RE: Wildcards. With 18 possible wildcards I've been using my d20 from Wrath and just randomly rolling them (rerolling 19-20).
I wouldn't say the wildcards do much to change the easier banes. Most wildcards feel like an annoyance to the characters while a few fundamentally change the way you play.
For instance one says (paraphrasing) you can only play one power on your turn that lets you explore. That's a game changer because it absolutely limits you to 2 explores per character.
Another forces you to bury a card in your discard pile at the end of the turn so you better be sure you keep you're best cards out of there.
Keith Richmond wrote:
Yep. As a 2-Handed weapon it doesn't get the freebie Acrobatics style; good for characters who are into that kinda thing, less good for someone like Quinn.
Late to the conversation... just noticed this weapon cause I finally drew it in a game.
Gotta say this reasoning seems odd to me. If PACG is representing the PRPG the Elven Curve Blade in the PRPG is a weapon that can be used with the Weapon Finesse feat. Feels like it should have an Acrobatic option in PACG. Falchion seems like the non-finese two handed version.
Just my 2 coppers on RPG flavor.
Of course if I'm consistent in my logic scimitar shouldn't have a Finesse option in PACG because its not a weapon you can use with Weapon Finesse in the RPG. You have to take a very specific feat called Dervish Dance to get the same effect.
Bonus: Did a quick check. My logic for both Elven Curve Blade and Scimitar also holds true for P2E-Playtest.
I'm on 3-4 of Curse playing with the Curse rules for the same reason noted above. Its been interesting. The static Bane's level 1 & 2 are generally push overs (some barriers with specific skill requirements are an exception if a character doesn't have that skill.) If there is anything challenging from them it generally comes from their before and after acting powers.
Banes with a single # generally aren't much of a problem.
Banes with ## feel about the right level of challenge.
Boons with a # in their effect are very desirable. Looking at you Enhance, Aid, Good Omen and Magic Weapon. At Curse Adventures 3 the #=6. Enhance therefore gives a static +7 to a skill and only keeps getting better.
I also have a sword that can be discarded for 1d8+# which can generally auto most combats. I call it my finisher.
I've now gotten to the point where I have access to the Blackjack Role but my DD to CotCT characters already have their roles.
Is there official word on how to handle this.
Do I lose the opportunity because my characters already have their role cards?
Can one of them swap out a role card for the blackjack role. If so do you reallocate power feats?
Should the spell Enchant Weapon in the Core Set have the Veteran Trait.
I ask because other spells with the # symbol in their Power's effect do have the Veteran trait (examples, Aid, Good Omen, Enhance.)
I've gotten to Curse's 3rd Adventure and am modifying my box and I noticed that of the 0 level spells Aid and Enhance were Veteran but Enchant Weapon was not and I'm just curious.
So on Wildcard "The Perils" there's a modifier called Confusing
After you reset, shuffle a random card into your deck.
At first I assumed this just means I add a random boon, but then I looked at it again and it says card. Should that include monsters and barriers? If so should it include story banes, locations, supporters? Character cards?
There is a definition for card types in the back of the Core rules but this isn't helping me.
Am I missing something that defines card? My guts says the intent here is boons, monsters and locations, as mixing the rest gets a little weird but I'm not 100% sure.
So how does Zellara's Harrow Deck work with recovery?
Zellara's Harrow Deck wrote:
First should this be like spells and say "If proficient discard..."(For those unfamiliar with the item there is a banish to do something power.)
Second who would be proficient. Its an item and the traits are Tool, Magic, Gambling, Harrow, Mental. No one from the Core or Curse has proficiency in any of those. Curious about the intent here.
So I've been playing this game since RotR. I've played every set (multiple times... gotta play every character) plus organized play and never once have I done the following until just now...
Taken an Armor Card feat.
My organized play group had a saying. "Armor is a crutch." It felt like something that just took up space in your deck. We avoided armor for the most part (sure there were a couple awesome ones but generally speaking they weren't very exciting.)
Now I've just finished DD and am playing Valeros and between his powers and the new way armors work and their new cooler powers... armors are finally cool and interesting.
Tip of the hat to the developers. Really love what you've done with armor in the Core. Look forward to what it looks like with Curse. Thanks!
So I know the answer to this one but are random scenario's intended to be restricted to level 3?
Strictly reading it playing a random scenario is playing 3C. That means the adventure level is 3. Which means you can only rebuild your deck afterwards with cards that are 3 or lower.
Obviously this isn't the intent but I don't see anything that contradicts it. Is there anything I'm missing in the RAW? Pretty sure the RAI is that the level is the last level you played before the random scenario.
Okay so finished 3C yesterday and moved on to CotCT. Read the rules noted above. So I'm assuming that the game should look like the following if completing DD & Moving to CotCT
Start CotCT at adventure 1 but # is considered 4
Add 3 Wildcards (are these permanent i.e. same ones the whole path or choose 3 each scenario?)
All Core and CotCT cards 0-3 are in the Vault. New cards will not be added to CotCT adventure 4 (which will be considered # 7)
That sound right?
So... if I read this scenario right the only boon you will ever see is the reward boon for completing the scenario?
You never explore the locations so you never see and encounter the boons. In so far as I can tell from my reading of the scenario you could simply determine how many boons each location has and put all weapons or spells or what ever because what they are doesn't matter. They're just a countdown clock to determine if you lose.
IIRC playing this type of scenario in MM got you a reward of rebuilding with what was left in the locations if you won? Been a few years so I could be wrong but I think there was some sort of boon reward.
So far as I can tell this is the only scenario of the random scenarios where you do not get a chance to acquire any of the boons. Is that intentional?
Has anyone taken characters through Dragon's Demand and after completing the Adventure Path used the reward to take their level 3 DD characters to level 1 CotCT.
If so I'm curious how that played. Its a lot of CotCT scenarios before you get to level 4 and can start getting feats again (admittedly by end of DD you should still have 1 feat to fill.) Also I figure there will be a lot more side ways advancement rather than upward advancement.
Anyways has anyone done this yet. I'm almost done with DD and about to start this path myself.
So Varian has a power that's worded like this.
Varian Scion of Cheliax wrote:
On a local check at an Urban location, you may recharge a card to add 1d4(□+1). (□ If the card you recharge is a Diplomacy or Finesse card, add its level.)
My question is what is a Diplomacy card. So far as I can tell Diplomacy is not a trait. Finesse is. Is this supposed to mean a to acquire check that has diplomacy as an option.
So Heritage... while there are some differences... Heritage just looks like a second Ancestry feat you choose at character generation only this "feat" comes from a small selection of "Heritage" feats. This change doesn't really do it for me. Its not really a change on the macro level. Just another "feat" choice.
Was looking over the multiclass options recently put out and while I like the idea of Multiclassing its so class feat costly. It got me wondering could spellcasting be a class feat.
Every class uses the same spell chart for gaining spells. What if instead of getting a new level of spells at 3rd, 5th, 7th, etc... they got a class feat and had to option to pick the ability to cast the next level spells of pick something else instead.
Example (Wizard class feat level 3): Arcane Casting 2
Something along this line allows a Wizard that wants to be a bit more gish to delve a little deeper into the fighter class at the cost of higher level spells.
Now this would be a lot more class feats in the hands of casters. Might need to look at non-casters in comparison.
Anyways rough idea I wanted to share.
Question on encounter I of Mirrored Moon.
This is the encounter with the Cyclops. The Start of Section I says its a High 9 (difficulty High level 9.) High equals 80xp to spend on monsters. I'm calculating the encounter has 145xp.
Elite Cyclop (level 6, party -3): 15xp * 9 = 135xp
Add it together and get 145xp. That seems way off. Is this an encounter the PCs aren't supposed to fight but rather negotiate?
Better yet how is this a High 9 encounter. What is the design intent here. Help appreciated... especially as I have 5 players and need to adjust.
Yeah I guess I'd just like to know the design intent. Were these flying incorporeal creatures designed to have a max of 2 actions a turn because they have to spend 1 flying? Or was that an oversite? If they weren't designed to spend 1 action each round flying and I playtest them RAW where they have to spend an action each round flying then the data on those encounters is off. Especially compared to someone who saw fly speed X and assumed it worked like PF1E.
Bummer that this hasn't been answered.
RAW Shadows and Poltergeists have to spend 1 of their 3 actions each round to fly or they fall (not sure they fall 1500 feet, but they certainly fall RAW.)
The question is whether this was RAI. Are shadows and poltergeists not allowed to hover in place without spending an action to take the Fly action?
Maybe this was intentional but it feels like and oversite to my PF1E sensibilities.
Help/answer appreciated. Thanks.
I had this question as related to Forceful and Charge weapons.
Forceful This weapon becomes more dangerous when you build up momentum. When you attack with it more than once on your turn, the second attack adds a circumstance bonus to damage equal to the number of weapon damage dice, and each subsequent attack adds a circumstance bonus to damage equal to double the number of weapon damage dice.
So... at high levels with a +5 weapon that's a +6 circumstance bonus to damage on 2nd attack and +12 circumstance bonus to damage on 3rd attack.
Would Forceful be the specific overriding the general?
So further more...
In twitch stream/you tube "Deconstructing Doomsday Dawn (Paizo Friday #16) Logan Bonner" says in reference to Frighten affecting DCs... [time 17:40] "And that's true for any of the conditions that work like that if something says it applies to checks it gonna to apply to DCs to."
So this quote is prefaced with "And that's true for and conditions..." but why would a penalty to checks from a condition be applied to DCs and not a penalty from say a spell.
Bane provides a -1 conditional penalty to attack rolls. Attack rolls are a kind of check (see checks p.290). If an attack roll is a check and penalties to checks (at least from conditions) are applied to DCs does that mean a caster under a bane has his save DC reduced by 1? How about a caster under the effect of a bless?
Would love clarification so I can playtest this correctly.
Although out the years of 3e/3.5/PF1 I've had an issue with the Aid rules and PF2 has the same issue.
Player #1 offers to Aid Player #2 (let's assume Player #2 has a better skill roll.)
Player #1 rolls the Aid. Rolls a 16+ and would have aced the check on his own... but all he does is provide a +2 bonus (in PF2 maybe a +4 bonus if critical success.)
Player #2 rolls a 5 or less and fails the check.
Does that situation bother other people? Its always nagged at me and happened multiple times in "Pale Mountain" with the elemental puzzle.
I'd love it if Aid allowed you to take better of the two checks results. Not roll but check.
Success = Your ally may use either your check result or their own which ever is best.
I would love a solution to this situation cause it drives me nutty.
So to add to this conversation... the new version of frightened as of Update 1.2.
You’re gripped by fear and struggle to control your nerves. The frightened condition always includes a value. You take a conditional penalty equal to this value to your checks, including your DCs (such as your AC or Class DC). Unless specified otherwise, at the end of each of your turns, the value of your frightened condition decreases by 1.
Bold emphasis mine.
So while there is next to no way to raise you Spell DC it can be lowered by effects that lower checks???
Or can this be read to say your DCs are to be treated as checks and thus Inspiring Courage would increase you Spell DC?
In one of the Paizo playtest videos they've put online the PCs were sneaking and it came time to role initiative. GM told a player he can roll Stealth. Player looked at sheet and said do I have to use Stealth. GM said no you can use Perception if you want.
Not sure if that option is represented in the book (RAW) but putting it out there.
So my party didn't make it. Started the day with the B5 Gnoll encounter. Party had faced the manticore already that day so decided to rest.
Next day they got in the tomb and dealt with both elemental fights (figured they needed the gems after the first elemental died.)
So far 2 four hour sessions averaging 3 encounters per session or 1 hour 20 minutes per encounter. Probably closer to 1 hour per encounter with some exploration and other bit mixed in between.
We also probably did a good hours worth of table time online over the course of the week.
Still need to do the device, mabar room and possibly final encounter (PCs are currently on Day 6. Also day 6 was totaly a 15 minute work day. Elementals 1, heal, Elementals 2, heal, rest. Ugh.
I'm bummed because I figure I need at least another half a session to finish this but that puts us behind on adventure 3. I'm also not looking forward t trying to cram in adventure 4 in 2 weeks!
Half damage on melee attack misses would incentivize rolling the third attack at -10 for half damage?
I suppose 50% damage/success on a successful save is better than nothing but it took 2 actions (generally) to cast the spell. A martial character can take two swings in that time, one at full to hit, the other at -25% to hit. Someone better at math than me can figure average damage there but maybe that math should influence how much partial damage/success a successful save should do.
None the less as characters level and martial character's gain better item bonuses and casters can buff the party with better bonuses to hit, save DCs fall way behind the curve means less and less chance for those critical fails. Does partial damage/success make up for this in the current iteration? My gut says no but I'll be watching play as we go in to level 7 next week.
Having a target make a saves vs. having the caster make an attack roll makes magic significantly less effective. Here are some reasons.
So let’s look at some numbers. Say we have two characters. We’ll call them Martial and Caster.
Martial has a +5 bonus to his melee attacks. Caster has a +5 bonus to his spell rolls.
They are both making an attack against the same target who has a 15 AC and a +5 Reflex save (Goblin Commando as an example.)
Martial rolls to hit and needs to roll a 10+ to hit or 55% chance of success. 5% chance of crit.
Caster has the target roll a Reflex save vs. his Spell DC which is 15 (10 + spell roll.) Target needs a 10+ to succeed. Caster has a 45% chance to hit. 5% chance of crit.
Now let’s level up to level 4. Martial and Caster are both at +8 and attacking the same target as before.
Martial rolls to hit and needs to roll a 7+ to hit or 70% chance of success. 20% chance of crit.
Caster has the target roll a Reflex save vs. his Spell DC which is 18 (10 + spell roll.) Target needs a 13+ to succeed. Caster has a 60% chance to hit. 15% chance of crit.
As the game progresses and we factor in buffs that affect attack rolls and item bonuses to hit, Martial’s chance to hit will significantly outpace Caster over the course of the game.
Solutions to this are many. You could make spells powerful enough that they are still worth the lower chance to hit (I’m not convinced that’s the case given what I’ve seen playtesting through level 4 but am willing to wait and see.) Already many spells do a partial effect on a successful (not critical success) save. This is good. But I seriously feel some consideration should be made as to whether buffs should effect Spell Rolls (and thus Spell DCs) or if saves should reverse and become attacks made by the caster against the target.
Some thoughts I’ve been having about the system. Not a math genius but I think my basics are right. Constructive comments appreciated.
Bit of thread resurrection.
Watched the Paizo play through of Lost Star. In part 2 (You Tube video) a monk tries to diagonal around a hard corner in the boss fight and the GM said you can't diagonal across corners. This forced the monk to walk forward into an ally occupied square and then to the side to get into position and since it was a move action it provoked and AoO from the boss.
Not sure how official this is but it was Jason Bulmahn GMing. FYI.
So Guidance says
So is this saying the target is bolstered against Guidance (which means the target cannot gain benefit from Guidance for 24 hours?) Or is the check/save bolstered meaning the same roll cannot benefit from Guidance for 24 hours.
If the latter this stinks as a cantrip. "Oh sure its at will, you can cast it as many times as you want in a day... I mean how many PCs are there... oh 4? Okay you can cast it 4 times a day, but still at will." ???
Dire Ursus wrote:
The Gnoll Sargent Zakfah is listed as having his strike action with a Scimitar, and his picture shows him with a scimitar as well, however his gear does not list him as having a scimitar and instead lists a longspear. Which should he be using?
Same question. Has this been answered?
Do you think your group can finish Pale Mountain in 2 weeks. I'm doubting my group can. We play Thursday nights for 4 hours. We dealt with all the setup and Lady Vord stuff online and started with Hyena encounter. We made it through Manticore encounter and avoided the Antkeg with good checks. So 3 encounters and some exploration. Feel like we're going to need 2.5 to 3 weeks. How are other people feeling?
So half my players are out this week do to "life." We're debating pushing forward or taking the week off... problem is that there is no way we can get through "In Pale Mountain's Shadow" in 1 week. If we delay a week we fall behind the playtest schedule and I'm sure at some point "life" is going to happen again and then we'd be behind two weeks or a whole adventure.
So the question... how long will Paizo continue taking survey info after each adventure's two week window?
See it now... thanks.