Why are Dexterity Fighers bad in PF2e? Just unable to take account of the correct feats etc? Could they not be great archers?
Reading this thread has been interesting, as I had been wonderign about Aid and aiding attacks, and whether the DC should be set to the AC of the creature, as that sounded like what would be appropriate following the rules.
But I think staying to DC20 to encourage its use and distinguish between success and critical success is important.
That is a good point and criticise. It is difficult to balance; though the Magus is a lot more offense minded and a better striker, since the Divine spell list is typically pretty restricted outside of what spells you get from following particular gods.
I haven't played or ran the system yet (as much as I want to!), so I haven't seen if there are any problems with the Warpriest versus Cloister in terms of balance or how good it feels; though I would guess that Cloister is better in more parties, while Warpriests might require specific combinations of party classes.
To clarify, everything I was suggesting is in addition to what it also gives you. Not having greater weapon specialsation and more armor profiency is unfortunate, but I feel that those might push warpriest over too being too much. Perhaps maybe giving better armmor proficiency instead for Final Doctrine?
My proposals for Warpriest would be:
Fourth Doctrine: you would also gain expert in all martial weapons.
Fifth Doctrine. you gain master weapon profiency with your diety's favoured weapon.
Final Doctrine: you would also gain master weapon profiency with martial weapons.
How do people feel this would land with how Warpriests are right now? Too good?
I t hink it all depends on the approach the author takes in their post.
Personally, I take an approach that Subjectivity is Implied when talking about things like this. Nothing I am trying to put across in my arguments is meant to be taken as 100% objective besides the facts themselves. Where I to say what I think is the best class, I would say "x is the best class", but I would mean it from my perspective... without having to put in all the qualifiers for it.
It is obviously fine and useful to sprinkle in terms such as "from my point of view" or "in my opinion", but otherwise it can bog down the point if you constantly have to qualify where you're coming from; or it dilutes the point and makes it too weak for what you want to come across with.
So while postulating the conclusion you have in the form of a question as a potential means of bait is wrong, I don't think it's problematic if you're not pretending to be objective on anything and you're willing to argue your case.
If you can't see how religion (particularly organised religion) can be used to harm and hurt people; that it is okay to criticise that harm and hurt without spreading religious hatred / hatred of anyone of a particular religion (which is often tied to racism); and that those criticisms are different from the transphobia faced by trans people...
I don't know how else to explain it.
A lot of things are starting to make a lot more sense now.
I find people's attitudes to moderation and forums strange here.
I have become somewhat active on forums such as enworld and rpg.net. Those places are both well moderated and warn users of infractions, publically, with quotes and without deleting posts. In addition, users are banned, sometimes permanently, if they break the rules.
I understand right now that the Paizo team is quite small and that they are under a lot of pressure and work to try and deal with current incidents. Removing posts to try and deal with incidents is logical in that situation and somewhat admirable; they have been some truly digusting things removed recently, that I can imagine have been upsetting to people.
If users are not being banned for blatantly breaking community guidelines, and then their posts are being removed... then their behaviour is going to continue, as their intention is often to hurt specific people at specific times - which tehy wil lget away with if there is no longer term issue.
I have heard there are significant issues with Pazio accounts being linked to purchases, which I can see being an issue; I am not sure how viable it is to refactor how accounts work to separate user accounts and purchase accounts.
But this needs to be done, along with hiring more moderators and properly dealing with abusive and rude users. Otherwise, the forum's viasblility as a place to discuss Paizo and its products will be reduced.
This is not directly related to Gods and Magic, but I am curious why Red Mantis Dedication is restricted to lawful evil characters, when Achaekek has LN and NE followers; I could imagine a LN follower potentially engaging with Red Mantis work in assassinations that are... not as morally questionable (someone like say Agent 47 from Hitmman - that type of character).
I tried to create a Rogue character with Free Archetype to live up to this type of concept but found I was better off using a combination of Human ancestory feats and Cleric multi-class dedication to reach this idea.
I'm guessing I'm missing a lot when it comes to alignment for why this restriction is here.
Cori Marie wrote:
At this point I'm almost content to leave the forums behind and just stick to the discords of my favorite actual play podcasts, as those spaces have been actively welcoming.
Off topic but any recommendations, particularly for a community point of view? With Critical Role vods being delayed to Monday and being live-streamed at really unfriendly times for me, I could use another TTRPG podcast / actual play to listen to.
Perhaps marginalised people (in particular members of the LGBTQIA+ community) wouldn't be so abrasive and 'rude' if we had the backing of more straight and cis people who would call out homophobic, biphobic and transphobic behaviour when they see it, and got rid of repeat offenders whos goals are to make us unsafe and unwelcome.
I certainly know, from my experience, so called 'abrasive' trans people tend to be, well, not be abrasive when they're around people who accept them. Almost as if coming under attack for existing is exhausting and draining.
Paizo, please hire a moderator team, or get vetted volunteers. This place is becoming pretty distressing to come to, in the way the subreddit of all things isn't.
To be honest IMO Alchemist and Magus, as far as I can tell from reading (not playing), both only need one change made to them to make them more viable;
Alchemist should get master simple and alchemical profiencies;
Spellstrike should be special and not trigger Attack of Opportunity.
I feel those changes would go a long way to address balance concerns with those two classes.
Diego Valdez wrote:
That's pretty horrifying. I'm hoping this is something that the union negotiations can discuss and solve, and that the new executives keep thise very much at the back of their minds that this has to change.
Thank you for speaking up Diego. Having this out in the open is important. Solidarity the whole way.
I hope that Butler and Webb both understand the importance of working with the union and workers, and they help to address the continuing concerns (as can be seen in other threads) about Paizo's exective team (particularly Jeff).
I would hope they help Paizo apologise for transphobic practices that occured in the past.
I personally rpefer Soul Vessal.
However I would suggest that each lich, based on who they are, would choose a shape, name and reference for their individual 'Soul Cage', and the term only be used as a generic reference.
Imagine, if you will, that the lich ytou're facing has a Waffle Iron of Soul Binding... how much flavour and stories can you great out of that?
Unsure about Magus, but for me for Gunslinger and very specifically anyone who wants to dual wield, it does feel awkward being unable to use your Way reload while having the Dual Wield feat from the Gunslinger itself. IMO, it'd make sense to mek to errata the Gunslinger version of that feat so that you can use it to reload a weapon without having to have a hand free, so that you can at-least use it when required. That doesn't save on action economy necessarily, but it would at-least make Pistolero or Sniper as safe paths for anyone who's going down that class fantasy.
Granted, I'm saying this without playing - it might be a different situation in actual play.
History being written by the victors is a myth. History is written by those who have the means and ability to do so, but also by what people leave behind and what spreads as cultural ideas or opinions.
Consider the fact that in Irish history, there were plenty of various different rebellions against the English and British administration on the island, all of which failed until the War of Independence. Yet, it is extremely clear that each one of these rebellions, despite their failure, continued to inspire future rebellions and inform Irish culture. This could not exactly have happened if the adage was always true, no?
... apologies, we're getting quite serious here.
While I generally prefer not to have alignment systems (though if I were to run Pathfinder, I would probably stick with it unless I had a compelling reason not to), I do agree capital G good gods should... well, not be outright bigots or engage in horrible things. While modern morality can be quite different fromn the past, history is not linger; it's not as simple as believing a medevial society, especially one where gods exist, would have misogny as a mainline view, to use the example brought up here.
I'm curious then - does Pathfinder 2e have a metanarrative, i.e., the results and endings of past APs will definitely tie into and become canon in future APs and lore books? I know the year advances to match the current year of our world in each material released.
Just because rights are enshrined in law doesn't mean those laws are enforced properly or correctly - or indeed, that people will have access to practical ways to take advantage of their rights.
Ask several trans people here about what rights they have on paper in the law of their country and what, actually, is practically available for them to help them.
Ask employees in many, *many* companies what their rights are according to the law of the land, and how much power and access to those rights they actually have.
You will for a significant amount of people, the de-jure and de-facto situation are very, very different.
It's really funny people are trying to find imaginary transphobic laws to minimise the more-than-likely transphobic actions of someone in Paizo in regards to a trans WOMAN and a cis WOMAN sharing a room together when they want to.
It would change nothing about how horrible an act like that would be. It wouldn't chage anything about what anybody is saying here. It says a lot about some posters views when they keep bringing it up and implying that people are being tricked or mislead. Wonder what that reminds me of.
Trans and non-binary people here have raised valid concerns and want them addressed by Paizo - whether vague or not, they need to at-least show, through action, that they support their transgender and non-binary staff and that those people are welcome and cherished at Paizo, and as customers.
Right now, that hasn't been shown.
I would rather think it would be pretty invasive to publish a screengrab of someone's private Twitter; she kept it private for a reason, and it may not have been the best idea for people with access to that Twitter to publish a summary of what she said (unless she herself confirmed that it was okay for people to do that).
A few others with access to the Twitter have confirmed what she said in the thread considering the president's reply.
I had recently bought three of the core rulebooks for Pathfinder 2e and had been hoping to find people to see if I could run an Adventure Path.
Now after all this news, I cannot decide whether I should just run free adventures or homebrew, or whether to run the system at all.
I had been hoping that Paizo would be significantly better than WoTC in terms of the actions they take as a company, but it seems to me Paizo's management is holding that possibility back.
Poker is as much about deception and bluffing as it is about gambling. There is a much bigger skill element to it than most gambling.
While there is obviously a large skill element here too, you can't force the dice to roll a certain way. Just like poker players can't force the dealer to give them certain cards.
EDIT: as well as that I wonder how many professional poker players lose a lot of money (my base outside impression is that as professionals, they don't just keep playing to increase wealth, but also to keep going financially.)