charissi's page

Does the rule variant suggest to subtract the monster level from ac/DC? If you subtract the pc's level, balance should be unaffected, while keeping the numbers on their sheets nice and low...

Love and use the sheets for PF1, am looking forward to the final PF2 sheets, thanks!

Reference pages say:

< AC/DC - 10 -> critical failure

should be: <= ('less or equal') AC/DC -10 -> critical failure

a 15 on a dc 25 check is a critical failure, there are only 9 steps for regular failure.

I think new 1E players are easily overwhelmed when they are asked to choose talents/feats and other options (happened to me/my players when we started pf1)

2E is intended to be easy to learn, and it is, imho.
I really like that 2E manages to guide players through character creation and level ups better, i.e. 'pick one of these 4 relevant options' rather than a whole endless list.
Also, 3-action economy is much more intuitive.

Yes, it is a possibility. But I wanted to present a little more flamboyant ones for this...

Hi guys.
We've been playing PF1 for some time and I (GM) want to introduce the gang to PF2 next year.

I want to run a short tutorial adventure, 2 sessions long.
I need some fun level 1 pregen ideas to tickle out some role play and character interaction. Nothing too fancy and serious.

I will probably add a goblin barbarian, that thinks he is a shark (similar to 3-action game night).

PS. Happy New Year!

My friend and I are debating how channel smite and harm interact. If he spends two actions to channel smite could he add the third action to empower the harm to it's 2 actions version? I don't think it works that way because channel smite doesn't describe you CASTING the spell, but EXPENDING the spell slot.

For example;
Channel Smite (harm) with a club
1D6+2D8
Or Channel Smite (2 action Harm) with a club
1D6+2D8+16
For simplicity I'm not adding stat modifiers.

2-action harm adds +8 (per spell level) only if you heal the undead, not to damage.

Titan Mauler (Instinct Ability), or the clumsy condition in general:

Is the dexterity penalty to AC also applied, if the character's dexterity bonus is higher than the DEX-cap of the used armor?

I was thinking about granting that amount everytime the pc's get an ancestry feat (houserule). This might make the difference between dwarf and goblin a bit more meaningful at higher levels, plus the levels with ancestry feats pose a greater mile stone.

I have not run a game yet, so I still have some time to consider

there is\will be a german prd site also. but it might be hard finding the corresponding german rules for the english ones, tbh... especially if you don't understand german yourself. (the english feats, monster names, and so on are not mentioned).

afaik the german translation will not be released in august. 'and september will be tough'

great job!

I didn't mind landscape, but handling 3 pages in landscape is a problem, Imho. (our group usually plays on a relatively small table)
Two pages is much more practicable.

This is really frivolous.

Being "available for everyone" is not a good thing. Sometimes it's better some things are closed off.

For example, Point-Blank Shot was a stone-cold tax feat that everyone wanted to skip, but everyone was burdened with.

Your post doesn't serve to advance a conversation, it seems like griping onto PF1 when, in terms of market share and accessibility, the game needs an update.

Now, a wholly different argument would be saying "hey, without Attacks of Opportunity, a lot of classes don't have an use for reactions, and combat feels like a constant chase", or "I don't have a lot of ways to make a more warrior-like Bard other than Fighter MC, and maybe I just want the dueling talents".

Focusing on what's different between two editions as though as it were inherently bad/good without looking at the system is disingenuous.

I agree.

A lot of the mentioned feats were mandatory picks, like PBS or twf, Imho. In pf1 e.g.twf was a basically a feattax of always the same feats one had to Pick... I fail to see the difference in pf2, Other than binding that feat chain dedication, if you really want it.

I am really glad we're getting rid of the skill points straight jacket from PF1. Especially those characters that had little points per level, and so many to choose from. "Ehm no, my Paladin never put any points into swimming, climbing, ice skating..., i concentrated on religion and diplomacy"
This gets really annoying as DC's go up, but your skills don't, and the GM keeps telling you, to not even bother trying on relatively mundane tasks...

The TEML-system helps make everybody feel at least a little useful in every situation, but with the new crit-system it also allows characters to shine in their individual fields.
What's also great, they use it on different aspects aswell, like weapon quality. It's just easier to understand/explain to new players, when you can just say M means +2.
-
I have mixed feelings about the +1/level on everthing. I realise that this prevents level1's to tackle an adult dragon. But we're gonna get ridiculously high numbers, and it is always gonna come down to that +-5 margin that matters.
Maybe +1/2levels would keep the numbers a little more in check.

I would like to see the amount of damage dice you get from weapon attacks tied to Something other than magic weapon pluses. I feel it’s weird that a lvl 1 fighter could do more damage then a 20th lvl fighter could just because they have a magical weapon.

...

The weapon dice on magical weapons is a change i really like. It makes magic weapons so much more rewarding and exciting.

The hypothetical lv1-fighter with the +5 weapon vs. the lv20-fighter with non-magical weapon seems absurd to me, though a fun thought-experiment.

I guess every standard campaign should reward the players at some point with some magical gear and the system is balanced around that, imho.

High level characters with low level equipment could be a fun intermezzo in a campaign (like fleeing from a prison or something), and would of course have to be adjusted to the loss of power level of martial characters.

Do two handed weapons add 1.5 x the strength modifyer or is something else done for extra damage?

No, they don't. But one should take the different damage dice into consideration.

a non-magical one handed (martial) weapon uses a d8 (or d6 if they have funky traits). Two handed weapons use a d12 (d10 if funky).
Average rolls:
d12->6.5(2H)
d8->4.5 (1H)

You can see, that a two handed weapon does two points better, on average, than a similar one handed one. (Though that was also the case with PF1-weapons, more or less)

But now consider that a magical weapon uses multiple damage dice.
So on a +3 two handed weapon you use 4 damage dice, each doing ~2 points more. The difference becomes greater on higher levels.

I think this is a quite elegant way to give two handers more punch. In PF1 we had a lot of flat +x, which were boring.
For example a paladin (~level 10) using smite + power attack adds +10 for smite and +9 for powerattack +9 for STR (two handed +6 x1.5) +3 Magic Weapon. (All estimates- I didn't check the rules)
In that case it doesn't even matter what you rolled on that one d12 roll with all these flat bonuses...

i think the sole purpose of this is, that a kobold cannot one-shot you at level one. the different values from 6- 10 are just flavor and completely unconsequential at higher levels.

i rathter like the change to make level 1 characters a little less squishy

I was a little disappointed with the 'orc' weapons. They're all in the knife group.

Maybe you guys could add an uncommon exotic weapon, that would make the weapon familiarity feat more appealing to martial classes, giving them a flavorful alternative to the standard greataxe/sword.

I had those weird hook swords from that ring movie in mind, for example.

Orc hook sword
uncommon exotic melee weapon
d8S 1hand 2bulk - deadly d8p, disarm, orc, two handed d12
something like that

Unexperienced GM here.
I am about to run a couple of game sessions.

Do you guys use GM screens? What rules do you put back there for quick reference?

Seems to me, the different actions associated with skills would be good, also dc-tables.

When you get to the 'humans' part it is 2 full pages about 'humans' and then ~1/4 page about the demi-ones each.

My idea for making h-orcs and h-elfs feel less like the step children:
Start the whole section as (demi-) humans, then have one trait for every combination: half-elf, half-orc, (pure) human.

Rarity

[...]The uncommon rarity indicates an element available
only to those who have been initiated into a special kind
of training, grow up in a certain culture, or come from a
particular part of the world. A character can’t take these
options by default. Specific choices, such as class features
or backgrounds, might give access to certain uncommon
elements. The GM can grant any character access to
uncommon options if she so chooses. The level (or type of
element for those without levels) is marked in red.

pg. 10

i guess being a goblin would be a reasonable ancestry to gain access to dogslicers. Still gotta ask/beg your GM.