I am hoping that the class has ZERO Alchemy features and instead goes its own direction. There is no reason to make Base Classes that have significantly similar or identical features to other base classes.
Just like if they come out with a Slayer Class, I'd be disappointed if they were given Sneak Attack.
I think this is an unbalanced idea.
Bombs are already the only weapons in the game that more/less "never miss" anyhow as others have noted.
As it stands they can already spend money they earn from adventuring and downtime to basically save up/bank what is effectively spell slots in the form of pre-made bombs.
Sassy today! The job of a GM is quite literally to determine what is and is not appropriate for their game. If that's controversial to some folks, I really don't know what to say to that.
Are you saying that all players should by default never have to run their character options past their GM before play? I simply cannot fathom your attitude as a player if you feel entitled to play literally anything and everything ever printed at an actual game-table without communicating with the person actually running the game.
That being said, I don't think there is anything fundamentally wrong with a GM openly stating "You can use whatever you like" for their game, I'm simply stating that the entitlement some folks have who are bemoaning their perceived loss via the inclusion of the Rarity system is mind-blowing to me. It's literally as hard as asking a four-word question and if people aren't equipped to handle that I'm not sure how they could ever handle an actual game.
"Are XXXX Ancestries available?"
I personally hope that it shares NOTHING in common with Rogue or Alchemist but instead have their own, brand new and unique skillset and abilities.
I'd really hate to see Paizo make the same mistake this go around as they did last time with creating hybrid classes. Much like the Magus, I think the Inv needs to define itself on its own terms.
Something along the lines of Equipment preparation whereby they can "attune" or otherwise improve how they use their physical equipment in unique and interesting ways.
At 13th Level the additional Item Bonus increases to +2.
At 7th Level you may Ready an Actions which require 1 or 2 Actions.
Just some silly, half-baked ideas.
So are you saying that the GM should NOT be the "Mother" in this analogy and have the ability to easily make broad statements about what is and is not allowed?
I'm not sure I really get your perspective here.
The Rarity gates exist to help make sweeping generalizations about what options should be freely available to Characters WITHOUT the conversation, and really, the VAST majority of all the rules ARE Common.
This is unlike situations we had in the last 50 years whereby literally EVERY option needed to be vetted by the GM in order for them to make the judgment call instead of a tiny fraction of the rules.
I can totally grok that people have different perspectives on games, really I can, but I'm having a hard time understanding how the simple prospect of having to run FAR FEWER options by your GM for approval than you would ever have had to in the past makes you feel discouraged.
Did you simply never actually run your character build by your GM in the past and just assumed that everything and anything that you could conceivably build was going to fly?
Since there is so much nonsense hyperbole in the opposite direction here I figure I'll toss my 2cp hat in the ring!
PF2 is soo good, it makes me want the throw all my Original PF books in a trashcan, set it on fire, and roll it down the hill. There is literally no comparison between the two, the new edition is better in nearly every conceivable way.
Base Class - Witch
By default, all witches use the Occult Spellcasting Tradition and use their familiar as their spellbook, much like they did in PF1. I'd like to see a divergence here for witches however whereby their Paton selection can and WILL literally grant then a whole new tradition of spellcasting to choose spells and hexes from.
Hexes are literally just rider effects, each tagged with 2 of the 4 spellcasting traditions so that there is some variability in what a given Witch can and cannot take for hexes based on their patron. Make it that hexes can be used at-will to add a rider effect to any Cantrip the Witch has prepared and can cast on a valid target. (Example: Fortune Hex as a Rider effect on a Message Cantrip-+1 Circumstance bonus on their next Attack, Skill, or Save Check before the end of the Witches next turn) Allow a Witch to add a hex to any higher-level spell they cast once per Round by spending 1 Focus Point.
N N 959 wrote:
Most GMs on here think they are 100% qualified and able to make the correct decisions for their campaign.
That's because they ARE qualified. You acting like you're better than everyone else because you believe that a core rulebook should have rules for literally every corner case, mechanics for every possible situation that could arise would make the thing be 2000 pages and it's downright absurd.
The only thing more rules in that vein do is alienate potential customers in order to appease folks like you who want everything in scripture. You say new GMs are stressed out by not having things written in stone but that is total and utter nonsense.
What stresses new GMs out is the feeling that they have to memorize tens of thousands of words of rules in order to sit down and have fun with their friends and elitist attitudes like yours where you talk trash about GMs who improvise to fit the story they're trying to tell only make it worse.
N N 959 wrote:
I am firmly in the camp that "GM decides" is a cop out and a necessity due to incomplete and contrived rules that form the foundation of the game. Ideally, nothing should need to be decided by the GM. All actions (given the same conditions) should have logical/predictable/repeatable outcomes, as it does in the real world. There should be nothing for the GM to decide.
Please tell me you're being sarcastic... Dear Gods almighty I feel terrible for everyone you play with otherwise. This isn't a computer game, it's a social narrative one and it sounds like you've been doing far too much theory-crafting and not enough actual gameplay if you think this kind of thing can even EXIST in the real world.
I don't usually accuse people of bad-wrong-fun, but dude, what you want is literally against the spirit of the entire genre of tabletop RPGs and should be denounced as toxic.
You first figure out the TOTAL damage you (The Character) would take from a hit. Then you decide if you're going to use the shield.
Then you take that TOTAL damage and apply the Shield Rules. If the order you take things in matters in any way shape or form, the GM decides what order you take it in, regardless you and the shield will always take the same amount of damage unless there are explicit rules from some ability or on the Shield which state otherwise.
The spoke about this on one of the streams briefly but the general idea is if it matters the GM decides.
So where do we go from here?
The answer is clearly spelled out in the book, it's literally a rule and that rule says "The GM decides."
If someone wants a game that is 100% pure unadulterated mechanics with no flexible narrative component then they shouldn't be playing with other human beings. They should be playing with a computer.
I created post it notes with the major important things as noted by others and two notes with character names and some of their personally traits and who they are. Pulled out unique minis and used dice to represent the drunk farmers. A little gaming paper doodle later I had my tavern/inn that could accommodate just barely enough space and things to break/throw around.
If it helps, use block init and have a few rowdy events/attacks and actions lined up for the important NPCs that fit with their role while just rolling bulk inaccurate non-lethal attacks spread over the whole room to keep it simple.
Also, save one story for after the fight to keep the party engaged with Bort during the dessert.
I know I am just missing it somewhere, but, I noticed that precious materials like silver weapons can only have magic upgrades to a certain level based on 'grade' of that item. Where is the rules for steel and what can steel be up to? Are they unlimited and its just the precious materials quality that determines how good of magic they can have?
I think the assumption here is that Steel is so cheap to produce that all of the materials for general sale already are of sufficient quality/purity to work with any level of magic enchantment versus the rare materials which are so precious that even a lower-grade purity/alloys are still considered more/extremely valuable.
For those of you who already have the Lost Omens World Guide: What are the best optimization uses of these new dedications?
Gate keeping through weirdness and rarity /advanced nonsense doesn't add to 'fun'. It just confirms those systems actually are the terrible idea they seemed to be in the first place.
Yeah, I don't understand this line of reasoning at all. The system is terrible because it does what it was intended to do? It's supposed to be a way for the GM to control the features and functions that fit within their game through having them permit certain options (Being the good guy GM) instead of having to require them to disallow them (Being the jerk GM).
Am I missing something here because I have yet to hear or read one solid criticism of the rarity system that didn't basically boil down to something along the lines of "WaaaaaH! I want to be able to use ALL of the silly and unbalanced options that are printed without having to get permission."
Allowing certain feats to be more subjectively powerful compared to the other options of the same level is a really elegant solution to bend the power-level formula to grant better options if it fits the game the GM wants to run.
If you're wearing a Gauntlet but using that hand for something else such as wielding a two-handed weapon I would follow the interpretation that you are NOT wielding the Gauntlet because of the bit in the Free-Hand trait that states "You can't attack with a free-hand weapon if you're wielding anything in that hand or otherwise using that hand."
This doesn't work, you need to be able to USE a weapon to be considered to be wielding it IMO and I would not allow this to function, otherwise all Characters would only ever need to apply the +1 and Striking Runes to the Gauntlet, then buy the Rings and BOOM you save yourself on ever having to buy another Striking or +X Rune again. I'm confident this was not the intended use for the item and would rule it as intentionally exploitative.
OK lets do this-
Let's do two comparisons here since it varied greatly depending on how you compare things.
Pathfinder RPG (Core Rulebook ONLY):
>1E: Important Selections<
---Class Options (Typically 0 - 10 depending on Class)
*Somewhat Important Selections
Pathfinder RPG (Most Common Rules):
>1E: Important Selections<
---Alternate Racial Traits
---Class Options (Typically 0 - 10 depending on Class)
---Archetype Options (Typically 1 - 5(?) depending on Class)
---Traits (Typically 2 - 5 depending on build)
---Alternate Skill Rules Y/N
-Hero Points Y/N
---Alternate HP/Wounds/AC/Armor Rules Y/N
*Somewhat Important Selections
Pathfinder Second Edition RPG:
>2E: Important Selections<
---Class Options & Feats (Typically 2 - 15 depending on Class)
*Somewhat Important Selections
So, from a very base level, it seems that PF1 Core and PF2 core compared against one another has PF2 with more individual options to choose from, and may very well take a bit longer to make a VANILLA Character. That being said, the PF2 System for Character Creation is so elegant and adaptable that instead of having to bolt-on whole new subsystems and choices over time, they will instead simply drop new options into the existing silos. This to me says that while the options that expand, the actual steps and choices you have to make in creation are DRAMATICALLY reduced over the array of choices a PF1 Character would have to make even if the only rules they used were from the Core, APG, Unchained and Ultimate Books (Which in itself represents less than 5% of the total catalog of different sources released for PF1).
It's not exactly apples and oranges so much as it is Granny Smith VS Valencia right now since we can only really ASSUME that based on the structure of PF2 and what has been said about how new options will work but I'm confident that with the 3.X legacy having been fully shaken loose from the mechanics of the system, they won't have to release whole new aspects/sub-systems in order to make customizing your PC possible or interesting, they need only create more options for the existing silos and customization "slots."
All in all, I think you're probably right. PF1 Core VS PF2 Core, it takes longer to make a PF2 Character, but once you compare PF1 with even a TINY FRACTION of the overall Content for the system over what we can reasonably believe to be how characters will be built even another 8 years from now with PF2, I think that PF2 will come out MILES ahead for build speed unless one chooses simply to make the easiest to create character possible that is boring, plain, and overwhelmingly underpowered.
Got a rules question about Pathfinder Second Edition? Post it here! And we might answer them on stream!
Given how the 2 extra flaws = 1 extra boost alternate rule is handled with a sidebar, should we treat the ability to have half-orc and half-elves of non-human Ancestry as similarly RAW implications? Can/Should Half-Elf Dwarves be legal for PFS?
Are the Focus Pool/Point rules intentionally different between the dozens of ways to get them, or was that simply something that was missed in the editing passes?
I feel like lots of folks are really throwing around the term "Trap option" without any regard for what those really are.
This is a well-balanced feat if you ask me, clumsy 1 is a pretty great debuff on a success which isn't reasonably difficult to get. The Critical Success benefit is truly and remarkably powerful since you can do it all day every day and it's a general incapacitate, unlike many other features that straight up take someone out of combat like spells and focus powers which eat up limited resources.
It really is starting to sound like what YOU really wanted was a 1500 page CRB that included everything from the existing book, and the upcoming GMG and APG in it.
Maybe it'd be best if you took some time to chill and wait for those supplements since from what I can tell the recurring theme in your threads seems to be X Mechanic/Customization isn't in the CRB- PANIC!
A single weapon that requires 1 or 2 Feats to get access to that is only marginally better than a whip.... I'm not seeing the problem here.
Is the issue that the DPR hounds are going to love it? I'm not sure that's much of a problem, it would have simply been some other weapon, in in the past the ideal DPR weapons didn't even require exotic weapon prof or the eq to get access to.
They are more expensive by dint of that fact, they offer more AC (Damage avoidance) or do more damage on a hit (+1/2 Str to damage) than their cheaper counterparts.
They're meant to be non-magical upgrade equipment after you've done one or two cool things before you end up spending money on enchantments and other high fantasy stuff. Besides that, I have nothing nice to say other than to simply restate that they're more expensive because they are more powerful.
Lo and behold- my terrible Ascii art version of the weapon!
Extra line for space....
And another line for space....
You hold onto that part in the middle there with your knuckles going through into a protected basket with the blades coming out of the left and right side.
That's my interpretation of the description anyway. Basically a set of knuckle dusters with a cage, a pair of blades off each side and spikes coming out of the front.
I personally love the new design. I wish there were General Feats to increase the casting limit before Overcharge by 1/day and maybe some Class Feats that do something similar but there is plenty of time and room down the road for this kind of implementation outside of the CRB.
I say bury the old Wands in the same grave as BAB and Leadership, then build a lead monument over the top before blessing the site and banishing the whole 3sq mile area to a pocket dimension.
Edit: Cabbage you ninja!
You currently cannot, as others have stated, much to my displeasure.
It makes NO SENSE that Fighter is more proficient with Unarmed Attacks than a Monk.
Someone high up in the ranks at Paizo either really hates Monk or simply doesn't care enough to pay attention to the details. In no universe should a warrior trained for his whole life to fight using his body fall behind doing something they are 95% focused on to someone who spends THEIR whole life mastering combat in heavy armor with shiny magic weapons.
Also, before someone goes all "It's for balance reasons!" on me, I find that to be a nonsense argument, the mechanics of the class should have been tweaked around Legendary in Unarmed to fit the fluff if the "math" was a problem.
Q 1) As Seisho noted I think this is what the deal is. Good luck trying to swing a weapon that is trying to light itself on fire and boiling the water around it with ANY amount of accuracy. It would in effect create a steam/gas barrier around the weapon that would wholesale prevent it from doing any damage at all to the intended target- Just switch the fiery weapon quality off or you have a piece of junk for underwater combat, seems about right to me.
2) Can't say because I know nothing about "Fortune/Misfortune" effects, I'm guessing that those are a specific kind of Tag or Trait that defines an effect? That said I'm not sure where the conflict in your scenario plays out based on how you're describing it. If you have a misfortune Trait in play on an attack, you'd need to decide to trigger your Halfling Luck to cancel it out before you roll anyhow so the whole thing is a wash no matter what, unless I misunderstand what these actually do.
I strongly disagree. I don't like marrying the system to the setting. I'm not playing pathfinder for Golarion, I'm playing it for the ruleset.
I get that, I really do, but that's what the Gamemastery Guide or whatever it will be called is for, that and 3PP.
Them publishing content that doesn't fit within the scope of Golarian is not only a bad idea, but it would also require them to add even MORE handholding for PFS and Con games in terms of hard-fast restrictions.
I said it in my post, it's an opinion, but I'll repeat it. If you want Glocks, SMGs, and full auto weapons in your Pathfinder game, then you should be looking to 3PPs for that, not looking to Paizo to contaminate their own pool and setting.
WARNING: These are all opinions spouted before my second cup of coffee for the day
Misfire on a 1 ONLY- Having higher misfire ranges did NOTHING except discourage people from buying anything except the same 4 firearms and leaving the rest in the discount bin with the exception of those few gunslingers who instead wasted their money on expensive and pointless enchantments to keep them from blowing their face off when instead they could have crafted better ammo and used an objectively better firearm in the first place.
I think Deadly d12 is reasonable for Critical hits.
I'd like to see Paizo take a stance with their mainline hardcover books and NOT release "Modern" firearms at ALL. They don't make sense for Golarion, hell even the space-laser weapons are more Sci-Fantasy than futuristic and adding in Semi/Fully automatic weapons with no misfire chance, superior damage and negating the Reload-Tax for the mainline products is just goofy nonsense that encourages everyone to build the same character, especially if they eventually use Class Feats to gain access to Gunsmithing Formulas to craft one or more Uncommon-Rare Firearms of their choice as they level.
I'm not usually one of those "Keep your chocolate out of my peanut butter" folks but I honestly think that 3PP can and should be the ones best suited to creating firearms that make sense outside of the context of Golarian, IMO nobody should be able to strategically use supplements even 5-10 years down the road with 1st Party books to create Master Chief, that's just silly and destroys the world continuity. Let Rogue Genius Games or somebody else take that creative space and play with it, don't contaminate the lore otherwise.
Tie Grit/Panache/Moxie/Whatever to the Focus Point system. I don't care if people think it's strange that it should use the same resource that Spellcasters use, it makes sense to tie the X/day really cool limited resource stuff to the same pool for every class for balance reasons, besides there is already precedent in place for ways to restore Focus which is a big part of what those systems were about in the first place.
One change I have considered is that it only costs 1 Hero Point to avoid death, but once you avoid death you can't do it again until you gain a level.
I REALLY like this idea, a LOT.
The idea that people who just show up to game sessions get 1 free "get out of death" card every game even if they didn't bring pizza or soda really has irked me for some time and I think limiting that to once per level would really add some cranberry to my vodka in terms of the life-saving function of Hero points.
As for the canon reason, I couldn't say but to me, I always assumed it was because he is some kind of double-agent for the Corpse Fleet who wanted plausible deniability regarding HOW the CF got their hands on the info about the Drift Rock in the first place.
If it wasn't publicly released then nobody but that party SHOULD know about it outside of the SFS and the Eoxian Embassy which would point some pretty serious fingers directly at Nor when the Corpse Fleet gets involved in the race for a super-weapon whose existence was discovered because of his intel gathering. If the info remained privately sealed and was then leaked to the press, hacked from his database, or otherwise stolen he would similarly be in HUGE trouble. Releasing it all out of the gate assured that he could simply say that he had no idea that the footage would be so explosive and the impacts so far-reaching.
I think that he is playing the Eoxian government and the Corpse fleet both like a master diplomat that he is in hopes to stay on top no matter who comes out the victor.
Other than that, because they needed a way to inject rivals into the story on the chase for the Steller Degenerator.
I know this is a discussion thread about the viability of either of these as whole new Classes versus Archetypes but I don't have the bandwidth to get into detail explaining why I feel as I do so I'll just make my perspective known instead.
Neither needs new Classes. The Archetype system plus the inclusion of additional Class Paths down the line will offer more than enough room to create both of these ideas without having to waste 25 pages in hardcover and continue supporting them with every other book down the line, it's a waste of development time and space.
If we're taking bets-
My money is on 18 episodes at 56 minutes each per season. They release the show starting on August 1st and release 1 show per week with JB and the G&S team in chat on Twitch with a 1 week YouTube Delay.
They can fly Jason out in another 3 months to film S2 for a Holiday/Winter themed continuation of the same story, same characters which begins airing early-2020.
I can't confirm this but I suspect that Alchemist will be the go-to choice for between combat healing and buffs while Cleric will be strongest when inside the Initiative Round, and to me, that seems totally fair.
An alchemist with a spec on healing will have more overall capability to do mundane healing checks and will likely be able to actually restore more HP with their elixirs in a given day than a Cleric but will fall behind when it comes to "Healing per round" inside combat.
That on top of having way more "ranks" to invest in Skills at large than your average cleric I think it's probably a good balance.
If Pathfinder 1 classes are eventually trickled back into second edition, which do you hope return first?
Still waiting for you to show me a page number or FAQ that lists what a "Bite" attack for a PC does. I'll help you out and copy the relevant text... again. This time I'll remove the fluff that's confusing you.
Starfinder #2: Temple of the Twelve pg. 53 wrote:
You can choose to have your unarmed attacks deal lethal piercing damage, and if you are 3rd level or higher, you automatically gain a special version of the Weapon Specialization feat that adds double your level to the damage of these unarmed attacks (rather than adding your level).
That's what the item does, and that's all it does... I don't understand why this is the hill you're willing to stubbornly die on. It's not that hard to understand.
The first part mechanically does zippo, zilch, nada, nothing. It is mechanically meaningless and you're inferring your perspective on what you think it should do instead of actually reading the RAW. Mechanically any unarmed attack you make can benefit, that's how its worded that's how it works.
No dude, that's fluff, find me a table that lists "Bite Attack" anywhere in print and I'll back down from my point. Your bold text does nothing to support your weak argument.
Unless there were some last minute tweaks to the NPC rules and the math behind the damage that monsters/baddies do I'd have to say that PF2 is significantly less lethal than 1st Edition and it's not even close by comparison.
That said, it's going to take some adjusting for GMs to really change tactics and really try their best to actively kill a PC but it's still possible, you just won't ever see it happen by accident any longer as the shift in things means that targeting one and ONLY one PC during combat for a group of monsters is totally legitimate tactic that doesn't fall under "foul-play" anymore.
Getting Hero Points for free just for showing up to a game and having a multi-level dying track instead of a target HP number you're shooting for means no character is ever going to go from fighting to dead in the course of a single round.
Not sure how I feel about that really... as others have said, I hope if things are how they seem from the previews and games I played/saw at PaizoCon that there are good options for increased lethality beyond just ratcheting up the Level of the encounters you throw at a party or adding templates to literally everything the party fights.
I'm personally still in favor of having the Cha Mod set the starting attitude of NPCs who are unfamiliar with the PC until they actively make a social skill check against them to raise the attitude level.
I have no idea if the starting attitudes are codified for PF2 or not but I personally plan on running with the following.
Most NPCs start as indifferent to Characters they do not know of or have a prior relationship with. Unless otherwise stated NPCs begin as indifferent. Depending on the Characters Charisma score NPCs have their starting attitude adjusted as follows:
Unfriendly -2 or less
Having an NPC treat Characters differently based on how powerful or influential their personality seems natural to me and I hardly think having most strangers treat the ugly, uncouth Barbarian with -2 Cha badly to start is unreasonable (Given how hard it is to even achieve such a score), and on the inverse, if an attractive well-spoken Bard walks up they should gain some benefit from this.
I think the disconnect probably stems from different perspectives on what min-maxing is at its core really then.
From my perspective, that sounds like rote optimization to simply make an effective PC versus min-maxing being what DPR crunchers and RAW loophole exploiters do so they can challenge CR+5-10 encounters realistically on their own.
Wait, min-maxing isn’t considered fun? O.O
In my experience, min-max PCs are only fun for the table as a whole if the WHOLE table is participating in it, and to a certain degree, it also depends on how effective each PC end up being in relation to one another.
I've never in my entire life seen a table benefit substantially from some characters just being objectively worse at completing encounters over others.
So... unless you've got a whole table that is interested in it and wants to chase the dragon, then in my opinion and experience... no, it's not fun for anyone but the person doing the min-max.
You, my friend, simply haven't had coffee that is properly attuned to your tastes and needs if that's truly how you feel... or perhaps you have a tannin sensitivity.
I mean, I don't want to be like this, but interpreting these things is literally part of my dayjob.
That period separating the first and second sentences makes all the difference in the world and the blanket "... your unarmed attacks deal..." statement means it applies to all of your unarmed attacks, not just the Bite attack you gain from the item.
I'm not projecting anything, I'm reading the words as written, you seem to be inserting interpretation where there is no room for any to be had. The item doesn't state "...your Unarmed Bite Attacks" ..." We can agree to disagree I suppose, but that doesn't mean the RAW does anything different than what it says it does.