Yoveu's page

Recoil would actually be a good negative for all firearms. Something like (this is just a to get creative juices flowing numbers aren't final).

- Recoil: Firearms have a lot of power messing with the accuracy of shots if not held correctly. 1-h firearms get a -2 on ranged strikes for every shot in which the firearm wasn't held 2-handed. 2-h firearms get a -4 on ranged strike rolls for every shot held 1-handed, and -2 on every roll held 2-h.

A gun stand reduces recoil penalties by 2.

As for sniping, well you can have: Increase the reload time by X, the weapon deals Y times damage on a success or critical success. Effectively, trading more attacks for 1 accurate very damaging attack. The problem might be how it interacts with runes, maybe make it so runes aren't affected if it's too much damage?

I see your point, the gun stand could become a “Gunslinger Stance”, or they could introduce many of thees stances, with different bonuses.

The only problem I see is that we'll need some powerful traits to justify this malus, something that makes you want to use a firearm even though you have to reload and suffer the recoil. I suggested only a pair, but I think they wouldn’t be sufficient. What could make sense?

I’ve got some ideas about this topic I’d wish to discuss.
It has been stated in the thread that:

-weapons have only 1 damage dice;

-although the first firearms needed much time to recharge, some weapon requiring 3 actions or more before you can do another shot would be unplayable;

-we need something else that make them feel unique, unless we want to relegate them as a flavour alternative to crossbows.

If dices cannot go bigger we can instead translate the “you target Touch AC” as a “you have a little bonus to attack”, which goes in the direction of “you can crit a little more frequently”.

Recoil: weapons with this trait need firmness to unleash their potential. You can use an action to stabilise your position and amortise the recoil: until you move you have a +2 circumstance/item/what-you-want bonus to your attack rolls. Alternatively, if the weapon is 1H, you can obtain this bonus using it with a 2H grip.

If it is a common trait to firearms you won’t need a high reload time: the fast shooter will attack quickly with a minor accuracy, the sniper will have his reason not to use another type of weapon.

There could be also other traits which characterise firearms, like

-Thoundering: weapons with this trait are extremely noisy. When you shoot with a weapon with this trait in the first range increment, the target has to make a flat check with DC 4-5: on a fail, he is deafened for his next round. Other people ignorant of the fight can make a Perception Check with a Circumstance +2 bonus to notice the shot.

We would also need some trait which replicates “scatter”, like

-Scatter: firearms with this trait can use two types of ammunitions. It can shoot normal bullets, which target one creature, or it can make a scattering shot, which targets all the creatures in a con in the first range increment. You have to make only one attack roll with a -2 Circumstance malus.

What do you think? What other traits could make their appearance?

I’m trying to make a homemade conversion of Zeitgeist to 2E, so I’m really interested in what could works.

We already have sorcerers for narrow concept spell lists. A wizard is a magical mechanic, and a mechanic has a wrench for each bolt, or he's not a mechanic.

Interesting point, what about the Arcane list?

EDIT: it seems the link previous link to the sheet doesn’t work, this one should:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13sRbT4KZ9mlk1uLdL1iPuGFU0G4gJV-Eo3m XI1cny1g

Ok, let's see what could be done...

Generalist wizard is the "wider knowledge but not so deep" one, right? I think it could be done letting him take more extra spells but not so with the same power of the specialist ones, three possible ways could be:

1) His list has more spells, distribuited among each school but with a spell level cap;
2) His list has more -or all the lost- spells, but he can take learn them only by research;
3) His list has more -or all the lost- spells, but he can take learn them only by research after he can cast spells at least 1 level higher.

I'll reuse the examples of the first post:

EXAMPLE 1.1

Arcane tradition loses 40 spells, 1 spell for each spell level from 4 to 8 for each magic school.
Let's say now a generalist Wizard has the capability to study and cast (through his deep researches on the field) Arcane Spells and 10 more (from the 40 we took), which must be in the 4-5-6 range of levels.

EXAMPLE 1.2

Arcane tradition loses 40 spells, 1 spell for each spell level from 4 to 8 for each magic school.
Let's say now a generalist Wizard has the capability cast Arcane Spells, but he can also research by study the following 40 spells (not anymore in the Arcane List): ...

EXAMPLE 1.3

Arcane tradition loses 40 spells, 1 spell for each spell level from 4 to 8 for each magic school.
Let's say now a generalist Wizard has the capability cast Arcane Spells, but he can also research by study the following 40 spells (not anymore in the Arcane List): ...
There's a limit in this research of new spells: to learn an external 4th level spell he must know how to cast 5th, and so on.

EXAMPLE 2.1

Arcane tradition loses 48 spells, 1 spell for each spell level from 2 to 7 for each magic school.
Let's say now a Wizard has the capability to study and cast (through his deep researches on the field) Arcane Spells and 36 more (from the 48 we took), the ones in the range 2-3-4-5.

EXAMPLE 2.2

Arcane tradition loses 48 spells, 1 spell for each spell level from 2 to 7 for each magic school.
Let's say now a Wizard has the capability to cast Arcane Spells, but he can also research by study the following 48 spells (not anymore in the Arcane List): ...

EXAMPLE 2.3

Arcane tradition loses 48 spells, 1 spell for each spell level from 2 to 7 for each magic school.
Let's say now a Wizard has the capability to cast Arcane Spells, but he can also research by study the following 48 spells (not anymore in the Arcane List): ...
There's a limit in this research of new spells: to learn an external 4th level spell he must know how to cast 5th, and so on.

EXAMPLE 3 would not be modified -not depending on specialization.

Not talking about houserules I have tested and proved balanced or anything else, just an idea that I want to discuss.

PREMISE:

I don't have any link, but I remember the devs said that when selecting spells for the traditions they were bounded to give to wizards (and so to arcane list) most of what it had in Pathfinder; otherwise veteran players would feel a too wide gap between what they could do and what they will be able to.

I also read many threads about differentiation of lists (here an example: https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42ber?Could-we-have-less-crossover-between-the #4 ), and recently a new thread about how to distinguish more wizards and sorcerers ( https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42d8h?Taking-a-look-at-the-Division-of-Niches- for ).

I have made a simple sheet to compare the 4 traditions: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13sRbT4KZ9mlk1uLdL1iPuGFU0G4gJV-Eo3m XI1cny1g/edit?usp=sharing

It's clear that arcane tradition has more or less all the spells except for the healing ones and the ones thematic of the other traditions (divine support, emotion control, nature), this cause an imbalance and limits the design space -I suppose.

PROPOSAL:

Make the arcane list thinner, removing some of the more generical spells from the 8 schools (3-7 each for example) and change the wizard specializations in a way similar to Dominions and Bloodlines: they now grant a selection of spells to the wizard not already in his tradition list.
The point would be to make Arcane school less factotum without take away identity from Wizard: he would instead distinguish himself from another Arcane caster for his augmented versatility -his proper niche.

EXAMPLE 1:
Arcane tradition loses 40 spells, 1 spell for each spell level from 4 to 8 for each magic school.
Let's say now a Wizard has the capability to study and cast (through his deep researches on the field) Arcane Spells and 5 more (from the 48 we took), the ones which were of his specialization.

EXAMPLE 2:
Arcane tradition loses 48 spells, 1 spell for each spell level from 2 to 7 for each magic school.
Let's say now a Wizard has the capability to study and cast (through his deep researches on the field) Arcane Spells and 36 more (from the 48 we took), which depend on his specialization: we would exclude the 16 from the opposite schools (a concept we don't have anymore).

EXAMPLE 3:
Arcane tradition loses 40 spells, 1 spell for each spell level from 3 to 7 for each magic school.
Let's say now a Wizard has the capability to study and cast (through his deep researches on the field) Arcane Spells and 40 more (the ones we took from the list).

We can change the variables as we like, and I have offered three examples from "School really matters for the wizard" to "nothing really changes".

What do you think? It's not a ponderated fix to the game, just an idea to share.

Now that we have the archetypes for all the classes I have a doubt about Paladins of Irori:
If at Lv 2 she takes the Monk Dedication feat she gains the ‘Powerful Fist’ feature:

“When striking with your fist, you deal 1d6 damage instead of 1d4. You don’t take the –2 circumstance penalty when making a lethal attack with a nonlethal unarmed attack.”

Would it stack with the deific weapon?

I think alchemists should be able to get away with just investing in craft and not in arcana. However it might also be fun if there were some feats that gave training in arcane/divine/occult/primal or had trained in one of those as a prerequisite and gave some sort of additional set of formulas or enhancements. Something like better healing potions for divine, better bombs for arcane, better mutagens for nature, better tools I guess for occultisim. That way you could have some mechanics involved with flavoring your alchemist a certain way. Maybe that's better left to archetypes though.

I think it’s a wonderful idea!

Personally I’d see good a distinction like this:
-Bomber, who study also Arcana to give his bombs better effects
-Potionist, who study Religion (especially the vital and spiritual essences) to empower his filters
-Poisoner, who study Nature and the different properties of venoms
-Mutagenist, who study Occult to change his body in extraourdinary shapes
-Tinkerer, who expands his Crafting knowledges and becomes reeeeeeeally cool; or simply Generalist

We all know that there are many feat of the alchemist tree that are underwealming, if they’re going to modify what we already know they could make the same treatment we’ve seen for the druid:
every specialization has a 1-level feat (instead of all about the bombs.

That’s the better idea I’ve seen about the alchemist, really great work!
Talking about the mutagen-chemist, there’s no need to treat mutagens as common: according to erratas Quick Alchemy can be used for everything you have in your Book
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2vawh?Post-Gen-Con-Update