Sovereign Dragon

Lucas Yew's page

414 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 414 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

On that thread about non-martials having a rough time getting new weapon proficiencies which scales past Trained, had me thinking of the ①titular question, and the following derivative:

Is having multiple martial classes with strict niche protections on the availability of individual fighting styles worth it for the game?

The fact that when another game, the often ill-spoken 4th Edition of Big D, divided classes into power sources, had a single Martial source manage to cover all classes that weren't Arcane, Divine, Primal, Psionic (4E's probably-equivalent to PF2's Occult), and Shadow, also cements this personal suspicion that weapon based fighting as a whole being divided among classes might be harmful to both the martials themselves and spellcasters.


P.S. Just in case, while the question may seem adversarial against martials, I actually prefer them to spellcasters (due to underdogma, I admit though).

1. Probably because Wizards have spells that (while no longer that severe) can bypass a respectable number of skill usages, the now non-magical Alchemists had to have something to be compensated.

2. Well, it's Paizo's decision to make Rogues as THE skill class so there's that. I do wonder when the Investigator goes online next year fans of those two classes get to scuffle a lot...

3. The most likely in-universe justification is that they spent all intellectual time studying wizardry while other smarties picked up skills during the same time.

4. While not a tryout for explanations, if I readjusted PF1 classes' skill points, I'd use the following principle;

(1) All playable races w/ class levels start with 2+INT skill points.
(2) If the class' main AS is not INT, gain 2 more.
(3) If the class has 1/3 or no spell slot progression, gain 2 more.
(4) If the class is often treated as a "skill monkey", gain 2 more.


* p.112: The Ancient Red Dragon is Huge, not Gargantuan as it's supposed to be.

I'm quite sure one of the dev team already confirmed it as a real error in an another thread, but I want to make sure that it will be fixed ASAP in he 2nd printing, hence the reprisal here.

Seems solid, upon first glance.

Both deal with Mind affecting spells. Meanwhile, whereas Arcane magic also deals with Material (Energy + Matter) spells, Occult magic deals with Spirit (soul) related spells.

At least, that's what the old dev team blog and the CRB's page 300 tells me.

It may also have to do with your total HP scaling across the entire 20 level progress. While in PF1 your HP multiplies roughly 20 times higher than at startup, in PF2 this drastically lowers to 10.5 times, nearly half the slope; probably to be closer to damage scaling (which is roughly 4 times at the highest for weapons, if you have major striking runes ready).

As the title, I'll ask right away.

1. Is a +3 major resilient orichalcum armor legal to give out as treasure?
2. If so, what is its Item Level and price (or general worth for WBL) treated as?
3. Is there no legal way as of now for gaining a 4th property rune for magical explorer's clothing?

Bonus. Do you treat the free gauntlets included in a magical full/half plate as magical too?

4 people marked this as a favorite.

This part piqued my interest.

N N 959 wrote:
I'm not aware of Monks being immune to poison as a trope either.

Said trope is actually common in most mid(and higher)-tier wuxia characters. Usually it's automatically gained as you train your body with qi/chi/ki (or whatever pronounciation depending on the country writing the story) required martial arts.

Actually, I was quite astonished that WotC managed to research very well (for a presumably non-East Asian staff) on the kinds of common wuxia superpowers when making the Monk class' static benefits (tongues of the sun and moon, timeless body, perfect self, etc.), and managed to mess those up blasphemously in a heartbreaking manner...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally the old wands felt more like drug syringes visually wise...

Yeah, it's the Big-D-ism, but still...

Probably common only for the adventurers, literally wise. But I think it's just for setting up the Recall Knowledge DC adjustments.

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Ashborne wrote:

*** Caution - - - - Rant Ahead ***

Extreme Magocracism

Wuxia heroes will want a long talk with this person...

No, seriously, in wuxia stories, it's the warriors who have a way easier (and safer) path for ascending to a higher plane of existence, not the caster equivalents. Quite the striking opposite of European chivalric stories, really.

Niche protection? Which I think is perfectly fine in a class based game, but only such games. Especially since PF2 did away with Lego brick multiclassing (which I have mixed feelings on).

Thanks for the data!

Do you have further plans for like adding the average DPR for each level for the first 3 rounds?

I need the rules too, so I can quickly create a version of true dragons that better suits my taste of their in-world positions. Plus NPCs that also work well numerically in a simulationist manner...

rainzax wrote:

Suggested Errata.

Alchemists have a new 1st level ability called "Smart Packing" allowing them to sub in INT for ST to Bulk.

Thus an INT 16 Alchemist can carry around 8 Bulk no sweat.

Edit: Maybe this only affects the first tier of Bulk, ie. 5+INT before Encumbered but 10+ST maximum?

Ah, inspired by the Scholar from SoM, am I correct? That might work quite well...

3 people marked this as a favorite.

While I have not much gripe with the art, I do wish they drew props for each monster's picture which would help visualize their size properly.

Maybe errata in an odd level feature that gives Alchemists extra Bulk capacity exclusive for their tools of the trade? For multiclass dedications this might come online a bit later (like AoO for other martials).

This actually can happen since PF1's Core Monk also received cold iron/silver Unarmed Attacks during a later printing, and that was more like a horizontal growth, unlike this vertically stunted situation.

In-game wise, while not applicable for direct combat power upgrade, a 14+ Monk is the most reliable way to achieve freedom from death by aging. Multiclassing can never achieve this in PF2, so is a Philosopher's Stone (as de-aging elixirs which are usually brewed with the extra money you milk from said stone are missing from Core).

1 person marked this as a favorite.

May or may not be related, but this eerily echoes off that rant about "Puritan regression" on an another thread...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

While I do agree with general nerfs for the "god casters" of yesteryear, it was a bit sad to see such "world-building" spells (incl. Fabricate, Teleporation Circle) get the axe on core treatment, as I like magitech style campaigns like Eberron or even the fan-made notorious Tippyverse.

Speaking of new iconics, who is the lady presented in the PF2 CRB's page 417? She looks like to be drawn by WAR (my favorite western artist, by the way), and I may have (or not) seen her before in an AP cover...

Burn was just plucked in last minute because someone in the dev team thought a CON centric class is overpowered (not true by the way, including the fact that there's no CON based skill to synergize out of combat).

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Best baiting title in a while, really. >:)

While it seems that not all data is uploaded as of now (I know, removing Golarion only content must be taxing with uploading domains and monsters), I look forward to see how a complete OGL compliant SRD for PF2 looks like!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Prestidigitation is Evocation... That's, um, a mighty weird decision. I'd rather had it kept as Universal...

About 1 and a half hours later as of writing this, I believe.

So almost 9 hours for me to get the PDF. At least I get it an hour before August 2 hits...

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheGoofyGE3K wrote:
if it's not a signature spell, can a spontaneous caster still use a higher slot to cast a lower spell without the heightening effect?

Seconded. This is a critical question for playing spontaneous casters in PF2 (and other Vancian systems in general).

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Uh oh... So something that I feared much did show up...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So, basically the vertical growth is handled automatically, and you strive to gain horizontal capabilities, am I correct with the interpretation?

Vlorax wrote:

I can actually answer this i think as I have the bestiary already. AC isn't consistent so it depends on the creature. and equal level creatures are meant to be a challenge for a party of 4.

lvl 10 Graveknight AC 31.
Fighter lvl 10 attack bonus 21 = 10 + 6 + 5 (lvl + prof + str)

So unbuffed no magic wep they hit on 10+ crit on 20 50% hit chance 5%crit

Lvl 10 Troll King AC 28
28-21= 7

Unbuffed they hit on a 7+ crit on 17+ 65% hit chance 20% crit

I thought PF rules hit when equal or higher than the target DC, am I wrong? You did get the crit chances right, though...


Anyway, here's my next curiosity: a quick rundown of "passive (always-on type)" capstone options (like the "permanently Quickened" ones) for each classes, please!

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Seconded. But it's more because the global area where I live will be August 2 when the Paizo office hits 9:00 AM August 1, so I am doomed to get it a day later (scientifically not, but it's that cheated feeling that's important for me)...

Both clerics still gain their 10th level spells though, am I right?

It looks incomplete as of now, isn't it? Or is the Solar missing in B1?

And Giant Monitor Lizard as a Monitor type is actually quite funny...

Is the Monk's Timeless Body still there? Is there any other way you can achieve "soft/safe immortality" via class feats?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I decided to post some questions for the lucky ones who got the books already (with a secondary purpose of providing myself a link to here since the forum's gone haywire today).

1. Is there any additional RAW method other than the Philosopher's Stone or Timeless Body (if they stayed at all) to gain safe effective immortality?

2. Other than the Wish-esque spells, what and how do the 10th level spells fare for each tradition?

3. How many and what kind of 20+ level foes have stat blocks in the Bestiary?

So it wasn't just me messed up here. I strongly hope Paizo fixes this up quickly...

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I thought you needed 20 in PF1 as your starting primary... Was such a thought extreme?

It seems more than a few people already got hands on the books...

So, are Imperial Dragons, Pegasi, Phoenixes, and Shoggoths extant in the Bestiary?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
The story and the narrative is not what happens at the table. The game happens at the table. The story is what gets told afterwards.

It's very pleasant to see someone of a mind alike. I'd previously state the same idea as not as intelligible as you worded it...

While I do not agree entirely with sherlock1701 completely, I firmly agree with them on their Point #10 (quantifiable NPCs). Guess I love having every single thing in (any) universe as quantifiable (thus why I like GURPS, as every power in that game is at least attempted to be quantified in CP) and predictable. Although I totally can compromise with critters not meant for PC playability, potentially playable ones are better off future-proofed (Goblin Scuttle as a Goblin 1 feat, for example).


For the main topic, I look forward to see most of the dynamic martial combat styles imagined in the 3rd party Spheres of Might, including stuff from the Guardian and Warleader spheres, right from the start.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Psychic. Keeping the ability to cast spells without a tongue nor a free hand. And a spontaneous caster.

After that, I want the prepared Occult full caster (probably Witch of PF2) and the spontaneous full casters of the other 3 traditions defined as quickly as possible.

I'm the type of player who let the dice fall where they may, not enforcing "acting out" dialogues but rather have the mechanical rules interact with the PC and the in game world so the log of all that happens end up being a more organic "story". And I really like power fantasy, as in casually freaking out the local young dragon with a random display of your power while sleepwalking and making them give up their own treasure in a funny interactive event kind of stuff. It's the main reason why I play a roleplaying game where everything in quantified in an universal metric (Level in D&D and PF's case, CP if GURPS) rather that a so-called "storytelling" game.

On the topic though, if the preferrence of power fantasy problem is cleared, I think that real life time constraints on keeping a long campaign is the main reason why high level games won't last long. If such, why not start the game from a high level (11+) to begin with? Why not slaughter that sacred cow of having to start with Level 1?

NPC classes built with legal formulae, for all PC-able ancestries. Would be much more easier after the monster rules are published so I can polish the math though.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

An "Absolutionist", so that's one clean way of describing people like me in a single word? Hmm, that's not bad. Yes, I'm the type who tries the best when having to slaughter quantum ogres and the other unsatisfactory aspects of "Narrative" style games...

Anyway, it's depressing every time I see battles stirred up on the Internet because of definition problems. Like, alll the time, though...

The first draft is out, but it's only for backers, for now.

Captain Morgan wrote:
I would hazard a guess that if there is a "standard adventuring day length" (not a given, since the big resource pool, spells, grows with level even if top level spell slots remain the same) that it will be based on XP, not number of encounters. IE, your party should be able to handle about 240 XP of encounters in a single day, and how it is split up is up to your discretion.

Now that's a neat method (the *** XP/day one). Wonder why I never even thought up something similar.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Isn't it immensely unfair for weapon-using classes (a.k.a. Martials) when their schtick is "stolen" by casting classes (Casters) easily while spellcasting is so hard to do the opposite?

If weapon based fighting is such a "small" concept that it has weight similar to or lower than a single casting tradition (like Arcane) or a spell school (like Evocation), the devs might have condensed all Martials into a single class, but alas, they chose not to.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Wuxia stories generally have practitioners from all sides apply "proper breathing methods" to accumulate their pool of chi. The old and prestigious schools usually have safer and more efficient variations in story.

While I don't like spell components either, at the very least Verbal does have some credibility here source material wise.

I wish all classes have a decent number of "always-on" (as opposed to action using) type class feats at launch, for each available levels (1 and all even levels). Personally I really liked the "permanently quick" capstones, secondary only to Timeless Body and Craft Philosopher's Stone (yes, non-spellcasters' easy access to quasi-immortality is a titanic deal to me)...

1 to 50 of 414 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>