much' you can do.
Force is how 'quickly' you can move or change directions.

People who are 'Agile' are those who do force training. (Examples include Racquetball, Soccer players, Gymnasts, etc.)

People who are into jumping are lean and have a lot of 'Force' because they can't afford to have bulky muscles weigh them down too much.

If you look at Rock Climbers though, they could be either way. Those without much strength use their legs and arms in coordination to make it over the cliffs while those who have natural Strength or Endurance just sort of shove themselves upwards.

Thus, I think that while strength is important for most physical activities, Dexterity/Agility is the most useful for jumping.

Just a thought.

Happy to help!

I think one of the updates addressed this... The update in question reads "Page 158—In the Sneak action of the Stealth skill, in the
third paragraph, in the first sentence, change “any time
during your movement” to “at the end of the Sneak action”.
After the third sentence, add the following “If you succeed at
your Stealth check and then attempt to Strike a creature, the
creature remains flat-footed against that attack, and then you
become seen.” Remove the last sentence of that paragraph."

So now you can use the Sneak action as long as you find cover/concealment at the end of your movement...At least I think that's what you were asking.

Hope this helps.
Good day!

There is something I dislike about the Level Bonus, and it's the same thing I dislike about Xianxia.

I have only read a few Xianxia, but I feel like I got the whole experience because they all were, basically, the same book and plot...Over and over again.

When someone raises their cultivation or power level or whatever, then all their abilities rise at the same rate.

Thus, someone who has better cultivation is better in every way. This usually ends up meaning that whoever spent the most time meditating wins the fight. (Except in the case of the Protagonist because he's special)

I prefer that someone can specialize their strength while excepting weaknesses elsewhere.

For example, Elder Elementals are strong in some ways. They are immune to a bunch of things, they have elemental powers, they are a higher CR than the party hopefully, etc.

But did you know they're incredibly easy to manipulate? Most have a terrible Wisdom and Intelligence score and no ranks in Sense Motive. A clever player, say a Rogue, who knows this can still 'beat' this enemy even when his normal tactic, Sneak Attack, is completely ineffective.

This adds an interesting weakness to a powerful foe.

This also works on the players.
A paladin has incredible AC and Saves but his lack of Touch AC gets him killed via Energy Drain.
A Wizard has a spell for every situation, but neglected his Swim skill and didn't prepare a Silent spell to save himself when pulled underwater.
A Phantom Thief has skills to cunningly solve almost any problem, but if he's drawn into a straightforward fight he's in trouble.

Each of these excels in an area but have a weakness that can be exploited by the players or the GM.

I personally, like it when players can be bad at some things while good at others. It means they have to shore up their weaknesses and not just focus on improving one thing.

That's my take at least.

Good day!

A thought occurs, can someone direct their companion multiple times in their turn until they run out of actions? Or is it just once per turn?

I'll second Lockewood.

The wizard may not have the "perfect" list of prepared spells each day, but he will 99% of the time have an adequate list prepared.

The sorcerer, on the other hand, has to sacrifice a bunch of his character options to even come close to that level of preparedness. The only way he ever has the "perfect" combination of spells is when the GM throws him a bone.

Well... The Sorcerer isn't completely helpless in the first edition. I would even go so far as to say he's stronger than the Wizard in certain situations. Even without factoring in stuff like Paragon Surge.

Sorcerer's tended to pick very versatile spells like Shadow Conjuration/Evocation or very potent spells like Battering Blast and Dominate Person.
Unlike the Wizard, the Sorcerer would then build upon those few spells until they could solve any problem using their small list of specialized tools. Quality over quantity.

I'm just speaking from my experience here, but smart Wizards tend not to have a problem with preparing the wrong spells.

Now many people that play Wizards aren't 'that' optimal, but most aren't bumbling idiots either. People learn quickly.

So, assuming optimization, here's what I've noticed in the First Pathfinder Edition.

Wizards don't prepare all their spells at the start of the day.

They prepare their 'all-day buffs', enough spells to get them through their first expected combat, and a little something extra in case of emergency.

You may think that you cannot accurately predict which spells you need in the first combat but that's not so. I'm not saying you can prepare perfectly, but adequately enough to only need your emergency spells for that surprise.

Most dungeons or adventures paths have a theme. So if you're playing in one you usually know whats coming and can prepare adequately.

Furthermore, most Wizards have access to either Divination magic or a scout of some kind. This means that they can usually prepare 'exactly' what they need if they are the one attacking.
In an ambush Wizards a toast unless they prepared an appropriate amount of 'emergency' spells.

A Wizard who is prepared can find the perfect spell to solve most problems.
A Sorcerer, on the other hand, prepared himself to find ways to solve problems using his perfected spells.

Lockewood wrote:

Hmm, usually Temporary Hit Points overlap and you only get the greatest amount. This never mentioned whether it stacks or not though...

Ah, I never knew that temp HP didn't stack. The CRB is unclear but I found the rule just now in the FAQ (which I never bothered looking in before). In that case Glutton's Jaws is flavorful but ultimately not very useful. Pity.

EDIT: Might be useful for getting a hero point by doing something cool though so that is something.

I like the way you think! I can see it now...

The arrogant king looks down at you and sniffs in disdain, "If you think you are worthy of serving me then here, eat this rat and prove how much of a lowly, powerless peasant you are!"

The Sorcerer's mouth erupts into a grin as he accepts the dead rat, to the horror of the onlookers the grin widens even further becoming feral and fiendish. As his fangs finish growing a forked tongue whips out and pulls the rat into it's maw. Slowly crunching the bones and swallowing, the Sorcerer growls in a deep, hideous voice "It will be a pleasure working with you my lord!" Then laughs a most sinister laugh!

GM:... You get a Hero point, no wait, Antihero point.

Lockewood wrote:

edduardco wrote:

Lockewood wrote:

edduardco wrote:

Mark for what you say looks like free spontaneous heightening would have been the closer we have seen to 3.5 Psionics, I admit I'm quite biased here because Psionics is my preferred casting system, so I'm having a hard time understanding the reasons to not have free spontaneous heightening.

Well, I've seen players who spend several minutes leafing through books because they don't know what the spell they just cast does. If someone can cast Beast Form II or Undead anatomy I but doesn't know the abilities each grants then they spend alot of time looking at the book while everyone else sits their patiently, or not so patiently depending on the person.

Is unfair to expect that a player know by memory the full spell list, but I expect caster players to have their spells at hand, in a separate folder, cards, etc.

I don't believe they should be forced to memorize their spell list, though I do believe they should at least have a solid idea of what the spell does.

All I was saying, is if you play a spellcaster there is already a lot of decision making to do. If a blaster has to compare Fireball to Magic Missle III, Flaming Hands III, Shocking Grasp III, and Sound Burst II then they might be sitting there a while trying to figure out which one to use.
That is why Mr. Seifter is worried about decision paralysis.

Those kind of decisions and comparison should not be done in the middle battle to begin with, but during downtime, so in the heat of combat the caster cast the first spell that comes to mind, and taking time to think which spell would be best should take in game time.

I agree with you to an extent, if you haven't noticed I keep bringing up the wordcasting system as a comparison because you had to do exactly that.

That is why I would like if there was a way for the Sorcerer's ability to Heighten could grow as they level.(Or maybe through expenditure of feats) That way, the eccentric, mathematically inclined people like me can enjoy the full flexibility of the class, and the more casual fun loving people don't have to ask an expert to teach them how to play.

Decision paralysis can be a problem, I'm just hoping we can all do our best to help the developers get around said problem.
Good day!

Lockewood wrote:

edduardco wrote:

Mark for what you say looks like free spontaneous heightening would have been the closer we have seen to 3.5 Psionics, I admit I'm quite biased here because Psionics is my preferred casting system, so I'm having a hard time understanding the reasons to not have free spontaneous heightening.

Well, I've seen players who spend several minutes leafing through books because they don't know what the spell they just cast does. If someone can cast Beast Form II or Undead anatomy I but doesn't know the abilities each grants then they spend alot of time looking at the book while everyone else sits their patiently, or not so patiently depending on the person.

Is unfair to expect that a player know by memory the full spell list, but I expect caster players to have their spells at hand, in a separate folder, cards, etc.

I don't believe they should be forced to memorize their spell list, though I do believe they should at least have a solid idea of what the spell does.

Mark Seifter wrote:

Quandary wrote:

I feel like part of calculus is not letting low-level Spells Known freely "upgrade" to high-level Spells Known, although I feel that concern isn't as strong as it seems at first glance, considering the Wizard is being allowed to gain spells and later freely Heighten them at no cost.

As the designer who was most in favor of give spontaneous casters free spont-heightening on everything early on, having then tested it out, I am willing to admit I was wrong. It's a combination of extreme load on the sorcerer's turn and the power of pinpoint targeting of the exact spell level you need. Like it's one thing to think "Yeah, the wizard could just prepare exactly an 5th level dispel magic, or a 7th level remove curse" but in reality, there's almost no chance the wizard prepared exactly that. Most likely he didn't prepare either of them at those levels or above. If you're lucky, maybe he prepared it almost at those levels (giving him some chance to help) or above those levels (so a sure thing, but only if he wastes a higher-level spell slot than necessary to solve the problem). The sorcerer always has exactly the minimum spell level you need to solve the problem with minimum effort, every time; this is something that might take some time playing around with it to see the full ramifications though. Now if you have the day to dispel the spell or remove the curse, the wizard can prep those spells tomorrow, sure, but the sorcerer can also change up her spontaneous heighten as well, so they both can handle it the next day.

Mark for what you say looks like free spontaneous heightening would have been the closer we have seen to 3.5 Psionics, I admit I'm quite biased here because Psionics is my preferred casting system, so I'm having a hard time understanding the reasons to not have free spontaneous heightening.

Well, I've seen players who spend several minutes leafing through books because they don't know what the spell they just cast does. If someone can cast Beast Form II or Undead anatomy I but doesn't know the abilities each grants then they spend alot of time looking at the book while everyone else sits their patiently, or not so patiently depending on the person.

Quandary wrote:

I feel like part of calculus is not letting low-level Spells Known freely "upgrade" to high-level Spells Known, although I feel that concern isn't as strong as it seems at first glance, considering the Wizard is being allowed to gain spells and later freely Heighten them at no cost.

As the designer who was most in favor of give spontaneous casters free spont-heightening on everything early on, having then tested it out, I am willing to admit I was wrong. It's a combination of extreme load on the sorcerer's turn and the power of pinpoint targeting of the exact spell level you need. Like it's one thing to think "Yeah, the wizard could just prepare exactly an 5th level dispel magic, or a 7th level remove curse" but in reality, there's almost no chance the wizard prepared exactly that. Most likely he didn't prepare either of them at those levels or above. If you're lucky, maybe he prepared it almost at those levels (giving him some chance to help) or above those levels (so a sure thing, but only if he wastes a higher-level spell slot than necessary to solve the problem). The sorcerer always has exactly the minimum spell level you need to solve the problem with minimum effort, every time; this is something that might take some time playing around with it to see the full ramifications though. Now if you have the day to dispel the spell or remove the curse, the wizard can prep those spells tomorrow, sure, but the sorcerer can also change up her spontaneous heighten as well, so they both can handle it the next day.

Hmm.. I agree that this, like the wordcasting system, has almost too many choices for players who haven't set up everything in their mind before hand.

Another possibility that interested me was if your bloodline allowed you to spontaneously Heighten thematic spells.

So the Ifrit bloodline would let you Heighten spells with the Fire descriptor in addition to one or two spells of your choice.

There are probably many flaws with this idea but if the Developers like it feel free to steal it.

Edit: Also, if you could Heighten your bloodline spells automatically that would make a certain kind of sense...

I would just like to say upfront, that all my comments are 'suggestions' not demands. I'm just trying to help.
So first of all, I like what you guys have done with this class. It's interesting and fresh but I take issue with two things.

1. Spontaneous Heightening (Edit: It seems this horse has been beaten to death. It took awhile to write this post so I hadn't noticed. Sorry...)

2. Bloodline Powers seem lackluster (more on what I mean by this later)

So first of all, Spontaneous Heightening. (PS. If I am misunderstanding how this works I apologize.)
I know you guys made Spontaneous Heightening the way you did to prevent decision paralysis but there's a problem.

In Mr. Seifter's own words; "There's no longer any need to learn long chains of spells that are incrementally different and each require you to refer back to the previous spell."

Except there still is for a Sorcerer.
A Wizard can just learn Summon Monster and be done with it after losing one spell known.
A Sorcerer who wants to know them all has to either use one of his Spontaneous Heightening slots every day or 'Nine' spells known. That's a full half of his flexible spells known! It seems like the Sorcerer gets less spells known and less bang for the buck if you ask me...

If you don't think new players will be able to handle Unlimited Spontaneous Heightening then I suggest that the ability levels with you.

So at the start you can only Heighten two spells spontaneously, at level three it goes up a little then again at level seven or so, then around level sixteen you can apply it to all your spells. This would ease new players into the system so that they would have to learn how to function even with lots of choices.

Lets face it, caster have always had a lot of choices but Sorcerers are suppose to be like Wordcasters. Able to instinctively work with magic and manipulate it to their will. Now, wordcasters were hard to learn but once you did they were extremely fun to play because of how much control you had. All I'm saying is, giving Heightening to the prepared spellcasters but not the spontaneous seems kinda counter-intuitive.

So now onto the Bloodline Powers and what does Lackluster mean?

Okay, so lackluster might have been the wrong word but to show you what I mean lets take a look at Glutton's Jaws...

Glutton's Jaws basically makes it so I don't need a backup weapon cause in an emergency I can summon up a pretty good enchanted weapon if enemies get too close for comfort.

So what's the problem?
Well, if I wanted to play some kind of martial Sorcerer this wouldn't really help me because:
1. I could make an even better weapon.
2. I can't enhance this cause it's temporary.
3. If I wanted to use shape-shifting spells to maul my enemy like a druid, then this still doesn't help unless I can apply it to that forms natural attacks.

So what I'm saying is that while this lets me replace my back-up weapon it doesn't really factor into my tactics much...
In the first edition you could bite in addition to whacking the guy with your sword but now you have to bite 'instead' of doing that and the sword happens to be better than your dentures at damaging.

So this becomes a matter of economics or more specifically, a matter of incentives.

Thus it wouldn't be a good idea to actually think about using this power except in very specific situations because their are much better alternatives.

I suggest that you add a clause to the ability that instead allows you to infuse your existing natural attacks with profane power to apply a lesser buff to them. Ideally this buff would stack with but not replace an Amulet of Mighty Fists or similar item that upgrades Natural Attacks. That way it feels like your that much better at Natural Attacks instead of just saving some cash also it would feel like your making something better rather than gaining a static, un-upgradeable weapon.

In short, I request abilities that can be built upon and that will change the way you play because you have them... If that makes any sense.

Thank you for all your hard work!
Good day.