Owen Hahn's page

Just to let you guys know, the designers are all off for a long holiday weekend. I came in for a partial day today specifically to reply to this thread just in case, but I'm not going to be watching it as closely from now on. For all other Pathfinder fans from the USA, have a great Independence day!

Thank you for coming in and answering questions!

Jinjifra wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Jinjifra wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Bruno Mares wrote:

Snares/traps can be an ok/nice/interesting option, but as a permanent/common/fixed/main class feature, you're doing totally wrong...

They are a nice/interesting option. They are not a fixed class feature.

How does the DC work for the snares? You mentioned that quick snares have a lower DC and that a ranger can use a scaling DC instead of the fixed one for their traps.

Thanks for answering all of our questions!

It depends; is this just some random guy or gal who spent a single skill feat on snares, or is this a ranger who's actually sinking class feats into snares? For the former, you use the DC in the snare, but for the latter, you can use a strong scaling DC. The lower DC is for the no-cost snares; setting them quickly does not decrease the DC.

Oh okay, that sounds pretty solid. Is it a two or three feat investment to be able to quickly set snares at the scaling DC? IT seems like if you are focusing on it you could be build a pretty interesting character based around traps.

And this is how I would build my Ranger for the playtest. I've never been big on Animal Companions or Ranger Spells, so this is definitely what my Ranger will be investing in. Also, I want to see if snares suck or are awesome, since, well, isn't that the kind of thing that the playtest is for?

The idea of a long range scout that drops traps sounds like a interesting concept to me too. It will be fun to see if you can pull it off.

Jinjifra wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Bruno Mares wrote:

Snares/traps can be an ok/nice/interesting option, but as a permanent/common/fixed/main class feature, you're doing totally wrong...

They are a nice/interesting option. They are not a fixed class feature.

How does the DC work for the snares? You mentioned that quick snares have a lower DC and that a ranger can use a scaling DC instead of the fixed one for their traps.

Thanks for answering all of our questions!

It depends; is this just some random guy or gal who spent a single skill feat on snares, or is this a ranger who's actually sinking class feats into snares? For the former, you use the DC in the snare, but for the latter, you can use a strong scaling DC. The lower DC is for the no-cost snares; setting them quickly does not decrease the DC.

Oh okay, that sounds pretty solid. Is it a two or three feat investment to be able to quickly set snares at the scaling DC? IT seems like if you are focusing on it you could be build a pretty interesting character based around traps.

Sad that Wand weren't shown

Also, why weapons get a free pass on investment?

Probably to not screw over TWP fighters or make it feasible to have multiple weapons on you in to overcome DR

Mark Seifter wrote:

Malk_Content wrote:

I assume part of the "Indestructible" shield is that it is indestructible.

This is a good assumption. And that's a big perk in terms of how you can use the shield. If you have the feat Captain Morgan mentioned, that's a worry-free -13 damage twice per round, as many rounds as you need without a breather to repair it (by that level, you can probably fix it in a matter of seconds, but a few rounds is more than you can afford in combat). You could also have a significantly higher hardness (up to around 25, which is quite a substantial reduction), but then you risk taking dents and the shield being broken if the fight drags on or you take a lot of hits.

It does seem a little counter-intuitive that the indestructible shield has less hardness than a shield you can destroy. I get why it might be necessary for balance purposes, though.

I Guess from a physics perspective it makes sense that an indestructible shield would hurt you more. Less of the energy of the blow is getting absorbed by the shield. Kind of like the crumble zone on a car.

I will playtest these rules - I may even come to like the system, but from all evidence presented this really seems like a whole lot of rules and system for something that could be solved by simply saying 'you can no longer buy magic items'.

I think you would also have to say you can no longer craft magic items as well. Which a lot of people like to do.

In all honesty I'm looking forward to some of the old prestige classes getting reborn in a way where they don't completely wreck your progression of you main class. I feel like Horizon Walker, Shadow Dancer, Dragon Disciple, etc could be really new and interesting

Stunning Fist should be renamed because its titular effect occurs only on a critical hit/crit save fail combo. I understand the legacy aspect of keeping the name, but imagine new monk players discovering how rarely it actually lives up to its name.

Does stunning fist look like it has some weird potential now? It looks like you can use it all day, but costs 2 AP and probably wont' stun. I was not impressed on the first glance then I realized that with flurry of blows being two attacks for 1 AP and can be used any point in your turn means if you want to just stand there and slug it out you can get three attacks at 0/ -2/ -6 somewhat reliably, make any rogue in your party very happy, and possibly set up a much nastier debuff.

I think the should do a hard curve and go full Franciscan. Just copying books, drawing stuff in the margins, nailing large numbers of thesis to doors, just go the full nine yards on em.

Jinjifra wrote:

How does the new double slice compare to the new power attack? They both seem pretty similar where power attack is 2 actions for 2X damage dice + str mod and double slice is 2 actions for weapon 1 dice + weapon 2 dice + 2X(?) Str mod. Am I missing anything there?

And double the chance for a crit. Yes, PA and two-handing really are looking like losers here.

Well the 2 handers get 1.5X str and have higher damage dice than anything you can dual wield with so I bet the match comes out pretty close.

I'm surprised no has brought up the changes in how weapons works. So now the weapon stats matter beyond crit range and threshold.

I'm pretty sure everything you need is in here Blood of the Moon

How do crossbows take any less expense in manufacturing and care? I will grant perhaps less training. Mass combat is also not a great comparison, as Pathfinder and its predecessor are crude simulations of skirmishing not wars. A lord or huntsman could be proficient in a bow and use it for hunting, bows have been for hunting and warfare since the Middle Paleolithic.

The decline of the archer in Europe may be attributable to other factors, like their lack of efficacy on armoured opponents, as they remained in wide scale use until over taken by gun powder weapons. Early gun powder weapons being much more susceptible to environmental conditions.

Actually building a long bow isn't that hard but the historical ones had a draw weight of 80 - 110 pounds, and the training to be able to use one was so intense that when they find the graves of longbow men the skeletons are deforned from the force of having to continuously pull the bow back. There is a famous quote by Edward the III "to train a longbowman start with his grandfather". The longbow was a more efficient weapon than the musket in terms of range and armor piercing it was just so hard to use that muskets took over. So going off of history it makes a lot of sense as an exotic weapon.

On the other hand if go by fiction, everyone who has ever set foot in a forest uses a longbow. I would say pathfinder is much more modeled after fiction than reality so it makes sense that longbows aren't exotic.

You might want to check this thread as well

Hunter Class (ACG) Teaching His Animal Companion Skirmisher Tricks???

Owen K. C. Stephens popped in and made a few good comments.

Here is a revised version of the text I came up with based on Owen's comments. It's by no means official but it's pretty good until the official ACG errata comes out

Animal Companion (Ex):
A hunter may teach her companion hunter’s tricks from the skirmisher ranger archetype (Pathfinder RPG Advanced Player’s Guide 128) instead of standard tricks. In this case, the animal companion is considered to be the 'ranger' for purposes of the trick. The animal companion can use such tricks a total number of times per day equal to 1/2 the animal companion's HD + its Wisdom bonus (if any). Note that some skirmisher hunter’s tricks are not suitable for animal companions.

I could see that being the final ruling but I really hope it isn't. At the cost of a trick slot and considering that most companions don't have very good wisdom mods, it would make the ability pretty bad.

Unlimited can get a little absurd though with every attack adding four effects.

I hope it falls something along the lines of unlimited but you can only use one trick per turn, but maybe that's just because I like the hunter a lot as a class.