i26c2's page

keftiu wrote:

I can share what convinced me: the setting is much more considered now thanks to the diversity of staff, without losing any of the old Pathfinder theme park fun. You couldn’t pay me to engage with the Darkest Africa “cannibals and headhunters everywhere” 1e approach to the Mwangi, while the 2e book on it is one of the finest setting supplements in the d20 sphere.

The old Dragon Empires books have aged like milk in places. I’m excited to see how a bunch of awesome Asian talent tackles Tian Xia for 2e soon.

Definitely, I had no desire to visit Mgwani before beyond, I'm pretty sure it's the last place the Tarrasque was seen? And there was a floating city there once? Is there an adventure path that explores those ruins that would be awesome.

But in 2e: that magic school AP looks really, really fun. I'm not even a Harry Potter fan.

I'm playing SoT right now and tis a ton of fun

WatersLethe wrote:

If one player doesn't want to use Free Archetype because they're overwhelmed by the rules and aren't confident in being able to handle it,

If one player doesn't want to use Free Archetype for personal preference reasons,

A possible third reasonable option that I have at least heard of is that they want their character to be dedicated to their one simple concept. Like a Cleric that is only a Cleric. Not a Cleric/Bard, a Cleric/Captivator, or even a Cleric/Blessed One.

My solution for that is (instead of double class feats) is to bend the rules and let them take their own class's archetype in their free archetype slots. So they could be a Cleric/Cleric. For some multiclass archetypes, I might also give them a second class feat slot at level 2 if the class's dedication feat is redundant with what they already have.

Honestly I think this should be allowed for monk. Monk ahs so little stappled to its chasis and needs feats for everything. You need a feat jsut to get your own critical specialization. You need feats for ki stuff, feats for stances, a feat to be able to switch stances better, and then normal buff your stuff feats. I think monk should ahve more stapled to it, so if I was playing free archetype and the person that really didn't want it was playing a monk, I'd be all for them getting it in their own class.

In general though, many classes already have archetypes that are not quite their class but gives access to some of their class feats. For example, if you are already playing a archer fighter or ranger, there is an archer dedication. If you were palying a two-handed fighter there is the mauler dedication. These are dedications that just make you better at what you already do. I suppose casters don't ahve as much of that. I don't think a dedication in your own class would break things too much.

i26c2 wrote:

I am confused as to why anyone would nto want to use free archetype as a player. It gives you more options to express yoru character vision and make your charcter unique. There are 22 class archetypes, but if you include non-class archetypes there are over 100. Each of those has several feats. If you turn off lockout requirements and let people take any they qualify for in those slots, mixing an matching as they choose, the possibilites are near endless. This is such a good customization tool. The only reason I would see not wanting it is if you are someone that gets choice paralysis, because it really does offer something for everybody.

At the end there, you've pretty much given the answer yourself. Some people already have enough to worry about when selecting their vanilla feats and/or don't want an additional layer of complexity.

Yeah, in that case though, just work with the person. Have them build the character without it, then ask them if there is anything they wish teir character can do that's not covered in the base build, then give them options of class archtype and feat choices that would help them achieve that. For example say someone wants to paly a fighter, and they build it and are like "I wish I had more skills". This is easy, show them the rogue dedication path and how jsut taking it gives them two more skills, and then they can take skill mastery a couple times and it will really increase not jsut their skills, but skill feats as well. This makes a much more interesting character than the standard fighter with only a couple muscle skills and intimidate and not much else to do outside of combat.

But what if they are a fighter and truely don't care about any of it. They just want to hit something with a big sword or axe and call it a day. Mualer dedication would make them even better at doing that. Or they could take barbarian dedication for a bit more damage from rage. Or if they wanted to be a sword and board fighter, bastion dedication would make them better at that too.

Another example is if they were a caster and were like "more spell slots would be nice" or "really I jsut want to do what I do only more so" then suggest a casting archetype that triggers off the same casting stat (so bard for sorcorrer, physic for wizard, etc. This gives them more spells per day so then can be a more castery caster.

Regardless of what it is they want out of a character, there is little that can't be at least partially achieved through the archetypes, so ask them what they want out of the character, plan out a few options, and present a choice of a few options to them. This will reduce choice paralysis by a lot. Its a lot more work for the GM, but the palyer that was stuck would probably appreciate the effort.

I am confused as to why anyone would nto want to use free archetype as a player. It gives you more options to express yoru character vision and make your charcter unique. There are 22 class archetypes, but if you include non-class archetypes there are over 100. Each of those has several feats. If you turn off lockout requirements and let people take any they qualify for in those slots, mixing an matching as they choose, the possibilites are near endless. This is such a good customization tool. The only reason I would see not wanting it is if you are someone that gets choice paralysis, because it really does offer something for everybody.

the book finally arrived. I am going to cancel msotly because the shipping is too expensive. That said, it doesn't help matters that customer service can use help. The process could use more communication, and honestly faster time from order placed to shipping (it shouldn't take more than 4 business days to get something out the door IMO). Once shipped a tracking number so you can follow the package would be great, and a phone numebr where you can actually reach a person would be great too.

nicholas storm wrote:

I was disappointed with singular expertise for ways that encourage melee. Why should a drifter encouraged in using a gun in one hand and a melee weapon in the other have to endure a lower accuracy with the melee weapon? The class is so underpowered as it is, that singular expertise should remove the penalty to other weapons.

As far as I understand it was put in to prevent the gunslinger from having three weapon types on the legendary proficiency track, when the fighter can only do two for most of the game. Basically, niche-protection for the fighter, which is genuinely funny imo XD. It was a reaction to the fact that, during the playtest, everyone who played drifter did exactly that - chose Unconventional Weaponry, the mauler archetype or some other option that grants scaling proficiency in a melee weapon.

I also think that is a bit weird, as imo the triple proficiency issue is a complete paper tiger. The gunslinger is already really niche, but the number of people who pick both a crossbow and a firearm at the same time probably is somewhere in the double digits. Globally. There is no mechanical reason to do so and the themes clash heavily as well, so why would you?

I am guessing you are right about why, they didn't wnat anyone to be more fighter-y than the fighter, its considered the upper limit of ledgendary weapon groups. That said they do have things in the build that make up for it, like this: https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=3159

The difference between mastery and ledgendary is just +2, and the difference between flat footed and nto is also +2, so they kind of cancel. It does lock you into using that action though.

If you want to manage something that is not automatically deal with, just create a custom buff ( defense sheet).

Thanks, I had even looked up at conditions which was very close to there, hadn't seen the custom buff section. That helps a lot, thanks! :)

i26c2 wrote:

still havn't received the physical book yet. It would be nice if they gave tracking number or something.

Treasure Vault SE is out of stock and apparently isn't going to get printed again -- I just got an email from CS about that.

I am extremely disappointed in Paizo about this since my subscription was in place long ago -- well before the recent increased interest in PF. By rights they should have ordered sufficient stock for me and the other subscribers *before* fulfilling non- or new subscribers but apparently that obviously didn't happen.

Bloody sloppy on their part.

Strange, because mine said it shipped on the 29th of march, and says 7-10 business days, so I would assume I should get it this week, but it alsio says no tracking number available, so nto sure if it actually shipped or not

Anyone here use pathbuilder and know how to update character speed as a result of custom feats?

Some background here I have purchased the 3rd aprty product from the paizo store "Exotic Ancestries: Centaur" by "Necromancer of the Northwest". I wanted to build some Centaur characters in pathbuidler 2e (paid web version), so I used the "custom pack" options to add the ancestry, its heritiges, and all of its feats (basically everythign in the book). For the most part it works great, and the ancestry lets me select its starting speed (30ft) and that works correctly when I select it for a character. The feats show up in the proper order and I can select them, but if I select the "swift strider" feat, for example, which should increase speed by 5ft,of course it does not. Of course it also doesn't give me the extra skills when I select the "Centaur lore" feat, but there is a mechanism where I can add 3 custom skill increases at level 1 and handle that. There is no where I can see in the custom pack to add effects to the feats themselves, and the ancestry specials lets you change a bunch of different peramters at different levels based on the ancestry itself, but speed is not one of them. Is there anywhere I can add in this speed bonus, even if I ahve to do it manually? If I choose the fleet general feat it correctly increases the speed so somewhere in the background this is calcualted, but is there anywhere I can override this calcualtion or add a bonus to it?

i26c2 wrote:

A vehicle innovation would be great. I'm trying to figure out how to get some ideas I have from a homebrew setting to work with pf2e rules, and in my setting is an inventor that specializes in vehicles. Would be nice to have a tricked out steam cart with a cannon on it as that's the concept essentially of his main fighting style. I suppsoe I could use the construct innovation but it doesn't feel right as his vehicles are not creatures taht act on their own, they need to be piloted.

I've been flirting with the idea of importing some notions from AD&D2's Spelljammer campaign setting because I like the idea of massive walking vehicles, flying ships, and submarines. In my drafty head canon I would realize this through an added vehicle innovation.

EDIT: This could be something else a tech guide book gives us.

So I figured out how to do it for my homebrew with minimal rules bending. The one thing I have to bend is to allow my inventor to "invent" a rare recipe, which there is nothing in the rules to even allow them to invent uncommon ones which seems unfair to me. In my homebrew setting (that I ran a bit in 4e but didn't get very far), its based on JRPGs and one of the aspects is collecting people that will end up being your generals in a rebellion. Those generals will be playable NPCs at different parts in the campaign (PCs can swap out and play the NPC instead of their main PC). One of these playable NPCs is an inventor whose big thing is inventing steam powered stuff like a car and a boat and is not playable until later on when the PCs find a cannon (such things are rare in my setting) and he decides he can add this to his car and essentially ahve a tank. As such he won't be joining as playable until later on in the campaign, so I can start him at 8th level.

Here is how I made it work: Construct inventor, flavoring his "construct" as the mechanisms that run the "tank" and so not letting the construct to ever leave the tank. The tank itself is a steam cart which he invented (his life's work can be a rare recipe IMO, this is where it breaks RAW, but he's an NPC so I do what I want). Obviously cosntruct celerity so he can be quickened and order his construct for free. His construct will do the loading of the cannon (flavored as an auto loader system), letting the inventor do the aiming and firing. It will still only fire every 2nd round, but doing cannon damage every second round and still being able to take an action driving is pretty good. I also gave him the free archetype artelleriest for some other benefits with seige weapons. As he's in a cart he and the "loading mechanism" construct will both have heavy cover at ground level and lesser cover otherwise, so it will be hard to take them out without first taking out the cart's HP (this does make it feel like a tank). His big downside is he is squishy if soemthing teleported into the tank or climbed aboard and started meleeing him, he'd die fast. His other downside is firing only every other turn, and the cannon's minimum 50ft range, which with only 25ft drive speed will be hard to keep far enough from the fighting to use. He will have other weapons to fall back on of course (including just running the tank into people to do collision damage, and the construct melee attacks which I'd flavor as weapons mounted on the tank like a buzz saw or whatever). Since artellerist has very few feats and he would run out long before 20 I've also ruled with the free archetpye thing that you can split more than one, which is the other rule bending I'm doing, and giving him alchemsit dedication as well so he can have bombs and elixers and still be useful when in a tight dungeon and can't use the tank.

A vehicle innovation would be great. I'm trying to figure out how to get some ideas I have from a homebrew setting to work with pf2e rules, and in my setting is an inventor that specializes in vehicles. Would be nice to have a tricked out steam cart with a cannon on it as that's the concept essentially of his main fighting style. I suppsoe I could use the construct innovation but it doesn't feel right as his vehicles are not creatures taht act on their own, they need to be piloted.

So I am gonna post most of the ideas I had, they are not coherent yet, but I want to share them and also prove that there is enough in this idea to more than justify a whole class

Firstly I think skald could potentially be a dual-subclass thing, like psychic. First subclass could be about their chosen kind of mythic thing or epic poem, like other users have said, the second would be fighting style, because this is a gish class and there needs to be something to support various fighting styles lest skalds all end up fighting the same way. They should have martial weapon proficiency progression like a magus of course, but like the magus, when you have a class that is meant to attack and cast, you need something to help even out the action economy (though the focus should be on Ragesong of course)
So fighting styles I feel should be supported
Weapon and shield – I feel like this is needed because it is cool and also action economy intensive, also the fighting style used by any historical skalds who were also fighters.

Dual wielding – skald Iconic dual wields and its cool,

Two-handed weapon – not as compelling as others in terms of skaldiness, but I think it should be supported

Unarmed – this could be a sort of dance based fighting style maybe? I know some cultures have dances associated with warriors, though tapping into that might be culturally insensitive, I am not sure.

Guns – mostly joking here but like, what if you went full Tchaikovsky here though? Full on gunshots as notes

Ranged/instrument and weapon (I have some ideas here that might be too much for a subclass)
So for this last one its weird but here me out I need to explain it. I was trying to think of a skaldic equivalent of the staff magus, and I think I have something here. You could choose an instrument and it could work like a staff for you, so you can give it extra spells or something, making this a more castery subclass. The instrument would be able to be wielded in one or two hands, like a magus staff but instead of melee it...

I love your ideas. For attributes keep it simple. STR for fighting, as they are barbarian like. Dex for AC, though like the barb, they don't need much as they can use medium armor. CHA for everything else (this fits the bard theme) including casting and other special abilities like some of the ragesong effects.

still havn't received the physical book yet. It would be nice if they gave tracking number or something.

Elemental ammunition seems reasonable if property runes still apply, even with the extra action. Something to keep pre-loaded as your first bullet for the encounter and shoot at the scariest looking thing for some free damage.

Of course, the main issue is Alchemical Shot exists, but elemental ammo doesn't misfire on a miss.

Except you are going to want that first shot to be sniper's aim because with one-shot, one-kill you you get bonus damage so you really want to crit if possible with that first shot, though I suppose if its pre-loaded you can activate and then fire, but it will leave your gun unloaded and won't let you take cover. What I was doing at level 5 was alchemical shot first round of combat, and it is SoT so I'm free archetype wizard and I would true strike if possible (only once a day, but a true strike alchemical shot is nice). Same thing with leaving gun unloaded (no fake out) and no cover, but it was worth it to guarntee that alchemical shot hit and have a very good chance of crit. I wonder if they want the ammo to require activation so you can't use both the alchemical ammo and alchemical shot (though I guess you could first round) for two different damage types, but honestly sniper's aim plus alchemical ammo would be better as criting is better than a second damage type. Again you really want to do everything to try and crit, otherwise your damage suffers. Not being able to use any of the two action strikes most turns with the ammo makes it not very good, though it might be better than alchemical strike. Alchemical strike is slightly more ongoing damage, but it has the drawback. Otherwise its pretty much identical.

Another thing I noticed about gunsligners that is really going to annoy me in the future as we gain levels is haste sucks for gunslingers. It only allows regular strikes or strides, not special two-action strikes or reload. Having the class that struggles most with action economy not get helped by the spell that is supposed to help action economy is another double whammy and not thinking things through IMO. They should really add reload as something haste can do.

if going by strict RAW it seems since they have interact actions listed (which might or might not be intentional), they need to be activated, but since no special activate rules are listed, it would use consumable rules. Consumable rules say activating a consumable immediatly consumes it, so by RAW alchemical ammo is useless and crumbles to dust when you activate it. Of course this makes no sense. If you ignore the consumable tag and just use standard activation rules, you need to activate it but there is no time limit, so you can activate everything hours before combat and it being activated is pointless. If you use the magic item rules, (which alchemical items are not magic), then they need to be activated and fired the same round. This seems to be the conclusion most people are jumping to, and honestly I think its stupid because alchemical ammo is weaker than magic ammo, so it still requiring the extra action basically makes it useless. Why introduce new ammo if no one is going to use it. I think the only one I might use following that interpretation of the rules is the healing ammo for emergencies when the healer drops. As other people have pointed out, the gunslinger is already at an action disadvantage, so creating new ammo obviously designed for the new class and then making it further cut into actions makes zero sense. This is why I am waiting on an offical ruling one way or the other, because right now its very ambigious as to how it actually works.

Sorry your answer seemed very dismissive I know tone is a difficult thing to interpret through text so clearly I failed there. I don't care where it is answered but you are right about it getting buried and errata would be ideal. I just saw a thread in general about guns and gears errata and someone actually did mention it there too, so that is good. Looking through that thread I see what you mean about many other things that need to make it there too. Some I think are much more obvious than this like does fake out shoot your shot (nope, clearly never says it does and would be useless if it did), and does alchemical shot work on two handed guns (of course it does, it doesn't specify 1H and is recommended for snipers) but those clarifications should also probably make it just to get rid of any ambiguity

i26c2 wrote:

Could one of the designers pelase anwser my question I posted here?

There are a lot of people who play this game. And most of them have questions about something or another.

There are not all that many game developers.

And if a question was answered in a random forum thread, it would get buried in short order - so someone else would ask the same question.

So a better place to answer questions like this is in the official errata and clarifications on the FAQ page.

Otherwise the game designers and developers would be spending all of their time answering questions on these forums instead of creating new content for us to play with.

being as guns and gears doesn't have an errata yet, and firearms and alchemical ammo was introduced in guns and gears, its not going to be on an FAQ. Intersting that that FAQ says if something is not anwsered there to check this forum and links me right back here, LMAO. Almsot like this is the correct palce to ask these questions and I have seen game developers have anwsered other rules based questions on this rules forum. This would be the best forum to hope for an anwser from one based on what I've seen. The problem with "communitty" anwsers is they tend to be all over the place, especially when rules are unclear. Getting an anwser specifically about designer intent from Paizo itself or a designer is always prefered. This is horribly worded and absolutely needs errata and/or clarification one way or another.

Could one of the designers pelase anwser my question I posted here?

https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43spq?alchemical-ammunition-and-activation#1

I flagged the thread to be moved here days ago but I think its faster just to link it. I got lots of interesting perspectives from forum users on both sides of the argument but would like to hear from an actual designer. Mainly I would like to know design intent. Was alchemical ammunition intended to require seperate activation actions like magic ammunition, or since its not magical, was the intent for it to activate on load or strike (load makes sense as that is an interact action)? Was it intended that activated alchemical ammo only reamin activated for the round same as magical, or can you just activate a bunch ahead of time and just use actions in combat loading and firing as you can with other non-magical ammo? This has a big impact on how useful alchemical ammo is for gunslingers, as they are already at an action handicap, so hitting them further with requiring activation for these ammos seems unecessiraly harsh.

I'm not happy with Sword and Gun. SOmething about it just irks me...

Also, I was kinda disappointed that there isn't some kind of 'can flank with ranged weapon.' for that Gun kata feeling ALA John Wick.

Here's a quick idea

Axis Relock Feat 1

Your ranged strikes with firearms and crossbows benefit from flanking, and for the purpose of flanking you treat them as melee weapons with reach 10. (Ranged strikes using firearms and crossbows do not trigger reaction against opponents you flank.)

The bracketed part is something that I'd add if it 'replaces' Sword and Gun.

Oh yeah, I'm sad to see those 1e feats go away. There is one for being able to flank I beleive, another not to take AOOs (this one was kinda implemented, but needs to add reload to it to translate properly), and then a follow up feat that lets you take an AOO with 15ft reach with a gun. A way that implements all of those would be amazing.

We posted at the exact same minute!

Great minds think alike!

I jsut realized there is a rules forum here: https://paizo.com/community/forums/pathfinder/second/rules

Can this thread be moved there, or should I just create a new one and link here?

I suppose since the rules for Activated Ammunition specifies magical ammunition:

7

Activated Ammunition wrote:

If magic ammunition doesn’t have an Activate entry, it’s activated automatically when it’s launched.

that some GM somewhere is calling that to not be good enough.

Though I would be interested in hearing the argument against using that and what said GM is proposing using instead. I'm sure it would be fascinating.

Edit: Of course, if a type of alchemical ammunition does have an activation entry, it would also have to be activated according to those same rules for activated ammunition.

I do think you should be able to activate the ammunition while the ammunition is already loaded.

The issue is it says magic and alchemical stuff is specifically not magic, so RAW that rule would not apply

more evidence to support not needing to activate them is that one of the ammos specifically deals damage to you if you touch it. Having to touch it to activate it seems weird (though I guess you can jsut always wear gloves).

Does anyone have an offical link or ruling on activating alchemical ammunition?

Magic ammunition you need to activate before firign to get its effect, and if you do, it must be fired by end of turn or it deactivates. This is clearly stated here:

https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=716

I have scoured Archives of Neyths, the core rulebook, guns and gears, and treasure vault, and I cannot find anywhere saying that non-magical, alchemical ammunition works the same way. By RAW, it seems, this type of ammunition should deliver its effects without activation. Why the activation entry for them though? Well regualr blackpowder entry ahs an activate entry too, but I think we can all agree regular bulelts don't need to be activated to do damage. Someone told me that entry was in case you wanted to blow up the black powder, not to use it as ammo. Presumably the other ammos also contain black powder so could also be destroyed by "Activating" them, or maybe since the entry is there for blackpowder they jsut kept it. This is the argument one memebr of my play group (but not the gorup I am playing in, as its split into two gorups with 2 GMS, he GMs the other group) is saying. I don't believe my GM has ruled on it either way.

This if nothing else is horribly worded. Maybe they didn't know alchemical ammo was going to be a thing when core rules hit, but guns and gears introduced them, and treasure vault gave many more examples of them. Either of these books could ahve stated in the rules that they work like magic ammo if they were intended to, but neither does.

As my character is the only gunslinger in the too groups, having some sort of offical anwser from Pazio one way or the other would be very helpful on this, as if alchemical ammo doesn't need actions to activate, it is much more viable to use. If it requires actions, it conflicts with all the good shots I have (sniper's aim, alchemical shot, later vital shot or called shot) as reloading takes an action too, making them much less useful. I would probably even retrain out of alchemical shot if I could sue the ammo (as funny as having the ammo for one damage type and alchemical shot for another on the same shot would be, I'd rather jsut use sniper's aim to ensure the special ammo hits). If it is intended that these require activate actions, I can let my GM know and continue with alchemical shot (and maybe buy a couple healing shots for emergencies but not bother with any other special ammo). If it is not intended that they require alchemical activation, however, I can let my GM know and he usually agrees with RAW unelss he ahs a strong reaosn not to. If we can't find conclusive evidence either way, I will present my case and use the other GM as help, maybe he will side with me, maybe he won't, but conclusive evidence would really be appreciated.

i26c2 wrote:

breithauptclan wrote:

I'm not Paizo's manager. I don't work here.

Have you checked your account page? At the top of this page there is the menu option 'My Account' -> 'Account Settings'. In there on the left about halfway down is a section labeled 'My Downloads'. Check in there for the PDF.

Until then, you can also look up anything you need in the Archives.

I know where to look for downlaods. It did finally ship and the downlaod is finally there, but it took over a week. I am not impressed by the way the store runs. I probably will cancel sub and not order any more physical products.

As for the can look it up in the archives, some things are just not there. For example I just bought guns and gears pdf because I couldn't figure out if I could buy different guns after my starting one as we are not in a location known for guns. The info of who can buy guns where was not in archives, probably because it was buried in a sidebar called "guns and access" in a very lore heavy descriptive section of the book. It basically says if my character is from one of the regions, I have access, which is still vague, but I assume that means I can buy any uncommon guns that could be found in the region my character is from. The thing I most wanted to know from treasure vault was regarding alchemical ammo and if activating it actually cost the activate action like magic ammo, or, if like normal blackpowder bullets, even though there is an interact action listed, it doesn't require this. If they require interact, they kind of suck, because you can't reload, activate, and fire with any of the two-action shots, as that would be 4 actions. This isn't clear from archives as regualr bulelts have the interact action in neyths too, but I know that those can be activated as part of relaoding (but magic ones don't) It still isn't clear from what I've seen of the pdf so far but according to other people on these forums it is true they take the

...

I must have missed where it said that, but that week (I think it was 8 days actually) was just until they sent the email saying it would ship soon and finally activated the pdf, that is not including the time to actually ship the product. That is horribly slow. Most online stores will send things out the door within a day or two, even if they take a week or more to actually arrive.

Do you think they will ever print a skald for 2e? It seemed like one of the more interesting PF1E classes. I know you can take a bard with a barbarian dedication or the other way around, but the fact that you can't cast spells while raging hurts that, and there is no way to share the rage like 1e skalds could.

I think the mechanics are there that this calss could be built. You would make ragesong a focus spell with the rage keyword (so it can be done while raging). This would take possibly 2 actions but would allow allies in range to accept your rage and gain the benefits and penalties of being under it. You would gain access to the same spell lsit as bards (I think its occult) but at a reduced rate (1/2 level maybe), and you would gain an ability that would let you use a certain number of spells/day while raging (they gain the rage trait), possibly by using an action before casting them. An ability that gives you unique rage abilities (maybe even some unique to skald that barb can't get) would also be neat, especially since you could share the rage. In a game system about teamwork, a teamwork class like skald would shine.

Thoughts?

I'm not Paizo's manager. I don't work here.

Have you checked your account page? At the top of this page there is the menu option 'My Account' -> 'Account Settings'. In there on the left about halfway down is a section labeled 'My Downloads'. Check in there for the PDF.

Until then, you can also look up anything you need in the Archives.

I know where to look for downlaods. It did finally ship and the downlaod is finally there, but it took over a week. I am not impressed by the way the store runs. I probably will cancel sub and not order any more physical products.

As for the can look it up in the archives, some things are just not there. For example I just bought guns and gears pdf because I couldn't figure out if I could buy different guns after my starting one as we are not in a location known for guns. The info of who can buy guns where was not in archives, probably because it was buried in a sidebar called "guns and access" in a very lore heavy descriptive section of the book. It basically says if my character is from one of the regions, I have access, which is still vague, but I assume that means I can buy any uncommon guns that could be found in the region my character is from. The thing I most wanted to know from treasure vault was regarding alchemical ammo and if activating it actually cost the activate action like magic ammo, or, if like normal blackpowder bullets, even though there is an interact action listed, it doesn't require this. If they require interact, they kind of suck, because you can't reload, activate, and fire with any of the two-action shots, as that would be 4 actions. This isn't clear from archives as regualr bulelts have the interact action in neyths too, but I know that those can be activated as part of relaoding (but magic ones don't) It still isn't clear from what I've seen of the pdf so far but according to other people on these forums it is true they take the extra action to activate jsut like magic ones do, which is rather disapointing.

So yesterday the order went into "pending" and the money came off my card, but still no pdf available. As a side note, with shipping it cost over $100 CAD. On Amzon.ca the book is $72.99 CAD and is delivered within a few days. So I am essentially paying $30 and a shit ton of time for a pdf that I still don't have. For sure I am cancelling the sub after I get it. I might buy the pdfs directly from Pazio or through humble bundles (that's how I got core book pdf and some adventure stuff I ahvn't looked at), and get any print copies I want from local game stores or used.

After seeing John Wick 4, the thing I most want for the Gunslinger is a way to effectively throw empty guns and spent magazines at people.

No Spoilers! lol

I don't think people really go through game stores looking for codes to steal. If you want to pirate a pdf there are much easier methods. That and if you really cared there are easy ways to protect it, like hiding it in a sealed envelope or otherwise a protected flap that is not to be opened before purchase.

4 subscriptions is more money than I can afford reasonably. I specifically meant having already purchased the pdfs should give you some sort of discount on buying the physical books. Many companies do that. The reason being is there is very little incentive for me to buy older books that I can't get through subscription, like the core rulebook, in print form from Pazio. If I were to buy something like that I would probably just buy it second hand rather than pay full price, or as you said get it from Amazon if I can't find a used one. If they said hey, get 15% off since you already baught the pdf from us forever ago, that would be an incentive to get it straight from them.

Anyway, those are just small things that bug me, but not having an option to just pay now and get the pdf while I wait for the book to get shipped is worse than any of that. It has been over a week now and no indication of when this thing will ship. That is simply bad customer service in my opinion. Its a good thing their product is so good, and their rules are open source.

The customer service staff do not monitor the forums for problems.

If you sent an email to
customer.service@paizo.com
and got back a ticket number, then you're in the queue. They will respond to your email when they get to you.

Did click "Treasure Vault" as the item to start your subscription with? If so, you'll get the PDF when it ships. It doesn't have to ship immediately for you to get the PDF.

If you explained the problem clearly in your email, staff will fix it when they get to it. It may take a week or two before you hear back.

Thanks. They did reply finally and say the pdf will only be avilable when it ships, which I already kinda knew, but I ahd no idea when it would ship. Then I sent another, and they sent one back saying it could be between 3 and 20 business days. Wow, that's a long time. If you are going to make someone wait up to 20 business days for a book, you should at least give them access to the pdf while they wait. I wish this is spelled out better beforehand that it can take that long before they even ship your subscription. In general this expierence is leaving a bad taste in my mouth. Needing a sub to get a free pdf is already kinda shady as some other companies just give you a downlaod code in the book (like Modiphius does with the fallout 2d20 RPG). Having to pay for 2 different formats kind of sucks. The other way around should also provide a discount IMO. I have a digital version of the core rulebook, would be nice if that gave me some sort fo discount to buying the print versions, but I digress. The shipping time and lack of communication about it taking that long is really poor service. Imagine ordering a book on amazon and them not even starting the shipping process for 20 days?

Pixel Popper wrote:

aobst128 wrote:

Yeah, running reload is borderline a tax. Can only get away not taking it on a drifter that can't use it anyways if you aren't using a capacity gun...

Dual Weapon Reload should not be an action, but, rather, a blanket removal of the free-hand requirement to reload...

That's why thaumaturge is a popular choice for an archetype because thaumaturge ammunition does exactly that with a pistol implement.

My sniper doesn't have running reload. He took munitions crafter, fake out and alchemical shot so far. IMO alchemical shot is better than risky reload even. A sniper doesn't move all that much. I also have the corgi familiar/mount with independant so I can get a free move every turn if I need it. I have used alchemical shot a lot. We faught oozes that split with piercing damage so I used alchemical cold isntead. Used alchemical fire on a wood elemental triggering vulnerability with ongoing, and the free aid from fake out has been very good when I remember it. Sniper is probably the one build that doesn't need running reload.

One thing I think they should add is a repeating two-handed gun with fatal. I would take that in a heartbeat. Even if it was only repeating 3. Only needing to reload after every 3 shots instead of every shot would make the class feel so much mroe balanced.

i26c2 wrote:

Since you play a lot of gunslingers, could you anwser this for me. I have a sniper and as far as I know it takes an action to covered reload and an action to shoot, so my other action can be to move or shoot a second time (and then reload a second time the next turn). I noticed that the new alchemical items in treasure vault have interact entries at top. Does this mean they take another action to use on top of the reload? I don't ahve my copy of treasure vault yet so I can't confirm if it is stated anywhere that alchemical bullets work like magical ones or not (magical bulelts need an interact action if they ahve an entry). The weird thing, is blackpowder (which I beleive is the entry for normal bullets) on Archive of Neyths (comes from gears and guns I beleive) also has that interact entry, but its not magical. So my assumption is that normal bullets do not need that extra action. If so, why is the interact entry there for normal bullets? If it can be ignored, can the interact entry for the alchemical ones also be ignored? So for archive only mentions magical ammunition requiring an extra action if it has an interact action, not normal bulelts or the new alchemical ones. I guess I can wait for them to ship my treasure vault, but I was hoping someone on here might already have it and know.

You are correct, shooting once (the basic Strike action), Covered Reload, regular reload (Interact to reload in game terms) and moving each take one action.

And yes, almost all "special" ammunition takes an extra action to Activate. This is true for both magical and alchemical ammunition of any type, as stated in their respective stat blocks. The only difference is that magical ammunition doesn't apply your weapon's property runes, while alchemical ammunition does. Otherwise, the rules are the same.

The black powder entry is somewhat misleading. It is purely for when you use gunpowder as an explosive, not as ammunition. The "round" entry is just a really nasty firecracker. This has no...

wow, yep, the game designers really hate gunslingers. All the good gunslinger attacks require two actions, so you can't use the special ammo with them easily. Would ahve to be like first turn shoot with regular ammo and reload with special ammo, second turn activate special ammo and fire it (and now have an emtpy gun). They really should have jsut made guns a die code higher or something. My jezail is only 1d8, the same damage as a longbow but it requires an action to reload and a longbow does not. It seems like game designers do this overcompensating thing a lot. In PF1e, gunslingers were very OP (attacking on touch AC, what were they thinking?), and in 2e, they overcompensated and nerfed them into being worse than bows.

Early this morning I ordered a subscription starting with treasure vault. The order went through and I got an email confirmation for the subscription, but isntead of shipping treasure vault it got put into a side cart. I tried calling the customer support number but nobody anwsers and it goes to a full mailbox so I can't even leave a message. I sent an email but ahve not heard back. I would like the book to ship immediatly so I can get the free PDF, which is why I ordered it as a subscription in the first place. Can someone please fix this?

Not to spike the wheel of the conversation too much, but it may be that this is just a perception and expectation management problem.

Gunslinger is a non-core class. So the comparison to Fighter and Ranger is going to be a problem. Perhaps instead you should compare your expectations to the class with that of Swashbuckler, Inventor, and Investigator. Is Gunslinger any more of a fiddly, finicky, and problematic class to play than one of those?

If you want to be best in class for ranged damage, you should probably play a ranged Fighter or Ranger or maybe Rogue. Because those are core classes and are inherently easier to use for a core game mechanic like 'deal the most damage at range as possible'.

The choice of playing a Gunslinger is as much for the flavor and style of the character as it is for the game mechanics.

Since you play a lot of gunslingers, could you anwser this for me. I have a sniper and as far as I know it takes an action to covered reload and an action to shoot, so my other action can be to move or shoot a second time (and then reload a second time the next turn). I noticed that the new alchemical items in treasure vault have interact entries at top. Does this mean they take another action to use on top of the reload? I don't ahve my copy of treasure vault yet so I can't confirm if it is stated anywhere that alchemical bullets work like magical ones or not (magical bulelts need an interact action if they ahve an entry). The weird thing, is blackpowder (which I beleive is the entry for normal bullets) on Archive of Neyths (comes from gears and guns I beleive) also has that interact entry, but its not magical. So my assumption is that normal bullets do not need that extra action. If so, why is the interact entry there for normal bullets? If it can be ignored, can the interact entry for the alchemical ones also be ignored? So for archive only mentions magical ammunition requiring an extra action if it has an interact action, not normal bulelts or the new alchemical ones. I guess I can wait for them to ship my treasure vault, but I was hoping someone on here might already have it and know.

Fair, personally I think RAI was for it to work when not moving. One of the big penalties for squeezing is to attack, which is pointless if you are moving, so for magic to get rid of penalties to not apply while standing still would be really weird.

This thread seems to have gone stale. It seems my DM is allowing the belt to work the way I expect once I can afford it, but it would be nice to get an official ruling from paizo for the future. Do the benefits of the belt only apply while moving or, is has been stated on this form by a couple people, they apply all the time and "moving through" is just fluff description. Is there a way to pose such questions to the developers directly?

Diego Rossi wrote:

i26c2 wrote:

Name Violation wrote:

You lose darkvision when wild shaped because that's dependant on form.

If darkvision is dependent on form, breathing should be too

I believe senses are specifically called out by the polymorph school, but breathing isn't.

Senses are called out as being added, not as being removed (unless they are EX or SU).

RAW you are a plant with full sight, even if the plant has no sensory ability that can be granted by Plant shape.

RAW you can be a Yellow Musk Creeper with full sight.

RAW you can be an octopus that breathes air, it is simply that it clashes with other stuff.

BTW, for added rule madness, you can consider what happens when a druid in fire elemental wildshape walks into a burning building. He has fire resistance but he still will have some problem breathing.

Undead Form and becoming a skeleton is even weirder. The caster breathes with his bones.

I have no nose, and I must smell

yep, and the earth elemental can burrow through the walls, but as a druid you can't see anything while doing so.

i26c2 wrote:

Name Violation wrote:

You lose darkvision when wild shaped because that's dependant on form.

If darkvision is dependent on form, breathing should be too

I believe senses are specifically called out by the polymorph school, but breathing isn't.

Senses are called out as being added, not as being removed.

RAW you are a plant with full sight, even if the plant has no sensory ability that can be granted by Plant shape.

RAW you can be a Yellow Musk Creeper with full sight.

Cool, good to know

You lose darkvision when wild shaped because that's dependant on form.

If darkvision is dependent on form, breathing should be too

I believe senses are specifically called out by the polymorph school, but breathing isn't. It actually kind of makes sense. You are nto actually turning into the animal, but rather changing your shape to look like/mimic the animal in many ways. Baleful polymorph might stop breathing because it's intention is to harm someone. Wildhsape's intention is to help, so you wouldn't want it to hinder you by restricting your breathing. Basically unless polymorph school, beast shape spell, or wild shape ability specifically call something out it doesn't change. I gain the swim speed, which lets me breath water while swimming, but I don't lose the ability to breathe air. I'm not actually an octopus, I just gained the form of one. If someone beats a perception against my disguise with a +10, they actually do know I'm a druid, not an octopus.

How are you breathing air?

Wildshape is a Polymorph effect, so most of your physical abilities change to match those of the new form. It is not entirely clear if that includes your ability to breathe air or no, but Baleful Polymorph seems to assume so. The octopus is a non-amphibious aquatic animal, so it can't breathe air.

Your GM allows you to maintain the ability to breathe air when taking an aquatic form?

Beast shape does not specify losing the ability to breath air only that I gain the ability to breath water if I gain a swim speed from an aquatic animal so I have both. The only thing that "changes" with the polymorph instead of just adding is the shape itself (therefore losing the ability to wield weapons and gaining the tentacle attacks), the size, and the base land speed as that is specifically called out for polymorph effects. There is nothing in there about losing the ability to breathe air.

I think a big, wooden wheel with spokes both inside and outside the ring would be like the easiest thing ever for a gigantic octopus to manipulate... and even an octopus with an octopus brain could probably figure out that manipulating this aforementioned wheel steers the ship. They have pretty good reasoning skills and decent eyesight... and could probably both realize that turning the wheel turns the ship, and then choose a direction they wanted the ship to go.

Now, an octopus with an octopus brain would not know how to read wind, or understand that rocks will destroy the ship... but it's a stupid fish, give it a break.

To contribute to the actual question, though, I believe there is nothing stopping you from being stationary whilst squeezing. It's not the same as being shunted out of a solid object. I think that's the word they use, anyways.

Your Weasel Belt should remove any penalties associated with Squeezing. You should be ok. I think...

thank you. I figured, good to hear others say it.

I'm not sure I understand; the lake octopus is just an Advanced giant octopus. Exactly the same, but Huge. And, presumably, breathes freshwater.

And what I meant about an octopi tenancles is that they do not seem well-suited to many tasks, like steering a ship.
I can't recall if it made it to Pathfinder, but 3rd pointed out that some animals are bad at certain things. A horse will struggle to walk a tightrope, despite being fairly dexterous. An elephant is incredibly strong, but is a terrible jumper. A whale cannot climb a rope, etc. --stuff the rules don't always spell out and we have to use common sense for.
In an attempt to reign in the terror of "the giant octopus druid", I've pointed to real-life videos of octopi, especially on land. They'd take penalties to all kinds of thing.

I feel like there are a lot of overlapping conversations in this thread and that things are getting a little muddied.

I'm not sure I understand; the lake octopus is just an Advanced giant octopus. Exactly the same, but Huge. And, presumably, breathes freshwater.

And what I meant about an octopi tenancles is that they do not seem well-suited to many tasks, like steering a ship.
I can't recall if it made it to Pathfinder, but 3rd pointed out that some animals are bad at certain things. A horse will struggle to walk a tightrope, despite being fairly dexterous. An elephant is incredibly strong, but is a terrible jumper. A whale cannot climb a rope, etc. --stuff the rules don't always spell out and we have to use common sense for.
In an attempt to reign in the terror of "the giant octopus druid", I've pointed to real-life videos of octopi, especially on land. They'd take penalties to all kinds of thing.

I feel like there are a lot of overlapping conversations in this thread and that things are getting a little muddied.

ah, guess you are right on the lake octopus. I know there was one that grouped its tentacles so they were only a couple attacks instead of 8, but I can't remember what it was called (maybe it was the giant squid?). The lake octo doesn't have constrict for some reason though. Constrict is good, even though our DM ruled you can't use it more than once a round. Apparently by RAW you can constrict as soon as you grab, so you can get it on every hit by letting go as a free action each time, but our DM vetoed that. I usually only grab if the last tentacle hits so I don't take the -20. Then I drop them the next round and full attack again.

Ordinarily I'd agree with you lots of stuff that requires a ton of fine control would be hard for an octopus, gripping and turning a giant ship wheel though really doesn't. It is big enough that its simple to manipulate, especially since octopus tentacles are good at wrapping around things and grabbing on (hence the grab and constrict abilities) and then its just a simple matter of moving them, which is not hard. A real octopus might have trouble because they don't understand what you are supposed to do with it, but an octopus with a person brain would be able to steer a ship no problem IMO.

Quixote wrote:

i26c2 wrote:

octopus tentacles are actually really good at gripping things.

Gripping, sure. ...

nope, nothing in Giant Octopus improves their grip or grab. They do get many tries due to Multiattack.

Quixote wrote:

i26c2 wrote:

I think I'm just using the stats for giant octopus but scaled up to huge. A giant, giant octopus, if you will. GM said that's fine.

Oh okay. Definitely a houserule, then. The RAW state that you can't wildshape into something that doesn't have a statblock. And while I disagree with the spirit of that ruling, I have a hard time arguing with it's effect. The last class to need more options and power boosts is the druid. Especially the ones that want to turn into giant octopi.

see above link if that's what they're using (sz:Lrg), I'd agree size Huge would be the above plus simple Giant (CR+1) template. Octopoda. Yes, I believe the designers wanted to limit template craziness as it had issues in DnD 3.5.

I don't know what the OP & OP's GM are actually doing as it's just a general post about rules, penalties, wild shape, feats/abilities to deal with squeezing. There does seem to be a bit of Game Balance given out but I don't know exactly why.

Yep, that's the one scaled up to huge when I wish. Basically the reason I need to squeeze is the area around the wheel is only 2X2 squares, and the wheel is up against the railing then a 10ft drop to the deck, and there are stairs on the side, so I can't be balanced overtop all that while piloting. The wheel is at the back of the ship and faces the front, so if i reached from the deck with my tentacles to steer I'd either be reaching behined me or looking the wrong way. The GM ruled that would give a penalty to piloting as would squeezing. Hence the question of whether you can squeeze without penalty with the belt even if you are not moving

i26c2 wrote:

octopus tentacles are actually really good at gripping things.

Gripping, sure. Fine manipulation and control, not so much. But that's also largely because there's an octopus brain in most octopi, rather than a humanoid one.

...actually, don't octopi have nine brains? One in the head and one in each arm. Ouphe. And I thought having no bones would take some time getting used to.

i26c2 wrote:

I think I'm just using the stats for giant octopus but scaled up to huge. A giant, giant octopus, if you will. GM said that's fine.

Oh okay. Definitely a houserule, then. The RAW state that you can't wildshape into something that doesn't have a statblock. And while I disagree with the spirit of that ruling, I have a hard time arguing with it's effect. The last class to need more options and power boosts is the druid. Especially the ones that want to turn into giant octopi.

(side note: you may want to use the Reply option to quote the people you are responding to, so you can be clear as to who you are addressing and prevent from flooding a thread with multiple posts)

Thank you for the reply thing. I kept clicking it earlier and it looked like it was just quoting myself so I deleted it. I did it again just now and now its working right, so I guess I was clicking the wrong reply button. Yes the human brain helps. As long as it can grip well that's what matters there. As for the octopus the giant template exists that goes on any animal, so it would be a giant giant octopus. I think you might be right by RAW templates are not allowed, but GM is allowing it. Makes more sense to have that octopus than the lake one in this campaign. The lake one is actually really cool and has a bunch of benefits, but the salt water one has more attacks so benefits more form multi-attack, so from a game stat point of view its a wash, and the salt water one is way more in flavor which is probably why its being allowed. We are in a race through a hurricane at the moment and just got to the part where a lightning elemental is attacking us and he put my large token on the screen and I was like I said I was being huge and that's when he said I would have been taking penalties on all those sailing checks I did if I was huge so no. Which is kind of a dick move that he hadn't just said that when I originally said it, but he must not have heard. Such is life but after the race I'm just going to steer backwards and take the penalty (I think its a -5), because my professional sailor is silly high anyway (I think +21 with the eyepatch, +26 on hard turns because of the wheel, and during the race I am also getting +2 from drinking the alchemists wine for a +23 and +28 on hard turns), so in non-race, non-hurricane situations, a -5 is not bad, but eventually I will want the belt. Especially since the belt will let me go through 5ft corridors in a dungeon as a huge octopus without penalty. The magic item I got just before the race was boots of striding and springing, because the octopus only has a 20ft move speed on land, which becomes 15ft in armor. The boots will make that 20 which isn't as bad. I might eventually pick up a level of barbarian for the rage and +10 move speed on top of that.

Again I don't want to reduce or put young template or anything that will reduce my combat effectiveness. I want to pilot as a huge octopus without penalties to piloting or combat. Yes the GM says I will take piloting penalties if I squeeze, but also if I try and get around it by steering backwards. Otherwise I'd just jump down onto the deck when combat starts and no longer be squeezing to get rid of the combat penalties. Its the penalty to sailor I want to remove, but without sacrificing combat effectiveness, and for this belt of the weasel or squeeze item is the best option (we have cohorts in the party that can craft these items). I really didn't want a critique of my character, I wanted a answer to my question which is will the belt work even if I'm not moving. Quixote seems to have given me the answer I wanted which is yes. "Move through" is not a game specific term, so I can just use those items to avoid squeezing. I don't know if he is someone from Pazio or not but until I get an answer from someone who is, I'm going to go with his response.

"why when you can hang out on the hull and steer from there" Again I already said GM said if I steer where I either I have to reach back to the wheel with my rear tentacles or I am not looking where I am going, I will take piloting penalties. I'm pretty sure the hull qualifies as taking penalties for that. Also Giant octopus does not have a climb speed, so being on the hull is a risk of falling overboard.

"be human and polymorph as needed". This is highly inefficent because transforming takes a standard action. Also in octopus form I can go into the water and form ice armor around me that fits in octopus form (which if I did that in human then transformed the armor would meld into my form). It also takes a whole minute to cast the ice armor, so can't do that if I'm attacked. I'm trying to make it so I'm ready to fight pre-buffed as much as possible before I get attacked. Typically when we board other ships we get one round of free buffing, so I would like to use that on bull's strength rather than waste it transforming.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I want to be huge because I do more damage and have better reach. As for the spells not working I don't see why not. All permanent items continue to function when they meld into your form except armor. So belt of the weasel or an item of squeeze would continue to work. Spells on my also continue to work but I'm not going to use squeeze for piloting because it only lasts minutes (even though we have an alchemist that can make infusions of it). So the belt of the weasal is the natural choice because its just better than a squeeze item at the same cost more or less.

octopus tentacles are actually really good at gripping things. I think I'm just using the stats for giant octopus but scaled up to huge. A giant, giant octopus, if you will. GM said that's fine as there are bigger versions of most animals, like some are just abnormally large, especially octopuses and squids. Octopuses are supposed to be good at squeezing too but unfortunately GM is not allowing that to give me any game benefit. In terms of hat, the funny thing is we have an eyepatch that gives +5 profession sailor, and it still functions for me even though its sized for a human, I just attach it to a really long sting. It covers a very tiny portion of my eye and looks ridiculous, lol. Having 30ft reach will be awesome not only for pummeling people to death, (I took multiattack so I have 1 bite and 8 tentacles at -2), but also if I need to deliver spells, like communal energy resist I can easily touch 8 people within 30ft, plus one perosn 10ft and anyone else touching me.