Lord Fyre's page

Scarablob wrote:

Lord Fyre wrote:

From an "in world" perspective, either side actually winning would make the victorious country a threat to their other neighbors.

Would it? Beyond their rivalry, neither country seems expansionist in the least, they both seems quite content in their position. I would expect that if one side "won" and absorbed the other, they would then spend decades if not century "integrating" it into their territory to secure an absolute victory with no possibility of rebellion, but that they would afterward remain mostly isolationist, trading with the rest of the world but not bothering trying to invade or conquer them.

After all, the reason of the conflict don't seems to be a power or land grab, but a mere ego war. They both could invade much "easier" neighbor to deal with if they actually wanted to expand, instead of focussing on the one neighboring country with a mastery of magic that rival theirs.

Geb's behavior as a state might be well-modeled as an extension of Geb's (the man's) personality (though even that isn't a sure thing; he's more active recently than he has been in past centuries), but Nex's government isn't headed by an eternal and unchanging leader and must be modeled by its neighbors as if it was a rational actor. That rational actor is kept from turning on its weaker neighbors not out of any policy of forbearance, but out of fear that if it was to turn its attention north or east its rival would plunge a dagger into its back from the south. But if that rational actor was to achieve hegemony by neutralizing its rival, it would be an unconscionable threat to its neighbors even if individual leaders might momentarily forbear to act on that threat. And Nex's neighbors are quite weak in comparison and have reason to fear Nex: Jalmeray is former Nexian territory and is currently a colonial holding of a distant power which may or may not be able or willing to defend it against Nexian irredentism. Katapesh is having internal troubles and is not in...

Katapesh and, especially, Jalmeray have resources that could be quite useful to Nex, if freed from the need to constantly defend against Geb.

I feel like, from a worldbuilding perspective, either side actually winning in a geb vs nex war would end up making golarion "worse" because the existence of the two country feels more interesting than either of the two winning over the other (or crumbling onto itself).

From an "in world" perspective, either side actually winning would make the victorious country a threat to their other neighbors.

UnArcaneElection wrote:

Dragonchess Player wrote:

No, it's just a different story that has no connection with Xotani, Nefeshti, or the fallen warshard; and adding mythic to a "protacted people's war" is like cracking an egg with a sledgehammer.

Actually, other than Paizo's reluctance to do any more 6 part APs(*), why not have the 2 plot threads interact? It would be highly likely to happen spontaneously, given the events happening simultaneously in roughly the same region.

(*)Maybe the way to do this would be as 2 3 part APs that are fairly linked together, but have room for different or partially overlapping PC groups to be in each -- after all, it's not as if that doesn't happen spontaneouly to some extent in the PbPs I used to follow on these boards in considerable numbers.

Because trying to tell two stories (unless they are very closely related) in a single AP runs the risk of a "bait and switch" like Second Darkness (start running a gambling operation in Riddleport, but then have to save the elves, who treat the PCs poorly, and the rest of world) or a "disappearing circus" like Extinction Curse (where the PCs basically have to abandon what was their primary focus to deal with the "real" story). Many PCs created for a "protracted people's war" will end up asking why they should care about some genies or a volcano far from the "important" parts of Katapesh.

Even if the stories are closely intertwined in an AP, it can still have problems - Council of Thieves for instance.

It depends,
Is it a large staff
… or just a publicist and a girl-friday.

Nostalgia?! I just got here! Really though, I won't be done with this game for a long time. I'm in a round-robin scenario where every few months we switch campaigns and GMs and it's awesome. Also, yeah I'm glad I came here after most of the trolls and such left. Now it's just a chill place where I can talk about my favorite thing ever, PF1e. And occasionally add mediocre additions to fun lists.

I'm still here.

Master Pugwampi wrote:

Rysky wrote:

Thank you Wumpums *glomps and cuddles*

Nut bunnies.

*sigh*

Missed you boss.

Missed you too, Wumpums ^w^

Aim better!

I'm quite familiar with PF2 and how it plays. If my GM regularly pitted our party against multiple (!) level +2 or higher "boss" creatures or characters, then we'd all be dejected hamburger meat as well.

It's not you or your tactics. It's not the game system or its math. It's the GM appearing to not understand the basic fundamentals of the game.

A big question becomes "does the GM realize the problem?"

Yakman wrote:

UnArcaneElection wrote:

Earlier, I wrote:

^The Runelords Strike Again!? The Infernal Empire Strikes Back? Heist of the Crown?

Here's a Runelord idea: A new generation of Runelords has arisen, but rather than staying secreted away in demiplanes or castles, these brazenly move among the public, actively moving the levers of political power and swaying the masses with crude yet glitzy demagoguery, as they seek World Domination through Political Action.

A Runelord striking north into the Linnorm Kings would be a fun Viking-based AP.

Oh I like that. A Viking AP would be a fun redux to Skulls and Shackles... instead of being a morally gray pirate AP run a morally gray Viking AP, striking south at Varisia or even further south into Ravounel or Cheliax. Scratches a very similar itch in my mind.

Actually, not even "morally gray." Within Norse culture of the time, Vikings were upstanding heroes.

Starfinder 2 seems to maintain if not increase Starfinders melee supremecy.

If something has hardness 10 not being able to damage it on a crit with a d6 or d4 laser pistol feels terrible.

Not being able to afford enough bullets at level 1 feels terrible.

Having to reload after 3 shots feels terrible.

Melee is still double the damage of ranged and reloading has gotten more annoying.

I'm getting flashbacks to that version of startrek where the crossbow was a better weapon than a phaser...

saving an action walking isn't an incentive to shoot if my third action is a shot at -10 for no damage. Or if i need to reload about as often as Bitey needs to walk in between things to chew on.

I don't know if lasers need super agile with only a -2 MAP or something but as is I'm looking at another edition of bringing rocks to laser fights.
Being in the monsters face isn't that much of a drawback. If the monster WANTS to bite someone, it will come up and bite someone.

Yes, the "Ranged Meta" mentioned on Field Test 5 p4, does quite work out.

A much bigger problem with firearms in Starfinder 2E is magazine sizes (it has been mentioned before).

B.T.W., larger Ammo Clips can actually help with "bad rolls" as it will allow more attacks.

Do you prefer:

Not Sequels
High level Adventure Paths that are stand-alone stories of their own. A GM would potentially have to work hard to link this one's plot and themes to a previous low-level Adventure Path, and it might just be best to make new high-level characters. This is the easiest type of high level Adventure Path for us to produce, because the developer...

This is the best of both worlds.

I just love that line "Let's give the violent little psychopath and his kill-o-saur some space"

That was awesomely funny. :)

"I'm assuming the murder kitty can stay."

Storyteller Shadow wrote:

Selene Spires wrote:

Right now...64%

What's the percentage of character completion? :-)

Almost done....like 90%.

I created the alias

How did I not know that you had reappeared????

Multiple times stated but yes...Yes please Paizo upgradable Projectile Magazines please!

Worth beating the drum. :)

One thing that is missing from Weapon Upgrades are larger clip sizes.

Currently the Magazines in most Starfinder 2E weapons are quite small. This really pinches Soldiers, but it is a problem for most characters.

One fix for this would be to make increasing magazine sizes increase upgrades at the Weapon Improvement table (Starfinder 2E Playtest Playtest Rulebook, p182) This would make the upgrade from Commercial to Tactical more worth it.

Eight Hours

Quest for the Frozen Flame so far has been my favorite Pathfinder 2e AP and what got me into running PF2 APs. Exploring northern tundra is one of my favorite campaign premises and Quest definitely delivers.

It certainly isn't without flaws, the main example being that the AP doesn't really give you a place to buy things until pretty late in the adventure, but that's an issue that I found pretty easy to solve.

I'll also second Fists of the Ruby Phoenix. And like Seven Dooms you can also get it in one volume.

Though technically this thread has accomplished its mission (Rusthenge + Seven Dooms For Sandpoint), I do hope there is some value in keeping it going for a bit. :)

According to the blog 10am EST Thursday 1 August

Yes, 7am PST.

Do we know when on Thursday the PDF should become available?
(A.K.A., when Paizo.com crashes?)

Just to clarify, we have the entire run of PF 1E Adventure Paths.

We liked
* - Rise of the Runelords (done - stepped over the 1st half of Hook Mountain)
* - Curse of the Crimson Throne (complete)
* - Legacy of Fire (in progress)
* - Skull & Shackles (in progress)
* - Iron Gods (in progress)

Yes. It was very sloppy and careless to publish those schools with those spells without making the schools themselves uncommon.

Not at all.

Lord Fyre wrote:

Looking at these, it appears that the haters are actually Right.

Wizards are Weak.

Because they are weak during 4 levels? Half of the classes are weak, then.

Which creates a "barrier to entry" for new players, and a source of frustration for higher level players.

Also given that the Wizard and not the Sorcerer was chosen for both Player Core 1 and the ORC Beginner's Box, that will not be encouraging for new players. It can - as evidenced by this very thread - be frustrating for existing players.

I figured that driving players to other game systems was not part of Paizo's business plan.

If you want to see why the wizard or any prepared caster isn't as good as a spontaneous caster, you need to go over their options.

-A lot of your class feats are worse than archetyping. A lot of them. Even things that seem like they should be obviously strong, like quicken, can be weaker for your character, your party, and your table's typical adventuring day than stuff you get elsewhere. (I point at quicken as an example because it's incredible, but only a once per day ability; if your table plays longer days, its value tanks.) Shop around. Poaching strong focus spells can be especially valuable.

Lord Fyre wrote:

* - At low level? (say 1-3)

* - At moderate level? (4-7)

I need to notice that wizards are in pretty bad situation in these levels due the lack of useful abilities for low levels.

Basically the 3 best Thesis are useless or almost useless in these lower levels.

Looking at these, it appears that the haters are actually Right.

Wizards are Weak.

Lord Fyre, I think that thread is a great idea. I'm not actually opposed to games requiring skill and having learning curves, and do wish more people were willing to meet the system where it's at rather than get mad about having to (gasp!) strategize sometimes. I just don't think people who are having a really bad time are necessarily helped by being told they're doing it wrong, and feel for those players whose idea of having fun as a wizard is different from Paizo's.

True. Being told they're "doing it wrong" is not enough. That's why I was asking for help finding better approaches.

I know this is emant to be a wizard thing, but should archetypes be brought up? I know Alchemist is popular, and I was sorely tempted to try Cleric.

Yes this was about the wizard class. If a class needs a Multiclass archetype to be strong, then the people saying that the wizard is too weak have proven their point.

…, while the other side can't seem to offer much other than a handful of (occasionally helpful) git guddisms.

I just started a thread in the Advice section about Wizard "git guddisms." You're right, the rules aren't going to change, so I want to see if something better can be done.

This is a lifeboat thread from "4 years of PF 2: Wizards are weak." (Which is likely to be locked soon.)

I do understand the impression that PF2E wizards feel weak - when compared to the powerhouses they were in PF1E.

My question is, without changing the current rules, can the "wizard" be improved through better feat & spell selections? (… because I don't think this is a "rules" problem.)

If so, what should a prospective wizard do?
* - At character creation?
* - At low level? (say 1-3)
* - At moderate level? (4-7)
* - At middle level? (8-10)
and
* - At higher level? (11+)

I know that this will change depending on campaign, but I am hoping that some general guidance could help those players who are complaining of the Wizard's weakness.

Note: The Rules Lawyer's video is helpful, but I would like more discussion on this topic.

Good. Wizards have been riding high for too long.

That way of thinking is BAD for the long term health of the game.

Why is this thread still alive?

See what I did there?

People also seem to be forgetting the elephant in the room - D&D 2024 . Which one way or another will shift the commercial landscape when it comes out. Even if most of us here don't play it as our primary RPG, D&D is still a gateway to the rest of the industry.

From what I'm seeing, the shift in the market from the release of D&D 2024 may not be to WoTC's benefit.

PF3E ? Set your alarm clock to 5-7 years in the future.

PF2 Remaster has a longer road ahead then that.

Besides, why does it matter?

If you have enough time available, you might want to kind of recreate the nostalgia by using this possibility shared by James Jacobs himself to bring PCs to 4th level :

"Convert "Burnt Offerings" (the 1st adventure from Rise of the Runelords), and then have the PCs take 17 years off after they finish that adventure to live in Sandpoint as citizens, before continuing with "Seven Dooms for Sandpoint.""

If you're less worried about the nostalgia, Rusthenge is nearby and runs from 1st to 4th. It also deals with a remnant of Thassilon.

We try not to do in-game explanations for standard errata or full edition changes (with the Remaster living between those two extremes, but being far closer to errata than an edition change), because the number of times that a game goes through those changes is so frequent that if we had to explain them in-setting every time, it would make the setting feel ridiculously impermanent and chaotic.

Also known as the Forgotten Realms.

That said, the adventure "Rusthenge" IS meant to be an intro adventure, and it also follows a similar model with a small town being next to a big dungeon (an element I drew upon when creating and outlining the story before hiring Vanessa to kick ass at writing it), and is positioned to serve as a perfect "What did you do for 1st to 3rd level" adventure before your group goes on to play Seven Dooms.

Linked for convenience.

On a lighter note: there is another problem with changing systems.

I'm pretty sure we've been over this before, but to my mind there were three main issues.

1. The lack of continuity between modules.
The resurgence of the serpentfolk should have been hinted at far more strongly in the beginning and the Vaults of Madness felt very tacked-on compared to the rest of the city.

Lack of Continuity was a problem with many APs, but it is especially a problem with some of the earlier paths.

I can see why I CR4 creature isn't more common in Souls for Smuggler's Shiv - but Racing to Ruin doesn't have this excuse.

2. Saventh-yhi was too small. and the 'conquering' mechanic, like so many of the sub-mechanics introduced in APs, felt forced and boring.

For what was supposed to be a major metropolis, SY was pretty small and very sparesly detailed. I would have preferred if the bookspace given to the Vaults and most of Ilmurea were given to fleshing out SY instead. I threw out the conquer aspect and threw in a lot of lost city stuff I stole from other sources, e.g. Myth Drannor and Maure Castle.

Ah! The page count monster! But, it's actually better then the inspiration.

3. The competing factions on the race to SY and conquering the city were not interesting and merely complicated matters in an uninteresting way. I'm sure there are GMs that could make this bit work but it didn't for me.

Yes, a LOT of space was wasted on this too.

I'll probably get some flack for this but the colonialism issues didn't bother me (or my players, that I could tell), though the different PCs had varying opinions on the matter.

I doubt you'd suffer too much. Even Paizo's own writers didn't perceive the problem either.

Glad you at least tried it so you could put that nagging doubt aside.

Actually, it has given me more doubts.

But, as I said, resistance was overwhelming.