Ramidreju

SheepishEidolon's page

1,748 posts. 20 reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist.


1 to 50 of 347 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I'd try to warn my players that something very powerful comes their way. That could be giant footprints, the crushed remains of powerful other creatures or a closing thundering. So they might have the choice between fight and flight. Or at least the chance to prepare, both mentally and mechanically. And if they flee, still I would have established that really dangerous creatures roam here.

If they had real trouble with Huge+ creatures (which not necessarily equates very powerful), I'd give them some hints how to fight them. Reach weapons, specialized feats (Just out of Reach) and size increasing magic come to my mind.

Monsters killing average PCs with a single hit have their place, but I'd rather use them as story elements than as regular encounters. To sow despair when the party has to watch the inevitable destruction of a settlement, as bodyguards of creatures that are not supposed to be attacked (at least right now) or as threat that could be released if they don't act fast enough. And leveling / gearing up to be able to beat an once overwhelming foe is very satisfying, so I'd try to offer my players a rematch.

If other monsters don't really challenge them, more battlefield diversity (fog, lava, walls etc.), NPC magic usage (illusions, healing, slowing etc.) or special combat tricks (Pushing Assault, Improved Reposition, Spring Attack etc.) can make a difference.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am reading Curse of the Crimson Throne the third time currently, and plan to GM it soon. The AP has an engaging and coherent story, enough setting variety and decent NPCs including a villain with some depth and early visibility. Opposed to several APs, there is no weak book and my players prefer heroic fantasy over survival horror.

Encounters might be too weak for the group, but that is hopefully easy to fix.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd go by Iomedae's paladin code:

Inner Sea Gods wrote:

(...)

When in doubt, I may force my enemies to surrender, but I am responsible for their lives.
(...)
I will be temperate in my actions and moderate in my behavior. I will strive to emulate Iomedae’s perfection.

Personal feelings about goblins shouldn't impact judgment, even if family was affected. That's part of being a paladin: You believe in something greater than your mortal instinct or emotions. Finally, it wasn't the kids who did all this. By RAW, goblins are not automatically evil:

Advanced Race Guide wrote:
Alignment and Religion: Goblins are greedy, capricious, and destructive by nature, and thus most are neutral or chaotic evil.

So for me the question would rather be: Can I allow my fellow adventurers to slaughter goblin kids?

Of course this is just one take on it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:

I noticed a bit of discussion on the fighter class on how it needs to change. I would like to know specifically what you would like to see.

Vote in the poll and leave a comment at the link.

Voted for "Keep it the way it is in the Core Rulebook".

A fighter is in a party of ~4 player characters. It's totally fine if he covers only a fraction of the noncombat capabilities. I am opposed to the idea that everyone plays a Swiss Army knife. Leave the skilled people (bards, rogues etc.) some space. Trust them to do their job.

If you still want to combine a fighter's combat prowess AND skills / magic, you can have that, thanks to the options of 10 years of Pathfinder. It's not baked into the class, so you will have to spend character options on it. Powers should come at a price - classes like cleric and wizard are the real offenders here, with their broad and free / cheap access to new spells.

Further, it's good to have a class that barely spans 2 pages in the Core Rulebook. People not always want to choose a subtheme (like bloodline) or sandbox options (like revelations). Or deal with a point system (like ki) or spellcasting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Melkiador wrote:
This message board is terrible for collecting all of the rules we will eventually need to integrate into a complete game.

If you want to advance the process beyond brainstorming and some discussion, a more methodical approach would be needed anyway. I agree the forum as a platform isn't perfect, but IMO the question of the best platform comes after deciding on the process. For example, more people involved in the actual decision making means they need more refined ways to commnicate.

Some thoughts on the process:

1) The project is too big to be solved as a whole. Splitting and further splitting is in order, until questions are of a size a team can handle.

2) And I'd absolutely go for teams, since individual persons tend to focus on certain things and ignore others. Even if they try to cover everything and be unbiased.

3) There is some science about optimum team size, it's supposed to be 2 to 7. Bigger groups tend to split into subgroups, fighting each other. However, as a project of volunteers a lot of people will drop out over time, so you might want reserves or to start with somewhat bigger teams.

4) In addition to the teams you need a least one dedicated person who supervises the entire process, with very low risk of dropping out.

5) Make sure there is some visible progress soon, to keep people motivated. For example it should be relatively easy to decide on whether to incorporate ABP and whether to tweak it.

EDIT: 6) Finally do some expectation management: There will have to be compromises and a few decisions won't be perfect in retrospect. So people with strong opinions on rules won't be 100% content with the result. But likely happier than with the current system...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chrion wrote:
The problem is, as I understand it, is that you can't take Accomplished Sneak Attacker more than once.

Yes, you can't. However, missing a dice or two not necessarily kills your build. And actually, you would have a hard time to insert the feat a second time (or more), given how many feats dagger throwing eats up.

My impression is: You already made up your mind and you want daggers and the rogue class by all means, with full sneak attack progression. So you are down to 2 class levels that can be spent otherwise. If you pick up brawler (snakebite striker, 1d6 sneak at level 1), you can afford another non-rogue level, so you are at 4 non-rogue levels.

Well, people here made several good proposals how to spend these levels. So I propose: Make your choice, accept that rogue and throwing both mean some struggle in actual play and enjoy the moments when it works.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If miracle simply closes the rift, with no delay, no interaction, no challenge and no consequences, you throw away a chance on adventure. And there is little satisfaction on such an effortless success, unless you really play up the story of this rift and your players buy it.

Miracle could help you find an artifact to close the rift, allow you to get some support from a lhaksharut (powerful inevitable concerned with the separation of planes) or protect the entire party from the Negative Energy Plane for a while, so you can close it from the other side.

I'd try to make the deity's way of support fit to their personality and portfolio. For example: Nethys points you to the artifact, Abadar wants you to strike a deal with the inevitable and Sarenrae enevelopes you in holy light.

So miracle would help you more than a lower-level spell, but still it's up to the adventurers to actually do the job.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Reminds me more of Star Wars Saga, which I have no doubt also inspired DnD4.

4e's lead designer (Rob Heinsoo) was inspired by RuneQuest (from the 70s) when he pushed the idea "every class should have special powers". At least afterwards he noticed that's not what everyone wants... According to an essay by him in the Complete Kobold Guide to Game Design.

Who knows, Pathfinder probably wouldn't exist if a certain guy hadn't picked up a certain RPG several decades ago...


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
The fact that I'm enjoying them does not preclude the fact that I'm of opinion that a) PF1 falls apart, especially at higher levels and is a mind-bending chore to GM and b) it's a dead system, on its way to obscurity.

Well, I agree to a), but since these problems have been known for a while, there are solutions to them. More HP for both sides, banning a few options, focusing on (rather) simple foes and some Roll20 scripts works for our campaign - my players are at level 18 now. The fixes shouldn't be necessary, but can be considered the bill for having so many options. Details on the fixes:

Spoiler:
We started with full HD for everyone, for a more tactical game, but currently I consider switching to double standard HP - it's more fair for creatures with high Con, Toughness etc. and fights rocket-tag further.

Dazing Spell... doesn't exist. Several battlefield control spells had to go, especially if they don't allow a save or take out a creature for the entire fight. Or worse, multiple (mass icy prison, I am looking at you).

I pretty much stopped building high-level casters, instead I pull big creatures from the Bestiaries, augment existing simple creatures with additional HD (such as hellhounds or demilichs) or add a few class levels.

Especially for the attacking routine, with all those bonuses that could be activated or not. Thanks to one of the players.

When it comes to the dead system (I guess you mean "no new rules from Paizo"), some GMs are actually relieved they don't have to deal with new stuff anymore. Now they can work their way through the pile of material they didn't check out yet, feeling more and more in control. And there is the good old escalation of commitment: After spending so much time with learning all the rules, some people feel it would be a waste to forget about all that and move on to another system.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I really like them, too. Made them the most important low level adversary for my current homebrew campaign - did turn out well.

Don't forget the mundane stuff: Searching for food. Preparing food. Eating. Sleeping. Talking with each other. Playing games with each other. Honing the weaponary.

As soon as you add a flavor of mitish behaviour to it, it becomes more interesting: Searching for vermin to eat, below rocks. Cooking weird soups from vermin. Eating rituals where the chieftain gets the yummiest bite first. Sleeping with moderately well-organized guard shifts. Blaming other mites for the failures at last expedition vs. the gnomes. Playing "warriors vs. kobolds", as kids, but also in a variant as adults, as preparation. Endlessly repairing the single dagger each one has.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I searched through the entire Core Rulebook PDF and these are my findings (sorry for repeating a lot of stuff):

Dex 0 turns you immobilized. (Ability scores: The abilities: Dexterity)

Immobilized is different from flat-footed. (Uncanny dodge, no matter the class or prestige class)

Immobilized is different from helpless or slowed down. (Monk AC bonus)

Being unconscious turns you immobilized. (Shooting or Throwing into a Melee)

Together, immobile and helpless cover bound, cowering, grappling, paralyzed, pinned and stunned. (Aiming a Spell)

Halt Undead immobilizes undead, effectively paralyzing them. (Halt Undead, Hold Person)

Iron Bands of Binding turn you immobilized, as if pinned. (Wondrous Items)

Paralysis turns you immobilized. (Special abilities: Paralysis)

----

Hence paralyzed and pinned are obvious cases of immobilized. Cowering, grappling and stunned targets are not helpless, so according to the Aiming a Spell text they are "just" immobilized.

So "stuck in your square" / "unable to leave your square" seems to cut it. You could add "on your own", because someone else could move a petrified person - or you could drop from the sky.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

1. My problem with +2 to everything is: It doesn't help to define your character. A +2 can be seen as an encouragement to focus on certain things, while a -2 gives you a hint what to avoid or work around.

Yes, +2 to everything is strong. And you can further build around it, although making really good use of all +2 seems challenging. +1 on certain saves and skill checks is nice, for example, but pales in comparison to what a class does with its primary score. See wizard and Int, for an extreme example.

If I had to build a character with such a race, I'd look into class combinations that are usually considered difficult, like a bard monk.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Secret Wizard wrote:
You'll NEVER outheal enemy damage, that's why Healer is NOT a viable role in Pathfinder.

Well, you don't have to outheal them. Healing half the damage to your party means they last twice as long. Meaning they have twice the time to do damage.

Or, to put it another way: Healing half effectively doubles the amount of frontliners. If one becomes two, it's not a loss that you aren't a frontliner yourself. If two becomes four due to this, well, party can be happy you are not just another frontliner (who would have been just number 3).


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
The people in this thread are clearly unsatisfied with 3600 feats and 5000 spells Paizo published for PF1, so I take they shouldn't have much problem looking through whatever of their interest might there be by 3PPs.

Well, the people here mostly post in their function as players IMO. And in this case they still have to convince their GM to also check out the 3pp content in question.

Speaking of, as a GM, I have a few problems with 3pp content:

1) There definitely is some content I'd call unwanted immediately. For example Improved Furious Focus which completely removes the Power Attack penalty for all attacks during your turn. It's ok at level 6, but scales with level in a quadratic way (more attacks benefit from removing an increasing penalty), so later its power level doesn't fit a feat anymore.

Hence I feel I have to examine 3pp options more closely and pay more attention on their direct impact as well as interaction with other rules.

2) I have a much harder time to find discussions about it, to understand the actual power level, the real price paid and connections to other options. For many Paizo options, you can find at least some discussion here - especially if they are powerful. For 3pp you will usually have to rely completely on your own judgment - which can be done, but means more effort for worse results.

3) It raises the potential for the ambitious players, but does nothing for the less ambitious players because they don't make the jump to 3pp. Which results in an increased gap of character power, meaning more frustration.

4) I have to bother with it. The Paizo content is already a lot - but at least it's fixed now, there won't be anything new for 1st edition. 3pp not only adds a lot of potential new stuff, it's also a still growing thing (not by much per year, but still).

------------

What can be done about it? Well, forum threads like "Favourite 3pp" are helpful. Maybe people will write guides to 3pp (even aimed at players only still helps a GM), maybe such guides already exist. Maybe 3pp content will get a bigger share of discussion during the next few years.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Rogue. Yes, it's not a powerhouse by default, but that's part of the charm. You have to work with what you got, try to land your sneak attack often and make the best out of these many skill ranks. On the plus side you rarely have to worry about daily uses (makes playing way more relaxed) and success with such a class feels way more rewarding. Hence I prefer Core rogue over Unchained rogue.

When it comes to flavor, I really like that you depend on your wits and not on a fickle deity or a pet.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This reversed behaviour has surprising consequences when you as a GM put harm traps on doors and the group starts using the dhampir wizard to neutralize them...

And previous posters made an interesting point: Harm heals some conditions undead creatures could suffer from. Becomes more relevant when Thanatopic Spell was used, since it makes undead vulnerable to death effects, negative levels and energy drain.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I really liked the bundle for having a clear focus (Golarion lore) and the limited overlap with previous bundles. The 40$ feel well-invested.

If you are looking for character options, it might be worth it or not, depending on preferences and campaign theme.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I really like the new action economy, but I think it should be mentioned its basics were introduced years ago, in Pathfinder: Unchained. Yes, that would draw reader's focus away from the fancy new product, but I don't see anything wrong with openly stating that PF2 is partially "evolution instead of revolution".

There are more changes I liked, and I didn't find a real stinker yet. Still I stick with PF1, and will do so for the next few years. Why? Because it lacks a "killer application" for me, like an AP that immediately engages me, or further rulebooks with interesting options beyond PF1. Sooner or later something will pop up, but till then, PF1 wins with its superior amount of material and because we need less effort to get familiar with it (because we made most of the effort in the past).


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Elorebaen wrote:
cinxz wrote:
Hi, i usually dont type something in Threads but can someone tell me which of you guys thought brown and blue synergizes, its like the worst combination i have ever seen
Apparently someone with much better visual design skills than you ;)

Well, he has a point, no matter the tone. Combining hues of red and blue is always risky, and these sheets have a lot of brown. Red hues are usually used to mark small areas that demand attention.

Don't get me wrong: The structure seems pretty good and it's great the sheets are out. But I will spend my next minutes on trying to improve these colors...

EDIT: I found the following attempts to improve the coloring (for my taste, of course):

1) Invert colors. Brown becomes teal, blue becomes yellow.
2) Reduce saturation. Once it's down to 50%, the brown is way less dominant. Turning it black and white (saturation of 0%) also looks fine.
3) Replace brown by a rather light blue (#3D6798).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andostre wrote:
A friend and I had a discussion where one of us pointed out that most classes are made up of abilities that could be quantified with points, and so a modular class system could be created where a character could gain abilities by spending a set number of points on them.

Some people already did, so you might enjoy this thread .

It's a fun exercise to design a class with such a system, sure. However, I could imagine it results in players emphasizing offensive abilities, meaning they are screwed fast in the few cases when they are surprised. Also, it further widens the gap between motivated players with high system mastery and casual players. Finally, it's not that trivial to tell fellow players what you are capable of and what not - everyone has some idea what a ranger does, but you might have trouble to even assign a name to the combination you created...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Some ideas I didn't play yet:

1) Bastard. Half-elf, wields a bastard sword, dips in many classes, feats to emulate further classes. Probably needs some thought about role(s) and synergy effects to stay relevant, but has a lot of tools for sure.

2) Reincarnated druid 6 + psychic (self-perfection discipline) 7. Can reincarnate herself one a week, uses wild shape to get back to the party (and her equipment) and gets Wis to AC. At character level 12, she can remove the negative levels herself.

3) Rogue (phantom thief) with Int 20. Who needs sneak attacks when you can use skills? Demoralize single targets, heal well even without a healer's kit, be party's scout, get 1+ rank in pretty much any skill - that's level 3, thanks to multiple Skill Focus feats and refined education. Later you start crafting and using magic items via UMD. If you ever make it to level 17, use Eldritch Heritage (destined) for a whopping +8 to any skill check that seems still challenging, for some reason.

4) Superfast bloodrager. Pick up the elemental (fire) for +30 feet at level 8. Sacrifice your level 4 and 12 powers to get four rage powers, including the complete elemental blood power line. The greater one means another +30 feet. Together with +10 from fast movement that's 100 feet per move action, at level 12, before enhancement bonuses. Weeee...

5) Qinggong monk. With invested regent archetype - qinggong's crazy CHA based twin which trades bonus feats for qinggong-like powers. Yup, they stack. Cherrypick your way through a doubled amount of possible powers and show your fellow gamers that MAD actually means "multiple ability domination".


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Half-elf fighter + rogue + wizard + eldritch knight + arcane trickster to emulate 2nd edition's triple class (fighter + wizard + "thief"). Effective fighter, rogue and wizard levels are to be pretty much equal, resulting in 5th level spells, Greater Weapon Focus, 5d6 sneak attack, BAB 14 and solid base saves (9 and 8) at level 20.

Actually worked fine in the computer game Pathfinder: Kingmaker, from level 1 to 17.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Xenocrat wrote:
archmagi1 wrote:
Wow, I love these campaign traits.
They're pretty bad, except for Pessimist.

The campaign is supposed to be survival horror - meaning exceptionally strong campaign traits would be counterproductive.

When it comes to design (creativity, plausibility etc.), I find them solid to really good. My favourite is the Outsider - a well-grounded penalty AND bonus to Aid Another at the same time is a great idea.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

For the median the formula is roughly 11.75 + 1.25*CR. While that's close to 15 + CR, the factor of 1.25 is important on the long run. It means that with full BAB alone you can't keep up with the increasing AC - you need to improve weapon enhancement bonuses, ability scores, class powers and probably buffs.

I like to think in "quarters" here, bonuses of roughly 0.25 per level. Each quarter gives you +1 to AB within 4 levels:

Full BAB: 4 quarters (+4 AB over 4 levels)
Medium BAB: 3 quarters (+3 AB over 4 levels)
Weapon enhancement: 1 quarter (+3 weapon at level 12, for example)
Ability scores: 1 quarter (+2 AB from +2 regular increases and +2 item increases at level 8, for example)
Class powers: 1 quarter (+1 from weapon training roughly every 4 levels, for example)
Buffs: varies a lot

If you can make it to 5 quarters (factor 1.25), you can at least keep up with the increasing AC - might be good enough for a secondary martial. For good progress you need 6 quarters, though.

There are also things which drag you down:

Power Attack / Combat Expertise / Deadly Aim: -1 quarter
Iteratives: -1 quarter in average, varies between -0 and -2 quarters (level 6 is harsh, for example: -0 AB and -5 AB means -2.5 AB in average, so about -0.417, nearly -2 quarters)

So you should aim to compensate them, get rid of them (sooner or later) or accept the reduced accuracy for other benefits (damage is the most obvious).


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd go with statements like this, to get into the mindset:

Quote:
It's perfectly legal.
Quote:
They totally deserved it.
Quote:
They had the chance to help themselves, but obviously they were too lazy.
Quote:
I just want order. In order everyone has a chance to prosper.
Quote:
Evil? Nah, I just have a realistic outlook.
Quote:
Evil? Look at those demon worshippers! They are all about destroying and killing!
Quote:
These goody-goodys mean well, sure. But have you ever checked out the collateral damage they cause?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You are right with the alternate racial traits for both half-human races - they are mostly redundant with Bastards of Golarion. Beyond these traits I don't spot any reprints, though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Random comments:

I miss the foreword a bit, despite knowing it's for a good case (more adventure pages).

Matthias Rothenaicher's maps remind me of the maps of a certain other big RPG. I slightly prefer Robert Lazzaretti's style, but it means at least some variety (which comes handy for custom campaigns).

So far, I skimmed the adventure (versatile, imaginative and sometimes challenging - great), runelord article (very welcome topic) and bestiary (creative as always, I dig magic-scent).

Personally, I found the adventure summary to be exhausting (more than a whole page of related events), though that's a general issue with APs for me.

I am not so happy with the first event - it promises combat but doesn't deliver (which would offend at least one of my regular players). The players can't do much more than a few skill checks, and then they risk to see their PCs run away (which is put into perspective, but still). To be fair, it's relatively easy to modify, and the following events are pretty good. Mister Retch has so much potential...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

What's the goal? Having fun building them or creating memorable foes for your players? Because depending on the answer, the villains might be very different.

I assume the second, memorable foes. Players often only get a very superficial impression of their opponents, so I'd go for one very visible ability from the first class and another one from the second. Random examples:

Monk + cleric: Moves around at amazing speed, casts divine spells then. They could cast a touch spell while still around the corner, move to the PCs, bypass the martials and touch a more fragile target.

Barbarian + druid: Activates wildshape, then manifests totem powers and some elemental rage powers. Fear the burning tiger with the gore attack!

Rogue + bard: Casts vanish, sneak attacks, runs away, taunts the pursuer with music.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MR. H wrote:
The Druid is still a better wildshaper which is just unacceptable.

As I read it, an adaptive shifter can totally combine wildshape and reactive aspects. At level 15 it's five simultaneous aspects on top of wildshape.

And even if druid is still better at wildshape, you could see it the other way: Druid is brokenly powerful, shifter is well-balanced. The game rather needs well-balanced classes than broken ones, so a shifter is a good addition. Depends on your priorities, of course.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes, it's good to listen to what a player actually wants and not just recommend the "best" class. No disagreement so far. Of course you should warn the player if:

a) the character concept not really works in Pathfinder (character who avoids magical items)
b) the power level or style won't fit the campaign (gunslingers etc.) or
c) the concept will negatively impact fellow players' or the GM's fun (necromancer vs. paladin etc.)

With the great amount of material it should usually be possible to figure something out.

That said, I agree with Claxon: There are (usually) many ways. A player could pick up the challenge and build Batman based on a wizard, without even casting much. A quick draft:

Spoiler:
Transmutation school with enhancement subschool, craft your own Batman gear (including Arcane Builder discovery), throw in some quickened buffs later. Get Arcane Strike for some extra oomph, compensate the low amount of attacks with Two-Weapon Fighting, and pick up any unarmed style you like and which doesn't require a high BAB. There are also a bunch of magic items which can help you with punching and kicking (or melee in general) - and hey, you can craft some of them yourself.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Downloaded the PDF today and reading chapter 1 currently. So far this book shines with a good chapter structure (chapter 1 is clear-cut for players, everything beyond is GM only), methodic archetype description (every archetype gets exactly one page and a decent image) and a quite interesting feat list:

Spoiler:
* metamagic to create difficult terrain with area spells
* Demonic Style for the generic pouncing barbarian (moar damage, bull rush your foes around)
* some fun with tails
* better healing with the Heal skill at level 1
* compression ability at level 7
* Planar Heritage (which actually offers fewer options than Racial Heritage, but can be good for a fly or burrow speed)
* metamagic that throws a target around (at least a fantastic NPC option)
* jump much higher at level 3

There are a few options that put a lot of power into the hands of players (or NPCs):

* a ranger archetype that allows you to fly at level 4
* a feat that essentially gives you hide in plain sight at level 5
* a feat that hands out dimension door at level 9

The dimension door feat turns Dimensional Agility etc. into fighter bonus feats - which is actually very welcome.

I am not so happy with Tempting Bargain. It allows an Unchained summoner to take an eidolon of any alignment (useful), but also can drag the PC's alignment toward the eidolon's - which is a random alignment shift, controlled by dice luck instead of player or GM agency.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Comparing the 4 example feats with others, they are of pretty much average power level, hence ok.

There is a huge gap between what some players expect from feats (gamechangers or significant numeric boosts) and the intended power level since 3.0 (small tweaks to focus your character). The fact that a few feats are gamechangers (allowing you to fly etc.) or offer significant numeric boosts (Power Attack etc.) just supports the gap - players consider these few feats normal and dismiss the rest as "crap". The latter also helps them to cut down an enormous number of choices to a manageable amount.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
April Henderson 283 wrote:
So my group is about to start chapter six, and I have an aasimar paladin that can't be touched.

Oh, he can totally be touched - by touch attacks. If I counted correctly, 33 points of his AC are from armor, shield and natural - so they are gone against any foe with touch attacks. Up to you whether you want firearms, brilliant energy melee weapons*, nasty monster touches, touch spells or some other class ability.

* For this one natural armor still counts, but that might be ok.

The healing from Lay on Hands can be halved or stopped by a few options, but I don't have them at hand right now.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There is actually now a feat which improves healing with the Heal skill significantly: Incredible Healer

Maybe it's worth to be offered at level 3 already.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pantshandshake wrote:
There's a monk archtype with a capstone that gives +2 to... dex wis and str, I think.

Yes, it's those three stats, and it's the weapon adept from APG.

Wish allows you up to +5 on any score, but it's expensive. Paizo took quite some care to leave no loophole to get the stat increase for free.

But you can get increased permanent enhancement bonuses: Pick up the shapechanger bloodline via Eldritch Heritage and its improved version. At character level 11 you can turn bull's strength etc. into an 1 hour / level spell, 1/day. Now be an arcanist with brown-fur archetype to increase the bonus by +2, and take VMC wizard to pick up the Idealize discovery at character level 15, for another +2 (+4 at character level 20). That's a +10 overall. Extend Spell makes sure the bonus is basically permanent.

It might be more efficient to do that with size bonuses to ability scores, since you can get a +6 enhancement bonus from items anyway.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Brolof wrote:
If you had the ability to decide what kind of AP or Module Paizo would put out, what would you choose?

I'd ask the available writers what they would like. Because if it's really the AP they want to write, it automatically becomes much better. As a player or GM I prefer an awesome AP with a (technically) dull theme over a dull AP with a (technically) awesome theme.

Anyway. When it comes to interesting countries in the Inner Sea, I'd like to see more about Galt, Nex, Geb, Rahadoum and Razmiran. Beyond that, the First World could make an amazing playground. And storywise, I wouldn't mind more proteans as opponents (up to the BBEG final boss), after all they try to dissolve reality!


3 people marked this as a favorite.

It's rough for a GM to put a lot of effort into something which ultimately doesn't get appreciated. That can happen with puzzles, storytelling, roleplay, complex NPC casters that simply get stabbed before acting and many more things. Don't take it personal - it's not about you, not about your campaign in general, but about this particular game element. If your group doesn't enjoy solving a puzzle, give them something else to do.

It happened to me too: I spent some work on making their town alive, with several NPCs and their quirks and quests. But at the end I was told they actually prefer to quickly return to the wilderness and kill things. Well, I grudgingly accepted it, changed priorities in the next sessions - and the players were happy again.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Stone Dog wrote:
Circle also makes sense for levels of initiation, tiers of power and such things, which is why other people have used it in those contexts.

Speaking of tiers, personally I'd rather go for "spell tiers". But I guess there are a few more options.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Souls At War wrote:
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Fighter ALWAYS needs outside help. Otherwise it's just a fighter by himself in a game that's meant to be cooperative.
Would be nice to have a Fighter that can do something without needing outside help.

They can do a lot of magical things on their own, with the right gear or feats. When it comes to flight, winged boots aren't that expensive and Flight Mastery is available at level 9.

Hence the Aerial Assaulter Fighter might still make sense, even without a built-in way to fly.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I found the GameMastery Guide to be incredibly helpful. It not only gives you a wealth of ideas but also a positive mindset: Play with your players, not against them. Disclaimer: I am aware there are groups which enjoy the competition between GM and players.

Further I played with a couple of GMs. Each of them showed some positive and negative behaviour, so I tried to learn from the positive and avoid the negative. Reading this forum also helps, especially the Advice and General Discussion sections.

Finally don't forget you are there for the fun too. There is no point in going for a campaign style you don't like, just because your players enjoy it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gevurah wrote:
How detrimental do you think a low DEX score will be?

It's not that detrimental. However, you don't save much by keeping it at 10 either. Dex 12 is cheap (assuming point-buy), and the upgrade to Dex 14 is nearly as cheap - you get a bunch of small boosts for little investment.

Quote:
INT 12 (13 at 4th lvl for Spell Specialization)

Usually it's a good idea to add the ability score increases only to the highest score. That allows you to keep the highest score a bit lower at level 1, saving a lot of points for other scores.

If you shuffle it around a bit, you get the following:

STR 7
DEX 13
CON 14
INT 13 (as nicholas supposed)
WIS 10
CHA 17+2

At level 4, your CHA will catch up with the original plan.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thflame wrote:

Maybe just saying:

"This spell takes 3 actions to cast and requires Verbal, Somatic, and Material Components"

would be better than:

"This spell takes a Verbal Action, a Somatic Action, and a Material Action to cast."

Especially since if I have my Spell component pouch, can speak freely, and move my hand freely, I can stop reading at "this spell takes 3 actions to cast".

PF1 uses this format:

Quote:
Components V, S, M

I guess they will use something similar in PF2 - maybe they will add a number at the beginning, maybe not. Personally I'd fine with either.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If I had told my players they are heading South, I wouldn't confuse them with cave corridors leading them northwards instead. Messing with expectations is something that should be done only with good reasons.

So if I wanted these random encounters, they'd happen on the way to the Southern plot point. Ok, maybe it's only a single mile from the cave exit to the plot point - then I'd like to make up a good justification why so much happens in a short time. Hence I'd replace the random encounters by (roughly) three connected and fixed encounters. For example:

1) A troll using the cave exit as his lair.
2) Troll hunters who don't take it well that you killed the troll.
3) A scout of the troll hunters who looked for the troll just to notice his group is killed by adventurers - so he starts a skirmish as revenge, hoping to at least hurt a few of the offenders.

If your players go for nonviolent solutions, you have to improvise. Keep in mind that an encounter without combat can still be an interesting encounter - your players might enjoy feeding the troll with trail rations and it's a valid solution (maybe resulting in less XP, but I'd give them some). If the troll lives, the hunter group might still be angry: Probably they don't believe the adventurers let the troll go, or they fear the troll is more vigilant after encountering them, or they wanted to lure the (now temporarily saturated) troll with food themselves etc. etc.

Finally, their scout is maybe just a jerk who tries to slip into camp at midnight, steal some stuff and run. Might be interesting to let the adventurers catch him and bring him to the rest of the hunting party.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Maybe they are still considering details - or even debating about the general concept of the class. In this case it's better they delay information instead of publicly changing their minds multiple times.

Ok, to be fair, paladins (and their race equivalent, aasimars) always cause me nausea when I notice them, so it's easy for me to wait, see and accept. However, paladins are quite popular according to the latest big survey, meaning there is a lot at stake when it comes to designing the PF2 class.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DerNils wrote:
Sleep especially has very few Things to do with getting rested physically and a lot with giving your brain time to Digest/sort experiences. If you quarter that time, that either means that this cheap ring is seriously Messing with your head or the guy will go crazy.

In real life there are at least meditation techniques that cut down the amount of necessary sleep. They can't replace it completely, and I doubt they can cut it down by 6 hours, but it's a step into this direction.

Quote:
As I said, just like the create water cantrips, the feede everyone spoon and many many more Things in Magic rich worlds it sometimes messes with Basic Society so much it takes me out of the game.

While the ring is relatively cheap by adventurers' standards, it's still extremely expensive for a commoner. There is a very limited amount of people who can actually afford such a ring.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

1. Psychic. I am already a fan of sorcerer with its clear focus and (relatively) simple mechanics, and psychic improves the approach further. It gets rid of the entire focus on a single ability score, due to its phrenic pool. Amplifications can do a lot of things, but you learn them at a reasonable speed. Each discipline is unique, not only because of its powers, but also in its way to regain pool points and that you can choose between Charisma and Wisdom as secondary score. Bonus spells come earlier than for sorcerers, so they really help to shape the character. Finally there is a capstone with several possible choices to look forward to.

2. Slayer. It has a clear mission and does away with many of the cumbersome details of ranger (favored enemy, favored terrain, animal companion). You get decent combat ability on a silver plate, unlike a rogue where you have to spend some thoughts on build and playstyle. I am not eager to play one, but I appreciate the handy design.

3. Brawler. It gets rid of all the esoteric parts of monk, so you get a simplistic and capable melee combatant. Martial flexibility is as complex as you make it - you can go with always the same feats or make up elaborate lists for different situations. And if you don't like it, you can easily trade it away. Lately I discovered that the class is quite nice for NPC development.

So overall I like a focused design which still offers a bunch of options.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Unicore wrote:
So I read the Jason Bulmahn interview today (...) "If you have to spend a great deal of time creating a character or reading a manual, that’s a time investment that you have to sink in before the fun can begin. I want to get out of the way and let people have fun as quickly as possible."

This is understandable, but there is a catch: The less time / energy / money people invest, the less committed they feel about what they got. Sure, you can hope the campaign will be fun from the first session, but if it's not, it's very tempting to just drop the character and move on - to another character, another campaign or even another game system.

Quote:
1st level characters shouldn't be loaded down with options.

Many options is much less of a problem if some simple, effective options are easily available. If a PF1 newbie wants to play a martial of some sort, you can tell them "pick up a greatsword and Power Attack". It's not perfect in all situations, but good enough for now - and the newbie doesn't have to care about the bazillion of other options.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
totoro wrote:
To be clear, I'm fine with mechanical dipping. I just think if you go 10/10, that is as worthy of a dedication reward as going all 20.

That actually exists in PF1:

1) Be a half-elf and keep the multi-talented racial trait.
2) Be a human (or something that counts as a human), pick up the Eclectic feat.

Now both ways come at a cost, especially the second one is expensive in comparison to Toughness and Cunning. Still, they exist.

I hope multiclassing will still be a real option in PF2. It's one of the things that sets D&D really apart from those boring generic RPGs (pick a class, refine your choice at level 20, refine again at level 40 - YAWN).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Isabelle Lee wrote:
I just want to note that a character possessing Aspexia's Mysticism in a Council of Thieves Adventure Path campaign unquestionably represents a time paradox. Be prepared for aeons and inevitables knocking at your door! ^_^

Bonus XP? Bring it on! :D

1 to 50 of 347 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>