Overworm

PossibleCabbage's page

8,421 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 8,421 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Fundamentally "non-spotlight NPCs just get fewer numbers to track" is just modern RPG design. If the tailor's job is to "make clothes" an "lie about the vampires in the basement" he doesn't really need more than a craft modifier and a deception modifier- if the PCs want to kill him, he's not going to put up a fight. PF1 had the kludge for run of the mill NPCs where, unless the tradesperson was a named NPC, we just referred to some stat block in a NPC codex- implying that most blacksmiths were exactly the same everywhere.

But it's easiest for the GM, in terms of respecting their time, to just limit most NPCs to "write down the numbers which are relevant to their role in the story". All you lose is the illusion that the game mechanics are a perfect simulation of a fantasy world everywhere all at once, but that was never really the case anyway. We see this with thing like the "troop" subtype in PF1.

For meaningful NPCs, we will probably eventually get tool to stat up the Hobgoblin General or the Grand Vizier who is secretly a Urgathoa cultist, etc. as PCs. It's just that their underlings who serve the role of "popcorn" don't require much written down.


Saedar wrote:
The above games are amateurs for heaps of dice. I have 180d6 bricks worth of dice for Mythender alone. It. Is. Glorious.

I just used a computer for my excursion into GURPS Mecha, it's less about "owning dice" because dice are for sale all over, and more about "how long does it take to tally 180d6?"


MaxAstro wrote:
DataLoreRPG wrote:
Another possibility is 13th Age. But its kinda noodly with some rules and you end up using HEAPS of dice.
I don't think you can really accuse a system of using heaps of dice unless you have played a high-level Exalted game. Nothing quite like the feeling of rolling 53d10 for an attack. :P

Nothing's ever going to top GURPS Mecha for piles of dice. But the problem that 13A has is that you will plausibly be asked to roll like 7d8 for damage, and who keeps that many d8s around? Having a bunch of d6s and d10s is reasonable, but d8s?


I would say that the hard and fast rule is that "nothing about a character counts before that character has been played, at which point the character is established."

So you can't rebuild your character before you have played them, this person basically does not exist before you have played them. If you decide "they should be a ranger instead of a fighter" or w/e that's fine, it's just you changing your mind about a character you were going to play. Likewise you can't "pre-craft" stuff before your character pops into the narrative, though I would recommend not allowing crafting to begin with.

But no "Barbarian, retrains as a wizard to craft barbarian gear, then retrains as a Barbarian" should not be allowed. All that is, is just someone trying to game WBL.


Pathfinder 2nd edition gives you a floating ability boost at the ancestry step, so every dwarf is +con/+wis/-cha but you can choose to make them +str, +dex,+int, or just cancel out the cha penalty. I like this model a lot and it seems like backporting it is easy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
We have airships and spaceships on Golarion.

I figure letting locks be as advanced as firearms is a good way to go about it. If Alkenstar can create the equivalent of an 1836 Colt Paterson Revolver (even if it takes a long time and mass production is difficult) then we can have pin and tumbler locks. After all, Alkenstar is going to want to lock up their guns...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I feel like "printing in China no longer saves money" is more of a concern for Paizo than "some forumites are still unhappy" by a considerable margin.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think multiple checks for picking locks makes sense if we're talking about pin an tumbler locks, since you have to set all the pins to the correct height in order to pick the lock.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

So backgrounds now add skill training in a non-lore skill. I guess that makes sense since if your background is "circus acrobat" getting training in circus lore but not acrobatics is pretty odd.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Oddly enough the Kineticist is the class that gets the ability to manifest a fire weasel or lightning hedgehog as a familiar as long as they concentrate which turns into a real elemental or wysp when you take the higher level talent. Elemental Whispers is a 1st level utility talent, so you just have to go 1 level without your water badger.


Squiggit wrote:
You're right. Where the hell is it?

Last I heard the last time Mark brought it up he was told to stop bringing it up.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

In the playtest we had the adopted ancestry feat for the general case of "raised in a culture not your own" but this sort of had the original half orc/elf problem where you are paying a tax on feats in order to play the character you wanted.

So I wonder if that feat shouldn't be better, or if a better version should be available to people for whom that is usually the case.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Elfteiroh wrote:
Just to note that in the final rules, hitting with a ranged spell attack will use your casting ability mod, as it's now a Spell proficiency roll. (And there's no more melee touch attack either, they have been changed to saves)

Most likely one of the reasons for this is that in the playtest charisma was more valuable to clerics than wisdom, so long as you avoided spells which asked for saves.

Like our playtest games had a 16 Dex, 16 Cha, 12 Wis archer cleric in it - it worked out great.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't hate the multiclass dedication stat reqs but I do think they should be 14 and not 16 (or else there should be another floating bonus at chargen.)

Since as it stands it's not possible to be a Dwarf Fighter/Bard or Bard/Fighter until after level 5, since you can at most manage a Charisma of 16 (with bard as your class) which leaves you with only 2 floating bonuses to put into Strength/Dex, else you have a Str/Dex of 16 but only a 14 Cha.

If we're really going to use multiclassing to replace certain hybrid concepts, we should not eliminate ancestries with a poorly positioned attribute flaw from participating in those concepts from the get go.

So, assuming things are as they are in the playtest I'm going to either drop the requirements to 14 or put another floating boost in the class step.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

A major difference between the two editions seems to be that retraining is a fundamental part of the core rules for PF2, and is indeed an expected part of one's character's journey (it's just a thing you can do with downtime in lieu of crafting or working a day job.) By RAW, you can only retrain feats (which is a lot of things), skill training, and skill increases.

So a high level character with sufficient downtime can, without needing the GM to sign of go from Legendary proficiency in religion and untrained proficiency in craft to legendary in craft and untrained in religion. Which seems to be a pretty big shift- I no longer know anything about religion but I now know everything about cabinetry.

Rulebook even mentions something like a sorcerer retraining their bloodline under exceptional circumstances. So if the circumstances are that exceptional, I don't see any reason not to let people retrain their class itself. For me something like "I was forced to go to the academy for magic by my family, despite having no aptitude for it" is something that works better on the level of backgrounds rather than classes. After all, this is about the stuff that happened before you started playing the character; almost certainly none of the action of the campaign is going to be *about* struggling at wizard school.

I'm inclined to let people retrain all class levels with a *lot* of downtime in circumstances like "a cleric whose god dies" or "a wizard who swears to never again use magic after a magical ritual gone very wrong." Some of this seems like stories that hard to tell with stories where we follow characters from level 1, since they involve "more things going on before we meet this person than is usually appropriate for a level 1 character" and one generally only gets to tell stories unrelated to the campaign with the cooperation of the GM anyway. But I would totally play a superstition barbarian who is a replacement character mid-way through the campaign as someone who was a wizard but swore to never use magic after some traumatic event


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Ryan Freire wrote:
Nah, by pf1.

One should never feel obligated to speak on behalf of abstractions, particularly ones that you have no actual stake in.


I feel like one big difference between changelings and, like aasimar, is that a changeling is pretty much always raised by people unlike herself, who eventually figure out she is something different. Golarion has whole communities of aasimar, there are tiefling gangs in Cheliax, etc.

So a changeling pretty much needs to be able to poach ancestry feats from whatever culture raised her, whereas an aasimar need not necessarily.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Loreguard wrote:
The weakness of the new multi-classing system is fundamentally, that it does not truly allow for the 'I changed My path' form of character development.

How often did this happen in first edition that wasn't something like a pretext for a character to have both monk and barbarian levels? It feels like if you really have something dramatic happen that fundamentally changes who you are and what you care about, letting people retrain as another class after significant downtime is a better option.

After all, if your wizard forswears the use of magic ever again after being party to some bit of magic gone horribly wrong, letting that person retrain as a barbarian, rogue, or fighter makes more sense than "vestigal wizard levels."


I figure this makes Waker May Changelings into double-changelings, since those happen when a Night Hag works the same ritual on a pregnant hag, and puts her own soul into the child.

But we should probably handle the Changelings for which an outsider and a ritual is not involved first, and consider the other two as exceptions.


Also there are some pretty big differences between the two games in terms of "what threats are appropriate challenges for various levels" just built into the system.

Something like Kingmaker will probably work since that's not really so much about fighting, but "unspecified Pathfinder content" most likely will not.


I'm reading spell cartridges as "1d4 per +1 arcane strike adds". Since, theoretically spell cartridges can be had well before level 5 and feats should do something as soon as you can have them.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

One of the big differences between changelings and aasimar/tieflings is that a changeling is always the daughter of a hag and some poor mortal, whereas just occasionally an aasimar or a tiefling will pop up in someone's family tree if there's some outsider blood in there somewhere, right?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I wonder if the new classes won't be arranged as part of the world guide line, with a class being debuted in the book which covers the part of the world where that class is most significant. So whatever book covers Irrisen gets witches, whichever book covers Sarkoris gets summoners, whatever book covers Ustalav gets inquisitors, whichever book covers Alkenstar gets gunslingers, etc.
Ehh...I think those books are maybe better suited for new versions of archetypes or prestige archetypes. Id rather see a less specific book with new classes, since you can be an inquisitor for the Asmodean church in Cheliax, a Nexian Summoner, or a Mwangi Witch.

Well, the PF2 world guide line is going to be very different from the player's companion and campaign setting books it replaces. We're going to get bigger books, less often, in hardcover, and with developer oversight. So putting some really meaty content in these (like whole new classes) is going to help justify their existence.

I mean, if you introduce the Witch class in the book with Irrisen content, that doesn't mean you can't have more with content (new feats, patrons, class archetypes, etc.) in the Mwangi book.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I wonder if the new classes won't be arranged as part of the world guide line, with a class being debuted in the book which covers the part of the world where that class is most significant. So whatever book covers Irrisen gets witches, whichever book covers Sarkoris gets summoners, whatever book covers Ustalav gets inquisitors, whichever book covers Alkenstar gets gunslingers, etc.


I have allowed a telekineticist using kinetic haul to lift people (including the kineticist) with basic principle as a hot air balloon. Specifically people stand on a platform with ropes attached, the ropes are tied together in a big knot, and the kineticist levitates the knot which lifts the platform it is attached to.

Or something like that approach, just build a more complicated machine (knowledge engineering is a class skill for you) until you are pushing or pulling something which is "unattended."


Clustered Shots isn't needed since your spell cartridges do force damage, so they bypass DR automagically. If you're fighting aether elementals, you're in some trouble though.


Gorbacz wrote:
Sure, Tian Xia and Other Exotic Places have a vocal following on the forum. But that doesn't translate to sales.

Haven't they been alternating "do something weird" and "do something pretty close to standard" for a while now? It's just that there are a lot of ways to be experimental that don't involve setting, and there are a lot of potentially "weird" settings that aren't "fantasy versions of real places", and you probably don't want to do all the experimental things at once- like an underwater intrigue survival horror AP set on another planet probably would not sell like hotcakes.


avr wrote:
A human magus could have those by 5th level, while still being useful before. It seems doable.

Problem is you also need to find a way to be proficient with firearms, which either costs you a feat or a caster level. I guess "guns everywhere" or "commonplace firearms" fix this, but it's an issue.

I've been thinking of an urban bloodrager who gets proficiency with an axe musket and gets arcane strike and spell cartridges before the archery suite- if you think you would need to shoot into melee, you are holding an axe.


So at minimum a spell catridges build is going to want point blank shot, precise shot, rapid shot, arcane strike, and spell cartridges? Is anything else essential?


I don't think we'll get any more FAQs from Pathfinder 1st edition, period.

But the issue is worth considering how to make this work better for 2nd edition (which hopefully will have fewer Gordian knots in the rules).


6 people marked this as a favorite.

I feel like my fundamental problem with XP is that it is a lot of bookkeeping for very little benefit. When I run games where "milestones" aren't a reasonable way to do advancement, I try to at least reduce the bookkeeping by making the XP awarded for various things like "1" or "5" and making the number of XP needed for level up more like "20" or "50".

I'm fine with "you get nothing for beating up really weak enemies if that buys me tractable granularity.


Sure but if the reason we're running an intrigue game is that we are invested in the idea of "undermining Cheliax" or something, you're going to try to run it in Pathfinder regardless. So it's best if it at least kinda works.

I mean, for reasons of verisimilitude it's best that people have a strong disincentive to start casting "Charm Person" willy nilly every time they go shopping in order to ensure better prices.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I feel like "magic, applied directly, is not your best option" is a good place for Intrigue games. Like if the Oceans gang want to rob somewhere, what they do not get is "a really big gun" it's "a plan". So if magic serves the role of "a really big gun" it's not what I want to be the thing that solves the problem.


My preference would be for Aasimars to be an ancestry with heritage like "Musetouched" who have a level 1 (must be taken at level 1) ancestry feat that allows them to gain a heritage from a common ancestry (things like Grippli Aasimar should be subject to GM discretion). If you choose a small sized ancestry, this should make you small.


One thing I am not entirely clear on is whether one swift gets you however many shots you can take in a round, or just one. If it's the former, this is conceivably super powerful in the hands of like a hasted urban bloodrager with rapid shot. In the linked thread the author's comment seems to imply "it keeps it loaded" not "it loads it once."


If you are already have nothing useful to do with your swift, does blooded arcane strike actually make a difference here?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As I understand it- not only are they going to be selling all the PDFs for as long as they can keep the lights/servers (and the lights on the servers) on, I understand they are going to keep printing dead tree editions of the "Pocket Edition" line of 1e sourcebooks.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I feel like if people aren't paying attention to you, they aren't really any more likely to notice you if you cast detect thoughts than they are if you were picking pockets, drinking a potion, drawing a weapon, opening a door, etc. Whole point is to make "casting spells" to be a thing people can notice if they happen to be paying attention to you.


I don't like the idea of letting people choose two heritages, honestly. While there are certainly edge cases where it makes sense, I think the rules should prevent someone from being, say, both a jungle elf and an arctic elf.

I think "choose another heritage" should be a feat specific to planar scions presented as an ancestry, not a general rule.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
NielsenE wrote:
Heritage is a special kind of feat...

In one sense, sure. It's mechanically more like a class or a background- a choice you can only make at level 1 which informs what sort of person you are. In the actual 2E rulebook we could drop the "feat" part and just say "choose a heritage" as part of what you have to do at level 1 and everything would work the same.


I don't see anything in that FAQ that requires manifestations to be visual. It's just that something happens which clues everybody around into the idea that "something weird has happened."

One's manifestations could be "everyone hears a distant bassoon" or "everyone present smells peppermint and sage" or "everybody has the distinct feeling of spiders crawling down their spine."

IMO the point of the FAQ is to give people a chance to say "huh, that's weird, what is going on?" to keep spellcasters from being able to operate with impunity, not to force wizards to light up like a candle every time they use magic. How subtle the manifestation can be should be commensurate to how subtle the effect is, so "nice smells with no apparent source" wouldn't work well for a fireball, but could for Charm Person.


12 people marked this as a favorite.

Illusion- it's really hard to find the correct balance between "illusions are super powerful" and "illusions are basically useless."


So in 2nd edition there does not appear to be anything keeping someone from being an atheist druid or an atheist angelic sorcerer. So does that mean that Rahadoum suddenly has access to magic (in public) they did not previously or is there a diagetic reason to continue distrusting druids even when they view their nature-centric viewpoint as "good stewardship" or something more humanistic?

Alternatively, is 2nd edition going to let you to do another pass on Rahadoum?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Humans come in Int 7 varieties and are often lawful evil.

A lawful evil society where everybody is kinda vapid and simple seems hard to pull off, since you probably need someone sharp to have their hand on the tiller lest things fall apart and descend into chaos.


One of the Pathfinder novels has this come up, as the protgonists are a Dhampir and a Pharasman priest. Per the novel this is a matter on which the church is divided as there are hardliners who will say "kill the thing immediately" but the mainline Ustalavic Pharasman church doesn't have a problem with them as a matter of dogma.


So in 2nd edition, when druidic magic becomes "primal" instead of "divine" is Rahadoum going to be fine with druids? After all, an atheist druid could conceive of their "protecting nature" agenda as merely good stewardship rather than anything religious.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

So considering the two primary reasons to be a non-human aasimar in PF1 were:
1) Fitting a character concept.
2) Being small was mechanically optimal.

Since there are so few differences between medium and small now (it's 100% gear related now, IIRC), couldn't we just have various planetouched folks have a choice of medium or small and let people describe their characters how they like?

If you want to do "my aasimar is super dwarfy, she grew up among dwarfs" you could give them something like the "adopted ancestry" feat as an aasimar feat.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm inclined to just treat sign language as speech for purposes of verbal components.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I was in favor of changing it to "one extra step of success/failure" entirely because that's easier to state and a GM shouldn't be running scenarios where a 20 doesn't succeed or a 1 doesn't fail anyway- if things are that lopsided, there's no need for dice.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DungeonmasterCal wrote:
Way back in the primordial 80s Dragon Magazine published an article with rules for mental and physical differences in male and female characters. I don't remember all the changes but one was that females got a +1 to their Constitution because, according to the article's author, women have a higher tolerance to pain because of the ability to give birth. I'm sure that fact was just made up, though.

Well "pain" is subjective, so it's very difficult to study but there is empirical evidence that women will nope out of the same painful stimulus later than dudes will. Like they did the "hold your hand in icewater for as long as you can" test on Mythbusters.

While "giving different stat mods to represent differences in biology" would be better if it's a Str vs. Con thing than a Str vs. Cha thing (Cha to represent "Women are attractive? Attractive to whom precisely?"), you would then run into situations where the optimal choice for most characters would be to play a lady character.

I mean, the variance in measurable things within a given gender group i going to be a lot larger than the difference between those groups on average, so it's best to just let the player put their stats wherever they want regardless of sex or gender identity. Characters reliably end up dramatically more competent than realistic people could possibly be, so "realism" shouldn't selectively matter in unfun ways.

1 to 50 of 8,421 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>