WatersLethe's page

Cozy Campaign Guide: How to play low stakes fantasy in Pathfinder. Also has detailed and engaging downtime systems like Farming, as well as fleshed out goods and services costs.

I did plan on lifting the restriction of property runes, forgot to mention that. I'd love for the staff to be a great way for "i'm a pure caster" type players to engage with the rune system.

Air repeater also has reload, and can't also be used for melee attacks one and two handed, as well as being a source of extra spell slots. I would say it's probably closer to balanced as-is than granting legendary proficiency with it to most full casters would be.

I think I've come down on it definitely needing to scale off standard weapon attack proficiency. The goal is to compete with having an air repeater, not to make a wizard as good at using an air repeater as a fighter, better than most martials.

Conceptually, it's launching an energy attack without building in spellwork to make it accurate. It's not supposed to be anyone's main plan of attack, and making it scale with spell attack is just too no-brainer. You'd never see casters opting to pick up different backup ranged weapons if they liked, since that legendary accuracy is too juicy.

If someone were to try to go all-in to optimize it with goodies that power up attacks, I would want a martial to be the one to be able to do that. So a multiclass fighter with a staff that they're really good at going pew pew with, better than a wizard, sits with me just fine. It might even help them feel more like a multiclassed character since they get more from being able to use staves.

And yeah, I think a level 1 staff is probably called for in this fantasy. I could see making it only available to spellcasting classes at the start, too.

Don't wizards in the Harry Potter universe fire simple quick blasts with their wands?

That sounds similar, but with a staff.

Actually, from what I remember, they are always using their wands to cast what are considered full on spells in that setting.

The Gandalf/Saruman slugfest with staves from the movies might be a closer example from media.

In WoW classic some classes would auto-attack with a wand doing chip damage when they were out of mana, which is probably the closest flavor to what I'm proposing.

I actually kind of like the mechanic of getting tougher the more feats of a tough class you take. It is true, however, that it's really hard to get value out of, and I very rarely take it.

I would note that Toughness and Resiliency aren't competing with each other, and if you really want to get more HP you're going to get both, and General Feats are, for some reason, the designated boring but effective math increase pool.

When you look at the math, it seems like they hit on 3 HP per feat because it leaves you just under the base HP of the next higher HP die after 10 feats of investment. 4 HP per feat makes you match. The problem is that 10 feats of investment is ENORMOUS. Already, I strongly believe you could bump it to 4, and it would easily be fair for that level of dedication.

Twice level HP, as Teridax suggests, would be a one feat investment to go up a die size in HP. That might be on the too strong side, and I would see going out of your way for it on any class below d12 hit die. Though, it does have the benefit of being simple.

I could see a flat +1 hp per level, plus 2 for every dedication feat. You get a little weaker toughness off the bat, but it stacks with toughness and other options, so lots of HP optimizers would still love it. Then the 2 hp per feat leaves you off at a total +40 if you go 10 feats deep, which means you'd be equal to a die size increase.

How would you feel about a high-magic homebrew rule that lets people make a ranged weapon strike with a staff that's 1d4 and a fixed energy type with a ~30ft range, maybe in the sling weapon group like foxfire?

Kinda like the idea of doing some old school WoW style wand spam, and making it a bit cooler to have a staff handy.

I really wish they had removed the different grades of materials and also the rune-gating, and made precious materials a lot cooler. At least if the effects were awesome the wildly out to lunch prices could be justified.

I ignore rune-gating at my tables so no one has to bother with special materials if they don't want to.

As-is, precious materials are essentially another monetary loot drop that is hard to slot in anywhere it'd actually be exciting without unbalancing party wealth.

Part of the problem with the Exemplar is that it sought to be able to embody the stories of heroes from mythology, which in large part the entire D&D/Pathfinder paradigm already tries to do with every character. High level PCs are supposed to have legendary items, a big history of heroic acts, fame far and wide, and a shot at challenging the gods or rising to divinity. That's a really common way of playing high level characters since forever.

The Exemplar, narratively and mechanically, is sort of a redundant subsystem layered on top of some foundational heroic fantasy adventurer TTRPG assumptions. They mix and match abilities that ordinarily would be spread throughout a party because their inspirations were often solo-acts, they draw class power from items that would ordinarily show up later in the game because mythological figures normally start high level and they had to square that circle, and they go about their party roles in nonstandard ways to differentiate themselves from the classes that would otherwise represent their mythological inspirations.

It's not a bad class, I appreciate its variety, utility, and flexibility. I think it's unfair to compare them at face value and say another class does their schtick better. In total, I think they're pretty well balanced.

I do find it a shame that they're so item/ikon focused, and are more of a mythological hero, main character-lite class than a Godling class. It would have been nice if many items being kinda boring had been solved so that everyone could have cool items, instead of making a class that kind of hoards the cool item concept.

This is like when the chipotle guy loads you up with double scoops without charging extra

Looks like we are back.

Looks that way, but can we ever really be sure?

Oh, wait, yeah, I guess we can be sure in this instance.

Oh no! Where are all the crypto spammers going to hang out while the site is down? Did anyone think of the crypto spammers?!

I'm going to be here, doing a long salute, as the server goes dark.

Definitely looking forward to the new shiny!

Also am ready for the challenge of remembering a new password. o__o

Just do what I do and use 12345, I haven't forgotten it yet!

Bigger = better is dumb.

If we're talking about having more mass, you can already make normal sized weapons nigh-unwieldable by adjusting the balance and materials. If more mass = more better, weapon design would already account for it. Essentially, you want to have a usable balance between mass and speed to convert your muscle power into damaging strikes that have a hope of hitting their target.

If we're talking about size, as long as a face, edge, or point is sufficient for lethality, extra size is only a detriment. Spreading your force over a larger area or introducing more surface area for friction during a cut is just not helpful.

Bigger creatures deal more damage because they're stronger, and can handle swinging around more mass at an effective speed. The increased size of their weapons is about durability and comfort.

So a regular sized human, who is supernaturally strong enough to effectively wield a giant's sword, would be better off using that strength on a weapon sized for themselves, with a mass distribution that maximizes their muscle effectiveness.

I get that some people are still going to be like "but my cool too big sword!" and want a mechanical benefit for using one. If giant instinct barbarian isn't enough, slap on a house rule +1 bludgeoning damage per die to go along with the clumsy condition.

One of PF2's strengths was the siloing of many options to reduce the cognitive load of making selections. The different feat buckets is the main example.

However, item selection is not siloed, and the reduction of slot based itemization from PF1 means you don't generally shop from a selection of rings, then a selection of boots, then a selection of cloaks, etc. It's easy to get lost looking into what you should buy.

If things were categorized better, and with a more clear reference to the ABP chart that tells you what you're supposed to have when, it could make the itemization much more approachable.

As far as food, the inner bark of certain trees, such as pine, birch, and willow, is edible and contains carbohydrates, fiber, vitamins (e.g., vitamin C), and minerals (e.g., potassium). At 500-600 calories a pound, you'd only have to make @5 pounds per person. So 2 uses of Base Kinesis covers 1 person.

LOL! Adventurers listening are absolutely sweating bullets right now.

"They're asking us to eat eat 5 pounds of tree bark now? I thought the jerky was bad enough"

I'd like to reiterate that the "Pay to get the new version that actually works" isn't a solution to the problems a lot of people are raising. It seems like those saying that we just need to make sure there are enough upgrades throughout the level range are ignoring this.

Players will *still* disdain items without scaling DCs because they don't want to get on the stupid upgrade treadmill. It doesn't matter if there are plenty of upgrade steps along the way. It's the same reason lots of people don't like consumables, a non-scaling item is just saying "Don't get attached."

Pouring money into a hole doesn't feel good and it's not weird that people prefer items that don't require you to do that.

Even if full automatic scaling isn't desirable, there are ways to give DCs that are at least relevant. Like my earlier suggestion, or like: "Use the item's DC or an Easy DC for the Character's level, whichever is greater"

One decision point I think really kind of sucks here is how SF2 sort of silo'd off melee builds into their own space. The fact that you can't be a melee ghost operative because Paizo decided to make your abilities not work unless you took the melee quarantine subclass hurts build variety a lot, and maybe contributes to that feeling of restrictiveness.

I loathe it when they do this. It's easily my biggest pet peeve when they design new classes.

Let the options breathe!

If I had to wait another got dang year to get SF2 out just to have a couple extra classes on launch I would have rioted. The starting lineup is plenty to get started, and that's not even considering the PF2 compatibility. I am quite impressed with what we got, and could see myself playing every class multiple times.

Either way, getting the system launched earlier rather than later was such a good call that I will forgive a LOT of foibles.

We've been trying to reach you about your starship's extended warranty.

I love the Wiki map!

I treat hard anathemas like for clerics, druids, champions and barbarians as roleplay guidelines. If the player is following their character concept they're mostly irrelevant.

They have yet to come up in any meaningful way in my games.

Never used items with set DCs. Never will I ever touch items with set DCs as I do not wish to be stuck in the loop of liking items then it becomes useless then I see it then buy a new one and repeat. It feels sooooooo useless to me.

Your subscription has expired. Please enter your updated payment details to continue enjoying our item member benefits. Thank you in advance!

Take-a-look o' sire
Your market's all on fire
Ashes! Ashes!
All across the town!

The King has sent his daughter
To fetch a pail of water
Ashes! Ashes!
All across the town!

Fire burns the thatches
Pockets full of matches
Ashes! Ashes!
All across the town!

etc

99 phials of fuel from the haul, 99 phials of fuel

hear that sound? burn it all down!

98 phials of fuel from the haul!

Just as a heads up, the actual scaling of DCs by level "skips" levels every so often.
So this formula to +1 for each gap level does help, but all item DCs would still fall behind. This could be seen as an issue, or a good thing to encourage upgrades (but that's often not possible).

https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2627

It looks like these DCs are skipped:

17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37,
and last that should be player relevant is DC 41 being lost between levels 20 & 21.

So exequiel759's mention of looking at the base item's "On level DC comparison" to then apply to the scaled level is the best for being accurate.

Basically, look at your item and compare to that chart. If it's +1 for it's base level, than it should always be +1 for its scaled level.

It falling behind is intentional, I mathed it out to ensure higher tier versions usually give a boost in accuracy at minimum.

A level 7 item has a ~35% chance to land against an at-level enemy at level 20. A level 17 item has a ~55% chance.

35% is a hail mary, 55% might be worth the actions.

If Shifter gets spell slots, it's already failed.

Justnobodyfqwl wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Individual responses to everyone

To be honest man, if you can argue against everyone in the entire thread at once like this, I don't really know what anyone is supposed to do to change your mind. Do you, like, WANT to argue about it? Or do you think someone has an answer that will satisfy you, and it just hasn't been said yet?

Making controversial topics and then argueing them to death seems to be one of RD's favorite pasttimes.

To be fair, sometimes it feels like Ravingdork is carrying forum engagement on his back.

Auto succeeding on an athletics maneuver against a foe is like finding out a cheat code. It's such a rush to be able to bully enemies with impunity.

It's a great tool for a smaller party. It's easy to fall behind in skills when you only have 3 non-skill-monkies in a party.

I would like to point out that "upgrading to level appropriate DC at an appropriate gold cost" has it's own issues. It's a bunch of annoying book keeping just to make items not suck, doesn't help in low down time situations, and still frequently results in unsatisfying stories. It makes loot sheets not only a list of expiry dates, it also asks you to reup your subscription to keep using them.

I recommend the [New DC] = [Old DC] + [Char Level - Item Level].

Then warn players not to try to cheese old low cost items.

I think it turned out quite well, especially as a base class that beginner players will be interacting with.

I'm just now building my first operative sniper in response to the comments about sniping in SF2e.

Am I doing the math right here?

A Commercial Assassin Rifle in the first range increment does 1d10 + 1 Kickback + 1d4 precision damage from aim, for a total of 3 to 15 points of damage.

On a crit hit vs a target that is off guard, a Commercial Assassin Rifle in the first range increment does (1d12 + 1 Kickback + 1 precision damage from Backstabber + 1d4 precision damage from aim) X2 +1d12 Fatal damage, for a total of 9 to 48 points of damage.

If this is right, then it looks like the sniper operative is all about setting up the perfect shot. To get the off-guard condition on the target will likely take teamwork. Off-guard only gives you +2 damage on a crit, but also lowers the target's AC by -2, which helps getting the crit.

Since real snipers normally work in teams of 2, sometimes 3. I'm thinking of making a sniper support character. I don't think a spotter makes sense in SF2e, but someone who can debuff the target, and or help get or keep them in line of sight, and help get them the off-guard condition. I suppose a spotter could be someone who buffs the sniper, and or uses the Aid another action. So maybe the best way to play a sniper is in a team of 3, the sniper, someone focused on debuffing the target, and someone focused on buffing the sniper. The buffer could also use spells to change the sniper's damage type or help boost the damage.

I have an animal instinct barbarian shirren with Eager Assistant. I also have a Sniper Specialization operative on my team. I am planning on doing some combination of bite, grab, and aid. I'm really wondering what's the optimal combo.

Signed up for the Starfinder 2E Core Rulebook subscription back in mid-July, but this is still sitting in my sidecart. I reached out to CS 3 days ago, but still haven't gotten a reply. I'm fine waiting, but I'd appreciate a response.

I'm not customer service, but my assumption is that you missed the window for the regular Player Core shipment, and thus your sidecarted items are waiting for the regular scheduled shipment for GM Core. I am also in the same situation, but I half-expected it given my prior experience with subscriptions.

I haven't seen it mathed out, and I'd like to see someone do some detailed round by round math before making statements like it does less damage. I'm not the math guy, but it seems like sniper crits are massive and there are a surprising number of damage bonuses (kickback, sniper critical specialization, backstabber, fatal/deadly). Doesn't seem straightforward to me, especially with how few directly comparable weapons there are.

You son of a lich, I'm in.

For what it's worth, during the playtest I gave players plenty of Pathfinder weapons with grades, it worked fine. As long as it's in line with ABP it's no big deal.

The contemplative is all about the brain. The tiny eyestalks that should hang out somewhere around the neck do not equate to a face, and shouldn't be were you would default to focusing for characterization. Doing so kind of misses the point. This is likely why the art neglects adding the eyes from the description.

Most other characters aren't depicted with their head gear active. I think it's fine to just assume a hardlight shield covers their brains.

I played a mystic who threw on resist elements and walked around a laser shootout impervious to harm, being able to regenerate more innately per round than all the enemies focus firing could get through.

There are a lot of situations where that HP pool makes you more survivable than the game necessarily expects.

I think the HP reduction is an attempt to make it feel a tad bit more even.

Really looking forward to finding out more about the project and team! I hope they don't make the mistake of launching the Kickstarter without building up to it on the youtube/reddit interview circuit.

moosher12 wrote:

And lastly, Vanguard is probably not gonna be a Vanguard perse. Frankly, it's name is misleading, and will become especially misleading when Pathfinder classes join the mix, as vanguard does little to invoke its actual abilities. So it would likely be due for a name change. I vote Entropath.

To be truthful, this is part of the reason why Vanguard never "clicked" with me in 1e. It felt like the entropy-related aspects were just kind of "there" in the class without clear guidance on their place within the setting apart from the villain-coded Ataxxea. Were you supposed to be spiritual as a Vanguard? No clue, the class text didn't really offer an opinion the way it did for Solarians. It felt redundant with Solarians narratively and felt like it was more interested in its mechanical role of "tank class" than it was in its narrative role of "empowered by entropy."

Obviously this is more a failure of imagination on my part, because the class seemed to be very popular from my admittedly limited experience, but I just could never really come up with character concepts whose narratives would be best served by being a vanguard...

Same. Vanguard was a giant set of off-putting mistakes to me.

I could easily see something similar mechanically and flavor-wise show up as a Solarian class archetype. Hopefully the name can be reclaimed by a more fitting class fantasy.

I like that it retains the ability to throttle back the amount of ammo spent depending on number of targets. Feels right.

I'd be fine letting a player expend ammo based on the number of targets they intend to hit, and letting the allies and unknown invisible enemies in the area get hit for "free".

I HAVE THE PDF!

Ladies and gentlemen, we have the pdf

My definition of a shifter is a martial class that is encouraged to take on different forms to suit different tasks inside and outside of combat. They should be a dynamic, bag-of-tricks class with utility and skill challenge tools rivaling casters.

I think taking on a single form and staying in it is better handled by other options. For example, an animal instinct barbarian can already be very closely flavored that way.

I think shapeshifting into other humanoids is fine, but shouldn't be the focus. I think the priority should be to enable becoming: animals > elementals > monsters/creatures > other humanoids.

WatersLethe wrote:

Just curious, if I added a Starfinder 2e subscription mid-July and I got Battlecry from my Pathfinder subscription delivered already, did my Starfinder books get sidecarted for a ~September delivery?

That's right on the cusp, so I'm not sure off hand, but if you reach out to Customer Service, they can let you know!

I'll probably just buy another at a FLGS on release day.

I'm gonna be out here stuffing SF2 books into peoples' hands like warm bowls of food at a soup kitchen.

What I would like to see in a Shifter class: starting perhaps with the ability to manifest a shape's natural weapons (e.g. claws for a Big Cat shifter), then adding at higher levels the ability to shift into that shape, then later more shapes ending with four or five different shapes from, well, the entire Bestiary. :-)

I'd like Paizo to attempt giving the class a full shapeshift from level 1. I don't want to have to play as an animal instinct barbarian for the first few levels until I have earned the right to play a shifter.

8th level is probably a bad comparison since the comparison of SF2e ranged meta and PF2e was in SF2e 1st level character can fly.

I wouldn't expect a Bulette to be using a gun any more than I would a Rancor from Star Wars. If you want a shoot-out with guns, you don't need monstrous aliens or PF2e creatures; you need intelligent opponents armed with guns (NPCs with bad attitudes)

Looking at 1st-level creatures in the Monster Core, you have lots of the low-level base creature stats for intelligent PF2E ancestries and species. Give them a laser gun, and there you go, they fit into a SF2e ranged fight.

There are plenty of uses for monstrous aliens or PF2e creatures in SF2e. But a ranged-only shootout is not one of them.

I've used so many shortbo- I mean gun, definitely gun- wielding statblocks already

Gonna dig deep into my bag of tricks:

1. Try sometimes advancing the plot mid-combat. Whenever I've had an NPC drop some important lore while in the thick of a fight, heads have snapped up from phones.

2. Have the dynamics of the world around the fight change. If the party thinks they have a handle on the way they expect the fight to go, they'll tune out and go through the motions. It can shake them up to have something unexpected happen, like shouts in the distance, or the storm that's been going on in the background suddenly turns for the deadly taking both sides of the combat by surprise.

3. Attack the players who aren't paying attention. If it would be a coin flip either way, maybe just select a target that brings a player back into the game. It's not punishing them, it's jangling keys in front of their eyes to get their attention.

4. Assign out of character tasks. Having someone look up a rule or keep track of buffs or debuffs can give them something to do to at least stave off pulling out the phones.

5. Use more complex hazards. Nothing like solving a puzzle with your life on the line to get some between-turn mental engagement.

WatersLethe wrote:

Zoken... I trusted you! You were the countiest of us!

Shirren are obsessed with choices; we need a species or versatile heritage obsessed with counting. I suppose skittermnandrs could be that species if you ask them to help count. I wonder if Zoken has the countdown condition.

But we already have vampires!

Zoken... I trusted you! You were the countiest of us!