Jhofre Vascari

Some Kind of Chymist's page

Organized Play Member. 167 posts (171 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character. 3 aliases.

1 to 50 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tusk the Half-Orc wrote:
The 1st level Oracle feat Divine Element has flames mystery as a prerequisite and only provides additional spells for the flames mystery, but opens with: “Your mystery allows you to cast certain spells that most others can’t. Add the following spells to your spell list, depending on your mystery.”

It's almost certainly a feat for most mysteries, they just don't all have options for that feat yet (i.e. its gated to flames in the playtest but wom't be in the APG) -- it's more than possible that the spells the other mysteries would get aren't core but from the APG (and they are playtesting spells)

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Mr. Paru wrote:

Certainly the first thing that comes to mind is; Why the witch has no access to Divine tradition)

I mean, your Patron can be an Angel or a Devil that we already saw in the sorcerer who grant Divine magic.

I think there will eventually be divine witches, maybe not in the APG but at least eventually, there are reasons for them not to be at least not as 'core'.

1. This set up has 3 spellcasting classes per tradition (not that it matters but if parity is a goal it does keep it)

2. The divine list has a lot of spells that poinf directly towards a diety, lke divine lance and all the ones that reference a divine weapon, which makes the whole mystery patron thing very complicated (with sorcerers and oracles its easy enough to say its whatever diety you follow but with witches some external force is definetly giving powers and that might be Nethys even if you follow Desna, so who's alignment/weapon/etc do you use)

3. Thematically, some external source gave me divine powers is very much an error thst has options, e.g. Cleric.

And most importantly in my mind

4. Witches kind of thematically fit the same role as Warlocks do in other games, making deals with unknown powers. The phrasing in the patron text even makes it semi clear that the divine beings at play granting these powers are trying to stay incognito and i feel that, at least storywise, divine magic is an awful lot easier to track back to the being that granted it. That is to say, most things that are divine that could make a cleric could make a witch. And if they don't need to hide who they are they'd just make a cleric who HAS to do what they say, rather than a witch that they're hopibg does what they want.

Either way, I'm glad we got our prepared any class.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

If we ever get a Strix ancestry we can make Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
In a PF1e Council of Thieves game I had a wizard who was also a lawyer (got reincarnated into a gnome at one point and was using magic or possibly a hat of disguise to keep up appearances and attend court and such).

I really hope you flavoured it as one of those wigs they wear in courts in Commonwealth countries.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Options in the new edition have shown me how awesome the idea of lawyer is as a character background.

It's just so thematic for so many types of characters: Clerics of Abadar, Asmodeus, Sarenrae, Pharasma, amongst other dieites along with scoundrel rouges, bookish wizards, charismatic sorcerers and many more.

So, Let's see what Lawyer PCs people have put togther; I'm sure some folks have thought up creations beyond my wildest dreams.

Also, I feel, depending on the GM and campaign, that legal lore can be a super useful skill (shame for my Cleric of Sarenrae that it keys of INT though).

The only thing that's a negative for the lawyer concept is that the Truth domain isn't very stong. (Don't get me wrong; I love the Word of Truth thematically [and vaguely remember something in PF1 that was similar that I also thought was cool], but it isn't very strong unless you have a very nice GM that is on board with it).

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Trap Options: 1001 Pptions for Traps for GM's and PC's

13 people marked this as a favorite.

The amount of type it took for me to realize that it was a pun, and not some complaining about something again, brings me shame.

Hopefully kobolds in the APG gets some good trap synergy in their ancestry feats.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Trip weapons let you do four things

1. Perform trip without a free hand.
2. Use the weapons reach to perform this trip.
3. Add the weapons item bonus to the athletics check
4. Drop the weapon to downgrade a critical failurw to a normal failure

How does this interact with Wolf Jaw strikes; which a monk can do in Wolf Stance if they are flanking?

I assume you can add your item bonus from handwraps of mighty blows; but can you 'drop' wolf jaw (leave the stance) to avoid a crit fail.?

Bonus Question: You can't enter a stance outside of encounter mode; does that mean you can't deal piercing damage with Wolf Jaw strikes outside of combat to an object?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Post your build challenges here and your responses to those challenges. Lets see what strange monstrosities of min-maxing we can come up with.

Build Challenge 1: Run Away

Fastest Character wins.

The Rules
- Up to Level 20.
- Most squares moved in one turn is the winner (excluding teleport and similar but including focus powers and such that allow for moving X times your speed or similar)
- Buffs allowed only if they are applied by you on your turn where you are moving as far as possible (chugging a potion, casting haste on self etc)
- Assume no AoO
- No external help from Liberator Champion or similar.

Bonus Points for a fast wizard that runs away (Rincewind Style)

Let the Race Begin!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yay! Pathfinder Friday and Starfinder Wednesday are back.

*starts dancin'*

2 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I like the Staff much more than the Wand for "the thing the Wizard just carries around all day".
The staff is one hand, half a dozen wands are in this holster opposite the free hand.
Bandolier holds 8.

Quick draw wizard duels.

I've always liked the idea of a character that pulls out and uses wands/bombs/scrolls/devices/etc. a wizard with a bunch of wands fits that nicely. You, max out at 10 per day though if you don't wear any magic items [12 if you grab a feat and have a high charisma]

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Worth noting.

In my homegame we did x =/= The published setting of Golarion does x.

If the homegame your playing has always chaotic evil goblins go for it; but that doesn't mean thats what Paizo has been publishing

EDIT: I spelt Golarion wrong for the 100th time.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

PF2 still has wands of cure light wounds; we just call them Paladins now.

But i do like the new wands; they fill a fun design space.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm making a wizard with the improved familiar attunement thesis (he was studying using squirrels to deliver spells). I'm quite looking foward to my squirrelly Wizard (even though he will never likely get played).

Has anyone made a familiar character sheet? I can't find one in the Character Sheet Pack.

11 people marked this as a favorite.

Rarity is their for two main reasons as I see it.

1. They introduce something later, maybe a special cantrip taught in Kyonin or something, and not have it instantly accesible to every character (which the GM can 100% allow)


2. It's a tag to say, this spell/artifact/whatever might cause problems in your game, allow it if you wish, perhaps make it an epic quest of discovery, for example going on an epic adventure to get Fabricated Truth and try and pull an inception on the King, but be wary. Its there to warn people that something probably has implications on the game and story that a GM should consider before handing them all out.

It has the potential to be a good and usefull system; it could also be a not great one, I guess we'll have to wait and see how it feels in play and what gets published in the coming years.

PF2 tries to make choices (and adventures), matter, gating some stuff that might make the game less intresting for some play styles is one way of doing that. If you don't like rarity; and neither does your group; its rather easy to house rule it away.

Edit: I just realised fabricated truth isn't uncommon (I do want an inception stlye adventure path though). Example instead could be Remake and a destroyed artifact.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Barbarians =/= Fighter =/= Other Martials.

Barbarian feats are what you miss out on and various boosts to raging amongst other things.

If you want to play a Fighter that MCs into Barbarian thats fine, but it's like saying champion multiclassed into cleric is a better cleric, maybe for something but its not generally true.

And Barbarians can get AoO at 6th level; Heavy Armour isn't that much better; the iconic idea of a barbarian doesn't use a sheild, they use a 2 handed weapon (and you can get shield block as a general feat); and barbarians get expert in weapons at 5th level (they do cap at master though).

The iconic idea of a fighter is well trained and skillfull; the iconic idea of a barbarian is someone who hits like a truck, even if they miss more often.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragorine wrote:

Leaf order also get a 2nd focus point at 1st level.

I have a problem with Goodberry taking a hour to cast. Everyone just waits around for a 1st level druid magically make 1 berry that heal 1d8+5 and save on one ration. Not to mention at level one they can only use their 2nd point to make 1 more goodberry if they have another hour to spend.

Goodberry takes a Hour! Thats insane.

What is the leaf druids niche; its not clear to me from what I've read?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
shroudb wrote:
FowlJ wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
shroudb wrote:
nick1wasd wrote:
Back to the original topic at hand, I feel pure Ki monks are no longer viable, as with a max of 3 Focus points, you completely crap out on your magic juice halfway through the fight if you're using one Focus Spell a turn, so you can't take a Ki ability feat every chance you get, or you'll have no use after round 3. This is quite saddening, I wish at least monks specifically got a higher cap than 3, or else you're forced to make a hybrid monk, well that's well a good, I'm sad to see my all-powerful mystic who's body is crap but mind is sharp has to be relegated to a casting class. Cest la vie I guess, Z-Fighter knock offs are more viable now though :)

trying to build a character that his main thing is JUST focus abilities is a trap either way.

since you can only regenerate 1 focus until level 12, and only at level 18 you can regenerate all 3 of them either way. (you can't "refocus 2-3 times in a row")

focus abilities are better seen as a thing you can do once per fight, with the option to "burst" once per day until VERY high levels at least.

as an example, ki blast is an excellent ability to open up EACH fight and then proceed to pummel your foes to death. And in a pinch, you may indeed blast 3 times in a row, but then you're back to 1/fight till next day.

Where is THAT stated? I haven't seen it, and we have some pretty compelling evidence it isn't the case since Jason told the Champion she could refocus back to back several times in a row.

Page 300, the requirements for the refocus action:

You have a focus pool, and you have spent at least 1 Focus Point since you last regained any Focus Points.
similarly, the feats allowing to regain 2 focus, have the added requirement of "having spent 2 focus since last time you refocused" so you can't even go "regain 2, use 1, regain 2"

I believe the Champion was casting Lay on Hands every 10 minutes and refocusing inbetween. It's why champions make decent out of combat healers, it stacks with medicine too, so you can have a medicine person healing someone every 10 minutes and the champion.

12 people marked this as a favorite.

On Bulk: It's an abstraction that is useful and easier to track and isn't a measure of mass; it's a measure of how hard something is to carry; and while it may have some weak spots with light bulk where you can carry 19 hatchets as easily as a spear, its more aimed towards making it so you can't carry 15 physical tables as easily as adventuring gear. So what bulk is a house, infinite unless you are some manner of giant, you can use pounds and ton for things where you need to know the mass of something but Pathfinder never really had a comprehensive system for engineering things, neither did any other direct descendant of old school DnD. If you ever really need exact mass, length, etc. for what's going into your games you care homebrewing heavily anyway (which is perfectly good and I encourage people to change the game to suit them) and could probably do away with bulk if you so wish. I've never played PFS but I imagine GM's there aren't letting you try and pick-up houses anyway so it's probably a non-issue there. Somethings do have odd Bulk for what they are but that's and entirely different issue than bulk itself being bad.

CRB Page 629 wrote:
Bulk - A value indicating an item’s size, weight, and general awkwardness. It takes 10 items of light Bulk to equal 1 Bulk, and 1,000 coins are 1 Bulk. A character becomes encumbered if they carry Bulk greater than 5 + their Str modifier, and they can’t carry more than 10 + their Str modifier.

As for the main point of this thread. A game can't be "better" than any other game in anyway other than subjectively and by general consensus of what people find subjectively better. A game can have better systems, it can have better coherence, it can have more polished stories and it can have many things like that but that doesn't make a "better" game. I still play Wolfenstein 3D and love it even though it may not be as technically well made as Fortnite or something else; does that make it a better game, yes, to me, does that make it a better game to someone that likes Fornite, no, to them.

Is PF2 a better game than PF1, the answer is yes, to some people and no to some other people. It's introduced many changes that I quite like and a small handful that I'm still Iffy about, and on the flip-side there are people that don't like those changes and wish it had stayed the same. Pathfinder 1 still exists and Paizo will keep selling PDFs for it until there is no longer a business case for it (which will likely never occur unless they go out of business), they aren't foolish enough to pull the PDF's from their store because they know what can happen when a business tries that. They will also sell whatever stock they have already printed and I'm fairly sure Erik Mona said they'll keep reprinting the soft cover CRB as long as it keeps selling. It has a decade of content, more than most people could ever play through in their lives and if people are disappointed by the fact that new content isn't being created for it anymore (by Paizo, 3PP still exist) they are going to be disappointed a lot in their life because things move on, grow, change and end. Doesn't mean you can't still play PF1, doesn't mean that PF1 was a bad game, most of the Devs for PF2 would be sad to hear if you think PF1 was bad because they spent a considerable amount working on it before PF1. If your sad that PFS no longer plays with PF1 rules or that it'll be harder to find a group, find solace in the fact that people still play AD&D home-games and the internet has plenty of people you can find, so you should still be able to find a PF1 home game for you with a little searching.

Lot's of Tabletop Role-playing Games exist, literally hundreds at this point, there is the right one out there for anyone. Give PF2 a chance if you can, but if PF1 or 5e or Fate or World of Darkness or any thing else is what you would prefer to play, go and play it. Other people having fun with a different system won't make yours less fun for you.

And for anyone who's problem with PF1 is that the game encourages new players, or makes things easier on people, includes more diversity, is "Politically Correct", or anything similar to that; PF2 probably isn't for you, Paizo does what it can to make this a hobby for everyone, and if that means that people that don't like that get upset, I for one couldn't care less.

As for something I like about this new system, Heritage feats. I know it has its detractors but choosing which thing my Halfling is good at for being a Halfling rather than just being given a bulk set of abilities made it feel more likely a Halfling, not less. My Halfing rogue knows about acrobatics, stealth and Halfing lore because he grew up listening to stories of Halfling folk heroes, that's the story in my head, if I had just been given a bulk set of abilities at level 1 without any choice I probably wouldn't have added that to my characters backstory. It would have just been another ability on my Character Sheet that I frequently forget about.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Here we go again.

Goblins plural; usually got attacked; goblin singular; people usually wait and see what happens. That was the general in universe reaction outside of places that commonly experienced goblin attacks.

Goblin society tended to be awful with a handful of non evil tribes (with recent events increasing the percentage) but goblins pushed out or raised away from from tribes aren't neccasairly going to be evil. Chaotic and overly fond of fire yes; but not necesarily evil. Terrible parenting is why most Goblins become evil.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Also worth noting that; just because a rules element does not yet exist does not mean any aspect of lore has been retconned; plenty of parts of lore existed in PF1 before any rules supported them. Diabolist will almost certainly return as an archetype or class archetype as will other things that support the lore Cheliax and other significant regions. Gunslingers don't exist yet but that doesn't mean that Alkenstar blinked out of existence.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
While I have you guys here so If I flurry my first attack the MAP would still be -0 -5 -10 etc. correct? not -0 -0 -10 right?

This is correct, yes. The Flurry action lacks any language changing MAP.

EDIT: Lots of multiclassed Monk/Rogues in this thread...

Also most unarmed are agile so its usually -0 -4 -8.

EDIT: That Monks famous speed in play.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's probably not perfect for min-maxing but it's not a trap option in the way that some things in PF1 where, and overall, as long as one of the options for stat boosts is reasonable for your character concept, not choosing an "optimal" background isn't going to be that bad in the long run. It's not like in PF1 where there where straight up pit traps you could fall into and never escape, it's more likely a non-optimal choice.

Edit: Ninja'd by Albatoonoe

1 person marked this as a favorite.

What is your favourite sorcerer bloodline for PF2 so far and why?

Currently I'm really liking the Hag bloodline for its debuffing but I haven't looked in depth at the Occult spell list yet so this may change.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
GentleGiant wrote:
Alahazra (Oracle iconic) does look like she's had a new, upgraded outfit in the latest PF1 offering (Druma, Profit and Prophecy), which could speak against her being replaced.

It's not a new outfit specifically for her; she's dressed as a Kalistocrat and Harsk is dressed as a member of the Mercenary League, two of the big factions for Druma.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

I mean, the weapon specialization for the bard specifies what to do if you have legendary proficiency, while the Bard can't even get master.

I'm guessing exhaustive language here is just for future proofing.

Yeah it is straight up future proofing; some on the class feats mention unskippable class features as prereqs as well; presumably so that class archetypes that remove those features work properly.

9 people marked this as a favorite.

I missread the title as "are fiends summoning wizards a thing of the past now" and was intrigued as to when that was option.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Also their original release schedule would have had 10 archetypes from the world guide day 1 but they had issues with the printing schedule. Theres also a fair bit of content announced for this year already that will put in more customizability with more likely to be announced at Gen Con.

23 people marked this as a favorite.
ikarinokami wrote:
all magic got "normalized"

This is a good description; it was less a nerf and more pushing them back into the bell curve of the powerscale, a process that also buffed martials and similar.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Clickable Link!

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Joe Wells wrote:


8 people marked this as a favorite.

[TOZ] Huzzah! [/TOZ]

YAY!!!!! *Starts running in circles screaming and waving hands*

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Diaz Ex Machina wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:
That would be 4pm in France.
Same in Italy.

11:30 pm in my spot of the Wonderful Land of Oz (and yes Australia does have a 1/2 hour offset timezone; it is strange)

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Some Kind of Chymist wrote:

I am also unable to download this one and i have tried everything I think of including using different browsers, refreshing the page, clicking the trouble downloading link, connecting to a different internet, logging in and out, etc.

No matter what I try all that I can download is an empty ZIP file (with file size 0 bytes) on my desktop computer and a failed download on my phone.

Any ideas?

It worked this time; Yay

*Kermit arm flail*

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mathematical Rigour

4 people marked this as a favorite.


My First PF2 PDF.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
The Fifth Wanderer wrote:
Mark Moreland wrote:
Joana wrote:
Looking forward to the Age of Ashes Player's Guide ... hopefully soon....
Very soon

Maybe Sooner? Link

6 people marked this as a favorite.

<TOZ> Huzzah! </TOZ>

4 people marked this as a favorite.
PFSocietyInitiate wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Patrick Newcarry wrote:
wait, how tall are you Jason? You're towering over everyone else in that photo.
I'm 6 foot, 7 inches tall. We were all standing I'm afraid. The photographer even asked if I could duck down a bit.

I'm sorry but WHAT?!?!

I've only ever seen you sitting down behind a GM screen or doing lore interviews! I had no idea you were 6 foot 7 inches! You just blew my mind!

Now we know why Paizo uses portrait GM Screens.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is a weird question but; when I buy my 2e books as PDFs (shipping sucks when it has to involve an actual ship or plane so I'm just buying PDFs until later down the road) I will likely end up reading them on my phone page by page so; are there any things that I should experience in their two page spread glory (I can pull them up on a big screen with pages side by aide I just usually don't when reading PDFs)?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

1. Are there clear rules for throwing improvised objects (and any feat support)? [Monk in a bar brawl throwing a tankard for example]

2. Abadar get any cool granted spells beyond the illusion of wealth one Erik Mona used in one stream? [And about how big is the write up for each Diety about what spells/domains/anthema/weapon etc. (Also are those in the Cleric section or elsewhere (like in a spot with world lore stuff))]

3. Is the abberant bloodline suitably abberant?

4. Is the Mega bomb feat suitably mega?

5. What are the Halfling bonus language options?

6. Any favourite weird spell?

7. Did Performance get any interesting skill feats? Likewise Thievery?

8. Can Monks be non-lawful now?

9. Any interesting magic hats in the book? What about magic travelling gear like tents?

10. Do you think that Storm order druids or Elemental Bloodline sorcerers make a better 'wrath of the storm' type character?

Please and thank you.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

How blasty have storm order druids turned out with the change to focus?

Please and thak you.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

If we do tieflings etc. as heritages how are we going to handle the cases where the heritage adds a stat flaw and extra bonus, when depending on the base ancestry these might not stack?

Like being a tiefling or a changeling or something should change a human from a +2/+2 to a +2/+2/+2/-2, but what would it do to an elf or a dwarf?

My Assumptions is they will implement it in one of four ways

A] They never make universal heritages that affect ability scores (unlikely)

B] The ability score modifers for your base ancestry are entirely overwritten by the heritage (i.e. you get the same array of pluses and minuses for that heritage no matter what your ancestry is).

C] The heritage forces you to use your free boost from your ancestry (every ancestry currently has at least one (I don't see that changing; as I see it; its there to encourage playing all classes on any ancestry)) on a specific (or choice of two for some heritages) ability score with no specific clause about 2 boosts to the same ability score

D] As C] but if it would boost a score to 14 you get a free choice again that doesnt make any score better than 12. (To curtail power gaming)

I think D is probably most likely or maybe B. It really strikes me as them trying to avoid locking specific builds behind a specific ancestry in this edition.

In short, i stongly suspect that Paizo will do whatever they can to not make it so that 'That Guy' at the table can't brow-beat someone else because you have to be an aasmir gnome to be a bard because thats the only way to get two 18's (which isnt allowed anyway) and other such arguements people make.

I'm hoping that PF2 makes it so that 1.] You have to actively try to make a non-functional character as opposed to them being unhappy accidents and 2.] Cutting down on the ability for people displaying toxic behaviour to have a strong mechanical basis for their claims of 'badwrongfun'.

2 people marked this as a favorite.


Name: Pavo Cailean
ABC: Chelaxian Human (Versatile Heritage) / Martial Disciple / Monk
Weapon: Fists.

[I'm assuming monks can be non-lawful know (this guys NG) but correct me if I'm wrong.]

Raised in an orphanage sponsored by the church of Cayden Cailean, he was put under to tutelage of an order of monks after showing some promise and a few behavioral problems. He eventually left the monastery and now travels Avistan fighting injustice where ever he sees it.


Name: DeeDee the Gnome
ABC: Gnome / Entertainer / Bard
Weapon: Three Chords and the Truth
Catchphrase: "HEY! HO! LET'S GO!"

Member of the all gnome 'rock' band the Ra-Gnomes (they mostly sing about the Plane of Earth).

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Name - Zoic (Not his real name; Names have power and you don't just give that away)
ABC - Kellid Human (Probably the Trait Heritage) / Nomad / Fey Bloodline Sorcerer (Possibly MC into Barbarian for thematic reasons (he's very angry))
Catchphrase - "I am Zoic; Fey-blooded and Fey-bloodied and you too shall fall"
Weapon - Primal magic

Zoic hails from the Land of the Mammoth Lords; he travelled away after his clan abandoned him. His father was a great warrior; a druid of the wild path, he fell to the fey that would attack their tribe. His mother too was a warrior of great merit who fought valiantly; one day whilst pregnant with Zoic (though she did not yet know) she unwittingly made a deal with a fey after a long fight. At that moment Zoic was granted with his primal magic (he would say cursed) even before his birth. From birth he was different and his tribe new it; they could sense the magic in him; and they where superstious on the best of days, and Zoic had the enemy running in his veins. One day when he was still young his mother went hunting alone after some great beast, to reclaim his family's honour (and to try and keep her son safe from those who would see him banished or worse; for his magic). She never returned, a week later Zoic went to sleep one night and the next morning his clan was gone. He did what he could to find them but they made sure not to leave tracks he could follow.

He travelled south after that and sustained himself as best he could; learning to use the magic he was cursed with. He vowed to use it against those that cursed him; those who caused him to be abandoned, those that made him lose his mother and his father. The fey had made him fey-blooded; he would make himself fey-bloodied.

That was longer that I planned; but I really like the character concept and have a whole arc of going from N to NG for him; learning to let get of the self-hatred and such.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Things I'm looking forward too

* Alchemy in the CRB [Despite being a different kind of chymist]

* Skill Feats [I'm good at X so I can do Y]

* Non-arcane sorcerers [Yay, more thematic sorcerers]

* Monsters w/ unique and awesome abilities [ Yay for monster design; where going to get zombies that feel slow and lumbering, Owlbears that strike terror in one's heart; More dinosaur-y dinosaurs; Etc.]
On other points;

Honestly, anyone whose enjoyment of something is predicated on the fact that it excludes other people has a pretty terrible view of gaming, and probably most things in general. Lowering a barrier to entry (an unnecessary barrier) by removing 'trap' options is the kind of thing a new edition should do; a rogue should have Trapfinding, it shouldn't be something necessary for the player to have to make that rogue mechanically sound.

Other people being bad at something isn't what makes you good at something, being good at it is what makes you good at it, and the argument that I see far to often is that 'System Mastery' should exist in such a way that punishes people who lack it instead of rewarding those who have it. As others here have said someone who knows a game well will still do better that some who doesn't in the same way that a chess grandmaster does better in chess than a novice, but the novice and the grandmaster are at least still playing the same game, with the same rules which can't be said for some of what went on in PF1.

And for anyone not swayed by the fact that games should be fun for anyone that whats to play them think of one very simple thing, when the designers don't have to account for an insane power disparity it makes it much easier (as in actually achievable) to create content, be that APs, PFS Scenarios, Modules, etc. that are fun and a challenge to most groups and most characters in most groups so that an encounter that is a TPK for one group isn't a cakewalk for another group just because they have 'System Mastery', having characters that are made to be vampire hunters should help you fight a vampire, not being really good at ramming together things that may be RAW but weere definitely not RAI. Making the game have a higher floor isn't the same as lowering the ceiling.

So I guess what I'm looking forward the the most in the new edition is a fun game, that's hopefully robust and fixes flaws that have haunted the game for too long. If that means a few people that think powergaming is the only way to play the game get their feathers ruffled I'm okay with that. Also bestiaries (gotta love a good bestiary) and an updated GMG (empowering new GM's for close to a decade).

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Yay the Saga Lands are next!

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Leotamer wrote:
I think it will depend on the mutagens you use. There is a sizable number of characters in more action-oriented fiction that augment themselves with chemicals, like Bane from Batman or witchers. If you expand the thematic scope of the mutagenist from chemicals to more science-stuff, hulk and most of his rogue gallery could be mutagenists.

I can't believe I forgot Bane; he is a pretty iconic example of someone that augments themself with chemicals as are Witchers. Now that I think about it there are lot of DC and Marvel comics characters that have powers that resemble mutagens; The Lizard from spiderman for example and as you said hulk and his foes (and most of the other failures to make another Captain America).

The Invisible Man also had a sort of mutagenist feel to him.

And of course Stefan Urquelle; though i doubt many people play Urkel-expies in Pathfinder (I'm sure there are people that do though).

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Do we know anything about gaining new alchemical formulas outside of leveling (as in, can they gain new ones like wizards with spells)?

Also can anyone think of characters that seem like mutagenist alchemist in fiction (other than the typical way that Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is adapted)?

Because I for one am super amped to read through the rest of the CRB and look at the various alchemical items and see how it all work. As can probably be guessed from the username I have a soft spot for Super Science! ; especially of the chemical/alchemical variety, and while I applaud Paizo for putting Alchemists in PF1 (Golarion has always been a setting with a place for most of what a fantasy/sci-fi/horror/western/etc. fan could hope for); the PF2 version being in the CRB and not relying on reskinned magic mechanics is awesome. Looking at what we know so far about the alchemist it looks like it has a decent chassis, it'll have teething problems for sure, but after a year or two I'm sure it'll have the breadth of options to make it everything I could hope for.

As for the whole bulk 'issue', low strength alchemists probably won't be numerous because the new character creation rules force you to spread out your stats more, making having at least strength 12 likely to be fairly common,a 14 or 16 more likely on a hulk style mutagenist alchemist. I've seen too many of these threads get derailed by arguments over mechanics we haven't seen the final version of at all, let alone how they actually play and I hope for the next 2.5 weeks we can see preview content and not immediately start doomsaying about what we haven't seen. After those 2.5 weeks we can all have at it and compare what we think of the actual rules but for now we should all play nice and not immediately jump to conclusions.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I mean, we have no way of knowing ATM that padded armour is the only armour with L bulk, we haven't seen the CRB yet, nor the final text for the rules on bulk yet. The playtest was a playtest and almost certainly didn't have the full list of equipment, or many other things that weren't strictly required for the playtest.

1 to 50 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>