Seannoss's page

Or, in full: What parts of APs work very well while only using a part of the arc or some of the books?

Examples - Hell's Rebels has a strong story for the first 4 books
Giantslayer has a nice and straight forward story for the first 2-3 books before overloading on giants.
The first 2 parts of Mummy's Mask is a good army of dead story.

Are there any other good arcs in APs with shorter stories?

Giantslayer has several red dragons in it. And going off of the cover Shattered Star has a blue in it.

From what I understand both churches would charge for their services and spells. However Abadar believes in fair pricing and would not alter the price while Asmodeans, being evil, would take advantage of the situation and inflate the going rate.

I do believe Ravenmoor is covered in an older module: Feast of Ravenmoor.

I'll add as a casual reader/lurker on many of these threads that a common argument in favor of wizards is fear and slow. That those spells come up all the time it does strike me as an issue. Like, if you have the arcane list and not using those spells you are doing something wrong. That sounds like an issue to me.

The most difficult creature did give them a pass, like it would any other worshipper of Nethys. The Scorched Hand did seem to have luck or an accurate map on their side, as there are pretty much no creatures over than the guardian between the entrance and where they are.

Pharasma, but she's a hard one to get interest in for my group.

Wouldn't the Peacock Spirit also be appropriate for Return of the Runelords as it answered a few forum theories?

Giantslayer has a lot of (obviously) larger humanoids.

How about viewing this from the other side? From reading this whole thread it seems like spellguard shield is too good. +2 to saves and a +2 to AC?

Maybe everyone being able to take the Raise Shield action is too good. Maybe shields should have a proficiency again so shields aren't a utility magic item slot to get what is best for your character. Like all those characters who weren't ever seen as using shields but its too good not to.

Can you post the build and the choices of that character to lower their damage by 3 while increasing the group's damage by 19 please? I have several players that would be interested.

I agree. But it certainly felt like someone on this thread was discussing that a +1 didn't matter. Typically RPGs reward specialization, PF1E did to a fault one may say.

So, like I said, the odds of that +1 mattering is only 5%. Just like increasing your attack by 1. Or increasing your AC by 1.

Hmm... maybe it does matter.

Sounds like he shouldn't be in the front. You have said that a +1 doesn't matter. Surely he knows this too.

Here I thought this was a joke about the size of the new core rules.

There are also the rules which back the fact that scry and fry doesn't work, unless you and your party enjoy that sort of thing of course.

In which case they may be wiped out by Karzoug at some point before they are anywhere near his level.

I am going to try this out in 1E as well. Do you recall some of the actions that you had to revise or sort out ahead of time?

thanks.

For another opinion on wandering monsters: I do not really use the charts as given. But I do like knowing what monsters or encounter options are in the region in case I do need and extra encounter.

I feel like the more lore skills that are added the less likely they are to come up in a game. Its a minor issue I have with the way they are set up now with an infinite number of lore skills.

Lowering the DC for having the correct doesn't make sense as each and every character has each and every lore skill. Even if it is untrained isn't the idea of the DC being 5 less (or more) make the idea of have more specific lore = lower DCs not work?

Yes, for the reasons you listed. Primarily the mythic part.

Wouldn't a fighter/wizard who wants to rock that heavy armor be a fighter first and take the wizard archetype? I know it isn't the same amount of spells but characters need priorities, you can't do everything on one character.

Skull and Shackles would seem like an easier fit for smugglers/Hutts against Imperials.

Nice bump, as I'm going to try and use this in a week or two.

I'm thinking about using Orik as a go between as he survived too and he'll reach out to the PCs to try and help out his girlfriend Lyrie.

On the flipside I'm thinking Ironbriar can reach out to the PCs to remove that loose end and more directly use the excuse to remove a drug dealer or two off the streets.

This came up in my party as well; Conditions of the same type don't stack either, correct? Like the wights ability to give enervated 1. Once a character has been enervated they can't suffer from it again I believe.

Out of all of those choices I'd prefer 1.

What didn't work with 1st Ed rage? Or especially the unchained version?

One of my PCs has played a barbarian so far and didn't like it. "Didn't feel like rage did anything or was worth it." This was at level 4 while playing fury totem (probably the most boring totem). But still if your main class feature is not fun then something needs changing.

1. yes, and I mentioned this on the survey
2. yes

As this is a yes or no question... my answer is no.

To elaborate slightly, I cannot imagine a system that would make PF/D&D magic items exciting.

By coincidence, or not, at least two of my PCs in Pt 3 took fleet.

My players have said that creating characters has gotten easier and quicker each time. We're on Part 3 now.

I don't understand the idea of giving out item levels rather than a gold piece total. I think that part does currently slow things down.

I also agree with removing ability scores at this point. As for the slower ability progression either:
a) who cares. I think players would like slightly higher ability scores.
b) charge 2 of the 4 increases to raise a high stat

This question came up during the game in part 3 of DD from a paladin character.

After reading all the sections on shields (conveniently split over several chapters), it seems that the only reason shield proficiency increases is so that heavy armor wearer's AC also increases when proficiency increases.

This feels lazy or awkward. Like why even include it at all? This could also further limit light/medium armor concepts with shields.

As I minor note, I do realize it helps out with shield slams but I think that is fairly minor as well.

I like the any two bonus idea as well.

If they keep it as is, then one of the two names needs to change, Having two long C words as the only names makes it much harder to remember.

FYI, this is also the same for knockdown attacks. that requires an action as well.

I had this same question too when I ran it. I also agree with the thought that if all the PCs say they are stealthy then they succeed. As pointed out above the odds of PCs rolling dice to be sneaky isn't going to happen (especially as I think the DC is 23 and not 20)

This is a test of expectations and writing.

Not that it matters, its not like a heavily armored PC is going to try to be stealthy. Stealthy PCs have enough difficulty being stealthy.

I suspect the goals of exploration mode would be to support the hex based exploration sections that make it into many modules and APs. I don't even mind that as a goal, it could lead to those sections being further fleshed out and using more skills.

However, the current page of rules and ideas lead to confusion. Taken one way the seem to be very limiting on what characters can do, like it uses an action to have your weapon out? Or two if you use a shield as well?

Are PCs supposed to break down their actions to avoid fatigue? Hmm, I can't use 20 actions or I'll be tired. So I guess I'll spend 10 actions moving, 6 actions investigating and 3 actions searching. And at 19 actions I won't be fatigued.

Or the answer is also no as listed on page 379 under shields.

I got there from checks in the glossary which refers to page 290. On pg 290 you can see the following things under the check description (also known as proficiency): attacks, armor (shields), perception, skills, saves and spell rolls.

I agree with Godfrey. Why are you assuming high level magic skill adjustments? If math is so important you have the ability to remove those and keep DCs more concise and manageable.

Bring the power to the hero and the character and not to whatever magic item they are using. This goes for magic weapons as well.

I thought the OP was going for sarcasm, but I'm not sure.

As a reminder being energy drained and poisoned doesn't matter, or I don't think. They each give the same type of penalty and unlike PF1 it doesn't seem like energy drain stacks with each hit.

I've also seen that its useful to squeeze out every bonus, like you should have cast bless, or flanked the creature which could have brought that +13 to a 16. Your players also rolled a bit low on average.

That said... I do think 'boss' monsters are too difficult. Players don't like missing on a 12 or so, then quickly picking up their dice and not seeing any 20s end their turn as I've seen several times in my group.

But of course you need to break out the spreadsheet every turn to calculate whether Assist will add or subtract that 1 point of damage. If it's not clear that something's likely to help, people won't bother. And if nobody's going to bother, it's a waste of ink.

I agree, and that was mostly my point. It doesn't feel good or fun so it won't be used.

True, I'm debating that part but more of the reverse. The adventure seems to state that it the PCs are being stealthy then they succeed. No die rolls or anything.

I'm pretty sure this all ties in to the 'tight math' complaint about PF2. So even if the math shows that doing this raises someone's damage by 1 additional point over the assisting character's it becomes useful, balanced and doesn't throw off the game.

This question comes from an encounter in Pale Mountain so minor spoilers will follow.

On one encounter the monster 'notices the PCs unless the entire party is stealthy in their exploration.'

Is this to be taken literally? Is it useful to just say you're being stealthy even if you're not good at it? If it matters this creature has a perception of +13 so it is highly unlikely that a whole party could sneak by it.

I had wondered this about that same trap. I also think it would be a good idea to lower dispel magic, or make it a ritual.

I will add that me sacrificing my attack and chance to be a hero to slightly add to someone else's damage isn't terribly fun. Also, I'm guessing by the weapons and stat arrays this character may have an equal chance of hitting as critically failing which the average/below average barbarian won't appreciate.

Also curious as you mentioned dirge and demoralize (which don't stack?) what are the checks frightened pertains to? I thought it would be everything listed on 290 but frightened also mentions saving throws which is on that page.

As a small and minor note I don't think the action system has completely nerfed casters. In my games both 1st and 4th level casters have cast multiple spells in a round which was not possible before this.

I don't know if its a good idea at times but it is possible.

Yup, by the rules there are no penalties for critically failing an attack.

I will say that my players were confused by this. It does feel odd to miss by 20 and have no consequences.

One of my players said the creation process was dry but couldn't nail down why.

One of my players took 5+ hours to create their 4th level character for Pt 2 of DD. The other three players were in the 45-90 minute range. This was their 1st or 2nd character made for PF2, doesn't seem too bad for me.

I have created several 1st level characters, takes me about 15 minutes. As of now I don't think there are very meaningful choices which speeds things up.

I do not like powers being mixed in with spells. There doesn't seem to be a reason that powers shouldn't be in their class section as I don't see them being shared between classes. Although that's hard to tell as powers just say power#, and not what has access to it.

Backgrounds still feel meaningless to me.

I do not like the items as listed for higher level characters. Its extremely arbitrary as to what makes the list and what doesn't. The price ranges within the same level are baffling as is the limitation on heavy armor (as if it doesn't have enough problems)

EDIT: Looking up where spell points are for each class has been annoying. If you're keeping the opening stat sidebar for each class, just put it there.

It is odd not to mention it as I would assume the answer is yes. Its not like Golarion is anywhere near a medieval tech level, its far beyond that. Or it was, maybe with all the magic nerfs it'll revert some.