TSRodriguez's page

Organized Play Member. 269 posts. 1 review. No lists. No wishlists. 3 Organized Play characters.


1 to 50 of 269 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Came here just to comment that the Entry challenges are the best idea ever. Love it, I hope to see it repeat in the APs
Reading through the player guide is such a trip down the memory lane, I missed these colorful guys

I know the brush ken is using, and I like it a lot. Looking awesome!! so hyped for the new dragons

I love this

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Amazing!!! For me, I want First Volume of Iron Gods, First Volume of Reign of Winter, and the Whole of Legacy of Fire...!

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Im very happy about this.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Omg look at that setting. Is like Warhammer meets Pathfinder. So Awesome as always!!

4 people marked this as a favorite.

My god that cover. Ekaterina Burmak is just a goddess of the craft - That is beyond amazing

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Cast slow, you win. If you fail, do it again, until win.

Watery Soup wrote:

Back to 2E. Philosophically, 2E is designed such that many classes have features that are most useful to other classes. The "item dispenser" label is used as a pejorative, but it's really accurate - the alchemist's most useful features are ones they can't themselves use. Their bomb damage is almost...

This is such a smart take on the thing (The entire post), even if you don't agree with the argument or the reasoning behind the issue.

That cover art... Dx Ekaterina is such a goddess - I love the idea of accessibility items!!!!

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah... I was about to ask the same. New players all feel magic is amazing and "broken" (And dont get me wrong, I agree magic was over-corrected, but then again, I am a veteran, and a caster player)

Being realistic though, the math isn't going to change - I don't see a patch/errata where they say "Yeah, Wizards now master at 5, +1-3 spells or saves"
At most we can expect better feats and focus spells - But that is it. That's why I always think these threads don't go anywhere

But then again, if new feats and Spells improve the class too much, they become mandatory

I don't know if any paizonian is going to read this, but I think the best errata/patch ever was the "Feat to Feature" of the alchemist powerful alchemy

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, I agree, maybe the avenue to improving is other than accuracy - But is hard to convince players that "They are being effective" by missing... while the fighter is on Crit City 2000

Its a tricky thing, the druid seems fine though for me, with the same accuracy as the wizard, it looks so much stronger

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, Spells can alter the battle by too much... A good placed slow, with a little bad luck, and the enemy boss is completely screwed... So its a tricky thing, the casters in my group have never felt weak, but I would still increase the chance of success by 5-10% on average.

Its so weird, that the casters increase their mastery in levels 7 and 15, and martials in 5 and 13... Makes the casters feel horrible in those "in between levels"

I completely disagree though on the hyperbolic statement that the casters are "bad" or "nonviable" - Or that spell attacks are not usable

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I seems that the design team puts too much value in the "effect on a miss" - I can see these on the alchemist as well
All the classes that have "effect on miss" have worse accuracy in general - in my opinion by too much.

I think they are close, and are comparable, so Its a good thing overall.

Spell-casters get rolling on 7th level, after that they pretty much rule. They still need their buddies to succeed though, teamwork makes the dream work.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Thank you so much for the answer. So it leans on the historic side, and maintains the limitation of the reloading needing a free hand is indeed intended. That lets me adapt accordingly
<I have never used and never will use the 6-2; Table of inhumanity in my games> But is so great to finally have an official answer.

The Gunslinger otherwise is looking so amazing, such a great job on the weapons as well. Expert level 1 + Fatal crits is a fantastic way of emulating the feel of the weapons, without breaking the thing.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I need to know if the Pistolero really needs 2 rounds, or 6 actions that provoke reactions to reload his pistols (I would never play like that, but just to know the true rule of the thing)
I will be play-testing right away, we already have a gunslinger who is anxious to try the real deal. Btw you did a gorgeous job with the feats, they are all really cool

1 person marked this as a favorite.

How do you reload a crossbow, if its uses 2 hands..? You just do it...

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah... this is a grand slam for me. It feels like the next step in class design for PF2e

Hunted Shot plus Gravity Weapon is quite good, you do your Hunt Pray, Spell + 2 attacks in 1 round, and then you can mix it up with some skirmish tactics, hit and run, or maybe later you can even go for an animal companion Cat to give your enemies flat-footed and you are golden, then is just a matter of what do you like best, or even some flavor stuff

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I Agree, its an extremely manageable system, you can lower the difficulty easier than any game ive played so far - So if your players are having a rough time because they dont use tactics, just follow page 7 of the GMG for advice, and page 7 of the Core Rule book, rule number 1

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Read, play, and see for yourself

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Cody's "Experienced" players, based on the example that he gave, and the anecdotes he provided (Druid and a Ranger's terrible example) came to the conclusion that; "All you do in this game, is repeating the same rotations with no variations, because other actions don't matter"
There is NOWHERE in the core rule-book where it is stated, that you should attack 3 times, and most of the time miss the third one, but YET, these "Experienced" players choose to do so...
You can be experienced and good in Dragon-age, and be terrible on the Witcher... It doesn't mean that the Witcher is a badly designed game, it has other expectations, in which you have to adapt your play-style, based on your knowledge of the game, that you gain by PLAYING the game

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Stangler/// What are you trying to teach... Everyone here knows more about the game than you. You OBVIOUSLY have no interest in learning it yourself. Are you trying perhaps to teach a lesson to Paizo, to those designers who clearly in "Cody's" opinion and yours, made mistakes in design based on some anecdotal notes, most of them wrong even.
What is the purpose of all this relentless sealioning? (my new fav word)

4 people marked this as a favorite.

It is clear and transparent. You play, and you notice those kind of things

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Depends on the enemies. On a enemy that is supposedly equal to you and your buddies, is 55/45. Harder enemies need tactics to equalize the number disadvantage against them (As it should IMO)
And against weaker enemies your chance gets bigger.
The modularity that is gives is amazing, every fight works as intended. But you have to be careful throwing big guys against your party if they dont use tactics.
APs are over-tuned in my opinion, everything should be baseline easier, most of the critics at the system point at that.
My players love the challenge, but not everyone is like that

5 people marked this as a favorite.

If you read the book, you would knew about all the options (If its clear or not, its subjective
If you play the game, you would know about how effective are all the multiple choices you have, if those are up to your standard, its subjective

Everyone is giving you examples of equally effective ways of using all your options the game gives your character. All depend on the situation you are in (WHILE IN PLAY), if any of those is a "illusion" its subjective

The third attack is discouraged SOME of the time. Against most enemies is useless, or risky, depends on your view of chance. But is great against Oozes, again, you would know this, if you would play the game.

Cody's Analyzes is really superficial, as demonstrated by everyone here. He doesn't have any mastery of the system to speak in any terms more than a simple opinion, which he has all the right in the world to have...

Those maths can be interpreted as; in 5e, you barely have any benefit for specializing, and it CAN be viewed as a flaw. Nothing that he said is "factual" - Is all anecdotal evidence based on something that is quite natural to all RPGs

They sound really antagonistic, I have just 1 player like that (out of 15) and I dont like playing with him
I have a couple of points
>You might be too hard on the rules. I say, kill them with love. Let them have it in the moment, and discuss it later. If a rule is complicated and the result depends on the GM, I usually give it to the players (The Game is hard enough)
>Never go late. In real life its tolerable, in VTT some players just disconnect themselves.
>I have players who can do 2 games at the same time, some can barely manage one (Worry about those ones)
If anything fails, just stop... and get new players. With real friends is hard, but just take a break, or explain that those arguments tire you up

I put my money on Foundry.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Im tempted to suggest Wrath of the Righteous for a fully Mythic marathon. That campaign (one of my favs) was really controversial because of the rules, its a hard adventure to do, but I think it would be a incredible challenge to accomplish in OAD style. And I think the marathon would match the release of the PC game based on that AP.

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Adam Smith wrote:
Quick question, now that things have picked back up here. We've got some time this winter to do some conversion work. If we were considering playing an older PF 1.0 Adventure Path on the blog, which one would you be most interested in seeing presented?

The really old ones. Legacy of Fire or Second Darkness :)

I also play with a GM that gives us everything for free, every combat is a cakewalk, he doesn't like the feeling of difficulty, he gets anxious and enemies just give up, or start doing dumb crap, like provoking AOs or just not attacking for a "flavor reason"
My advice would be "find your own fun" Sometimes if you want to play you have to endure certain annoying things, better is to concentrate on the things you like, rather than the ones that makes you want to stop playing.
Maybe just talk casually with him, tell him you would like to play "more" from the the book, but in my experience that never works... Concentrate on yourself, when the gm gives you something for free, without investment tell him; no, I dont get to do that, its ok...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Omg I love this Thread.
I love the fact that I dont have to baby-seat some of my players, they can build whatever and it always works
The difficulty is so easy to measure
I love the MC and archetype feature, and that there is an optional rule to give them for free
Monster design is wonderful and its easy to home-brew new ones
New players are getting the system in no time, and making their own weird builds.

7 people marked this as a favorite.

The order is always a blob of positivism that makes me wanna play everyday for 20 hours straight - Everything looks gorgeous <3

6 people marked this as a favorite.

When you summon Bahamut in Final Fantasy is just a spell with a face... but we still call it Summon...

Yeah, that Kineticist is top quality, and very close in feeling to the original

At the beginning of each session, and when a player rolls a nat 1

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I like scent, its a useful, flavorful ability. And in play, has been game changing for us, and memorable (The most important quality in a feat)

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Specialization in attacks and DC based on his school (Something like +1 +2) like everyone has said. And better/more focus spells.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wind Chime wrote:

I think the only thing contentious here is the idea that casters are balanced with martials, which doesn't really see, to be the case from most of play experience admittedly that's not a lot of experience .

Its like that for us, they seem very balanced. We play 2 times/week, 10-12 players. No one thinks that the casters are weaker than martials...

Amazing work!

Of course/ I would love an Unchained Mythic like other guy said <3 and a compendium hardbook of the Old APs... (Legacy of Fire) and Campaign Settings and Companions

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Martialmasters wrote:

I don't see how unless your GM is running home brew bosses. But cheer's to them.

Im the GM, I use the monsters on the bestiary for the game. No melee can achieve the damage of a well rolled Shocking grasp crit, or a crit fail on Tempest Surge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Martialmasters wrote:
I've yet to see a spell destroy anything but low level mooks tbh. Saves time i guess.

The 2 casters in my group are the boss killers. Elemental Druid, Diviner Wizard. And they have the record of highest damage in one shot by far

Maybe as a focus spell, still super strong though

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:

The bolded part is super subjective, not true in my experience, and often poor game design if talking about enemies you should be on even terms with.

I think hitting foes half the time (60% of the time with flanking) is perfectly reasonable vs. on level foes you're attacking with no specific advantages.

I Agree 100%

4 people marked this as a favorite.

First signs of hostility in this thread was these:

"Sometime after the Space Colony on Europa becomes the 57th US state... :P"
"Yeah, it's more than a little embarrassing"

So, not someone "defending" Paizo

1 to 50 of 269 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>