Hathor

SteelGuts's page

Organized Play Member. 227 posts (228 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.


RSS

1 to 50 of 227 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Thank you for your post perception check, it is not only my opinion but an opportunity to discuss the game. To be honest I wrote this post at the beginning for people like you and me who were considering PF2 and could find themselves on each side of liking/disliking the game.

Sorry to know that you don’t like this iteration. Maybe given time and supplements you will grow to give it another try, if not I am sure you will have PF1 that give you joy!

I am glad to see that post not being an edition war, and people giving some useful tips, and dev commenting on their design. I feel that this kind of discussion is useful on many levels, and that we can all be respectful around a passion we all got, and not just be **** about it on the internet.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The fact that I insist on the Magic Warrior being so bad is not a min-max thing. I could totally play a character who studied the art of Jatembe and refuse to remove his mask. I will probably negotiate with my DM to invent a few spells, an Anathema, and I will push his roleplay in my description of his spells and his culture. And it will look damn cool and fun to play and I will not loose class feat for that.

Of course the same could be said about each Archetypes, but the thing is that even if they are not broken, they are all at least (because some of them a just pretty nice) decent at what they are supposed to do. Mantis give your Sawtooth and Crimson/Mantis abilities jut like PF1. Lion Blade too. But if you studied the magic of one of the greatest human of Golarion and his acolytes, from at least one of them launched the Shory into the sky , which are the topic of legend, you got an Animal Form that does not scale and you better have an hole in your mask to be able to eat. Come on, let’s have some respect for the setting. I found the Archetype to be one of the very very rare trap option of PF2.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
DoggieBert wrote:
Fennris wrote:
As for Doggieberts comparison to PF1. I feel that the argument is flawed. Having played PF1 at high levels I never felt that all those items were required to be effective. Those were just power gamers must haves.

So, in PF1 most full BAB characters can actually get away without magical weapons at high levels and still hit decently, but AC has absolutely no mechanic of climbing on it's own without magic, so high level ACs are laughable without magic items. Maybe your group is just good enough that most enemies aren't meaningfully challenging to you without magic items, in which case I would say this is an argument about re-balancing monster difficulty rather than how much magic items matter.

In general though I don't think this question should be "Can I beat a creature of CR = X without magic items" in PF1 vs. PF2 since monsters have been re-balanced in PF2. The question should be "In a fight that the party has Y% of winning how much worse off are they without magic items?" These are likely much different CRs between editions due to the re-balancing of CR. I think in this case the PF2 party will be better off since pretty much everything except damage scales decently with level, while PF1 was much more reliant on buffs and magic items to get characters to the expected numbers.

Personally I prefer PF1 with Automatic Bonus Progression, and I expect I'll prefer PF2 with the equivalent, since, like you, I want all of my numbers stuff to be built into the character and allow magic items to be mostly cool abilities and flavor things.

The way I like to think of it is this: If a 10th level PF1 fighter steals a 20th level PF1 fighter's gear while the 20th level fighter is bathing, equips the gear, and attacks, the 20th level fighter is toast. Even a 1st level PF1 fighter pulling this trick can get to the point where the 20th level fighter needs a 20 to hit, but the 20th level fighter has enough HP to wait for the 20s to come.

In PF2,...

Thanks Mark that was exactly my point. Level matter, what you are good at matter, and your class fantasy matter. Magical items are much more icing on the cake. I was a very big fan of Automatic Progression, and I really like the current path of PF2.

I would also like to add that I appreciated you and other Paizo dev taking the time to discuss and explain the choices you made, the maths or the design behind it. It is always good to know how this or that idea came to place, even if we disagree.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

The more I read it the more Mage Warrior is bad. Nondetection is good only if the whole party got it all the time, otherwise a BBEG will succeed to use it. Animal Form does not scale well, AND you got a roleplay Heavy malus with your only cool thing, your mask. Damn this is bad bad bad. You wonder how Jatembe and his Warriors made it to be such famous people with such bad class feats.

I don’t know how something so bad could make it to print. It is even more disapointing when we don’t talk about a random magic tradition, it is one of the most flavorfull and cool.

On the other hand all the others go from very decent at what the dedication is supposed to be to very good for a lots of builds. Really I want to try the Mantis.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Except Magic Warrior who is very underwhelming for more than 2 feats, I find at least one or two decent or even good concept of characters for each Archetype. They are not overpowered but a lots of them are not underpowered too, they are flavorful. I am very excited to try Aldori or Mantis Rogue and a Barbarian Shoanti Runescarred.

And I am glad to not see any power creep, good for the future of the game.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Nice to see good talks here.

So to answer a few questions:

- I don't think the module ask for a tracking check, but I'm not sure as I was a player. What I am sure of is that as usual you got to be smart about what your character can do, and how put your abilities on the spot. It was usefull quite a lot during the game, giving us clues, numbers of potential ennemies, and the like. So yeah I found Tracking to be usefull, but it wwas not the most impressive power of our Ranger.

- For the Goblins, I am confortable with exotic Races in Golarion. And OF COURSE Goblins should be playable. But for our table, it make no sense as a Core Common Playable Race. There are depicted multiple time as being responsible for many many crimes and war, are the first ennemy of the AP that made Pathfinder. It is even more disturbing when the AP and the module stat in Isger, the only place where we imagine people killing them on sight. I don't mind Goblins adventurers, but they should be rare, because of their society, the human perception of the race, their tendancy to be sociopathic pyromaniac child eaters and etc... But yeah I am all for exotic race, my favorite one is Tengu for example. Just not as a Common Core Ancestry. In our Golarion, you got more Gnomes and Halflings in the Pathfinder Society than Goblins. But as usual, that is just an opinion. For me I see their presence just like the Drow in Faerun. They are an evil race that was made anti-hero race playable because they sell the setting well. And I don't like that. Fimbus is your everyday fun Drizzt Do'Urden.

- I want to be clear, what are here cons (lacking options, etc...) is our opinion on the CRB only compared to ALL PF1. So yeah we are very hopefull that the cons list will be getting even shorter and shorter over time. Because it was unfair to compare the 2, but we did because that is probably something a lot of other players, most notably those won't don't want to try PF2, will do. And I hope that the list could make them try at least the game. Because it is that good.

- The magic part is really what was in our group the main debate. We agreed on this list for the most part all of us, but not on magic. What I mean by nerf, is that with bonded accuracy and the fact that you can't improve you DCs, you can't use save or suck spell as you could in PF1. For example Hold person, at level 3, you will probably get a Will DC at 20 INT+one feat+maybe one trait or item or other feat= 17/18. Against a monster with like between +1/+6. And you will make a Coup de Grace just after the spell to finish him off in one quick combo. Now, if you try to do that on a boss or difficult monster, he will have his FP/level as a bonus on his roll, and the way bonded acc works, he will have more than 50% to save, or even critical save. But on the other hand, if he only save, he will probably got some sort of short penalty, like a Slowed condition for one round or something. (I'm not a math expert please be nice with me here). So you can never maximize your chances to make your strong combo in PF2 like you did in first edition. But you will also rarely do nothing if your combo does not work,because there will be some kind of penalty. On the pro side, healing in combat can be really strong now.

By the way the group was: Gnome Ranger with Kukris, Dwarf Alchemist Bomber, Half-Elf Divine Sorcerer and Dwarf Fighter. We got a Rogue too but he did not survive the first part of the module. I can not stress enough the fact than an Alchemist or MC Alchemist is very good in the module, and the player will have a blast. But all Classes can shine I think.

The funny part is that a lot of our group switched playstyle when making the group. Our martials fan tried casters, because they liked the fact that spell generaly do something even with a save succeded. And our casters went martials, because they liked the fact that you can try way more things with martials, with skills feats, differences between the action economy of the classes, etc... And our DM really had a blast, from playing the module as intended, but also to be able to make things from the scratch because the rules are easy. He nerfed a few combats on the scratch with a simple -1, and added a reaction to the final boss just like that. And it was flavorfull, elegant and fun!


4 people marked this as a favorite.

So a few remarks:

- About the magic items not being mandatory, I mean way less mandatory than in PF1. Your striking rune is hard coded, you will have it. But you don’t have the big six, or a few special items that were known to be really good and accessible (Ring of Sustenance is uncommon now for example, or the Aegis of Recovery don’t exist):

- You made a very good point John, I indeed dislike many things about character creation, but I really like the feeling of playing the game. Very much like 5E to be honest, as PF1 I always loved building a character but sometimes the game could turn into a slog at high level.

- When I say avoir the bloat I did not exprime myself well I think, English is not my mother tongue and I lack good vocabulary or subtlety sometimes. What I mean is that Ithink the CRB options will stay relevant, even with 4 core books along the line. The design is like the builds, more wide than tall. I think new options will add mechanical ides and concept,but will not make previous content irrelevant. Or in PF1, it has been ages since I saw a vanilla Fighter without Archetypes or weapon mastery. I think the design space here is really smart and if they don’t inflate new options it should stay that way.

- As for the Goblins, to be honest with you guys I hesitated to mention them,just like in the Playtest, because I don’t want to turn this post into Goblin War again. But as you ask Iwill share my thoughts: Goblins should be an Uncommon/Rare Ancestry that come from a setting book, not the CRB. Just like the upcoming Hobgoblins, who are perfect. For me and a lots of players I think Goblins are iconic yes, but iconic monsters. They are the enemy mascot, just like the beholders and will it hides for Faerun. We got a huge list of AP and modules introducing them as pyromaniac child-eater crazy pyromaniac pest. So there is a retcon not explained at all here.Even more the lack of rarity tag let us think that in the core assumptions of the setting, it is as common to see a Goblin adventurer as a Halflings Adventurer, and again it makes no sense. And finally for me it show the Drizzt disease of “my race is like 98% evil but not me and our four previous Goblins characters”. Chewbacca is special because he is the only alien of the team. Add two other wookie and he loose all his charm. Same for Goblins. So for us they got the Rare tag, as a houserule. You can select them but you better be ready for the roleplay consequences, and have a solide backstory.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Also, I forget one pro, and a very important one. I think the all game is designed to avoid bloat, and unbalanced future options. The core system is, I think, very robust to add things that don’t break what is already here.

I am looking at you Dervish Dance! You made all our Rogue, Magus and Duelist Quadiran Dancers for years!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Glad to see people sharing their impressions too!

And yes we had a Gnome Ranger who picked the Kurkri, and he was a blast to play. Ta combo with his Hunter Quarry and the Agile kurkris made the three Attack viable. And he had an imprecise Scent and was a Bounty Hunter so strong roleplay and flavor too.

And god he tracked a lot. I don’t want to spoil, but he tracked a monster from the first encounter who fled, the boss of the part one, and a few strange creatures at the end. He used Survival a lot to start hunting prey before the fight, gaining some action economy.

Probably the strongest character of the group to be honest. And when he decided to pick animal companion, with the new mechanic that allow monsters to become pet, well I don’t want to spoil but I will just say if you play Plaguestone, have a nice DM and have animal companion, don’t pick one, just the feat, you will have good surprise ;)


33 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey guys, a year back I did this post in the Playtest section: https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2vbha&page=1?My-opinion-as-a-15-years-game r-after-around

It was a long feedback on the first iteration of the Playtest, and I did not try again before the game real launch. But my post had some sucess from other playtesters, and I know from Mona answer that my feedback reached Paizo.

So as we just finished this weekend Plaguestone, and we are heading next week in the AP, I just felt that it was faire and square of me to post my opinion on the game. I was not really convinced at the begining of the Playtest, and now that the game is out, I thought my experience could convince some people who shared my worries back then to try the game, and it would also be a good place for everyone to share their thoughts on the game.

Of course all this is only the thoughts of our group, and I invit all of you to participate, as long as you can stay civil and polite with each other.

So, Pathfinder 2, after Plaguestone, from an experienced gamer:

THE CONS:

- We only got a few books for now, and of course we can't compare the huge diversity of builds that PF1 allows with Pathfinder 2 for the moment. Which means that if you are looking to do a brawler with a mechanical leg, a Psychic with a monstruous race, or an Oozemorph, the game might not be for you... yet.

- You can't be the BEST of the BEST in ONE thing like you could in PF1. You can't overcharge your Hold Personn DC, you can not Grappple all the creatures as easily that if you built for it in PF1, you can't use natural attacks shenanigans for more sneak attacks, etc... You do what you do, and you can't improve it as much as in first edition.

- As the game is just out, from the build diversity to the short life of the game, some builds are not avaible, or broken due to the lack of an errata. Mutagenist for example, Unarmed proficiencies, bulk... These things WILL get fixed, but it will take some time.

- In a lot of ways, adventurers do less things at lower level that what you can do in PF1. Because the game is made to go to level 20, you can't have as much options at level 1-5 than some builds from Pathfinder 1. For example a Magus, or a Brawler with an Archetype, or even a Alchemist with archetype can do more things at level 3 in PF1.

- Magic got nerfed, hard. It does not mean that magic is useless, and there are pros to that that i will explain later, but in general, magic got nerfed. You will not be invicible at high level, you wil not break the game at low level, and you will have very little power on your DCs. On that subject, we found the Divine list to be lackluster and boring, at low levels anyway.

- Charisma is underused, like always.

- Anathemas can be a real pain, that not to serve the story of the nuance of Golarion at all. Evil clerics, and some goods clerics, are just a pain in the party and it is a shame. These things should stay roleplay guideline, not hardcoded things that can cost you your powers.

- The D20 dice is the master of all things. If you got poor rolls, with bounded accuracy, you will be in a lot of pain. You can't maximize enough to protect you from bad rolls.

- Goblins are core, and don't have the Uncommon tag. Which make no sense at all in Golarion or in many universes. This is a just a mascott thing to sell more. You have as many chance to cross the path of a Goblin adventurer than a Halfling adventurer.

- You are your main class, in sooooo many ways. You can pick multiclass archetypes, you have some diversity from one fighter to another, but you are your class. This is not just a buffet of ability that you pick to build your perfect concept like in PF1. No, if you are a Rogue you will do Roguery things. Many things, but Roguery almost all the time...

THE PROS:

... But your ARE your class. Even with MC archetypes, you will have the opportunity to do things that only your class can do. You will have a lots of thematic feats, and in all purpose, you will have a strong fantasy to support your concept, mechanically and in roleplay.

- The three action system is solid, versatile, and fun. You can play around action economy, and you got each turn strategic decisions to make that matter.

- The four degrees of sucess/failures is very good, easy to grasp, and allow the DM and the player to see more variations in the outcome of narration and mechanical decisions.

- The monsters are very different from one to another. They got unique and thematic abilities that make them fun to play and fight. They are not players, and don't work the same way. Wich means you can make a solo Rogue NPC boss, and give him the action economy to make him dangerous.

- From the monsters, the treasure list, the wealth for players, the tags... The game is way easier to DM. You got more "headspace" for roleplay, descriptions, because the rules are simpler and more logical.

- Martials rock. They are strong, versatile, dangerous, and they got thematic abilities.

- Magic is less frustrating than before. Because even if a monster suceed a saving throw, he might suffer partialy from the spell. You can do a blaster with elemental magic, and you will be dangerous. In many ways this translate with more diversity in choice of spells, and the outcome of spells.

- Skills and skill feat are just better than in PF1. Your skills choices are a very important part of your character, and allow for build diversity and some strong actions choice, like Intimidate, Medicine, Knowledge, Crafting, etc... Skills matter in Pathfinder 2, a lot.

- The game is more streamlined. It is very difficult to make a bad character, and there is more balance between an experienced player and a new one. The abilities boost allow you to make the character you want, and to have 18 in your primary stat, no matter your race. They also give you the opportunity to do things that suck before, like a Fighter good in knowledge or the party face.

- You got way lesser trap or must-have options than in PF1. Some are better in general, of course, but by a little margin.

- The way the game works, your level matter a lot. You will be better against lower level threats, and your Wizard will kick the **** out of thugs with his staff. But a Dragon will be way more dangerous, because he got a better level than you, so he will be harder to hit, and will critical hit a lot. Your level, your experience, MATTER a LOT. You can feel the increase in power at each level, constantly. You path to glory is hard, but you can FEEL that an Orc who is a serious threat at level one, become something you can butcher at level 3.

- You are less dependent on items and treasure, and your build is the base of your powers.

- You got more place for roleplay. You want to have a good idea to get some circumstance bonus, and the three action system allow the DM to give life to your decisions. You will propably try more various things in PF2 when it is your turn to play.

- Hero points means less deaths, and maybe more succes in clutch moments, that define what it is to be an hero.

- You don't go tall, but wide. You increase your toolbox as you level up, and what could have been a terrible flaw yesterday become something you are good at.

- Without Attack of Opportunity, you got way more mobility in fights.

- Small Race can go in melee and bring the pain.

- This is the perfect spot between the gamey Pathfinder 1 and the story telling 5E. You nailed it perfectly Paizo.

To conclude, we ha da blast in Plaguestone. Pathfinder 2 is strong, fun, driven by story and strategic choice. It offer improtant decision making choices, a huge build diversity from only one book, is easier to DM, and is the perfect spot for our group. I am glad, as a fan and a customer, that Paizo listened to our feedback, and decided to refocus the game on what a RPG is suppose to be: a narrative shared by people who make cool and strong characters.

Finally I want to point out that the game is not just an evolution of Pathfinder 1. It is something else. You got some strong connections, like Golarion, huge numbers of options, the vocabulary, but it is a new game. Which respond to the standards of the industry, and in our humble opinion, to what make a good game.

Thanks Paizo, continue the good work!


Thanks for the insight, you rule it pretty much how I imagined it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Okay guys so I want some insight on how you use the roleplay description of some weapons, because you got sometimes roleplay on one side but rules on their one side.: For example, striking someone with a hatchet in melee and then throwing it at somebody should allow you to use Sweep, but it does not work with the roleplay description. The same could be said about a Returning Hatchet thrown on différent people in the same round. Or for any weapon thrown as an improvised weapon with similar abilities.

In that case wha do you have to apply, the roleplay description or the mechanical advantage?

As for the other questions:

1. When a property of a weapon like Sweep says “this weapon”, does it means this precise same hatchet or the weapon hatchet, as an another one? I want to be sure, I would think this the the same precise weapon but English is not my mother tongue so maybe I miss a few things here.

2. If a thrown weapon is in the melee weapon table, it means it does not work with a feat that asks you tu use a ranged weapon, even if this melee weapon got a range property? Like the Ranged Reprisal from the Champion?

3. If a thrown weapon is a melee weapon, despite its range, does it mean that you can use them with feats that require melee weapons, and throw them? Like the Twin Takedown of the Ranger?

4. Finally do you think that your weapon have to meet the prerequisite (being a thrown weapon) of the property rune Returning given by the 3rd level ability Divine Ally- Blade Ally of the Champion? I really don’t know because the general rule is you have to put returning on a thrown weapon, but on the other hand specific overrides general and the ability does not say you have to meet the prerequisite of the rune.

Yes you guessed right I want to build a thrower :D But even so, in general, I really think that Thrown weapons are in a strange spot and I just want some insight on how people deal with it.


mrspaghetti wrote:
SteelGuts wrote:

Do you think that you apply the Fatal trait of the Pike weapon (or any trait that could apply for that matter?) to the Hand of the Apprentice?

Because it make sense for some of them, but for other like a propulsive weapon or a thrown weapon, by the rules it would add STR over the INT bonus. So I can see it working for some weapon, and not for others, and so I think that it probably does not work. Imagine a Hand with Lance as you moved 10ft before on a mount, it would not make any sense RAI, but RAW if Hand apply the weapon traits, you would gain the bonus from joust.

Any opinions?

Hand of the Apprentice is specifically for melee weapons, not propulsive/thrown weapons.

Regarding the lance jousting trait, that sounds like silliness that obviously is not intended and should not be allowed by any sensible GM, IMO.

So you would allow the fatal trait to work with Hand? And would allow a Sweep trait from two Hand of the Apprentice in the same round?

Just curious.


Do you think that you apply the Fatal trait of the Pike weapon (or any trait that could apply for that matter?) to the Hand of the Apprentice?

Because it make sense for some of them, but for other like a propulsive weapon or a thrown weapon, by the rules it would add STR over the INT bonus. So I can see it working for some weapon, and not for others, and so I think that it probably does not work. Imagine a Hand with Lance as you moved 10ft before on a mount, it would not make any sense RAI, but RAW if Hand apply the weapon traits, you would gain the bonus from joust.

Any opinions?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lanathar wrote:

Do you need them errata’d for your GM to accept them ? Some of the ones you mentioned are from mouths of the developers and transcribed into here (or could be found on twitch)

So hopefully that would be enough ?

I didn’t think the proficiency issue came up for several level so you are probably safe to start on that one...

Yes this is exactly why we could use them, the most proeminent one being the inventory bulk. Our GMlike official material only, regarding this kind of things.

We happily ignored weight for a decade of d20, so now that we have bulk he's tracking our poor low strength character like a nessian hellhound.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Can we make an Hellknight Signifier like Wizard in Hellknight plate?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey guys do we know when the first errata is planned? I saw the Alchemist, bulk for some items, unarmed proficiencies and other things are going to be adjusted or corrected but do we know when? Or at least a quote of an official staff member speaking about it?

We are beginning the AP this weekend and I am considering a MC Monk and one friend wants to go Alchemist so we are really interested by these changes ^^


I miss slutty Succubus, inbreed Ogers and childrien-eaters Goblins.

I remember a description in Inner Sea Gods of Zon-Kuthon ritual that was just so horrible and gore. Basically a rich cultist is flayed, and all his organs are removed (eyes, limbstongue...) so he's just a torso in permanent agony at the end.

Yeah I like my Golarion gritty and mature, sometimes. Not always, because it does not make any sense, but on some monsters, or gods, I like the opportunity to create sensible and mature stories.

Dealing with rascism, inbreeding, deviant sexuality, drugs, slavery... These are goods things to fight as an hero, and great things to do as a vilain. Because it is a game we can explore these things. One of my friend is a police officer, and he likes dealing with hard content with his big holy axe in way he can not in real life. Another friend of mine got PTSD from assault, and bullying bullies is great fun for him too.

So yaah, sometimes, bad is good in a story.


I did not know that multiple players could use the Battle Medic feat! Very interesting! However you stil have to interact a few times and use the healer kit with both your hands to pull that off in fight.

As for Wands, yeah it will be very usefull.

By any chance, do you know if we have to have the formulas to craft Scrolls & Wands, as the feat Magical Crafting? Can't find it in the book, and we are basically in the middle of nowhere.


Arakasius wrote:
SteelGuts wrote:
I know about Medicine, but you don't have that 10 minutes (or even one actio nwith the feat) avaible all the time. You were almost always full HP at the end of a fight in PF1 wit ha Wand. Now it seems to be way harder to do so. But the monsters still brings the pain.
That’s a good thing. Your health should be a valuable resource. I don’t really know what the composition of you’re party is but it sounds like they’re not playing smart to minimize damage (either by playing tactically or using CC spells or such)

We have indeed two heavy hitters two handed as a frontlane, who like to rush into battle giving the opportunity for the monsters to hit multiple time, and our DM is so far having very good luck thourgh the module, so I may be in a particular spot here, and it will probably fade off after a few more game.

They are used to go full combat DPR monster and be cured after almost each fight from PF1 so I think we will have to adapt to the new system ^^


I know about Medicine, but you don't have that 10 minutes (or even one actio nwith the feat) avaible all the time. You were almost always full HP at the end of a fight in PF1 wit ha Wand. Now it seems to be way harder to do so. But the monsters still brings the pain.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hey guys we are almost done with Plaguestone, and something is bothering me. One of us play a Divine Sorceress, and we find the Divine list to be really lacking in term of coolness, and almost all her spells are getting used on Heal spells.

So yeah heling is strong, very stong, but without a good way to heal the group outside of this spell (you got no Wands of CLW like in PF1, and no short rest like 5e/SF), you have to rely on healing with your own spells. Yes there are Elixirs of Life, Meidicne, and Healing Potions, but their dices are really not impressive after level 1.

So we really are having the impression that an healer is mandatory. Nothing is even close to the Heal spell at low level, maybe that will switch around level 6-7? Because one of the thing I really liked about PF1 was the fact that you don't have to have an healer. Just someone who can use wands. Any thougths?


Do you think that the quicksilver mutagen apply to spell ranged attack? They are ranged, but they don't use Dexterity so we have a disagrement here with our DM, because for him it increase only agile things, not your ability to increase your magic.


sherlock1701 wrote:
SteelGuts wrote:

I played the boss of Rise of The Runelords, the first AP, agaisnt a full level 18 group, with over the top stats, well builded and played.

He is a Vanilla Transmutater, but I adjusted the spelllist of course, because he is a BBEG and a Wizard, master of magic and preparation.

With Anticipatied Peril, Aroden Spell Bane, Spell Protection, Mage Disjunction, some quick hard ass save or suck, he killed the party after 6 months of playing. It was juste boring, easy, and non fun.

Before that the Psychic of the group one shooted all the dragons in the Ap with Possession with stupid high DC without a sweat. Three dragons presented as worthy opponents got just shred without a sweat too.

At the end the game was blocked by question such as do Spellbane counter Spellbane while you are in an antimagic field bla bla bla....

It is a good things Spells got nerfed.All the cool things that the Unchained Rogue and the Monk of the group had come from the Psychic and the Oracle. And Monk & U Rogue are not top tier, but not trash classes either. As soon as Mage DIsjunction hit, fight was over.

The same happened in Iron Gods, where the Mage of the group just rekted the final boss with some clever spells combos.

In all serious talk, from our last three APs, we got at least 8 instances of spellcasters from the group or the ennemy wiping the opponents with a few hard save or suck and spell combos. At the end the question was just to know his this spell beats this other spell. And all the martials could do was to be enabled by caster. like Haste or Gre. Invisibility.

Magic had to be nerf. It should happenend 20 years ago to be honest. it was finally time. With 5E & PF2, magic got tuned down hard, and it is a good thing.

Was there not a caster who could just cast Dispel Magic on the disjunction? You can straight up counter it with a 3rd level spell.

He lost initiative. So I don’t think you can counter when you have not played yet? If not it was a mistake on my part.


Alchemist with the poison feat from Rogue at level 4 using MC (or the other way around). You got what is supposed to be a three action time (use Poison), for one action, and it is probably free and well scaled with your level.


I would say yes, they got the attack tag and are at melee range. However I would rule, just like in PF1, that you can't be tripped when you are still on the ground. The attack is made before you stand up entirely. For all purposes, you are still on the ground when the attack is made.


The bag of holding is probably a mistake, it should be 1+ like the bow.
As for Quick Alchemy for me it is just action economy, like the poison feat for Rogue at level 4.

You have prepared raw potions with your alchemical kit (which are a part of your kit), and on just mix quickly with the right reagent to make the thing you want to create on the spot. You don't really use your alchemical kit like you do on a lab for four days, no you just mix and match whatever you need with an almost complete item and one hand. But to mix and match you got to have your kit on your personn.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

They are some very usefull use of Crafting:

- Repair a broken shield.
- Make some snares (1 minutes)
- Use it to make money in downtime.
- Use it as Medcine for Alchemist.
- Use it to identify some items like alchemical, maybe more depending on the GM.
- Use it as Lore Alchemy.
- Transfer Runes from one weapon/armor to another.
- Use raw special material like adamantium or mithral.
- Saving a lots of money when you got the time.
- And crafting. When you are far away from a decent merchant of your level. Plus, formulas make for a fun loot.

And that is when staying in the "true rules", with a DM that does not hesitate to go outside the box and some clever player, the skill could get some other use: developp your own formulas and items, use it to make your headquarters with traps and the like, use part of dead monsters in your recipes, etc...

To be honest I found the skill to be almost mandatory for a lots of group.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

As for my caster in PF2, I made two people have a critical hit with Guidance in the first part of Plaguestone, healed the Figther at almost all HP, used Shield to no bet one shot, and Charmed an NPC with used us a lot. At level one. With a Diabolical Sorcerer.

I strongly disagree that Magic is weak. Each little bonus is way more important in PF2.

That being said, I agree as so far than level 3 for our group, casters are a bit boring to play. You are useful, but I am more excited by martials, and that comes from someone who always go at least 6th spells in PF1 and just roll Bard or Cleric each time in 5E.

In PF2 gimme a Champion and a Barbarian all day long, damn they feel cool!

The spells do the job (Heal is very powerful BTW) but they lack the oompf of a 5E Guiding Bolt or the “no limit to my power” Hold Personn DC 16-17 at level 1 in PF2.

The fact is that the people in my group who always played casters preferred martials so far (me included), and the other half who always played martials and did not care at all about martials-casters disparity still want to play martials.

And we come back to the question of fun and balance. The nerf was needed in my opinion. But maybe the cost is too high, only time, play time, and futur material will tell.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

I played the boss of Rise of The Runelords, the first AP, agaisnt a full level 18 group, with over the top stats, well builded and played.

He is a Vanilla Transmutater, but I adjusted the spelllist of course, because he is a BBEG and a Wizard, master of magic and preparation.

With Anticipatied Peril, Aroden Spell Bane, Spell Protection, Mage Disjunction, some quick hard ass save or suck, he killed the party after 6 months of playing. It was juste boring, easy, and non fun.

Before that the Psychic of the group one shooted all the dragons in the Ap with Possession with stupid high DC without a sweat. Three dragons presented as worthy opponents got just shred without a sweat too.

At the end the game was blocked by question such as do Spellbane counter Spellbane while you are in an antimagic field bla bla bla....

It is a good things Spells got nerfed.All the cool things that the Unchained Rogue and the Monk of the group had come from the Psychic and the Oracle. And Monk & U Rogue are not top tier, but not trash classes either. As soon as Mage DIsjunction hit, fight was over.

The same happened in Iron Gods, where the Mage of the group just rekted the final boss with some clever spells combos.

In all serious talk, from our last three APs, we got at least 8 instances of spellcasters from the group or the ennemy wiping the opponents with a few hard save or suck and spell combos. At the end the question was just to know his this spell beats this other spell. And all the martials could do was to be enabled by caster. like Haste or Gre. Invisibility.

Magic had to be nerf. It should happenend 20 years ago to be honest. it was finally time. With 5E & PF2, magic got tuned down hard, and it is a good thing.


If you wanna have fun go with Ranger Hunter's Flurry Twin Strike, at level 1 you can have 4 attacks on your prey; With Agile weapon and a little bit of luck/buff/setup, it can do quite some dammage.


Lukas Stariha wrote:
You are correct, the Alchemist uses the listed DC for the item unless they take the Powerful Alchemy feat (which still only applies to items made via quick alchemy).

Thanks!


Hey guys, quick question:

When an Alchemist craft something using his class abilities (like Quick Alchemy, or Advanced Alchemy), he uses his own DC for the Alchemical Items or the one listed in each entry of the gear section?

I think he uses the one listed in the gear section, but one of my fellow player disagree, and it could make sense to be honest, so I ask you.

Sor for example a level 1 Alchemist throw a lesser Tanglefoot at someone. He has 16 Intelligence and he's trained in Alchemist DCs. Does the Tanglefoot have a DC 16 (Trainned lvl 1: 3+ INT 3= 16 but will hugely increase with levels) or the listed DC in the gear section (17).


Thanks for the inisght guys. I will have to be cautious with multiclassing. Probably jusy going for a few buff/support spells will be enough for my concept.


I really love the concept but I will not play before next week. I was considering a Multiclass Character for my first campaign, but I am afraid that they don't scale well with the proficiency. The maths are so tight that I wonder what a multiclassed wizard for example could do while being only trained in his arcane spells at high level.

What do you think people? Some of you might have the chance to play a few games already?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Words of Truth is one of the most powerfull ability I have ever seen for a low level PC. You can come before a royal court, accuse one of the court member of being a traitor, and people will know you tell the truth.

It is very thematic, almost useless in combat, but damn it is good and flavorfull.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't see the fact that putting more clothes on a succubus is good. Succubus are slutty, just like Elves have pointy ears, and Dwarfs beards. They are Chaotic Evil Lust Demons. Not love, or flirt, or romance. Lust. For a lots of Angels, the new skins make sense, because Chastity is one of their trait. Not demons, base on the sins of mortal souls. I don't see any sin in that Succubus. )

And a lots of people focus my comment on outfits, but I got an even bigger grudge with Ogers and Goblins. Rise, which let's be honest, made the succes of Pathfinder, showed us the marvelous creative freedom of Paizo with roleplay for a few classical monsters.

I mean for me the Ogers are a chaotic evil rednecks from the Hill Has Eyes who practice cannibalism and inbreeding and mutilations. Now they are just cannibals. Even their new look is more classical.

And Goblins are funny Drow. Because they are good, but not really. Just enough for having a few in a party.

Don't get me wrong, I'll playtest the game next week, and so far I am very confident that I'll like it. But the art and the settings updates, for a lot of reasons, make me sad that Paizo is going for a less mature spirit in Golarion. I like my Golarion grittier. And yes I can always use preivous material, but for me it is a shame that the default assumption for the universe is to be so innocent. Because it was not the case for the past ten years, and sometimes it does not make sense.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't care about Seoni new outfit the old one was just over the top sexualised, but it is a shame for Sajan. He looks less Shoanti now, I think.

However some of that PG thing just wrecked my favorite monsters: Ogres were way better before. Now they look like generic cannibal monsters, but no more consanguinity or mutations, that's a shame. Same for the Succubus, who looks like a Tieffling courtisan rather than the lust demon.

I think that being more conservative for players is okay, but some monsters should keep the atrocity/maturity they deserved, in the core representation.

I am afraid when the art of Noctila & Sorshen are going to come out. They both use lust power.

And it is not for the sake of it, just that if you want to have some mature thematic and monsters, it should be ok for these few monsters to be represented in terrible ways. That is what make them monsters and opponents.

I remember a time when Goblins hide for trying to catch and eat childrens... Now they eat pickles for god's sake.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

To be honest my group is waiting for PF2 as the messiah. Because we are getting tired of the disparity of power in PF1 between experimented players and the one a little bit lazy with the rules, and th fact that if you don't have th feat taxe to do anything you are for a lot of pain. But we are also tired of the lack of classes options for 5E, especially with some classes from the core book (Ranger...) that are badly designed.

So yeah we expect PF2 to fix all that. And our expectations are very high indeed, we will accept nothing short of the perfect mix of the two. Because if it is for a good roleplay we will have 5e and for a good rollplay we have PF1.

Paizo a leading company in the hobby since ten years +, they have wonderfull artists, authors, writers, workers. We expect PF2 to be breathtaking. RPG are getting smarter, funnier, better written, every day. PF2 has to be the revelation for the few years to come.


Debelinho wrote:
SteelGuts wrote:

Is that possible to have a sword and shield ranger or a blaster cleric with holy magic?

And as a more generic question if these ones are too specific: can a chracter, or even the rogue, have DEX to dammage in close combat, like with starknife or dagger or things like that?

yes, yes and yes :)

you can use wpn and shield as two wpn fighting(if you put shield spikes on your shield), and still use a raise shield action to defend yourself.

blaster cleric is possible, but i don't think you have a very big choice of blasting spells from cleric list in first few levels....druid list(primal) on the other hand is made for blasting :)

you can pick a rouge technique at 1st lvl which gives you dex to dmg with finesse wpns

Thanks! Nice to know for the Druid and the Ranger. Such a shame that we got no dexterity to melee though; it's 2019 already, time to accept that a duelist with a rapier kill at the throat, not by forcing trhough a shield.


Is that possible to have a sword and shield ranger or a blaster cleric with holy magic?

And as a more generic question if these ones are too specific: can a chracter, or even the rogue, have DEX to dammage in close combat, like with starknife or dagger or things like that?


Alright there are already a lots of interesting ideas! So for the questions:

- Yes we will find a way to accomodate Bonded items and other abilities that give players a "magical items" during the course of the game. It will work as intended (giving a bonus spell), and you will have the opportunity to improve your item as the story goes forward.

- @Magicblast As you prefer. With only four players I will probably avoid to have two times the same class, even if there are indeed a lots of differences between an Archeologist and other Bards. Do as you prefer, the most important thing for me is having a character that you like and make sense within the group and the adventure. And yes I will accept Weapon Finesse on a whip.

- @Kira Mindcrusher I will suggest that you pick one concept and stick with it! And yes I dont think the adventure is Psychic friendly at all. A lots of monsters are immune to mental control. Sorcerer is a better idea if you want to go on a spellcaster.

I will keep a list of all the submissions, and you will have at least around next Friday night CET (or day for PDT if I am right?) to post your submissions so don't worry you have time.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Here it comes, my first adventure as a DM on PbP! I swear to you to do my best to make the adventure entertaining, and to at least DM the first volume of the AP, which is kind of a stand alone adventure. If the experience is sucessful for me and you we will continue! We will use Roll 20 for the maps, arts, and treasure keeping.
All you need is a free account. As it is my first campaign as a PbP DM, and because English is not my first linguage, I expect of you to point out any mistake I make and forgive me for my lack of vocabulary sometimes. It will be a tough challenge for me and I see this as an opportunity to improve myself.

I would like to have four players, two veterans of the PbP which can give me advices and two new players just like myself, because we all need to start somewhere. I expect at least one post each day, and more if you can. I will try my best do to the same. Sometimes I will make a few rolls for you to make the story move quicker or if some secrecy is needed. Of course if you can't post for a long period of time just warn me before. Read the Mummy's Mask Player Guide, it contains usefull informations for what you will encounter, as a little bit of lore. Try to roleplay as much as you can, as this game will not be just about rolls.
Recruitment will be close at the end of next week. You don't need to create an alias for now.

I would like for each submission a description of your character background and behavior, why you are in Wati risking your life exploring dangerous tombs, and your experience with Pathfinder and PbP.

Characters Creation Guidelines:
- All Paizo Pathfinder is ok. No 3rd Party stuff.
- 25 Points Buy. Minimum 10 and maximum 18 before racial adjustments.
- Core Races are prefered. Other races are okay too, but I will select only one exotic race. Don't forget to specify an ethnicity if you are human.
- Rogues, Barbarians and Summoners are Unchained. For Monks do as you prefer. For Barbarians and Rogues unchained, you can use Archetypes from the core classes.
- I warn you about pet classes or monsters summoners, as a lot of the action take places in small rooms whe you will be crowded. I will only select one character maximum that have that kind of ability.
- No more than one archetype per class. You will be able to only multiclass in one other class.
- Power Attack, Combat Expertise and Deadly Aim are free for all, even if you don't have the prerequisites. My monsters will have them too. Think of them as way of attacking rather than feats.
- Two traits including one from the Player Guide. You can tweak the roleplay of the trait a little bit if you want.
- No magical crafting. If you have a feat or ability that uses that, we will find you another feat.
- Starting Gold: 200 gp.

Houserules:
- Magic Items will be much more expensive, rare and powerful, including consumables. Anyone can use them without Use Magic Device or tests. They scale like staves, using your spellcasting ability or your higher mental stat. A lot of them will be custom items, with strong effects. No magical crafting of any kind. I will make a list of what you can find in the city, and for what prices.
- I will use the Automatic Progression System from the Pathfinder Unchained. You can find the rules on Pathfinder SRD or Archyves of Nethys.
- I will not use XP but story progression.
- You can expect a lot of roleplay opportunities that can improve or handicap your characters during the adventure. Like the tongue of a troll could increase a healing spell, a flaming spell could put you on fire, or a water spell cast near a river could be more powerful. An ancient papyrus could be the way to learn a new linguage, spell or weapon mastery, or your disrespect
for a God could have dire consequences. I will always try to improve the story with these opportunities, and if you have good or bad ideas, it will help me a lot.
- I will use the Fighter Weapons Groups for any kind of feat that deal with weapon like Weapon Focus, except for Weapon Finesse.
- Weapon Finesse add your Dexterity to dammage just like the feat Slashing Grace of Fencing Grace, with a one handed finesseable weapon. If you want dex to dammage for two weapons or for some class abilities, you will have to go Unchained Rogue or Agile weapon or things like that.
- There will be no kind of resurection. Once you are dead, you are dead, unless something incredible happen during the storytelling. And I would not expect that from an adventure for low levels.
- I don't care much about weight, unless your very low on strength, or the volume is important.

Final note: Mummy's Mask is tough, but you are powerful. Expect small areas, traps, undeads, constructs, mysteries, treasures, and I hope fun!


This AP seems to be very promising, here is my submission:

Gromrik Ranfulsson, Dwarf Brawler (Constructed Pugilist) CG with the Kraggodan Castaway trait.

Role: Frontliner with a bit of control, and Crafter if the time and the adventure give me the opportunity.

Background: Borned and raised in Kraggodan, Gromrik was supposed to become a Cleric of Torag, if it wasn't for his lack of commitment to the principles of the faith and his undisciplined mind (Well, if you ask to other Dwarfs).

When the other acolytes were studying old religous books, Gromrik was spending his time at the tavern, brawling, drinking and arm wrestling anyone passing by. The only place were he felt at home was the forge, where all his crazy ideas could come to life.

Wasting his time in a vocation that was not for him, he left Kraggodan, serving as a mercenary and smith for hire. During one of his first mission, he lost an arm to a Hobgoblin mercenary working for the Molthune.

His body was broken, but not his mind. He spent two years working on a prosthetic that could replace his lost member. Working with only one hand, inspired by the Druids and their ability to shape the wood and the lessons of the Dwarfs smiths, he created a new kind of weapon.

Since then, he settled in Phaender, where he is hoping that his inventions will be able to help those that magic can't.

Experience: I play D&D 3.5, 5E, Pathfinder and other RPGs since I am 14, and today I am 26. As a DM and player. I never had the chance to really try PbP, because the games always quickly died. English is not my native language, so I always double check to be sure that I don't make any mistakes, but I think you should know. I can post a few times each day.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Alright I already switch a lots of things for my games so here comes the list:

- Automatic Bonus Progression
- Reduce Feat Taxe, Power Attack and the like are optional ways of attacking, not feats.
- Consumables stacks with characters and levels, like staffs. But they are more expensive and rarer.
- Change craft, make it simpler for non magical items, and harder for magical items. With pie ces that you have to hunt on monsters, and formulas that can be looted.
- No AoO for maneuvers. For more versatility in combat.
- Scaling cantrips. Because a Wizard should spam Ray of Frost, not crossbow.
- Rarer magical items, that increase as you level up and follow the story, with stronger bonuses and rules, not just increasing maths. Like really magical.
- More Hps at lower levels, and no resurrection unless unique event/story/loot/divine intervention later in the game. Death should be permanent in my opinion, but less frequent at low levels.
- Less skills, and stronger things to do with it. And less specific rules that sucks like unsheathe à weapons, or very specific rules entry like « on snow... », or « when stealthy and.... ». Give the man who has 15 ranks in climbing a climbing speed please. For example.

Yes I want a lots of things from 5E, but with the complexity and tactical superiority of Pathfinder. And the diversity in builds.


You masturbate.

Sorry, I had to take it out my chest. Could not resist.


I am so interested by an L5R campaign. To be honest I have the books since ages but never really tried it at my home table and that could be the opportunity I was waited for!
Quick questions:
- When are we playing and who is the Emperor? Just to have an idea of who is in positions of power.
- Do you use the latest version of the game or the older one (4th? The one with the Spider Clan). Because I don’t have the new one but I can get my hands on it.

However I am not familiar with the rules at all, just (kinda, because it is enormous) the lore.


Doting for interest. Are you sure about the Occulte classes? Because I have a nice idea about a rich Occultist who likes to collect Taldan trivia and relics. But I have also a few other ideas so no big deal.


Hey guys!

When you use Divine Fighting Technic: Desna to add your Charisma on Starkinfe, can you throw them and still add the Charisma bonus?

Because the feat says: "When you are wielding", and throwing is not wielding. On the other hand the rest of the feat gives option to throwers. So I don't know.

I am planning a character who will pick this feat and I know my DM is going to roll his eyes on this one, so I want to be sure I do things by the book. This is not for PFS.


Hey guys,

So I got a build coming up but I want to know if it is working. When you are playing a Constructed Pugilist with the Grapnel Arm feature and the Hook Fighter feat, how does it works?

Because on one hand you got the capacity that said you can't make melee attack with your arm after you launch it, but on the other hand the feat says that you can use it as a weapon, because it is a grappling hook. So which one got the priority?

And another quick questions: if you do get the grapple going on, you can choose to automatically to make your target come closer to you, like any grapple, right?

1 to 50 of 227 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>