It's not so much he's completely out of resources, in fact he still has a base to call home.
It's more he's in a very dangerous spot after the starting events offscreen of the AP.
Put a different way, Harrigan is bleeding but will live and be able to come back strong enough to even try to earn a seat at the pirate lords later on(Book 3 I believe).
But he is bleeding and you know what sharks do when they smell blood.
There's a module floating around that has the PCs raid a sunken ship and ends with a large octopus attacking them. I've seen people use that to show how tough Harrigan is to players.
Vic Wertz wrote:
Thanks. I always had ideas on the backburner but never got around to actually seeing them past the idea/homebrew stage.
But now I might actually try to put the work into seeing them become something more but wasn't sure if Paizo was going to say.., ramp down on third party publishing.
It's not just Traveler's Any Tool I'm worried about.
There's a LOT of interesting stuff deep in PF1's gear catalouge that I wonder if they will make the jump or not on account of the stronger skills and the lowering of just outright +s.
Yeah yeah, CLW wands all day err day; didn't care. My PF1 side healer used a feat or two along side Bloodblocks to get the job one.
Now this isn't me harshing on PF2(For once), I just don't know how they're going to translate some of these items over. Even nerfing them might not be enough(0r too much to make them actually usable outside of loot drops).
Though hmm, rather than just raw numbers maybe some of these items can bump up the Proficiency during use? Or maybe throw in a reroll? I dunno, there's hopefully something they can do.
We pretty much had this same discussion regarding grenades in Starfinder. I think the consensus was that they're best off as loot as no one will buy or craft them.
Only Grenade that looks useful is the one Soldiers can make as that's at least 'reusable' and you can splice some effects to it later I think.
But is this just wands being king again or are staffs also up there too? Playtest looked to try to improve staffs but I haven't really checked that section too much.
[I can only speak for myself, but the math and attempts to break the system are precisely why I'm here. At some point, I am going to gather up all my toys, write up my houserules, and not come back for a while. That doesn't mean we do math when making player choices. It just means I want the game designed to maximize choice with minimum punishment for "roleplaying" choices. I'm sure the game designers would tell you that requires some math. The simplest way to put it might be: You don't come to the forums to roleplay.
You're right. We don't come to the forums to roleplay.
But at the rate it seems on the forums, I question if most people here wouldn't be happier with a skirmish war game instead. Or one of those board games that simulate a tabletop game.
I make choices based off some math. The community seems more than willing to just take the accepted answer because of math going into the decimals.
And if a person is that willing to give up their own choices, I can only question what sort of actual in character agency they'll have, never mind their player one. They've already given that one up.
I mean yeah but Slay the living I think is said to be used at half HP?
My team actually didn't explore that place so I have a Sceaduinar running around. Maybe link up with the Cult.
I'm interested in ideas for the High Prestess of Thoth myself.
My game's leader/soul of the group is a Priestss of Ma'at and linked up with Ma'at and Thoth's worshippers.
I'm trying to figure out a good way of expanding on the beef between them and the Nethys church. Right now I'm going with the fact Thoth's group is big about spreading knowledge, regardless of what happens afterward.
Doktor Weasel wrote:
That's kinda debatable and probably more based on Build.
A Feat each level more than likely just means 2 feats from each Rung. And I can't picture there not being at least 2 winners each Feat Level Rung. Double backing for a weaker feat at a higher level seems a bad move unless you're using it to unlock something else later on.
Meanwhile people who have a good build picked out can multiclass a lot easier and probably get close to the old hybrid classes.
In PF2, the action cost for debuffing is much less: characters can do a debuff instead of taking a third attack at -10 or for free with a crit.
If a third strike at -10 is universally a better choice than inflicting Frightened on an enemy then that's a damning criticism of the system. I suspect that isn't actually true, though.
You Can. Will you want to is left to be mathed out. Especially later on when new splat books come out and there might be ways to over come that -10.
I mean for the sake of all the PF gods, we have people mathing out DPR already, to decimal points.
It's why I hang my head at times when talking about PF1. It's not Agency or the choice, it's the Math that makes people do stuff. And far too often it seems. Did it make sense to take this trait for my character? NO but it gives me the Math I wanted. Story be sod off, I need Fey Foundling on Paladin. We'd be here all day if I kept giving examples but I think people get it.
I might not like the changes but right now might actually be the best time to try PF2 as the math isn't figure out just yet. Or maybe it is but it hasn't been broadcast to the wider community just yet.
[Maybe. But when you are fighting giant rats and skeletons it doesn't seem in character for the enemy to do that. Also, in most cases the monsters are outnumbered which limits that tactic's effectiveness for them.
Against 1 big target sure. And against Several targets yeah AoE still exists.
4 PCs vs 4 Bandits or even like 4-6 goblins I've just seen it turn into a running battle. And not an actual epic running battle the kind you'd seen in movies or fiction. More like Tom chasing Jerry. So then my own groups see this cartoonish running fight or the martials standing in place to screen the Ranged, usually in a corridor to the point we're back where PF1 put us.
That's funny once. Having it happen all the time is annoying.
Besides, where are we in the multi swing math?
Why do we care about debuffs if the math shows just doing as much damage as possible is usually the way to go?
You can do debuff fighter in both systems. Both systems(and community) will say you're probably not playing it right but you CAN do it.
Always gotta go for the big numbers, that's what we've been taught and told.
Well actually it's a change for the computer games and not in the tabletop system it seems. Weird. And the Etiquette's in game unlock more dialogue options or different skill checks.
But I like the idea that each person/character has their own insights or manners when it comes to speaking to certain groups. Someone skilled at making deals with the nobility might find it hard to deal with the street gangs. An Academic styled character can easily talk to others about science, magic, occult topics but throw them in room full of Socialites or Military minded and they might flummox a bit.
I'm not a fan of the new background system but I think that might be the key way to easily slide such an idea into PF2. Sure someone that can craft masterwork/legendary weapons after adventuring for awhile can convince a Smith, but someone with the Background: Blacksmith has been around long enough to know more of the dangers, pick up on the more subtle tells and can tell the odd metalworking joke that other smiths actually get.
It's not a perfect system probably, and I haven't really tested it in a numbers way but it's something I'm keeping in mind a little bit in my own games.
I've always questioned "Dump stats". I'm the guy that at least likes to keep everything at 10-12 so I don't get a negative. I never saw going lower as a 'good thing' unless it was for spell casters and even then, there's ways to get more spell slots/recharge them. Also the danger of taking Stat damage early but that's gone last I saw(There's no stat damage just debuffs. Can you die if your stat hits 0 by debuff?)
As someone who plays charisma characters a frankly unreasonable amount of the time, this behavior annoys the hell out of me. It feels like being deliberately robbed of my investment in diplomacy because the GM wants to punish the dwarf. You wouldn't force someone who didn't invest in Thievery to pick half of the locks.
No but the CHA character everywhere or at least IN character might not have the mannerisms to be fully trusted.
A Bard might be able to win over the Thieves guild but a Rogue or someone that is more criminal/underground might have a better idea or way of getting them to talk cause they are "One of us".
It's why I'm slowly testing out Etiquette from Shadowrun in my games. Well the Shadowrun Returns series. Basically different mannerisms or talking/culture points that help with discussing.
Yeah your Dwarf might not have CHA to talk to the big merchant lord but he'd have say Etiquette Miner or Streets and be able to talk with the lower classes just fine, as an example.
While having a strong CHA build is fine, just make sure to let others talk and not just be for combat.
This is a stance I can actually get behind. I don't even think PF2 is a 'bad game' but it does nothing that says "Play me" to the point of not only switching systems but switching over to that(If I'm jumpping systems, I'm detouring to Shadowrun first).
For newer players, yeah I'd say give PF2 a shot but at the same time I don't see what makes PF2 really stand out from DnD 5E. Now that's not to say it's a clone of it but some things do remind me of DnD 5 that I don't like. Example; Some classes having to pick a certain focus after X level feels a lot like DnD 5E's "You're level 3, pick your actual build" idea. I didn't like that there, I don't like it here.
But I honestly can't say if it'll be better or not. It's certainly a different flavor and it might appeal more to new players and vets. Not me but hey, hope it works out well enough for Paizo to keep the lights on.
I'm more interested in how this works with plot. But this is also running with old info.
Does a summon still take an action from the summoner to do anything? If so, how does one portray the evil court mage that has a few Fiends summoned to do evil plots? If he has enough summoned by RAW he shouldn't be able to do anything and just stand in place. Or just be locked in his room all day.
That said, Planar Binding might still be around?
Yeah no I wasn't expecting instant rules on how to revert back in the first couple APs. Unless said APs are retreads/repeats, like Rise of the Runelords 2.0. Just a little "Hey here's what to do to update it" or something like that.
But again unless it's retreads I don't expect to see rules on how to convert back till later.
I get that you guys want to keep working. I even get you guys want to move on. And I wish you luck.
I just hope your new game doesn't get broken and answered in a year or two.
Suggestions on how to port new AP into the old system.
Ramifications on the larger setting could be good, as I think most of us who have run more than one AP like to reference that. I did Iron Gods and Wrath of the Rightous afterward and made a new order of knights/paladins to go with the PCs based off Tech found in Iron Gods.
Or maybe find ways to link the AP from one book to another. Now of course this would be a giant task if you do it for all the APs but maybe link them based on Region or style? It doesn't even need to be the same characters, maybe the retainers of the PCs are sent to deal with an issue near by, but if you're going to link them based of PCs(And their levels) maybe give a broad suggested stat bonus to give monsters? I don't know.
Like if you completed Skull and Shackles, your next character for say, Serpent's Skull or Ruins of Azlant was a retainer/helper of your old PC and gets a small Pirate bonus?
Something to help flesh out where they're from or at least what "Completed" AP they are from. You don't even need to beat the AP but can now go "Okay this AP was completed and here's the fallout" in an easier way.
I think Reign of Winter mentioned a Module that might have been played before the AP and goes "So here's what's up if that happened" or something. More of that be interesting to see.
Optimization paths and preferred builds - okay.
Community and dev expectation that they are the absolutely only way to play the game - bad.
I'm tired of being told I need a barrel of happy sticks. I'm tired of being told I'm bad if I select a tier 1 and struggle. I'm tired that everyone rolls their eyes if I pick Rogue or a class-race that isn't optimal.
I'm tired that everyone seems to expect everyone to min max. Even the devs at this point.
And if PF2 shapes up the same way, then yes, I'll consider it a failure.
I disagree with that too. We absolutely want better builds than others. We want people who explore and theorycraft to find synergies that are hidden (and then of course make guides/posts/videos about it). If there wasn’t room to get superior (and by that also inferior) builds in PF2 then the game would imo be a failure. What they do need to do to succeed though is have the gap be narrower. Too often in PF1 one character would overshadow the table and make them useless. There was a hug gap between optimized and incorrectly built, but the bigger problem was the huge gap between optimized and averagely built.
I don't mind when people do that but I mind when people fully accept it as "The only way to play".
PF2 is a failure to me if it sells itself on all this 'customization' and "oh these are viable" only for the community to throw out 75% of it and keep playing with the same builds again and again regardless of if it fits the character or not.
I don't want to pick Fighter in PF2 and instantly have the community and even Devs expect "Oh he's going Two hander cause that's the only way to play that class at this point". I don't want to pick Wizard and the answer be "Oh pick X, Y, and Z" and have the community AND GAME tell me I'm bad if I don't.
Also; "We want better builds than others". Yeah. That's how the arms race begins.
Between you and Arachnofiend I feel like I need to expand.
You build a Fighter. It's expected you go with These Feats during level ups or even this Dedication. Because the community expects it as it does the most, and thus the devs also start to work with that being the 'standard'.
You pick up a wizard, it's fully expected you take these spells. You go shopping, it's clearly time to pick up X item or you're shooting yourself in the foot. Why would you not do Y because it's mathed out to be the best? You must build "Z way" or you're not playing it right.
This is what I want to see avoided. All the math solved, all the choices discarded for the most standard and board reaching options.
The actual rules are still brand new so no one has had time to actively sit down and solve them and even then a splat book or two might mess that math up.
But that math will be solved again. It's just how much that actually settles into the standard community that I'm waiting to see.
It's fresh. It's new. It's shiny.
It needs time for the new paint to wear off and the community to solve the math problems. Then we'll see if it's a better game or not.
Because I see the term "Tier list" adopted by the community at large, AGAIN in PF2, and a general expected mathed out "you must be X strong" come up AGAIN in the community and official books; it will in my opinion have failed.
doc roc wrote:
Isn't Caster Cleric the default of Cleric? Yeah they can support or smash face but Cleric being high on the tier list isn't due to martial power. On that note;
Loved: All the numbers. All the odd ways you could find to boost stuff or cover weaknesses. There was a lot of odd items and feats you could find if you dug deep.
Wanted: Better Animal Companion support. I'm not asking it to be on the level of Summoner's pet but bring them up at least so it's worth taking cause most were gimmick builds or abused some rule.
Hated: The expected 'solved' math and tier list that both the community and even the devs seemed to follow. Which is probably going to happen again in a few years but what can you do?
Will miss: Alchemist. I don't like the new walking supply shed they made it.
Continuing my obsession with the brawler class and it's archetypes;
Okay so the first part is kinda okay. You can move and Feint but I don't understand the second part when you have something like Improved Feint. Unless it means you can Feint then move?
But it's the level 11 ability that concerns me. There doesn't seem to be an action to do it, you just can. So does this mean you can do this without Feinting? Also, what happens if you move, does the flanking space still stay there?
By RAW I don't know. Others have put it up there so I suppose that's what happens.
However, in my Mummy's Mask game, I had a snake just as a random enemy. It was hiding under a table outside an estate the team was exploring. The team..., not only left it alone but also gave it some food.
There was a weapon in the building that was going to be VERY useful to killing about half the enemies there so I ruled that the former owner of the weapon was a Ranger/Hunter of some kind and his animal companion was the snake. Smart enough to do a 'snapping' trick to make a sound and smart enough to lead the group to the weapon(Which has a snake decal on it).
The party took the helpful snake with them and actually became the Cleric's familiar
Elanor Benedetto Giuseppe Pietro da Milano (Or Elli)
Elli was just an Alchemist Tiefling born to a Crusading Noble family around the World-wound. She actually wasn't bullied, feared, or anything like that. Sure a few off putting moments but she had a happy upbringing. Well as well as you could near the World-wound.
She actually took off to Numeria not because her family died or she was driven out, she just did it cause as a kid she got a small wind up robot/golem toy from a traveling merchant which lit a fire under her. She was no warrior but what if she could turn the relics buried under Numeria into weapons FOR her and the crusaders? Eventually this desire became more about "Better life through tech" than warfare.
This of course led her to butt heads with the Technic League and lead her to hide out in Scrapwall. When the rest of the party found her.
Sure she's had to struggle a bit with her Demonic nature when she gets really mad but Elli didn't have dead parents, lost love, trauma, etc etc.
She was fun to play.
Okay so I know that having more than one archetype works the following way;
"A character can take more than one archetype and garner additional alternate class features, but none of the alternate class features can replace or alter the same class feature from the base class as another alternate class feature."
So if for example 2 archetype change/remove Alchemist bombs, you can't take both.
But how do this work with Skills for example?
My first alchemist I drew him up as a escaped chemist from an evil Empire(homebrew setting). He was a part of weapons development but fled when the Empire field tested his stuff on on combatants.
While I didn't go into the Class or the Story thinking about how he would use all his abilities, he actually could and would use all his stuff.
Poisons in combat? No, but he did threaten a Empire Soldier with a slow painful death due to the fact he could not only Poison the guy but keep him alive DURING the process to drag it out further. Needless to say we got the Info from him.
And yet at least from what I saw of the playtest, Monk is still very much a trained, drilled, and schooled Unarmed combatant. Put a different way, I can't flavorly make the Brawler I have now(Washed up, half drunk former tavern bouncer who fights well due to his job and the fact he's seen like 50 adventuring parties throw down in a pub and recalls their tricks) with PF2 Monk. If anything, he'd probably be closer to Fighter and even then that's still not close enough.
Monk to me always says "Path of Dedication, Training, and Self Betterment through Practice/Martial Arts". Removing Ki doesn't change that, especially when the other choices seem to be "Pick your School Stance". Monk doesn't seem to a good pick if you want a more Travern Brawler, Street Fighter, or Boxing Master.
Monks without Ki sounds like Sorcerers without Bloodlines. Or Alchemist without Bombs. Or Rogue without Sneak Attack. And everyone complains about Casters doing too much but no one wants Monk to do magic stuff with Ki.
Sure you're still viable but you're going to need some extra help to get over hurdles and from what I understand, Magic isn't as helpful as it was last edition. Well not as helpful to other people, it seems more damage focus/selfish this go around. Why buff you when Spell X can do your damage better?
I'm just confused by PF2 monk and the community.
Ed Reppert wrote:
It is a tad..., odd when it comes to the story aspect of the game.
But the flip side would be we're 19 levels of whatever class we are + 1 level of Commoner/Villager stats.
I mean from what I understand, Ezren the iconic Wizard should be closer to Wizard 4-5 and Expert maybe 2-4 given his flashback in the comic along with other material.
I wonder if it'd be more interesting to ask, "What class would you never take without using an archetype?"
Alchemist. Shaman. Druid. Brawler.
Honestly I really like base Alchemist as it's the class that made the system click for me. It might be a 'grab bag' of random abilities but it always made sense to me.
You're just a chemist/pharmacist who's learned how to fight, heal, and change your own body with all kinds of mixtures + a bit of your own latent magic.
That and I've played the Atelier games a bit along with Secret of Evemore. Both games with a big focus on Alchemy.
Sadly, PF alchemist will never learn Crush.
I feel like one thing that kind of makes brawler style flexibility less necessary in PF2 is that most combat styles no longer require a massive feat investment to be functional. Like grappling feats are no longer math enhancers that help you successfully grapple, they give you options for things you can do to someone you can grapple. A 15th level fighter with 16 dex and mastery with the longbow should be able to hit a lot of things with arrows without a single archery feat.
And yet I would prefer to decide at the start of a fight "Am I going to be grapple based or given that it can fly, should I take some Archery Feats to help me fight it".
That 15th level Fighter can hit things with a bow yes. But he still has to pick "Do I want to be a better Archer or a better Melee today" is the issue. Yes you could just use Brawler to sneak past the Feat Tax problems but being able to pick up 1-3 feats at the start of a fight was really fun and let you choose how to fight that battle. I mean I like Pummeling Style, but I'd like to only have that for DR enemies. I can do that with PF1 Flexing.
And really something that should have it's own topic. Again I just dislike that Brawler seems to be "Ki-less Monk" when it brings it's own style of play to the table.
That aside, I know people want Ki-less Monks for..., flavor or mechanics reasons but what do you DO as a monk if you don't have your Not magic but totally magic powers?
Cause it seems like asking the Spellcaster for buffs is out or at least not as useful.
Ed Reppert wrote:
The stories rarely match up with the Rules/Community play. I mean any story that has Ezren in it should just feature him solving the problem himself if he's past level 10 or so. Like in the comics he gets trapped in some crypt or tomb without his spellbook. You mean to tell me a Wizard didn't have a backup scroll just for that? Who doesn't carry around 10 Stone Shape scrolls or a wand?
As for me, I've always kinda taken the "override" theory. I mean most characters didnt' start off as Alchemist, Fighter, Wizard, Paladin etc as Kids or teens. But at the same time we didn't start off as Commoner or Expert either, we have a full 20 levels to go.
So when your power awakens(Sorcerer), you're chosen(Paladin), something pokes you(Cleric, Oracle, Summoner), or you've just found your path(Fighter, Alchemist, Brawler, etc etc), it supersedes and overrides whatever you were before.
It helps but I can't help but feel it was just a small bone/nod to what they learned with Brawler.
Meanwhile Brawler could slide into some Ranged feats for a fight and not be locked into that for the day.
I suppose 2.0 Combat Flex is good if your spellcasters are Scrying.
Because I'm very good at coming up with odd ideas for builds/characters. Like I just found out there's kinda a "Dancer Fighter" archetype for Brawler and I need to make something for that.
As for Jojo..., maybe the first 2 parts. We'll have to see how they do Summoner and see if we can do Stands again.
This is very off topic now so I'll stop.
I just picture 2 Anime Monks just countering each other's Ki ability spam while the fight goes on around them.
The multiclass part sounds like it could just ripe for abuse in practice. But they'd(hopefully) figure out how to restrict it a bit. Like Brawler 9/Fighter 1 shouldn't qualify for Certain Strike as a fast example.
But this is more a Monk topic. I just dislike that Brawler is waved off as "Monk without Ki".
Is it the Flurry or the Unarmed damage that makes it so? If it's the latter, there's a lot of archetypes in PF1 that were "Monk without Ki"
Can you even do Unarmed without being a Monk or taking Monk Dedication?
If they count as magic, can they be countered Spelled? Does Anti Magic Field gimp Monks now?
As for the topic, I see this going 2 ways.
1) Nova. Every Fight. I disliked it in Spheres, I'll probably dislike it here. No reason to think about resources, no reason to think up a plan that isn't "Damage". Death is the best CC and just take 10 minutes to eyeball the room.
2) Nothing. Being so trained over X years to never use their cool stuff till the boss, players might actually with hold using their powers out of habit.
Unless they changed/came out with new abilities, I don't think they rolled Brawler into anything. Yeah there's always been the idea of "Unarmed combatant that isn't Ki Powered" but Brawler was more than just that.
And given that Combat Feats are gone, I don't see how you can have a Class like Brawler anymore.
zza ni wrote:
for alchemist id say Grenadier (getting precise bombs at 2nd level sign me on!) it was so basic that it was posted twice in the books. since it first showed up as a monster race archtype in the monster codex (i believe it was meant to be hobgoblin only at first). untill now both d20pfsrd and the archive of nethys keep 2 pages of this archtype. one for the monster codex one for the pfs field guide.
Personally I would say it's a perfect archetype that should really be the standard class. If it didn't do away with Brew Potion which by RAW, we can't get back. But some people don't like to craft so it's understandable.
Following this; really any Alchemist Archetype that trades out the Poison abilities is as close to "Default" as you can get. It's a neat thematic nod but in practice Poison is just too meh to really bother using.
The flavor is sneak attacks. Maybe I want to go all Hulk on someone and smash their face in. I don't think there's an Alchemist archetype that does that.
Vivisectionist is more Jack the Ripper or as you said, straight up Hyde. Get them flat footed and eviscerate them. But if you don't want to mess around with fishing for that sneak attack damage you're up a creek.
There's also the... odd extracts/spells it gets. Once you hit 7, you also splice in basically Dr Monroe vibes.
Again it's a good archetype, but to say it doesn't enforce any flavor just sounds weird to me. Though I could be the weird one, and people are able to ignore things that I get hang ups about. That or the added damage dice is good enough to just ignore it anyway.
If possible, try to do research on the Wizard itself.
Yes yes, every wizard becomes god at level 13 or so, and your GM has warned you to prepare and this might be deadly, a thing you say he doesn't do often if ever.
But I'm guessing the wizard didn't spring into reality during the last session, they had to have existed at some point in the world.
See what info you can get before heading off to fight them. What Schools do they study, what's their base/hideout/tower like, do they have helpers, monsters, or are they known for summoning armies?
Yes all those questions and more could be faked by the wizard to give false info to their enemies but I feel it might be easier to prepare against what the wizard is KNOWN to do or is said to have DONE than what the Wizard Class CAN do.
Cause otherwise you prepare against the whole spell list and if the GM really wants to end you, hello Timestop+Lantern Archon army.