Search Posts
Milani is pretty handily my favourite. I don't normally like CG that much as an alignment, but Milani has this brilliant synthesis of Lawful Good and Chaotic Good belief and behavior. It really feels like she hasn't written off what she learned from her time as a follower of Aroden. I really want to play a LG Milanite in a home game, though I may make her part of the PC's personal pantheon with Olheon and Eritrice.
There's definitely a huge Your Mileage May Vary effect with quality of APs. Tyrant's Grasp is probably my favorite AP from 1E but its themes and game type are not going to be for everyone. Either way, to answer OP, our group hasn't moved onto 2E and likely won't for a while, if for the simple reason that there's so many good 1E APs out there.
** spoiler omitted **this is 100% the case. There's an encounter in Book 4 which is 100% a tpk... except for the obols. Many of the most powerful undead monsters are effectively nerfed as a result of the obols, which I really, really LIKE. PCs get to take on more powerful foes than they would otherwise, and it adds a lot of flavor.Which encounter are you thinking of? I've only just started GMing this one - players are about to exit Roslar's tomb for the big reveal - and I only read the 6 modules for overall plot. I pretty much ignored individual encounters. Spoiler: Oh god, that one is brutal. The absurd perception check means the dragon's probably showing up while they'll climbing, and the party is getting hit by the frightful presence and potentially bunched up for the breath.
I'm both sad and amused that my group's spiritualist just oneshot it with a readied cast of Etheric Shards. There's so many moving pieces to that encounter.
We had two deaths in two hours a session or two ago. Name of PC: Demetrius Valdemar
Fortunately for him, he's a Mystery Cultist. Olheon was not satisfied when she tried to retrieve his soul and got the body, too. She resurrected him and sent him back, with a warning that he can't expect her to do this again. Name of PC: Maria Florea
I don't find the Inquisitor as "overpowered". The class's scaling and synergy only really gets out of hand with archery and a few other effects--compare Cunning Initiative to Diviner Wizards or Battle/Time Oracles. But, I look at that class's package and it feels like the favourite child that just got given all the gifts. Nothing it gets is weak, and every class feature is universally useful. I get to Stalwart and start wondering why the other classes don't get packages this good. The answer to that is probably because other classes get bonus feats or talents, but Inquisitor's archetypes are so strong the talents really aren't needed. On topic, hard for me to pick a favourite. I adore Paladins (and Insinuators) but the lack of feats or skill points physically hurts me. The Tortured Crusader is my jam though. Warpriests are super fun and the Molthuni Arsenal Chaplain is remarkably powerful. At that point you're playing a Fighter that trades HP and AC for 6th level spellcasting and quickened spells! Oracles have some of my favourite class features in the game but I don't like spontaneous 9th level casters and limited spells known off the cleric list is an exercise in masochism. I just can't do it! I think I'd have to cheat and say the Reliquarian Occultist is my favourite Divine Caster. After that, Warpriest and Paladin.
My lass played a Mindwyrm Mesmer with Signature Skill (Intimidate) and used Blistering Invective to comical effect. Mesmerist is an absolute blast. Medium is rad. Especially the Fiend Keeper. Fiend Keeper is on my shortlist of classes I really want to play! The fluff for this one is so juicy.
We just finished our Wrath of the Righteous campaign (after two, three years?) and it was amazing! The militant nature of the LG deities and planes in contrast to the other Good aspects is interesting to explore. I gained a lot of respect for Iomedae and the crusades after the AP (and after reading about the shining crusade etc). I'm looking forward to seeing how Owlcat pull this one off. Are there any scenes or parts of the adventure you really want to see carried over in the game?
Oh I meant to ask, what route did you take for this? This is one of those builds I always wanted to do but could never quite make to satisfaction.
I've been planning a Silksworn for War for the Crown, and the spells known/spells per day are amazing, with tons of clutch staples - the only issue I have had is finding a good go-to sledgehammer school of spells for when I'm not buffing (or summoning shadow beasts). The necromancy list looks very good for higher levels though, so I'll probably end up drifting that direction. -- I'll give a shout-out to spiritualists. At any one thing they're pretty mediocre, but the spell list is brilliant. I've been having fun with mine in The Harrowing! -- I think for this thread, I'm inclined to mention the Medium. While I appreciate a lot of the skepticism is in the uncertainty of where they can channel spirits, I don't think the Martial and especially the Trickster spirits get nearly the recognition they deserve.
How did the final encounter play out for you? Are you supposed to randomly determine from which patch the fire spreads? I guess if every patch keeps spreading the PCs don't stand any chance to stop it at all. Might be advisable. I rolled once for each fire (I ran only two weakened stalker goons that fight as the party triggered the encounter early and disrupted the alchemist's fire plan) - the building was engulfed within four rounds.
The Cipher archetype of the Investigator class gets hide in plain sight at 7th level. It's not completely without a condition, though the condition itself comes with the inattention blindness ability that allows the cipher to just not be noticed by people unless they spot him from 10 feet / class level away. It's a fairly fun archetype if you want to be very unlikely to be noticed, though not legal for organized play if that's a concern. The Cipher is Me IRL, the archetype. It's super cool, but the massive lost of investigator talents (can't even buy them back with feats until 13!) leaves me unwilling to take the plunge.
I still really don't like how Half-Orcs and Half-Elves have turned out in 2E, so I will say I do prefer them as unique races. It makes it easier to expand them as their own thing, and shouldn't really get in the way of having Aasimars/Tieflings/ect of other races. I am a fan of other races having planar scions but those characters are still outsiders, first and foremost.
I've played an Empiricist Investigator for low levels, and a Questioner a little farther. I don't really like what the Empiricist does but I can't deny that it's a strong archetype. The lamplighter's pretty cool too, though! What works for melee alchemists also works pretty well with Investigators. I'm quite partial to a longspear-weilding Investigator that buffs reach to excessive levels. An Admixture Vial can combine Enlarge Person + Long Arm for example, and let you buff yourself with both as a single standard action. Of course, this competes with Monstrous Physique/etc. Quick Study is an absolute must of a talent, as studied combat is one of the best combat buffs in the game and an ability the class sorely relies upon in combat. Between Mutagen, Heroism, Studied Combat and Inspiration, accuracy is no problem for this class. Therefore having a lot of attacks would work great but the class gets few enough feats that it takes forever to get archery online. TWF fares better (and you can run Artful Dodge reasonably well) but I still wouldn't consider it worth it. Alchemy is certainly the best spellcasting for combat, but the archetypes that change it out are still good - they will make better use of the class's investigative and support potential.
The only downside is it wants you to be Undine, a restriction I actively ignore as I strongly believe had Naiad existed when it was printed it would have been given to them (and definitely should have) Yeah, watersinger loooong pre-dates the Naiad. Wicked cool archetype though, I just wish its mechanics were more clearly written.
I have to give a shout-out to Silksworn Occultist. I've not seen any other archetypes that push the casting aspect of a 6/9 caster, and this one gives the class a huge boost to flexibility and longevity. It bugs me that the spell DC increase comes so late, but I'm so happy it exists. Especially because I like the Occultist's spell progression in general.
The latest book, Heroes of Golarion, actually does include a few mythic rules for occult classes - including Kineticists. Kineticists didn't get a particularly large amount of path abilities, but they can use mythic power and burn interchangeably, and spend 1MP to add a third infusion to a blast while also reducing total burn by 2. Those two alone make kineticists pretty crazy.
Aside from simple thematics, and the perk of having some mind-affecting magic that isn't enchantment, I'd go with the concept of fear being something more primal and rooted than other emotions and thoughts. It's somewhat of a impulse all living things have, and you just need to poke them in the mortality to get them to feel it. Just like you tap a knee to get it to reflexively kick. That said I generally echo Set's thoughts here.
A lot of the pure martials, in our group. Never seen a fighter, core monk or barbarian. Nor cavalier, at that, outside of a oneshot. That might change if I get to play my Heritor Knight, though! All of the occult classes have fans in our group - Medium hasn't seen play yet, but I've got one or two in the works.
Yeah, the separation of the codes in this manner in particular makes absolutely no sense to me. The two less important and most misinterpreted rules being left to the iconic paladin as key features really rubs me the wrong way. Compassion, redemption and fighting tyranny have always been iconic themes of the LG Paladin and I really don't like these are taken away from its identity.
Hah, I love it. That's improved my opinion of her, if anything. Really though, historically, deities and demons were always used to explain stuff that we now understand as genetic defects and the like. This is exactly the kind of juice I can get behind. I like Iomedae's scene in WotR (Divine tests for champions are cool, and I really think people over-exaggerate what actually happens), I like that Erastil is a controversial traditionalist and while I used to think worship of Urgathoa was crazy her antipaladin code is actually brilliant. Of the core deities, the only ones that impress me less are Cayden, Torag and Nethys. Cayden, I have more of a personal distaste of his themes, though I don't entirely hate him. Torag's just disappointing as I love dwarves and he's just there being dull. Droskar's way cooler. Nethys, I will agree with the stuff stated above. I don't pretend to understand him that well but he does not at all seem suitable as an object of worship!
Wrath of the Righteous's bit with big Io herself. Evidently the main thrust of the situation is players can get blasted for failing know checks. I hear there's more nuance to it than that but I wouldn't touch anything Mythic with a 30ft pole so I can't say for sure.I'm surprised the infamous trivia contest hasn't been brought up yet.? In the context it made perfect sense to be honest. Testing mythic heroes and all, the punishment is basically a slap on the wrist and most of the questions shouldn't be difficult.
This is my perspective, too. The new tighter math has a few problems with skills. I noticed this when I realised my Barbarian was bad at handling fort saves because they only had 12 con at 4th level, and it's just as bad if not worse with skills. One of them is that ability scores are now overwhelmingly important for skills (and saves). Having better training in a skill or save will not matter much at low levels compare to the ability score's differences, while in P1 you could easily compensate through traits, class features, training or items. The scaling meant you could still be great at a check even if it was outside your 1-2 good ability scores. And I think that's really important. I realise it gets better with item bonuses but those still require significant financial investment. Skills being so harshly tuned were especially bad for any mechanic that made sequential rolls. Swimming or climing against a vaguely CR-appropriate DC is going to be discouraging even for athletics expert strength-based characters due to ACP and requiring 3 checks in a round to get very far. I found that you either struggle and shouldn't even try, or you grab a feat (skill or class) that lets you bypass the checks entirely - typically stuff that grants swim or climb speeds.
The 'big 6' and the 'magic utility belt' are a large part of what makes PF mechanically fun, they aren't a 'problem' that needs fixing they are a core and interesting feature. That for me is the disconnect here, Paizo are introducing a system to 'fix' what makes high magic, high fantasy games fun. This is something I vehemently disagree with. Everyone has their own take on fantasy. For me, 'gearing up' as it were is a needless treadmill that takes power away from the character and forces you to put as many decision making on what order your character gets +1s as you would on new abilities. It's the dated progression system that I really wish wasn't stuck tacked onto this genre. In 1e, there are so many magic items I may as well ignore because they are a belt, cloak or headband slot. Usually fun ones, items that would free up feat slots or enable strange styles. If I was very lucky there'd be time and crafting available to make that slot a hybrid item. For me, consumables (potions/scrolls), toys (wands/metamagic rods) and other items that give on-use boosts or other ways to spend my actions are the only magic items I really care about. I like resonance for investure (and killing off the problem of bringing 5 quick runners' shirts on an adventure without tacking on the day-long attunement). I like resonance for activating wands, and staves, and boots of speed, and cloaks of elvenkind. I don't think it's fun while it applies to consumables, and as others are showing, it simply isn't working when tacked onto healing.
I agree there needs to be a larger amount of damage contributed from the character than from the weapon, but this is really, really not the way to do it. Master and Legendary weapon proficiency are almost exclusive to the fighter. Most classes can't even get expert without multiclassing fighter and at least 12 levels. It is already a very significant disadvantage.
I like the Silver Standard (have used it myself, for years, Planescape campaign, there just is not that much gold flowing around the multiverse, gold really is rare and has remarkable properties, I embrace that), but chancing prices as well makes it unfriendly to conversions from PF1. Convertability is a fair point. And I should probably state, regardless of whether I think the current scaling really works, it's still better than PF1. It doesn't cost you several months' earnings to afford the weakest healing potion in this system, and that's a huge step up.
I think it was a good idea to reduce the cost of items to match a silver economy but it all feels rather fruitless when the price scaling is just as extreme as it was in 1e.
To be honest I prefer most of the new concepts and wouldn't want to revert to the older ones so much as have the execution of the newer ones improved. Most of what I have seen are good ideas executed in ways I simply don't enjoy. The only thing I feel is in the right place and working as intended is martial combat. For one, I don't want to go back to the old monster system. The idea of monsters being built on the same system always seemed laughable to me when they had a whole load of natural armor, number tweaking feats and other odds and ends thrown in specifically just to get around the levelling methods. Still, there are a few. And that's what this thread is about, so I'll drop what I wish to see return. 1. Races. Ancestries just feel awful. It has been said numerous times that all the feats achieve are buying back your old racial features - which is completely true unless you are a human. The races are also completely imbalanced - I love that halflings are wisdom based but there is absolutely nothing going for them. It's even sadder for half-breed races - their relegation is much an emotional problem as it is the actual issue of them investing in a feat tax before they get any choice with their race. 2. Caster level. There are a few casts where I think spell heightening works. Predominantly healing spells, dispels, and spells that gain extra features or area of effect. But the embarrassing duration on most spells and painful scaling of blasting is evident. The latter is strongly tied to enemy saves though, and could quickly get out of hand if multiple facets of spellcasting are changed. 3. First level general feats. I don't think there is anything unreasonable about wanting to use exotic or uncommon weapons at 1st level, but nope. You have the choice of race-specific weapons or playing a human. If you're a half-orc or half-elf, you're strictly out of luck. No ancestral weapon for you - enjoy playing with longspears until 3rd level. The biggest thing for me about pathfinder was how much you can customize even 1st level characters. This does not at all feel true for 2e - not the playtest at least. 4. Better-defined skills. I don't like the idea of players being able to completely break down exactly how some skills works and challenge the GM on them. But on the other hand, 2e's skills are far too nebulous. Monster identification is a notorious example of this, I can bet there has been a whole bunch of argument over whether certain outsiders come under Arcana, Occult or Religion. Let alone figuring out the DCs, sheesh. My other issue with skill checks is how everything has a crit fail built into it now, regardless of whether it was needed. I thought the tighter number scaling was introduced to encourage people to roll on things they aren't specialized in?! When some of these crit fails are so extreme and easy to hit, I just don't want to roll on anything unless I have to. I like the current skill scaling but the tuning and execution are not something I am remotely comfortable with right now. 5. Paladins. I like a couple of the new features. The +1 holy damage on attacks is clever and great. Retributive strike on the other hand, while powerful, is not a design that I feel represents the class well or encourages intelligent or in-character play. I've griped about how restrictive the lack of feats leave paladins in P1 but they're so much more restricted in 2E.
I can't disagree with this post, even if I think a lot of the magic did need nerfs. Originally, some of the crowd control spell nerfs seemed like a good idea, but that was when I was under the impression that they were going to make it easier to land spells. That was always my grievance with save-or-suck. Either it won the battle instantly, or did nothing. I thought by having the +/- 10 system would allow to have slightly weaker effects on a regular fail, but making failing saves more likely. Instead, enemies failing saves is both less likely and less effective. It's depressing. What frustrates me the most about this system is how pitiful the spell durations are. Why does everything have just a minute duration? It kills the utility of so many spells. A prepared caster will not want to dedicate spell slots on a one-minute utility spell unless they know exactly what they intend to use it on. At least with longer or extendable durations, you can get any mileage out of it or cast it in advance if you anticipate it being useful. A spontaneous caster will not want to dedicate precious spells known on these spells when they're nerfed into even smaller niches than before. A spell that lasts just a minute has so many tactical applications removed. Don't even get me started on polymorph spells. I haven't reached the point where I can playtest them yet but when I first heard about the action economy and multiclassing system I was excited to try out a polymorph specialist. But at a glance, it looks like there is no way to specialize in this anymore as stats are preset and unimpressive. I'll certainly give it a try when I can, though.
Someone commented that picking locks can take seven or more attempts. Bulmahn states that it is meant to be a difficult task and this organically represents how long picking the lock can be, as you can just keep trying. They don't know if they've got the exact success rate but they also point out that locks generally have a static DC so this will get easier as you level up.He... is aware that Thievery has a critical failure effect, right? Is the first level Rogue just expected to put her entire starting wealth into spare picks? Good question. I feel far too many of these actions/skill uses were designed with "crit success, success, fail, oh, we need a crit fail effect, too!"But no, we really really really do not, especially given that nat 1s crit fail for reasons I don't understand. I like the idea of success/failure with the three action system organically determining how long it takes things but everything having a crit fail attached breaks it entirely (plus it runs counter to the design intent of encouraging dabbling in skills).
Just watched this, was a very juicy update. I'm just gonna clarify a few of the points discussed in the first thread - at least as far as I understood them: Regarding 3b: To make the intent clear, currently when you end your stealth action out of cover, you are seen. With the errata'd Very Sneaky, this is only at the end of your turn. This makes it pretty powerful as you can spend a large amount of your turn in the open and still be hidden (you still can't attack/etc, of course, without being seen). 7. It sounded like they were considering making heritage feats a baked in freebie at level 1. They realize that races were one of the most popular way to distinguish characters and activate their playstyle at 1st level, this would help bring that back. 8. So the point here was there isn't much general weapon feat support because half of the default archery feats were just to get rid of the penalties. So what the intent is, weapons like bows don't need general feats and should work without extra feat investment. The iconic rogue uses two weapons, yet there's no TWF support in rogue. Oops. They'll want to address that (as you said, space issues got in the way), but don't expect rogues to just get double slice as well. 9. First question is about how hard it is to remove persistent damage, it being either a 5% or 20% flat check. Jason's argument is that the 5% is only if you don't do anything (and you should probably do something about being on fire). Additionally, it's only what, one action to attempt the 20% so if you spend a full turn rolling you've got a good chance of removing it. He also states that most persistent damage effects have a guaranteed way to remove them, like dousing fire with water. The next question was the infamous 9+int sorcerer skills. As Jason put it "So, Errata #6!" They forgot to remove some text in the book but the bloodline skills are just signature skills, not trained. Someone asked about if it was intended for Wizards to just be able to multiclass fighter and get full armor/weapon proficiency. Answer: Yes! There is no arcane spell failure, Paizo reckons the opportunity cost of investing in strength and skipping a bunch of metamagic will make up for the difference. If it doesn't, it should show up in the playtest and they can change it. Someone commented that picking locks can take seven or more attempts. Bulmahn states that it is meant to be a difficult task and this organically represents how long picking the lock can be, as you can just keep trying. They don't know if they've got the exact success rate but they also point out that locks generally have a static DC so this will get easier as you level up. Someone mentioned how a lot of people dislike Volley on longbows, and why not just give shortbows something nice (agile in this case) instead of penalizing longbows. Turns out Paizo had already seen these discussions on the boards and have been discussing exactly this. Jason does point out that longbows are long distance weapons meant for large battles, and not really standard adventuring fare, but they are definitely thinking about it.
There's a lot about it that I like conceptually. People have mentioned the wands and item slots, but it can also also change other things. It lets them print more powerful magic items, and reduce the need for items to have charges/daily limits. It replaces the 24 hour attunement items, means players don't try the old stack of spare quick-runner's shirts if you don't have the attunements... It's only when I saw how many of these mechanics still made it into an awful lot of items did I actually worry about resonance. I think it's probably still not too severe a restriction, but I don't really feel like it's serving its purpose in its current state.
So far, my group did our character build session and the question came up essentially "Why can't I be a Paladin of Pharasma?" What reason does Pharasma have to invest her power in a champion of righteousness, when the battle of good vs evil is not of interest to her? There might not be any direct anathema conflict but that does not mean interests align, or that a Paladin would do much to aid her cause. Yes, Paladins are excellent at fighting undead, and oaths against undead doubtless exist, but Pharasma already has Clerics, Druids, Assassins and White Necromancers (users of the school that do not raise undead) as loyal servants who can better uphold the task of maintaining the cycle of life and death. If you want to be a particularly righteous slayer of the undead, well, Sarenrae's got that niche covered.
Casters for me. I'm a junkie for resource management and I love the kind of things magic users can get up to in downtime. While I enjoy the theory involved in building martials, I find that feats, traits etc are tight enough that I don't have the freedom to play the stuff I want most of the time, whereas spell acquisition is much more dynamic and even story involved. That said, I still prefer putting a stick in things or tripping fools over ending a fight in one spell. Gishes are where it's really at. I'll take my Magi, Warpriests and Occultists with 5 different resource pools each.
I'm actually very okay with how this multiclassing works.
Like others, I'm wary about how much stuff has devotion but I get why it's there. It will be interesting to see how much chance there is to explore it in the playtest.
Actually, I'll admit that I should wait to consider it in the context of the other ancestries... with the present "buy your PF1 ancestry back one feat at a time for your first ten levels" system, I guess the other ancestries might not be any better off. This is a fair point - ancestries in general are quite barebones at level 1.
As others have echoed, I do think this penalizes the halfbreeds. Yes, you may *want* some of these abilities, but the other racial abilities feel stronger. I'd agree with what others have said, perhaps 2 race feats at first level, one of which must be a heritage feat. Going by the heritage feats we've seen, I'd say the half-blood ones are definitely stronger than the average. The problem from my perspective is the bottleneck, not the merit of the feat itself, which honestly is a legit couple of features to represent the racial difference.
Oh you're right, it's powerful. If anything, it's a feat that does three to four feats' worth of lifting (movement speed, extra trained skills, and two extra lists of ancestry feats to take are all things that you could get with various types of feats), so it's a powerful trade to take, but a more restrictive one. In a world with two ancestry feats like people in this thread have been suggesting, I would imagine the half-ancestry feats would not need to give so many more benefits than other choices, either, since you would not be having to consider them against your favorite ancestry feat from the two parent ancestries (if you don't take a feat from the half-ancestry itself). Yup, I noticed the feat itself is definitely more flexible and higher tuned. I can tell that thought was put into how to make it work as a tax. I think I'd prefer the feat being weaker and getting two at generation, but I'm willing to try it as it is during the playtest. I hope the orc one gets weapon proficiency as an option at least!
I have to agree with Arachnofiend here - this feels like a demotion of half-breeds from actual races to a variant human, and that makes me sad. Half-breeds make up a good half or more of the PCs played in our group. ...that would translate to half our 2E PCs not actually getting any choice in their first level ancestry feat. The feat itself seems balanced and on par with other ancestry feats at first level, but... it's a funnel, a chokepoint, a barrier. This could work much better if we had two ancestry feats at level 1, but as it is, it's awkward. I like that there are Orc and Half-Elf specific feats but it doesn't sit right with me overall.
Here it is I suggest reading the rules on planar traits before dismissing the archetype. Let's take a look at a Cleric of Iomedae as a really simple example. Heaven has the Strongly Aligned trait for Law and Good, AND Enhanced Magic for Law and Good. What this means is, when you channel your realm, all good-aligned spells get +2 to CL. ...but that's not all! Any chaotic or evil aligned creatures suffer a -2 penalty to their will saves from the strong alignment. Additionally, well, your realm is heaven. Enjoy ready access to Holy Word. If your deity is Shelyn or Sarenrae, you lose the bonus against chaotic foes, but you now have Holy Smite and Protection from Evil ready to spontaneously cast - and frankly, Protection from Evil is a really welcome spell to have spontaneous. This archetype actually lets you go evocation with alignment spells, and I like that. Combo it with the Blissful Spell metamagic (even better, get a rod), and this means you can pump a spell's CL when you need to by making it good aligned - AND add on rider effects. Plus, invoke realm works with Quick Channel so you can set it up as a move. It takes a few levels to be worth it but it's really good if you're creative. EDIT: Now I'm wondering how much idea sharing was involved with the alignment metamagic. Those are deceptively good, and have a lot of subtle interactions.
Healer's Hands is crazy - hardly a waste of a feat. With the Heal skill unlock, at 5th level onwards, one becomes able to heal 3*level HP AND 2 points of ability damage as a full round action for nearly no cost. This can be repeated 5+ times per day. At 10th level, with this feat and the skill unlock, we are looking at 5* level + 4 points of ability damage as a full round action. that is better than anything but the Heal Spell or extended Greater Path of Glory. If I ever play a rogue, I will 100% be grabbing this feat. Even if I'm not playing one, it'll be on the radar.
I like resonance but it's for reasons entirely unrelated to CLW (and more to how it opens up design for other magic items, and removes dumb stuff like keeping a stack of 10 Quick-Runners' Shirts and enabling more than x uses per day of items that can replicate spells). I'm not a fan of CLW spam, but I would be fine with resonance not being used by consumables. Stockpiling scrolls and potions for major expeditions can be awesome, even if I don't like having a golf-caddy of happy sticks to down like mugs of milk/ale. I think one thing that would go a long way for stuff like the CLW wand issue is to make caster level/spell level scaling less explosive. I'm looking forward to seeing the math for these items because the 3.5/3.P scaling for magic items really did not work well at all. I like the idea of healing spells going up to a certain limit - I think it would be good to have this limit modified by the recipient's CON mod or a percentage of the characters' max HP total.
The Azatariel is a swashbuckler that emphasises the charisma aspect. It trades a lot of the standard deeds for the ability to weave in and out of battle, provoke a bunch of AoOs and then redirect those attacks. Best archetype in the book. You lose precise strike, but get monk-tier mobility and eventually, pounce. It's an amazing 3-level dip and such a juicy archetype that I wouldn't mind playing one standalone. The Dreamthief is a rogue that trades out sneak attack for a phantom's emotional focus. You even get a slam attack (!!), and get to poke around in peoples' heads. Almost all the archetypes in the book are a hit on flavour.
Azatariel, Dreamthief, Gloomblade are all amazing. I really like the feel of the Soul Warden, though it still feels like a downgrade in more ways than I'd like - a familiar's charisma is not enough for the aura to be relevant. That said, the Soul Warden's innate "You can switch to this archetype by helping your phantom move on" is the coolest thing. I loved the archetypes for 'fallen' classes, and this is even cooler! I haven't given the feats a full readthrough yet but the First World conduit feat caught my eye. Full of flavour, heinous shenanigans and a legit method to deal with enemy mages! |
