Tarrant1012's page

Midnightoker wrote:

I would say magic has an actual high skill ceiling now and a high skill floor. For three editions that was the goal, but mostly amounted to people finding the most binary op spells and spamming them until something better came online.

Now tactics matter for magic. At least that’s how I’ve experienced it thus far. On paper, it looks like a nerf, but in reality it’s still strong.

If anyone here is a fan of mobas, it reminds of when lee sin gets nerfed. Every time it happens people say he’s garbage, and then it turns out he’s not garbage you just play him a little different and he’s still s tier as a champion (haven’t played in years so maybe it’s actually different now).

Nope, i disagree heavily.

There is only on paper for plenty of spells.

There is no high skill ceiling for unseen servant that lasts "10 minutes", if you actually keep it for 10 minutes, oh boy prepare for consequences.

Duration, was nerfed across the board, with one spell here and there being saved. Save or Die became critically Fail or be mildly/lightly inconvenienced for a short while for plenty of spells... Some buffs dont even make sense to me, like haste, i cant see why in gods name i would ever cast this spell till 7th circle and by then i would likely want something else in such slot anyway...

Due to the new balancing, apparently damage spells kinda work, if you spend enough other spells to support landing them well anyway.

I will give you that, when all yours spells are much weaker, you better be by far the most intelligent and capable person sitting on that table, cause you have a limited number of short duration spells to make count, missing will cost you. So high skill ceiling, if that is what you were going for.

Mages became "The guys who are fancy for a few minutes a day". Which for a fantasy setting kills any and all my interest in playing it. Their utility was reduced to pretty much battle and one offs.

Luckily, I have my main group and we will continue with PF1, in...

I’m curious what you view the role of non-casters to be. I’ve heard this argument that lowered durations and removal of Save-or-die spells ruins casters but I’m not sure I completely grok the argument and how it fits in with other characters.

John Lynch 106 wrote:

sherlock1701 wrote:

It's not at the expense of anything. I know of 0 fighters who would want the buffs on them to last for less time.

I know of 0 fighters who given the choice between being awesome because he is inherently good or being awesome because the wizard decided to offload some low level spells onto him will choose to need the wizard.

Ah, so we should just delete all the buff spells then, I see. Nobody would ever want a buff, given the choice between having one and not having one.

I think this argument is disingenuous. Having buffs that last most of the adventuring day necessitates that buff by feeling mandatory. Having buffs that are meant to last an encounter or two makes it much more balanced in terms of measuring the impact of the spell.

From a tactical point of view, casting your buff spell in the right fight at the right time feels much more impactful than set it and forget it buffing. There is nuance to the design of buffs beyond “they last a significant duration or we should delete them”.

Thank you all for the responses! A grappling Ape Instinct Barbarian sounds brilliant and very fun.

What would a reasonable starting stat line up look like? I’m pondering:

18 StR
14 Dex
12Con
10 Int
14 Wis
10 Cha

That would make Animal skin at 6 have capped Dex. Lack of skills is a tad sad and I’m not sure how to round out his out of combat stuff.

Hey All, I’m looking for some tips to help build an animal instinct, ape, barbarian. I’m currently thinking human but can be flexible.

How do animal instinct barbarians stack up compared to other barbarians? I like the idea of Ape quite a bit just because of the flavor of it so I’d like to focus on that specific animal instinct.

Thank you in advance!

Ira kroll wrote:

So, the first failure is at DC-1, since if we make the DC, we have a success. Then, counting down, we have:

DC Success
DC-1 Failure by one.
DC-2, Failure by two.
...
DC-10, Failure by ten (or more). Equals critical failure.

If we did that on the other side, then

DC+0 = Success by one.
DC+1 = Success by two.
DC+2 = Success by three.
...
DC+9 = Success by ten, critical success.

At DC+0 = success

Failure is measured by how many more points would you have needed to succeed. Critical success is measure by how many points did you have above and beyond what you needed. This is how I read the rules when I was going through it.

The example for earn income also explicitly uses an example where the bard is paid in a living crystal rose so I don’t think reskinning to something like crafting materials (which you could sale for the monetary value accorded by the check) is outside of RAW.