But you'd have it at the start of the next level 2 scenario because you got it at the end of the previous level 2 scenario. Or does that level 2 item allowable purchase for a level 2 character not count for the legal level 2 character? You use the +1 rune at level 2 if purchased during the 3 scenarios that comprise level 2.
Also from the Organized Play Guide:
Any common equipment in sanctioned Pathfinder content with an item level less than or equal to your character’s level (minimum 2).
Always, not midway through a level. Always. Boom I got enough gold for a +1 rune at the start of level 2. Always.
Thanks for the prompt reply Mathmuse
So why is that Champion waiting till level 4 for the Weapon Potancy Rune? It's a Level 2 item. Can be used at level 2 so why wait?
That means that level 2 Champion would have a +9 to hit, better than a +8 narrowing the gap between Level 2 and Level 4. So not as big a jump as you write about
Deriven Firelion wrote:
So I just gave in. I'm going to run them power gaming for a while and hope point buy is enough of a throttle to not make my life completely miserable. We'll see how it goes.
Where are you setting the point buy? Cause too high and you'll hit the same stumbling blocks. Too low and the players may feel cheated.
Um a Monk becomes expert in unarmed attacks and simple weapons at level 5 same as Barbarian, same as Ranger for becoming Expert. No early expert with a Monk.
A Monk is an expert at Unarmormed Defense but that's another story
How viable would it be for Paizo to support a digital-only fork of the rules that wouldn't have print limitations and support continuous balance patches?
I Ate Your Dice wrote:
To those that think I'm being too harsh, I'm more critical of the company I work for than I am of Paizo. Don't get me wrong, I like my company just fine, I just think that my staff and our customers deserve the best instead of our best, and am willing to fight for that change.
This statement is meaningless. You don't name the company you work for. You also haven't proved you are more critical of it than Paizo by any measurable yardstick. So why even?
Not suggests, tells. Your words.
I would kindly tell them to leave my table, or withdraw myself from the table, because I'm too old to put up with petulant drama queens.
What makes them petulant drama queens as opposed to you being on overstepping domineering play what I say sort?
Despite there being only three people in the 10th-level party (a champion, a wizard, and a fighter, the last of whom was unconscious and on his way to being buried by his friends*), nobody died in the fight against the four 9th-level bandits. So that title would have been a lie.
As opposed to incendiary like the current title.
And before you say "well they could have done x and y as of level z" all monks I've seen have been 5 under.
Then to be fair you shouldn't
Braggard does have that issue but it's solved by 9, and before that if it's just 1-2 ennemies just don't use a finisher till it's clutch.
Gymnast is the trickiest one but also the most team based one as you either help your team out with maneuvers (which are the most potent they can be when you're level 10 and roll twice on every check while you have panache) or you can absolutely destroy anyone who's probed or grabbed, making high teamwork tactics very engaging.
Its rather disingenuous to talk about swashy choices at level 9 and 10 and then tell people not to talk about monk choices at higher levels because you've only seen monks 5 and below.
Teams usually have 2 casters, and at least one of them has a fly spell for just such scenarios.
What percentage of all PF2 teams does that usually imply? How many 4 person teams have two casters? Does it differ greatly from 5 player teams with two? And what happens in PFS when you sit down to a table with no casters?
So what do you mean by usually?
Or is it not useful generalization?
umm...to the no.
You jumped in with what you thought was all someone needed and didn't back read to ascertain that didn't fit the parameters of what someone was talking about or asking for.
Hush now sweet "I can't back down gracefully or ever" poster. Your work here will most likely go oh and on and on and oh yes on.
I liked him living in the Tower some of my favorite comics happened when he was living in the Tower
My FN bad. I only looked at his producing credits. But if he had those 4 credits to his name why were there so many interviews at the time and in retrospect interviews where he said they didn't know what they were doing as novice show creators?
They each have one credit prior to this just like 2 other dudes allowed to be show creators who seemed to have no experience. And Game of Thrones worked out pretty well for those guys.
Quark Blast wrote:
Quark Blast's original predictions from October.
I see no predictions for "Best Short", "Best International Feature", "Best Documentary"
Unless of course you ignore historical accuracy with guns the way Paizo has, but then there's no reason that everyone hasn't traded in their swords and bows for guns and that gives a very different feel than I want in my fantasy.
I hate this argument. Fireball ignores historical accuracy. Dragons ignore historical accuracy, why have huge castles and towers when dragons can fly over your walls and slag your castle? Buying resurrections from your friendly neighborhood temple ignores historical accuracy.