Mass Kneebreaker's page

I mean i am surprised there already isn't one, considering the inspiration. Anybody else think so?

The Reveals of Magus and Summoner have made me ponder something for quite a while (as much as it has been a while since then), about what is the future of Pathfinder 2E.

When do you guys think we get an entirely new class in this edition? Is that ages away? Will it happen when this 10 year travel is almost over? Do you think all classes should be ported over from 1e first before thinking of something new, Or would trying to create something entirely new take priority for freshness? And More importantly...what would you like it to be? Any ideas for that?

Warlord pls, if i may wish.

Hey there! I have to say, i'm liking the new edition a lot. I remained very skeptical till the release, but now, i can say was happy to be surprised. Regardless, i hope paizo keeps churning support for this game for another ten years!

I am not good at segue's, so what i was wondering, what class support would you like to see in the future? Not as in new classes, but new options for existing classes. Here's what i would like to see!

Two-weapon barbarian: I think the whirlwind style barbarian is just as iconic as the huge weapon type in fiction. The option is sadly not yet really viable for a barbarian without multiclassing. How about giving Barbarian their own version of twin strike?

Weapon bard: Bard has always been a versatile character, able to do a little bit of everything. But right now, the option of playing a more combat oriented bard (like dervish, remember that?) is not really there without multiclassing, as you can only get expert with weapons. Also, Skald would make for a great dedication.

Blight druid: Can we have this again? I loved it in first edition.

Reach fighter: Oddly, there is a not single feat in the entire book that specifically supports reach weapons. I find that...strange.

Drunken monk: My favorite archetype of all time. Please bring it back~

Thrown weapon ranger: Doesnt have to be ranger, but please, more support for thrown weapons.

Thats pretty much what i would love to see. or maybe i am an idiot and just missed the options. Anyways, what would you like to see?

After the survey for ancestries, i noticed a part where we were asked if orcs should be a core race, along with their half brethren. I think it is an important question, though personally Im all for it. I mean we got goblins so orcs arent that big of a stretch. Also am i the only one who thinks allowing half-orcs but not full blooded ones feels a bit weird? Are half orcs really that common?

What do you think about this?

I havent seen much talk about this in the forums, so i thought i'd bring it up. How do you think how animal companions should be handled in PF2?

Ps: for the love of gods finally give us large bears.

Don't make them all have a strength penalty, Please. Otherwise we have 3 races in the same book, all excelling and Sucking at almost the same things. I'm not sure how to best do it, but please, don't make all the little folk so similar stat wise.

I have this concept in my mind about a Arabian style Desert elf wizard who uses magic themed around sand for an upcoming game. Unfortunately, i haven't found a way to really do this in game terms? Does anyoen have any ideas? Are there a lot of spells themed around sand in the game?

We all know what we think is the best archetype. (Drunken master and I will fight you for it.) We all have our opinions on this and they have been discussed at great length, which i love. However, what do you think, in your personal opinion, is the absolute worst archetype in the game? Your opinion on why that is completely up to you. Let's put the crud into a pedestal.

Personally, what i think is the worst archetype is the Pack Mule. Not only do you lose a feat, you lose all your armor training to become a glorified Luggage carrier. It takes the one thing fighter is good at...you know, FIGHTING, and makes him the undisputed king of...carrying things. Well, until magic solves the problem with weight entirely.

SO! What do you think is the worst archetype?

It maybe just me, but i couldnt help but notice there wasn't any acid or poison weapons in the core rulebook, aside from the dart guns. I was hoping we could get guns that spray acid or shoot poison goops at foe, or some other chemical weapons like gas guns.

Anyone else think those would be cool? Also shields.

Lets say it would be a live-action movie, and the budget would be on the level of lord of the rings. The movie would star The Iconic heroes.

Who you think would be a good actor for the individual iconics?

What could the movie be about?

Would you go watch it? Cuz I surely would!

Hey, it's me again. This is something that came up two days ago in our session. We have Ranger character Mjoll the Lioness ( i heard she took the name from Skyrim but i don't know where) Who is obsessed with food. She puts points into profession:cook every level and keeps all kinds of food items on hand. What is wierd is that apparently her dream is to Slaughter monsters of the world, Cook them and eat them and then write a cookbook about what monsters are edible and what they taste like, and then publish the book.

However, our DM is left a bit perplexed by the questions and actions of the character, so i decided to get her some help with these questions.

1: Under normal rules, food is simply something that prevents death. Is there any way to make it more interesting? Like getting benefits from good and tasty food?
2: Would eating Monsters, if they're sentient (like dragons) Be considered an evil act?
3: So far she has eaten (or at least tasted) A white dragon, A cockatrice, A hydra, A manticore and a troll (she threw up on the last one though). What effects would you give for eating these, what do you think monsters in general would taste like?

Any other advice would be appreciated! Thanks in advance!

I have been discussing about this in other threads, and i decided to see if there was any people who shared my opinion.

Small races have a hard time making melee combat a viable option. Not only do they all have a strength penalty (expect Wayangs but i have never seen anyone play those) they also have less movement speed, lower weapon damage, and Minuses to combat maneuvers. In exchange they get plus one to hit (which is denied by the strength reduction) and Armor class as well as big plus to stealth. It seems hardly a substitute. Well, unless your character is stealthy like a rogue. But what about people who want to Play Hafling fighters? Or Gnome Paladins?

Now, i get it. Races have advantage's and disadvantages. But Small races have these stacked so hard against them that 40% of play styles is being discouraged from them. And i am from the mindset that you should encourage but never discourage characters.

Now, there are some workarounds for this. Here are ways i have found out to make small characters better at melee.

1. Weapon finesse
Allowing you to use dexterity instead of strength in melee removes your biggest disadvantage. However, it limits your weapon choices severely. Also, you either have to enchant your weapon or have to get Slashing grace/Fencing grace/dervish to get damage rolls with dex too, and latter makes you have to keep your offhand empty.

2. Mounted combat
This is actually a good idea. Small cavaliers are actually more viable than normal sized cuz they can fit into dungeons with their mounts. For those who don't want to ride, animal companions can share some of your burden in melee.

3: Sneak attack
Both Gnome and Halfling rogues are good. Sneak attack allows you to deal damage that is unaffected by strength. For those who do not want to be rogues, this is of course not an option. I personally don't like playing rogues as i like to be more direct.

So, what other ways have you discovered to make small characters better at close combat? Do you think that there is not enough options, and paizo should give us more? Do you think that Small races Anti-melee design is stupid, or at the very least they went completely overboard with it, like i do? Please, make halfling fighters not be something to snicker at.

I have an idea for a character. It is an old D&D character of mine, A gnome fighter (yes, gnome) Who i named Tina Kneebreaker (she got the name after shattering the knee of an earth titan with a magic hammer in our campaign.).

Anyways, her shtick was that she Knew how to use two handed weapons, Weapon and shield and duel wield in equal measure. Is a fighter Build like this possible in pathfinder? Or viable? I have tried vanilla but it seems to take so long to be viable in more than one way.

Let me explain. Were about to have a campaign in a Low magic setting. It takes place in a stand in for London, and has has commonplace guns, And is pretty much Victorian age.

Magic, being not only very rare, but also quite Discriminated and evil in the setting, means that Most spellcaster classes are not allowed. Only ones who are allowed are Alchemists (who are men of science), Bards (who are men of entertainment), Oracle's (who are religious figures. They were chosen in cleric's place as he doesn't want any full spell casters.) investigators, paladins and Inquistitors. (rangers must pick a spell less Archetype).

However, use magic device and other means of getting spells are allowed, and in fact encouraged, due to story reasons. Thus here is my question.

What are the way to get spells for classes without taking levels in spell using classes? Are there any? Also can you use Magic device without being a spellcaster?

Thanks in advance. Would you like to play in a setting like this? My group is a big fan of the victorian style.

There is desert themed game session starting near my location, and I want a Arabic knight character who fights foes with scimitar and shield. I want it to be a divine character, but paladin does not seem to have any way to be effective with light armor. Anyone got any ideas for a character like this?