RafaelBraga's page

To the people that are saying "you run the number":

People, its VERY easy to do, just build a character of X level and compare.

I've said this problem literary 1 day after the playtest released. Its VERY EASY to figure out.

My first suspicion was seeing that ALL the monsters had perception WAY ABOVE (ranging from +3 to +5 or even more in some specific monsters) than their wis and level could allow. There are some MONSTER LITERARY CHEATING... not even with +5 item and +3 from legendary they could have that values.

They i started building players... after a little while, 2 or 3 characters, you realize that all classes are just standarlized to 4ed levels, and everyone has exact the same MAX at something at said level. There is literary no choice... well, you can choose to be unoptimized, but that means that you will ALWAYS be behind the values of monsters.

And another IMENSE problem i realized after also playing a session: most monster are literary made to challenged everyone at what they are THE BEST... that means that all monsters fight like the best fighter, scout like the best possible to challenge the optimized rogue stealther and when they do anything else they are always good enough to beat a player optimized to do that thing.

So while the players specialize, monster are good at everything.

Have a diferent opinion? Open bestiary and do the math, its actually very easy after a while.

Also that Bard with +2 example really made me reflect upon the game...

...I bet that Bard would actually have fun versus those wolves! I know he's probably not the "average" character, but maybe he should be? Part if the reason things got out of control was by raising the baseline to a 20 point buy. This wasn't done with the purpose to "power up" characters, but simply because the point buy math heavily favored/disfavored some classes with 15, which 20 smoothed out. The power increase was a negative consequence of this. It escalaed to where the CR system got out of control since it still used the old parameters, not to mention the release of superior options that further allowed guys to widen the gap.

Yep, that simple fight... with 3 wolves, gave the characters(3, a bard, an alchemist bomber and a barbarian) a lot of fun.

I play with 25pt buy... but with a special rule, they can use 20pt wichever way they want then i spend the last 5 "adjusting" acording to their background and things i knew will be useful to the campaign. The bard is the most average cause the player wanted to play a support character that was like a "secondary everything"... a secondary melee when needed, secondary ranged, secondary caster, secondary healer...

So he ended with Str 14, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 14, Wis 10, Cha 18 half elf. Note that he is pretty strong overall, but any optimizer could have changed his stats to something like lots of 7s and a 20 in CHA.

He works extremely well in what the player envisioned and i am very statisfied on how the game is playing.

See, a 25pt buy with only a +2 to attack.... this is BLASPHEMY! since many power builds archieve +5 or higher at 1st level with 15pts... i imagine the frustration of playing a +1 character with 15pts characters if the system were designed around the munchkins.

That said, the barbarin,fights much better but not enough to make the Bard feels useless...

As a funny side note the bard was the one who landed the killing blow on the Bear at the Temple of the Elk... one of the "miniboss" of the Kingmaker AP that is very popular.

I really prefer a game that focus on the unoptmized, just taking a few steps to garantee that the optimized is better, but not enough to break the game.

As a last observation: I really few that all the "brokeness" of some optimized builds are due to lame design on some aspects of the games that are not inherent to the system, like OP feats or class features, not ineherent things like stat modifiers, how weapon works, so on.

MAN: Damage Dice Should Come From The Character: Simply put, a 17th level fighter should be deadly with any weapon he can find. If they pick up a functional longsword in a moment of desperation, they're still a 17th level fighter and someone you don't want to tangle with! Tie the damage dice to the character's level. You can even tie it to class and level; favor the fighter and barbarian for highest damage dice with ranger, rogue, and paladin lagging just behind them, then on down the line.

I am reminded of the old Star Wars RPG's, where the heavy blaster Han used was available to the PC's. You could buy it as starting gear. The weapon wasn't overpowered, but that didn't take away from Han's feats because Han was that good. It made Han special, not the owner of a +5 DL-44 blaster. Han was a hero, not the vehicle by which an OP weapon defeated Stormtroopers.

This paradigm also lets the martials do what casters do; feel the power is mostly coming from themselves.

MANUFACTURE: Weapon Quality Gives a Bonus to Hit and Damage: A better weapon allows for a better to hit and damage roll. For example, allow a +1 to +3 to hit and damage increase for weapons from Expert through Legendary. You can even limit whether someone can benefit from an Expert or better weapon until they gain an appropriate level of skill with that weapon. The justification is simple; anyone who masters an instrument, weapon, or sport knows how good you have to be to really feel the benefit of a high-end piece of gear. I, for example, am an amateur fencer. I can feel a crappy epee when you give it to me compared to a well-made one, but I couldn't really get the nuance of a truly top-tier nationally ranked competitor's weapon.

Now, I can already hear someone thinking, "With 20 points of Proficiency and more from Strength, does that piddly +2 or +3 matter?" The answer is of course YES! Increasing your chance to hit by a flat 10-15% chance is nice, but that also augments your chance to *critical* by the same amount. If have, say, a 70% chance to hit, your chance to crit is 20%. Adding an additional 10% chance to both probabilities is definitely not a trivial gain; that's almost as good as Keen in PF1E + Good Hope.

MAGIC: Magic Adds Special Properties (and ONLY Special Properties): Allow magic to only add in properties to a weapon. Let magic feel special and practical. DR can come down to weapon types, alignment, and special materials instead of magical weapons.

This fits in much more with mythic, religious, and literary genre tropes and will make magic feel special. Magic makes weapons Returning or Flaming and so forth.

Bottom Line: Let the character (Man) dictate the damage dice. Let the magic give the weapon awesome properties. Let the quality (Manufacture) give the weapon a small bonus that - at the margins - does matter.

I like all this ideas. To make "perfect" i would make a little less dice than now (now its up to 6d), but each individual bonus applying to each die. I would recommend something like one extra at levels 5,11 and 17. So a longsword-wielding level 17 character with greatest possible item quality (+3) with 18 strength should do 4d8+28 damage.(1d8+7 x4)

That would increase the value of strength to damage... that is almost null at the current state.

Its on the VERY DESCRIPTION of the class:

Weapons:
Trained in all unarmed attacks.

Ok, good to know, now just like 2 critical, 3 major, and a lot of minor issues to fix before a good playtest can start :)

Some examples:

Frost giant:Level 9, +2 wis... somehow +16 perception.

Fire giant: Level 10 +2 wis... somehow +18 perception. (well, at least i lied and it is below +20, but without cheating it would be around +11 to +13, even a +5 item couldnt reach the value)

And that progress all the way to 20

Balor: Level 20, +6 wis... somehow +35 perception (not even with legendary perception, +5 item you can archieve so high, "cheating" is not a fun rules mechanic).

PS: Please note that the balor is exact matched to the number a level 20 rogue, with max dex, dex boosting item, +5 item would have... simple the best modifier possible in the game.

It's definitely a bit of an issue, though I'll note that the Str 16 Barbarian in my Playtest game did fine. That's only one character over one session so far, but it's worth noting.

I do believe its extremely possible at level 1, but i was building a level 13 monk for a session i will play in a few hours.

The main problem is that almost everything below "ultra optmized" was completely garbage. For exemple, since i had a reasonable Dex(16) and no armor penalty, i thought about getting some stealth.

Then i went to the bestiary to see how well i would fare against CR 10 to CR 13 monsters...

My best possible stealth was +17 if i bought expert in it. I didnt found a SINGLE monster of CR 10+ with less than +20. Every single monster in the bestiary have a perception bonus WAY HIGHER than their level should allow and the more the level, more the difference. They seems to be balanced around a MAX dex for level rogue with maximum possible item bonus for that level. I did a little math and that was the case, with some monsters "cheating" and having even higher than possible for that level.

That showed me another problem i wasnt even thinking in the beginning: Whats the point on doing a stealth rogue speciallist when everything level appropriate will always have at least 50% chance of detecting you? I am talking about the best of the best... the character made around it... it showed to me that the system now is "combatfinder" with rogues being "finesse light fighters" instead of rogues.

The days of scout missions with a main rogue and that monk/bard/other ligth armored assistant is gone.

Oh, and good luck winning initiative in a perception contest.

Traits, properties and action identifier should be put apart.

Action identifiers: Press, open,... should work as they are now, and only appears in actions sessions.

Traits(or descriptor) should have no inate effects and only work of rules and effects refering to them, for example: concentrate, manipulation, arcane, divine, spell, metallic, occult, primal,...

Finally properties(or traits, if you use descriptor before) are not tied to actions, but items or effects and have a standarlized function: Agile, Throw, Forceful, Finesse,...

2 of thesse should never be in the same section of a action or effect.

Descriptors should never have a innate effect attached to them, their only purpose is to clarify if a weapon is mettalic, a spell is divine, if this action is a concentration action, if an effect that works when someone usa a manipulative action works with it, so on...

And all of this should be condensed in the same page of the rulebook.

Not even in PF1, with its 100 books, i took so much time to build a character just because i had to come back and forth in the book so many times, that wasnt a pleasant experience.

They've also rebalanced things so that a level 1 foe is actually more equivalent to a level 1 PC in terms of effectiveness (which the CR system said was true in PF1, but certainly wasn't of something like the wolf with AC 14 and +2 to-hit).

In PF1 not every character needed to be maximized to be played.

To be honest, in the few different groups of PF1 i took part, i should have seen like 1 or 2 characters optmized at most. Many... MANY had like +2 to hit. (I am DMing right now an adventure where the bard was melee/ranged hybrid and his normal to hit, without performance, was +2 and he for sure was effective)

To me, te mentality of "everyone is maximized and optmized" is exactly what destroys a system. The system should try to make the difference of very optimized to "normal" character less impactful (as opposed to 3.X were the difference was of orders of magnitude) but would balance around non-optimized values.

For example, if they keep saying that 16, or even a 14 is a viable option at level 1 at the main attribute, they should balance the system around that. If you have a 18, you should really be a little ahead, if not, what is the point of having a max stat at all?

If they keep this thread of assuming everyone will have a 18, this game will be even more boring than 4E, and to some points, even more normalized.

Just a correction in the few past posts:

A fighter doenst 6d12+5 damage,

A fighter does 1d12+5 damage

A magic weapon do 5d12 damage

never forget that.

A sorceror do 10d8, 11d12 or whatever the number.

Thats the correct analysis and the main problem of this whrole thread.

"Martial" = use MAGICAL weapons

I dont see a martial solution at all.

Tie damage dice to levels, problem solved, works for cantrips, works for weapons.

I would also recomend adding bonus per die, instead of total, to give more meaning to strength and other minor damage bonuses.

Making a weapon do like 6 times more damage due to quality(or magic) is beyond dumb.

The solution to this problem is not having it at all.

Spread the damage around character level, similar to how cantrip work and scrap the bad idea. Trying to build uppon a failed idea just will waste more work.

The main problem is that or youre maxed to even try out, or dont even waste points in it.

I really dislike this kind of design were to have at least 50% of succeeding i have to be maxed.

The perceptions values scales off to dulicrous values (there are more monsters in the bestiary with perception above 30 than with perception below 5)

Its a very unfunny arms races, seems like all monsters are trying to munchking the game as much as possible.

And since a monk has a free +1 conditional to every attack, this -4 can be considered just -3 in most situations.

Nadlor wrote:

RafaelBraga wrote:

My monk AC

In combat, you optimum damage is flurry+ki blast.

You get 2 attacks, with agile, base 4d10 each if both hits plus ki blast for 12d4

4d10 each of the two unarmed strikes, for a total of 8d10 if both hit? How is this achieved?

No, he meant 4d10 after combining two 2d10 flurry attacks.

Nope, i meant 8d10 combined damage.

At level 13, youre a +3 weapon wielding a monk (since youre a weapon in this edition trying to find a level equivalent adventurer).

Your monk have the ability to flurry.. you will do your second attack at -4... but as part of the same action of the first attack, so its a bonus... then you Ki Blast... since ki blast is save DC based, it isnt affected by MAP... so you use your normal DC instead of a -8 attack...to me, a VERY worthshile trade.

If both attacks hit... you are doing 8d10+(2xSTR) (cause fierce flurry) with 1 action and have the option to ki blast or do something else with your 2 actions. In a DPS race i would always Ki blast unless the oponent have a way to always critical success or have a incredible low AC.

The way magic weapon plus works, your tiger strike decreases in power and utility VERY fast, specially costing 2 actions, since some cool combinations can be done with the 2 actions.

Womp womp

It seems you failed at reading and math, Rafa.

Why don't you go ahead and make a thread asking for clearer wording instead of wilfully ignoring the text? Good faith is required in any tabletop.

Could you please reproduce the text where the cost of the ability is?

I cant find in the entire book.

All abilities with costs, specially powers, have it cost written usually both at the power and at the feat that gives access to both.

This power have neither. It only cost is a free verbal action that you take just before the attack roll.

Feel free to quote the text otherwise if it is on the book.

@Cellion:

Can you share your calcs? (In a spoiler perhaps?)

How do you get to be master in all saves by 15th level?

Rogue multiclass.

Pillars of Eternity armor "problems" come to gimmickers playing PotD for silly archievment.

That game is one of the BEST examples of GOOD use of armor rules.

The "Pillars of Eternity Armor Problem" is just a problem for minmaxers, for normal play, it functions exactly as it should and is one of the best implementations of armor in any videogame...

Until the waterfall of tears came, they changed the rules for PoE2 and the mechanics sucks.

Bro, my perception of what can i acomplish with a monk at the current state is very different than yours.

I ended with a AC far better than i expected. Skills doesnt matter much at all, unless you get to master for some absurdity (combat medic, catfall), otherwise they are more flufy than anyhing... and the fact that you dont have armor problems too athlectics or acrobatics works in your favor.

I ignored the monk relation with religion and did one with survival... i could get everything i wanted. To be honest only medicine, acrobatics and craft have something really worth above expert, and the skill feats are unbalanced as possible. Some are simples much better than others and many are just noobtraps that shouldnt be there in the first place.

I will actually play theese characters this friday and will see... (The party has a fighter, ranger and sorceror) i will play with the monk and sincerely i dont foresee many problems.

If something come up, i will come here and post.

I doesnt have a cost. So, as it stands, it costs 0.

Which would me more than ok, since you can do VERY powerful effects by 2 SP.

And bards can do the same, as an AoE, with 1 action.

The fact that i have the tools to overcome MOST problems without even having to resort to magic items(of course not counting magic weapons, since in this edition magic weapons resort to you from time to time, not you that resort to a magic weapon) make the monk one of the most versatile class, if now the most.

Wind step to fight in melee with flying monsters, awesome heal both in and out of combat, escape a grapple with a short distance teleport...

if youre clever you can even ready action to dimensional step out of area of a breath weapon or are spell.

So much versatility. While being good at climbing, sneaking (if you peak as a skill), jumping, resisting effects (saves).

The only thing a monk is bad is perception... but everyone sucks at perception since monsters have unfair boosts on perception and unless youre max dex rogue, with max items, you will never sneak at anything anyway.

To me the stances need a SERIOUS buff as well as much more abilities to be competitive with ki powers.

Anyclass that doenst cantrip will suck at melee or ranged, there is no way to evade that the way damage work right now.

You cant afford to have 2 good weapons with same enchantment, and enchantment plus trumphs everything in the system right now.

After failing with math, people fail with reading. (Unless it has been errataed)

The Ki Strike power doesnt have a cost.

You can use it as often as you like as long you have the ability to do verbal casting (i.e. youre not silenced)

Both the Power description or the Feat say anything about having a cost, it just gives you your first access to Spell Points.

Dragon Stance attacks do do 1d10 base, but they're neither Agile or Finesse, which makes it a poor fit for Dex Monks, although the posted Monk is Str-based. It's also Tiger Stance, which is 1d8 base, which also doesn't work, there is a 1d12 attack you can do with it, but that's not the same.

Fierce flurry.

RafaelBraga wrote:

My monk AC is 31.

+13 level, +2 master, +3 dex, +3 bracer.

Then the Fighter has +3 magic armor, so it's AC is 34.

Quote:

But the SP give the flexibility to cast that 6 spells you need when you need. At level 15 all of them will power up again for increased damage, healing and distance.

Heightened lower level powers are weaker than equal level spells (that is, a 3rd level power heighted to 6 vs. a 6th level spell.)

At 15th level, Fighters get Improved Flexibility, so they have a lot of tricks of their own.

Quote:

You get 2 attacks, with agile, base 4d10 each if both hits plus ki blast for 12d4 without the MAP.

How are your attacks dealing 1d10 base damage btw?

Anyway, I think you are willfully ignoring all the benefits of the Fighter, so I don't think I can help. The Fighter is better at martial combat than the Monk, and has less powerful abilities but with better accuracy in terms of spells. The Monk has more powerful abilities but worse combat stats. Not many ways around it. Nice talk I guess?

The bracer of +3 AC doesnt equal to a +3 armor, its actually around +2 armor level costwise.

There is also the fact that i am not min-maxing the monk at all.

The fighter has some cool abilities, i never denied that, i am saying that the abilities you get after wasting a ton of feats on multiclass are VERY lackluster.

If i min maxed, the monk AC would be up there with the fighter. The d10 for tiger stance is comming from the fierce flurry ability.

Like i said, i actually build both characters, i am not expeculating, i am comparing having both in front of me.

The immense small amonth of spell slots simple kill the multiclass, they are too few to be of real value. MAYBE you will find one use for a spell out of combat, its possible, but the ting that i see you using most is mirror image. Even haste, since it only give a strike option and not an action for an ability that make you strike, is very lackluster. Fly is now 4th level, meaning you have 1 daily casting and thats it... competing with goodies like fire shield or stoneskin.

Instead of expeculating, go ahead and build the character youself, you can probably do many things better than i did for sure, but you will realize how few resources you have at your arsenal.

If i gonne for a dex monk, my AC would be equal to a fighter, with a better TAC, losing like 2 damage per strike... (well, 4d10+3+1d6fire+1d6vsevil against 4d10+5+1d6fire+1d6vsevil)

Just build and you will see.

My monk AC is 31.

+13 level, +2 master, +3 dex, +3 bracer.

The spells mus be prepared at their respective level, meaning that their overall power is very low and you basicly have 1 use of each... wich is not THAT bad since some dont need level scaling.

But the SP give the flexibility to cast that 6 spells you need when you need. At level 15 all of them will power up again for increased damage, healing and distance.

The flexibility of the monk is even higher than the flexibility of the fighter/mage. It will also increase every new book that a new option of ki power is released.

In combat, you optimum damage is flurry+ki blast.

You get 2 attacks, with agile, base 4d10 each if both hits plus ki blast for 12d4 without the MAP.

That said tried to opmize my fighter at every choice, i just build the monk as a ki monk on the fly, since my original choice was to do a stance style dancer... but the "open" trait dont allow and worse still, every single ki choice is stronger and scale exponentially the more choices you take.

RafaelBraga wrote:

I just did a lv 13 figher with mage multiclass and the monk is superior in every aspect, that fighter with spells didnt got better in a single aspect aside from detect magic.

Seems hard for me to believe, wouldn't the Fighter have better ability score economy (given that they only need 14 DEX for max AC, whereas the Monk always needs as much DEX as possible) and the MC Wizard grants them better DCs than Ki Blast could have because of Expert/Master Spellcasting proficiencies.

Combined with the aforementioned better ability score economy for higher INT, seems like it should actually be closer than what you are saying.

End values of both(at level 13)

Fighter/mage
Str 20
Dex 12
Con 16
Int 18
Wis 14
Cha 12 (for roleplaying, could be put in wis or dex)

Monk
Str 20
Dex 16
Con 16
Int 12
Wis 18
Cha 10

Both have 190HP with toughness

Base saves without magic items:

Fighter: F+17 R+15 W+16(with Iron Will)

Monk: F+18 (i chose master fortitude with path to perfection) R+17 W+18

Monk has 12SP, Whroleness of Body, Ki Blast, Abundant Step, Wind Jump with all heigthned to 7th level (12d4 Ki Blast, 11d8+4 WoB, 15ft Dimensional Step, Can fly for 55ft and acrobatic DC30 to keep flying (current at +23 acrobatics, will be +27 at level 15 meaning almost perfect flying, if he falls he get no damage due to catfall and daredevil boots, at level 15, just due catfall)

Fighter has 2/2/1/1 for sell slots. So a total of 6 casts... at levels 1-4, monk get at least 6 casts (since most powers use 2 SP, but some use just 1) all at 7th level potency.

The monk still got some options left for some stances, stance strikes and othe stuff to do while not using SP. I chose the Tiger Stance path, but anyone of them could work.

The fighter is master of Perception but have an overall lower perception since the monk is expert with higher wisdom.

After build the two, i would probably say the multiclass system is crap cause even at level 13, i used most of my character options to praticly dont have casting power at all. That said, i think a speciallized wizard, specially on the damage department, would fall very far behind non-spell slot based classes. To me te Spell Power system is a much better system overall and should be the stardard casting system, it would as a side effect make multiclass a lot easier to balance(specially if we go back to the BETTER level based multiclass, instead of this BAD feat based multiclass).

This new system proved to me the most dipping/gimmicky system ever... its like you just pick it not when you want to play a multiclass but something that you pick when you visualize a very powerful powercombo beteween some cherrypicked abilities.

The only thing the fighter/mage was good was recognizing spells... but that was a effect of arcana skill, not the wizard multiclass.

Monks should be renamed "Goku" in this version.

At level 13, the one i build can ki blast, wall jump, fly for lets of minutes,heal himself a lot of times for 11d8+wis each time.

And on a side note, Ki Strike doesnt have a cost. You can use it always as long as you can do a free verbal action (in other words, you can speak). Ki strike gives you access to ki pool, but doesnt have a cost associated both on the ability or the power itself.

Sincerely, the monk is too much anime... and more concerning, the "animeish" options are by far the best options by the current rule system. That said, he is one of the most powerful classes, specially if you get every single ki power you can get. You have a lot of spell points and actually is a better caster than a multiclassesed mage and probably better at many things than a full classed mage.

I just did a lv 13 figher with mage multiclass and the monk is superior in every aspect, that fighter with spells didnt got better in a single aspect aside from detect magic. (even the ranged option of a cantrip is better as a monk cause of huge move and ability to teleport out of battle if needed, the only saving grace for the fighter was the possibility of getting a bow, but since magic weapons rules above all, at the current system changing weapons is like lowering your damage output by half or worse in many situations)

If they redo the damage system, maybe a more mundane monk could be better, ATM, even if dont invest heavily on wis, its better to be a ki monk and fly, teleport, ki blast, heal.

Is there something not mentioned about monster perception bonuses?

All monsters in the playtest bestiary have perception bonuses WAY higher than their wis modifier + level.

Am i missing something?

In most cases the bonuses are more than +5 the expected number.

in PF1 they are virtually, in PF2 they are not virtually.

This comparisson make me sick. You need magic weapons to be very effective in PF1, but their impact is MUCH lower. You dont need even a top weapon depending on class.

In PF2 your weapon PLUS is what defines your fighting capability, everything else is just flavor.

Numbers...

PF 1 level 15 fighter

Weapon training +3, BAB +15, STR 24, +5 weapon, lets say greatsword.

Hit: +32 (counting weapon focus and greater)
Damage: 2d6+22 base (24 to 34, average 29)

PF 1 Level 20 fighter (no magical weapon)

Weapon training +4 BAB +20, STR 22 (i will even remove his str buffing item)

Hit: +32 (again, weapon focus and greater)
Damage: 2d6+17 (19 to 29, average 24), one aditional attack but at -15

PF 2 level 15 fighter

str 21, greatsword +5

hit: +25
damage: 6d12+5 base (11 to 77, average 44)

PF 2 level 20 fighter, no magical weapon

str 22, greatsword

hit: +26
damage: 1d12+6 (7 to 18, average 12.5)

PF1: 20,83% damage increase (there are other factors that could make it higher or lower like enchants, but also high level fighter abilities)

PF2: 252% damage increase

we are talking things that arent even in the same order of magnitude, so please, stop make yourself looking like a fool by failing so much at math.

THERE IS NO COMPARISSON.

(and even meaning far less, i hated the DEPENDENCY of magic weapons of PF1, so it just got 10 times stronger)

I want to be a monster.

This also let people left clerics, rogues, bards, alchemist and all other 3/4 BAB increasing proficiency at lv 8 and 15 to keep on par with PF1 and all 1/2 BAB increasing proficiency at level 11.

I would for balance sake (and fun, since is not fun to play a bad swordsman if you want to be a good one) allow a genetal feat that allow you to chose a single weapon and put your profiency with it on par with a fighter...

Weapon Focus... maybe for the first time in 18 year really meaning focus on a weapon.

And fighters(and all other full BAB that get increases at 6,11 and 16) dont need it cause they plus is BEING focused on all weapons (their bread and butter)

And for sure, if people commit to math, they will surely find even better and more balanced solutions.

My take on the problem (to me it is by far the biggest problem of the edition, worse than all other added together)

Rearrange weapon proficiencies around to "balance"(my take should be 6, 11, 16 lv to make on par with PF1 extra attacks)

Untrained: reduce weapon die by 1 step(d8 to d6)
Trained: 1 x WD
Expert: 2 x WD
Master: 3 x WD
Legendary: 4 x WD

WD = Weapon Damage = The base die of the weapon PLUS the bonus from the character Strength modifier plus item modifier.

Item modifier = The "plus" of the weapon.

In this version weapons go from +1 to +3 only (+5 is a HUGE modifier... they reduced all spell bonus to +1 cause "the edition changed, every +1 matter" then left the weapon with +5, wich make absolute no sense)

Generic weapons can only be +1

Named rare weapons can be +1 or +2: Flame tongue, Icebrand, Sword of Sharpness, Trident of the Tides, Dagger of Venom, Dueling Rapier, Shield of the Lion, Any named weapon used in all this 40 years of DnD.

Named Legendary top tier weapons are +3: Holy Avenger, Vorpal Sword, Dwarven Thrower, Oathbow, Bow of Thunderbolts, Lifestealer, All other top tier weapons.

The plus of the weapon add on the hit roll and on each dice of the damage roll (like the strength bonus)

Now you have a system were magic weapon matter, but the adventurer wielding than is the most important thing.

Yep.. i was hoping for something like "+1d6" damage to a flaming weapon at most... but cool effects like some weapons stopping regeneration, other weapons being able to do a melee attack at range (like a wind sword doing a wind slash at range), just adding cool stuff... but the core of the power being on the character.

There were so many possibilities.

The topic is wrong. They are not "virtualy required" they ARE required.

In the new system youre are actually playing your magic weapon searching for adventurers with cool abilities to wield you.

+5 to damage is ok (but +5 to hit is a bit too much), 6 times the damage of a non-magical weapon is not "a bit too much", its just plain fail at math and game design.

Sorry to be salty, but there isnt a "mild" way to make it clear.

The biggest problem by far is that in PF1 you were a character looking for magical loot to enhance your abilities...

In PF2 you are a magical weapon looking for an adventurer to enhance your abilities.

80% of your performance is your magical weapon... gear, skills, abilities, choices, are the other 20%.

I simple left the playtest. If in one of the interations they change it, i may come back and try the new system.

Everything pales in comparison to magic weapons. I would say that it worry me more than every other change added together.

I think you didnt read the new action economy very well.

If this rules stand to the final of the playtest (and the sad part is that it probably will, since it is THE damage upgrade of the system), every single PFS guide will be about saving money for the next weapon upgrade.

AC is cool, save is cool, killing the monster before he hits you too many this is the best bonus to save and ac... and what you gain is incredible.

Someone with magic weapon at first level will outdamage everyone else.

"I power attatck mhhauhauah" - fighter

"Ok, i have a chance to attack once... i will do at least the same damage with good chance of doing awesome damage, good job fighter." - anyone able to cast magic weapon.

Man, this magic weapon rule is a walking abuse... its so much of a problem to the core of the system that it actually increases all problems people pointed from PF1 in the last weeks on this forum.

Dex to damage, caster over martials, rule consistancy...

I cant think of a single aspect of the world that is improved by this rule... a single one!

Lets put this way... Sir Knito challenger Sir Commus to a duel...

Both level 9 paladins...

Duel start... rolls initiative...

Look at character sheet...

Sir Knito weapon is +3

Sir Commus weapon is still +2 cause the upgraded his armor also.

Sir Knitto wins and challenge the next owner of a still "unupgraded +2 weapon".

When we remove extremes and add close characters, the weapon upgrade become even more important. Your feats are equivalent, your stats may vary a little +1 here and there... but your weapon can be a full +dice that will add up to victory in the end after X hits.

Thats too much impact for a mere +1.

Well, roll your stats them, of all the crappy rules of the playtest, that one is the easiest to solve and the option is even there on the book itself.

If you can have a magic shop selling a +4 sword... the game has every shop like this NEVER have a 3rd level rogue robbing it right?

Cause mechanics wall is more important than game consistency.

Even low level PFS adventures have imporant locations being robbed here and the (Blackros family seems specially prone to attract low level invaders)

Oh... the "appropriate level magnet" rule that we all live uppon. You never, through your 20 levels of play, will ever touch some blasphemous level innapropiate item.

And again, in a world when a weapon dos SIX time the damage of another, war should be fought by this weapons and every high level adventure party would have to massacre the kindown they are entering or having their weapons "confiscated by law"

The problem is not when the 3rd level paladin found an ancient holy avenger in some lost temple...

The problem is when a 14lv paladin is penalized for using a normal sword or even "just a +1 sword" cause some story relation and he perform even worse than a PF1 character in the same situation (wich is already bad).

The magic weapon dependancy grew exponentially in this ruleset... and i am very shocked that people that were complained of a +2 damage diferential on a rogue having or having not dex to damage are simple mute.

I guess people just have trouble with math when it is a variable number.

RafaelBraga wrote:

Like even a +1 weapon having an IMMENSE impact on character damage more than high level fighter abilites, for example.

Yeah, the math, more than anything, is what's setting my head to shaking. It's like an unholy baby made of 5e bounded accuracy and 4e "Add your level to all rolls".

I mean, I was playing Pathfinder to get away from things like that.

Man, i feel so much better after reading this. Thank you :)

Because he lives in a real world instead of a mechanic plot wall universe and he just stole the gear of the party at the in, for example.

Will never happen in a PFS game cause of some limitations that are needed to evade cheating, but can happen in a normal game.

Actually, in my game years, it was relative common, specially when the weapon impact the game so much, literally doing five times the base damage of a normal weapon. People would wage war over theese weapons, like they do on nukes today, cause they are the most impactful single aspect on a combat. Other aspect together CAN impact alot, specially when added together (level+skill increase+new ability), but every single +1 of the weapon is BY FAR the most impactful aspect.

To me, this is very wrong. Everybody can disagree, ok.

But man, i dont know how people complained about things like dex to damage since this impact overall damage so much more.

This is only the beginning... to my merit :P it took shorten than i thought to people realize they will be playing the same numbers over and over, not matter what they build.

Will differ a little over VERY high levels (uahh, i am master athletic instead of master acrobat, i have +1 over you)...

And than people will just WoW it out and realize that their geat make much more impact than even high level abilities and everyon will fight for the next plus one in the weapon. (And god protect your party if for some plot reasons they are imprisioned and forced to fight with normal gear at high levels).

The problem Sir, is the IMPACT... youre giving a feat tax to power attack to get 1 extra damage die...

a few days ago everybody was discussing the Dex to damage vs Str for hours...

Than a impact that make one game mechanic, that technicaly speaking is not a real part of the character is having more impact on the game or combat than everything else was so fiercly discussing and no one seems to care. Thats strange to me.

When the +1 or +2 of your weapon will be decising factor of a fight, something is very wrong... if you need to overlevel your opponent for a ton of levels to equal... something gone very badly.

I almost remember one of the blog posts where someone was discussing a level 20 wizard and one of the devs, trying to sell new fighter mechanics, said that "he would have trouble against even a level 3 fighter cause the fighter could nullify one of the wizard melee attacks". Sure... the wizard use magic weapon or one hight level weapon enchant... lets say on a common bamboo stick of base 1d4 damage... suddenly the wizard have a +3 bamboo stick of 4d4 damage examploding the fighter shield. If he do this to his normal longsword... he will explode both the shield and the fighter in the process.

Bro, i would really like if they abandon "+1s" to weapon/armor and favor it with cool abilities... be it flaming, draining, anything... but not the only way of really increase your damage that trumph everything else in the system.

So far I've only had time to scan the classes, but I like the general design of the classes. I haven't digested the classes, yet, though. But, I do like the options and the design space that is left open to build upon.

Makes me wish this version of the game had come out 10 or 15 years ago.

Trying not to bash, but some design choices really looks like things from 15 years ago :P

I'm optimistic. I just hope Paizo is willing to make some sweeping changes to that content to bring it up to 'exciting' rather than feeling things are too late and that they are only willing to make minor changes.

What do you sincerely think of the new plus system of weapons?

Like even a +1 weapon having an IMMENSE impact on character damage more than high level fighter abilites, for example.

The action system.

And to be honest, in the whrole thing is the only change that i really found very good.

ALL OTHER THINGS are either plain bad (magic weapon damage) or have some nice idea but a incredible bad execution (new AC, skill system, +lv to everything, for example)

I am trying to not be a hater, but not be a fanboy either. From my sincere perception of the new system.