Mewzard's page

105 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 105 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Captain Morgan wrote:
I'd say no, you really don't need it. Also monks have better options than climbing if they don't mind spending class feats like wall running or flying.

I just like the option of being able to fight in any given scenario, and at full speed. Put a decent chunk of my skill feats into that to save Class Feats for the good stuff (options for maneuvers, ki powers, and of course a decent stance).

Set up to do solid attacking and tanking as well. Good times.

While trying to build my old 20th level Monk in 2e, I considered Combat Climber for some all terrain fighting, but what it does is this:

"Your techniques allow you to fight as you climb. You’re not flat-footed while Climbing and can Climb with a hand occupied. You must still use another hand and both legs to Climb."

Well, Quick Climbing grants a Climb Speed at Legendary Athletics, which removes flat-footed and my Monk is hand to hand only, so no weapons to occupy a hand.

That made me wonder...does it serve any purpose? Is it required for those moments you use a hand to strike, or is it not particularly useful now?

If it serves no purpose, I'd toss it for another feat. Any help here would be greatly appreciated.

So, what’s the word on the Student of Perfection?

Vlorax wrote:

Seems intended to me by the wording of the feat.

If you're small and want to wrestle with the big boys multiclass into Barb(giant instinct) and take Giant's Stature feat.

That multiclass really doesn't fit (even ignoring that it took every single last class feat to create my character correctly)...guess I'll just have to wait for either Paizo to clarify or ask for a houserule on the subject.

Thanks for the idea though, it's not a terrible one for a more appropriate character.

Titan Wrestler is a useful feat that lets you Disarm, Grapple, Shove, or Trip creatures two sizes larger than you, and that grows to three sizes larger than you at Legendary Athletics.

For a normal sized creature, that means you can use these maneuvers on literally everything, but a small-sized creature, it means you peak at Huge.

Do you think that was the intent of the feat to limit small PCs? Just feels off that a difference of two feet could be all that stands in the way of one Monk German Suplexing a T-Rex, while another has no real issues doing so.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:

This is one thing I kinda hate. Classes like Bard and Ranger went from being high skill classes to just baseline and that feels pretty jarring.

I mean it's nice not having the Fighter et al. just be terrible at skills for no good reason, but I'm not sure I like high-skill being the sole purview of rogues either. Investigators will probably get good skill increases too but that doesn't really change the point.

I can't speak for Ranger, but the Bard still has great skilling options. Bardic Lore, for instance, lets you do Recall Knowledge checks on literally every single subject, and can hit Expert, so while you might be -4 compared to someone with Legendary in a Lore or say Arcana, you can literally recall from all subjects.

Versatile Performance meanwhile lets you use Performance to Make an Impression, Demoralize, and Impersonate instead of Diplomacy, Intimidate, and Deception (and lets you get the skill feats from those skills with Performance's proficiency).

Taking Eclectic Skill lets you add your level to all untrained skills and lets you do any skill check that requires you to be trained. Bump that up to any skill check that requires you be Expert when you hit Legendary Occultism (that's also when Bardic Lore bumps up to Expert).

Hell, Inspire Competence lets you use your Performance to Aid your ally on a skill check, and bumps up any failures to successes. Legendary in Performance? Auto Critical Success.

The Bard definitely still has a role as a skilling character, it's just not set up the same as the Rogue.

Bandw2 wrote:
Kyrone wrote:

Tiefling and Aasimar will be heritages, it was mentioned at Paizocon.

The different types of them could just get the Elf Atavism treatment.

ooo nice to hear. did they say what they'll apply to? any races or specific ones for various races?

They mentioned several examples, like Elf Aasimar, Dwarf Aasimar, etc.

It's not only Aasimar and Tiefling, I believe Duskwalker is also a heritage.

They should be for all Ancestries.

Hell, even Half-Elf and Half-Orc had a note in the Core Rulebook saying that GMs could allow said Heritages to pretty much any Ancestry if they want, with a little detail into how it worked.

I'd love to see a Half-Giant Heritage down the line. GM let me play a Half-Giant Unchained Barbarian for our Iron Gods game, and that's been fun.

graystone wrote:

For me, I'm lucky to see a game run to 12th so I'm only going to see 2 or 3 of those feat. It's great that there are cool feats like that, but it's not something special for the ranger.

No, not at all. Fighter has gotten loads of upgrades for instance. Sorry if I gave the wrong impression.

It's not good for that though: it gives them a free action to Sneak but gives them no bonuses to do so. For a bonus, you need to follow the leader than that is a different action. What this is good at is that it allows your already stealthy party to do multiple things. For instance, now your rogue friend with Trap Finder can sneak, search for traps, and investigate all at once.

Oh, they can kills things quite well so no complaints there: it's the rest that's an issue as you seem to have to mono-focus as much as possible to keep an aspect relevant and that of course comes at the detriment of any other facet of the character you want.

True, but some skill feats can let you do things that weren't possible in 1e (or required a lot of effort to get to).

It's quite alright, it's like 2AM at this point, misunderstandings are bound to happen, lol.

Oh, I did misread that...though that is still quite useful.

I mean, it's really a question of how good you want to be at one thing vs how minimally good you're willing to be at several things. Do you want to be a good archer and tracker, or do you want to be THE BEST Archer or THE BEST Tracker? That sort of thing. A specialist or more of a generalist.

In my longest running game, I wasn't the best at DPS, AC, Face skills, Combat Maneuvers, etc...but I was good enough at most things to serve the group in several aspects.

Honestly, it depends on the group. If the group absolutely NEEDS some role filled, it might be an issue to not be optimal...but if they're managing fine in the major aspects, a secondary solid character at a few aspects could still be useful.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:

Ok, a cool feat.

Not exactly: it's only guarantee is you can feed yourself. "A success on your check to Subsist can also reduce the damage dealt by the plane, at the GM’s discretion." Can, not does. Free food isn't too exciting IMO.

Not bad.

But lets get to the point here: you only get ONE of these nifty things at 7th and only for skills you increase. How many skills are getting high enough for these again? maybe 4 skills? Now how many of those awesome skill feats use the same stat? I'm seeing Int, Cha, Wis...

Scratches head... How do any of these impact the ranger? I'm saying the RANGER seems a downgrade. Or are you telling me a ranger should multiclass to get an upgrade?

To be fair, someone keeping their Survival skill up on Proficiency with a decent wisdom will probably manage to find food more often than not. Also, the other part of the feat letting your success reduce damage of said plane is useful.

Also yeah, only one, then two by level 9, three by level 11 (more if you're a Rogue of course). ALso yes, you are limited by what skills you've raised, but there are a lot of solid options I feel. As for stats, the fact that you need to raise four unique stats every single time you hit a stat boost means you're bound to at least have a decent mod in some of them. Also, you're bound to have at least one skill associated with a stat you're good at, like Athletics for the Fighter, Acrobatics if you're rocking a Monk, etc.

Sorry, I misunderstood that part and thought it was a dig at 2e overall.

Alright, Ranger. I've not done much with them in 1e, but I did notice the occasional gem.

Warden's Step at level 10 single-handedly makes group stealth viable in natural environments, terrible group stealth can be so frustrating when you're particularly stealthy. In the same vein, Camouflage to sneak even when being observed is particularly useful. Swift Tracker letting you move towards your target as a free action if you did Survival could also be quite useful for a more melee-focused Ranger. Stealth and Survival are definitely two skills that are supported by the class.

Not a feat, but the degree to which Flurry lowers MAP is also quite valuable. It can be hard to justify the -10/-8 with agile third attack on a lot of foes, but -6/-4 with agile? Much more viable, and the degree to which it lowers later is insane.

graystone wrote:
Mewzard wrote:
But is it really a downgrade?
*nods* Yes. If you have to point to 16th or 19th level abilities, it's not impressing me as upgrade material. How about tell me what the upgrades are from levels 1 to 15? Because I spend most of my time in the 1 - 12 range so it the wonderful upgrades are all 16+, it's not sounding so good to me.

I mean, endgame martials actually feeling like they could be godly heroes is important, but fine, some earlier stuff, let's try some stuff from Master Proficiency, starting around level 7:

Being so skilled at stealth you can hide from all forms of senses (Tremorsense no more), so adept at surviving that you can survive on planes of existence that shouldn't be able to support you due to a lack of food and avoid the harm such planes cause, be so good at Deception that you can deceive magical means to read your mind, tell if you're lying, or detect your alignment.

Hell, by this point, Quick Repair lets you fix an entire broke item in three actions, you can heal up to four people at a time with Ward Medic, and feed up to 16 people with Forager (double on a Crit Success).

If you want to talk classes:

A Fighter could take Sudden Leap for a massively high Jump (up to double their speed depending upon what DC they can beat) and strike with two actions at level 8, and at level 10 combine it with Felling Strike to down a flying foe with just one more action.

A Monk could take Ki Blast at 6th level for up to a 60 foot cone and 4d6 damage with some knockback, which scales up every single spell level. Wild Winds Initiate gives the Monk a ranged stance that also gives a bit of ranged defense and ignores cover. Sleeper Hold at 10th level gives them an excellent option to knock a foe out right away

If you're going into Wild Shape, I'd argue 2e's given a lot of great options for it given the wide variety you can add to your options. The Bard being able to add their level to every untrained skill at level 8 is basically like getting skill points for everything in the list, and I rather like their 4th level Metamagic feat Melodious Spell. Forget Still and Silent Spell, they might have never noticed you casted a spell if your performance check is high enough.

Honestly, I like a lot of what 2e's got going for it.

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Claxon wrote:

Yeah, they made things real hard choices about what you want to excel at instead of giving you everything for free.

Yes characters are less powerful in PF2 and have a smaller suite of abilities at their command.

This is all intentional.

This is part and parcel to why I haven't committed to switching to PF2. I plan to play a one shot or maybe a short scenario to see how I feel about it, but I definitely feel "downgraded" in comparison to PF1.

But is it really a downgrade? I don't recall being given an option to casually Jump over a hundred feet in the air, trip the largest monsters in the game, fall from orbit without a scratch, run full speed through a gap about the size of your head as if you were a Pillar Man, survive all extremes of temperature without food and water with no harm, steal the literal armor off the back of a man, scowl at someone so hard they literally die...all things without magic, just with pure physical/mental skill. Like, one feat and going Legendary in Athletics is all it takes to get either a full climb or swim speed equal to your speed (your Monk is a damn speedboat at this point).

That's not even counting stuff like the Ranger's 20th level ability to track their target pretty much anywhere, even through teleportation/planar travel if they're Legendary in Nature. Or the Rogue's 20th level ability to be so stealthy, you go so absolutely invisible that not even glitterdust, see invisibility, etc help find you.

Even casters get 10th level spells. Turning into the Avatar of your god, or a literal Kaiju. Hell, upcasting Earthquake makes it damage a quarter-mile burst up to half a mile away. That'd devastate a town.

Even ignoring 10th level spells, True Shapeshifting is an insane capstone for the Wild Shaping Druid. Bards can rock a Haste Cantrip in Allegro, Wizards can give themselves spell slots to combine two spells into one (sometimes you just want to double Disintegrate someone), I mean, the list goes on and on.

I can't really say I feel particularly downgraded here. Especially with Martials, but even with Casters.

The Dex/Cha boosts of the Goblin do support a Bard as an option, which don't have to be comic relief if you don't want them to.

An Enigma Muse can allow you access to Bardic Lore, which lets you make Recall Knowledge checks on everything. You think your smart? This Goblin went to Bard College. Polymath Muse meanwhile can get Versatile Performance, letting you use Performance in place of Diplomacy, Deception, and Intimidation for certain actions. You could always do both later.

The mix of full Spellcasting, skilling options (Eclectic Skill lets you add your level to all untrained skills), and some fantastic Composition Cantrips (Allegro is a Cantrip Haste, definitely worth grabbing), you can be quite the asset to the team in and out of the battle.

You don't have to be a singing or instrument Bard either. You could Act out a scene, use Oration to tell stories, Dance your way across the battlefield, it's up to you.

Honestly considering something along these lines for my first character.

Paradozen wrote:
So if you attack them or make noise or shake them they wake up. And are neither prone not disarmed.

Would the target fall if you used it on a flying foe? Could be a way to hit someone with falling damage and getting high enemies down to the ground, as a Monk with Quick Jump/Cloud Jump and a high movement speed could easily jump around 100 feet or so with like 2 actions (especially if you take options that increase your jumping distance).

A Monk should be able to get Legendary Athletics easily, meaning you'll have a high roll for the grapple checks. Flurry of Maneuvers will let you do both Grapples in one action, and Titan Wrestler will let you use Sleeper Hold on pretty much any creature in the game.

Want to put that Dragon in a Sleeper Hold? Incapacitation doesn't count as sleep, so it's not immune (though, it's only going to work on a monster of equal or lesser level, as stronger monsters fare one step better against Incapacitation effects).

ChibiNyan wrote:

There's not a lot of skills in 2E. A Rogue will pretty much have all of the relevant ones trained right off the bat.

It does seem a bit silly, they could do with 1-2 less since they also have more skill increases. Let other party members shine too!

I mean, a Bard can take Eclectic Skill at level 8 and add their level to every single untrained skill, and even use the trained options for said skills. Throw on top of that Bardic Lore, where you are trained in it and can use it for all Recall Knowledge, and even raise it to Expert when you're Legendary in Occultism, and the Rogue isn't the only skill class (also, you know Investigator will be one too).

But yeah, a lot of your skills as a Rogue will be Trained, as I doubt most Rogues will be able to resist having six Legendary Skills.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

According to Jason Bulmahn at the Paizo 2019 and beyond Gen Con panel, they consider the Core Rulebook, Bestiary, Gamemastery Guide, and Advanced Player's Guide to be the "Core Nexus" of Second Edition that they'll assume everyone has at their table, so that should aid including playable Orcs greatly (less so for poor Hobgoblins, even though Hobgoblin enters Second Edition first).

Slyme wrote:

The Oracle seems like an odd choice for the APG, especially now that the Sorcerer has options for divine casting...Oracle always seemed like the Sorcerer version of the Cleric...and I'm not sure how they plan on differentiating the two now.

Investigator was the Alchemist/Rogue hybrid class...and isn't the new multi-classing rules supposed to cover making hybrids like that?

Swashbuckler is another hybrid class...but they are introducing it before they introduce one of the classes it is a hybrid of? Seems like a questionable choice.

Witch in 1e was written to be thematically almost exactly like the Warlock from 5e (magic via otherworldly pact)...but played nothing like the Warlock...and slumber hex was so game breaking, that almost every witch I have ever seen took it. Hopefully they avoid that mistake this time around.

What I would really like to see are things that add totally new mechanics, things that don't follow the decades old character tropes, etc. Some of them I could see potentially being archetypes or handled via multi-classing...things like the Brawler could be done as a monk or fighter archetype, or multi-classing.

Well, the stream mentioned that the Sorcerer did touch on some things for the Oracle, but they did specifically mention Curses and touching on the Pantheistic roots of the Oracle (mentions Divine elements, even a bit of Occult).

The Swashbuckler was mentioned to be "The Ultimate Mobility Warrior". Apparently the new action economy makes them quite exciting.

The Investigator, meanwhile, is very skill-focused, about solving problems through skill use.

The Witch, of course, is rocking those Hexes and familiar.

I'm betting each of those classes have a lot of unique elements to them. We'll find out in October, excitingly enough.

Chetna Wavari wrote:
It all depends on the strength of the rest of your table. If your table is generally unoptimized then it might have seemed strong, but it wasn't. It had a lot of holes.

Speaking from my personal experience playing one, it was holding up well. The AC I got my Swashbuckler to brought no end of frustration to the DM struggling to hit me (especially with Dodging Panache as an option for my very Charismatic Swashbuckler), the Intimidation options were quite nice when focused on decently, and I was also quite stealthy, which never hurts. The 15-20 Crit range with the Rapier only made me that more annoying to the poor DM, who couldn't hit me while I was doing decent enough damage and regaining Panache with my Crits.

But yeah, can't wait for the new Classes and Ancestries. More options are always good in my book.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
All Orichalcum items if damaged but not destroyed repair themselves after 24 hours.

Huh, so they're basically the Cloths from Saint Seiya? They could achieve some level of self-repair and were even partially made from Orichalcum. I can appreciate the nerdy reference if so, lol.

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Lord Fyre wrote:
Does this PF version screw over the rogue again?

Well, Rogues do get twice as many Skill Feats and Skill Increases when compared to all other classes (one of each per level), so that alone is a massive boon for them.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
sherlock1701 wrote:
It's very frustrating and boring that you can't specialize in a skill enough to guarantee being better at it than any equivalent-level or slightly higher creature you encounter throughout your career. It's a slap in the face as a player that you've invested in something as much as possible but you're still worse at it because the game is designed that way.

Skill feats are also quite important. How important is it that you run into some creature that is close to your Legendary Medicine modifier when you can end up healing 8 entire creatures without stopping, if they're stuck healing one creature with them then being unable to be treated again for like an hour?

It is that big a deal if your Athletics are comparable if you can grapple the largest creatures in the game and they can't? If you're so good, you get a swim speed whereas they have to roll regularly?

MaxAstro wrote:
Saint Evil wrote:

Last year I was an advocate of Fighters getting both legendary weapons and armour, did that happen?

And what is the top prof rank for each class by weapon and armour?

** spoiler omitted **

Do you mean there's a Monk feat you can take for any of your saves you take to Legendary?

What does it do, and do you think it's more valuable than having multiple Master saves for the ability to count all successes as Crit successes?

PossibleCabbage wrote:
Aside from the change in proficiency math, do monks get anything new to help out for the first few levels? In the playtest I found monks were great by midgame, but the early levels were rough.

I know my Unchained Monk experiences were rough at first in PF1e as I dumped Strength hard, but eventually did get a Dex to Damage option and things improved from there.

Not going to be an issue in 2e at least with how easy it is to get stats up to a decent level.

How viable is the Medicine skill as the primary source of healing in a party if you're willing to invest the skill feats into it? Thanks.

8 people marked this as a favorite.
PMSchulz wrote:
So, multiclassing into a spellcasting class is still a bad thing. Well, there go a lot of play styles. I was hoping the "you get two zero level spells to cast per day and have to burn another feat to get a first level spell" was a bad idea that would get tweaked. If you didn't want people to multiclass, why even give the option?

...Why is it bad now? If you want to be, say, a Fighter, you still get your full proficiencies, saves, attack, hit points, etc, but for a few feats, you can also get some cantrips, up to 8th level spells, master proficiency in your casting, up to two spell slots of every level through 6th, and that's not shabby given it also doesn't completely hobble you like it did in Pathfinder 1st Edition.

Sure, you're short a few feats, but with five alone (of eleven class feats), you can get all of the above. Still leaves you with a few decent feats for your Fighter abilities. Whereas if you went in, say, ten levels into Wizard on your Fighter, you'd be massively thrown off in important aspects that make you a Fighter (BAB goes down the drain, your HP gains would plummet, you'd have a drop in bonus feats, and you'd do all that only to peak at 5th level spells, which your stats may not end up supporting all that well anyways, vs how much easier 2e makes raising multiple stats).

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Antony Walls wrote:
Did I mention the rules?

They literally just let loose a hundred spoilers, 99 of which we have. We’ll be getting more info soon.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Alenvire wrote:
I find it funny everyone is talking about how this game should be more simple and easier to play then pf1. Me, I am hoping its not too simple. When you have simple systems you end up with simple characters, simple games, and simple just ends up being identical to other characters with just different flavor. If a rogue stabs for 1d6 and a fighter stabs for 1d6 does the rogue and fighter really matter? That is a overly simple example that I really hope is not a problem in pf2

Simpler than Pathfinder 1E doesn't mean as simple/samey as D&D 4E.

To me, from what I've seen, Pathfinder 2E's going to find a nice home as a healthy middle ground between Pathfinder 1E and D&D 5E. For Pathfinder 1E players who want something simpler without hitting 5E, and for 5E players who want something more complex, but not at Pathfinder 1E's level, this could be the perfect home to many players.

Honestly, if it goes well with my group and it gets proper support from Paizo...who knows? Maybe we'll move from PF1E to 2E.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Darkwynters wrote:
Duergar anyone...

I'd be down with some Svirfneblin love, gotta recreate my super awesome Svirfneblin Monk.

There's so many fun Ancestries left to add, that's for sure. Kobold? Orc? Drow? Half-Giant?

The DM for our Iron Gods campaign gave us the option to use Psionics if we wanted, and while nobody opted for the classes, I did end up going with a Half-Giant Barbarian, which fit the setting well enough, as far as I could tell.

Mark Seifter wrote:
I feel like the rogue with monk multiclass I built is incredibly powerful, but I also felt that way about the one I built in the playtest. I never got to play it though, so didn't test to see if it was as good as it looked on paper. Did anyone here test it in the playtest? Flurry of sneak attacks with Wolf or Tiger Style to give you a very powerful agile finesse attack is really good.

I think of Monk of the Mantis when I think of the Monk/Rogue, which is a fun way to try and capture the feel of Kenshiro from Fist of the North Star. Striking vital points to do massive damage.

My personal Monk eventually went from Vanilla Unchained Monk to a Serpent Fire Adept, all for spiritual reasons after recognizing his flaws from focusing on the body moreso.

I saw so many posts just dogging Chakras, but man, they were both amazing and fun for me, plus a great opportunity to explore a more non-religious spirituality.

I'm really looking forward to seeing the finished Monk in 2E, as I enjoyed a lot of the concepts from the playtest, but want to see where it's fallen.

Being a Monk tank is a special kind of fun, glad to see that's being helped early game.

Ediwir wrote:

One thing I noticed about casters and skill feats is that a lot of things that used to be "baseline" are now skill feats - mostly in regards to what you can do to magic things up. So casters (who already are normally the best with their casting skill) likely level it up and tend to take the magic-oriented skill feats to "do magic better" and perform other associated magic-related deeds like identification or spell managment.

This might be a form of feat taxing, but I don't mind it - being good at magic is hard and it does mean you won't be good at climbing or swimming. Neeeerd.

Meanwhile, the Fighter can leap 30 feat in the air towards a mountain and casually climb to the top, lol.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, the comments on nerfing PCs/weakening their abilities seem off. With the skill feats and hitting Legendary, you're seeing characters able to land from space with little harm, literally scare someone to death via intimidation, then go ham swimming across the planet like they were Heracles. On top of that, the dice increases for enhanced weaponry get to insane levels for singular attacks.

Casters may have gone down a bit (though they too can take skill feats), but closing the gap isn't a bad thing. And I seem to recall some of the things being addressed for the main game is a general improvement/powering up of casters.

If both martials and casters can be badass gods by level 20, I can dig it.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm actually playing Kingmaker for the first time and playing as a Chaotic Good Goblin Rogue (with an impressive 14 Charisma, which would be 18 Charisma under 2E Playtest rules). Let's just say my Gobbo's going to be making a strong argument about changing society and the world at large.

I've never been a player who likes the assertions of some race or another being inherently "evil". So, I'm always down with adding options for playable races.

Well, I suppose Ancestry now.

Either way, definitely want to do a face Goblin down the road in 2E. Maybe a Bard. Having fun with my Bard in another game.

Captain Morgan wrote:
If a broken shield can't be used, I can't imagine how it goes from "broken" to "destroyed." I imagine the Glass Cannon Podcast can clarify this a little. Pretty sure a shield got destroyed there, and they were using it past the point of broken.

Pretty sure if it does double of your shields hardness, you get hit with two dents, so if you were one dent from broken/two dents from destroyed and you blocked that big an attack, it would be gone...but you'd be choosing to block that damage, so you'd have to be desperate enough to risk your shield, probably to prevent death.

Given you can get three whole stats at 16 at level one, I don't think it's too hard to multiclass in PF2E.

Of course, if your class needs multiple stats, that can get iffy, but given you get four +2 at 5th level and every five after that, it's not too bad.

MusicAddict wrote:

1) Monk - Serpentfire Adept

One thing that's always stood out to me about monk in pathfinder is that, while the original core class was weak, the variety of archetypes that it played with without damaging the "what it means to be a monk" that's expressed not just in the original class features, but explored through these new archetype features. I had a hard time just picking one, so I went with one that's not spectacular, but one I want to see a new and improved shot at.

You know, this Archetype is really underappreciated. My Monk was able to one round a pit fiend, fight a Jabberwock, and go head to head with a friend possessed by a god (the DM was tempted to ban Monks after this game, lol).

When you can full round ten attacks at a great distance (either Flying Kick or Pummeling Charge) with advantage on your attacks, skill checks, saves, anything with a d20, all while having ridiculously high AC (second only to the tank proper)'s amazing. Yeah, at low levels, it's not impressive, but end game? Just death.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

So...are we also getting an Orc Ancestry? Feels like with Orc Ancestry Feats it seems reasonable.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Neo2151 wrote:

I just wanted to say...

Casting Lightning Bolt outside of natural stormy conditions is both unnatural weather and potentially harmful to wildlife.

It also seems like a pretty staple action of a Storm Druid.

Also, basically any use at all of Control Weather. Making a thunderstorm worse than it already is isn't something you cast high level magic to do - making a tornado or four on a sunny day is *exactly* what you use high level magic to do!
And it's anethema...

So... Uh... Rewording plzkthx?

Also, I'm really not liking the sound of shape shifting being tied to Polymorph spells.
Prepared at the beginning of the day? Limited by number of times you can cast?
This makes the class fantasy of a shapeshifter basically impossible to fully realize... Unless I'm missing something.

Mark mentioned the Anethema earlier:

Mark Seifter wrote:
Something like mega drought in the rainforest, snow in the Sahara, anything that is so far off that the local environment isn't ready to handle it and could be truly damaged as a whole should be off limits. Damaging a few things in the environment is one thing, damaging the environment itself is another.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
The lesser version isn't bad (though I'm curious if the enfeebled condition even works on Undead, if they have abilities similar to PF1, where they can ignore certain conditions, have special score generations, attribute conversions, and so on), but the greater version seems to have an unusual Save DC (32). Assuming you do get this weapon at 15th level, facing a 16th (or 17th) level undead BBEG, he most likely has a (17 level + 5 modifier + 2 proficiency bonus =) 24 saving throw against the effect, meaning he's fairly likely to make the saving throw, and has a decent chance of a Critical Success. He also can't ever Critically Fail it (even on a 1, since it's still less than 10), meaning the odds of using this weapon against comparable opponents and making them die from it is pretty weak and unlikely, which only gets worse as the levels increase.

You're missing an important part of the critical hit/miss system:

Natural 1s make your roll count as one degree worse and your Natural 20s count as one degree better.

If you roll a natural 1, your result counts as one degree worse. Meaning, if it would have been a critical success (10 over), it's a regular success (at or slightly above DC), if it would have been a regular success (at or slightly above DC), it would have counted as a regular failure, and if it would have counted as a regular failure (less than DC but more than DC-10), it counts as a Critical Failure.

The reverse with Natural 20s.

Meaning, if said undead rolls a natural 1, and it's less than the DC, it Critically Fails and dies.

Not the highest percent chance, but that's the chance of insta-killing the Boss. If he's been swarming weaker undead minions/sub-bosses, you have a higher chance of killing them instantly.

Also, it still does 2d6 extra damage and even if he Critically Succeeds, he's still slightly enfeebled for a round, moreso if he fails.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
MerlinCross wrote:

I question why Dents is capitalized. Possible Weapon/armor damage mechanics?

Also wait, do I have to spend RP, after drinking the Dragon Potion, everytime I go to breath?

I'd like to see this clarified before jumping to "Worst potion ever" stance. But if true I can see this only being used at time of drinking.

Didn't they mention a thing a while back about shields receiving damage if you tried to use them to block damage and the damage was higher than your shield's DR?

Maybe it's for that, fixing up jacked up shields.

Also, could be for sundering shenanigans if that's still in game, but I don't know if it is.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tholomyes wrote:
Except you have to Crit and they have to critically fail to get stunned. Even if you're good enough that you crit, say, 20% of the time, and they crit fail also 20% of the time, that's still only 4% that you stun with it. And I'm guessing that the chances won't be that high, unless you're fighting something that's way lower level than you, based on what little we know about monster stats from the stat blog, which makes it look like you're seeing only about a 1% or less chance to stun, barring things we don't know about yet, which might put it closer to 2%, but that's still not a lot.
Kaemy wrote:

Then he needs to Critically Fail the Fortitude Save. I'm not sure how you calculate it, but in the post it says it's based on your STR or DEX... Let's assume its 10+Level+STR, that would be DC 15 (is this right? I'm missing something? Maybe a Proficiency?)

A Lv1 enemy usually has +0/2 Fort Save, right? Let's be generous and go with 3. So he Critically Fails when rolling 1 or 2, so 10% of the time...

In these two scenarios (assuming your DC is actually 15, and the 10AC and 15AC enemies have a +3 Fort Save) you are Stunning them 4.5% and 3% of the time). Granted, is not amazing, but is looking okay-ish.

If the enemies had a +0 Fort the Crit Failure would increase from 10% to 25%, and the total stun chance would grow to 11,25% and 7,5%.

You're both missing something important. If you Critically Hit someone with an ability that requires a saving throw, their result is one degree worse.

Meaning, if they normally would have saved from that roll, your Critical reduces their result to a Failure, and if they regularly fail, that would be reduced to a Critical Failure. Even a Critical Success would be dropped to a regular Success from your Critical Hit.

In the scenario you crit them, that DC 15 stays a DC 15 for Critical Failure vs Regular Failure, and would require you to beat a DC 25 for a regular Success.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
JoelF847 wrote:
I'm in no way comparing stunning fist to anything, spellcasters or not. I'm talking about the name of the power. I think it's poor to name a power for something that only happens on a critical hit. That would be like having fireball not cause fire damage unless it's a crit, and otherwise just warms targets up and give them heatstroke. Or to use your color spray example, have it not create a spray of colors in a cone unless you crit them. It's not calling stunning spray. If it were, that would be a much better comparison to stunning fist only rarely stunning.

Critical hits are far easier to get in 2E given either a natural 20 that beats their AC or getting 10 over their AC will work. With said crits making the failure degree get one worse, all one needs is a regular fail to get the Stun.

Doesn't seem like it will be all that bad to stun someone.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Ninja in the Rye wrote:

Pathfinder Design Team: "Hey guys, with the new action system making that last attack with a big penalty often isn't worth it, so we're giving classes lots of FEATS and class abilities that let them trade that last attack that probably won't hit anyway for something more useful!"

Monks: "Oh, cool. So what ability do we get in place of making that third attack?"

PDT: "You get Flurry of Blows, which lets you make two attacks at the highest penalty instead of just one!"

Monks: ...

Uh, you could make the Flurry of Blows as your first attack, which would be +0/-4, like doing two attacks, meaning you could move in, get in two attacks, and get out of dodge, something that's not really an option for many classes.

Plus, you could do Flurry of Blows then a Ghost Strike. Three actions, three attacks, but your -8 attack would be against Touch AC. Not amazing against, say, another Monk, which would probably have equal normal AC and Touch, but I'm betting a foe in Full Plate or a Dragon might not have the best Touch AC.

Just some valid options.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
The Mad Poet wrote:
-4 for flurry of blows? Back to flurry of misses. Also no wisdom to AC? How on earth is an unarmored monk supposed to survive? Why then would a monk ever pick strength?

It follows the progression of all iterative attacks, but gives you an option for one more. Normally it's +0/-5/-10 with each additional attack being -10, but since your unarmed strike is agile, it's instead +0/-4/-8.

So, using three actions for four attacks thanks to Flurry of Blows gets you +0/-4/-8/-8 before adding your proper modifier to them, and if you were hasted, one more -8 attack.

Monks aren't punished any more than any other class trying to do multiple attacks.

Also, Mark did mention a Monk's AC could match a Paladin in full plate:

"In fact, a full-on Dex-based monk will very eventually hit a point where they can equal even a full plate paladin, all while not having any of the restrictions of heavy armor, which is pretty incredible."

The Monk will be fine.

UnArcaneElection wrote:

By the way, in case anyone didn't notice, the Monk blog came out today and DIDN'T mention alignment restrictions at all . . . .

Nor is Wisdom required if you don't wish to go that route:

"The monk's unarmored defense proficiency also goes up as he levels, first to master at 13th level and then to legendary at 17th. You'll notice that monks no longer add their Wisdom modifiers to AC, which is due to a few factors. First, depending on the monk's Dexterity modifier, the gulf between a heavily armored character and a monk without armor is extremely low, so adding even more bonuses would put the monk really far ahead. Second, adding more than a single ability modifier to a check or DC now really distorts the game. Third, we have another role for Wisdom to play in the class, and wanted it to be optional so monks aren't dependent on many different ability scores, giving you more flexibility with how you can build a monk character."

Also, all you need is one feat to be just as good with both simple and martial monk weapons as you are unarmed:

"Your monk could take Monastic Weaponry at 1st level, letting him use his unarmed attack proficiencies, as well as any monk abilities that normally work with unarmed attacks, with simple and martial monk weapons. This is how Sajan gets to use that sweet temple sword!"

Fuzzypaws wrote:
As I mentioned earlier, monks don't get a ton of bonus attacks at low levels in PF1 either. The fact that they only mentioned a "Flurry of Blows I" that lets you use one action per turn for this, does not mean that there isn't also a higher level "FoB II" or "FoB III" available (either as class features or selectable feats) to do it twice or three times per turn. We didn't get the complete class writeup.

A very fair point. The last time this topic assumed something, we had Monks with less AC than a Rogue, lol.

I'm always down with more attacks for a Monk. A 20th level Unchained Monk with Haste, Medusa's Wrath, the extra ki point attack, and double Elbow Smash in a Flurry of Blows can do 12 attacks (with two being non-lethal).

That's just absurd, and it won't hit that level, but I'd take another attack or two via Flurry of Blows upgrades.

Just noticed, but do Monks peak at Expert for Unarmed Strikes? Wonder if you can go Master with a feat...

Secret Wizard wrote:

The whole "dump STR, pump DEX" playstyle should be a thing fo the past – not because I hate DEX builds (which I do, but that's beside the point), but because it is based upon the assumption that effective builds are product of overcommiting on character creation.

One of the stated goals of this edition is to ease it up and make it more natural. Beside there being nothing natural in allowing STR dumps on a martial class (sorry, just had to take a potshot at those builds, it's ultimately unrelated to my...

Don't want to go into it too much and derail the topic, but what it came down to was both my character and my philosophy when it comes to Monks. When you look at a Shaolin Monk, the stuff they do isn't because they have superhuman strength (though they do have some strength), it's something more. Between that and the story I wanted to tell, a lower strength just made sense.

Don't forget this revealed Monk ability from the previous blog:

"For instance, a 20th-level monk with Enduring Quickness is permanently quick, and can use the extra action to Stride, to Leap, or as part of a High Jump or Long Jump."

For people who want to move in attack, and leave, this can get you the three attacks with Flurry of Blows being one of your actions.

Secret Wizard wrote:
All of this is good to hear for later levels, but I'm still a bit worried about the early game. Will test it out in the playtest!

The longest game I ever played in Pathfinder was a level 1-18 game as an Unchained Monk. At first, I kinda sucked (dumped strength, so until I got an Amulet of Mighty Fists with a way to do non-STR damage, I wasn't doing a lot).

But as I grew in levels...I found myself gradually more useful. Universally good saves really started coming in handy, my good Dex and Will plus Monk level stuff got me heading towards good AC, and as my unarmed damage increased, I gained methods to full round from a distance, and my number of attacks at max BAB increased, I started getting dangerous.

Everywhere I looked, Monks lacked a lot of love, but as I became the secondary tank in the group (second to our fully armored tank) who could full round from ridiculous distances, avoid some crazy s+&~ from any type of save, and let my allies reroll saves with Inspired Wisdom, I found it to be an awesome experience.

So yeah, kinda like old school wizards, it's a rough beginning, but can be dangerous if you can reach higher levels, get some decent magical support, and pick your abilities wisely.

My biggest concern, the AC, is clearly not an issue, so I'm good with this. Tank Monks are fun.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dilvias wrote:
I am... concerned. From what I can tell, compared to PF1 monk, PF2 monks lose all weapon proficiencies, increasing damage dice past the first level, stunning fist, bonus feats, wisdom to AC and fast movement. Some of these can be bought back as class feats I presume, but doing so means you don't get ki powers at the appropriate levels. Flurry seems worse as well, going from -1/-1 to 0/-4.

Worth noting, Monks have several means to increase their dice damage (Fierce Flurry ups their dice by one level on two attacks if both flurry attacks hit, and styles change the dice, potentially increasing the dice as well).

Most everyone loses bonus feats as well (though Rogues get bonus Skill Feats).

Also, Monks still get Fast Movement, how did you miss it?

"Speaking of moving, at 3rd level, a monk gains incredible movement, increasing his speed as long as he's not wearing armor. This starts at a 10-foot increase, and it goes up by 5 feet every 3 levels."

Both Incredible Movement and Fierce Flurry are built in upgrades not listed in the feats section.

edduardco wrote:

That it breaks the progression of previously 18th levels, that is another nerf to casters making original level 9 spells 1/day pushed to level 20, that is gated behind a feat tax.

Epic Levels Spells? Given Paizo tracking I don't believe for a moment that these 10 level spells are going to be the equivalent of Epic level Spells, no even Mythic accomplished that.

Examples we've been given of 10th level spells include literally turning into an Avatar of your god, destroying an entire environment, and a spell, as described, that sounds like turning into the Tarrasque.

That's pretty damn epic.

But yeah, skill feats are something I'm looking forward to.

I might pick Rogue first just to fully embrace the mechanic from day one.

Deadmanwalking wrote:
Actually, this is when the Cleric gets Legendary Spellcasting. We don't know when the Wizard gets it, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's a tad earlier.

We do know, the Wizard Blog directly stated it:

"As a wizard goes up in level, they gain more spells that they can cast (either one extra spell of their highest level, or two of a new level) and their proficiency at spellcasting also increases. They start as trained, but rise to the rank of legendary at 19th level."

NetoD20 wrote:
Wait a sec, you're telling a need to spend a feat to get 10th level spells?? wuuuuuutt Where is that referenced?

I believe it was mentioned in the Druid/Paizo Con topic:

"Except 10th level spells aren't part of the regular progression (which would give you 2 at 19th level and 3 at 20th), but a 20th level feat selection that only gets you one a day."

But it's not surprising, given some tenth level spells include destroying an entire environment, turning into an Avatar of your god, and a spell as described sounds like turning into a Tarrasque.

I imagine you have to limit that kind of stuff more than the normal spells.

1 to 50 of 105 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>