paizo.com Favorited Posts by Ticktockman1paizo.com Favorited Posts by Ticktockman12024-03-28T16:03:56Z2024-03-28T16:03:56ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Has the PF2e remaster improved low level play? If so how?Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yj8?Has-the-PF2e-remaster-improved-low-level-play#382024-03-27T20:37:28Z2024-03-27T14:08:53Z<p>Any static DC becomes irrelevant at some point. So it happens a few levels earlier now. That’s better than putting new players off the action entirely. But as I said, I would be fine with something that scales.</p>Any static DC becomes irrelevant at some point. So it happens a few levels earlier now. That’s better than putting new players off the action entirely. But as I said, I would be fine with something that scales.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2024-03-27T14:08:53ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Has the PF2e remaster improved low level play? If so how?Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yj8?Has-the-PF2e-remaster-improved-low-level-play#332024-03-28T12:26:03Z2024-03-26T21:23:06Z<p>I would be fine with a scaling DC, but I much prefer this lower DC than the DC 20 it was before. At low levels, it was really disheartening to have to beat a higher DC than the task itself just to help someone try to succeed. (Note that I mainly play PFS, so the GM using a lower DC for the aid isn't an option.) In a game that is built so much around encouraging teamwork, starting the Aid DC at 20 was really counter productive in teaching new players to cooperate.</p>I would be fine with a scaling DC, but I much prefer this lower DC than the DC 20 it was before. At low levels, it was really disheartening to have to beat a higher DC than the task itself just to help someone try to succeed. (Note that I mainly play PFS, so the GM using a lower DC for the aid isn't an option.) In a game that is built so much around encouraging teamwork, starting the Aid DC at 20 was really counter productive in teaching new players to cooperate.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2024-03-26T21:23:06ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe&page=4?Remastered-Barbarian#1792024-03-26T19:05:50Z2024-03-26T14:06:06Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Gortle wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ferious Thune wrote:</div><blockquote> Now a reaction to negate a crit might be something worth considering. </blockquote><p>Valuable when it fires.
</p>
It would be hard to use in practice as you have to leave a reaction spare in order to keep the option open. </blockquote><p>I would make it a lower level feat, so you could, in theory, take both it and Reactive Strike. If it needs to be limited to 1/rage to do so, I think that would be fine. Even that could mean the difference between the Barbarian dripping halfway through the fight, then losing Rage for the remaining part, and the Barbarian staying up and murdering the boss.
<p>This also makes me wonder why Barbarian doesn’t have an equivalent to Orc Ferocity. A reaction to stay conscious when you would normally drop also seems good for a barbarian. Anyway, a series of feats around the idea of them powering through damage twitch their rage seems more thematic than some of what we’ve got, while also addressing the serviceability without raising their AC.</p>Gortle wrote:Ferious Thune wrote: Now a reaction to negate a crit might be something worth considering.
Valuable when it fires.
It would be hard to use in practice as you have to leave a reaction spare in order to keep the option open. I would make it a lower level feat, so you could, in theory, take both it and Reactive Strike. If it needs to be limited to 1/rage to do so, I think that would be fine. Even that could mean the difference between the Barbarian dripping halfway through the...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2024-03-26T14:06:06ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe&page=4?Remastered-Barbarian#1722024-03-27T02:04:57Z2024-03-26T03:59:22Z<p>Now a reaction to negate a crit might be something worth considering.</p>Now a reaction to negate a crit might be something worth considering.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2024-03-26T03:59:22ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe&page=4?Remastered-Barbarian#1602024-03-26T18:50:23Z2024-03-25T20:40:02Z<p>Battle Medicine is not magical, is pretty common, and doesn’t even have Concentrate, so a Barbarian can use it themselves. Elixirs are not magical, and while they aren’t fantastic in terms of action economy or the amount of healing, they are options in an emergency. That’s not much worse than where most negative healing (or whatever it’s called now) characters end up in random PFS groups where other characters haven’t necessarily planned for it. </p>
<p>Renewed Vigor is an option, though not a great one as an 8th level feat. </p>
<p>Anyway, I think the issues with not being able to benefit from buff spells is much bigger than the issues around healing.</p>Battle Medicine is not magical, is pretty common, and doesn’t even have Concentrate, so a Barbarian can use it themselves. Elixirs are not magical, and while they aren’t fantastic in terms of action economy or the amount of healing, they are options in an emergency. That’s not much worse than where most negative healing (or whatever it’s called now) characters end up in random PFS groups where other characters haven’t necessarily planned for it.
Renewed Vigor is an option, though not a great...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2024-03-25T20:40:02ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe&page=3?Remastered-Barbarian#1382024-03-25T03:16:39Z2024-03-25T02:40:24Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">YuriP wrote:</div><blockquote><p> We have but they are still limited to some classes or archetypes (and there's many like Cleave that currently is one class only). Many of these feats was general feats in PF1/3.5.</p>
<p>I'm not saying that this need to be changed. As I said it was a design choice made by designers to make some combat feats unique to some classes to make these classes more unique. What I just say is that's a thing that won't be change in PF2 and if someone doesn't like how it was made in PF2 these people will need to wait some years to propose these changes in a PF3 or make it as homebrew. </blockquote><p>My earlier point wasn’t an attempt to get the design philosophy changed. I understand how we got here and why. The end result is that we have feats that don’t have anything to do with class identity being artificially turned into class identity. Because we have Cleave, or because Reactive Strike is a class feat, if you want to improve or in some cases keep up, you have to spend class feats on generic combat feats, instead of on actual class feats. Cleave is a Barbarian only feat because someone chose to make it one, not because it has anything to do specifically with being a Barbarian. Reactive Strike/AoO is a near automatic choice when it becomes available, because it’s just mechanically good. So instead of taking a Champion/Barbarian/Swashbuckler/Magus/whatever other class gets access to it feat, you have to spend a Class feat on it.
<p>I don’t expect that to change, but it is part of the reason we don’t have more thematic feats for the classes. “Fixing” Cleave might make Cleave a better feat, but it won’t make it feel like it should have been a Barbarian-only feat in the first place.</p>YuriP wrote:We have but they are still limited to some classes or archetypes (and there's many like Cleave that currently is one class only). Many of these feats was general feats in PF1/3.5.
I'm not saying that this need to be changed. As I said it was a design choice made by designers to make some combat feats unique to some classes to make these classes more unique. What I just say is that's a thing that won't be change in PF2 and if someone doesn't like how it was made in PF2 these...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2024-03-25T02:40:24ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe&page=2?Remastered-Barbarian#832024-03-23T09:24:54Z2024-03-23T06:08:14Z<p>I mean, Cleave wants to compete with Reactive Strike, but since Barbarians can get Reactive Strike at the same level, I’ve never seen anyone choose Cleave over it. Cleave is far too situational. Sure, Barbarians might drop a lot of enemies, but the requirement that the target of the cleave be adjacent to that enemy drastically reduces its usefulness. Plus having to take the MAP hit on the second attack. Swipe has the adjacent issue, but at least is a full MAP attack, and likely with a to-hit bonus if you combo it with a Sweep weapon. </p>
<p>Maybe it’s just annoyance that they used a feat name from 1E, but made it work differently. Then they create a feat with a different name, but made that one work almost like Cleave from 1E.</p>I mean, Cleave wants to compete with Reactive Strike, but since Barbarians can get Reactive Strike at the same level, I’ve never seen anyone choose Cleave over it. Cleave is far too situational. Sure, Barbarians might drop a lot of enemies, but the requirement that the target of the cleave be adjacent to that enemy drastically reduces its usefulness. Plus having to take the MAP hit on the second attack. Swipe has the adjacent issue, but at least is a full MAP attack, and likely with a to-hit...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2024-03-23T06:08:14ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Remastered BarbarianFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yhe&page=2?Remastered-Barbarian#762024-03-24T04:26:28Z2024-03-23T00:45:45Z<p>For those who've brought up Cleave, Swipe is essentially what Cleave should have been. Though I wish there was some way to get it to a point where the enemies don't have to be adjacent. My barb will eventually be Huge with a 15-foot reach, but will still only be able to Swipe 5-feet.</p>
<p>I'm in the camp that thinks that there are too many feats that are locked to specific classes that don't really have anything to do with that class. I'd have preferred that Combat Feats had remained as its own category, instead of being how they tried to differentiate the core classes from each other. But, I know enough not to think that will change in the remaster, so it is what it is at this point.</p>
<p>I find that Barbarian has a lot of good feats. Level 1 is a little underwhelming, but that's true of a lot of classes. Sudden Charge means there's at least one good choice that also helps with the action economy of needing to rage. Acute Vision is also decent if it's an ancestry without Darkvision. Yes, Raging Intimidation, Moment of Clarity, Adrenaline Rush, and Raging Thrower are all kinda meh, but two decent/good 1st-level feats is more than some classes get. </p>
<p>Evening out the instincts would be good. And yes, the biggest issue with Rage is not being able to do Concentrate actions, so it would be great if that got fixed. I don't mind so much that Rage ends if you get knocked unconscious, as that gives incentive to not get dropped.</p>
<p>In general, though, I'm pretty happy with where the Barbarian is. I'd just want more cool, unique feats that let them do interesting Barbarian things. But I want a version of that for all of the classes.</p>For those who've brought up Cleave, Swipe is essentially what Cleave should have been. Though I wish there was some way to get it to a point where the enemies don't have to be adjacent. My barb will eventually be Huge with a 15-foot reach, but will still only be able to Swipe 5-feet.
I'm in the camp that thinks that there are too many feats that are locked to specific classes that don't really have anything to do with that class. I'd have preferred that Combat Feats had remained as its own...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2024-03-23T00:45:45ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: In-game explanation for the Remaster?Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43yf7?Ingame-explanation-for-the-Remaster#212024-03-19T20:35:14Z2024-03-18T02:35:53Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Finoan wrote:</div><blockquote> One Remaster change that affects one of my characters is that Witch suddenly wakes up one morning and now their familiar can do more cool things. But that isn't really all that jarring. Witch familiars already do rather unexpected things. And when they level up it is not uncommon for the Witch to wake up one day and have they're familiar able to do something new. </blockquote><p>My Witch will just assume that her familiar was hiding her extra abilities, because, well, her familiar is a cat.Finoan wrote:One Remaster change that affects one of my characters is that Witch suddenly wakes up one morning and now their familiar can do more cool things. But that isn't really all that jarring. Witch familiars already do rather unexpected things. And when they level up it is not uncommon for the Witch to wake up one day and have they're familiar able to do something new.
My Witch will just assume that her familiar was hiding her extra abilities, because, well, her familiar is a cat.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2024-03-18T02:35:53ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Friendly Clerics, Problematic GodsFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43y2n?Friendly-Clerics-Problematic-Gods#252024-03-07T21:57:37Z2024-02-25T22:55:18Z<p>You could just only heal using Risky Surgery. That way you are inflicting more pain while also making sure they don’t die. So they can experience more pain. </p>
<p>My witch uses Soothe, but justifies it as the subject needing to be able to experience the new pains fresh, so that they can properly describe how it feels. But not a Cleric, so not as bound by the anathema.</p>You could just only heal using Risky Surgery. That way you are inflicting more pain while also making sure they don’t die. So they can experience more pain.
My witch uses Soothe, but justifies it as the subject needing to be able to experience the new pains fresh, so that they can properly describe how it feels. But not a Cleric, so not as bound by the anathema.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2024-02-25T22:55:18ZRe: Forums: Advice: Throwing Dagger RogueFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43xv0?Throwing-Dagger-Rogue#432024-02-19T15:31:41Z2024-02-19T12:48:03Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Trip.H wrote:</div><blockquote>Though Gang Up is plain amazing, there are situations it does not help (and it kinda encourages Rogues to not offer the mutual flank, which kinda stinks. Meanwhile, Tumbling Behind and standing there offers that nice mutual flank if desired). </blockquote><p>Just noticed this point. In the remaster, Gang Up now provides a flank to all of your allies as long as you are adjacent to a creature.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Remastered Gang Up wrote:</div><blockquote>You and your allies harry an opponent in concert. You can flank an enemy if it’s within reach of both of you and an ally—you and your ally don’t have to be on opposite sides. <b>This benefits your allies as well as you</b>, but only if they’re flanking with you, not each other. The other requirements for flanking must still be met.</blockquote><p>Bolding mine. Gang Up was already one of the better feats in the game, and somehow they decided to make it even better in the remaster. But I can understand skipping it on a thrown/ranged build.Trip.H wrote:Though Gang Up is plain amazing, there are situations it does not help (and it kinda encourages Rogues to not offer the mutual flank, which kinda stinks. Meanwhile, Tumbling Behind and standing there offers that nice mutual flank if desired).
Just noticed this point. In the remaster, Gang Up now provides a flank to all of your allies as long as you are adjacent to a creature. Remastered Gang Up wrote:You and your allies harry an opponent in concert. You can flank an enemy if...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2024-02-19T12:48:03ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Society: Influence Systems in PFS2 scenariosFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43rm7?Influence-Systems-in-PFS2-scenarios#492024-02-09T10:44:46Z2024-02-09T02:09:29Z<p>Some additional guidance on what you learn from a Discovery check would also help. If you are asking for a skill, the default seems to be to provide a single skill with the lowest DC first, which is often an obscure lore that no one is going to have. That means the first Discovery check is essentially a wasted round, even when you succeed. It gets even worse when there are two or more obscure lore skills for an individual, potentially wasting multiple rounds trying to figure out a skill someone has that they can use.</p>
<p>But in general, it's good to know our local group has been essentially running this correctly.</p>
<p>EDIT: Hmm... I guess the lowest-DC thing is written into the success condition of the Discover check, so it doesn't really need clarification or guidance. It's just unfortunate when it leads to multiple wasted rounds just trying to figure out what skill to use.</p>Some additional guidance on what you learn from a Discovery check would also help. If you are asking for a skill, the default seems to be to provide a single skill with the lowest DC first, which is often an obscure lore that no one is going to have. That means the first Discovery check is essentially a wasted round, even when you succeed. It gets even worse when there are two or more obscure lore skills for an individual, potentially wasting multiple rounds trying to figure out a skill...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2024-02-09T02:09:29ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: Paizo Blog: Roll20 Pathfinder Core Sheet Community PreviewFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6sihc?Roll20-Pathfinder-Core-Sheet-Community-Preview#62024-01-11T18:12:35Z2024-01-11T00:55:34Z<p>I'm less concerned about the look, but the extra features sound nice. Is there going to be an easy way to move characters from the old sheet to the new one? Or will we need to reenter them if we want them updated for the remaster? Or better yet, will the fields line up so that we could export them into a game using either sheet? There are a lot of people with tables built for PFS scenarios set to use the old sheet, so just hoping to not have to maintain two copies of characters.</p>
<p>Overall, though, I'm excited to see the sheet go live!</p>I'm less concerned about the look, but the extra features sound nice. Is there going to be an easy way to move characters from the old sheet to the new one? Or will we need to reenter them if we want them updated for the remaster? Or better yet, will the fields line up so that we could export them into a game using either sheet? There are a lot of people with tables built for PFS scenarios set to use the old sheet, so just hoping to not have to maintain two copies of characters.
Overall,...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2024-01-11T00:55:34ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Harpy - Captivating Song - Poorly Balanced - Poorly WrittenFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43xco?Harpy-Captivating-Song-Poorly-Balanced#72024-01-08T08:24:40Z2024-01-08T02:45:31Z<p>It could be clearer for sure. I’d read it as the first interpretation, because it doesn’t say that breaking the fascinate removes the other effects. But I could see that as being intended. </p>
<p>I’m no fan of harpies, because they always seem unbalanced for the levels they show up. I will say that this is a big improvement from 1E. In 2E, Captivating Song has the Incapacitation trait. So at the point where you’re seeing more than 2 in an encounter, they are probably going to be your level or lower with maybe a higher level boss. That alone improves the chances to avoid being affected considerably. </p>
<p>Also, 1E had Coup de Grace, and someone who failed a save against Captivating Song was essentially helpless against that Harpy. Plus, being attacked by the harpy that had you captivated didn’t break the effect or give you a new save. And making the save only made you immune to that particular harpy’s song. </p>
<p>Now, 1E had Protection from Evil which could give a new save or potentially make you immune, but… there was a LOT of table variation about whether or not Protection from Evil worked against harpy song due to unclear wording in Protection from Evil. </p>
<p>So while I can agree this needs some clarity, it’s a much better situation than 1E even with the less favorable reading.</p>It could be clearer for sure. I’d read it as the first interpretation, because it doesn’t say that breaking the fascinate removes the other effects. But I could see that as being intended.
I’m no fan of harpies, because they always seem unbalanced for the levels they show up. I will say that this is a big improvement from 1E. In 2E, Captivating Song has the Incapacitation trait. So at the point where you’re seeing more than 2 in an encounter, they are probably going to be your level or lower...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2024-01-08T02:45:31ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Battle Medicine Crit Fail Damage?Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43tc9&page=2?Battle-Medicine-Crit-Fail-Damage#752023-05-14T04:34:40Z2023-05-13T16:48:16Z<p>What you are also missing in that analysis is that while Intimidating Glare lets you do something you can’t normally do (demoralize without a shared language), it is an expansion of something you can already do (demoralize with a shared language). Someone without Intimidating Glare can still Demoralize, just not against every enemy. </p>
<p>Same for Assurance (Athletics). Anyone with Athletics can trip an opponent. Assurance just sets the value of the die roll.</p>
<p>Without Battle Medicine, you can’t Treat Wounds in combat <i>at all</i>. It is an entirely new action. Not the expansion of an existing action. And on top of that the math is really good for Battle Medicine even with the crit fail. Which, if you really want to eliminate the crit fail effect, just take Assurance (Medicine), and you don’t have to worry about it after 3rd level.</p>What you are also missing in that analysis is that while Intimidating Glare lets you do something you can’t normally do (demoralize without a shared language), it is an expansion of something you can already do (demoralize with a shared language). Someone without Intimidating Glare can still Demoralize, just not against every enemy.
Same for Assurance (Athletics). Anyone with Athletics can trip an opponent. Assurance just sets the value of the die roll.
Without Battle Medicine, you can’t...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2023-05-13T16:48:16ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Battle Medicine Crit Fail Damage?Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43tc9&page=2?Battle-Medicine-Crit-Fail-Damage#732023-05-13T10:47:06Z2023-05-13T05:42:37Z<p>I mean, Battle Medicine is already one of the best 1st level Skill Feats when it can deal damage on a crit fail. Take that away and it would be even better.</p>
<p>I don't know any other skill feats that do something similar, but I might be missing something. The closest in a widely available 1st level feat I can think of is Shield Block (as a General, not Skill Feat), which most characters wouldn't be able to take until 3rd level.</p>I mean, Battle Medicine is already one of the best 1st level Skill Feats when it can deal damage on a crit fail. Take that away and it would be even better.
I don't know any other skill feats that do something similar, but I might be missing something. The closest in a widely available 1st level feat I can think of is Shield Block (as a General, not Skill Feat), which most characters wouldn't be able to take until 3rd level.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2023-05-13T05:42:37ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Why doesn't RAW allow a Rouge to use a Main-Gauche as a class proficient weapon?Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43qrr&page=2?Why-doesnt-RAW-allow-a-Rouge-to-use-a#802023-01-24T03:37:40Z2023-01-24T03:34:40Z<p>Name a martial finesse weapon that would be unbalanced on a Rogue and why. I maintain my contention that if there is one, it’s probably the weapon that is the issue, not a Rogue using it.</p>Name a martial finesse weapon that would be unbalanced on a Rogue and why. I maintain my contention that if there is one, it’s probably the weapon that is the issue, not a Rogue using it.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2023-01-24T03:34:40ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Why doesn't RAW allow a Rouge to use a Main-Gauche as a class proficient weapon?Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43qrr&page=2?Why-doesnt-RAW-allow-a-Rouge-to-use-a#762023-01-24T02:45:39Z2023-01-23T23:40:39Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">BloodandDust wrote:</div><blockquote><p> "Shortswords are also too complicated to use"
</p>
>> Well, if you mean fighting effectively with a sword, then yes, takes a lot more training to be good with a sword than a club. If it's a machete... basically a chopping sword, then no. Not sure what they had in mind making shortswords martial. As I said, I'd leave Rogues with only simple weapons though.</blockquote><p>Just clarifying that, aside maybe dagger, •the• prototypical Rogue weapon is too complicated for a Rogue to use.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">BloodandDust wrote:</div><blockquote><p>"relegates Rogues to only people who can’t afford a decent weapon"
</p>
>> No, that is a misreading. Character starting class and income are not correlated in game... if anything a Rogue might have more money than the average barbarian or fighter (thievery skill after all). It's about class focus. Rogues as a base class are not, or at least shouldn't be, stand-up fighters. They don't spend hours training in martial weapon technique, they spend it on skills. The current base class design essentially provides that. Rogues that •do• want to be more-martial-than-rogue should probably make an investment to do so... spend a class feat on the Mauler or Archer archetype (or Duelist, if it included rapier, main gauche, sword cane, etc.).
<br />
</blockquote><p>Rogue does not equal "street thug" was my point. But also, I guess Investigators are stand up fighters? The only implication in the class they spend any more time training for combat than a Rogue is... that they have Martial weapon proficiency.
<p>Thaumaturge is described as: "You use your implements and diverse arsenal of mystic tools and tricks to assist in combat, always presenting the right bane to exploit enemies' weaknesses or shield your allies against the supernatural." I guess that makes them stand up fighters?</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">BloodandDust wrote:</div><blockquote>Basically: Rogues are not stealthy martials! Stealthy Fighters are stealthy martials. Rogues are skills focused opportunists.</blockquote><p>Rogue, meantime, is described as, "You move about stealthily so you can catch foes unawares. You’re a precision instrument, more useful against a tough boss or distant spellcaster than against rank-and-file soldiers." Sounds like a stealthy martial to me.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">BloodandDust wrote:</div><blockquote><p>Granting rogues free martial weapon expertise just feels like basic goal-post moving / power creep. Five minutes after that gets approved we'll have this same thread again with "why can't rogues do sneak attack damage with a greatsword, it's so unfair. Backstabbing with a giant thing is the same as with a smaller thing, it's not complicated".</p>
<p>Just my current opinion / preference though, not a hill to die on.</blockquote><p>Again, giving Rogues martial weapons <i>isn't</i> power creep, if all martial weapons are balanced against each other. It didn't break the Investigator. I haven't heard of it making the Thaumaturge broken. The limiter on Rogues is agile or finesse. They aren't going to be sneak attacking with a greatsword, because it's not agile or finesse.
<p>Duelist granting dueling weapons makes sense, but it isn't going to solve the Rogue issue, because many of the martial weapons that make sense for a Rogue aren't dueling weapons.</p>
<p>If you want to limit it, then give Rogues all Agile or Finesse Martial weapons. That both keeps them from getting free Greatsword proficiency and avoids the issue of them either being shut out of weapons that are thematic to the class (again, war razor, sword cane, main gauche, etc.) without needing additional text with each new weapon published. That would put them on par with Alchemists, who are limited to a type of martial weapon (alchemical bombs) that can be defined without listing specific weapons.</p>BloodandDust wrote:"Shortswords are also too complicated to use"
>> Well, if you mean fighting effectively with a sword, then yes, takes a lot more training to be good with a sword than a club. If it's a machete... basically a chopping sword, then no. Not sure what they had in mind making shortswords martial. As I said, I'd leave Rogues with only simple weapons though.
Just clarifying that, aside maybe dagger, *the* prototypical Rogue weapon is too complicated for a Rogue to use....Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2023-01-23T23:40:39ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Why doesn't RAW allow a Rouge to use a Main-Gauche as a class proficient weapon?Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43qrr&page=2?Why-doesnt-RAW-allow-a-Rouge-to-use-a#732023-01-23T21:28:51Z2023-01-23T20:01:55Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Errenor wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ferious Thune wrote:</div><blockquote> What kind of street thug uses a rapier? Well, that depends on the setting. Golarion has a wide range of fantasy settings within the same world. Anything based more around 15th - 16th century or later instead of Middle Ages might make sense, which I assume is why it was included (beyond being a legacy weapon, why it might have become part of the legacy weapons in the first place). </blockquote>A setting is not a problem at all. The problem is, clubs and knives are much cheaper, easier to conceal and use in pretty much every setting. At least it's how I understand the remark. </blockquote><p>But that also relegates Rogues to only people who can’t afford a decent weapon. That’s not really what the classes are. Especially when NPCs don’t even typically have classes anymore. Rogues are highly trained or self-taught. They have more skill increases than any class except Investigators, and more flexibility in their skill training than Investigators. A 20th level Rogue with enough gold to buy out a small nation can’t get scaling proficiency in main gauche. Player Characters with class levels aren’t “street thugs” to begin with (and the term carries some derogatory connotations), unless that’s their concept, and then they have plenty of weapons to choose from. But there are also plenty of examples where the rapier is the most common weapon seen, and plenty of enemies have them who might also be considered “Rogues” without the class levels.
<p>As for the easily concealable part, locking Rogues out of martial weapons also means they can’t use effectively things like war razors:</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>A war razor is an exaggerated version of the barbers’ tool. It is a brittle but extremely sharp weapon that is very easy to slip into a pocket or sleeve.</blockquote><p>Or <s>fang wires</s>, or fighting fans, or sword canes… I’m sure there are other items designed to be concealed that are also martial. If your highly trained sneaky character that is good at concealing things can’t use those, then it feels like something is off.
<p>EDIT: I guess Fangwire is a Kobold weapon, so it's possible for Kobolds to get scaling proficiency. I left Dogslicer off the list for a similar reason, so it's fair to strike fangwire.</p>Errenor wrote:Ferious Thune wrote: What kind of street thug uses a rapier? Well, that depends on the setting. Golarion has a wide range of fantasy settings within the same world. Anything based more around 15th - 16th century or later instead of Middle Ages might make sense, which I assume is why it was included (beyond being a legacy weapon, why it might have become part of the legacy weapons in the first place).
A setting is not a problem at all. The problem is, clubs and knives are much...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2023-01-23T20:01:55ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Why doesn't RAW allow a Rouge to use a Main-Gauche as a class proficient weapon?Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43qrr&page=2?Why-doesnt-RAW-allow-a-Rouge-to-use-a#692023-01-23T18:40:14Z2023-01-23T17:51:09Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">BloodandDust wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Maybe the right path then is to add Dueling weapon proficiencies into the Duellist archetype... to match the way that Mauler and Archer work.</p>
<p>For the "What kind of street thug uses a rapier?" questions above, I agree, but for a different reason. I do not think Rogue class should include Rapier proficiency. IMO the class-included proficiency should purely be "Simple Weapons". Frankly, including rapier, the one 'off brand' weapon is what started this debate. </blockquote><p>Shortswords are also too complicated to use, I guess?
<p><i>If</i> there were an easy way to pick up scaling proficiency with a martial weapon, then it wouldn't matter so much. </p>
<p>If we accept the basic premise that martial weapons are supposed to be balanced against each other (I know, there are exceptions where that doesn't work), then having access to one martial weapon means having access to others shouldn't break things. We have unofficial previous designer support for this idea. If something does break, then maybe the issue is with that weapon, and not the class.</p>
<p>Rogues already have something built in to prevent getting sneak attack with a larger die melee weapon. It has to be an agile or finesse weapon. Even Ruffian only expands that to include simple weapons. Thief Rogues can't get Dex to damage unless it's finesse, so they are even more restricted.</p>
<p>What kind of street thug uses a rapier? Well, that depends on the setting. Golarion has a wide range of fantasy settings within the same world. Anything based more around 15th - 16th century or later instead of Middle Ages might make sense, which I assume is why it was included (beyond being a legacy weapon, why it might have become part of the legacy weapons in the first place).</p>
<p>I'm not opposed to Duelist adding dueling weapons, though since that isn't a trait on weapons, it still means a static list that might need updated at some point. I'd rather see things simplified and just give Rogues martial weapons and Wizards simple weapons, because it isn't going to break anything to do so.</p>BloodandDust wrote:Maybe the right path then is to add Dueling weapon proficiencies into the Duellist archetype... to match the way that Mauler and Archer work.
For the "What kind of street thug uses a rapier?" questions above, I agree, but for a different reason. I do not think Rogue class should include Rapier proficiency. IMO the class-included proficiency should purely be "Simple Weapons". Frankly, including rapier, the one 'off brand' weapon is what started this debate.
Shortswords are...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2023-01-23T17:51:09ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Why doesn't RAW allow a Rouge to use a Main-Gauche as a class proficient weapon?Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43qrr?Why-doesnt-RAW-allow-a-Rouge-to-use-a#462023-01-22T06:01:44Z2023-01-21T19:43:44Z<p>Just making something simple doesn't quite solve the issue, as simple weapons presumably have different design constraints, and they are also available to the casting classes (excepting Wizards). There's clearly a design space somewhere of weapons that should be martial that thematically fit Rogues. Main Gauche is a pretty good example that people are finding as an oversight.</p>Just making something simple doesn't quite solve the issue, as simple weapons presumably have different design constraints, and they are also available to the casting classes (excepting Wizards). There's clearly a design space somewhere of weapons that should be martial that thematically fit Rogues. Main Gauche is a pretty good example that people are finding as an oversight.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2023-01-21T19:43:44ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Why doesn't RAW allow a Rouge to use a Main-Gauche as a class proficient weapon?Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43qrr?Why-doesnt-RAW-allow-a-Rouge-to-use-a#412023-01-21T17:47:50Z2023-01-21T15:20:13Z<p>Back on the OP’s question… Yeah, I think the Rogue proficiencies and Wizards not getting all simple weapons was a miss. If they did it for legacy reasons, why choose to do that for this, when so much else in the edition has purposely deviated from the legacy? If they did it for balance reasons, it was unnecessary and an example of where the system is over correcting. It’s already a balanced system. There isn’t a need for this kind of granular rule. That’s part of the benefit of having a balanced system in the first place. </p>
<p>To put it another way, it’s not future proofing. It’s complicating future releases, because if anything is meant to be released for the rogue to use, it needs an additional note granting them proficiency. The balance of the system itself has already future proofed this. If a weapon is released that breaks that balance, it’s going to be an issue for more than just Rogues so would need to be addressed anyway.</p>Back on the OP’s question… Yeah, I think the Rogue proficiencies and Wizards not getting all simple weapons was a miss. If they did it for legacy reasons, why choose to do that for this, when so much else in the edition has purposely deviated from the legacy? If they did it for balance reasons, it was unnecessary and an example of where the system is over correcting. It’s already a balanced system. There isn’t a need for this kind of granular rule. That’s part of the benefit of having a...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2023-01-21T15:20:13ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Society: Sanctioning Change Request for Beginners BoxFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43qei?Sanctioning-Change-Request-for-Beginners-Box#72023-01-04T16:33:11Z2023-01-04T16:30:34Z<p>It’s double ACP and repeatable. I’ve similarly never played it, in part because of the character requirement. Whenever I see it listed, I don’t seem to have the time to look over the rules.</p>It’s double ACP and repeatable. I’ve similarly never played it, in part because of the character requirement. Whenever I see it listed, I don’t seem to have the time to look over the rules.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2023-01-04T16:30:34ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: CRB Errata v4 discussionFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43qek?CRB-Errata-v4-discussion#282023-01-05T11:17:53Z2023-01-04T16:13:38Z<p>For the minion action clarification… Does that also apply to minions who receive 1 action without being commanded? Such as a mature animal companion or an independent familiar? The adjustments are applied “when the minion gains its actions,” which has to happen for them to get 1 action, right? So a slowed 1 mature companion would get 0 actions if not commanded or a hasted one would get 2 (to stride or strike only)?</p>For the minion action clarification… Does that also apply to minions who receive 1 action without being commanded? Such as a mature animal companion or an independent familiar? The adjustments are applied “when the minion gains its actions,” which has to happen for them to get 1 action, right? So a slowed 1 mature companion would get 0 actions if not commanded or a hasted one would get 2 (to stride or strike only)?Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2023-01-04T16:13:38ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Society: Companion countFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43q6x?Companion-count#242023-01-03T18:28:10Z2023-01-02T20:18:44Z<p>The 2nd-level Longstrider wand lasts 8 hours. It's meant for out of combat use.</p>The 2nd-level Longstrider wand lasts 8 hours. It's meant for out of combat use.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2023-01-02T20:18:44ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Society: Item crafting 2eFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42wyo?Item-crafting-2e#342022-11-22T07:28:46Z2022-11-19T16:53:08Z<p>With regards to having multiple units of downtime, that’s in there to account for field trained agents. Field trained agents receive an extra 50% of downtime days, so for a typical scenario, they get 12 days. They have to use those in an 8-day unit and a 4-day unit, not a 12-day unit. The multiple units rules have nothing to do with banking downtime for the future. </p>
<p>Rather than thinking of it as “days off,” think of it as days between adventures. If you don’t do anything between two adventures, you don’t get any benefit from those days. </p>
<p>EDIT: Another thread has reminded me that APs or chronicles that are awarding more XP than a scenario might also award more than 8 days of downtime, so that’s the other reason for the multiple units. If you get 24 days of downtime from an AP chronicle, then you would spend 3 units of 8 days each.</p>With regards to having multiple units of downtime, that’s in there to account for field trained agents. Field trained agents receive an extra 50% of downtime days, so for a typical scenario, they get 12 days. They have to use those in an 8-day unit and a 4-day unit, not a 12-day unit. The multiple units rules have nothing to do with banking downtime for the future.
Rather than thinking of it as “days off,” think of it as days between adventures. If you don’t do anything between two...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-11-19T16:53:08ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: ErrataFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43les?Errata#42022-03-23T23:12:48Z2022-03-22T18:09:43Z<p>I think there are a few things in the errata FAQ that aren’t in the 2nd printing, but not much. The PDFs get updated (though possibly only when the physical books are updated), so if you’re worried about buying the book and not getting future changes, get the pdf and you can always download the most recent version. </p>
<p>But also as was said, Archives of amethyst should be current as well. </p>
<p>There’s unfortunately no published schedule on when the errata will happen. It’s tied to when they do a new printing of the book.</p>I think there are a few things in the errata FAQ that aren’t in the 2nd printing, but not much. The PDFs get updated (though possibly only when the physical books are updated), so if you’re worried about buying the book and not getting future changes, get the pdf and you can always download the most recent version.
But also as was said, Archives of amethyst should be current as well.
There’s unfortunately no published schedule on when the errata will happen. It’s tied to when they do a new...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-03-22T18:09:43ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: What animal companions do you think PF2 is missing?Paul the Lumberjack (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43lcg?What-animal-companions-do-you-think-PF2-is#232022-03-20T01:24:45Z2022-03-19T05:17:08Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Themetricsystem wrote:</div><blockquote> Kangaroo, Giant Crab, Giant Spiders, Owlbear, Bull/Bison/Buffalo, and Goblin Dog are all currently not published to name a few Animals that are otherwise given stats as a creature/monster. </blockquote><p>Bull/Bison/Buffalo/<b>Ox</b>.Themetricsystem wrote:Kangaroo, Giant Crab, Giant Spiders, Owlbear, Bull/Bison/Buffalo, and Goblin Dog are all currently not published to name a few Animals that are otherwise given stats as a creature/monster.
Bull/Bison/Buffalo/Ox.Paul the Lumberjack (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-03-19T05:17:08ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Arcane Cascade for Starlit SpanFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gdq&page=3?Arcane-Cascade-for-Starlit-Span#1332022-02-25T19:41:02Z2022-02-25T18:26:22Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">The Raven Black wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ferious Thune wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">The Raven Black wrote:</div><blockquote><p> It just makes Starlit span even better than the other studies than it currently is.</p>
<p>Really, if it's such a small difference, why add it ? </blockquote>Because it's weirder to exclude it, and because things shouldn't be balanced around people finding ways to exploit a mechanic. The exploit should be addressed, not everything else made worse. For a normal Starlit Span Magus that isn't seeking out the most damaging focus spells from dedications, it's not going to matter much if they have Arcane Cascade bonus damage or not. For a Starlit Span Magus that wants to build around a concept that is slightly underpowered, like not using their spell slots for the biggest damage they can find, it would help keep them on par with everyone else. </blockquote><p>Starlit span is already better than the other Magus studies. Any Magus concept you make with another study will be weaker than the same concept with Starlit Span.
</p>
This has nothing to do with the "exploit" discussed above, which just takes Starlit span's already existing advantages and magnifies them. </blockquote><p>That's a matter of opinion. Other studies do different things. They are only "weaker" in terms of the amount of damage they can output a round. There are advantages to being in melee as well.
<p>The other studies don't <i>just</i> get bonus damage from Arcane Cascade. Laughing Shadow gets bonus movement (admittedly, Longstrider eventually nullifies this, but that's another example of a spell that's out of whack with the rest of the system), Inexorable Iron gets temp HP, and Twisting Tree gets improved action economy. </p>
<p>Starlit Span gets neither the bonus damage, nor any other effect, and that's just plain weird. If the extra damage is an issue (it really isn't) they could still get something so that they can at least interact with the class feature without having to take additional feats.</p>The Raven Black wrote:Ferious Thune wrote: The Raven Black wrote:It just makes Starlit span even better than the other studies than it currently is.
Really, if it's such a small difference, why add it ?
Because it's weirder to exclude it, and because things shouldn't be balanced around people finding ways to exploit a mechanic. The exploit should be addressed, not everything else made worse. For a normal Starlit Span Magus that isn't seeking out the most damaging focus spells from...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-25T18:26:22ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Arcane Cascade for Starlit SpanFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gdq&page=3?Arcane-Cascade-for-Starlit-Span#1302022-02-25T19:37:20Z2022-02-25T18:12:01Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">The Raven Black wrote:</div><blockquote><p> It just makes Starlit span even better than the other studies than it currently is.</p>
<p>Really, if it's such a small difference, why add it ? </blockquote><p>Because it's weirder to exclude it, and because things shouldn't be balanced around people finding ways to exploit a mechanic. The exploit should be addressed, not everything else made worse. For a normal Starlit Span Magus that isn't seeking out the most damaging focus spells from dedications, it's not going to matter much if they have Arcane Cascade bonus damage or not. For a Starlit Span Magus that wants to build around a concept that is slightly underpowered, like not using their spell slots for the biggest damage they can find, it would help keep them on par with everyone else.The Raven Black wrote:It just makes Starlit span even better than the other studies than it currently is.
Really, if it's such a small difference, why add it ?
Because it's weirder to exclude it, and because things shouldn't be balanced around people finding ways to exploit a mechanic. The exploit should be addressed, not everything else made worse. For a normal Starlit Span Magus that isn't seeking out the most damaging focus spells from dedications, it's not going to matter much if they...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-25T18:12:01ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Arcane Cascade for Starlit SpanFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gdq&page=3?Arcane-Cascade-for-Starlit-Span#1282022-02-25T17:57:25Z2022-02-25T17:39:08Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">CaffeinatedNinja wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">HumbleGamer wrote:</div><blockquote><p>- true strike ( this has been an issue since the release, with the fighter crit fish heavy pick ).
</p>
</blockquote>Totally aside from Magus issue, I absolutely agree on true strike. It literally warps the game, because every single big attack, spell or physical, has to be balanced with "what if they use true strike!" which is annoying. That spell should have been errated in the first round, would have saved a ton of grief. </blockquote><p>Yeah, this is where I was going with my earlier post. The Fighter builds admittedly are more about the big melee weapons, while Precision Ranger does well with the thrown weapons, due to also usually doubling the range increment, and sometimes stacking companion support on top of gravity weapon and everything else. It's not that those things necessarily compete with a super optimized starlit span build, but that they demonstrate the power of true strike.
<p>I feel like the main reason that casters can't get item bonuses to spell attacks is that it's too easy to also stack true strike on top of them. Starlit Span is just showing what happens when you do that (with an extra regular attack on top of it). True strike combined with the crit mechanic is causing a lot of things to be limited. Just look at how many hoops they jumped through to stop most Magus builds from being able to overuse it (Fused Staff, for example, and how it's specifically written to prevent casting the spells out of it separate from Spellstrike). Twisting Tree can still do it, and Starlit Span, but for the other builds, they're going to mostly be limited to the ones they can cast themselves.</p>
<p>Anyway, something all this math has shown me is that the extra +1 to +3 from Arcane Cascade would be minor compared to just using true strike, so I still don't think it would be an issue for Starlit Span to be able to use the stance.</p>CaffeinatedNinja wrote:HumbleGamer wrote:- true strike ( this has been an issue since the release, with the fighter crit fish heavy pick ).
Totally aside from Magus issue, I absolutely agree on true strike. It literally warps the game, because every single big attack, spell or physical, has to be balanced with "what if they use true strike!" which is annoying. That spell should have been errated in the first round, would have saved a ton of grief. Yeah, this is where I was going with my...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-25T17:39:08ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Arcane Cascade for Starlit SpanFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gdq&page=2?Arcane-Cascade-for-Starlit-Span#882022-02-24T15:05:34Z2022-02-24T14:57:02Z<p>With regards to one-handed ranged weapons, it’s not that difficult to get them. Any decent thrown weapon (trident, or even javelin if you want more range) with a returning rune at 3rd level. I’ve seen precision rangers and fighters abuse taking a dedication/basic spell casting while holding a staff of divination in one-hand and a thrown weapon in the other then basically true striking every round of a PFS scenario. </p>
<p>I don’t feel like starlit span is so overpowered as to need banning, but it’s definitely the easiest magus style to pull off, and potential burst damage is huge.</p>With regards to one-handed ranged weapons, it’s not that difficult to get them. Any decent thrown weapon (trident, or even javelin if you want more range) with a returning rune at 3rd level. I’ve seen precision rangers and fighters abuse taking a dedication/basic spell casting while holding a staff of divination in one-hand and a thrown weapon in the other then basically true striking every round of a PFS scenario.
I don’t feel like starlit span is so overpowered as to need banning, but it’s...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-24T14:57:02ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Devise a Strategm and SwipeFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ks7?Devise-a-Strategm-and-Swipe#382022-02-18T08:52:29Z2022-02-17T04:54:42Z<p>Keep in mind that one of the major downsides to DaS is that you have to use the roll of you Strike that target, even when it’s bad. If DaS doesn’t apply to subordinate Strikes, then it’s extremely easy to get around that restriction by just getting any single action feat that combines a Strike with any other action.</p>Keep in mind that one of the major downsides to DaS is that you have to use the roll of you Strike that target, even when it’s bad. If DaS doesn’t apply to subordinate Strikes, then it’s extremely easy to get around that restriction by just getting any single action feat that combines a Strike with any other action.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-17T04:54:42ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Retributive strike timingFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43kmj?Retributive-strike-timing#202022-02-09T22:48:01Z2022-02-08T16:36:35Z<p>Champions are Trained in armor at level 1. They get Expert at 7.</p>Champions are Trained in armor at level 1. They get Expert at 7.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-08T16:36:35ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Crowd-sourced FAQ?Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43kmq?Crowdsourced-FAQ#132022-02-07T14:58:26Z2022-02-07T06:29:19Z<p>Having a central collection of links to clarifications would be incredibly helpful. With so many things getting announced places other than the forums or FAQ, it’s gotten really hard to remember where a designer commented on something. Even just listing the questions and a summary of the answers from Ask a Paizo Designer would be helpful. </p>
<p>Way back in oldentimes, a PFS1 player (Jiggy) did that for PFS clarifications in the forums, and that was a great resource.</p>Having a central collection of links to clarifications would be incredibly helpful. With so many things getting announced places other than the forums or FAQ, it’s gotten really hard to remember where a designer commented on something. Even just listing the questions and a summary of the answers from Ask a Paizo Designer would be helpful.
Way back in oldentimes, a PFS1 player (Jiggy) did that for PFS clarifications in the forums, and that was a great resource.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-07T06:29:19ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: A Safe Space for Respectful Criticisms of PF2Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43jh6&page=10?A-Safe-Space-for-Respectful-Criticisms-of-PF2#4792022-02-11T08:55:23Z2022-02-06T05:13:11Z<p>Like I said, I don't want this to turn into a large discussion in this thread. I don't disagree with the statement "Specialization is not rewarded in PF2" and I don't disagree that the limits PF2 puts on you forces you to diversify. PF2 is also more balanced than PF1. But that doesn't make the system flexible like a points-based system is. PF2 achieves its balance and forces versatility <i>by restricting options</i>. That's what I don't like about character creation.</p>
<p>I'm going to cut it short there, because this isn't the thread for a full discussion on it. I don't fault anyone for enjoying 2E. There are aspects of it I find really fun. I just don't see it the same way you do, and I have also played PF1 and PF2 extensively. I offered my post as my opinion, because that's what it is, and this is the thread to vent about our opinions and criticisms of the game. No one has to agree with us.</p>Like I said, I don't want this to turn into a large discussion in this thread. I don't disagree with the statement "Specialization is not rewarded in PF2" and I don't disagree that the limits PF2 puts on you forces you to diversify. PF2 is also more balanced than PF1. But that doesn't make the system flexible like a points-based system is. PF2 achieves its balance and forces versatility by restricting options. That's what I don't like about character creation.
I'm going to cut it short...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-06T05:13:11ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: A Safe Space for Respectful Criticisms of PF2Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43jh6&page=10?A-Safe-Space-for-Respectful-Criticisms-of-PF2#4742022-02-11T08:54:41Z2022-02-06T00:57:23Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Deriven Firelion wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Squiggit wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">The Raven Black wrote:</div><blockquote>And I expect someone who decides to play a Swashbuckler of a given style to choose Acrobatics and their style's skill as one of the three they will always increase.</blockquote><p>Which gives them one whole skill that they get to pick for themselves.
<p>Oh and the Swashbuckler's underlying mechanics don't work with ranged weapons unless you take a feat, and even then only a narrow selection of them.</p>
<p>... And people say this tabletop has the most versatile characters they've ever seen? </blockquote><p>Not the most versatile I've ever seen. Just more versatile than PF1. D&D/PF are all class and level based game. So by their nature they are specialized and have been from the beginning. So that is not new. PF2 is far more versatile than D&D or PF1 in my experience.
<p>The most versatile game I've ever played is probably GURPS. No classes. It's point-based. You can build any way you want to build. Class based games are by their nature specialized. PF2 went farther than any other edition of D&D to make things as wide open as they can get in a class based game while still being effective.</p>
<p>Almost every character I make between the background, base skills, archetype feats, ancestry feats, and general feats has tons of skills. They gave so many ability boost, it's hard not to have fairly good across the board abilities. You don't really need to take any specific feats on any specific character and you're still going to do fine in an adventure.</p>
<p>PF1 felt super specialized with its feat chains and limited skill points. PF2 feels very wide open for all classes. </blockquote><p>I feel like we're heading towards a back and forth, and I don't want to debate in this thread. But I do want to say that my personal opinion is that 2E is less versatile and open than 1E. There are a lot of options that have been published in a relatively short period of time, but I find far too many of them locked behind classes or archetypes. In 1E, you could choose your fighting style or boost your magic or various other things and not lose any of what makes your class your class, because combat feats, metamagic feats, etc. were separate from classes (though obviously some classes got more and some feats were locked behind class requirements). I like that classes have class feats now, but too many options that should be class independent are locked behind them. Rangers shouldn't be the TWF class, etc., and if you want to TWF as not a Ranger, you shouldn't need to sacrifice an actual class ability or lock yourself out of all of the other archetypes to take Dual-Weapon Warrior. Character creation in 2E is incredibly frustrating to me and my least favorite part of this edition. The game itself plays well, and things like the three action economy are great, but I've had so many character concepts just fall apart, because you can't get access to two different things in any reasonable number of levels.
<p>1E Pathfinder was the most like a system like GURPS of any of the editions I've played (I skipped 3rd, 3.5, and 4th). 2E feels like a step backwards in that regard, where they've really leaned into your class mattering the most of anything. Feat tress and such were a problem, but now everything feels like it is behind a feat tree, which starts with your choice of class or archetype.</p>Deriven Firelion wrote:Squiggit wrote: The Raven Black wrote:And I expect someone who decides to play a Swashbuckler of a given style to choose Acrobatics and their style's skill as one of the three they will always increase.
Which gives them one whole skill that they get to pick for themselves. Oh and the Swashbuckler's underlying mechanics don't work with ranged weapons unless you take a feat, and even then only a narrow selection of them.
... And people say this tabletop has the most...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-06T00:57:23ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: A Safe Space for Respectful Criticisms of PF2Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43jh6&page=10?A-Safe-Space-for-Respectful-Criticisms-of-PF2#4692022-02-11T08:53:18Z2022-02-05T22:09:08Z<p>I don't think making Rogue a little stronger is going to break much, though I do consider Rogue one of the better classes, as it is both the best skill class and holds its own with Martials in combat.</p>
<p>I will amend my earlier statement, because Humans can get a few bonus General Feats (at the cost of heritage or ancestry feats). They're also the ancestry that gets a heritage that advances a skill to Expert automatically.</p>
<p>I'd just rather the game not be built around keeping one class or one ancestry from being a little too good at the cost of many other classes struggling to do anything outside their box. That's an oversimplification, but also my general thought whenever one build is pointed to as a reason everyone else can't have something.</p>I don't think making Rogue a little stronger is going to break much, though I do consider Rogue one of the better classes, as it is both the best skill class and holds its own with Martials in combat.
I will amend my earlier statement, because Humans can get a few bonus General Feats (at the cost of heritage or ancestry feats). They're also the ancestry that gets a heritage that advances a skill to Expert automatically.
I'd just rather the game not be built around keeping one class or one...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-05T22:09:08ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: A Safe Space for Respectful Criticisms of PF2Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43jh6&page=10?A-Safe-Space-for-Respectful-Criticisms-of-PF2#4662022-02-11T08:53:03Z2022-02-05T20:58:52Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">The Raven Black wrote:</div><blockquote> I think such a feat would become an auto-choice because Too Good to be True and then would be decried as a feat tax that should be included in class progression, like Perception. </blockquote><p>There are already autopick General feats. I'm getting a little tired of taking some combination of Toughness, Diehard, Fleet, and Ancestral Paragon. You only get so many General Feats, and I don't think anyone gets bonus ones, so that would be the category where it would have the least impact on something like Rogue. But, I mean, Rogue would have access to it like anybody else, and they'd still get more skill increases for free, so I don't think it would be that big of an issue.The Raven Black wrote:I think such a feat would become an auto-choice because Too Good to be True and then would be decried as a feat tax that should be included in class progression, like Perception.
There are already autopick General feats. I'm getting a little tired of taking some combination of Toughness, Diehard, Fleet, and Ancestral Paragon. You only get so many General Feats, and I don't think anyone gets bonus ones, so that would be the category where it would have the least impact...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-05T20:58:52ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: A Safe Space for Respectful Criticisms of PF2Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43jh6&page=10?A-Safe-Space-for-Respectful-Criticisms-of-PF2#4622022-02-11T08:52:44Z2022-02-05T19:33:49Z<p>For half a Swashbuckler's levels, it's 2 skills, not 3, that they can increase. They get two skills to Expert by 5th, but then at 7th and 9th can make those Master. Then at 11th can finally make a 2nd skill Expert. It's all part of why I just really don't like Swashbucklers before 10th level or so. But that's an issue specific to that class, for the most part. Barbarians have similar problems getting more increases, but they aren't generally as dependent on their skills as a Swashbuckler is, so I don't mind it as much. You can bump Athletics and Acrobatics, or one of those and Intimidation, and you're ok as a Barbarian. For a Swashbuckler, you increase your two skills, or you're hurting your chances of contributing in combat as well as out.</p>
<p>Acrobat as a Swashbuckler Feat would almost be preferable to the archetype, as now if you want it, you're locked into the dedication.</p>
<p>More generally, I wish that there was either a Skill Feat or General Feat that was just "Give this skill autoscaling at these levels."</p>For half a Swashbuckler's levels, it's 2 skills, not 3, that they can increase. They get two skills to Expert by 5th, but then at 7th and 9th can make those Master. Then at 11th can finally make a 2nd skill Expert. It's all part of why I just really don't like Swashbucklers before 10th level or so. But that's an issue specific to that class, for the most part. Barbarians have similar problems getting more increases, but they aren't generally as dependent on their skills as a Swashbuckler is,...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-05T19:33:49ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: A Safe Space for Respectful Criticisms of PF2Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43jh6&page=10?A-Safe-Space-for-Respectful-Criticisms-of-PF2#4562022-02-16T03:13:55Z2022-02-05T18:46:55Z<p>Moving this to a separate post, because someone favorited the other one before I added this, and I don't want to force their endorsement...</p>
<p>Speaking of respectful complaints, I really wish more things in 2E worked like Raging Intimidation and Acrobat. When I heard 2E would have Class Feats, I had high hopes that classes would be modeled around the 1E Vigilante. For the most part, once you selected an option, that option would continue to improve without having to spend anything else on it (spellcasting was the exception, I think, for the versions of Vigilante that got that). It bothers me in 2E that if I take a class feat at level 1, in many cases if I want it to still be relevant at level 10, I need to spend another class feat on it, instead of getting to do something unrelated. I understand the value in being able to swap out pieces of an ability, but for me it adds to the feeling that even though all these options exist, once I'm down a path, if I want to remain capable of using something, I generally need to continue to invest in it. I'd even have been fine with fewer class feats if they autoscaled in some way.</p>Moving this to a separate post, because someone favorited the other one before I added this, and I don't want to force their endorsement...
Speaking of respectful complaints, I really wish more things in 2E worked like Raging Intimidation and Acrobat. When I heard 2E would have Class Feats, I had high hopes that classes would be modeled around the 1E Vigilante. For the most part, once you selected an option, that option would continue to improve without having to spend anything else on it...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-05T18:46:55ZRe: Forums: Advice: VampByDay's Swashbuckler's GuideFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43kl2?VampByDays-Swashbucklers-Guide#212022-02-05T18:50:10Z2022-02-05T18:29:01Z<p>Yeah, so definitely worth a mention, as it's either going to be your 2nd level skill feat, or your first Stylish Trick feat at 3rd level, if you want something that isn't based on a physical stat skill at 2nd.</p>Yeah, so definitely worth a mention, as it's either going to be your 2nd level skill feat, or your first Stylish Trick feat at 3rd level, if you want something that isn't based on a physical stat skill at 2nd.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-05T18:29:01ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: A Safe Space for Respectful Criticisms of PF2Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43jh6&page=10?A-Safe-Space-for-Respectful-Criticisms-of-PF2#4552022-02-11T08:52:19Z2022-02-05T18:24:38Z<p>Raging Intimidation grants intimidating Glare and Scare to Death (once you qualify), so in that sense, it's three feats in one and a way for Barbarians to squeeze out a couple of additional Skill Feats. </p>
<p>I see both sides of the specialization/versatility conversation. The game encourages specialization, because you have to focus on something in order to keep up with the math. But it forces versatility, because you can only focus on something so much. It's just, when the math is that focusing on something means that you have a 50/50 chance of succeeding (or with extra work to temporarily buff/debuff, maybe 60/40), anything less than that may not be far off being specialized, but also fails more often than it succeeds. So I seldom feel like I'm actually any good at something I haven't focused on. It just means I get to try to make a roll when trained is required.</p>
<p>And, yes, some classes are hurt more than others. Swashbucler in particular, because not only do they barely have enough skill increases to increase Acrobatics and whatever their Style skill is, but they also need STR, DEX, CON, and CHA (except Gymnast), meaning most Swashbucklers are going to start with a 10 (or lower) INT. If they want a way around that, they can take Acrobat, but now they're sacrificing a class feat just to buy back some skill increases for other things in a class that really needs its class feats.</p>
<p>There are certain skills that are an exception. Medicine combined with Assurance remains useful (adding Battle Medicine even moreso) and you can get to the point where it works by 3rd level, even if you are only trained.</p>Raging Intimidation grants intimidating Glare and Scare to Death (once you qualify), so in that sense, it's three feats in one and a way for Barbarians to squeeze out a couple of additional Skill Feats.
I see both sides of the specialization/versatility conversation. The game encourages specialization, because you have to focus on something in order to keep up with the math. But it forces versatility, because you can only focus on something so much. It's just, when the math is that focusing...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-05T18:24:38ZRe: Forums: Advice: VampByDay's Swashbuckler's GuideFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43kl2?VampByDays-Swashbucklers-Guide#152022-02-05T06:19:48Z2022-02-05T05:20:52Z<p>Overall looks good. A few small thoughts:</p>
<p>I <i>think</i> it’s generally accepted that Battledancer compares their roll against all observing foes, and the immunity to fascinating performance doesn’t matter, because you don’t need to actually fascinate them, or even use fascinating performance at all. You just need to make a performance check to perform. That gives Battledancer an advantage in gaining panache that other styles don’t have. It’s possible the common interpretation of that has changed, but Battledancer does have different phrasing than all of the other styles. </p>
<p>Gymnasts can run into creatures who are immune. Anything 2 sizes larger, or assuming Titan Wrestler (what else are they going to spend a skill feat on?), three sizes larger. So a small gymnast will have trouble with Huge creatures, and a medium gymnast will have trouble with gargantuan or larger. Since those are also likely to be boss fights, that can be a big hinderance. </p>
<p>I think I mentioned this in an earlier thread as well. Fencer should get some credit for Create a Diversion being able to be used at range. You at least mention Create a Diversion, which is good. It’s not terribly exciting, as it targets perception dc same as feint, but it’s better than having to always be in melee. </p>
<p>One advantage of using a buckler is that it still allows you to do maneuvers, so it’s an option for a gymnast if they don’t want the open hand style. Also, for a fencer, the glamorous buckler can give a bonus to feint. Though it makes the already rough action economy worse, as you have to spend the action to raise a shield before you try to feint if you want the bonus, so if the feint fails, you’ve only got one action to try to tumble through or feint someone else, and nothing left to attack with. </p>
<p>Finishers being 2d6 vs Sneak Attack being 1d6 to me is kind of a wash, since Sneak Attack can apply to more than one attack per round, and you can’t attack after a finisher.</p>Overall looks good. A few small thoughts:
I think it’s generally accepted that Battledancer compares their roll against all observing foes, and the immunity to fascinating performance doesn’t matter, because you don’t need to actually fascinate them, or even use fascinating performance at all. You just need to make a performance check to perform. That gives Battledancer an advantage in gaining panache that other styles don’t have. It’s possible the common interpretation of that has changed,...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-05T05:20:52ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Society: Aeon Stone (Pearly White Spindle)Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43jgq?Aeon-Stone#102022-02-05T09:26:21Z2022-02-04T20:14:12Z<p>I think this thread has convinced me to go ahead and pick the aeon stone up on a couple of characters. There are enough “you have 10 minutes to heal and refocus” situations that getting an extra 10 HPs in that time is helpful. And I just happen to have been in a lot of groups lately without guaranteed free healing between encounters (people with medicine, but none of the supporting feats, including no assurance).</p>I think this thread has convinced me to go ahead and pick the aeon stone up on a couple of characters. There are enough “you have 10 minutes to heal and refocus” situations that getting an extra 10 HPs in that time is helpful. And I just happen to have been in a lot of groups lately without guaranteed free healing between encounters (people with medicine, but none of the supporting feats, including no assurance).Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-02-04T20:14:12ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Society: Home Region and Languages in Guide 2.0Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs436va&page=2?Home-Region-and-Languages-in-Guide-20#712022-01-26T03:18:53Z2022-01-25T16:35:06Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Wei Ji the Learner wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
I'm still trying to figure out how this all works for a kobold that has grown up in the dwarven-majority culture of the Terwa Uplands which is considered part of the Mwangi Expanse.</p>
<p><span class=messageboard-ooc>Kobolds have lived peacefully with dwarves for centuries there, and they share cultures, beliefs, backgrounds, etc...</span> </blockquote><p>Yeah, I think there’s always going to be some limit or some situation that’s outside the rules and feels weird. It would be great if there were a consistent way to account for that. I don’t think PFS will try to solve every issue like this, and the additional language adds a lot of flexibility, but unfortunately won’t help with Dwarven. In the case of Mwangi, though, PFS didn’t create the rule that everyone from the Expanse gets Mwangi.
<p>Related, but not exactly to your point, I wish Adopted Ancestry granted one ancestral language, but that’s not really a PFS thing to change.</p>Wei Ji the Learner wrote:I'm still trying to figure out how this all works for a kobold that has grown up in the dwarven-majority culture of the Terwa Uplands which is considered part of the Mwangi Expanse.Kobolds have lived peacefully with dwarves for centuries there, and they share cultures, beliefs, backgrounds, etc...
Yeah, I think there’s always going to be some limit or some situation that’s outside the rules and feels weird. It would be great if there were a consistent way to account...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-01-25T16:35:06ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Society: Home Region and Languages in Guide 2.0Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs436va&page=2?Home-Region-and-Languages-in-Guide-20#612022-02-09T06:17:33Z2022-01-22T20:52:31Z<p>Just an update on this. Someone on the OPO discord noticed that the rule in the guide has changed with regards to starting languages and access to regional languages:</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Organized Play Guide wrote:</div><blockquote>All Pathfinder Society characters are literate and speak Common (Taldan) as well as any other languages granted by their ancestry. All Pathfinder Society characters have access to all common and uncommon modern regional languages (Core Rulebook 432). All Pathfinder Society characters begin with one one additional Regional language. </blockquote><p>So unless this is a glitch/mistake, it appears everyone gets one additional (regional) language and has access to all of the regional human languages.
<p><a href=" https://organizedplayfoundation.org/Lorespire/pfs2guide._.Full-Guide#Languages" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">LINK</a></p>
<p>Can anyone confirm this is intended before I go edit all of my characters?</p>Just an update on this. Someone on the OPO discord noticed that the rule in the guide has changed with regards to starting languages and access to regional languages:
Organized Play Guide wrote:All Pathfinder Society characters are literate and speak Common (Taldan) as well as any other languages granted by their ancestry. All Pathfinder Society characters have access to all common and uncommon modern regional languages (Core Rulebook 432). All Pathfinder Society characters begin with one...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-01-22T20:52:31ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: A Safe Space for Respectful Criticisms of PF2Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43jh6&page=4?A-Safe-Space-for-Respectful-Criticisms-of-PF2#1992022-01-25T14:41:42Z2022-01-22T16:19:50Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">The Raven Black wrote:</div><blockquote><p> In a home game, you just need to convince your GM to grant you access at creation. </p>
<p>In PFS IIRC there are boons that give access to uncommon options at creation. </blockquote><p>Yeah, it's somewhat more of a guarantee that you can get access in PFS if you want it, because the ways to do that are pretty well spelled out at this point, and things like World Traveler exist to get access to stuff from a different place than you're from.
<p>Outside PFS, you just need to talk to your GM.</p>
<p>I think the complaint is really less about the access issue and more about two halves of a book being completely disconnected, though that was the intent from Paizo, so it's just the way it is.</p>The Raven Black wrote:In a home game, you just need to convince your GM to grant you access at creation.
In PFS IIRC there are boons that give access to uncommon options at creation.
Yeah, it's somewhat more of a guarantee that you can get access in PFS if you want it, because the ways to do that are pretty well spelled out at this point, and things like World Traveler exist to get access to stuff from a different place than you're from. Outside PFS, you just need to talk to your GM.
I...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-01-22T16:19:50ZRe: Forums: Pathfinder Society: How come no Summit & Sundry boon?Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43k8b?How-come-no-Summit-Sundry-boon#32022-01-26T02:10:27Z2022-01-21T02:59:25Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Character Options: Grand Bazaar" wrote:</div><blockquote>All options are of standard availability unless specifically noted otherwise.</blockquote><p>The waffle iron is common, so no boon needed. Waffles for everyone!
<p>The Mithral Waffle Iron is Uncommon, though, so no luck there.</p>
<p>EDIT: You can even get the imprint waffle iron and make <s>Mickey</s> Groetus Waffles.</p>Character Options: Grand Bazaar" wrote:All options are of standard availability unless specifically noted otherwise.
The waffle iron is common, so no boon needed. Waffles for everyone! The Mithral Waffle Iron is Uncommon, though, so no luck there.
EDIT: You can even get the imprint waffle iron and make Mickey Groetus Waffles.Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-01-21T02:59:25ZRe: Forums: Rules Discussion: Next batch of unofficial errata on Youtube starts with a bangFerious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43k2i&page=3?Next-batch-of-unofficial-errata-on-Youtube#1362022-01-20T17:58:17Z2022-01-20T02:24:54Z<p>Fortunately, we have a writer’s input telling us how it was meant to work, so we know which interpretation of the sentence to use so that interpretation makes sense and also doesn’t change a bunch of other rules. </p>
<p>Could the sentence have been written better? Sure. Would an errata as suggested help make things clearer for all of the people who read it and don’t know about the video? Absolutely. Should we now assume that every innate cantrip gives the ability to activate Wands and scrolls? Absolutely not, because nothing anywhere in that sentence or the video says that is the case. </p>
<p>I’m not arguing that no one should have read that sentence and assumed that you need basic spellcasting. I completely understand where that comes from. It’s just a big leap to go from the clarification to everything else cantrip related breaks the game and a gnome can now activate a 9th-level wand just by being a gnome (with First World Magic).</p>Fortunately, we have a writer’s input telling us how it was meant to work, so we know which interpretation of the sentence to use so that interpretation makes sense and also doesn’t change a bunch of other rules.
Could the sentence have been written better? Sure. Would an errata as suggested help make things clearer for all of the people who read it and don’t know about the video? Absolutely. Should we now assume that every innate cantrip gives the ability to activate Wands and scrolls?...Ferious Thune (alias of Ticktockman1)2022-01-20T02:24:54Z