Porridge's page

It's not nearly as concerning as the archetype, I agree; it breaks a far less integral part of the game. But 1d8+d8/2lvls on yourself every round is out of line with every other available option. It needs a 10 minute cooldown.

This is especially noticeable at lower levels, when fewer healing options are online and a simple treat wounds check might have a 1 hour cooldown (no continual recovery!) and fail to bring you back to full.

The worst abuse case is a party of nothing but exemplars with scar of the survivor, since they can heal up after every combat in less than a minute without any investment in alternative means of healing. That's more than a little off. Sure, it's not something I'd think you'd /want/ to do, necessarily, but the fact you can bothers me.

Although I largely agree with those who think out of combat healing isn't a big deal, it does seem like it's supposed to be one of the things that cuts down on the "buff like crazy and then charge through encounters" style of play prevalent in PF1. I.e., the duration of most buffs is not short enough that they'll expire by the time you're healed up and ready to move on. But if you can heal yourselves up to full in a couple rounds, then that style of play threatens to return...

So, while not a huge deal, I agree that this seems like something they should add a timer to.

If you don't want to go super complex (Vance and Kerenshara's rules), and don't want to just handwave it, you might consider an intermediate option like these homebrew rules from TALlama:

Domainkeeper

They radically simplify the kingdom building process, and make things a lot less onerous on the GM (and come with a JavaScript implementation).

"On basic enviromental protections:

Some armors do this through an environmental field (a minor force field specially tuned to protect from a vacuum that doesn’t reduce damage from attacks), while others can be closed with helmets and airtight seals. While using your armor’s environmental protections, your armor can protect you from the dangerous environmental effects of a vacuum and can facilitate self-contained breathing. This allows you to survive and breathe while within a vacuum or a submerged area of non-damaging liquid. This protection doesn’t protect you from smoke inhalation, inhaled poisons, thick or thin atmospheres, toxic atmospheres, or corrosive atmospheres."

Thin atmospheres... you know what a vacuum is.. airtight.. if a O2 molecule can't slip through then how is a complete chemical poison compound. Self contained breathing... you mean like fire fighters wear to not die from smoke inhalation.

Corrosive is the only one that makes sense at least for a physical protection as it would attack said airtight seals.

One of the most disappointing features of SF1 for me was how difficult the default environmental protections made it to make "struggle against the environment" adventures. Especially since this is a common trope in sci-fi.

So you can add me to the list of people hoping to see the default environmental protections minimized/cut down. I'd much prefer these show up as (1) additional equipment that has an opportunity cost, and so isn't ubiquitous, and (2) things that are relatively specialized (perhaps one upgrade protects from extreme heat, a different one protects from extreme cold, a third protects against extreme pressure, etc). This would make adventures with "struggle against the environment" features much more do-able.

EDIT: And to the extent to which default environmental protections are kept, I hope they shorten the duration. E.g., if armor comes with (lvl minutes) of environmental protections, then it's something you generally keep off and only turn on during emergencies. But if all armor comes with multiple hours or days of environmental protections, then it's effectively removed as a plot point for GMs.

I'm still waiting for the charge to finish going through on my credit card myself.

Yeah, me too.

One of the minor problems you mention in the document is that the system doesn't really provide any incentive to build additional settlements.

In the document you suggest that RP reasons might suffice to justify building further settlements. But for those who would like there to be a mechanical benefit as well, what options for introducing such an incentive have you considered?

Mark Seifter did a recent poll of people's favorite PF2 class, and the Kineticist was very popular (third favorite class overall):

Favorite Class Poll

It's unlikely that Paizo is going to remove one of their most popular classes.

Let's get this out of the way. While I can certainly see some legends being intimately associated with a worn or wielded object, I find it thematically limiting, uncomfortably similar to the Thaumaturges, and running counter to the idea of being essentially a godling.

The first idea that came to mind when I heard of this class was to play a Dragon Exemplar, and I always play dragons to have as little dependence on gear of any kind as possible. The second idea, after hearing about Fishing from the Fall's Edge, was to play as an Awakened Bear, with the similar goal of being a paragon of it's kind which naturally lends itself toward reduced thematic dependence on items.

Should there perhaps be an option to allow you to choose 3 Body icons to switch your power between, or something along those lines?

Thoughts?

FWIW, I had the same reaction. Although there are plenty of mechanical differences, it's uncomfortable similar to the Thaumaturge thematically-speaking. And a lot of the Exemplar ideas that I want to try out don't fit well with the idea that they're item-dependent.

I like your suggestion though, of having something like body-part-options. Or perhaps each ikon might itself be associated with both an item and a body part, and you can choose which one gets imbued with your power?

Something like this would be nice to have thematically. And since it doesn't really make many *mechanical* demands on what the class is like, it seems like a relatively easy change to make.

Here's hoping something like this makes it into the final version!

I actually had the opportunity to help edit and develop Ultimate Rulership a bit.

It has a lot of great ideas, I plan on posting a thread with my initial thoughts next week.

I also plan on doing some Kingdom Simulation using it but that will take a while.

Sweet. Looking forward to seeing your thoughts!

Ok I've gotten all my stuff organized and shared it with Legendary games.

Over 21 pages of notes, clarifications needed, and simple corrections for Ultimate Rulership 2e.

I'm looking forward to UR being as awesome as possible!

So I got an email noting that the final PDF for the Ultimate Rulership 2e book was now available. How does it look to you now?

Nice guide!

One typo: Tremor requires a basic Fortitude save, not a basic Reflex save.

This is actually one of the nice features of it - most impulses target Reflex saves, so Tremor offers you the option of targeting Fort saves when something has lower Fort saves than Reflex saves.

There will be a print option, I backed the kickstarter for both PDF and Print.

I have the PDF now but I'm very underwhelmed by it.

It's barely useable.

I'm very interested in hearing more. Any more details you'd mind sharing about the pros/cons of the supplement?

(I've backed it too, but I haven't familiarized myself well-enough with the original rules to evaluate its merits.)

I'd like the Lore skill you get from your background to automatically scale like the skill from the Additional Lore skill feat.

One avenue that should be explored in this regard is simply enlarging the base pool of skills/actions that can trigger things like panache. The gunslinger has the same problem - the pistolero basically has a non-repeatable special reload and vanguard can only shove and nothing else. Adding things like Bon Mot via Diplomacy to Raconteur's Reload or the option to Trip to Clear a Path would do a lot. Sorry about always bringing the gunslinger into this, but it just the class I know the best ^^

I really like this idea. That would add a lot of potential variation to the gunslinger "loops".

On alchemists:

I think a lot of people fixate on the power curve; which is fair; but my biggest gripes with the class (having played it since the game released in a long term campaign 1-15 so far) are:

...

So, what I can conclude is that:
-Early game alchemists need zero cost or renewable resources to do cool things. The difference was night and day before and after perpetual alchemy.
-Due to distributing item bonuses, the alchemists main buffing outlet feels like a treadmill that has no progression through the game. When my table switched over to ABP, alchemical elixirs and the like got homebrewed into becoming status bonuses, which gave an immediate sense of progression; and my allies were a lot more happy to take the mutagens.
-All mutagens should have a built in "off switch"; even if it's just being dismissable; but preferably more like the drakeheart mutagen. Serene Mutagen having something like a "if your roll perception for initiative, roll twice, take the better result" and Cognative Mutagen being like a free action recall knowledge would make these mutagens a lot more useful since you're no longer risking making yourself terrible in combat by taking them.
-The alchemist needs more items that have a wow factor. Right now, they don't have much in the vein of "make your table cheer because you impacted the course of battle in a very dramatic and cool way"
-late game alchemists stuggle with accuracy; with the before mentioned houserule making my quicksilver mutagens status bonuses, my accuracy actually feels pretty good, but I know I would definately be stuggling under the normal rules. Alchemical Alacrity just doesn't work as it stands; and imo should either be turned into making Quick Alchemy a free action or just giving the people what they want and making it master weapon proficiency

I think this is probably the clearest and most level-headed assessment of the State of the Alchemist that I've seen. Kudos!

Really hoping they add optional 3-action economy rules. One of the best in the PF1 Unchained book. Bring it to Starfinder too!

To re-orient a bit:

Suppose I want to create a new magic item for my PCs that grants some underwater abilities, including water breathing and a swim speed. What price and level should it have? We're directed to look at existing items, and use those as our guide. But in this case it's not clear which items to look at.

I haven't finished it yet, but I'm loving Impossible Lands. Great ancestries, with enough page count to make them rich and exciting options; fantastic adventuring locations with a radically different feel from anything else you'll find in the Inner Sea; just all-around great stuff.

I think it's neck-in-neck with the Mwangi Expanse book for my favorite book in the Lost Omens line.

For those of us who already supported the KS for Ultimate Kingdoms, is this the same version? That is, you have not (yet) revised Ultimate Kingdoms for 2nd edition of the Kingmaker campaign, have you?

Thanks, and good luck!
Franklin

It looks like the book called "Ultimate Kingdoms" book is the same PF1/5e book as before.

But one of the add ons is the "Ultimate Rulership" book, which is described as the book that expands upon the PF2 kingdom/mass combat rules.

this class seems to want to be mobile a lot of its impulses are centered on the kineticist and ideally you want to be bouncing around the map to get into position however they don't have the action economy to do this at all, their offensive overflow impulses are all at least 2+1 actions leading to awkward gaps after you reposition since you have a remarkable lack of one action options leaving you nothing to do but blast, which leads us to the second problem.

This is a good point. It's nice to have class design make use of the three action economy, which motivates adding the extra action taxes to the class. But a class that focuses on AOE effects is *already* engaging well with the three action economy by heavily incentivizing spending an action to move before unleashing an AOE.

(This also makes it clear that, as is, cone or line AOEs are a lot less attractive to kineticists then "place a burst wherever you want" AOEs. The former almost always require movement to make work, while the latter generally will not.)

I think one of things that makes combination weapons feel bad in a lot of games (like mine) is the popularity of the ABP optional rules. Since that essentially removes the rune cost for having multiple weapons, it eliminates the big thing combination weapons have going for them.

@Michael Sayre: For people using ABP, do you have any thoughts about what a good house rule might be to make combination weapons more attractive? (Perhaps making the switch between ranged and melee modes a free action that doesn't have the manipulate trait?)

I'd recommend you use color coding to rank various options like many guides do. Makes it easier to read. Love the effort put into this.

I'll second this request. It makes guides much easier to read!

Porridge wrote:

AlastarOG wrote:

Tier 1

Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better or on par with classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels.

According to this, a necessary condition for being a Tier 1 class is "often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player". I don't know of any class in PF2 that can often solve level-appropriate encounters solo, to say nothing of solving them with a single ability and little thought. That by itself would seem to ensure that no PF2 class is Tier 1.

Climbing a harsh cliff can be done with dimension door.

I cleared out an entire obstacle in a chase scene by casting stinking cloud in a crowd to disperse it, no roll needed.

Gravity Well cast twice near a cliff can solve an encounter immediately.

Casting sending for reinforcements, depending on the setting, can effectively nullify an encounter (My annoying bard with sending in Agents of edgewatch proved that often enough!)

Casting locate to find the important thingamagig for this part of the adventure can invalidate the need for an entire sequence that the GM had planned.

If you broaden encounter to not only narrowly encompass combat, then that premise holds true.

I think we're reading the "Tier 1" description differently.

Tier 1

...Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player...

I take the canonical examples of this to be the many 1-trick pony builds of PF1. For example, the uber-grapple monk build who just grapples and pins every other opponent, or the slumber-hex Witch, who puts them asleep for a coup de grace, etc. These are builds with one mechanical trick that can dominate many encounters, even if the players are playing on auto-pilot and barely paying attention.

I agree that in PF2 there are some non-combat encounters that clever players can solve with the appropriate spell (or alchemical tool). But this isn't a case where players who are barely paying attention can dominate many encounters using the same mechanical trick over and over again.

Tier 1

Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better or on par with classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels.

According to this, a necessary condition for being a Tier 1 class is "often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player". I don't know of any class in PF2 that can often solve level-appropriate encounters solo, to say nothing of solving them with a single ability and little thought. That by itself would seem to ensure that no PF2 class is Tier 1.

I’m hoping for some extra Gadgets. It would be great to get an expansion of the Inventor options.

It’s also my understanding that 2e doesn’t have any adventure paths widely regarded to be straight-up D-tier the same way 1e did with things like Second Darkness, Serpent’s Skull, or Council of Thieves.

Though the first book of Serpent's Skull was really good - probably my favorite first book of any AP.

The party needs another martial (to flank with the thief), and a tank of some kind. So a Champion would be the natural choice. (As well as an excellent class to pick for this AP.)

Top 3:

Gunslinger
Swashbuckler
Magus

Bottom 3:

Alchemist
Witch
Oracle

I tend to like classes that require you to cleverly juggle your action economy, and which feel really effective when you do.

I tend dislike classes which seem to have brute drawbacks you can't cleverly work around, or classes which tend to seem like strict downgrades compared of other classes.

CaffeinatedNinja wrote:

It works with a Jezail even in 2handed mode because it is technically a 1handed firearm.

That's not how it works. Handedness in PF2 is determined by the number of hands being used to wield the weapon. So if you're using a jezail in two hands, it's a two-handed weapon and you can't use any options that require you to be using a firearm one-handed until you're back to wielding it in one hand. If you use a dagger in two hands, it's a two-handed weapon for the purposes of feats and abilities that require a two-handed weapon, as laid out on pages 279-280 of the CRB. When determining the handedness of a weapon, the two questions are just "What's the minimum number of hands used to wield this" and "How many hands am I currently using to wield it?"

Very helpful clarification!

By the way, should we read this as clarifying whether a pistolero can draw a Jezail when they roll initiative (Ten Paces), and be ready to use it 2-handed? (A) The minimum number of hands you need is 1, and (B) the number of hands you’re using when you activate Ten Paces is 0… which would suggest you can?

Or perhaps the two clauses you mentioned don’t settle this case, since the question isn’t whether you can *draw* it (you can, since it’s a 0/1 handed weapon according to the above confitions), but whether you can choose to come to be holding it in its 2-handed stance…

The smallest mech frames (which are Huge) allow for 1-2 pilots. So piloting one solo is definitely an option.

A Mechanic with the Experimental Armor Prototype alternate class feature would be my first guess.

If you really wanted to hit the "overwhelmingly powerful" angle, you could use the Starfinder Mech rules, and stat out the Glitter Boy as a kind of mech. But I think the smallest mechs are Huge, whereas the Glitter Boy seems like it'd only be Large.

Very nice guide!

It might be worth mentioning the Intuitive Cooperation and Helpful Halfling feats for the Halfing Ancestry, since this is a pretty nice boost for Aid-focused Wit Swashbucklers. (I'd also be inclined to make Halflings blue for Wit Swashbucklers.)

Will there be any changes/revisions to the AP? (Like in the Rise of the Runelords and Curse of the Crimson Throne compilations?)

My five favorite depictions were:

The Devourer
Oras
Nyarlathotep
Pharasma
Triune

With Eloritu getting an honorable mention.

There weren't any depictions that I hated, though the art for Iomedae and Sarenrae looked a little funny to my eye.

Yeah, I love the cantrips in Galactic Magic - Adhere, Misfire, and Stumble (and maaaaybe Psychokinetic Shove?) do a lot to make a non-weapon focused spellcaster a viable option.

I'll second the Champion (Paladin or Redeemer) suggestion. Since you have a relatively squishy party, a Champion is a great tank to hold the front line. It's also a great way to protect other members of the party (with your champion reaction). And a number of the Champion feats work particularly well in this AP. Finally, it adds a lot of value by providing your party with a permanent source of between encounter healing (lay on hands).

EDIT: I don't want to spoil anything, but I'll flag that Blade Ally is what I'd recommend for this AP - it's really, really useful.

Does Spell Sergeant or any of the other methods of improving spell damage not work with scaling cantrips?

That's a good question. If you *did* allow the Spell Sergeant bonus to stack with the scaling cantrip damage, though it looks like a Spell Sergeant's cantrip damage would be almost exactly the same as a Longarms weapon of the same level. (Running some quick numbers against Laser Rifles, the cantrip would be 1 point ahead at L6, 1 point ahead at L9, 1.5 points behind at L13, and 0 points ahead at L17.)

So that looks pretty balanced, actually.

Here's another way to assess the scaling cantrip option, comparing them directly to pistols. Using the standard line of laser pistols as our point of comparison for EAC cantrips, we find that:

Level 1-5: Pistol (Azimuth) is ahead by 1 point (on average).
Level 6: Pistol (Corona) is ahead by 3.5 points (on average).
Level 7-8: Pistol (Corona) is ahead by 0 points (on average).
Level 9: Pistol (Aphelion) is ahead by 2.5 points (on average).
Level 10-11: Pistol (Aphelion) is ahead by 0 points (on average).
Level 12: Pistol (Perihelion) is ahead by 2.5 points (on average).
Level 13: Pistol (Perihelion) is ahead by 0 points (on average).
Level 14: Pistol (Parallax) is ahead by 2.5 points (on average).
Level 15-16: Pistol (Parallax) is ahead by 0 points (on average).
Level 17-18: Pistol (Zenith) is ahead by 2.5 points (on average).
Level 19-20: Pistol (Zenith) is ahead by -2.5 points (on average).

So the scaling cantrip is around 0-2.5 points of damage behind the corresponding laser pistol for pretty much one's entire career. Given that laser pistols are expensive and cantrips are free, this seems like pretty good scaling to me.

Aaron shanks said that it's fake on a Reddit thread.

Link here.

Xenocrat wrote:

I thought the downside to accessing the scaling cantrips was that they're still not good enough to replace a pistol?

That's unfortunate.

Two thoughts about the cantrip option.

1. Unlike on-level pistols, they're free. So if you stick to cantrips, you get a huge chunk of change you can spend on other things.

2. The damage is pretty comparable to that of a Vanguard taking the Entropic Shot alternate class feature (which makes the entropic strike ranged). Focusing on EAC-targeting cantrips, their damage compares as follows:

Levels 1-4: Vanguard's Entropic Shot is ahead by 0 points
Level 5: Vanguard's Entropic Shot is ahead by 1 point (on average)
Level 6: Vanguard's Entropic Shot is ahead by 4.5 points (on average)
Levels 7-8: Vanguard's Entropic Shot is ahead by 2 points (on average)
Level 9: Vanguard's Entropic Shot is ahead by 5.5 points (on average)
Level 10-11: Vanguard's Entropic Shot is ahead by 3 points (on average)
Level 12: Vanguard's Entropic Shot is ahead by 6.5 points (on average)

So it's only a smidge behind the Vanguard's Entropic Shot, and the Entropic Shot is one of the Vanguard's major class features. All in all, it looks like a viable option to me.

Here are the chapters:

Table of Contents
Preface
1 Prayers for the Living
2 Hymns for the Dead
3 The Grim Crypt
4 Lands of the Dead
5 March of the Dead
Appendix

I'll show an image of the ToC in Paizo LIVE in late February as motivation to subscribe. :)

"March of the Dead".

That's not ominous at all...

StarlingSweeter wrote:

Are equipment loadouts/character build examples useful to you? Do you like it when guides go through all published character options (like ancestries and backgrounds) or do you prefer they give some generalizations to keep it readable?

Only include the ones that are noteworthy. Equipment/Ancestry/etc that has a specific synergy (or non-synergy) with the class. Especially ones that may not be obvious. For example pointing out that Barbarian doesn't do well with mounted combat (Rage + Command an animal don't mesh well), or that Monk Monastic Weaponry, Bo Staff, and Tangled Forest Stance make a useful combination.

I'll echo Castilliano and breithauptclan here, and say that guides are definitely one place where "less is more" can apply. If a guide spends a couple pages focusing on ancestries that mesh well with the class I'll skim through the section for interesting suggestions; if it spends 40 pages covering every ancestry I'll skip it entirely.

I love pretty much every entry in this book.

But Ainamuuren might be my favorite. It just lends itself so naturally to a free-archetype 20-level campaign, where players get the Pactbound Initiate archetype as they agree to share the burden of the pact with the Ainamuuren. So many ways to go with this, from helping in low-level ways (finding other volunteers, helping to search for others of their species, keeping their existence and location hidden from potentially nefarious powers) and high-level ways (confronting high level agents seeking to break the pact and unleash the evil within, or even facing the evil itself).

Congratulations Mark!

And as sad as I am that Mark is leaving Paizo, this sort of thing is good for people working in the industry. The more talent poaching via salary increases goes on, the higher the expected pay for the people who work there.

My apologies. I didn't realize how long that ended up being.

As a side, I just had a thought. Would anyone else be interested in seeing this sort of book continued, but about specific groups of monsters? They could do a book themed around say Dragons or undead, and give detailed information on a number of the most well known examples alongside heavy lore. And I don't mean simply your run of the mill examples, but incredibly unique or powerful creatures, or those bearing names or heavy ties to Golarions lore.

Some examples could be Daughters of Urgathoa in an undead book, or Daralathxl, Sixth King of the Five Kings Mountains in a dragon book. And the dragon book wouldn't be restricted to just true Dragons, but draconic creatures in general.

Sort of a spiritual successor to books like Undead Revisited or Dragons Unleashed.

I would!

This book was fantastic. I'll just repeat what I said in the product thread:

Wow. I was not expecting to like this book as nearly as much as I did. I thought this might be a mini-bestiary, or something. I didn't expect 20 sketches for homebrew APs! Mix that with amazing, evocative descriptions, juicy stat blocks, and some interesting player options, and you get an amazing book. My favorite "short" Lost Omens books so far.

Kudos to the authors, developers, editors, and everyone else involved!

keftiu wrote:

Mewzard wrote:

Out of curiosity, what's the highest CR Monster in the book?

Fafnheir is level 24.

Thanks!

Guess my dream of some horrifying CR30 monstrosity will have to wait.

Any Great Wyrms yet? Last I saw, we were still peaking with Ancient Dragons.

Well, there is an entry for a class of monsters too powerful to get stats (the book flatly states that level 15-20 characters aren't powerful enough to deal with them)...

Wow. I was not expecting to like this book as nearly as much as I did. I thought this might be a mini-bestiary, or something. I didn't expect 20 sketches for homebrew APs! Mix that with amazing, evocative descriptions, juicy stat blocks, and some interesting player options, and you get an amazing book. My favorite "short" Lost Omens books so far.

Yes, that’s my reading. If you have Sword and Pistol, the tanged attack part of Stab and Blast won’t provoke.

I really like the Mechfinder rules. A real Battletech feel to it. And I really like how it gives a lot more weight to the size of mechs — it seems like this should be a huge deal, power-level wise, but in the Tech Revolution rules buying a larger mech doesn’t change much. (In fact, it generally seems like a downgrade, power-level-wise.)

Thanks for all the help. With unexpected Sharpshooter available, I might go

2: Unexpected Sharpshooter
4: Lucky Escape
6: Sniper's Aim
8: Unbelievable Luck
10: I meant to do that
12: Chain reaction

Would this be better or would I shoot myself into the foot?

Fake Out is really good. It’s a use for your reaction that you’ll get to use every turn. And it’s a good use. So (IMO) it’s hard to pass up.

(It won’t work if you’re hidden, though, so if you’re planning on being hidden a lot, you can skip it.)