Sten43211's page

Sten43211 wrote:

No but going up to spellrank 3 is a major jump compared to rank 1 to 2 or rank 3 to 4.
as such i assume that the "decrees" in accuracy stems from the spells having a higher base power for those levels where you lack behind.

I am not so sure that can be assumed. Its not the spell attack spells that make...

I was talking "in general" focusing on the point that even save dc's lacs behind at lvl 6 and 6, because of just how much of a powerjump rank 3 spells are.

The Raven Black wrote:

Bluemagetim wrote:

Unicore wrote:

its not whether it changes the actual game math, it is about what it leads players to try to do in play.

I would think what players try in play is as varied as the tables out there. The math however either supports that play or doesn't.

I don't see the +1 as changing behavior much. But it will have a few benefits.
It will give casters a bonus to look forward to obtaining providing a sense of growth at a time when there is no feature/feat/magic bonus growth in this fashion till level 7.
And
It will soften the accuracy problems where it is at its worst while not making it go away.

This doesn't address all the problems people have with spell attack but its an easy thing to accommodate without changing much else.

There is a significant power up in the magic abilities of casters at every odd level. It is called higher spell rank.

Thats true spell rank does determine access to more capabilities but it doesn't change how accurate you are with spell attacks.

Also the challenges are comesurate to those new capabilities and are increasingly harder to hit because they have to be for their AC to stay relevant to a martial doing strike, especially fighter. I mean thats it right? AC on monsters is structured around a martial and their progression. Saves are structured around casters and their progression. But caster progression set to later levels than martials to establish DC appropriate for saves isn't up to the task tackling ac.
A +1 doesn't remove the gap or change how a caster will be played but it makes the distance just a little more tolerable.

No but going up to spellrank 3 is a major jump compared to rank 1 to 2 or rank 3 to 4.

Quote:

I'm not going to force a player to feel useless, but I'm also not going to lecture them on using attack roll spells correctly. It's for them to figure out or ask for advice on if they want it

Heck, I'd probably look for excuses to put monsters in for which AC spells would be more valuable. Because it's a game, and it's supposed to be fun, and if a player wants to play to an archetype, then as a GM I'll look to build in some opportunities for that archetype to shine. OTOH, that's not going to be every encounter.

Just like if someone wants to play a lightning focused caster/character i will be more likely to put both enemies that are weak to lightning damage, and sometimes enemies that resistant/immune to lightning, so that they will feel awesome in some combats but every now and again have a combat where they need to switch up, and or rely more on their team.

Right, if a creature has an ability that targets 'an adjacent creature', will I let it use that on the PC that it's hovering 5 ft over? Of course. Same with a bow crit.

I don't agree that it strongly resonates with the fiction most of the time (like, pinning someone's clothes to the ground is fine but how does that also do a boatload of damage?) but I'd say that if one is very sensitive about that kind of thing, PF2 is probably not the right ruleset to use anyways as it's rather gamified.

I would say that an arrow through the foot, might hurt a decent bit?

RootOfAllThings wrote:

I disagree here. Immobilized is a pretty useful condition, so bow's critical specialization is almost always a wasted action on the enemy's part, even if they could pass the check with their eyes closed. For your melee comrades, it's an Interact to remove, so it provokes Reactive Strike, and stacks with Prone and Grabbed for extra lockdown. Meanwhile, 1d8 to 1d8+3 bleed damage is nice at low levels but doesn't scale well into later levels. It's 25% of the HP of a level 0 creature, but 2.5% of the HP of a level 16 creature...

Ok so random question but do you play using theater of the mind or actual maps? Because I can't understand what's with all this praise for the bow critical specialization. It's not supposed to be guaranted, it says so on the tin: "If the target of the critical hit is adjacent to a surface, it gets stuck to that surface by the missile."

If there is no adjacent surface, there is no pin, and no wasted action for the enemy. The only way I can see this being the best critical specialization is if the GM goes out of their way to always give it to you with sentances like "Oh yeah there was definately a chair next to that enemy" or "yeah sure pin them to the floor, I'll count that as adjacent" which is easier to do using theater of the mind.

Granted a bleed spec isn't guaranteed either, but it's hardly a downgrade, and I feel like it's more likely to go off since you have better control on what you chose to attack and with what. You have no control on where an enemy decides to move.

The ground is an adjacent surface.

I feel kinda sad about the loss of snare support in the base ranger class, especially since i will no longer be able combine both the ranger class and the snarecrafter archetype...

Snares is the best part of being a ranger - Kaas, my kobold snarecrafter ranger