Mystic Theurge

Old_Man_Robot's page

Organized Play Member. 1,278 posts (1,282 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 2 Organized Play characters.


1 to 50 of 1,278 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

Gortle wrote:

But it goes both ways now. Recall Knowledge has been clarified in a way that makes it useful.

I feel that RK has become fairly democratized as this edition has gone on. We have a growing roster of classes that are straight-up good at it, and several others with strong options.

I generally wouldn't put RK in the same category as save-impacting abilities. Both work great in tandem, but potentially messing with an enemies actual numbers can move the needle more.

Gortle wrote:

Wizards have ways of swapping spells during the adventuring day. So in a real sense prepared casters can overcome their key limitation too.

I actually don't agree with your premise here. I don't think a key limitation of a prepared caster is mid-day spell swapping, its certainly something they generally can't do, but the ability to just come back the next day means its not a hard limitation. Being able change mid-day just moves around the time restriction on something which is already a core part of the kit.

Sorcerers being able to change the spells they can cast is a much more valuable sort of feature. Being able to learn and prepare additional spells on a daily basis is just something spontaneous casters just can't generally do.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think The Psychic is a very good class, with plenty of depth and strong options.

But from a class on class perspective, it has to be the Sorcerer.

I admit, I am of the controversial opinion that Sorcerers are actually too powerful and have too much stuffed in them compared to other casters.

Sorcerers are 4 slot-3 focus casters, giving them the largest overall arsenal before specific builds are considered. As a Pick-a-List caster they also have the most range a caster can have. Spontaneous casting is very good in PF2, thanks to Signature spells. Charisma is probably the best mental stat a caster can key off thanks to its range of save-impacting actions and feats. These last two points are true for the Psychic as well, but with the more limited spell slots and the ability to key off Int as well, a Psychic can make themselves less optimal much easier through their choices.

Arcane Sorcerers can overcome the key limitation of Spontaneous casters, in that they have the limited ability to prepare some spells.

Primal Sorcerers can have very strong blasting and healing options at the same time without any real trade off.

Bloodlines have a suprising amount of meaningful stuff to them, with Blood Magic often being a somewhat unique effect. They're not all equal, and some are definitely much better than others, but you have a lot of options overall to get the list / vibe you want.

I think they are also set to see additional improvements with Player Core 2.

They're just a more stacked class than the Psychic.

Do they make the Psychic obsolete? Not at all! A Sorcerer can't touch the Psychic where it lives, in that the Psychic has powerful and unique cantrips that let it work in its space extremely well.

But the Psychic just can't have the sheer range and depth of the Sorcerer.

Dark Archive

6 people marked this as a favorite.
DM Kaustik wrote:

G'evening, fellow adventures.

I was trying to understand why the Scroll Trickster have a "blank feat" space at level four. Look, one of my players use this Archetype (under the rules of Free Archetype) and it seems a little odd that they don't have any level four feat to choose.

How can I resolve this, since he cannot choose another Archetype Feat?

Thanks in advance.

Archetypes, on the whole, aren't designed with Free Archetypes in mind. Its less of a problem these days, since the explosion in the popularity of FA, but earlier archetypes simply don't / couldn't consider it.

Archetypes are meant to be taken in place of class feats, and have their placement and balance influenced by that.

Dark Archive

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Castilliano wrote:

On the flip side, maybe Paizo considers the few Int abilities so valuable, like initiative & team#, that they believe they've already covered this well enough. Hmm.

Its a play test still, this sort of discussion is what we are here for.

The problem is that Int itself is generally the weakest of the core stats. On paper, from a stat on stat view, its tempting to say that's Charisma. Which is probably why during the PF2 playtest, Charisma was the key stat for how many items you could have invested.

In reality however, Charisma has many very strong feats and skills that key off it, and it has generally a lot of support.

Int's benefits are generally more marginal / situational, and largely lack direct combat application.

This means that Int based classes generally get less from their KAS investment.

So even if the Commanders utilisation of Int is fine and on par with how other classes use their KAS, it feels lacking because the inherent value of a high Int is lower.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.
SuperBidi wrote:

So, let's say the Rogue is flanking an enemy and the Commander player uses Strike Hard! on them. The Commander gives an action with a specific goal in mind: The Rogue should attack the flanked creature. It's the sound action to do so why would the Rogue player object, refuse a free attack or use it to do something else?
So it's an order, a disguised one but a clear order. And the Rogue should comply as not doing so will be seen as disruptive, and not only by the Commander as the other players are also aware that the sound thing to do is to attack the flanked creature and as such obey the Commander. It's peer pressure, that happens around every table, but this time it goes slightly further as there's a reward if you are a good boy, as the Commander will continue using Strike Hard! on you, or a punishment if you don't comply, as the Commander may decide to stop using Strike Hard! on you.
Your solution of asking "Who wants a free attack?" is not a perfect one unless you randomly choose who gets the attack. Otherwise, we are back to the previous case where the Commander (or the group if it's a communal decision) gives an action to a character for a specific purpose and as such it's again an order the player should comply with.

While I take your meaning, I feel like this pressure is perhaps overstated.

Would this not be the same anytime another player lays something up for you? Its not coercion to take the path someone else has arranged for you if its something that aligns with what you want to happen overall.

For a bit of an inverted example, it wouldn't seem like toxic peer pressure to expect the parties healer to use their actions and resources to heal an injured party member. The dynamic is largely the same as you lead out, and I think we would all agree that a healer refusing to do so for no real reason wouldn't be "Pro Social" play.

The affirmative example, as we get the Commander is pretty much the same. A party member did something Pro-social for you, without good cause, it would be werid to turn it down simply because they arranged for you to receive a benefit, just because they wanted you to do it.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's really tempting to say Investigator, just so you can be as SAD as possible with the Commander.

I honestly don't think this would be bad, but you'd pretty much the same result much easier just by going Rogue and using Dex as your secondry stat.

But even something like Ranger would be strong. Since your campanion can be a Squadmate, you can guarantee someone can take advantage of your Tactics.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tactical Drongo wrote:
even if one plays a armchair commander

New concept:

Commander whose Commanders Steed is any of the chair mounts.

Literal armchair Commander.

Dark Archive

I'm planning on testing out a Commander with the Scout Archetype.

General plan is to use Deceptive Tactics and a series of Deception feats like Fleeing Diversion to enable Scout's Charge and Scout's Pounce.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Alchemic_Genius wrote:

I think you kinda hit the nail on the head for what I was looking for: basically a few "showstopper" type abilities to go alongside your bread and butter tactics.

Now we're cooking!

Let's simplify the whole thing and make it work more like the Swashbuckler's panache.

Doing certain things could grant you "Momentum" or "Advantage", something like that. While you have Momentum/Advantage, you can spend it to do something to enhance your Tactics with extra effects or utility.

We could have a few evergreen effects which Momentum/Advantage could be used on, then with feats which enable additional options and/or grant the Commander bonuses while they retain Momentum/Advantage.

That way, we introduce the potential for consistent play loops. The Commander could use Tactic A to setup Tactic B, while gaining Momentum/Advantage. Tactic B is then more effective or does more because Momentum/Advantage is spent on it to do a thing. Done right, and it would incentive the Commander to plan a head a bit more by allowing them to arrange setups and payoffs.

Dark Archive

Easl wrote:
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
I'd love to see something like "Break Their Ranks" that could inflict fleeing on enemies for a round, but I think the structure of Tactics is too narrow to allow something like that without it either being broken or useless after its first instance - effectively reducing your already limited tactics.

End It! inflicts fleeing (+ frightened on a crit fail) on enemies for a round. It looks like a great tactic to help kite enemies to me, but I haven't had a chance to playtest either new class so I'm saying that from a theorycrafting perspective.

But if you get a chance to playtest it, select it, use it, tell me if it does that. :)

That's true! I think I'd discounted it due to having some very specific requirements before use.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alchemic_Genius wrote:

But I also find it really odd that for a class that breaks the norm in being a non caster and having a Legendary DC, but only has 4 instances where that DC is actually applied (critical hit specialization, stupifying charge, intimidating charge, and executioner's volley). Are there plans for more tactics that utilize this really awesome DC? I also would certainly enjoy tactics that target other saves; like ones for toppling foes against reflex to avoid being knocked down or a relentless onslaught thats a fort save against being enfeebled.

I'd love to see something like "Break Their Ranks" that could inflict fleeing on enemies for a round, but I think the structure of Tactics is too narrow to allow something like that without it either being broken or useless after its first instance - effectively reducing your already limited tactics.

Someone else in the thread suggested feats that work like meta-tactics, something which would allow you to apply effects to more general tactics.

That way, Tactics could stay fairly broad in scope / function, but allow people to select add-ons to tactics which enable them to give extra effects on the fly, if they have the feat.

You could have a feat which works something like:

"Once per round, When a squadmates makes a strike granted by a tactic, they can attempt a Trip Attack as a free action against the target using your Class DC"

"When a squadmates uses a reaction to stride, they do not provoke and gain a +1 status bonus to their AC"


Edit: Just had the idea of the Commander actually having a pseudo focus point mechanic called "Tactical Genuis".

Wherein, instead of having feats like the above, there is a series of modifers a commander can make to tactics, but these modifers cost points from their Tactical Genuis pool.

The pool could refresh per 10 minutes, and allow the Commander a certain degree of additional utility to their tactics.

Additional Tactical Genuis options would then be gated behind higher level feats.

Dark Archive

Michael Sayre wrote:

A commander can give reactions to their mount via Drilled Reactions as long as it's one of their squadmates.


Dark Archive

Love the concept and the current execution looks to be on the right track. My first blush feedback would be:

Drilled Reactions: Fantastic, love it and the expansion feat.

Warfare Expertise: Love it as well. I would maybe consider a bit of a re-jig however with the Deceptive Tactic's feat.

Warfare Expertise has 3 components:
1) Autoscaling of Warfare Lore
2) Specalised Recall Knowledge option
3) Warfare for initiative

Deceptive Tactic's is great in and of itself, but I think I would like to see it bundled with Warfare Expertise and maybe have either the Recall Knowledge component or the initiative component as the seperate feat instead.

Reason being that deceptive tactics are really a part and parcel of warfare, whereas something like having good knowledge of your enemy isn't always needed. So maybe breaking it out that the deception portion is baked in while the Knowledge is the optional feet aspect. Feels like the more flavourful configuration.

Breaking the knowledge part out into a feat also gives the option for it to be an attractive part of the multi-class for any class that like's Warfare lore but isn't already inclinded towards Knowledge. I could see a figther grabbing it from the dedication, even if their int is only so-so.

Tactics: In general are a mixed bag of good, meh and situational. The layout for some reason also suggested to me that their would be "Defensive" tactics as well and I was just tabbing over them.

I'm not wild on the grouping concept as it stands.

If we want to mark out Tactics into different sections and have options that play off that, maybe having something like Mobility, Support, Offense and Defence would be the categories and have different numbers of each be allowed per preparation.

Combat Medic: I'm always a fan of feats like these.

Dazzling Display: I feel like there should be a Dazzling Display-like feat somewhere in the Commander. Maybe using deception or Warfare, but it really does feel like there should be something like that in here.

Horsey: Should probably count as a sqaudmate for the purposes of Mobility tactics.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Well we know in Pathfinder that time is not universal. Its not even objectively experienced. From spells like Time Beacon and Freeze Time, to planes with different flows of time, to gods who can mess with it.

Time in the pathfinder universe is both mutable and pliable in several respects. You can send information from one plane to another and those planes can have wildly different time traits, erratic, static, Timeless, etc. But it all sort of "works out".

We probably don't need to throw out all sense of relativity, just understand that it isn't as objective as it is for us and understand that all this stuff is probably looked after by Bythos and/or Axiomites or an even more specalised type of Monitor. Mostly because the rules are pliable and have even been broken on several occasions.

The only real relativity in Pathfinder is narrative-relativity. A set of physics driven by the universe needing to keep itself coherent-to-itself, but not always consistent.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would also argue that captial T - Teleportation (as in magical teleportation not the quantum kind) is not FTL by default. Teleportation means moving from one point to another without crossing the intervening space. Travelling faster than light still involves travelling in some capacity, so to talk of Teleporting being faster than light is technically only to talk of functional equivalence, not a literal comparison.

Like judging who is the better athlete between two people in a race. one runs while the other takes a cab. They both left at point A, arrived at point B, and we can contrast the elapsed time to give us an answer. It won't be right answer, but without a suitably thorough examination of the mechanics of each racers means of locomotion.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mellored wrote:
Since your magic needs to reach your destination.

That is not necessarily true.

Back-dooring in implicit physical limitations to something which can fundamentally break physical laws seems like an approach which will only lead to problems.

Magic only plays by magics own rules. Without some sort of fundamental theory behind us, expecting it to work like physics just isn't going to work.

The most basic of cantrips break thermodynamic principles and can reverse entropy in sufficiently localised systems. Expecting it to obey energy-mass equivalence and the implications there-of seems counter productive.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Finoan wrote:

or Rank 10 Teleport (from Pathfinder2e).

Rank 9 would do the trick.

It takes light just over 8 minutes to reach Earth from the Sun. Golarion's solar system is pretty much analogous to our own, so we can assume that it would take light about 13 and a half minutes to reach Akiton.

Given that Teleport has a cast time of 10 minutes, going anywhere beyond Eox pretty much means you are beating light there. Hence FTL.

Using Teleport to travel within the inner system (Aballon, Castrovel, Golarion) is technically sub-FTL, as light could cover the same distance in under 10 minutes.

Dark Archive

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Mechanically, I hope there exists some options that allow for some limited template breaking.

A new "mythic" proficiency tier which gives a +10.

A generic option that allows you to advance a prof up a step, which can be taken a few times, maybe up to a cap so a non-Fighter/Gunslinger can never get mythic weapon prof, buy they could advance to legend, etc.

Same with things like armour, saves, casting, and so on.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragonchess Player wrote:

Eternal Legend sounds like the "tough"/"resistant" mythic destiny to me. It could also potentially include self-healing and status removal.

My money would be that's abilites are a generl grab bag on handy things.

Eternal Legend could be the more secular, folk hero, factionless, path. You're still a mythic being, but you chose no side or aligned to no power in whatever that landscape looks like.

The "other" option in the mythic census.

Dark Archive

These damn forums.

I had like 3 paragraphs after the end of the example about the use of the feat. Gone for no reason.

Dark Archive

Errenor wrote:
I really can't understand the last sentence: "You’re a treasure trove of information, but not all of it comes from reputable sources. When you fail (but don’t critically fail) a Recall Knowledge check using any skill, you learn the correct answer and an erroneous answer, but you don’t have any way to differentiate which is which. This can occur as not knowing something is significant, but not whether it’s good or bad." Scratch that. I can't even parse it at all. What do they even mean simply in English, if not in terms of rules? Even in the context of the previous sentence. Could you help?

Your party is attending a fancy gala, when, shock-horror, a guest has been found murdered in a quiet part of the manor. The body is managled, both ribbed to shreds, but curiously, drained entirely of its blood.

Thinking back, you felt that the towns mayor was acting unusual all evening.

You recall knowledge on the mayor, but fail. You have the Dubious Knowledge feat, and your GM presents you with the following:

You recall that the mayor didn't use the silverware that was at the table, instead you think he ate with his own utensils.


You recall that the mayor said he was too tried to walk in the gardens with the other guests. He retired to his room, only appearing again after sundown for the evening meal.

Dark Archive

Deriven Firelion wrote:

I was looking over sustained damage spells and Phantom Orchestra is the main one I use.

I can never think of this spell as anything other than that scene from the 2nd Doctor Strange movie where the two Strange's are throwing musical notes at each other.

Dark Archive

Do the characters have access to a means of getting compound interest?

Dark Archive

SuperBidi wrote:

The proper combo is Water Walk, Wall Run and a Decanter of Endless Water. And now you can get everywhere you want.

Unfortunately, I don't find the Decanter in Remaster...

Sounds like a job for Base Kinesis to me!

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I never thought about it before, but I love the Pawns of the actions.

Giving new players action tokens, so they can have a tactile aspect to using their actions each turn, is great!

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:

I see the Essences as being of one of two types : what you affect : Matter (tangible) or Spirit (intangible) and how you go about affecting it : Mental (mind, logic) or Vital (faith, instinct).

IMO, there cannot be Traditions blending 2 Essences beyond the 4 Traditions we already have because they would be missing an essential component.

Matter + Spirit would be missing how you go about affecting them : not the mind/logic nor the faith/instinct.

Mental + Vital would be missing what you affect : not the tangible nor the intangible.

That is on the assumption that the essential components as we currently understand them are all there is. Perhaps they are incomplete understandings, or, something grander - like the existence of Gods - suppresses other components, but now they are starting to emerge again.

Just like real world physics, if we think we have the mechanics locked up tight, its really because we aren't seeing the whole picture.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Red Griffyn wrote:

Its like you're complaining that a barbarian is too powerful because it can rage. No, that is a defining feature. If literally any class could beat it at one of its primary class identities by taking a L2 archetype dedication I think that would be very dissatisfying and poor game design.

Recall knowledge is no single classes defining feature, as almost all classes need to have access to that knowledge.

Recall Knowledge is also not the thaumaturges primary class identity.

I do feel that Paizo making the Thaumaturge's lore features tied to Charisma was a mistake. Charisma is already a particularly powerful stat, with a number of excellent abilites keyed from it. Making it a key driver for a knowledge skill does undermine Intelligence a good deal.

That said, both the Thaumurge and Diverse lore are utterly fine. They aren't the problem.

Its that Paizo has generally dropped the ball with making Recall Knowledge an accessible and rewarding activity for some Int based classes. The Wizard, the most academic and knowledge themed of all classes, has a single interaction with Recall Knowledge - and it just came out in the remaster. And takes a critical success to work...

Dark Archive

Jonathan Morgantini wrote:
Secondary Nova wrote:
So it recommends the Runelord archetype, with the dissolution of the magic schools how do we play that one. Or do we just play that one as per pre-master rules.
Our first Remaster AP is going to be Wardens of Wildwood. Seven Dooms is our final Adventure Path using the OGL pre-Remaster rules.

I take it that we won’t be seeing a Remastered Runelord archetype in 7 Dooms then?

Seemed like such a natural place for it as well.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

That is the why the conversation is focused on quality and parity of the options, rather than just the existence of the options.

Technically some classes have about 1460+ spells-from-spell-slots spells per day, with things like Bloodline Conduit, Leyline Conduit, etc and their normal spell slots. We don't take that into consideration because just the existence of the option doesn't impact its qualative aspects.

The goal should be overall class parity, with each class having their own meaningful "thing" that adds to a parties overall value. If one class can bring everything another can, plus more, that's a problem, and its why we have conversations like this.

Dark Archive

YuriP wrote:
foxpwnsyou wrote:
Old_Man_Robot wrote:

I think sorcerers should have 1 less spell slot per level actually.

Making them a 4 slot caster ate too much of the Wizards lunch.

Agree'd to be honest on top of this Sorceres need to KNOW less spells...they are spontaneous and can up and down cast spells ffs...they should only KNOW 2 spells of each level and have 3 spell slots end of story, its ridiculous to me how OP they are...yes Wizard can be GOOD but it takes 10x more effort to do.
I honestly don't like this type of leveling down

I'm not a fan of it either honestly, it feels bad.

But now, with Player Core 1 behind us, subtraction is what Paizo opted for with the Wizard. The school slot change really curtailed the versatility aspect of the Wizard.

It makes sense that they should apply the same hand to the Sorcerer.

Arcane Evolution, at least, should be reworked and no longer allow for spell preparation.

Leave novel/niche spell-based solutions wholly to the prepared casters.

Dark Archive

Trip.H wrote:

Such as Pocket Library's +1 Status, which is not a Circumstance.

Pocket Library is an interesting one.

Pocket Library wrote:
During the duration of this spell, you can call forth a tome from the extradimensional library when attempting a Recall Knowledge check using your chosen skill. This is part of the action to Recall Knowledge. You must have a hand free to do so


It is unclear if this should be taken as "Part of the recall knowledge action, as defined on page 239 of the Player Core, etc etc etc" or if it becomes part of any action which invokes a Recall Knowledge check.

I feel like the design of Pocket Library means that it is intended to work with any action that invokes an RK check, but I can see an equal argument that since such abilties don't grant the action, it doesn't allow for the ability to be used.

A good case study for this is actually Discern Secrets in its Premaster vs Remaster state.

Premaster Discern Secrets grants the RK check as a subordinate part of casting the spell. An argument can be made that since this is not a RK action, Pocket Library couldn't be used.

Remaster Discern Secrets grants the RK as a free action instead of a subordinate one, so its much clearer that Pocket Library has an actual RK action to work on.

Dark Archive

SuperBidi wrote:
No, they don't interact. The RK check from Organsight is a specific RK check that asks for an action, you can't use another RK check like the one from Discern Secrets instead.

You can't use the RK check that is subordinate to the casting of Discern Secrets itself, in the place of the RK check called for in Organ Sight.

You can however, on subsequent actions, after sustaining Discern Secrets, apply the bonus it grants to the RK check called for in Organ Sight.

It's better parsed in the Remastered language, so its clear that the bonus to the chosen action is applied to future versions of the same action, not just the one granted by casting Discern Secrets.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If I was a new player, coming to the game with a fresh reading of remaster-only rules, I would not come away from reading Staff Nexus with the idea that the Makeshift staff did not gain charges like a regular staff.

I would, has directed in the ability, look at page 278 of the GM Core to understand how regular staffs operate vs the Makeshift one.

The Makeshift does differ from normal staves, and the ways in which it differs are laid out in the text of Staff Nexus.

So, what are we to make of this?

The removal of the charges verbage from the ability post-remaster could easily be an oversight. With the intention being that the lack of the staff trait means it does not function as an normal staff, save for the exceptions in the ability itself.

Worth noting however, is that the staff trait does not grant any special function or ability that is not references in Remastered Staff Nexus' text.

Staff Trait wrote:
This magic item holds spells of a particular theme and allows a spellcaster to cast additional spells by preparing the staff.

Staff Nexus talks about casting spells from the Makeshift staff and the process of preparing it. So the lack of the staff trait doesn't actual mean anything in the context of the Makeshift staff.

There is a case strong case for the negative reading however, in the below:

Remastered Staff Nexus wrote:

You can Craft your makeshift staff into any other type of magical staff for the new staff’s usual cost, adding the two spells you originally chose to the staff you Craft. This staff gains charges from preparing it along with expended spells. Magical staves are described
on page 278 of GM Core

This creates the idea that there is a divergence in how the Makeshift staff gains charges from how it works when upgraded.

So its a bit of a mess.


Does the remastered Staff Nexus intentionally allow for charges to be gain like any other staff?

No, Probably not.

If I was new the game, or seeing Remastered Staff Nexus for the first time, would I have any reason to think it DIDN'T gain charges like a regular staff?

No, Probably not.

Staff Nexus needed to keep it clear language regarding staff functioning for this exact reason, and it should never have been removed.

Dark Archive

Gortle wrote:

Everyone agrees that DreadStriker makes all this tumbling effort obsolete.

They're different attack vectors. Just because one is potentially more universally accessible than others doesn't mean I don't want options. I will always taken an option that me to target multiple types of saves to get my desired effect instead of just one.

I always wanted to stack the deck as much as possible.

Dark Archive

lemeres wrote:

That needs 50' movement speed when tumbling through a medium creature. (40' if you are just trying to stay at the range of regular daggers). Possible, but it needs some work.

30 is enough for medium creature.

Start 10 away,
Difficult terrain, so 10 through,
and then 10 out the otherside.

You need to start and end 20ft away, 10 works just as well in most circumstances. Sure, there is reach considersations, but you need to factor that in no matter what you do.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Lets not forget Tumble Behind!

It was the core of a friends early level Thrower Rogue build.

Tumble through their space, get some distance out the other side, Sneak attack from range. Daggers have a pretty small range increment by default anyhow.

They eventually made heavy use of Dreadstriker and You're Next/Battlecry/Dazzling Display, etc.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.


It used to be called Cascade Casting in the early days of the edition, but now the word Cascade is used elsewhere in PF2, so it can be confusing to google. I have a handy table for useage in excel ( Found here - the rest of this doc is terribly out of date and its advice should never be followed)

Best advice I can give is to get a mount via either the beast master or cavalier archetype.

That way you can stay mobile while attempting to utilse.

Dark Archive

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Reminder to toss a coin to your Blake Davis.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

If you are going for an Arcane Witch, you would still probably be better overall with a Wizard and poach just Witch feats via archetyping.

If you are going for anything other than Arcane, Witch is the better class now.

The Wizard's legacy of having largely dull/marginally useful feats has the "benefit" of meaning you can trade most of the away for archetypes without feeling too much pain.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

When I consider the attributes, I find it best to seperate them into two groups. The active and the passive.

Passive attributes:

- Dex: Reflex Saves, naked-AC
- Con: Fort Saves, HP
- Wis: Will save, Perception

Active attributes:

- Str: Bulk limit
- Int: Additional trained starting skills, additional languages
- Cha: zip!

It important to bare in mind that until the end of the playtest, Charisma played the roll of determining how many magical items one could have invested. Which might explain its lack of other inherent qualities.

All the ones in the passive group are incredibly important to almost every character. Some aspects, like the importance of Dex can move up and down depending on things like armour and use of fineese weapons, but those are generally on top of layers.

Of the 6, it looks like Charsima is the worst intrinsically, as it has little in the way of generic benefit. It has an interesting parrell with Strength, in that all of its power comes from its active use. Its also somewhat telling that Strength acts on your physical carrying capacity, and Charisma was intended to work as your magical one.

The active attributes then come down to their actual effectiveness when literally used.

Strength is the fundamental combat stat. Dex can swap in for some builds/weapon choices, but strength is really the core.

Charisma is the fundaental social stat. Deception, Diplomacy, Intimidate. The work horses of social interactions, with hundreds of skill feats between them.

Intelligence then is something of the odd one out. It grants some passive benefits, but none anywhere near as important as the main 3 passives, and its active uses are pretty much confined to Lore rolls. Lore, unlike athletics or intimidate or the like, does bring with it or actually enable any changes to the world or enviroment. It sits as the odd one out.

Marginal passive effects, marginal active effects.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

You know what seperates Intelligence from Charisma in power? Charisma has a series of strong, math influencing, feats and abilities.

Feint and Demoralise are two very strong ever-green options. Bon Mot is a 1st level feat.

Intelligence doesn't have anything like that.

Recall Knowledge is good, but does nothing inherently and just knowing a good course of action doesn't mean you have the means to implement it.

How to make Int better without making changes?

Buff the Battle Planner feat.

- Remove the Expert skill requirement
- Drop to 1st level
- Let your party share in it (maybe scale that it so that it impacts you + 1 other at trained, +3 at Expert, +6 at Master, + "any number of allies within 30ft" at Legend)
- Losen the restrictions a touch

Now, suddenly, Int can play an important role in planning ahead and more actively rewards scouting.

Dark Archive

I feel like you answered your own question really.

You are right, in that the PF2 Kineticist is elementally focused. It draws its power from the elemental planes and as such, its power sources are tied to those planes.

There is no elemental plane of "force" or of "mind" of anything like that.

Its a lore driven decision due to the class being fundamentally and conceptually different from its 1e namesake.

The concept of telekinesis is already captured by the Psychic anyhow!

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Unicore wrote:
I wasn’t arguing you couldn’t build it with legacy material, just that it is not a rogue build possible with the remastered rogue. You can’t get Wis as a key attribute anymore, which makes magical trickster much less valuable as a feat. You are already dealing with accuracy issues as a rogue caster. And without Wis KAS, you are no longer better as a trap finder than any other rogue.

But you can still do that. Nothing stops that when using either premaster or remaster material. Eldritch Trickster isn't removed, inaccessible or incompatible due to the remaster. It just wasn't in PC1.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tactical Drongo wrote:
Joseph Collins wrote:
Personally, I expect to see it return, as it is generally well-liked and well-used, in addition to being a classic character type. Either as a Rogue Racket in PC2, once all the kinks are worked out, or, my preferred choice, pulled altogether and repackaged as a new Archetype that can be used by multiple classes.

Part of the pc1+2 rearrangement was to *Not* split content over multiple books, so we probably won't See a magical trickster Racket there

But I can certainly Imagine the Feed being added to an arcane trickster archetype that has more versatility

Archetypes are going to be in PC2 however. So its possible that class archetypes for PC1 classes may be printed there.

Dark Archive

The "Chair" companions (Legchair, Oozeform chair & Rootball chair) are all pretty good for casters.

Their support benefits don't help casters with their magic directly, but they help mitigate other concerns. Such as movement, cover, Oozeform might be able to grant off-guard, etc.

Beastmaster is a somewhat slept on caster supporting archetype, as, after 4th level, you essentially gain a bonus action to Stride, meaning you can use Spellshape feeats more freely. This is indeed addition to granting additional early-level focus points, which is a real boon post-remaster.

Dark Archive

Finoan wrote:
Old_Man_Robot wrote:

are we at the stage where:

- A suitibly high level character
- Utilising some means of sleep reduction (Ring of sustenance, etc)
- Using Complex Crafting rules

Create at least 2 scrolls per "night"?

If you are creating that many scrolls, I assume that it is so that you can cast them during the day's adventures.

So why not use Scroll Trickster?

Scroll Trickster only requires trained in one of the spellcasting tradition skills, and two feats will get you 2 scrolls per day at level 8 (the level 6 feat upgrades itself to two scrolls at level 8).

There is also Wizard Scroll Savant and Thaumaturge Scroll Esoterica for characters of those two classes.

I always need more scrolls.

Always more.

Plus if I can stockpile permanent scrolls, it means I can save them up for cases of prolonged adventure.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The shipping has been utterly crazy this time around.

On the 15th, when it was clear there was a problem, I just cancelled all my orders and subs for the Remaster and bought the PDF's directly. Called a LFG to see of they had got their order in, then swung round and picked up the hard copies the next day.

Not a "good" solution for anyone really, but at least I wasn't stuck waiting until now.

Dark Archive

My own pet question around scroll crafting is, given the reduced general crafting time in the remaster, are we at the stage where:

- A suitibly high level character
- Utilising some means of sleep reduction (Ring of sustenance, etc)
- Using Complex Crafting rules

Create at least 2 scrolls per "night"?

Dark Archive

Finoan wrote:
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
Like other consumables, scrolls can be crafted in batches of four. All scrolls of one batch must contain the same spell at the same level, and you must provide one casting for each scroll crafted.
I guess the can should be read as an "up to" in order to make scroll crafting possible for lone spellcasters.

I would insist it be read as such because the consumable crafting rule that it is referring to does actually use that wording.

Player Core Consumable Crafting wrote:
You can Craft items with the consumable trait in batches, making up to four of the same item at once with a single check.

There we go then!

So Wizards and Sorcerers can potentially make up to 4 scrolls per day.
All other casters can potentially make up to 3 scrolls per day.

With anything less than 4 being potentially augmented up to 4 with the aid of another caster.

Dark Archive

Eoran wrote:

A Wizard would be able to provide 4 castings of a 1st rank spell at level 2 or level 3 by using Drain Bonded Item.

The craft rules don't have any requirements on when the spells need to be cast, so as long as the process isn't interrupted, this is probably an easy to handle it.

It DOES make crafting a batch of scrolls a problem for most casters however. You can't even use a heighened version

Like other consumables, scrolls can be crafted in batches of four. All scrolls of one batch must contain the same spell at the same level, and you must provide one casting for each scroll crafted.

I guess the can should be read as an "up to" in order to make scroll crafting possible for lone spellcasters.

1 to 50 of 1,278 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>