Steelbro300's page

Given my previous thoughts on this line seem to have panned out with regards to Dark Archive and Blood Lords AP, I'm gonna stick to my guns and keep hoping for a martial warfare themed book. Maybe they'll go all in and outright call it "The Art of War".

Could have warfare themed casting and spells as well, meaning some of these gishes could fit. A class archetype that allows casters to give up full casting for the Magus bounded style plus some ribbon abilities might satisfy a lot of these wishes personally.

D'aw, silly foxtato. You didn't have to thank me publicly like this. Being friends with you is more than enough.

I want to thank you as well! That Hao Jin article explicitly speaking about an asexual experience really hit home. I started identifying as aroace in the beginning of 2020 after years of calling myself bi cause I never knew it was "an option", and seeing something in print - a legendary sorceress no less - was huge for me.

Most surreal of all was having aced the Paizo design test last fall.

Ha! Love that you snuck that in not but 50 words after coming out. Congratulations on your success and getting to know yourself better!

Recently had a strange encounter in which a succubus lied to the party, saying that she was a simple human researcher that had been held captive by the other monsters in the dungeon for her knowledge.

She crit succeeded her Deception check against the party, and so I told the players that she seemed absolutely sincere when they asked if she were lying.

Even so, the players were extremely skeptical because she was found tied up in an opulent chamber, whereas even the monster's apparent leaders slept on straw beds elsewhere in the dungeon. It just didn't add up. So, despite her lie that the monsters had attempted to bribe her initially with the gifts, the player characters kept asking over and over again who she really was even though--as far as their characters should have been concerned--that had already been established.

Bolding mine, to show the "clues and in game information" they were using to conclude that while the NPC didn't seem to be lying, something didn't add up.

Just because someone is a great liar and you can't catch them in the act, doesn't mean you trust them.

Ravingdork wrote:

What could I have done to make this go more smoothly? What would be some good advice for similar situations in the future, in which an NPC lies to the party?

This may or may not work depending on if you're running a module or how important a plot point it is, but this is what I would have done:

She is telling the truth - I change the situation so that she isn't a succubus and the PCs are, in fact, wrong. I let their suspicions get them into trouble.

Now [i]that's[/s] metagaming!

I kid, but if the players figure out your plan don't just change it so that they didn't figure it out. That's just like a TV show finding out their audience correctly theorized the ending and then changing it the next season just so that it's surprising.

At least, don't do it all the time. Being "right all along" is a great feeling to let them have. They're wrong so many times already, no need to force it so that they don't "win"

On the topic of Lie (and any other social skill check) against PCs, there is precedent in the rules with regards to the Diplomacy and Intimidation actions in the "Changing Attitudes" side-bar, and I do not see it as a stretch to also include Deception in the advice even though it's talking about the loose attitude mechanic. https://2e.aonprd.com/Skills.aspx?ID=7

"No one can ever change the attitude of a player character with these skills. You can roleplay interactions with player characters, and even use Diplomacy results if the player wants a mechanical sense of how convincing or charming a character is, but players make the ultimate decisions about how their characters respond."

So 'allowing' players to decide themselves whether their characters believe the lie or not is not just age old GM advice, but almost outright recommended by the book.

Almost without fail, rolling social checks against PCs will lead to a bad time at some point down the road. I agree that the Lie action is wrongly worded, it should not be "the target believes your lie" but "the target does not notice any signs of your deception" or something like that. In the opposite direction: "You don't see any tells, they seem to be truthful" should be the result of a successful deception check against you.

My 'issue' with Golarion (and most published settings) is that the lauded pros are in turn cons for me. It's all already written, so I don't get the fun of creating it myself and to top it all off I'd have to force myself to read lore (as opposed to stories, which I love). Players can explore it without you through wikis and such, and they can even surprise you... but I hate that. I should be the one they go to with questions about the campaign so we can discuss and build together. You can play any story in Golarion because it has everything... but I don't want half those things in my game, so that does nothing but hinder me!

I'm gonna be running an AP for the first time soon, to see if I'm right about my feelings. Though I'm already planning a bunch of changes because if I didn't do that I wouldn't feel like I was playing the game, so is it even gonna be a fair test? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It's about control, ownership, and fun, I suppose. We all get fun from different parts of the hobby.

Deleted an earlier post I made, but I’m curious if there’s a pattern in releases. Beast books seem one obvious type. Genre books like Guns and Gears seems like another. To me, that leaves “playstyle” as a good third. Stuff like Ultimate Magic/Secrets of Magic, Ultimate Campaign, and Ultimate Wilderness.

I know there’s not a lot of daylight between “genre” and “playstyle”, but that’s kind of what I’d seen them aiming for with their July releases. A book that can bend a campaign’s play into one direction or another, but could be used at almost every table, where the steampunk vibe of G&G cannot.

I'd be a big fan of this! I think you're talking about something like the Galaxy Exploration Manual which they just did? I'm a sucker for anything sandbox, and I'd definitely be in for some deep wilderness rules.

I'm imagining another one of the themed rulebooks will be announced at this year's gencon for the next year, and I bet it will have classes again as I don't think they're gonna stop completely on putting those out yet! I got a lucky guess on calling Undead cause it's probably the most open theme for a bestiary, but for a rulebook, I totally expect to be surprised and be totally off base on my occult (which would fit blood magic) or martial warfare book guesses.

I think we can all safely guess that the AP after Frozen Flame will be a Nex/Geb one though! After that, an Arcadia or Tian Xia Lost Omens book would make sense to me considering where we're at right now, but it could also be tied to a rulebook like G&G is tied with Alkenstar.

Really hoping for some lich PC options, myself. I've always had a silly character duo idea rattling around of someone adventuring with their cantankerous lich grampa.

I said "I wonder if there is a ritual to become a lich in The Book of the Dead?" in the discord Q&A and Erik Mona did say "That would make a lot of sense to include!" So I think we can safely hope!

The Pathfinder Society Grand Lodge from Pathfinder Society Guide + Wynsal Starborn from Pathfinder Legends + the Agents of Edgewatch AP + the A of E Pawns + The Grand Bazaar (which is in Absalom) + all the NPCs in the GMG + NPC Battle Cards + all the ancestry and class options from the Advanced Players Guide, Secrets of Magic, Guns & Gears & Ancestry Guide + 440 pages of Absalom, City of Lost Omens = one HUGE urban campaign. Wow. Did I miss anything?

Dead God's Hand also ties in! Shove in a bunch of Kobolds from Little Trouble in Big Absalom too why not.

Romão98 wrote:

Fumarole wrote:

Is it just me or is the cover new? I dig it.

Wow i just saw and I like it! Maybe this symbols represent the megical schools. I count just 7 instead of the regular 8 schools.

The would-be 8th one was probably omitted to make room for the "Second Edition" in the upper right corner pocket.

From the 7 I see, 2 I can confidently guessing is in which school. Upper left corner pocket is adjuration, and right side pocket is necromancy. The rest are a toss-up (I thought bottom left corner pocket was divination, but the eye in the top side pocket could also be it, too. Or maybe that one is enchantment. Who knows???).

I bet the hidden one is the illusion school.

I imagine these are the last hours where we can get our thoughts in before an announcement at PaizoCon (I imagine it'd be at the keynote, I believe that's how it was last year).

My biggest thoughts are on a Warfare themed book. A lot of people have wanted a Warlord class or something along those lines. It could fit various subsystems, weapons, archetypes and even spells. Though, Kingdom Building is something Kingmaker is handling, so I don't know what would happen between these two.

That said, I don't think that one would be early next year. I'm imagining an occult one first cause y'all coming from 1e seem to love that stuff! This would probably have one or two Occult classes merging ideas from all the ones from before, or splitting them into Archetypes. What I'm not sure of is what else would go in the book, though I'm sure there's a lot!

Hmm... Could be we get a merged themed Bestiary + player options book. First blind guess there would be Undead, but I'm not familiar enough with the bestiaries to see anything missing. A planar book would be perfect, but not this soon into the game I'd imagine, since they seem to be focusing heavily on Golarion.

Answering rules questions on Twitter should not be the default at all. I mean, look at his Shield Master rulings. Anyway, much better to not answer directly and go through official channels like errata if necessary.

And these two quotes are great for those looking for expanded options:

"Change how you cast spells entirely, with options like channeling powerful emotions as a source of magic, casting exclusively elemental spells, tying your gear directly to your soul, harnessing the magical potential of true names, and more."

"Ley lines make certain locations more magical, and pervasive magic can put magical power into every creature and place in your game world if the normal amount of magic isn’t enough!"

Yooo I wonder if "tying your gear directly to your soul" means getting scaling DCs on items as you level.

Very excited for the "ley-lines". Well, very excited in general.

One is that maybe people have a complexity cap. If they spend their creativity creating an interesting backstory, there isn't much left for piecing together interesting stuff for the character mechanics itself. Alternatively, if the person spends their time and energy on the mechanics and story of the current and future character, they might not have much left for backstory.

I do think it's something along these lines. Rather than a complexity cap, I'd call it being enough stuff to seem "sufficiently interesting". Unique ancestries and combinations come pre-packaged with stuff that stands out, and also with a lot more specificity by nature of being more niche.

Meanwhile, people who play humans or other common ancestries, are 'forced' to come up with the interesting part themselves, to reach the same level of sufficient uniqueness. I do think that people that tend to play these kinds of characters just prefer that sort of control over what makes the character tick, a complete blank slate, rather than having to conform to the image evoked by the stranger ancestries. Could be a confirmation bias though, since I am firmly in this group.

Basically, as AnimatedPaper mentioned the "10 things" method. Most of those 10 things are taken up by "I'm a fleshwarp" and the addons to that. While for a human character, you have more space that you can/have to fill.

I'm curious about what spellhearts actually do. Like a fire spellheart gives a fire spell, adds one dice of damage to fire spells, and gives 5 fire resist? Idk I'm spitballing here. Really interested to see what the heck they are

This is what I'm expecting. Not outright +1 item bonuses to spells, but something that improves a small subset that you want to focus on. Sort of like property runes maybe, but for your magic.

I'll admit something too, that sounds like a hell of a lot of work for something that should be pre-made, damn.

The idea of wizards approaching magic with a scientific progress mindset only works in game if every wizard is very self serving and not interested in raising a general understanding of magic and its applications forward.

What? Why do you say so? Scientific progress is *predicated* on being "interested in raising a general understanding of" the world. Research is incremental on that which came before. That's the very opposite of self serving.

"I figured this out on my own," is a good way to put it, I think!

Personally, the wizard has always been the most compelling for me *because* it is not beholden to a higher power, or the natural world, or connected to powers they do not understand. The arcanist learns their abilities through hard work and study. I've always liked maths, and the imagery of applying pure mathematics to the world and obtaining magic, is very satisfying for me. This is in general though, not specifically for PF2e. I like how the Magicians by Lev Grossman makes it a PhD level course, for example.

It probably stems from the same spot that makes me drawn to almost always play humans. Wizards (and most martials) are the normal folk who worked for their abilities.

I agree with WWHsmackdown in that the Sorcerer in PF2e kinda steps on those toes for me, getting access to the same spell list and a spellbook as well.

I want more archetypes that are specifically for casters! Maybe themed to the schools of magic, so that specialists wizards can specialise further, but keeping the option open for other classes too. I'm thinking Evoker, giving stuff like metamagic to shape the AoEs and your Evocation spells, a Conjurer to boost summoning, etc.

Rules are not clear about the Corgi/Witch familiar (as you cannot have two familiars), so you'd have to ask your GM if you do the sprite thing. In my case, just going to treat the Corgi as my witch familiar (and spellbook!) and give it enhanced familiar (similar to how the Familiar Master archetype handles the matter).

You could also just take a different Ancestry feat and flavour the Witch familiar as a Corgi.

I'm astonished that these conflicts exist in a system that's so stripped down compared to its previous edition, especially so early in this editions life with so little released as of yet.

If it is the case that you simply don't get any benefit from the rogue racket because of your preference of ancestry, that's poor design and just feels bad! Looks like I may have to rely on my GM ignoring the RAW again for this one (assuming the RAw is that you do gain no benefit from the racket's dedication feat).

All the Ancient Elf does is give you a dedication. Your "preference of ancestry" is wanting to start with two multiclass dedications, which is clearly stronger, and almost certainly not intended. Just choose another heritage and say you're old.

Would you feel the same if Ancient Elf said this:

"Gain a multiclass dedication. If you can't for any reason, you gain the benefits of any other Elf heritage."

Heh. In English, the form -mancy refers to divination. So "geomancy" is a form of divination (and so is necromancy). In Pathfinder, not so much.

"Words mean what I want them to mean, neither more nor less." -- Humpty Dumpty

To be fair, I don't think any fantasy fan would think of "fire divination" when they see pyromancy, same with necromancy. These words just mean different things in the fantasy genre.

... because not a lot of people ever get to double digits levels organically, and those people won't want to jump to high levels...

I'm not disagreeing with you, I agree that the level 1 to 10 adventures would probably be a lot more popular. But this part of what you said seems to be the major draw for high level adventures. Since not many get to that point normally, they might find it appealing to start halfway there and thus actually get to experience that part of the game. The real thing that pushes people away in my opinion is that then the game starts out extremely complex, without the background of having grown with the character from level 1 slowly adding complexity along the way.

To broach a different topic, what other class feats abilities do people think we might see for non-gunslinger classes? I'm trying to imagine a barbarian with a gun, and beyond throwing the musket at someone I'm not sure how they might best utilize one.

I imagine we'll get a gun themed racket for Rogue, not sure what it might be called though. Bandit? Would let you sneak attack with guns, but I don't know what else.

Maybe an Edge for Rangers for reload weapons? Marksman's Edge. Gadget stuff could fit the ranger too, then it'd really be good for Batman.

I imagine Gunmage would be an archetype to allow access to more characters. Something along the lines of Eldritch Archer. Perhaps you would prepare spells as bullets during your daily preparations, and then casting them is shooting them. Edit: This could just be a magus subclass!

Maybe a gunslinging swashbuckler? That might step on the Gunslinger's toes though.

Now I'm thinking of a sheriff as an Investigator... What's a sheriff's methodology?

A whole lot more variable action spells! I don't even know what they could be, but more stuff like Heal and Harm would be amazing.

And not exactly spells, but feat lines for the wizards who are specializing in schools. I can't believe there aren't any yet. Say, an equivalent to Selective Energy for Evokers, or more support for Conjurors who are summoning creatures beyond just their focus spell.