I’ve been out of these forums for a while and I’d like to ask if there’s any news on Battlecry’s release date? Took a look at the Products page and found nothing. Isn’t it supposed to be up of they’re aiming for a Gencon release?
Search Posts
It recently occurred to me that there is a part of the Commander class fantasy that could be better represented in the rules.
But another facet that also represents class may be that of the Commander who blows a horn (think Boromir blowing the horn of Gondor or the classic American officer sounding commands through a trumpet). I know one could argue that these would be just warrior muse bards, but I feel that there is space for Commanders to also employ sound instruments, whether through a feat that shapes the banner’s area or extends it temporarily or a dedicated item.
Hi y’all I am playing an Alchemist and a question came up during our last session. The Quick Alchemy action says the item it creates ‘ has the infused trait, but it remains potent only until the start of your next turn’. So if I use Quick Alchemy to create a mutagen or elixir with an effect that lasts for 1 minute like a lesser bestial mutagen, does it end at the end of my turn or does it keep its effects as normal and I get until the end of my turn to drink it? I imagine the correct answer should be the second, but is there any rule that supports this interpretation? My GM said they’re okay with ruling it this way but would like to know if there is any specific text in the rules…
So, like many, I've been having a blast playing Elden Ring, particularly using the multiple versions of Carian Slicer, Piercer, Greatsword, etc. Going back to my weekly campaign, I just realised that PF2 has no spells that let you conjure weapons. The closest thing we could get is Soulforged armaments, but those are tied to Wis and divine casting... This is a common trope, with games like Skyrim and even Dnd with its shadow and fire blades coming to mind. Here's to hoping that we see some of these spells in PF2 one day (:Maybe as a modification available to Spell Tricksters (something like 'you change the spell to resemble a weapon and attack with it') or as their own spells
Hi all, I'm a forever GM who's been playing their first PF2 campaign (as a player... I've GM'ed a homebrew 1-20 PF2 campaign right before this one). I have a greataxe wielding Inexorable Iron Magus and we're very close to reaching the 6th level. Turns out that, although I've been enjoying my time going nova and dealing tons of damage, I'm finding myself thinking about giving my Magus some time off and bringing in a new character. The group's Bastion just changed characters to become an Animal Instinct Barbarian, so I'm looking towards other concepts. However, there are just so many options. I was wondering if I could get your opinions on what could fit with my party. We're six players. Myself, a Warpriest of Chaldira, a Forensic Investigator, a Tyrant Marshall of Asmodeus, the Animal Barbarian and a Stars Oracle. Any cool concepts or build/archetype ideas that could maybe fill a niche in my group?
Hello, I'd like to cancel my adventure path subscription. I want to keep the Rulebook subscription.
Basically, the thread's title. I know Striker's Scroll alows a Magus to attach a scroll to their weapon to Spellstrike with it. The Scrollstaff seems to do the same thing, albeit with the Magus having to craft the scroll into the staff. I was wondering if the rules on the Scrollstaff, that include allowing the caster to Cast a Spell from the imbued scroll would allow a Magus to use it with Spellstrike, since it includes the Cast a Spell activity?
Reading the Striker's Scroll Magus feat, I came to wonder if a Magus that had a scroll in one hand and a weapon in the other could Spellstrike with its spell. The feat specifically mentions it allows the Magus to use the spell on the scroll as part of the Spellstrike ability, so I am in doubt as to whether Striker's Scroll would be the only way for a Magus to Spellstrike with a scroll spell or if it is just the most efficient way to do it.
I had a doubt when reading the Magus and was hoping to get an oppinion on how you read the Expansive Spellstrike and Spell Swipe feats. Expansive Spellstrike reads::
Rather than needing to use a spell that has a spell attack roll for a Spellstrike, you can use a harmful spell that can target a creature or that has an area of a burst, cone, or line (abiding by any other restrictions of Spellstrike). When you Cast a Spell that doesn’t have a spell attack roll as part of a Spellstrike, it works in the following ways.
• If your Strike critically fails, the spell is lost with no effect. • Creatures use their normal defenses against the spell, such as saving throws. • If the spell lets you select a number of targets, it instead targets only the creature you attacked with your Strike. • If the spell has an area, the target must be in that area. A burst is centered on a corner of the target’s square, or the square corner closest to the center of the target, if the target is Large or larger; you choose the corner if more than one is eligible. A cone or line emits from you and must include the target; if you’re not adjacent to the target (using a reach weapon or starlit span, for example), choose any square adjacent to the target as the source. The spell affects all creatures in the area as normal, but the Strike still targets only one creature. Spell Swipe reads like this:
You attack in an arc and enact your spell against everyone you hit. Make a Spellstrike, but roll separate Strikes to attack two creatures, each of whom must be within your melee reach and adjacent to each other. If your spell could affect two or more targets, your spell affects whichever foes you hit, not just the first target; otherwise, choose one target to affect with the spell. A Spell Swipe counts as two attacks for your multiple attack penalty, but the penalty doesn’t increase until after you make both attacks.
If you’re using a weapon that has the sweep trait, its circumstance bonus applies against both targets. You can use this activity with only melee Strikes, even if you have the starlit span hybrid study or a similar ability. If you use Expansive Spellstrike to Spellstrike with an area spell, apply the area as described in Expansive Spellstrike, choosing one of the creatures you Strike to determine the area and whether the spell fails due to a critically failed Strike. If you use Expansive Spellstrike to Spellstrike with a targeted spell, the spell is lost completely only if both Strikes are critical failures. So what I was wondering was: a Magus using Expansive Spellstrike to Spellstrike with, say, Electric Arc or Chain Lightning will only hit a single creature (as per the third bullet point in Expansive Spellstrike). Can the Magus uses Spell Swipe with a spell such as those and get the spell to go off against the two creatures targeted by Spell Swipe?
Here’s a question for those that have had their subs shipped (still waiting on mine). With the way Spellstrike seems to be worded, could a Magus use Telekinetic Maneuver (2 actions, attack trait and targets a creature) to make a maneuver with a weapon attack roll?
So, today saw the release of Game Trade Magazine. It feautres a two page article by Logan Bonner on SoM. A friend of mine got access to it and mentioned these news: • Magus will get Spellstrike and a new mechanic referred to as magical stance, a stance that adds damage all their attacks • Summoner is mentioned as having the ability to share senses, quickly manifest and dismiss their eidolon • a lot of new spells. There’s vague mentions of more cantrips, variable action spells, summon spells and 1e spells • there’s a section on legendary loot. Mentions more magic weapons, runes and apex items. New categories of items seem to be fulu, paper talismans, grimoire spellbooks, magical tatoos and personalizable staves. • spellhearts seem to be new items that attach to your gear to improve attacks, defense and grant extra spells • the book of unlimited magic will use class archetypes. Flexible spellcaster is a class archetype that applies to prepared casters and when combined with Wizard could mimic 1e arcanist
So I'm GMing a campaign that has been going from level 1 to 20. It ends in two weeks and the BBEG is the Treerazer. Players are expected to reach level 20 in today's session. While doing my prep, I kept wondering if the Treerazer is enough to pose a challenge to the characters. I mean, I know it is a level 25 creature, which should mean it is off the charts already, but have any of you run an encounter with it? The party is a ranger, a cloistered cleric, a beast summoner, a dragon barbarian and a bard. I feel kind of worried on the action economy. I have also had the Treerazer prepare some 'nastier specials' in the form of a few power word kills, a prismatic wall for crowd controlling and an antimagic field if things go south. Do you feel it could be a decent fight or am I looking at a piece of cake or TPK?
During the playtest, I have seen this community divided as to what to do with Striking Spell. Some disliked its two roll system regarding spell attacks and the majority of the posters I engaged with seemed to advocate for Striking Spell to tie the result of spell attacks (those that require an attack roll) to the result of the Magus' martial attack with save spells working the same way they already do. Opposed to them, a few users argued that the fact that the Magus could hold the charge for a second round could potentially be overpowered or that a one roll engine did not seem necessary. I have also seen an argument that folding the whole process into a single three action activity was not ideal to be a class' base routine. Seeing valid points on both sides, my table has come up with a feat that is basically the Eldritch Archer's Eldritch Shot, except that it applies for the Magus' melee attacks as well: Eldritch Strike (3 actions, Magus, Feat 6):
Its merits are:
Well, today's the last day. With this playtest ending, I was wondering if there will be a post-playtest stream like last years' but didn't find any information on that. If memory serves me right, last year's stream was a few days after the playtest was over, but with the pandemic and the time needed for data gathering, I don't know if that'll be the case this time around. Do any of you know if there's info on that?
While reflecting on the Magus, I had an idea that could maybe help the Magus. Like them or not, the Syntheses are significant effects that I would rate as ‘somewhat to very powerful’ to use survey terms. However, I don’t think they are unique enough to be subclasses. Instead I thought that, since they define fighting styles, they could be Stances spread across the 1st and 2nd level feat spaces. My reasoning behind this is that Magi are proficient in martial weapons, so they could theoretically be able to shift styles. Replacing Syntheses, we could have more meaningful mechanics that altered how the classed viewed magic and might. Maybe a focus spell one, a castery one and a martial one, haven’t thought much on that end. Perhaps a few fan favorite 1e archetypes as subclasses? The pros would be that we’d adress
So, today was probably the last time I got to playtest the Magus before the playtest window closes and it was the most disappointing of all my experiences (find them here) . Today's session saw my Magus at level 14 fighting alongside a Dragon Barbarian, a Bard and a Beast Summoner versus two Black Scorpions. It was bad (I was outclassed and outshined by both the Summoner and the Barbarian) and I'm not going to detail the issues, because they were the same recounted over multiple threads in these forums, including mine. With that, said, I think I can conclude my own playtest evaluation of the class. Overall:
Magus felt like a bold class. It combines a new and unique spellcasting system with a new and unique core ability and some very interesting feats, at least in theory. Unfortunately, to me, the execution did not deliver. These aspects each taxed the Magus in a different, but limiting manner, which led me to believe that finding a balance in which they can coexist will be a hard task for the devs. 4-slot casting:
Upon my first experiences, I did not feel bothered by the 4 slot system and did not mind that the class was built around cantrips. However, I soon perceived a few problems stemming from the way Striking Spell worked that basically only rewarded cantrip use on extremely specific situations. In addition to that, I began feeling the need for more low-levelled slots in order to have the Magus apply buffs and utility spells, which is why I ended up focusing on getting rings, scrolls and staves to suit my needs. I think 4-slot casting can work on the Magus, provided their other issues are thoroughly addressed .. the chassis:
No big qualms in here. The current Magus has a solid martial chassis and gets the proficiencies it is aiming for. Only two nitpicks: I wished Magus got Juggernaut sooner and that there was an option to choose Int as the main stat for those Magi that want to focus on their spellcasting.. Striking Spell:
My biggest issue with the class. I only got it to work against level (-) and equal level creatures. When attempting to use it against level + foes, I suffered heavily from accuracy issues. In addition to that, the two rolls for attack + spell attack resolution felt unintuitive.
The way I see it, there are several issues plaguing the ability: first is that it has an action economy tax. I don’t necessarily think that that tax needs to go, but it becomes problematic when it is coupled with the current two-roll system and the fact that the Magus does not have a caster’s proficiency. The only benefit we get from it is the much discussed crit-fishing mechanic and the ability to hold the charge for an extra turn. However, these boons never felt like they compensated for the action economy and accuracy tax I was paying, especially when I was up against level + creatures. I have seen people argue that tactics could diminish or nullify the Magus’ issues, but I felt that there were some flaws in those assumption, mainly because I got the chance to playtest Magus alongside other martials (Barbarian, Ranger and Fighter) and these classes were improved by these tactics while the Magus was becoming functional instead.
I know damage is not all, but when spending several actions to set up a routine, that routine has to consistently cause an effect and in none of my experiences did it feel rewarding.
I could also live with an action economy fix that allowed the Magus to deliver their strike as part of casting their spell, while maintaining the two roll system. This would mean you would essentially Strike at 0 MAP, Spellstrike at -5 MAP (because the difference in accuracy is floats between -2 and -5 anyway) and possibly Strike again at -10 MAP or Stride in an ideal turn. I am less fond of this solution and this is not a thread about mechanical solutions, so I will carry on..
Syntheses:
I’m going to be honest and say that the Syntheses felt more like they were fixing issues with Striking Spell than adding cool ways to play the class. I found both Sustaining Steel and Slide Casting to be playable and did not like Shooting Star at all. My players all went and replaced it with Eldritch Archer’s Eldritch Shot as soon as they got to level 6
I feel like all Magi could benefit from some version of the Slide casting ability (maybe allowing a Step or a half Stride when triggering Striking Spell . Feats:
There’s a lot of potential in the Magus’ feats and, from level 4 onward, I really felt like I had relevant choices to make. Some of those feats need polishing (Raise a Tome, I’m looking at you), while others need to be toned up (more weapons on spirit sheathe, please!), but I liked what I saw and played with
I felt there was an issue with low-level feats in that the Magus benefits a lot from either a caster or a martial multiclass dedication. Perhaps a few flavorful or unique alternatives to incentivize those that go ‘vanilla’ Magus could help. . Spell List:
I liked that Magus got the Arcane list
. Other types of Magi:
Partly because I really love the Eldritch Scion Magus, I hope we get it as a class archetype on SoM. Also missed the Hexcrafter and the Black Bladed Magus.
. Conclusion or TLDR I got to play and run the Magus on about six sessions with different characters of different levels. I felt like the class was heavily taxed from three fronts: the fact that it had the 4 slot casting system and was expected to rely on cantrips for its routines, the action economy costs of Striking Spell and the accuracy of Striking Spell when applied with Attack Spells (basically all but three of the damaging cantrips the class had access to). I feel that if we are going to keep the same design philosophy moving forward, one of those three taxes needs to go:
With those considerations, I'd like to thank you all for the discussions, the inputs and insights. It has been a nice experience for me (I was mostly a lurker during the 2e and APG playtests and only came out due to the fact that Magus is my favorite class) and I am looking forward to seeing the final version of the class. Will continue to lurk and ocasionally post, but will refrain from tackling the Magus as whole from now.
So, with the playtest due to end next friday and these forums probably shutting down, I would like to make a thread for those that intend to keep playing with both classes to share the adjustments they will implement until we get their final versions. This will probably get moved to homebrew, but I'm posting here, because most of the fixes/additions are detailed in these forums. Just share your adjustments (if any)! Mine are as follows: Magus I think we're just giving some adjustments to Striking Spell. Considering three candidates: The Smite Variation:
(named after the 5e Paladin): Striking Spell remains as is with the exception that it does not necessarily trigger upon a successful melee Strike.
Instead, you spend a reaction to discharge the spell imediatelly after resolving the weapon attack. We're considering folding Energize Strikes into the ability (as suggested by MartialMasters in a similar thread) to give some sort of bonus while the charge is held. One of my players pitched this as an alternative to the current Striking Spell in the sense that you could choose which Strike to discharge with, allowing you to discard a hit in favor of a potential crit.
The Logical Variation:
(named after the idea that it's narratively logical for a spellstrike to do something when you hit with a strike): Striking Spell remains as is with the exception that Attack Spells use the same degree of success as the martial attacks for their resolution.
Fortune trait gets added to the ability The Martial Proficiency Variation:
: Striking Spell remains as is with two rolls and every other aspect, except you make spell attack rolls using the same proficiency as martial attack rolls. For example, if your weapon attack is a +26, then your Striking Spell Produce Flame is also a +26.
Summoner For Summoner, we've liked quite a few of the fixes on these forums and will probably go with: a) Mark's Act Together alternative. Although we haven't played with it yet, feedback seems to be positive. b) The Summoning Font, working akin to Cleric's Diivne Font, but for summoning spells. I don't know who proposed this first, so if it was you, feel free to comment. So, if you, like myself, intend to keep playing or running characters from these classes until SoM comes out, what adjustments will you implement?
I know we've had dozens of threads discussing potential Striking Spell fixes, its alleged and perceived problems, its merits and every issue it could possibly have had. What I am aiming at, with this thread, is to get a glimpse on how you felt after playtesting it Do you still that it still needs a major overhaul? are you fine with it? Have you toyed with adjustments? I'd like to attempt to propose that, instead of debating its merits, we each (if you'd like) post a single time about our perceptions, favorite fixes (if any) and positive aspects. So I'm going to start. Initial Perception Really disliked the action economy. I had a Wizard/Fighter that the GM had been letting run around with a HB version of the AoA Npc's Spellstrike, so, at first, I just couldn't be sold on it. I also thought and argued (strongly and insistently) that the crit mechanic had to go. Hated having to have two rolls for spell attacks. My playtests (so far) I've played a level 1 Magus (encounter test run by myself), a level 12 Magus (thrice), a level 6 Magus (once), GM'ed for 6th level, 7th level and 15th level Magi (once). I've also had a 14th level NPC with the current Magus abilities. My post-test perception Not bothered by the action economy or the crit mechanic that much. As I tested, I found that what really bothered me was how the Magus' spell attack accuracy floated around compared to its martial one. Sometimes the gap is not that wide, but then it widens, then shortens. What changed I had experiences in which Striking Spell worked and they felt good. Still had difficulties and problems that I'd like adressed. These boards have really opened my eyes to some potential in having actions that could tie to the Striking part of Spellstrike (just check the more recent threads) and to a nice idea that I hope gets ported into the final version of the class: that the Magus somehow gets an ability to hold the charge longer and chooses on which Strike to deliver it. In an ideal world I'd still like to see the two rolls folded into one, especially to incentivize cantrip use. My favored fix right now Keep the action economy as is, the crit fishing mechanic as well and have Spell Atack rolls made through Striking Spell use the same bonus (proficiency, ability and item) as the martial roll, no MAP. (i.e. if your weapon has a to hit of 26, that is what you roll for your spell attack to deliver it through Striking Spell) I favor this over just giving the spell attack a bonus because the spell is being delivered through the weapon and then the accuracy is always on par with the martial attack one, hence removing the problem of the Magus having points of their life in which they are almost as good at fighting and spell attacking and then they get worse. You'd not be hitting automatically and would have paid a price in the action economy as you'd set up your Strike. Save spells remain as they are and spell attacks made without the striking spell mechanic remain int and spell proficiency based. MCD characters also go this route for their Striking Spell (we already have a precedent for abilities working differently on MCD characters from the Investigator). Could balance additionaly by having that second attack suffer a -2 penalty (hence, it will always be a -2 behind, not -2, then -4, then -5, then -2 again and so on)
I've had some experiences with the Magus, to which you can find the reports here
This report is a continuation of the first. I am in a campaign in which I used to play a Wizard with Fighter MCD whose main routine was to spam true strike and shocking grasps. I tried to emulate the Magus concept as best as I could, so, naturally and with my GM's blessing, converted my character. We're currently in a desert-themed adventure set in our homebrew world. We were wading this huge desert in search of a Hamunaptra-like city. The only sign of its existence was a distant ember, which some said was a large ruby, that appeared in the horizon (Return of the Mummy feelings). We were looking for the evil Stone of Tut-Kareth to bribe a demoness to let us take a sappling of the World Tree from her garden. We play once every two weeks and, during the last session, we had faced a Purple Worm. My Magus played poorly and I did not enjoy trying to port the Shocking Grasp routine to the new class' chassis. So I read these forums, got some very interesting insights on tactics, playstyles, items and even some much needed clarifications on what types of Strikes could be used to deliver Striking Spell. Hence, with my GM's blessing, I rebuilt my Magus as follows: Asahir:
Human (Versatile), Artisan, Level 12 Magus Synthesis: Sustaining Steel (changed from slide because I favored using a Bastard Sword in a two-handed fashion and, during my first playthrough, I overlooked the free-hand requirement for the Slide Magus) Ability Scores: STR 20, DEX 16, CON 18, INT 18, WIS 10, CHA 10. AC 33 (with a +2 Studded Leather Armor) Weapon: I used to wield a +2 greater striking shocking bastard sword. We got to a mirage-like town inbetween tables and the GM let me sell it. I used the money along with some savings to get a +1 shifting staff of divination. Other gear: Even before my conversion, my character had a Ring of Wizardry (type III) and a Bandolier with a few potions of quickness. Ancestry Feats: Natural Ambition, Clever Improviser, Multi-talented Skill Feats: Crafter's Appraisal, Quick Repair, Improvise Tool, Specialty Crafting (from Background), Impeccable Crafter, Bon Mot and Courtly Graces General Feats: Fleet, Additional Lore (Academia Lore), Toughness (from Versatile) Magus Feats:Combat Assessment (Natural Ambition) Cantrip Expansion, Bespell Strikes, Martial Caster, Standby Spell and Runic Impression Archetypes: Fighter Dedication (Multi-talented) Archetype Feats: Basic Maneuver (Snagging Strike). I know I was going to use the sword two-handed, but I thought I could add some versatility by having these one-handed Strikes I could combine with something like produce flame. Cantrips: Chill Touch, Daze, Electric Arc, Produce Flame, Telekinetic Projectile, Detect Magic, Mage Hand Spells: True Strike (from staff of Divination), Mirror Image (Ring), Slow (Ring), Paralyze (Ring), Phantasmal Killer (lvl. 5), Vampiric Touch (lvl. 5), Flesh to Stone (lvl. 6), Teleport (lvl. 6 - my party really likes me to move them around). Sudden Bolt was my Standby Spell. A minor nitpick I was really disappointed to discover Brutish Shove had the press trait. It would be so awesome if we had an attack inducing maneuver like snagging strike that worked with two-handed weapons, but that's not a problem.
The Party:
My party usually consists of me, a human Redeemer Champion, a half-elf Flurry Ranger with a nimble Vulture Animal Companion and an elf Witch. This time it was just me, the Redeemer and the Ranger How it played We arrived at the temple, found a secret entrance thanks to my use of detect magic and got to a barely lit corridor. Exploration Mode:
The Champion used an everburning torch and we started to wade in. I kept using Detect Magic but could only find traces of some scarabs that had a faint evocation trace.
The GM asked for Perception checks and the Ranger heard a faint hum as they touched their ear to the wall. Something was in the other side of it. The Ranger pulled their Onyx Dog Wondrous Figurine and the dog darted toward a corner that would lead to an entrance said room (we assumed). The dog enters the room with us trailing it, there is a cracking sound and the dog starts barking, then whining. We draw our weapons and we have a hilarious moment where everybody was ready to go and my Magus started chugging the potion of quickness and casting Potency and Runic Impression - the other players had not seen me do that in the previous session - they were like 'dude, the dog's there!'
The first encounter was a low threat encounter against three lvl 9 giant mosquitoes that had been reanimated from statues - our GM adapted them with the monster creation rules. How it played:
Ranger, Champion, me and Mosquitoes in the initiative order. Ranger Hunts prey, then Hunted shoots Mosquito 1, pinning them to the wall with a crit. Misses third shot. Champion is wielding the torch and a lion shield, raises shield, strides into the room and activates the lion shield for a small amount of damage on Mosquito 2.
I cast Produce Flame, wield the sword two-handed and Stride in, engaging with Mosquito 1. I hit with the Melee Strike for 20 something damage and hit with the Produce Flame for another 20. Mosquito 2 hits Champion with its proboscis attack and grabs them. Champion makes the save against Septic Malaria. then, the mosquito Blood Drains the Champion. Mosquito 3 Strides toward the Ranger, hits them once with Proboscis, does not Grab and Ranger succeeds at their roll against Malaria. Third action is a Strike that misses. Mosquito 1 hits and grabs me once. I too make my save. Ranger Strides away from the Mosquito 3, commands Vulture to attack, hitting, and hunted shoots it (rules oversight since they were hunting Mosquito 1) with two hits. Champion raises shield and keeps lioning Mosquito 2. Having thought that the insect would suffer from fire and found it had no such weaknesses, I decide to use Telekinetic Projectile, succeed on my flat-check and hit with the weapon and the spell, finishing Mosquito 1. I then Stride toward the Champion and Mosquito 2 (the GM had some high rolls and the Champion was not struggling but had lost the most HP between us) Mosquito 3 hits Vulture once, Vulture makes their save, then Strides towards Ranger and hits them once. They fail their save and become sickened 1. Mosquito 2 keeps blood draining champion (our GM ruled that it could do that, but the drained 1 never got worse) Ranger disengages from Mosquito 3, commands Vulture to engage and attack and hunted shoots it once more, critting once and killing it. Champion raises shield and casts Lay on Hands on themselves. Attempts to break from the grab, but fails. I imbue produce flame and crit with my weapon Strike due to getting a flank. The spell attack is also a Nat 20 and the Mosquito is looking bad. I Strike with my last action and kill it.
Onyx dog's alive, so we keep exploring, reaching a room that has this large well filled with water. We study some hieroglyphs, inffer something about a being wanting to return to its master and carry on towards another chamber where there are two Giang Slugs and two Deadly Mantises(Moderate, according to the GM) How it played:
Ranger and me first, then the Slugs, then the Mantises.
Ranger starts by Hunting Slug 1 and shooting it thrice for three hits. I drink another potion (had 8 on me), Potency+Rune myself and engage with Slug 2. Slugs 1 and 2 use trample to our dismay. We roll badly, suffer 30 from 40 damage each and are left in their Mucus trail. Mantis 2 leaps, grabs ranger and flings them toward the Champion!, Mantis 1 comes towards us but was too far away to make it this round. Champion throws the torch at the middle of the room, draws warhammer and Strides toward Mantis 1. Ranger, commands Vulture to attack Slug 1 and then shoots it some more. They hit with every Strike. I Stride toward Slug 2, cast 5th level Sudden Bolt and crit with it, killing Slug 2 in one take. We have this description of how I made an electric chainsaw out of my sword and cut it in half. Slug 1 keeps trampling away. At this point, Champion is struggling a bit (forgot to use Lay on Hands during the second exploration phase) Mantis 1 leaps, takes champion and flings them at ranger. Mantis 2 does the same with ranger and the champion. Champion Strides and Strikes Mantis 1 once, then burns 1 focus point for Lay on Hands on themselves. Ranger keeps chipping at Slug 1 and kills it. However, they are very near Mantis 2. I become desperate and cast Flesh to Stone, striding toward Mantis 1, flanking and hitting it with a crit (nat 20) Mantis one critically fails their save (nat 1 - roll20 shannenigans) and becomes slowed 2 Mantis 2 leaps and flings ranger at champion. Mantis one hits and crits me. Succeeds at first Fort save and becomes slowed one instead. Champion raises shield and attempts to get in the way of Mantis 2 and the Ranger. Ranger starts chipping at Mantis 2. I decide to leave Mantis 1 be, Stride and cast Electric Arc on both Mantises. Do half damage, then I strike at Mantis 2 and miss. Mantis 1 leaps and grabs me, then crit fails their fort save (another nat 1) and becomes stone. Mantis 2 is really castigating the Ranger. Champion manages to hit it twice Ranger then finishes Mantis 2 off.
We explore some more and meet the ghost of the high priest from that temple. He tells us of a Phoenix that is attop the builiding, mentioning that he and his acolytes attempted to corrupt it. They managed to do so, but the Phoenix killed them in the process. Now, it rages on, the stone of Tut-Kareth embedded in its chest and tormenting it forever. Thus, we ascend, make it through a very complicate puzzle and meet the phoenix. The Phoenix (Extreme)
How it played:
Luckly, we got to heal and refocus before the fight. I also started the encounter quickened, potencied and runed. I apologize for not having as much details, but we kind of struggled and the Vulture got killed.
I will say that I managed to hit the Phoenix with a 6th level Sudden Bolt (bye bye teleport) which just got through due to True Strike. No crits this time around. Would have been taken out, if not for Mirror Image, which I also precast.Made the mistake of attempting to cast Phantasmal Killer, which the Phoenix just crit-succeeded against. Were it not for the fact that it was Evil due to the stone and that our Champion dealt a lot of Good damage to it via Blade of Justice, we would have TPK'ed. The Phoenix got ressurrected and we got our stone, heading on. My impressions: - The Magus played really well against the lower-leveled foes up to the point that it did not need to flank to get its routine going. The class really shone, damage-wise, especially in comparison to the other two. - Although it was a painful separation, there just wasn't any point to not favoring Sudden Bolt over Shocking Grasp. An extra die, the possibility of causing half damage and the fact that it is a save spell make it arguably a better alternative to those wishing o recreate the good ol' electric blade Magus. - I still struggled against the lvl+ enemy. I thought that, with the lower-levelled enemies, I was hitting as much as the others and outdamaging them. With the lvl+ enemy, I still kept hitting (martially) as much as the others, but my damage really lagged behind theirs due to the fact that the crit mechanic was so much harder to achieve. - The fact that I was forced to spend two of my slotted spells during the previous fight, and that produce flame didn't work on the phoenix could have contributed to that. - The accuracy gap we have discussed so much was only felt in the level+ encounter. I don't know if that was the intention. My impression was that I was this minion detroyer from hell and when I got to the big baddie, we all struggled, but I kind of felt like being slowed 2. Did not think folding the two rolls was a need per se. Kept wondering if I wouldn't have been just fine if the spell attack was made with the same proficiency bonus as the weapon. - That said, I didn't feel as frustrated as the other time around. Replacing attack spells with save spells is the way to go.. - Part of me really wished for our witch to cast Heroism on me. Tried Bon Mot, but the Will DC was just very very high. - Still, the phoenix didn't fly a lot and I'm pretty sure we saw huge waves of benevolence from our GM. We were able to flank, though. - Those temp HP on Sustaining Steel really helped. - Things that helped over my previous experience True Strike and the Quickened condition allowed me to stay mobile, so I did not feel much difference between going from Slide to Sustaining Steel - Snagging Strike helped me during the phoenix combat. I remember using it to set up two Telekinetic Strikes, one which hit. Would be nice for Magus to get access to low level combat maneuvers like this without needing an archetype, although, I don't know if that would work. - Mirror Image saved my life, so I feel that having space for such spells, either in the form of limited slots, or martial caster-like feats, like some people have pointed out, could be beneficial. I hope to get one more playthrough before the playtest is over and am considering having Illusory Creature for my own personal flanker.
So, one of my players was builing a Summoner and asked me about the difference between Act Together and Move in Tandem, especifically asking me if the Summoner couldn't just use Act Together in the same manner (i.e. Act Together, summoner Strides, Eidolon Strides) I confess that I don't have much mastery over the Summoner rules. Is there a practical difference?
Since the playtest started, I have been active in the Magus forums, where I have expressed my concerns with the class, mostly based on my own experiences while playing it. This time, I got to GM a party of two Magi and two Summoners as we went through the PFS Quest – Shadow of the Black Sovereign. I will try to convey how the encounters played out, as well as our experiences. Since my players do not participate in these forums, I will focus on their perceptions of the classes, rather than my own, which can be found in the threads I have participated so far. The Setup The players in this group are somewhat experienced with Pathfinder Second Edition to the point where they can create characters without guidance and effectively play them on PFS Scenarios and Oneshots. However, they do not have a very deep understanding of the rules. The players are big fans of 13th Age and brought some of that experience with them. Due to that, I apologize if I end up mentioning elements from that game in my players` report. To avoid any preconceptions, I did not mention anything that has been discussed on these forums, the ways people had been playing them or my own concerns regarding the classes. The only resources they had access to were their Core Rulebooks, the playtest doc and Archives of Nethys.
I gave told them they had two days to create characters on roll20 and gave them 450 GP each and said they could purchase items up to level 6. Magus 1
Magus 2
Summoner 1
Summoner 2
The Encounter
Magus 1 spent their first round Hasting and using Magus Potency. Magus 2 used Magus Potency, engaged one of the zombies and swung away. Summoners 1 and 2 manifested their Eidolons (although they did not use synthesis). Then, the fight played out with the Magi attempting to flank the zombies and Zatqualmsh. Magus 2 kept trying to chase Zatqualmish away (I used their Run away reaction quite often) and resorted to using Striding, casting True Strike from their staff and striking for most of the encounter`s first half.
Magus 1 did attempt to use Striking Spell quite often, but got into a situation in which they hit with their Strike but missed with their spell attack due to mediocre or poor roll. Because they had the slide synthesis, they were usually flanking with one of the Eidolons or with Magus 2. If I recall correctly, they missed one produce Flame, one Shocking Grasp and then crit with Sudden Bolt for a successful save (I got a crit) that damaged one of the zombies. Magus 2 eventually started to use Striking Spell, but the Goblin Pox slot due to a string of bad rolls in the martial strike (they even asked one of the summoners for Guidance but rolled pretty badly). They then hit with Vampiric Touch to gain quite a few temp hit points. Summoner 2 eventually forgot to sustain their summoning spell and also got clipped with a failure against Zatqualmish`s Slow. The whole combat was over after 7 rounds because the party did struggle with some bad rolls. No one went down, although Magus 1 got close. Overall Impressions The summoners felt strong, particularly due to their Eidolons being strong martial characters. The Magi felt considerably weaker than them and were not very versatile. Here`s the players` input: Summoner 1: said that they were not bothered by having few slots, because they thought the Eidolon played very well and, to them, it felt very nice to just sit back, boost the Eidolon and watch them wreak havoc. They said they did not use Synthesis because they did not want to lose the ability to cast spells. Summoner 2: said that they were expecting more summoning versatility out of their summoner. They liked the eidolon, but felt that there should be more interactions with the Summon spells they took. They also said the Eidolon was vastly superior to the Summoned Elemental and Animal. They also detested that effects like Slow affected both the Summoner and the Eidolon. Both players said they`d like more options for the Eidolon`s abilities, maybe one or two they could choose from. Summoner 1 said they were considering an Angel Summoner, but felt that that Eidolon type did not have many enticing abilities. Magus 2 : said they really did not see much of a reason to use Striking Spell. They were mostly bothered by its action economy and said that they felt they were doing more through their Strikes. They did not bother much with the two rolls, but said that they felt intimidated by the action costs on their turns, especially given that they did not cast Haste. They said that their Magus did not have much mobility and that Haste was pretty much a forced choice. Magus 1: was very bothered by the accuracy and, later, when I mentioned that some had proposed that the two rolls be folded into one, felt that that was more intuitive. They felt that they and the other Magus had been completely outclassed by the Eidolons and pointed that they felt the Summoners had more versatility in that they could either cast or act through their eidolons, whereas the Magi were left with the striking spell routine. I should point out that this player is big fan of gishes (never saw them not play one) and a huge fan of 13th Age`s Swordmage and mentioned that class as a model of a `Magus` that had its magic more integrated to their fighting than PF2`s Both players Said the class seemed very cool on its presentation, mentioning Magus Potency and the proficiencies as positive elements. However, they said that they would rather play other classes if they had known how Striking Spell worked.
I was just reflecting about striking spell and noticed that 18th level Magi get access to this ability: Second Chance Strike
While I get that it is a powerful ability, I think it should be made available from the start or at a lower level than in its current iteration, especially because it helps make striking spell less unviable and also because it still only allows you to keep it until the end of your next turn. Maybe put an improved version of it at lvl 18 that lets you keep the spell for 1 minute?
Inspired by Midnight Joker's quote that PF2 should play smooth and be improved by tactics, I have come up with a rework the ability to match a lesser version of the AOA NPC's . It would read like this: = = = = =
My case for it: - Narratively fits the spell-imbuing premise. - Easier to understand. - The tactics department would still come into play quite often since you'd not have True Strike. However, your chance to hit would be improved because you're using your martial strike. You're still 'high risk, high reward' because of your few slots. - The 'keeping your spell on a martial miss' idea could become something like Recall Spell working as a focus spell or standalone ability similar to Drain bonded item. This would bring your slots to effectivelly 3/3. You could even have Second Chance Spell Strike as is, coming into play as a powerful lvl. 18 ability. - Int is not dumped. You still depend on it for Save spells and your proficiency will lag behind a caster's. - Casters would not be outshined. They'd still have more slots, unique abilities and a higher spell save DC . Magi should be, IMO, the best at using attacking spells. A Shocking Grasp infused blade should feel more dangerous than a Wizard's electrified hand in the same way that their mind control should be harder to resist than the one steming from the character that spent their precious magic school years swinging swords. - Crit rider effect replaces one of the mid or high tier abilities. I intentionally made the spell only be a hit (not crit) if the melee strike connects. Its still viable, but rather than creating the class that needs to crit fish, we have a cool class that can be cooler by crit fishing. - Synthesis -es stay pretty much the same:
- Cantrip use would be incentivized. You can either hit reliably for less damage and maybe go for a weakness or attempt to strike more times for a higher damage output. - I think the class would be closer to but still be behind Rogue, Flurry Ranger and Barbarian in damage dealing terms. They'd still get few slots to compensate for their ability to go nova. - You'd still get versatility. With this, you're basically freeing up an action that could be used to stride, grapple, trip, shove, demoralize and feint, among others.
Disclaimer I do not like Striking Spell in its current iteration and think it is a subpar ability. I also believe the Magus to be barely functional as a class. I would rather see it fixed and made consistent and workable as it should Even though my own personal take would be to have it allow spell attacks made through it to have the same result as the melee Strikes that deliver them, I do acknowledge the concerns of many regarding the alleged power budget of the class and its versatility. With that in mind If striking spell remains the same - ish, I would like to suggest that Paizo creates an Eldritch Knight archetype that works as the melee version of the Eldritch Archer. Although I haven't put much thought to it, Eldritch Shot could become Eldritch Strike and most other abilities be transposed to a melee focused build. It would also make it a compeling choice for Magi wanting to change their action economy and to gain more slots while deeply focusing on delivering spells through their weaponry. Assuming Paizo chooses to keep its current design, what would you (those that, like myself, expected more of the class and those that stand by its current iteration) think of it?
I know that striking spell has been debated, calculated and analyzed in depth. While I do get that it is tied to a benefit supposedly coming from synthesis and applicable with any spell, I am still baffled at how Warpriests get a much better version of it. Channel Smite, a level 4 Cleric feat works like this: You siphon the destructive energies of positive or negative energy through a melee attack and into your foe. Make a melee Strike and add the spell’s damage to the Strike’s damage. This is negative damage if you expended a harm spell or positive damage if you expended a heal spell. The spell is expended with no effect if your Strike fails or hits a creature that isn’t damaged by that energy type (such as if you hit a non-undead creature with a heal spell). The way it reads, it is IMO, a better version of spell strike. Sure, one could argue that clerics lag behind Magi in weapon proficiency, but they get many more slots opposed to the Magus’ 4 slots per day, trigger their ability as a two action routine that does not provoke attacks of opportunity (the spell’s damage is just added to the weapon attack’s own damage) and, unless I’m wrong, can be combined with Guidance and True Strike (through Multiclassing or a diety that provided it). I keep asking myself: why not have the Magus have a feat like this (applicable for damaging spells or some specific spell) or striking spell be built more in its likeness. The way things currently stand, warpriests, eldrtich archers and characters with a functional spell storing weapon seem to have a better shot at doing the Magus’ nova routine better than them, which is strange. I mean, I get that striking spell provides some benefits, but more and more they do not seem enough to justify the other limitations already placed upon the class
This is a continuation my other thread
Last night, I managed to get together a group of friends to playtest the Magus.
The first one was a replay of the purple worm encounter in the previous thread. The second and third one were against 3 and 4 scarlet triad bruisers, respectivelly, and the fourth was against a couple of Adult Black Dragons.
Disclaimer I am aware that my experiences may not reflect the ideal and most optimized way to build a Magus nor that they are necessarily representative of the norm for play experiences regarding the class. The Build
The Magus Feats were Eschew Materials, Bespell Strikes, Martial Caster, Energize Strikes and the last feat was used to acquire Investigator's Stratagem from the dedication Archetype. Spells were a combination of Haste (usually through Martial Caster), True Strike, Cone of Cold and hightened Acid Arrow, Vampiric Touch and Shocking Grasp in different variations. How it played
My Impressions (continued from the other thread)
- Similarly, although this might not be the way for some Magi, striking twice with a good weapon tends to be better than spellstriking a cantrip. In addition, more playstyle, equipment configurations and builds need to be effectivelly supported. The barbarian alongside me often fought with different weapons and their rage was always there, consistent, reliable, while I absolutely had to rely on a specific build to get something out of my main gimmick. - As some have pointed out, there is a way for Magus to shine without having to rely on Striking Spell (or a similarly named ability). This means there could be design space for a swordmage-like class or archetype in the future (does not necessarily have to be magus).
Like many, I love the concept of playing a gish, having had Swordmages in both 4e and 13th Age and Magi in my 1e campaign and Kingmaker playthrough. With that in mind, I admit to share most of the concerns raised in these forums over the last couple of days, especially regarding the Spell Striking ability, a Magus core feature that seems to need some adjustments. With that in mind, I managed to play a Magus last night and would like to share my experience. To sumarize, I felt that many of the concerns we have been debating are completely valid and justified, having emerged in my playthrough, which did not go very well. A bit of context : I play twice a week in a homebrew campaign that is co-GM'ed by myself and a friend. My character is a human artisan universalist wizard with a fighter dedication whose routine is to basically benefit from Haste and then True Strike Shocking Grasp and Strike with Bespell Weapon during most turns. Although the character is somewhat fragile, gameplay is rewarding. While I don't often hit with the melee Strike, it does not concern me much because I usually manage to deal significant damage with the spell. I play alongside an Elf Ranger, an Elf Witch and a Human Redeemer So, with the long-awaited Magus in hands, I got my GM's permission and started converting : Lvl. 10 human artisan Magus (Slide Synthesis)
During our game, we faced a Purple Worm (lvl 13) - severe encounter : I will try to compile the fight as me and the GM best recalled it. My numbers will be provided through our roll20 logs. I rolled very low on initiative and got to act last. == 1st round == Ranger manages to hit twice, Champion engages and hits once with Lion Shield but gets attacked and swallowed during the Worm's turn. Then, the Witch casts 5th level Summon Fey and its my turn. I decide to go in guns blazing and attempt to save the poor Champion, so I free action Spell Strike to imbue a 4th level Shocking Grasp on my blade, use Synthesis to Stride and engage and attempt to hit with my Strike. I roll a 12 for 32 to hit and the GM says that barely makes it. Then, I deal 21 slashing damage and 3 electricity damage due to bespell strike and proceed to roll the spell attack. I get a 13 on the die for a total of 29, which the GM says does not hit. I lose my spell slot, but the champion is freed. == 2nd round ==
Champion hits twice with their striking cold warhammer and deals some nice damage. Purple Worm goes all out on me. It body slams and crits me and then stings me twice, missing the third strike. Champion uses their reaction and etc. I manage to resist the poison and am still standing and thankful for those extra Magus HP. Witch uses Phantasmal Killer. GM consults that rules and thinks the Purple Worm could be affected by it. The Worm fails its save, takes some nasty damage and is frightened 2. She then commands their Unicorn to engage and attack, horribly missing. Then its my time to go. I do the Spell Striking with a 4th level Shocking Grasp hit with the strike (it is frightened 2, now is the time!) but then I roll a 9 for a total of 25 on my spell attack and miss. == 3rd round ==
Champion hits twice and uses once action to Lay on Hands on me. Purple Worm body slams me once, then hits and swallows the Champion again. Witch Hastes me and commands Unicorn, who misses again. While Hasted, I decide to True Strike, then Spell Strike Vampiric Touch. I roll a 13 for 33 to hit with the Strike and kindly remind the GM that the creature is still frightened. The GM says I hit. I deal 20 slashing damage and 5 negative damage, freeing the Champion once again and then the Worm critically succeeds against my Vampiric Touch, which is lost. == 4th round ==
Champion hits once, casts lay on hands on me and raises shield. Purple Worm stings me thrice, critically hitting with the first strike. I fail my save against the poison, take 23 damage and am enfeebled something (can`t remember if 1 or 2). Witch commands unicorn to cast neutralize poison and manages to counteract the poison. Then they cast Shadow Blast and I think they caused half damage. My turn. I spell strike with electric arc, roll a 17 for 37 to hit and cause 11 slashing and 1 electricity damage. Purple Worm succeeds at its Reflex save and my 16 damage becomes 8 damage. == 5th round ==
Champion keeps fighting and hits twice. Purple Worm crits against the Champion, swallows them whole again. Witch commands unicorn to miss and casts a focus spell they did not have logged on their roll20 spell list. My turn. I decide to true strike shocking grasp as a 5th level spell instead of spell striking. I roll a 10 and an 18. The 18 becomes a 38, which we know hits. I cause 44 electricity damage. == The combat goes on for two more rounds. I get swallowed and regurgitated during the 5th and we eventually win on the 6th with me striking four times and benefitting from Haste Overall Impressions I think that, out of the 4 times I tried Spell Striking, I only managed to land it once, which is quite frustrating. In the end, I kept thinking on how better it would have been to just have used true strike alongside an attacking spell or to have more slots as a Wizard. I did not have a problem with having to roll for the spell to hit, but there was at least one instance in which I actually rolled higher than my attack and still missed (the Worm`s AC is 32 as it turned out). There were times when I really wished there was a way for me to use True Strike with the Spell Attack or some mechanic like Devise a Stratagem, or even to use Spell Strike like the Eldritch Archer. I was hitting with my Melee Strikes, so there`s not a problem there. Its the spell accuracy that seems to need fixing. Out of all the solutions people have proposed, the ones I seemed to be more fond of, after playing, were the ones that did away with the spell attack roll for the spell to discharge. You could even apply a penalty to the melee strike and it would still be viable because of the runes. I have yet to test my character against enemies of a lower level, but the save spell striking did not seem to do much and the cantrip damage just seemed to be on par with what a second attack would do. Although it does not solve the problem of not being able to do your stuff consistently, holding on to the charge until you manage to hit with your spell or until the end of the next turn rather than until you hit with the melee strike would help. Overall, I found my Wizard Fighter to be more satisfying simply due to the fact that I got a better chance at dealing that significant spell damage and then maybe landing an enhanced strike. With Magus, it is the other way around. You hit with your enhanced strike and maybe, just maybe get to use that big juicy spell, which is kind of a bummer.
I am probably late to the discussion and don’t know if this was pointed before, but, like many, I find Spell Striking to be lacking. Two attack rolls with that proficiency difference make it just too hard to land a high level spell. So why not go with something like the version they used for the Rinnarv Bontimar NPC? “Spell Strike (Free Action) Frequency once per round; Trigger Rinnarv begins to Cast a Spell that targets at least 1 creature; Effect Rinnarv channels his spell through his blade. He makes a Strike with his blade against a target within reach. If the Strike is successful, the target is automatically subject to the spell. If the spell required an attack roll, the target is hit. If the spell required a saving throw, the target takes a –4 status penalty to its saving throw instead. If the spell could target multiple creatures, it targets only the creature Rinnarv hit with his Strike.” Maybe put a -2 penalty to the first attack roll, have the spell charge be lost on a miss and just remove the need for the second attack roll would make it more balanced and functional. IMHO, the action economy, the odds of you getting Aooed at some point and the fact that Magus already has few slots justify the ability to Strike and cast as a two action activity. That way, a Magus would be able to Spellstrike and maybe get a Strike with Bespell Strike more efficiently.
Hi All,
The Terrifying Howl Barbarian Feat mentions that the targets become immune to it for 1 minute. Does the 1 min immunity replace the 10 min immunity for the Demoralize Action? Otherwise the 1 min immunity would become irrelevant...
Hi All,
The Terrifying Howl Barbarian Feat mentions that the targets become immune to it for 1 minute. Does the 1 min immunity replace the 10 min immunity for the Demoralize Action? Otherwise the 1 min immunity would become irrelevant...
A player in the game I am currently GMing has asked me whether there are any weapons that have the Grapple trait. I read the Equipment chapter and, unless my eyes deceive me, could not find one that had such trait. Are there any weapons that currently fit that criterion or is the trait there for future weapons?
Hey all, I was looking to downgrade a monster a couple of levels and was wondering what would be the correct or best way to do it. My first idea was to somehow utilize the monster creation rules but I did not find any explicit guidelines on how to approach that. Should I just change the values via aproximation? Another thought that occurred to me was using the elite/weak template. Would it be possible to apply multiple templates of that kind? My goal is to homebrew a level 3 Lamia
Hi all, I have decided to run a conversion of Dnd 4e's Storm Tower for my players. So far, I have managed to convert and/or adapt everything by using the Bestiary andthe monster creation rules. However, I am having trouble with the Snapjaw in the second encounter. Will try to give as much info over here without running into copyright issues: - Stats -
- Actions -
- My questions/problems
Thanks in advance!
I am starting a campaign this week. I am the GM and am having some trouble outlining which items to award each level. I know the tables in the book and understand the guidelines. However, I would like to award the party with items that 'made sense' and am a little insecure on what items to handle the PCs, especially when it comes to consumables. The party has a cleric of Iomedae, a barbarian, a champion of Torag, a rogue and an alchemist. Would you be so kind as to give me a few suggestions for the first four levels just so that I can get the hang of it?
So I was skimming through the Barbarian Class and saw that some feats, namely Weapon Specialization, mentioned an extra +2 damage if you had legendary proficiency in a weapon. However there seems to be no way of achieving that. Barbarian weapon proficiency caps at master. Am I missing something?
Hello all, Our group is ending a two-year campaign of 5th edition D&D due to the DM going abroad for a couple of years. After much discussion, they have elected me to take over GMing. Discussing a little more, the players have all expressed an interest in getting to know the Dark Sun setting. The problem is: I have been a GM for 16 years, but never got to use the setting. I have the option of running the game in 4th Edition or going berserk and attempting to do it in the Cypher System. AD&D2e is just out of question (can't seem to get my head around its design). I do not think the players would enjoy PTBA. They seem to be more interested in the setting's theme, rather than strict cannon. So... I turn and spot the 2e CRB, Bestiary and Word Guide on the table and get this crazy idea of using it. The arc is 12 sessions, could be extended and is supposed to start in early October. I am thinking mostly of reflavoring, but may use some homebrew. So, here is what I have so far: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
The problem here will be half-giants, Mul and Thri-Keen. I am thinking of retolling half-orcs as half-giants. For Mul, I would try to homebrew it as a Human heritage similarly to half elf. For thri-keen, I have no idea. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --
For the other classes, I have a problem in that I need to figure what to do with defiling, preserving, psionics and templars. I have thought of a few options:
b) retool alignment fluff from champions to turn them into templars. As option 'a' for clerics, wizards and sorcerers. c) use archetypes for templars, psionics, defilers and preservers. d) go completely out of canon and make clerics that channel positive energy be preservers while those that do so with negative energy be defilers. For psionics, I still have no idea. I was thinking of maybe doing something with occult spellcasting. Anyway, if you could, I'd like to hear some thoughts on whether my idea would be feasible and how would you go about doing it. I am willing to use and attempt homebrew, although I have just finished the core rulebooks, having run plaguestone for another group.
I have a question concerning conditions. Supposing I demoralize a foe and cause it to be Frightened 1. An ally then takes its turn and takes another successful demoralize action against that same foe. Is the foe Frightened 2 or Frightened 1? Where can I find the rules on this?
So, if I cast a spell that summons me a minion, not an animal, the rules say that I have to spend an action to command it. The rules say that, for non-animals, you sustain a spell or activation. Then they say that, unless specified, you issue a command with the auditory and concentrate traits. My doubt is, suppose it is the second turn after casting the spell, do I have to spend an action to concentrate and then another action to command the creautre or item, or does the action to sustain the spell already count as commanding the minion?
Hi all, I have been away from lurking since the end of the playtest and am now reacquainting myself with the release of 2e. I have read a topic here and maybe watched an interview in which it was said that there would be only multiclass archetypes in the CRB. Having played a Cavalier and enjoyed doing so during the playtest, I was wondering if anyone knows whether that archetype will be released in the world guide or whether Paizo have abbandoned classes as archetypes altogether.
I am trying to build 3rd level characters and the book tells me to give them 2 permanent 1st level items. However, all lvl 1 items have the 'consumable' trait. I see that the Party Treasure by Level table also mentions that a party of adventurers should have between 1 2nd level and 2 1st level permanent items. Any idea on where to find such items?
I was just re-listening to the 'Glass Cannon Podcast' playtest and have noticed that the players used the 'seek' action to try to see through the town wizard's illusions, applying perception and/or some form of Lore. Later on, the paladin uses Religion to recall knowledge about the lesser shadow, which also requires an action. Have you glimpsed any difference between these two actions? It seems that both may involve knowledge-related skills and could potentially overlap. It got me a little confused, as in first edition, recall knowledge did not require an action, if my memory serves me right. |