I have a monk wrestler I want to play sometime, pick up clinging shadows and lock most medium or smaller creatures down and pummel them. Lizard folk size increase to do the same to large creatures late game, sounds fun.
I like the look of those wings and the horns framed to look like they hold the halo up is great. The body is a bit lanky looking and the side view of the head just makes me think "unavoidable chin move". Benevolent, gold and strives to protect innocents. So it's basically a combo of the only metallic dragons most people could tell apart.
I think a lot of 80s, 90s and even 2000s movies give the impression that translation can often be a one for one thing. We don't get exposed often to the fact all languages have phrases that encompass ideas that are unique to that language or society. Many have single words to things other languages would require a sentence to describe just because it isn't a word for them. Also the fact many words come with social baggage or gender baggage, it can make it hard to put such things in simple terms without writing an aside for your language to allow you to relate better to it. With that in mind, I think this was an amazing piece, giving a lot of insight into things with such a simple setup and encounter between two people.
We've only just started lowering corruption in modern times compared to nearly the whole of human history so I don't think it should be all that surprising. When you add in actual evil beings and many anti-social or xenophobic creatures and societies that take resources and lives away, then is it any wonder why people in positions of power cut corners and make deals? Even with good intentions just trying to keep things stable, there's a lot going on.
The AP has lots of problems, from the map not fitting the descriptions, the plot hooks and the NPCs. Out of the 4 APs I've done so far this was the least enjoyable. That's saying a lot considering I played a Kobold inventor who started off styled like Wolfwood, carrying his mech around on his back until he could ride it, then he rode his dragon tank everywhere, was very fun. You find lots of broken steam punk automatons, fight several different types of them from guard bots to ale servers. So I think there's lots of steam punk inspired stuff around. The big disconnect is likely how the map looks rather plain and many of the descriptions of places don't make sense on the map and don't give the feel of crazy inventions and unique things that can only be found here. On the topic of weapons, you aren't going to get things that operate different then what we have. You can re-flavor them to be lever action or revolver like, but the mechanics are there to keep them balanced, that's one of the core principles of PF2e.
Just want to point out a lizard folk champion with a shield can make everything adjacent for them difficult terrain, getting off guard on all enemies around them.
Hopefully we can get an article on remastered animal companions.
I don't care about the hang ups people have of changing the class focus and such, but if you do want to change then soldier is a back ground, not a class. A field operative is a soldier, a sniper is a soldier, a tank crew are all soldiers, a spell caster who's enrolled in the military also fits. If we are going to have every class have more of a theme and not have a generalist combat class then I hope the classes we do get can cover a WIDE variety of concepts because otherwise there's going to feel like a big hole. It might get filled eventually by being able to have more interesting themes, but it does seem like a weapon generalist fits a lot of peoples idea for just want to be good with gear theme. I'm all for themed classes, so long as they are varied and aren't mechanically inflexible. It will hurt the short term but I think would allow more classes in the long run. As for a new name, maybe point man, SAPper (Squad Assault Person), Demolisher or Brute.
I loathe vancian casting. I've never played in a game in 30 years that a DM would give you so much knowledge of what your up against that you could make spell choices that you knew would be perfect. I've also never played a game where you knew for sure you would have have a day off so could swap to all non combat spells and have that be meaningful. So for me, being prepared for as many things as possible as often as possible has always been a baseline. Prepared casters have always been bad at that, because sometimes you need that one spell two or three times, and only spontaneous casters reliably cover that. The exception being themed adventures like AV, but I tend to have a low opinion of adventures you can build a character that is just a good counter to the adventure as a whole. I haven't played one yet but I think I would like a sorcerer with the spell book feat to have some ability to swap spells around. For me, the feel of having multiple spell slots not be the right thing for that day vastly outweighs any good feel having the right spell gives. As well as choice paralysis, do you use this ok spell now and maybe not have it when you need it? That's the least amount of fun possible to me.
Likely to get higher weapon dice for ranged compared to PF2, but the big difference is probably going to be magazine size, not having to reload all the time so you can instead put damage out and do something else. Melee will still likely be the only d12 and have stat to damage. Can't imagine them having multiple dice for any basic weapon, would be nice though. Hopefully with interesting traits and functions the weapons will be more interesting to use then just thinking about what die it has. If we don't get a slew of new traits and abilities like beast weapons, then it will be very stagnant.
Jedi are space magus. Biotics/psychers are space wizards/sorcerers. We already have lots of sci-fantasy with magic.
This sounds exactly how I think most people use it, and likely results in people playing what they want. So I don't understand your statement of rare making it so many people won't be able to play it. We don't have a rare class yet, so will be interesting to see what they show mechanically and thematically for such an option.
Keep using them. The remastered books are for new players. Just get all the changes printed out and slap them into your current books, or do what ever you normally do for errata.
I think that Michael meant casters have to wait until the right moment to use spells. Either bring about the conditions to use your slots or use them when the time is right. The problem is that suggests you should be doing other things then using magic most of the time. This was common in older editions but how many stories are told with pure caster types just not using magic all the time these days?
Cleric is the best cleanser, has feats to counteract lots of nasty things. You also don't have a defender, so Thaum with amulet to reduce damage and stack up on tons of scrolls and you'd fit both roles and then some fairly well.
Uncommon just means ask your GM first, there should be no other barrier then that. So either your GM says yes and you can pick it up on level up or buy it, or you have to put some effort into it doing a little side quest, or you don't get to use it.
How could most focus spells get worse. They heighten like all other spells, meaning they don't keep up with higher spell slots, and many are low impact already. Lets hope most focus spells get brought up or expanded so casters of low to mid level have reliable things they can do other then limp cantrips.
I hope we can see a better version of natural armor for them at some point. More heritage based feats, supporting both the different physiology of the heritage and cultures. Would love something to make their natural attacks work with weapon feats better, especially ranger feats, but I think other ancestries need that as well. Would just be great to have more support to make a character that uses natural armor and attacks that isn't a monk.
I think on the mechanical side they are a bit weak, all ranged weapons are, and they suffer from not working well with the highest optimal dpr of attacking twice per round. It's very strange even at lower levels of hitting for 9 damage one round then critting for 32 the next. As for the theme, we don't actually have cowboys at all. Maybe in a future book, but Alkenstar is all steampunk/clockwork and has no wild West themes. Otherwise I think they fit in, we perhaps have too much guy with gun takes on an army in modern media and not enough guy gets shot and cleaves the shooter with a greatsword. Because nearly everyone seems to think one bullet will always take someone out. That should only be true if your making one of those bad action flicks where one kick takes someone out of a fight for a minute so you can take on the rest of the goon horde. Skalgrim recently did a video on guns in fantasy and part of his conclusion was he would rather be hit by a lever action rifle then a battleax. In that regard I agree, but considering how much movement everyone in PF2 has to make the best of ranged weapons you need to actually fight at long range, 100+ feet at least.
Wrap up all four limbs, feet and hands, the magic goes through the body to connect all four(maybe five of you want to include the head with a headband or similar) and thus connects with all your chakras to infuse your body with magic. That's how I see it working with all the non fist attacks we have. If someone looks at you with detect magic you might even look like you have "the glow" from The Last Dragon. Magic coats your whole body to make your hits land better and stronger.
In my homebrew I already add on some cultural and biological traits to make kobolds more interesting. I've never used the alignment system since even as a child I saw how bad it was for anything other then actual beings made of good/evil, so I've never seen kobolds as evil, even in 3rd edition. They are considered evil because they exemplify some bad human quolities, greed and xenophobia. People call them cowardly because they are afraid of creatures three times(often much more) then their own size that often want to kill them, go figure. I think there's plenty of room to keep all that and putting a better spin on it. Hoarders who don't value personal ownership of things, everything they take is for their tribe. They see themselves as heirs to draconic power, thus other creatures are lesser and they tend to only get along with like minded people so often keep to their own little groups.
Frozen sea, level 3 earth/water lizardfolk.
4 encounters so far. First was spent just trying not to hit friendlies with my aura, two round fight so I did nothing. Second was over before I entered the room, I was last in almost every fight. Third was rough, a little ranged damage in a small space, failed to judge when to stone block(second enemy didn't attack me), standing still and trying to block to avoid AoO, finally tidal hands and enemy rolled a one so felt great. With nearly any other roll it would have been much less enjoyable I think. Fourth(boss) fight was brutal, put up aura then was downed before second turn. Group basically TPKd if not for GM allowing sly player idea to work, so poorly made fight that doesn't really reflect anything. I like the things I can do, but so far feels like I'm fighting against handcuffs to do them. I can't start with my aura or an aoe and then raise shield, so I'm rather squishy as a con/str based character. Hard to decide to block first attack that hits you and thus lose the shield protection that might deflect other attacks.
In a mostly ranged group, so my damage shouldn't feel low, but with at least one gun user critting per combat or the ranger swapping to a reach weapon, it does feel a bit underwhelming so far.
If those actions are the normal hostile actions they would take, ie getting in your face and flanking you, or taking cover, then no you are not posing any additional threat that any other ranged character wouldn't do better.
Aoe only matters of you are reducing the number of hits your martials need to kill things. If your Martials need 4 strikes to down something before and after your aoe, then you did nothing.
Answer is ask your GM.
Being able to take a shielded tome into a situation where a shield would be suspect is not useless. Combine this with spirit sheath and your magus is fully prepared for combat while not appearing to be.This is a pretty niche benefit and feels more like for GM tools than anything. Players aren't very likely to build towards always looking like they are helpless just to trick hapless fools or infiltrate neutral zones undetected. Unless that's the flavor of your adventure, or you get captured, that's a trope that happens a lot. Or your blending into a high society event, or trying to avoid suspicion, or doing a diplomatic mission, etc. It might not be your groups kinda thing, but I always prefer my characters to either look threatening even without gear, or to look like a commoner who can Shazam.
Only Eidolons get to make skill checks or do anything outside of combat at the same time as their summoner because of Act Together, minions take your action to do a thing so it's either you go or they do.
Like everything, we just ground it down with brute force, was very frustrating and not fun to be told you have to roll a 20 in a specific skill (only one of us had trained or above in) or damage keeps incoming. Would love to hear how your battles go, we just finished book 2 last night. Thought we had a challenge with a rather large enemy but a fighter crit followed by rogue critting disintegrate put that hope down.
Ever since AD&D I always start on page one and go to the end, paying less attention to less interesting parts or power/feat lists that I will go over when making a character that uses such things. I've always had the mindset of, I paid money for this, I best get the most use out of it by at least letting it inspire my creativity even if I don't ever get to use it in a game.
This to me is what the sorcerer should be. Not just other wizard that's spontaneous with a little other flavor, I've always hated that. Really go deep into the awakening your blood aspect of it. You should get the associated heritage feat (if one exists) for your type and gain access to those feats (perhaps even earlier) and eventually end up becoming as close to a full blooded version of that creature as you can. Fiend, celestial, azata, dragon, ooze, aberration, fey, etc.All the options we have for such now, archetypes and heritages, are significantly hampered by the fact you can pair them with any class. There's lots of different transformation tropes to be filled, I prefer one that focuses on one creature and permanently becoming that thing. Hopefully some day we could see something that focuses on that.
I love FA. I think talking about what might be too powerful is rather subjective. Nothing really breaks the system other then some extreme edge cases, and even then there's only so much you can do. There's several layers of power prevention, so even if you dual class and FA there's still a limit on what you can do. The combos that become too much are obvious things you can avoid.
AoA was rough because there were custom made or upleveled creatures that just broke every sense of balance that you suddenly get punched in the face. Six attacks at -2, two action aoe damage every round in confined spaces, regen that's turned off by a rather rare damage type, they aren't bosses either so they come in packs. AV was alright, not a fan of dungeons and didn't enjoy my character. FotRP is great so far, a bit easy but fun if you like making friends by fighting them.
I'm wondering if anyone else is finding danger island far too easy? My group started with 5 people going through AV and we lost one fight and nearly died 2 other times. We lost our cleric and I swapped from swashbuckler to a druid for FotRP. For most of these fights, our fighter and paladin could handle them without the rogue and I. I accept that our fighters build puts him way above the power most are going to have but is that enough to just break these encounters? We went up against both a Dragon and legendary reptile, these were both four or five levels above us and neither lasted 2 whole rounds. First one I cast haste on the rogue, who missed all his attacks, so neither of us did anything for that fight, the second I wild shaped and moved and that's it. Our GM has started adding in extra enemies but it doesn't really seem to matter, against two 8 enemy groups that were level -1 or -2 I was able to do some nice aoe damage but still the only damage done to the group was against the rogue and I, the fighter and paladin just cut through everything that comes up to them and they mitigate nearly all damage to them. So I'm wondering if most of these fights are soft ball stuff compared to things like AV and AoA? Or is having martials that can easily keep frightened 2 and flat footed on their targets just force multipliers that trivialize most encounters? Are the other books more difficult or should I let my GM know he's going to have to scale every fight we do up? On that note won't we eventually level faster if we are fighting harder/more opponents and thus run into more trouble? So far I think I love these bigger fights against larger groups, I don't know how many my GM is adding to these fights, but they are far more enjoyable then anything in AV or the later half of AoA that I played.
The AC doesn't include proficiency or magic items as you level, so it will just keep getting farther and farther behind. Also the damage is a big deal as every time the rest of the group gets better striking runes, you fall behind, as well as weapon specialization. So forms don't scale well offensively or defensively without being heightened.
Most of those negatives are actually positives.
I got to level 18 with the updated playtest, it was good but had some issues.
With free archetype bard you are almost a better bard in every way. Better economy to inspire/dirge while still being a capable martial.
If all your doing is trying to be a bulldozer, then I can see how it's less effective then a fighter, but then so is just about everything else. You can build to have interesting and effective options for when you need them.
TBH I never liked halflings since I don't know what a ling is.Well, as someone said upthread, a type of fish is one meaning of the word "ling", but the suffix "-ling" is a diminutive, so a halfling is a small half. :-) So, like a quarter then? Or a 5/12ths sort of situation?
The number of Kobold characters I play might drop significantly once dragons come out, but going from 60% down to 30% and still being in second place says a lot.
More defenders.
As someone who tends to exclusively play reptilian characters, not having half dragons is rough, the idea that they are staying away from it because it is or was popular in D&D (and poorly balanced), sounds dumb to me. Like losing money on something a modest number of people would make use of sort of dumb. Nevermind not getting serpentfolk or other options, yet. Hmmm, Luis has the couatle stuff done, was it him that mentioned in one of the live stream about maybe getting it as a heritage? That got my hopes up. Couatles are my second favorite thing right after dragons but very little has ever been done with them. The one in grand bazaar is super cute. Would love to see them fleshed out in the cosmology and such.
Nearly all adventurers are killers, that's just how adventuring works. If your killer can't figure out how to be good, maybe don't play a champion. Depending on your God and personal view you might look into stealing or destroying a slavers business to get the slaves free, or leave a trail of bodies to let everyone know what happens to slavers(even if guards get involved, you might try to talk them down but you will let them know that you won't be stopped by those who enforce tyrannical laws). The only time a champion will not act on something they view as wrong is when they don't think they could succeed, or if a greater objective is more pressing. Champions are beacons of light and faith, they are the ones who act when no one else can or will. Simply put, slavery is evil, even if it's lawful. You are bound by your code to stop evil any way you can.
Played/ran several AD&D and 3.5 modules and hated them. Have been in two AP's and they are alright, so long as you force yourself into the mindset of "this is the adventure we are doing, stick to it."
I would prefer a GM who has the drive to invent and change things, who reads lots of fantasy books and has looked over a lot of AP's and modules to get inspired to make things of their own and perhaps supplement from different sources in areas they aren't as confident in.
Bard is great for summoners, free dirge or inspire. Worked well for me in AoA. Rogue for skills is iffy, I made a build for it and your just getting a couple master level skills and some good extra skill feats. Bard for versatile performance gives you two legendary skills for the action you would use those skills most for. Also synethesia and more usable wands as well, summoner's should carry lots of wands.
If your DM wasn't giving your party loot that was at least useful to them in some way, they failed that part of their job. Same holds true today, when running a game you should find interesting and useful gear for your group, nothing's changed in that department. One of the issues today is there aren't enough interesting gear pieces with cool effects, not math bonuses, especially for a lot of niche builds. Hopefully we get there, until then make up your own gear as you would have in AD&D.
Great to see interaction between summoner and Eidolon. Maybe a little bit too heavy on the showing game rules for my tastes, but loved this a lot.
Dragons, kobolds and dwarves living together. Tying dwarves to dragons and bringing in their similar interests to kobolds is fantastic. I've never been closer to not disliking dwarves.
I used lore arcana for initiative in the last fight even though I'm untrained and have +0 int, as part of an encounter I was reading a book when the fight broke out and so I told the GM, I'm working on the book, not paying attention so I'll just roll lore. I got a 2 and it fit perfectly.
My issue with official settings is you let players loose in it, then you either know a lot about the setting so they can explore it, or you don't. Then you either make stuff up and the players are fine because they don't know anything about the setting, or you have problems. So to me it's better to just make your own stuff up at that point. Then the players can help building and changing things. My issue there is I'm more big concept and less detail oriented, so my personal setting I'm working on bogs down when I make metropolitan cities as there's just too many things I want to put in them.
I started playing D&D when I was 7, being a hero and taking out monsters. The idea that I was too young to do so sorta feels like toxic gatekeeper sorta mentality, even if it's coming from a good place it sounds overprotective and stiffling. Being able to have a character that has agency in their world can be a huge thing for a kid who has none, especially when you have a lot of negative things in your life. Love this background, I just wish it fleshed out how the Eidolon thinks and interacts with others a bit more. Can't wait to get bits of her interacting with other iconics.
I wish I found enough good things in 5e to want to revise it. I'll have to settle with a dozen plus optional and homebrew rules and systems tacked into PF2.
If you want less restrictions wouldn't a CG champion suit you better?
|
