Search Posts
RAW there is no answer I know of. Running PFS I'd require the two to be tracked separately simply due to the wording stating "of *the* gorgon's breath weapon" but outside of PFS I think it is reasonable for them to stack the effect such that the second breath weapon makes you immediately make the save, but not force you to make 2 saves per round from the persistent effect.
Congrats on the master necromancy. But you can currently filter by source, just not using the search function. The Sources tab allows you to open by source book. If you know the name of the item, use the search function. If you know the source, look it up via the source book. It isn't like the search is broken, so it doesn't need to be 'fixed'. It just doesn't have a particular feature as that function is achieved elsewhere on the site. I'm sure that now Nethys is the official PRD we'll be seeing more updates and improvements, but that kind of thing takes time. If you do have suggestions for features to add, you can contact feedback@aonprd.com to suggest potential features, but understand that it will take a little bit of time to implement, especially if there is already a way to do it (as there is for filtering by source book).
I really don't see why what you're calling the "Christmas Tree effect" is an issue. I've seen no players "[rushing] to fill their slots with items featuring charges or uses per day" in 3 years of PFS and home game play. Certainly I much prefer passive bonuses over uses per day items, even if they are overall weaker. And I can confirm what some people are also saying: in our PF1 Iron Gods home game, it took us 3 weeks in game to clear a dungeon that was supposed to be a quick and simple run. We didn't have access to a CLW wand, we didn't have any 9th level casters (which I don't think is too uncommon) and because of the way the AP was written, our melee characters didn't have the heavy armour they needed until quite late in our adventuring. In the end, we needed to stop and rest for a couple of nights just to get back to reasonable health, since PF doesn't allow you to just fully heal overnight like in 5e (which I like). But resonance just makes having a dedicated party healer (which most of my groups fine UNFUN) pretty much necessary if you want to do anything with potential time pressure. I'm fine with taking a while to clear a dungeon, but time-pressure is often a key element of building tension in games, and if you don't have a dedicated healer, giving PCs any sort of time pressure seems entirely unreasonable. In short: the Christmas Tree effect isn't an issue? A lot of people don't like playing dedicated healers, and it is unreasonable and unfun to balance the game around that expectation, which it seems it is. Resonance just makes this problem more apparent for times when nobody in the party wants to play a cleric.
Maybe I play quite differently from most, but I find I'm taking less time with my companion builds in PF1, and PF2, than a lot of the other players in my various groups. It isn't that hard to just put in the effort to plan what you do and/or roll attack and damage dice together. Yes, sure, I put all my efforts into my companion so my actual PC does little (maybe cast a spell or use some other special ability) but even my 5-attack-pounce companions are taking less time than other people's sorcerers or rangers. My real disappointment is I can now no longer have my companion as the real powerhouse of the duo. I'm sure this will get better as new content is released, but I feel for the amount of investment I'm putting into my companion, I'm getting very little out of it.
I'm pretty sure the point of them not having stats is so you can create whatever animal (or Leshy) familiar you want - you just have to give it the appropriate power choices (eg. choose a flying creature, you have to give it a fly speed as one of its powers) Here's another issue: Gnomes can get a familiar and it explicitly states they prefer familiars with a burrow speed. I'm sorry Paizo, you haven't given us that option?!?
From what I've read through and played so far, the answer appears to be, disappointingly, GM discretion. Which has multiple issues. From a core perspective, while Nature and Religion seem well-defined, Occultism and Arcana, for example, have quite blurred lines. Even my current GM is a little baffled at how to describe, say, and Ooze. Is it Nature, because it can arise naturally? Is it Arcane or Occult in nature? Who could even know? And from the perspective of organised play, it's a disaster. 'GM Discretion' is throughout this book, and it's exactly what causes the most issues with PFS. One GM might always default to Arcana instead of Occultism unless specifically told not to.
Except you can't take the Ancestral Paragon feat until 3rd level. Heritage feats can only be taken at 1st level.Ancestral Paragon allows you to take a level-1 ancestry feat at, at minimum, 3rd level.
So no, the feat does not override a general rule, or if it is meant to, the wording of it does not.
I'll admit: I have some reserves about some of the maths and other rules elements that have been changed (especially the changes to Perception and Sense Motive) but that's why its PF 2e, not PF 1.5e. I'm excited to see how they play out and figure out how much I enjoy them. But I have to agree with the OP. The system looks really interesting. I love the new action system, I love that you don't need to get a maximum number of attacks off in one round to be quite effective. I really like the modularity and diversity of the feats and how they enable you to build a unique character. BUT. And it is a big BUT. When I look at the feats, and the class options, I'm terribly underwhelmed. Much as I love the ability to have a range of options, that counts for very little if none of the options are impactful. Maybe we just need to wait for Paizo to release more content. The racial feats are by and large disappointing and I don't feel like I'm making a choice for most of them. I feel Gnome feats have been done the best, and even then... The skill feats suddenly make you invest in feats to do things that seem tied in to what the skill should be doing already. The Survival skill, for example, should let you be good at foraging for food, find shelter and the like. And yet I need to invest in a feat to be able to reliably get enough food for myself and a single other person? The legendary skill feats are also underwhelming for the level at which you can access them, and they're really the first feats that are EXCITING. Paizo, I really want to love PF2. I really do. I want to have a wide range of options to create a unique character, even if I've done the same race/class combination three times previously. But to do that, all those choices I make need to actually mean something, not just add safeguards to prevent us from critically failing in things we're supposed to be good at anyway! I don't expect to have the same kind of skill differences as in 1st edition. But at the same time, the change to the maths has made it so that even a character who is legendary in a skill can get a lower result than someone untrained in the same skill far more easily. I don't want to just be taking options that make my failures less punishing. Make my successes more interesting! That's my one issue with the Playtest. My options, though myriad, are just not interesting. I'm finding myself pouring over feats to find interesting ones to take, and then having to go back over it to find enough feats to actually fill out my build. Feats that do very little for me, that I'm not interested in, and I don't feel good taking. The action system is great. The changes to maths is acceptable. I feel like there is minimal impact to my choices.
Seriously, there is a limit on space in the CRB they have to manage. Goblins are in because they've become so linked with the Paizo brand. The other monstrous races won't be too far behind, I'm sure, but you can't expect them to add everything in just the CRB. They'll be publishing more books fairly quickly, and sure, I'd love to see full orcs as an option. There is no need for them to be in the CRB - not to say I don't want to see them within the first year of PF2 books. But if Paizo put everything people wanted in the Core Rulebook, you wouldn't be able to pick it up. Leave them some space for future content.
I think Druid's Circle sounds better than Druid's Order. Order implies organization. IMHO, Order sounds better for more lawful oriented, like Knight or paladin orders. Golarion lore already has various Druidic Orders - I don't see why they'd make up a new term for something that already exists in-world.
Why would your descendants not be Aasimar at all? Aasimar are not just the immediate descendants of celestials, but can be the progeny of two Aasimar or can skip generations, unless I'm missing something that has been stated outside of the main Aasimar statblock? I guess it isn't guaranteed, but if you'd really like to have only Aasimar heirs, I think you'll need to take it up with your GM - I don't know of any ways to guarantee it RAW, but I don't think it would be too much of an ask for the GM to create some sideplot involving celestials who could do such a thing.
Pretty majorly a different situation there..."You know those animals that I died trying to save innocent people from being horribly torn apart by? They're great. Stamp of approval. Raise them, take care of them, all that jazz." I don't know that it is that big a difference... Actually pretty apt to be honest. However, I think it's best to leave the real world religion out of the forums, since I've seen how quickly it can devolve since neither side is likely to see the other's as a valid argument. I've been there before, lets just leave it out of this, whether or not the comparison works. There's nothing people hate more than others denigrating their core beliefs, whatever they may be.
I'm with Yolande here: who says that animal companions "should" be in any particular role? As is, most of the companion's are actually pretty terrible at combat, and are also worse at being their animal type.
I play a lot of animal companions, and I don't like that they feel pigeonholed into a combat role, as it makes me feel reluctant to choose many of the companions in favour of choices like the wolf, the cats or the deinonychus. Why can I not play with my hawk as a scout with good vision (when a base familiar is better at the role than the animal companion?) The hawk and falcon animal companions don't even get bonuses to Perception, despite the falcon being described in UW as having "amazing eyesight". I for one hope that animal companions are made more diverse and their unique abilities deepened so you can feel different having a big cat as opposed to a deinonychus, or actually feel like choosing a falcon will give you some benefit for the thing the falcon is supposedly good at.
Ignore the bestiary entries - animal companions have nothing to do with their bestiary entry, only that under the animal companion rules.
Much as I want to see some decent updates to the Shifter, I'm not holding my breath, and if I do want to play a Shifter in game I'll be asking for some heavy homebrew. I hope we see an update eventually, but I'm not counting on it being soon or for it to actually fix the issues.
I would recommend the player gets a +2 equivalent weapon, namely +1 Agile so they can legally add Dexterity to damage, or yes, the Slashing Grace feat. Both of these will be pretty much essential for the character to do melee damage outside of sneak attack, which some creatures are effectively immune to. Dealing 1 nonlethal damage (1d4 - 4, minimum 1 nonlethal) as your max damage without sneak attack is pretty rough, so being able to deal 1d4 + 4 (for example), which increases with Dexterity (used for attack, damage, AC, initiative AND skills at this point) is almost a must: even if they do have spellcasting ability. It sounds like a very fun character to RP, but DEX to damage is pretty important for a character with such a low strength score who will (I'm assuming) be in melee.
It is exactly as listed: it is not a polymorph effect, and it grants you a bonus, typically to a stat or skill. It grants only the abilities listed under the various Animal Focus types (eg. for Bear, you gain a +2 enhancement bonus to Constitution, increasing to a +4 bonus at level 8 and a +6 bonus at level 15). Reading the text of the Animal Focus ability is all you need: it is fairly unambiguous and specific as to the benefits you gain.
In terms of summoned creatures, there's the option to summon 1d4+1 Dire Bats, and once you get 6th level spells there's the spells Summon Flight of Eagles (for combat-trained eagle mounts for 10 minutes per level) or Eagle Aerie (Not as good for in combat, but better for out-of-combat travel since it lasts hours per, reduced to minutes per in combat) For Wild Shape, there's the Dire Bat and Pteranodon as your best options for a flying mount. There's also always the option of Communal Air Walk (5th level Druid spell) if none of these other options appeal.
It would help to know which spirits you tend to channel: trickster, champion, guardian etc. because if you're tending to use any in particular, that can change things. For example, the Champion is one of the stronger melee builds just due to the spirit bonus and extra attack from the Champion intermediate power, while Trickster is much more rogue-like and so can benefit from things relating to sneak attack. Either can use PA, but have very different playstyles.
Note that your stats do not transition as per the size chart and *then* apply the bonuses from the spell as Selvaxri has said. If you are a small or medium size character, you just apply the benefits listed in the spell. If you are a tiny or large race, then you use the chart to modify your ability scores and then apply the benefits from the spell. The polymorph chart is not at all related to the size of the creature you are polymorphing into, only what size creature you originally are. You shouldn't need to use this chart as a regular PC.
No. If the weapon cannot be used with weapon finesse, then you cannot use dexterity to attack just because you are using flurry of blows. A monk can only use weapon finesse with flurry of blows because unarmed strikes and other light monk weapons are usable with weapon finesse, so using a weapon not compatible with weapon finesse in a flurry does not suddenly grant that weapon the ability to be used with weapon finesse.
Yes, you do get 1.5x STR modifier on your gore attack, and you retain this while hasted, as you still only have the one natural weapon. You cannot use it with Flurry of Blows UNLESS you are using Feral Combat Training. In this case, you do retain 1.5x STR modifier to damage, as you still only have one natural weapon.
I like the concept, but will note that it is becoming a little too powerful for a Ranger AC, and more akin to that of your typical Druid, Hunter or the like. That being said, I'd certainly allow it or something similar, perhaps with a feat or trait investment that catalyses the upgrade from Giant Raven to this, and maybe gives it a little extra if it is a feat. That being said, Rangers are meant to have a more limited list of animal companions, which typically are weaker than many choices available to Druids, which would be my only concern, but of course that doesn't seem to be much of a problem for Paizo's new companion creatures, which as mentioned by Set, are very variable power-wise.
You use your own stats, modified by whatever modifiers it lists in the spell description. You also gain any abilities of the creature that are listed in the spell description (if it has a lesser version, eg. fly 30 ft when fly 90 ft is allowed, you only gain the lesser version). You also gain the natural attacks of the new form, as long as they aren't granted by a special ability not listed in the spell description. Most magical gear that does not require activation (like an amulet of mighty fists or a ring of deflection) do continue to function, but items that require activation do not. Additionally, your armour does not function while polymorphed into anything other than humanoids really, unless you have Wild armour (a +3 equivalent enchant) and are wild shaping.
Instead of increasing to Large size, gaining +2 natural aror, increasing the bite damage die, gaining Str +8, Con +4 and getting Dex -2, you instead get +2 Int, +4 Wis and +4 Cha So it is now Size Medium; Speed 50 ft.; AC +2 natural armor; Attack bite (1d6 plus trip); Ability Scores Str 13, Dex 15, Con 15, Int 4, Wis 16, Cha 10; Special Qualities low-light vision, scent. Not including increases from the animal companion table.
Elemental fury is on ALL of your natural attacks or unarmed strikes, not just one. So, if you make a full-attack or flurry of blows, each hit will deal your unarmed strike damage, plus your 1d6 elemental damage from elemental fury, and if you hit two of your three potential unarmed strikes at this level, you deal an extra 2d6, assuming you have used the swift action to enter Boar Style. Note that Boar Style applies "once per round". But you can still hit three times, dealing 3 x unarmed strike damage + 3d6 elemental damage +2d6 Boar Style damage. You could combine the Shattering Punch with the second attack you make (hoping that it hits) to make sure the 2d6 damage from your Boar Style will also bypass DR or Hardness.
Issue is, I believe Feral Combat Training allows you to use your natural weapons in place of your unarmed strike — you still cannot flurry AND use natural attacks, your natural attacks become your flurry (You don't get the extra natural attacks when you flurry even if you have Feral Combat Training) Additionally, even with pounce or a similar ability, only the first attack in a pounce routine gains the benefits of effects relating to your charge, such as the bonus to hit or the Horn of the Criosphinx feat.
I am wondering whether the inquisitor/paladin spell Sanctify Armor, from the APG, is able to interact with the various non-standard armors from many of the oracle mysteries. For example, the Wood Mystery has the Wood Armor supernatural ability, that conjures "wooden armor". Is this a valid target for Sanctify Armor?
If it is a valid target, would it be ruled that the armor summed from the Wind Mystery, Air Barrier, while merely creates "an invisible shell of air that grants a +4 armor bonus", would similarly be a valid target for the spell?
|
