Captain Elreth

Neume's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber. FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar Venture-Captain, California—Los Angeles 127 posts (132 including aliases). 1 review. 1 list. No wishlists. 29 Organized Play characters. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 127 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court ***** Venture-Captain, California—Los Angeles aka Neume

Bob Jonquet wrote:
I can see the appeal of the AL system, but there are reasons why people prefer PFS to AL, so we should be cautious changing our system to much to resemble their’s else we could start losing players. Some areas already have challenges to keep player interest.

So then we should not do option 2 or 3 because AL did both (and dropped both for option 5). Oh and we should definitely get rid of the suggested log sheet because it is almost a carbon copy of ALs (as others have already pointed out).

The idea that we should or shouldn't do something because of AL is so horribly flawed I don't know where to begin. We should do something because it is the best choice for the campaign regardless of what any other OP is doing.

Having said that, I actually think this ledger idea is strong. Unlike the log sheet here or the one AL uses, a ledger could be simple, straight forward and really easy to audit.

Each row could contain XP Earned, Final XP, Gold Earned, Gold Spent, Final Gold and then a line describing the source.

Example

Date | XP Earned | Final XP | Gold Earned | Gold Spent | Final Gold | Description | Notes

10/10/18 | 300XP | 300XP | 58sp | 0 | 58sp | PFS2 1-01 The First Adventure | Earned "Wayfinder" boon
10/11/18 | 300XP | 600XP | 56sp | 50 | 64sp | PFS2 1-02 The First Adventure II | Purchased Potion
10/12/18 | 400XP | 1000XP | 65sp | 50 | 58sp | PFS2 1-03 The First Adventure III | Purchased Potion. Used Potion x 2. Earned "Rare Find" reward (100XP bonus)

Or something like that.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

This is spot on one of the things I've been saying about Bard being nerfed. To me, very clearly RAW you cannot use both. It is one of the reasons I've been saying there are issues.

I don't have the book in front of me but I'm pretty sure these two Feats are chained off each other (you need one to get the other). But because the Bard doesn't synergize well with itself, we're left with two abilities that used to work together, but now clearly don't.

I don't know if this was an oversight or what but it is a primary issue with the class. As Bard's level they get less and less powerful.

Sovereign Court ***** Venture-Captain, California—Los Angeles aka Neume

1 person marked this as a favorite.
shalandar wrote:
Jon-Enee Merriex wrote:
caubocalypse wrote:
Everything outside of Option 1 would be annoying to keep track as a player (I could see many of these getting lost). If printing is an issue, you can get sheets printed cheaply in black and white at any office supply store.

I run 3 T1 conventions a year. We have 75 to 100 tables a convention. We have to print 6 player chronicles and a GM chronicle for each table. That's 700 sheets of paper. Using the corporate rate discount at Kinko's (which is by far the cheapest you'll find in the Los Angeles area) on the cheapest paper it is still $0.06 a copy. Or $42 out of my pocket every con and that doesn't Account for things like pregens, boons, and faction journal cards.

Just because you don't pay it or don't see it, doesn't mean it is not a real problem.

I'm asking an honest question here....is there a reason you can't ask players to donate €1 per person to help offset administrative costs? I don't mean per person per table, I mean, just per person.

Or even work something out with Paizo to get, say, a special boon to auction off, where proceeds go to the organizer to help offset out of pocket costs to the admins at cons?

Players already pay $45-60 for a badge plus travel expenses. We are not allowed to charge players extra unless we're doing some type of tournament where there is prize money or all proceeds must go to an approved charity.

Michael Eshleman wrote:
Is there a convention fee? IMO you should recoup your printing costs there.

The convention gives us a budget which is completely used to pay for rooms and parking reimbursement for our GMs. And even then I end up spending money out of my pocket to cover parking for GMs because it takes a lot of GMs to run 100 games.

Having attended this convention for over 20 years and having been a VO in this area for over 5, you can bet I've stopped to do the math and worked every possible angle on this. The reality is our friends in AL don't have this problem because they've gone with option 5 - end chronicle sheets and boons completely.

Instead they use a log system that players can create how theyd like and if there is a boon or special magic item, the player records it on their log sheet. I don't understand why we can't do the same.

Additionally, I'm appalled at the cavalier attitude that "shifting the costs" to players is unfair. Currently, the people who do the most volunteer work to make games happen end up paying the most and somehow that's "fair". Asking people to buy sheet protectors for $2 is unfair, but me spending $150 a con on printing is not.

Price Example

And God forbid I didn't print the pregen you had your heart set on playing... Then I'm a MONSTER!!!

Sovereign Court ***** Venture-Captain, California—Los Angeles aka Neume

caubocalypse wrote:
Everything outside of Option 1 would be annoying to keep track as a player (I could see many of these getting lost). If printing is an issue, you can get sheets printed cheaply in black and white at any office supply store.

I run 3 T1 conventions a year. We have 75 to 100 tables a convention. We have to print 6 player chronicles and a GM chronicle for each table. That's 700 sheets of paper. Using the corporate rate discount at Kinko's (which is by far the cheapest you'll find in the Los Angeles area) on the cheapest paper it is still $0.06 a copy. Or $42 out of my pocket every con and that doesn't Account for things like pregens, boons, and faction journal cards.

Just because you don't pay it or don't see it, doesn't mean it is not a real problem.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Siro wrote:
So, you start out being generalized {arguably all class start out like this a little bit] just the bard is better then most at this. However as you go further up in level PF2 assumes you have specialized, and unlike other classes, the bard does not have a really good ability to do that.

Also, all of this.

Everyone I talk to who say bards are fine have not played one past level 5 or have just accepted that Inspire is so good nothing else matters. Inspire for one action every turn then sit down.

But if the class is reduced to 1 action, what's the point.

Personally, I don't understand the world in which a bard exists but performance doesn't. So I'm all for creating a more for performance> I previously stated I thought it should have functioned like Lore, but Alchemy/Craft works too. Mundane effects anyone can do.

I really like the "taunt" effect (-1 to everyone but the person using the skill. +2 to them).

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Siro wrote:

Hmm… Didn’t really think about performance being used for a more downtime activity, although now it has been pointed out to me, it seems obvious.

Though getting into the meat of it, I do agree a lot of classical fantasy performance is routed in encouragement, and encouraging effects would be one from of performance. However this would not be the only from a performance can take. For example siren song is known allure, a shaggoth maddening sounds are known to madden, and many rituals incorporate chanting to contact the sprits, or to summon creatures. The use of Performance as bolstering is a very good start, but don’t be limited by it.

The idea I was having would be Performance itself would consist or more mundane effects that could be caused. For example a ‘Inspiring Word’ performance that would take one Verbal action and have the effect “Target gains +1 against Fear until your next turn.”, on a passed check. Or an ‘Insulting Joke’ {Perhaps 2 actions} where you make a performance check against the targets Will DC. On a pass they take a -1 on attack rolls, -1 AC, and -1 on Perception checks made against everyone except you for 1 round. Regardless of the result the target gets a +2 on attack rolls, AC, and Perception against you for one round.” Or, incorporating what Performance already has with a “Delightful Ditty” that gives the user a +1 to its next Diplomacy check against the target, as long as its made within the next hour on a pass check. Or “Marching Drum” which you use at the start of...

This. All of this. This is exactly what I'd been saying. Performance should be much more robust than it is.

I also really like the idea of a way to restore spell slot. I think though, it may be better that the ability restored spell points. Every caster (and several other classes) have them and they do things that are worthwhile. This is also a LOT easier to balance than a spell slot.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
ErichAD wrote:
Neume wrote:

<snip>

I say all that to say, performance is about a lot more than "diplomacy" and "acrobatics".

The idea isn't that the character doesn't study in order to perform, its that they've studied a practical field and can use that knowledge for entertainment purposes. Rather than asking a gymnast if doing a flip means they can plan a routine, ask them how valuable their ability to plan a routine would be if they couldn't do a flip.

Charisma is a weird stat, it certainly doesn't translate to modern usage of the word. And the player is still investing skills so they aren't just "grooving to the music".

This is where I'm confused. You're saying that because you know how to talk to people you can play the clarinet. That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works...

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I would also say that in 1ed Bard was the one who benefited the most from Archetypes and multiclassing. This is mostly due to the fact that many archetypes traded out "social" abilities for "combat" abilities in a way that was satisfying.

I say this to say, it is entirely possible the issue is that at its core bard has always had this issue. Now that it has been striped bare in the playtest this has revealed itself.

I too feel like Fighters, Rogues and Clerics feel really solid in comparison. Bards aren't even good at the thing they should be (buffing the party) when Clerics can do it just as well with Bless (which doesn't stack).

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

The idea that all you need to perform is a good charisma makes me a sad panda. Ask any gymnast and they'll tell you, being able to do a flip is a lot different than planning a routine to perform. Just because you are charismatic and can "groove to the music" doesn't mean you have what it takes to put on a dance show that people will care about.

This dovetails back into what I was saying about Bards in general. This idea that it's all CHA and no study, no practice, no skills is baseless. I know I'm doing a lot of real world comparisons but, just because you have a high diplomacy doesn't mean you can play like Yo-Yo Ma.

I've studied music for well over 30 years and I can say, I know music better than 90% of the world's population. That said, a new kid joined our church chorus last week. He's quite gregarious, handsome and more than anything he sings like an angel. That said, he cannot read music, he has no breath control, he has no experience on the stage, he doesn't even know how to hold his music. But he's the nicest guy in the world and we're thrilled to have him and teach him those things he doesn't know and must learn.

I say all that to say, performance is about a lot more than "diplomacy" and "acrobatics".

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I've now played 5 different bards at various levels and 1 from level 1 to 10. Cantrips are not living up to the hype, especially after level 5. Spells in general are a big problem.

Part of me feels bard may feel very different is spellcasting wasn't so pointless at the moment. Not only do you not have enough spells, you run out quickly (at least in the play test) and are left with cantrips that don't do a lot. Like melee combat, around 7 or 8 the effectiveness of spells wear off. Bard is suffering from all the problems Wizards and Sorcerers are seeing.

I know the design team is aware of both the issue with melee for casters and casting, however, cantrips do not in any way "save" the bard from the issues we're talking about. Though, I agree, if one or both of those issues are fixed it would make bards feel more relevant.

Though, I think one vein that bards are lacking on the class feat spectrum is actually combat feats. Maybe Diva Style type feats for a new Melee focused Muse. This would add both new options for bard and help shore up weaker points. Maybe there is a Caster Muse introduced as well that introduces more spell options.

But spells are in a not good place right now and that includes cantrips and compositions.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Chief Cook and Bottlewasher wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:
You have currently pegged everything at costing a feat

Hmm.. I have seen this, or something like it, in quite a few places. Its interesting because I think we are using the term feat for these options because they are selected and applied to your character in a shared way.

What they do not share is an equal value. A class feat is better than a skill feat. An ancestry feat is not meant to be the same value as the others. I see a lot of comparison between the categories and that alone might be the biggest problem with using the word "feat" for all of them. Useful to learn the system, but the baggage from existing users applying to word to mean "a rule with a specified amount of power and utility" is a barrier to overcome.

Except humans can choose a class or a general feat as an ancestry feat, which kind of implies they are equal. Or else humans can get stronger ancestry feats than anyone else.

The feat choice that Humans can make is limited to level 1. Meaning, my level 17 Ancestry Feat Choice can be a level 1 Bard Class Feat or a General Feat. This is an intended bonus to being a Human. It seems to be a clear exception that is meant to be a balance to the options and abilities other Ancestries get.

Sovereign Court

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Anguish wrote:
Neume wrote:
Marco Massoudi wrote:

<snip> As it stands now, i'll not be playing 2.0, but 1.0.

The playtest is not second edition. In my opinion, this it the thing people misunderstand the most. The playtest was specifically designed to test a number of concepts. Those concepts may be bad and may get reverted back to 1ed or they may get updated to something else. But we're testing these ideas, NOT testing 2ed.

Sorry friend , we (the disenfranchised) are not clueless. If a person is vegetarian and their favorite vegetarian restaurant introduces "a new menu we're working on, but not all the details are decided", and the menu is full of meat, and then the test menu gets some alterations, which are all changes to which animal the meat comes from, that person is well-informed that it's time to plan to eat elsewhere. Not-meat isn't on the menu.

To be really, really clear, I've chosen this analogy because I adore meat.

PF2 isn't wrong or bad or even a mistake. It's just not what I want to eat.

But to imagine that somehow we can't tell from the playtest and the adjustments since, and from posts by devs (and lack of specific posts), we aren't equipped to tell what the end-result is going to look like... isn't realistic, I think.

But the devs themselves have said they don't for sure know what the final game is going to look like. Which is why the Playtest isn't 2ed. If you look, they never refer to the Playtest as 2ed. 1ed was wildly different from its playtest. The devs have repeatedly said, we're testing things they were pretty sure would have to be cut or changed. By giving feedback (like on Resonance) about how those things make us happy or sad the team will be able to develop the final game in a data driven direction.

I say this to say, walking away will just ensure the game looks nothing like you want. Giving your opinion will at the very least give the team a data point of feedback to build from - even if the overarching design goal is contradictory. Because maybe a LOT of people give feedback about a design goal being contradictory to what they want the game to be.

Sovereign Court

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
N N 959 wrote:
Don't juxtaposed orthogonal choices. I shouldn't be choosing between Wild Empathy or a Full Grown Companion. I should be choosing whether Wild Empathy gets a bonus on vermin or magical beats or Animals. I should be choosing whether a...

I feel like this is what I'd want more than what we got for all classes. Like Bards should have gotten Versatile Performance and chosen one performance at first and then choose others later on. They should start with Inspire Courage, and choose other performances as they level. At the moment it feels like I'm choosing between my favorite children.

You've absolutely hit the nail on the head here.

Sovereign Court

32 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Marco Massoudi wrote:

<snip> As it stands now, i'll not be playing 2.0, but 1.0.

The playtest is not second edition. In my opinion, this it the thing people misunderstand the most. The playtest was specifically designed to test a number of concepts. Those concepts may be bad and may get reverted back to 1ed or they may get updated to something else. But we're testing these ideas, NOT testing 2ed.

Sovereign Court

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Siro brought up a point that I think is important in my head. Bards are Jacks of All Trades, however in 1ed, Bards started that way and could specialize in one area or stay more generalized in all.

In this edition, so far, as they progress Bards don't specialize well and they don't generalize well. The result is they end up becoming more and more lackluster as they grow. That's one of the reasons I was thinking of creating something that is "Bardic" in nature to tie bards to that can grow so they don't get left behind the other classes that specialize.

Again, Bards began to shine when the Archetype system was released in 1ed. With the way the Class Feat system works they should be doing more and their path should be clearer. I was thinking more about this when I realized, what needed to happen was their tie to their muse should get stronger as they choose feats that are connected to the muse.

For instance, each muse should have clearly defined feats. Such as the Lore Muse: Bardic Lore -> Loremaster's Recall -> Mental Prowess -> Mental Stronghold. Instead of the feats giving additional skill points, they should increase based on how many feats you have with that Muse. In this way you're rewarded for sticking with your Muse, but you still have the flexibility to do what you want.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I'm not sure I want to see performance removed as a skill. I think there are a lot of generic uses for performance, we just aren't seeing them used in 2ed. For instance, performance combat should be rolled into the skill. I also think it needs to return to being like Lore as it was like Knowledge in 1ed. You should specialized in specific things: Sing, Oratory, Combat, Percussion, Wind, etc. Making it specific again allows for a design space to create skill feats for things like:

"Rally (1 action): You use Combat performance to get the crowd on your side allowing your allies the ability to re-roll one dice in the next round. This re-roll cannot be paired with any other re-roll and the ally must take the result, even if worse."

The more I think about it, the thing that urked me with the Performance skill (and feats) is they took a magical bardic performance (Fascinate) and gave it to everyone. I think that should return to bards and Versatile Performance should be the skill feats for Performance (And maybe give bards suggestion again...). That way there can be a skill tree to gain versatile performance for different usages based on the performance skill.

It makes way more sense to give that to everyone and have bards focus on control through performance. IMHO

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I really like this idea. I too felt that VP was too limited in its current form. It also hurt that basically there is a level 2 skill feat that did the same thing (Impressive Performance).

Personally, I would like this to be a feat you can take multiple times and each time it applies to a different "allowed" skill.

Maybe Versatile Performance gives you the Virtuoso Performance skill feat for free and allows you to use performance in place of a skill based on the specialty you choose?

Sovereign Court

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I come to talk specifically of this topic and I find it here. Huzzah!

1. MUSES: If they don't mean anything, then why have them? At the moment they don't really mean anything. I get not wanting to create restrictions like Domains, but in my mind, the bard isn't like the Cleric so why add something like this if they don't need it. I say cut it.

2. I agree with the OP, the more I play, the more I feel that bard feels like it has fewer choices and worse still, it plays second fiddle to everyone else. This may have something to do with how the Perform skill turn out in this edition, but the things that made "bard" unique are gone. While we got 10 spell levels, we didn't really get anything that feels bardy.

3. Ear Piercing Scream, the Inspiration Spells, and the Finale spells really must make a comeback. OR we need to rethink bards and spells all together. Occult just doesn't feel so bardy - especially as we move up in levels. I feel like I'm playing a shadowcaster, not a bard.

The more I think about it, the more I think that maybe, it is time to rethink spells and bards, maybe even remove them have bards focus on compositions (similar to 1ed's Masterpiece system). Maybe bards do everything with Spell Points.

As someone who studied music and acting in college and professionally I can say the idea of a bard sounds more like someone who has a "repertoire" that they study to remember what they are doing that day but then can switch out for something else next week.

This is just more comments on real life stuffs:
At the moment, I am in 3 different Christmas Caroling groups. I have a binder full a music for each. Some of the songs are the same, some of them I have committed to memory (because it's the Hallelujah Chorus and you just commit that one because you've performed it more times than you can count) some of them I read from my songbook on Sunday because we're only doing that one a few times for the little, old, blue-haired ladies, and some I refresh my memory on just before we sing at a party because it was a "special" request. We'll probably never sing that one again.

Acting is the exact same thing (albeit the time frames tend to be longer). I'd memorize all my lines for a show and perform it a million times in about 30-60 days, then forget them as I begin memorizing for the next show. At the same time, some soliloquy I've got down for life (I'm looking at you Marcus Anthony's mount speech from 'Julius Caesar') and others I keep for a short while, maybe for an audition or a film. It's the same concept.

To me, it would be cool if bards casting was more like the Esoteric Scholar Class Feat, in general. Bards mix the study of Wizards with the talent of Sorcerers. So casting with a crossover system would be cool. Cooler still would be if bards could write Arcane, Divine, and Primal spells to their repertoire book and attempt to cast them using Spell Points and a performance check. You fail the check you lose the spell points with no effect.

This would mean now bards WANT to find new texts, stories, and arcane lore to add to their rep. Re-enforcing the lore that bards are looking for new texts to add to the repertoire.

Compositions should be different from spells because their outcome depends on the bard's performance result. Where as spells bards relay on magical effect, Compositions relay on the bard's skilled performance. If they fail the result should be lessened, but if they do well the effect should be empowered.

Or, maybe compositions fill the design space masterpieces left behind? Performances bards can learn in place of a new spell or class feat.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Thanks for the reminder. I forgotted. Purchased :)

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

So, I now feel I've played enough Bard to talk more knowledgeably about how the class feels at low levels (1 and 5).

Character Creation (Layout): Flipping back and forth looking at compositions and spells was very frustrating. BUT, I am glad for the page number to the composition.

It's been said elsewhere but I'll say it again, Spells and Compositions should not be in the same place. If a Wizard cannot take a Composition unless she multi-classes into Bard, then Compositions should be found in the Bard section. This was SUPER confusing.

Spell Points: I get trying to reduce complexity, but I will always miss the specific over the general. Bards have performance rounds. I know this is semantics (because the current use isn't "rounds"). I don't know, I want Spell Points to be specific to my class and not a generic, homogeneous thing.

Also, the more I think of spell points and Compositions, I get confused as to why I'm tracking two resources for the same thing. If Compositions are spells then they should be tracked with spells. If they are not spells, then they shouldn't be with the spells and tracked with a completely separate pool. It's so confusing.

Inspire Courage: OMG thank you! Being able to freely inspire has been so great!

Action Economy: Right of the bat, the change to the action economy gave Bards a wonderful boost. Being able to begin a performance, move up to a baddie and attack them in one round has been phenomenal!

Spell Casting: So... while we got a buff (now 10 lvl casters) we also go a nerf. It's an odd feeling to not be able to cast as many spells. I've continually run out of spells. This is especially bad when I'm the sole healer of the group (going to get to this in a second). 2 spells at level 1 and 4 Spell points are gone in 2 encounters. Which leaves me swinging for the final encounter. I've overcome this by just not using resources in the first encounter. Which means people die. "I'm saving it for the BBEG" is the worst excuse to someone who is on the ground with the dying condition.

Bardic Healing: Sit down, this is going to be a long one. Overall, healing in the playtest is immensely difficult. The only spell in the playtest with descent through-put as far as healing goes is "Heal", however, that is only available to Clerics and Druids. And Druids who bring heal suffer from the same issue the Bard does I mentioned above in Spell Casting. You get 2 and you're done. With Resonance this means that there is very little healing going on if you don't have a Cleric.

Having said that, as a player that enjoys healing, "Heal" is the BEST spell in the game and it is blocked to Bards :(. Not only that, "Heal" is a fun spell. It's versatile and effective and makes healing exciting. I'd love for Bards to have heal but, in reality, what I really want is for Bards to heal their allies as well as Clerics, if their spec'd for it. The discrepancy isn't just in the 1d6 vs the 1d8, or the range, but also in the fact that at first level the only spell that heals multiple targets at range is Heal.

One thing I was thinking is what about a bonus if you are using an Inspire ability (Courage, Competence). Instead of the range being touch, it is "one target affected by your Inspire abilities". Then maybe Soothing Words allows you to choose between it's current effect or choose to allow your Soothe spell to affect multiple targets, however, all targets need to be affected by your Inspire ability and within 30 feet of you. The through-put wouldn't be as great as a Cleric's "Heal" but it would offer up another viable healing class.

Of course a lot of this would change if spell casting changes, but the main thing I want to point out is that healing is on the fritz. I've played games where I was the only healer, I've played games where it was me and an Alchemist or me and a Paladin or me and a Druid and I've played when it was me and a Cleric. It is night and day having a Cleric. I think the problem lies in the fact that they are the only class that can mass heal the team. This has caused the side effect of everyone NEEDING a Cleric. Not HEALER - CLERIC. This greatly diminishes Alchemists, Bards, Druids, and Paladins if Clerics are the clear winner of the healing wars and no one can touch them.

Add to that the fact that, it seems, a lot of people don't like healing, relegating it to just one class means even fewer healers. Not only do I have to like healing now, I have to like Cleric, even though I love Bards more. This was an issue in PF1 too. I hated this. If you want to heal you have few choices, even though you could have many.

This creates fewer and fewer healers because all the hoops they have to go through to play the spec they like. However, if classes that have healing can spec into healing, it adds many more opportunities for more healers. Today, as the playtest sits, Cleric is the game's healer, everyone else is pointless.

So I say all that to say, I like SOOTHE, I like the idea that Occult does healing differently. But differently cannot completely inferiority, otherwise there's no point to learn Soothe, if I always have to get next to the person dying and I can only heal one person and I do less healing than the other "better" healing spells. It cannot be all those things.

Having said all that, I have really enjoyed the rest of Bard. Muses are great (I cannot wait to see more) and there is so much good stuff packed into the class, from shadow spells to buffs. I am sad we don't have Ear-piercing Scream, the Finale spells and the Inspiration spells (Timely Inspiration, etc). However, so far (levels 1 and 5) the class feels very bardy and performs (pun intended) well - outside of that healing bit.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I agree with Singularity. I like this idea but the term needs to be much more of a "keyword" and "basic" doesn't feel like it fits. Maybe "primary"?

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I KNEW there was something happening there. I thought it was just stray text... FOR YEARS!!! OMG, I am SOOO happy to know, I'm not insane!

Sovereign Court

11 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Bards should get "Heal" #ThereISaidIt

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
BPorter wrote:

Are six-volume Adventure Paths too long for your group?

Frequently. It's been the biggest barrier to getting my groups to sign on to playing them.

Would you like to see more content that starts at higher levels?
Yes. Back in the days of Star Frontiers and AD&D, have story arcs that covered different ranges of levels was useful.

Or do you prefer the dangerous thrill of those first few levels?
Yes, part 2. Having many of these to choose from is never a bad thing so long as other levels, especially levels 3-12 get lots of love also.

I also wish to comment on this:
Sure, there will be a slight change of tone in the adventures, but if your group doesn't mind the shift, then you should go for it!

I think this is sorely needed, honestly, especially for a game setting as broad and deep as Starfinder's setting. Six AP installments of same/similar theme & tone is...challenging. If everyone in a group is onboard, it can work, but see my answer to the original question above. Most of my players' resistance to the 6-part APs stems from a feeling like they are "committing" to something that they worry they may tire of or want to try different characters and stories. Even though I've assured them they aren't being held to a multi-installment commitment, there's still resistance.

To put it in a different context, look at how the MCU movies can still hit different themes and genres yet remain a consistent whole that provides a superhero experience. THAT is the style of experience I want from Starfinder science fantasy (and Pathfinder fantasy) APs.

Everything this person said, I agree with.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I too feel MORE ancestries should be included in core. I have no doubt we'll get more ancestries, I was just disappointed there weren't like wood elves and sea dwarves and stuff at the very least.

Sovereign Court

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

If I didn't say it before, Crystal's my favorite adventure writer. I've loved reading War of the Crown and can't wait to get to run it. The Harrowing will forever be my favorite module, but War of the Crown has been one of the best APs. Definitely up there with Runelords and S&S.

#First

GAH! Thwarted by TriOmegaZero - AGAIN!!!

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I like these, this is much more flexible than SF and I'm happy about that. I Bard Bard Bard Bard Bard Bard. Bard Bard Bard Bard Bard Bard Bard Bard Bard. Bard Bard Bard Bard Bard, Bard Bard Bard Bard.

~Bard

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

CONGA RATS!

Also, you should add conga rats as a new playable species for Starfinder. #justsayin

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Fuzzypaws wrote:
kaid wrote:
Varun Creed wrote:

If you wouldn't want a 'Legendary' style game, your campaigns wouldn't go above level 15 anyhow in Pathfinder 1.

In PF1 once people start slinging around wish and opening new dimensions and some of those crazy spells a thief who is really good at stealing pants does not seem to be that far fetched.
I have literally watched someone steal a person's pants without the victim being aware of it, with my own eyes. Which means it's something which can happen in real life so shouldn't even be legendary. Master at most.

OMG I was going to say the same thing. In my fraternity days there was a guy who was highly skilled at this.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Honestly, they should just sell a encounter update document for PF2. I'd buy that in a hot second. Everything else would be the same basically. Just update the mobs and maybe some skill checks.

Honestly, if they were going to revamp anything, I'd think Kingmaker or Skulls & Shackles because both have extensive sub systems that could be really great additions to 2nd edition imho.

Sovereign Court

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

This blog has made me fear greatly for my favorite class - Bards. The fact that we keep hearing about Rogues getting 20 skill feats and that they get the most makes me think that Bards are either A - getting more than everyone else but less than Rogues or B - they're getting the same as everyone else.

I was OK with that until you revealed Fascinating Performance... which sounds like anyone can now do the magical coolness that was previously Bard territory. Then I thought, well maybe Bards will get all skills as trained. But that presents a new problem directly tied to the issue with proficiency making the difference between untrained and legendary 5.

... I'm trying to withhold judgement, but this blog has me terrified. PLEASE TELL US ABOUT BARDS!!!

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Gorignak227 wrote:

I noticed the Heal touch attack on an undead opponent didn't list a save for half like the 2 action ranged attack does.

I wonder if they've applied the no save vs to hit spells for cleric spells now? (i hope so...:)

Yeah it looks like this is 1 d20 roll now and the roll is by the caster.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Yolande d'Bar wrote:
My vote also goes Gnomes +INT, Halflings +WIS, and Goblins +CHA. I fondly remember the gnome illusionists and halfling druids from ancient AD&D days.

I concur. I get that each ancestry is going to have a physical and mental bonus. I think this break down does fit the three races much better.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

While I may just be a cis-gay-boi, much love goes out to my transgender brothers and sisters. The struggle is real and has always been led by you showing the rest of us the way. Never dull your light!

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
GentleGiant wrote:
thflame wrote:
I'm not sure I like the fighter doing minimum damage when he "misses". The way I read this, because there is no "critical failure" blurb, he even does minimum damage on a critical failure too? (Or is it that because there is no critical failure blurb, that there is no effect?) I feel like a fighter should still be able to miss, no matter how high a level he is.
That's a special attack, like Sudden Charge, so probably something you have to take a feat to do and might have to spend two actions on doing.

I just want to support this, because as written, if a critical failure uses the failure line if there is no critical failure line, then, for this action, they will always deal minimum damage on a failure. I can see myriad power gamers lining up to exploit that loophole.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

OMG this is so boss! I'm totally doing this!

CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!!!

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I'm so happy that made it in. I love these and I don't even own them yet (but I will soon... SOOOO SOOOON!!!!)

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I like this thread. Honestly, I love both Pathfinder and D&D 5ed. But one thing I wish Pathfinder had is the Short Rest. That function is so great.

Sovereign Court

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
skill rank increases

Honestly, that right there alleviates a lot of concern I was having listening to the pod cast. I was terrified you all went the way for 5ed - not that there's anything wrong with 5ed, it's just, customizing my skills is one of the many things I love about Pathfinder. This was one of the three hills I was ready to die on for 2ed.

Sovereign Court ***** Venture-Captain, California—Los Angeles aka Neume

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dustin Knight wrote:

I'm all for environmentalism, but the chronicles as individual sheets of paper is something I've really grown to love. The flavor of having to chronicle one's adventures and having physical sheets representing your character is something I really value.

Without going into the math, we'd have a net-zero loss if one out of every 100 PFS players decided to just recycle all their junk mail. Admittedly, they should be doing it anyway, and each individual contributing is what contributes to a cohesive positive coinsciousness shift yaddayadda...

I doubt that. One twelfth level character will have at least 33 Chronicle sheets, plus character sheets, ITS and Faction Journal Cards (one from season 6, 7, 8 and 9). That puts me at about 40 pages. With almost 30 characters that's a lot more than 1 in 100 recycling. And again, that says nothing about the fact that the cost for all these pages getting printed is on me, the organizer.

Dustin Knight wrote:
But keeping track of half-pages of paper handed out as boons is a real hassle. There are binders for it, I suppose. But in that case, why not just use playing-card sized boons and store them in 9-card binder slots? Heck, that'd make physically "slotting your boons" a little simpler, but it'd require GMs to spend the night prior cutting out these playing-card sized boons (pity the convention volunteer).

We were able to deal with half sheets in ACG and in AL. Somehow mankind survived.

The other bonus here is a lot less hassle for GMs. You tell players what they got and then all you do is verify what they wrote and sign and date it.

Sovereign Court ***** Venture-Captain, California—Los Angeles aka Neume

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


As someone who has played through a couple of campaigns of Swords and Spreadsheets, I'm very much not in favor of TPS reports that need to be filled out, and going all digital will SEVERELY hamper locations that do not have reliable internet connections/people who can't afford WiFi.

I'm confused, everything on the character journal you're required to fill out right now on Chronicle sheets.

Sovereign Court ***** Venture-Captain, California—Los Angeles aka Neume

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So, I don't like the fact that after a time, I can no longer play my character. No matter how cool he is, how much work I've put into him. At a certain point he's gone. The addition of high level play would help, however, I feel like, even with playing at half speed, I only get to play any character for 1 year before being forced to make a new character (I got to this calculation by saying if I play once or twice a week and need 33 XP to level 12 that would be 66 sessions when going slow. With 52 weeks in a year and a few conventions thrown in, in about a year the character is dead to me).

My proposal here isn't to make leveling a nightmare. No, it is more to say, that 3 XP per level below 10 seems fine. But maybe at level 11 it becomes 5. Or, maybe I can freeze my character level at a certain point an no longer earn XP/gold. I honestly don't know, but I know that at the moment, my second biggest concern with PFS is that my character's lifespan is so limited.

Sovereign Court ***** Venture-Captain, California—Los Angeles aka Neume

6 people marked this as a favorite.

End Chronicle Sheets

The waste of paper and environmental cost is staggering, let alone the cost to volunteers to print them. I print about 2000 sheets of paper per 3-day convention. It is appallingly gross and is something we can easily avoid or at the very least, significantly reduce.

Instead or chronicle sheets, we should utilize character journals. Each journal can keep record of about 2 levels of play on 1 page (so 2-sided gets you 4 levels or 12 games). The character journal has the following information:

Character Name, Player Name, OPF#, Character #

Below that are the 6 chronicle entries that include:

Starting XP, XP earned, total XP, starting prestige/fame, prestige/fame earned, prestige spent, total prestige/fame, starting, gold earned, day job, gold spent, total gold and a notes section where things like character death or statuses gained can be written. Below that is a line for GMs to write date, event, event #, sign and write their OPF #

In a world with this character journal, players utilize the Inventory Tracking Sheet to track ALL spending (not just things over 25 gold). They'd also probably have their Faction Journal Card as well. This brave new world sets out to say that boons are rarely used, just like magic items on chronicle sheets are rarely purchased - except when they are things that have 24/7 use or are clearly dynamically different from magic items that can be purchased. In those specific instances, a boon sheet (which may also include special magic items) should be created to give to the players. Preferably this is a half sheet at most that the player can keep with their character and character journal materials.

But I forgot about GMs. The amount of XP, PP and Gold to hand out (as well as any boon sheets) should be included at the end of the adventure. Like players, GMs should add those things to their selected character's journal.

Doing this would DRASTICALLY reduce the amount of paper use across the campaign. Even if every adventure has a boon sheet, if they are half a sheet of paper, we've cut paper use in half.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Drat I missed first! I am very much excited for this.

Sovereign Court ***** Venture-Captain, California—Los Angeles aka Neume

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Black blade dex magi would be high and dry as far as I know.

Ah, yes, this is true. But then again, they get an intelligent weapon.

Sovereign Court ***** Venture-Captain, California—Los Angeles aka Neume

2 people marked this as a favorite.
pjrogers wrote:
As someone who is thinking about rolling up a magus, without dervish dance, a dexterity-based magus is impossible, right?

I'm lost as to why people think this... Agile and Weapon Finesse are real things that exist.

As someone who plays a class much more feat starved than the Magus, I'm always amazed that it has become a Dervish Dance or bust class. It is a very powerful class as STR based and with a small nuance of determination it is a very powerful class as DEX based.

So you go a few levels without adding DEX to damage until you pay for Agile, boo-hoo, you get a free attack at level 2. You should be able to swing Agile by level 5 when everyone else gets their extra attack. AND GOOD LORD don't get me started on shocking grasp.

I think many of us roll our eyes at this because of all classes, the Magus and the Gunslinger are the most powerful and those players tend to be the most cheesy and vocal about being denied their cheese.

Sovereign Court ***** Venture-Captain, California—Los Angeles aka Neume

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The advent of Two-Weapon Grace makes me pretty sure Dervish Dance doesn't work the way people want it to. There is no way 1 feat = 2 feats that were created AFTER the first.

Spoiler:
You can gain the benefit of the Fencing Grace, Slashing Grace, or Starry Grace feats while fighting with two weapons. Your penalties from two-weapon fighting increase by 2 on all attack rolls you make when doing so, and you can’t decrease the penalties to less than –2 even if other abilities would reduce the penalties further. Add 1/2 your Dexterity bonus to damage with your off-hand weapon instead of 1/2 your Strength modifier. If you attack without using your off-hand weapon, you can use the aforementioned feats despite your other hand being occupied.

In addition, Two-Weapon Grace counts as Double Slice for the purposes of qualifying for the Two-Weapon Rend feat.

Sovereign Court ***** Venture-Captain, California—Los Angeles aka Neume

Obviously Orccon's entry is special cuz we're the most special-est! :D We're super excited to host John next week!

Also, THANK YOU for letting us know about the GenCon badge issue. I'll pick mine up tonight before the lottery.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

What CrystalSeas said!

This is so flippin' amazeballs! but yeah having a way to identify each face would be awesomesauce.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

I need this in my life. PLEASE!!! I heard about this after the fact at GenCon and was sadfaced that I missed out. I would totally pay for a "Season of the Kobolds".

#MAKEITHAPPEN

1 to 50 of 127 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>