Olorin_Plane_Walker's page

To be honest, I think I really like the sound of this new actions system. If you really think about it, it seems to be better then the current system in practically every way. Kudos, Paizo.

I just wish we didn't have to wait so long for the playtest to come out, I can't wait to get into this & try it all out for myself.

Something specific that's concerning me is this story about races now being called "ancestry."

Why the name change? Are the rules for races different now? Sounds exciting TBH.

To all those who say "you can still play 1e if 2e doesn't appeal to you" that's obvious, but that's not the point.

Look at it this way, do you think it would be more fun to play in & be a part of the currently supported system, or would you rather be left behind in the dust?

No one voluntarily wants to play an "outdated" system & you can hardly blame them for voicing any displeasure they have towards that. Long time Pathfinder fans should know this better then anyone, considering PF's origins...

You keep using words like "confusing" and "stream-lining", but you're not very convincing about it. Because, face it, most GMs can hand wave any of the difficulty of your system away, but can that difficulty so easily be reinserted? Your game is challenging and complex, and while it seems you think that is a detriment to your bottom line, I think you're going to find that the majority of your players see it as the very core of your value.

100% accurate.

The main reason I've switched from 5e to PF is because of PF's more structured & complex game design. If I wanted to play a rules-lite RPG, I would have just stuck with 5e. I came to PF for a reason, don't now make that a moot reason.

---------------

This whole talk of backgrounds becoming a rule & not just fluff is troublesome to me though... Having something as important as your characters background be governed by something as concrete & restricting as the very rules of the game seems like a really bad move to me.

Unless you create rules for every possible background a character could have, in other words, do the impossible (& make the game needlessly complex in the process), or have the backgrounds be extremely vague & broad, leaving finer details up to the PC, I don't think this idea is going to win you any fans. If anything, it will just help drive away current supporters...

PossibleCabbage wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

the magus build

Since, as I understand it, the core PF2 rulebook is just going to have the original CRB classes plus the Alchemist (which does not include the magus) is it safe to assume that the plan eventually will be to produce Pathfinder2 versions of all or most of the Pathfinder classes?

Since every class is probably somebody's favorite class, are there classes other than the CRB ones that you can confirm will/won't be coming back?

I doubt it will be a 1-to-1 conversion though and frankly I'm of the mindset that less classes can be better. Not less diversity mind you, but I believe many of the classes could easily be baked in as Archetypes of existing groups. Especially with the new action economy and if they give Archetypes the ability to be a bit more robust. A few examples:

- As Mark said just a few comments up, a Magus can now be much easier created out of a spellcasting class as you get three actions and could use 1 (or 2) to cast a spell and another to attack with a weapon. In addition, an Archetype on a Wizard/Sorcerer that allows spells to channel through a weapon gets you pretty close to a Magus.

- Shifter could easily be a Druid Archetype

- All of the hybrid and alternative classes just scream Archetypes to me.

- Psychic could fit neatly into Sorceror

- Summoner and Spritualist could go to Wizard

- Oracle could fit into Cleric

Of course some may not fit so neatly, but there is a pretty darn good start if you ask me. I'd love to see these types of very robust Archetypes (more so than many are now) rather than whole new classes. Of course that's my opinion is all.

This is actually a really good idea... Hey Paizo

*Olorin points to Novo*

Listen to this one, he/she knows the way.

Its really ironic that the main reason PF exists was for old fans to keep playing what they loved (playing 3.5 instead of migrating to 4e) and now PF sits with the EXACT same issue... It was bound to happen at some point I guess, a revision would probably even be very good, as long as it stays true to its roots. But still, that's really ironic.

*Laughs*

How long till another company brings out a "new" game that plays awfully similar to Pathfinder?

All joking aside, I completely agree with everyone's complaints about having to "re-buy" content they already bought. I guess there's no way around it & Paizo naturally has to turn a profit, they can't just give stuff away for free, but damn...

I just hope 2e doesn't try & be too much like D&D 5e now...

One of the MAIN reason why I've switched from 5e to PF is because the Skill system & combat seems way better & more structured then 5e.

Please don't let PF 2e just be a dumb'ed down simplification of PF...

I've just recently started getting into Pathfinder, about a month ago, coming from playing D&D 5e. I really love what I've seen so far, but... I'm not sure how I feel about a new PF edition being thrown into the ring.

Should I stick with PF 1e or make the switch over to the new edition...? There's probably enough content in PF 1e to last me till the day I die, but at the same time, I don't wanna be left behind in the dust....

I'll probably end up switching to 2e when its available. I'm probably in a very lucky situation since I'm now just getting into PF & not an old fan, so it won't really have much of an impact on me, I guess.

Diego, you say a LvL 6 Fighter can only make 1 attack per turn if its unarmed, but the rulebook says that a LvL 6 Fighter gets a BAB of +6/+1. Wouldn't that mean he can actually make 2 unarmed attacks using a full attack action?

Apparently the ability to do multiple attacks per turn relies ONLY on your BAB. Your STR & DEX are irrelevant to that, they would just determine how much you add (or subtract) to your attack mod.

For example, if your BAB is +6/+1 & your STR is +2, you should be able to make 2 attacks using a full attack per turn, right? One at +8 attack mod, the other at +3 attack mod.

*Laughs*
Forgive me, CrystalSeas, but its practically impossible to accurately guess the gender of someone when the name "CrystalSeas" & a picture of a crocodile is all you have to go on.

Wow, it hasn't even been an hour since post #1 & already 4 great dudes have clarified everything. What a great community.

I believe I understand all of this now, thanks guys, enjoy your day.

(-_^)-b

LOL, this thread is plagued by "same-time-posting."

Anyway, thanks for the help, much appreciated.

I posted post #3 before I saw post 2. Many thanks for explaining that, Asmodeus' Advocate, it makes perfect sense now. *chuckles* Damn, that Angel is extremely powerful.

I suppose the same explanation can be given in reply to post #3? Starting at 6th level barbarian can attack twice & its BAB for the first attack is a +6 but its second attacks BAB is a +1? Makes sense.

Could you tell me where in the core rule book it speaks about this so that I can study it (about how a high BAB grants you multiple attacks per turn), I must have missed it somehow.

A similar peculiarity appears in the modifier of a PC's Base Attack Bonus.

For example, look at the level up chart for the Barbarian class (table 3-2 of the core rule book, page 32) at level 1 it shows you that you get a +1 to your BAB & it raises by +1 each level, at level 5 it would be +5. So far, this makes perfect sense. But then at level 6, suddenly it says your BAB is now "+6/+1"... The hell? Which is it? Do they mean +7? Surely not, they would have just put a "+7" then, right?

At level 16 its insane, it reads "+16/+11/+6/+1". What on earth is the meaning of all these "/"? At level 16, wouldn't you're BAB just be a +16? Why the need to make it seem/look so complicated?

For example, look at the Astral Deva Angel (3rd monster in Bestiary 1) its melee attack reads:

"+2 Disrupting warhammer +26/+21/+16 (1d8+14/x3 plus stun) or slam +23 (1d8+12)"

I understand little of that... I'm not even sure if that's one attack or two.

Ok so... If it attacks with its hammer does it get a +26, a +21, or a +16 to its attack roll? What's the meaning of the "/"? Surely it doesn't have multiple attack mods for the same attack? What about the "+2" just before the name of the hammer, how/where does that come into play?

I understand the damage though. If it hits, it does 1d8+14 damage (x3 if its a crit) & then stuns the creature hit, right?

Is "slam" an alternate version of its hammer attack? That ones attack mod & damage calculation makes perfect sense to me. Roll a d20, add +23 to the result, if it hits, deal 1d8+12 damage (x2 if it crits).

Well, I gave up on trying to find a YT campaign to watch, & instead, I've started reading the PF Tales novels starting with Liars Blade. Its way better then watching any campaign & I really recommend it, its a great read.

I was really surprised at the fine quality, even if Pathfinder didn't exist & this was just a standalone novel, it would still be really good, its not just a licensed cash in like so many things are now-a-days.

Wow, thanks for the clear & quick responses, guys.

I thought it would be like this but just wanted to confirm. Cheers.

Would someone mind looking over these four scenarios & telling me which ones provoke an attack of opportunity, & which don't? Thanks in advance.

The setting is, a PC is wielding a weapon that has a long reach, say a spear. He can use it to attack anyone 10 feet away, but not 15 or 5 feet away. Then there's an enemy, lets just call it a goblin.

1. The goblin is standing 10 feet from the PC, in the "Threatened Area" of the PC's spear, he takes a 5-foot step to be standing within 5 feet from the PC, then attacks the PC.

2. The goblin is standing 15 feet away, he then takes a 5-foot step so that he is now standing in the "Threatened Area" of the PC's spear, he ends his turn.

3. The goblin is standing 20 feet away, then runs up to the PC so that he's 5 feet away, moving through the "Threatened Area," then attacks.

4. The goblin is standing 5 feet from the PC, he then takes a 5-foot step away from the PC & ends his turn in the threatened area.

Am I right in saying only scenario #3 provokes an attack of opportunity? Keep in mind that this spear cannot attack someone who is 5 feet away, only 10 feet, does that change anything?

In the rule books, they always have some awesome art, along with what looks like an exert from something to go along with the art, before each chapter. Where do these come from?

For example, on pages 6 & 7, just before chapter one of the core rule book, you see some art depicting a group facing a white dragon with some text to the right side of it.

Where does this come from? A novel or something? Or is it just made up for this sole purpose?

I like watching D&D campaigns on YT, like "The Provokers," but I couldn't really find any Pathfinder ones... Would someone mind please suggesting/recommending me some to watch?