Skedge's page

I did not receive the normal auth e-mail but I did get the shipping e-mail yesterday, so I assume there was just a glitch with the e-mails going out.

No e-mail as well, order does show as pending under order history.

When should we start worrying about our August subscription sitting in Pending? Got the email that my subscriptions were processing/etc 8 days ago. Saw the post that shipping was delayed until this week due to needing more time for Customer Service to catch up on post-GenCon backlog of requests. I know it takes time to process and usually I don't mind waiting, but so excited for so many things in this shipment that its getting difficult. When's it appropriate to ping CS asking about a particular order? I'm guessing we're not at that point yet, but was hopping to know when it would be :)

The answer is right on your confirmation e-mail

Mine says

Transit Estimate Expected to ship in 12 business days

So I should see the order completed and shipped by the 27th since I got the first notification on the 15th.

UPS Mail Innovations, does offer some tracking, it is not as detailed as normal UPS tracking.

It will looks something like this. No estimated delivery date is generally provided and it can a few days to update.

Jul 20 2019 Package transferred to Post Office
Jul 20 2019 Package enroute to USPS for induction
Jul 20 2019 Package received by dest MI facility
Jul 16 2019 Package transferred to dest MI facility Fife, WA
Jul 15 2019 Package processed by UPS MI Fife, WA
Jul 15 2019 Package received for processing Fife, WA
Jul 15 2019 Shipment tendered to UPS MI Redmond, WA

I got my "Your Order has Shipped" notice today. It says it is leaving Ruskin, Florida. That is strange, there are closer Amazon warehouses than that, like southern California.

Amazon ships from the closest warehouse with the item in stock, not the closest warehouse period.

Hye Azakyte wrote:

Sorry if there is another thread for this, but I didn't find one(maybe I am just crap at searching, iunno).

Anyway, just what the title implies, What are the differences between PF2 and the playtest?
What things changed?

The PF2 core rule book is a whopping 640 pages, where the playtest is much smaller. What all content was added?

What rules have changed?

Enough has changed that anyone who was put off in any way by the playtest rules needs to take an open-minded look at the final 2E CRB.

The only example I'll mention is that Resonance was struck completely from the game. So Paizo had no golden cows, they acted on playtest feedback with very positive results IMO (based on what I've read - I do not actually have my PF2 books yet)

This is exactly correct, I did not like the play test, there were parts that if they had kept in the final I would not have looked at it. I got my books earlier this week and so far I love it. The change log would be almost a book in itself.

Samurai wrote:

Thank you Jason! My handwriting has become almost illegible since my stroke last year, and even I have trouble reading what I wrote. But I still love to play RPGs, I'm just having to find new ways of doing some things.

My handwriting is nearly illegible and I don't even have an excuse. I love form-fillable PDFs that I can print and bring to the table.

I am in the same boat, cannot write in a legible manner, no excuse, never have been able to.

89
Skedge Stoneheart
Dwarven Champion of Torag
Blacksmith
Dedicated to the stalwart defense of his companions

As someone who lives in the greater Seattle area, housing prices near Paizo, Redmond area if I recall, are fairly high already.

High being an understatement if Zillow can be believe median home value in Redmond is around $830,000.

For those GMs that do tell players DCs, so you also tell players enemy AC? I do not, but of course my players usually figure out the AC after a round or two of combat.

I write the AC on a white board behind me, as you have noted the players usually have it nailed down within a round or 2 anyway, and this keeps combat flowing especially with larger groups.

DC's I never give out. You want to do that? OK give me a _______ check. I then use the results to describe what happened without telling them directly that they failed or passed. I might use something like "After several tense minutes you finally feel the last tumbler fall into place" or "After several minutes working on the lock, several broken picks and frustration are all you have to show for your efforts"

Got trackin on mine, it’s been moseyin around Washington all day hehe

Mine is in the same spot 3 entries now all for Fife. WA. So close and yet so far, only about 1300 miles to travel... Hoping for Friday but expecting Monday.

Asgetrion wrote:

And I want to point out that I'm fine with max. HPs, I just still might want to house-rule them in my games. I definitely do not want to return to days of rolling ability scores, that often resulted in bitterness when one of the guys rolled up an "elven hero" and the rest were playing farmboys with pitchforks. This expression comes from an Undermountain campaign years and years ago; one PC was an elven fighter with vastly superior stats (Str 18/96, Dex 18, Con 17, etcetera), while others had 14s or 15s in their prime attributes. It wasn't really fun to play in that particular campaign.

I remember those days, as well. I started GMing at the tender age of...ten? With AD&D 2E, I think. I do remember the days of rolling my character's attributes, and HP, and I definitely don't miss it. I very much like the way that PF2E does it, myself. Rolling a 1 sucked. I know we were often allowed by one GM to reroll 1s, but then I would get a 2 or 3, and it just wasn't very fun. The rolls I want to matter are the ones taken for in-game actions, rather than vital character attributes.

Even so, I do hope they have an option for you. The default assumption they're running with is much more to my taste, but it wouldn't take much word count to give you an optional rule you're looking for, I think.

For the most part I agree with you, but think it was a mixed bag. The thrill of getting high enough rolls to play a Paladin or Bard... On the other hand, if you wanted to play a certain class and your rolls where just to low it sucked!

From what we have seen I am really liking the way 2E is looking for character creation and leveling.

Correct me if I am wrong but it feels like most people are saying more or less the same thing just wording it differently.

It seems to basically boil down to:

Players attempts to overcome challenge and fails, but magically succeeds anyway, potentially with some negative consequence, because failure at this point would stop the adventure is bad.

Players attempts to overcome challenge and fails, so player finds a different route through the challenge through their own choice of actions potentially with negative consequences is good.

I would tend to agree that the first option is a bad option, if the players failed the check, then the players should be the ones to figure out another approach. I would also agree that designing an adventure where there is a bottle neck where the adventure has to stop due to a failed challenge and there are no other paths through, that would be bad adventure design.

I got my email stating that the books were being shipped but the link to download is not working.

As has been stated multiple times on the forums and elsewhere.

Malk_Content wrote:

On the AoO and tactics things. My players had to use MORE tactics because "just stand in the way" wasn't automatically enough anymore. If they wanted to stop enemies getting to the backline they had to use chokepoints, grappling, wall spells, mobile fighting etc. It was way more tactical without the assumption of a perfect disincentive for everyone from level 1.

PF1 wasn't tactical. It was strategic. You leveraged as many resources outside the fight as possible to make the fight effortless. Pure logistics. Once you were in the fight the only "tactics" was hit hardest and fastest.

Can you give examples of how this was able to be accomplished? I did not see my groups doing this, but it was probably because they were PF1 players and hadn't adjusted.

It might have come down to me as a GM not creating a diverse enough battlefield for them to employ tactics, but either way it was not my experience.

We ran homebrew, so DD may have had more elements/terrain in this case to support it.

I saw my own players pay more attention to where everyone one was standing, and make more effort to shield the back line casters.

Less of a consideration in a tight hallway or passage, much more of a consideration in more open terrain with more enemies.

GOT MY SHIPPING EMAIL!

Which hilariously says it won't actually ship till Auguest 2nd XD

I just got mine as well, but it says it will ship BY August 2nd.

Baldur's gate is turned based, it just does not auto pause between turns by default. It is a setting you can change in game :)

On a semi-related note, I pre-ordered some books for 2E and I got an email telling me it was pending. That was 5 days ago. Will I get an email when it goes through or will it go through today cause it's finally July 8th?

You will get another e-mail saying the order is finalized and providing shipment information. It may or may not be today however depending on where in the shipping order you are.

As I have done with every new RPG I have played starting with AD&D2E I will probably roll 2-3 characters of every class withing 24 hours of getting the books. The order is hard to say, if nothing jumps out as I have to try this right now probably alphabetically.

From what we have seen so far there are so many possible builds deciding where to start will be very hard.

WatersLethe wrote:

I just really want to start building characters :c

Same, tbh. Character building is how I grock new D&D-type systems.

I do the same thing, the second I have the Core book in my hands I will start rolling characters, minimum of one of every class, likely multiple of each.

I think you will be fine, Just assign appropriate spells for your worlds Deities to grant, done. How and why those items and spells work you can decide to not explain or explain in a context that makes sense for your world.

From what I have seen and read I think it will be just as easy if not easier to use the 2E rules in other settings.

If you already had the Paizo Advantage from the AP sub you are grandfathered in and keep it. If you do not currently have it you must meet the 4 subs req.

I am going to make a huge assumption and say it is likely that the different "breeds" will be via feat's choices available for the various heritages.

WatersLethe wrote:

Charisma as it stands is in a unique position, and can't be treated like the other stats without consequence. The only way to bring it in line is to formalize some alternative means to handling the narrative power of social skills and their interaction with ability scores.

That uniqueness is the problem in many cases. Every GM I have had in the past 5 years has subscribed to the "roleplay, not rollplay" philosophy of social encounters, meaning that charisma rolls never come up, and high Charisma is nothing but an ability penalty for my Sorcerer or Summoner (and even if they did do charisma roles, I don't want to play "the face"). So it stands out as the only ability that requires the GM to adjust their playstyle to make relevant.

It is not possible at every table especially if you play at events or online. But when I GM I take the PC's charisma into account when role playing an encounter. No dice rolling needed.

Not a hard or fast rule and somewhat arbitrary on my side. It also allows me to more easily do things like a noble that only respects other nobles or a barbarian warlord that only respects strength to make more sense.

Skedge wrote:

I am trying to remember the name of it, it was for either AD&D or AD&D2E, but there was a mod that started out with the PC's as commoners and the DM was supposed to track their behavior and assign them classes at a certain point in the adventure. I do not remember it working very well but was an interesting concept.

I'm pretty sure that would N4 - Treasure Hunt. The PCs start as galley slaves, are shipwrecked, and that's when the adventure you describe begins. There might be others like that - Dungeon Crawl Classics makes it a key part of it's design - but that one I know.

Thank you, yes N4 and N5 are the the mods I was thinking of. Both were Level 0-3

I can see 0-level PCs working really well in 2nd edition. Choose ancestry and background, skip class, and go. When you hit 1,000 XP, you become 1st level.

I was thinking the same thing, you could start a group very easily at level 0 under the 2E rules, by stopping at various places in the creation process.

Apparently it is a long turn around. I am in the same boat. E-mailed on the 19th, not even an acknowledgment it was received, posted the issue here on the forums on the 24th and no response here either.

I am trying to remember the name of it, it was for either AD&D or AD&D2E, but there was a mod that started out with the PC's as commoners and the DM was supposed to track their behavior and assign them classes at a certain point in the adventure. I do not remember it working very well but was an interesting concept.

Please remove Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Druma, Profit and Prophecy from my side cart.

I play with people that love to invest in skills and some that only care about one or 2 skills that they favor. I love this option since it allows both play styles well not closing off any options for players tackling challenges.

I can see it both ways.

"This sword, even though it is of normal quality has a rune etched into it making it easier to swing"

"This sword has been forged by the legendary Dwarf smith Bolthar HammerHand. It's quality and balance are superb making it easier to swing"

I will likely use both methods, at my table as both add some flavor to the game.

Maybe the first sword is owned by a young poor adventurer and the rune was etched by a friend or perhaps a wizard he helped out.

The second sword could have been commissioned by a Dwarf king and be a family heirloom given to the party as a token of thanks for saving the heir to the throne.

As long as players are allowed any agency in assigning stats, players will assign stats based on the character they want to play. Min/Maxing, stat dumping etc will always exist in such a system unless all stats are equally valuable to all characters.

The only ways to stop stat dumping, without fundamental changes to the game, like getting rid of stats entirely, would be to go back to rolling 3d6 in order and that is what you get, or allowing a single predefined array that all characters must start with.

A Paladin is a champion of Good. They hold themselves to a code of conduct to better themselves and lead by example; adhering to a code like that is something a Lawful character would do. Therefore, only Lawful Good characters would want to become Paladins. A Paladin code is not a pact you sign for power; it's a standard they hold themselves to because that is what they believe they should be.

A Chaotic character would never willingly force themself into something like that. If you think that they would, you clearly don't understand what Chaotic means: it's the manner in which the character thinks.

Honestly I have since AD&D 2nd edition ran Paladin's like this. They are holy warriors of a church and champion that church's cause. Paladin's in games I run are the alignment of their deity and we adjust their abilities to match.

For anyone who argues that they have to be lawful good:
pal·a·din
ˈpalədn/Submit
nounhistorical
any of the twelve peers of Charlemagne's court, of whom the count palatine was the chief.

I will second this, I have played with both Crit and Fumble charts since 1st Edition AD&D. They add interest to an otherwise boring x2 damage scenario. Would love to see this in the core.

So far I am cautiously optimistic. We have very little real data to go on but the action system here looks good. Will have to see what the rest of the rule set looks like.

I think the issue is people tend to view alignment as a rigid structure. I have always viewed is a characters general outlook. For example a Good aligned character will tend to help when possible. A law abiding character will generally make a good faith attempt to follow the laws of the land etc. I never force rigid structures around alignment.

I fit Paladins into the outlook, by having them actually be the alignment of their god rather than enforcing LG. It makes more sense to me this way, all religions then have their religious warriors. I just alter abilities based on alignment like a clerics channel ability.