Onkonk's page

545 posts. 3 reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 545 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ascalaphus wrote:

So then the question is, are you supposed to take that back to older books? If you're dazzled and someone is standing right in front of you, is that kind of concealment not also the kind where peoples' locations are still obvious?

All of these examples have an individual go blurry, you are hard to see but since you're the only thing blurry you can't hide.

For one it even says "As usual for concealment involving an obvious
visual manifestation" which is what all these examples evolve.

Dazzled is no different than fog cloud, everything is a bit hazy and it is hard to see anything, a person being dazzled has the same vision as someone standing in a fog cloud.

Many talismans Barbarians can't use because of Command or Envision :(

You do meet Mokku in Book 3, Chapter 2, Area G6.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
CRB pg.12 wrote:
Bonuses and penalties apply to checks and certain statistics. There are several types of bonuses and penalties. If you have more than one bonus of the same type, you use only the highest bonus. Likewise, you use only the worst penalty of each type.


It would be a -4.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ascalaphus wrote:

Counterpoint: Blur

The target's form appears blurry. It becomes concealed. As the nature of this effect still leaves the target's location obvious, the target can't use this concealment to Hide or Sneak.
I'm seeing this kind of phrasing more and more in new abilities that grant you concealment due to looking different, rather than due to having something to hide behind.

This feels like the opposite of a counter. If you make yourself blurry, then yeah everyone will see where the blur is at. But if everything is blurry then the target's location is not obvious. When you're dazzled it's like everyone is in a fog cloud.

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

bandolier also might creat a talisman problem

talismanic sage are extremely powerful level 14 feat

but now 20 throwing knife can have fear gem on them and can be used in a single fight

maybe add a rule that talisman must be placed on bandolier not weapon in it

You can't Quick Draw and activate the talisman at the same time, so to draw a weapon and using a fear gem is a 3 action routine. I don't think I am super worried but we'll see I guess.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Katana trades some damage (deadly d8 is sort of half a dice size) for versatile p/s. So the "niche" is being a bastard sword but with two damage types.

So there are half-elves and half-orcs but do we know if any other ancestries are also capable of having children together in Golarion?

I think if you want to use the curse, taking Additional Lore frequently is a good thing to do, if you can reliably roll vs a lower dc then it starts to become more worth it.

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Verzen wrote:
The-Magic-Sword wrote:
keftiu wrote:
Is there a description of that new Orc gun? I’m VERY tempted to have an Gunslinger from the Deadshot Lands with one.

The Barricade Buster?

"Developed by a half orc inventor from Alkenstar who brough the technology north to battle the Whipsering Tyrant alongside the ord hordes of Belkzen, the barricade buster deatures eight barrels fixed around a central pivot attached to a handle and firing mechanism. A barricade buster fires spheres of metal with extreme velocity and very little accuracy"

Its literally a hand cranked gatling gun.

That description does not coincide with the lore.

According to lore, only level 0 simple and martial weapons can be a weapon invention.

You can craft stuff outside the innovation class feature.

Berselius wrote:
Does anyone know if we get 2nd edition stats for Hao Jin in this?

She has no stats in this.

The pdf is not only a cost for the pdf as a file but a cost for the adventure itself. So the cost for foundry is the extra work it cost to make it into a module.

At least how I understand it.

So it seems you can have a lot of fun with Living Vessel. You can make it so Osoyo can be the living vessel and occasionally control the PC again when they reach 0hp. I'll have to read deep into their motivations to figure out how to do it, but it seems there is a lot of potential here.

Ezekieru wrote:
Onkonk wrote:

Is the Feng Huo Lun a rename of the Butterfly Blade? ALso is Wind and Fire Wheel changed?

Also is the Sixth Pillar Dedication changed?

A quick Google search reveals Feng Huo Lun is another name for the Wind and Fire Wheels. So it looks like they got nerf'd down from a 1d6 die to a 1d4 die.

Huh, those are the exact same stats as the butterfly swords though. Unless those were changed too.

Is the Feng Huo Lun a rename of the Butterfly Blade? ALso is Wind and Fire Wheel changed?

Also is the Sixth Pillar Dedication changed?

Ventnor wrote:
Neat guide! One ancestry that I think is also worth a look is the orc, specifically because their Iron Fists ancestry feat lets you add the shove trait to your fist attack, which I will note is already agile. It’s especially nice if you’re going the monk route and plan to get Handwraps of Mighty Blows already.

Yeah, that is a nice tip. Added an Orc section as well.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I guess the big question is, what are you doing when not healing? Divine casters also have pretty nice offensive spells and at worst cantrips. It seems you would be somewhat limited since you need to spend resources on bombs that also go to healing.

Mark Seifter mentioned this a while ago (after he quit Paizo though)

Mark Seifter wrote:

Some of the old classics like bespoke Simple minus for wizards or bespoke simple + a few for rogues and bards (or druids balancing around only nonmetal options which are weaker in terms of shields and restrict your high AC armor options), are a little odd. It might have been better to just have wizards and bards go simple, rogues go martial, and druids use metal, from a streamlining gameplay perspective. But sometimes people value the tradition. Designers tend to be the ones who are willing to reexamine tradition and propose radical new ideas, so I'd definitely propose it again!

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Maybe not that novel of a concept for those experienced with the game, but I decided to make a write up and try to explore most mutations of the Flurry Maneuver Ranger. The basics of the build is that Agile works with Trip and similar actions and Flurry can get that number extremely low to spam attempts for super high chances to succeed.

I wrote it all here, if there is something wack in it, I appreciate the feedback though it could very well be we value different things in this game :)

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Wouldn't be an AP product page without bickering about reviews.

Non-broken link

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cordell Kintner wrote:
These are supposed to be ridiculously OP abilities.

This is not supported by the book at all:

GMG pg.95 wrote:

Keep in mind that relic gifts are often a little more powerful than other items with the same Price even when they start out, and they often scale without any additional costs, so PCs with relics will usually be a bit more powerful.

The relics are supposed to be mostly in line with what the game already offers.

Yeah, that seems way out of line for an at-will ability. A cooldown will make it fine though in my opinion.

Ezekieru wrote:
Hopefully it'll get sorted out on Tuesday. I really wanna know how they went about addressing the Sixth Pillar Dedication and Sixth Pillar Mastery!

Also the weapons, wind and fire wheel looks cool but haven't ever been able to use them because they are wrong.

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Buri Reborn wrote:
Raynulf wrote:
When it comes to Paizo: 20 years of consistent behaviour and integrity matters. Sure, we can't predict the future - maybe a giant legal battle with WotC will nuke their finances and force them to sell, and the new owner is a tyrannical maniac. Or a comet could land on the office. All of these could happen. But they aren't likely. If in the short term we had to put our money on one party to take over the role of custodian of the Open Gaming movement... Paizo would be a good candidate.
Devil's Advocate: The only reason Paizo has been behaving "well" could be due to the OGL having set the terms of fairness to-date. We've never seen a Paizo without the OGL that set a certain level playing field across the industry. I don't think Paizo has ever been threatened in this manner either and may be prone to react in a protectionist manner as well.

Paizo was not forced to use the OGL for PF2, they could have gone for something else if they wanted to be "less nice".

1 person marked this as a favorite.
AnimatedPaper wrote:
Xyxox wrote:

But Hasbro has many times more money to throw at the case than all of the combined third party producers could come up with together and could bankrupt them all long before a judgement is ever achieved should they decide to go the Lawfare route unless others join in to help fund such a lawsuit.

Given that Disney and Microsoft would both also be affected by a complete shut down of OGL, money to fight an injunction might not be an issue.

Whether either company cares enough to fight the full battle, I couldn’t guess. But telling WotC to take a long walk off a short pier if they want Disney to stop selling KotoR (ancient as it is now), that seems likely.

Edit: actually, I suppose Disney would have incentive to sue Hasbro into tiny tiny pieces regardless of the actual issue at hand, so who knows.

AFAIK regardless if WotC manages to revoke the OGL1.0, everything already made under the OGL1.0 license is safe but you can't use it for future products.

11 people marked this as a favorite.

I saw an interesting post from Michael Sayre about PF2 and the OGL (it was made 9 months ago so not a comment on the leak).


That's less true than you think. D&D already keeps their most defensible IP to themselves and every word of PF2 was written from scratch. Many of the concepts (fighter, wizard, cleric, spell levels, feats, chromatic dragons, etc.) aren't legally distinct or defensible except under very specific trade dress protections that Paizo's work is all or mostly distinct from anyways, and game mechanics aren't generally copyrightable even if PF2's weren't all written from the ground up. Most of the monsters that touch WotC's trade dress protections (i.e. real-world monsters modified heavily enough to have a distinct WotC version that's legally protectable) have already been reworked or were just always presented as legally distinct versions that don't require the OGL, and things like Paizo's goblins have always been legally distinct for trade dress law and protected for many years despite being released as part of a system using the OGL.

Considerations like keeping the game approachable for 3pp publishers, the legal costs of establishing a separate Paizo-specific license, concerns about freelancers not paying attention to key differences between Paizo and WotC IP, etc., all played a bigger role in PF2's continued use of the OGL than any need to keep the system under it. Not using the OGL was a serious consideration for PF2 but it would have significantly increased the costs related to releasing the new edition and meant that freelancer turnovers would have required an extra layer of scrutiny to make sure people weren't (unintentionally or otherwise) slipping their favorite D&Disms into Pathfinder products. It would have also meant all the 3pps needed to relearn a new license and produce their content under different licenses depending on the edition they were producing for, a level of complication deemed prohibitive to the health of the game.

It's possible and even likely that the next edition doesn't use the OGL at all but instead uses its own license specific to Paizo and the Pathfinder/Starfinder brands. It's just important to the company that they be approachable to a wide audience of consumers and 3pps; this time around the best way to do that was to continue operating under the same OGL as the first edition of the game.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
SilvanOrion wrote:

Firstly, I want to apologize if this has been discussed already and I simply couldn't find it.

With the changes to the healer alchemist (I'm bad at spelling), do we think we will ever see adjustments to Natural Medicine? I don't want to see it take over the medicine skill, I just wish it would qualify me for continual recovery so I can use it more than once an hour.

If they won't do that, can someone help get me off of my soapbox and explain why not? If not for me, than for my poor DM that has to listen to me.

Natural Medicine did receive a clarification!

"Page 264 (Clarification): When I use Natural Medicine, can I attempt the higher-DC checks even though I'm not using Medicine?

You absolutely can. Essentially, you replace any mention of “Medicine” in the activity with “Nature” if you’re using Natural Medicine. You do still need healer’s tools. 

Also, note that this feat applies only to using Treat Wounds. You would still need to be an expert in Medicine, not Nature, to select the Ward Medic feat. If you did qualify for and did select Ward Medic, you would be able to use Nature to Treat Wounds for two targets. You’d still need to become a master or legendary in Medicine to treat more targets than that."

2 people marked this as a favorite.
RMapua wrote:

I love PF2E and I love the changes added as they further improve the game.

I just have one gripe:

The one weapon that actually SHOULD have reach, doesn't, and that's the 1h spear. There's no point in giving it a throw range if there are javelins that already do this.

It should be a simple, yet effective weapon that conveys an advantage of reach.

I mean:

I petition:

1. remove the throw range increment on spears and give them reach instead.

They're making a 1h reach spear in Treasure Vault! So in but a few months you'll have your wish.

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

Less incentive to minmax is a feature, not a bug, at least to me.

So you either wanted to play a frail Human for purely roleplaying reasons with no mechanical representation, which means you're not affected at all, you're good to go with telling everybody how sickly and tired you are every half an hour, or you were trying to minmax/shoot yourself in the foot, in which case I'm glad you can't.

Seems like an odd stance at a change where you also make it easier to minmax (i.e. it is now easier to use Orc builds where you don't use the strength boost).

There is some sense of irony of complaining about people being annoying and being this hostile.

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:

I'm also disappointed in the Voluntary Flaws change. One of the things I've often experienced, particularly in Organized Play, is an intense stigma against "making your character worse for no reason", with the implication that your character is ruining other people's fun. The old system neatly sidestepped that to an extent by offering a small, but still relevant, benefit.

Ah well. I look forward to having to rebuild half my characters to comply. :|

You don't need to rebuild your characters, both the "old" and "new" ability score generation systems are equally valid.

And yes, "I gimped my character because I like edgy challenge // I like how everybody at the table talks about how I'm a low CHA bard" are both intense red flags that suggest somebody's ego is too big for the table they're sitting at.

An example:

I'm making a fleshwarp animal barbarian, and I want dex, con and strength. I could before do a stat spread like +Con, +Dex, +Str, -Int, -Cha.

After the change I can either do +Con, +Str using the Fleshwarped stats or +Str, (+Dex or +Con) using the new stats. But in either case voluntary flaw is now gone.

It isn't the biggest deal ever and I'm appreciative of the new stats for opening up more builds but it is a loss to some characters for sure.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Unicore wrote:

So the flick mace is just a worse bladed scarf now?

A whip always offered reach and flail crit specialization with one hand for no extra feats.

Well, not really because the Bladed Scarf is a 2h weapon. And it has more damage than the whip.

So it still sits firmly in the "highest damage 1h reach flail/hammer".

The crit spec was the strongest part imo (even if the d8 was egrigious) and having a d6 over a d4 is still a solid upgrade.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gobhaggo wrote:
Sorry mis-sent but on Tempest Oracle; True but also that Tempest Touch is really bad since its a touch spell on a subclass that wants to be away from people.

Reach Spell is your friend!

I don't think it has no drawback, I've noticed barbarians have a very hard time using items because envision and command are concentrate and interact requires a free hand.

Dc5 is pretty low so the drawback could indeed be too low perhaps but I think you use concentrate more than one thinks.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Keep in mind that Dispel Magic only targets unattended items.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Training and dedication is mostly captured by weapon proficiency I reckon, much like other weapons.

Are guns uniquely proficient in targetting large creatures? AC also does happen to represent armor rather than their dodging ability alone which seems to be the same for a bow as it would be for a gun or a sword.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Comparing ranged and melee damage in a vaccum probably is not going to shine a light on the strength of a ranged build.

Ranged characters can engage fights on their own terms (a Ranger can start a fight 200 ft away without penalties with a longbow and 300ft away with an Arquebus), forcing enemies to close the distance to them.

They're also safer and less likely to take action penalties to Stand and pick up their weapon.

Ranged characters can also engage in kiting strategies much easier to completely shut down something with low speed (and many things have pretty low speed compared to a horse), or even attack from positions where they can't be targeted. Combining ranged damage with a spell like repulsion can be devastating.

They're also able to target enemies that melee characters are unable to, a flying dragon can be completely impossible to handle without having good range, flying speed of most characters rarely go even close to a good flying enemy.

But if you are playing mostly in tiny rooms where enemies engage 20ft away from you a ranged character is going to be less useful than they could be.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The article was definitely intriguing, the start being an urban sandbox in Highhelm sounds super fun.

Gobhaggo wrote:
More divine elemental spells, hate that tempest don't get their extra damage before level 4 with divine access

While I agree with the sentiment, don't you get it on your focus spell?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A swash (or a Rogue) can certainly make use of the Elven Curved Blade. Swash does have feats which gives you benefits for having a free hand but that doesn't mean you have to use them, they are only options after all.

The role it would have is squeezing out a bit more damage than all other finesse options available if that suits oneself.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Also while it can enhance your experience depensing on the table there is no need to describe exactly how your character performs every move. For many people it is enough to just say they cast fireball without describing the runes they trace and how they look like.

Here is a link to the archives for it

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The player's guide mention bleaching gnomes as good options, as far as I know we don't really have anything representing them in the rules?

The Character Guide mention them briefly but does not suggest a heritage like the other gnome ethnicities. What would be a good fit in your opinion?

I am currently playing a Starlit Magus with a gun (also picked up psychic powers through the mana wastes =^)) that is now level 7!

The character is using one hand for a Double-Barrled Pistol and one hand for a Staff of Divination, if you don't want to use a 1h weapon the Double-Barrled Musket is also fine.

The way it plays is that you open up with a powerful turn (my fav is true strike + focus spell), then next turn you can recharge + spellstrike again without reloading. Drop the staff when you need to reload and pick it up at the end of the fight.

You can also not use true strike and then you get an extra turn of spellstriking (t1 recharge, t2 reload, t3 recharge).

If the fight is taking a long time I like to weave in actions like recharging with a spell or a cantrip or I can just take a single down turn to get my stuff back up again.

It is a bit janky but works decently well in my opinion and I am having a lot of fun with it.

Mark Seifter mentioned on a book of the dead stream that Cognitive Crossover works like SuperBidi is arguing for.

Obviously this is not rule text and I think Mark even had quit at this point but might be helpful if someone wants to divine the RAI for this feat.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Phntm888 wrote:
On this page, it says July 2023. If I'm looking at the wrong page, that's fine, but Paizo is gonna need to fix that.

It certainly isn't the most intuitive page but how it should be read is:

The preordering is expected in July 2023, the product (in the product availability lower down on the page) is saying that the product is releasing August 3rd.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Don't forget rust, spider and worm as hints either.

Rust seems very plane of metal to me.

Will the player's guide come in mid december or is christmas bumping that to early january?

Without spending any feats will be hard but Trick Magic Item skill feat can help you with scrolls/wands of mage armor.

Haste is good but also a bunch of defensive spells that might be hard to use otherwise like mirror image, blur, mask of terror.

1 to 50 of 545 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>