james014Aura's page

It's poor form to interrupt a battle to lecture the BBEG on why their spell selection is highly inefficient.

From above post, "where if you're an awful person you take the shortcut and enslave a spirit/soul in there and are just as bad."

What if the magic user contracts freely and openly with the animating spirit? Does that count, or would it be fine since it's contracting honestly?

Example:
"Hello, open call for a spirit of earth to inhabit this vessel under these listed conditions, service to end upon destruction of the vessel. By my standards, this is intended as a very long-term contract, but if your standards of time differ, I may be in error. The major catch is, once you inhabit the vessel, short of someone destroying it, there's no going back."

james014Aura wrote:

Do the gods have a memetic component? That is to say, if perception of art were to refocus towards portraits [say, over landscapes] and literature [say, over music], would Shelyn then have a greater focus on those two things? Or would Shelyn refocusing on those things over other arts cause (through her followers following suit) perception of art in turn to refocus on portraits? Both/neither?

Rephrasing a little for clarity, because my thought tracks tend to diverge from others' thought tracks: if perception of a god or their domain by said god's followers were to shift slightly, would the god themself shift a little to accommodate that, provided they didn't outright reject the shift (or lack thereof, like Nocticula rejecting Chaotic Evil followers post-ascension)?

EDIT: I'm only asking about if there is a component at all, not how intense it is beyond 0 or not-0.

Both.

So, if a god wants to rebrand so to speak, how much pushback from their followers/priests would they need to worry about? Just as examples, if Iomedae were for some reason to choose to refocus on the interpretation that one book on the Ascended called her, the Prime Commander vs Shelyn rebranding as a variant lust goddess (since she has the Passion domain, I'm guessing "you weren't already?") vs what Nocticula went through ascending and abandoning the CE alignment. I'm assuming that it scales (not necessarily in a linear fashion) with all of how much/far, how many followers, and how traditional they are?

Do the gods have a memetic component? That is to say, if perception of art were to refocus towards portraits [say, over landscapes] and literature [say, over music], would Shelyn then have a greater focus on those two things? Or would Shelyn refocusing on those things over other arts cause (through her followers following suit) perception of art in turn to refocus on portraits? Both/neither?

Rephrasing a little for clarity, because my thought tracks tend to diverge from others' thought tracks: if perception of a god or their domain by said god's followers were to shift slightly, would the god themself shift a little to accommodate that, provided they didn't outright reject the shift (or lack thereof, like Nocticula rejecting Chaotic Evil followers post-ascension)?

EDIT: I'm only asking about if there is a component at all, not how intense it is beyond 0 or not-0.

Welcome back!

Here's my question: What's your favorite villainous faction, and why?

That has the problem of, well - firstly the worldbuilding question of "does this ~medieval/Renaissance-esque society even have institutions devoted to this?", but assuming that's the case, will they listen to random adventurers who march in and say "hi, this guy is an evil cultist, please lock him up for a while and maybe teach him to stop being evil, thanks!"?

Especially for adventures that happen outside of the obvious reach of the law of whatever place they're being brought.

I was thinking more along the lines of, "Hey, we captured these two cultists outside town. We'll stay long enough to provide four sworn testimonies about the circumstances. And here's the group's journals for evidence. "

I mean, Rise of the Runelords established Magnimar's justice system has some intricacies to it, already.

Outside that reach, though... well, that is an issue, but I was concerned more about close to the cities.

So, who leads the other Outsider races then? I'm assuming the Whisperers/Oinodaemon WOULD lead the Daemons if he could (and the Horsemen collectively do), but what of Agathions, Archons, Azatas, Aeons, ... would Proteans even have a leader? I'm also assuming Pharasma for Psychopomps.

Since Outsiders can Fall/Ascend on their moral axis (Celestial to Evil, and a couple Fiends to non-evil), can this happen much on the ethical axis? I'm especially interested in the Angels here, given the non-Neutral Good Angelic Empyreal Lords (according to the Wiki) like Pulura and Tolc (CG), or Ragathiel and a couple others (LG).

Or, interpreting how Archives of Nethys's cites the Bestiary, is it just that Angels are *slightly* less bound to the Neutral part of the NG alignment than Agathions are?

PCs can't dedicate the time, but what about the magistrates of, say, Magnimar or other cities? (And re: eye for eye, "provided they've only done things that could be undone or repaired"). EDIT: For clarity, I'm talking about, just turning the villains over to the magistrates.

Is this thread because of my questions in the ask James Jacobs anything thread? Because those are because I was considering playing a Ragathielan and was trying to understand him a bit better, starting from a view similar to the first post.

Do you guys think harsh sentences spent mostly undoing stuff the sentenced villain has done (provided they've only done things that could be undone or repaired) would be in line with his 2e softer self?

What would Ragathiel think of:

There has been faked data. And hype, lots of hype.

Thanks for finally admitting your role in this. Prior to my quietly washing my hands of this in hopes the thread would die - a washing I see was premature - I looked at a sample of the links posted by persons other than you, and they're not the ones with fake data.

When given three wishes, they can't be:
1) give the tarrasque ghost touch and immunity to evil,
2) teleport the tarrasque to Geb,
3) Wake up the tarrasque.

Mage the Ascension / pf1 spheres of power 3pp / GURPS / Mutants and masterminds: Just because the rules allow it, that doesn't mean my character can be apocalyptic right out of chargen.

There are 10 kinds of people in the world: Those that know binary, and those that don't.

There are two types of people in the world:

james014Aura wrote:

Irontruth wrote:

If you die in the same hospital you were born in, your average lifetime velocity will be zero.

Relative to what? Earth, certainly, but the planets and stars will be in different positions. Galaxies, too.

Also disageeing because the maternity wards are in a different position than your deathbed.

Have you ever measured the speed of something on Earth (and not the Earth itself) relative to anything other than the Earth? I know it's possible, but rather I'm asking whether this would be something you'd find useful in describing the behavior of this object while on Earth. The closest example I can think of would be the tides, but even that is usually still measured relative to the Earth.

Also, you can't think of a single possible way that someone might die in the place where people give birth?

Lastly, if you don't like a joke... you can just move on and leave it alone. No reason to pick it apart in a thread about jokes. Kinda ruins the vibe.

I was making a meta-joke by demonstration about people who do that. It seems I went a little too deep, though.

If you die in the same hospital you were born in, your average lifetime velocity will be zero.

Relative to what? Earth, certainly, but the planets and stars will be in different positions. Galaxies, too.

Also disageeing because the maternity wards are in a different position than your deathbed.

So, when someone shows that YOUR OWN NUMBERS, QB, show that it's a whole lot easier for us to fix than you claim, ... you move the goalposts, by a trivial amount?

200 m3 was above average, but let's go along with QB's x2, and then 100 more for the roads (you make numbers up QB, so I can, too.) That makes CB's 1 year 2.5. Still very reasonable.

Might I suggest you guys introduce a rule for your responses:
If no source cited (and not talking about another post that doesn't fall afoul of this rule): Respond with "No sources given, therefore unverifiable. Unfortunately, we must disregard this, given mountains of evidence against it, and none presented for it." and then continue a productive conversation with each other?

Seriously, I find debate fascinating. But this stopped being debate a while ago. It takes someone on both sides to be in good faith for a full debate.

Irontruth wrote:

My point right now is that you aren't citing anything. By not citing anything, you are proving me right.

So me not citing anything makes it a lack of proof for the position I'm arguing, but at the same time these lack of citations is (positively) proving the metalhead's argument right?

WTF philosophy class do you learn that in? "Philosphy and Psilocybin"?
:D

Leaving aside the insult...

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Both sides have made said claims.
You have repeatedly been asked for sources (6 and 7), when you failed to back your claims (1, 5), meaning your words have nothing supporting them (2, 4). Just your own opinion, repeated again and again.
The others have, in both link and summary format (8)

Your claims are thus far 100% unsupported. Meanwhile, their claims ARE supported, and contradict yours.
Claims + Evidence is FAR superior to Claims + No evidence.

Also, you previously claimed that "By not citing anything, you are proving me right." is a double negative. It isn't. There is precisely ONE negative in that. Doubles require TWO, by definition.
THEN, you Strawmanned my complaint about that as saying that the statement was objectively right and moved the goalposts, adding in an ad hominin against me. I'm making that claim NOW, but I wasn't, then.

So, things you have done:
1) claims with no sources or backing
2) moving the goalpost fallacy
3) ad hominin fallacy. Possibly Tu Quoque instead.
4) strawman fallacy
5) ignoring the burden of proof that's on you
5a) both a fallacy, and
5b) when OTHERS do obey the burden of proof.

Under 1-5a, your arguments are 100% INVALID. Wrong? Well, under fallacy fallacy, I can't say for certain. However, per 5b, the others have provided solid evidence, so while what I've looked at thus far isn't 100% conclusive, their evidence is sufficiently vast that it's worth treating them as almost certainly correct.

Walks slowly away from explosions.

I actually like that song. It's a guilty pleasure, but I like it all the same.

-> Limited Spell Level Slots.

NOPE

Look, I'm fine with fewer per day for balance, but not NONE per day. This was tried in an optional hardcover for PF1. It should have been forgotten after that. Thought it had been forgotten.

I don't see anything that says they can take two rackets. Could you cite the appropriate text?

Although the high-level feats technically mean I was wrong:
1) that happens so late it doesn't matter for vesatility unless you start at a high level.
2) fireball is just one blast of many.
3) I am not disputing that bards are versatile. It's just that Arcane casters have versatility in spades.

Sorry for taking so long, but Wizards are hard to build. I promised this: Adventurous Transmuter.

Do people agree
1) This has a niche that Druids can't poach, thank you certain Wizard class features and feats, and Will save spells
2) This has a niche that Bards can't poach, thank you powerful blasts.
3) This does NOT poach anyone else's niche? Of course Bards have better support powers and of course Druids are better at killing things. Except possibly for having enough Int to poach a Bard's knowledges, but that's more secondary overlap.
4) this is viable? I optimized slightly. I stopped at a point, though, so there's room to make it even stronger.

and 5, most importantly) That this showcases the Niche of the Wizard class.

If they specialize, they still get as many spell slots outside the specialization as others do, but those slots are free for other schools. They can skew towards a school, but specializing does not mean they're exclusively that.

Even with the school specialization, they're easily built as being more general. But, the Arcane list itself is the jack of all spells list.

Specialization is +1 spell slot, from 3 (from 2 at highest level if you just got it). Yeah, that's 25% of the spells you prepare outside cantrips. But it's still lots of room to be diverse.

It is also easier as a bard give you can take a path that gives you all the skills with a bonus equal to your level while focusing skill increases on crafting.

It is good that you enjoy the wizard. They can still be effective, just not as effective in most circumstances as an equally well built bard or druid.

Okay. Now can your Bard use Fireball, or your Druid use Phantasmal Killer (without multiclassing)?

What a Wizard is not is a specialist in a field. What a Wizard is is a specialist in being versatile. It sounds like your previously-mentioned party didn't need more physical magics, so the Bard was a good idea there.

Basically: What Bards are to the game at large (the jacks of all trades), Wizards are to magic specifically (and they get more of it, too). Except for healing, of course.

It has net +8 modifier to stats, which is what people have before their class bonus. It's also level 0, so it would have no class levels to start.

Going by bonuses, it appears to be Expert in melee, but Trained in thrown. Its saves indicate it gets Fort halfway between Trained and Expert, Ref at Expert, and Will between Untrained and Trained. Going by the other two orcs, it looks like Ancestry HP of 10 and the Brute gets 5 hp from level (and 0 from con b/c that's per level, and level is 0).

Those modifiers appear to be a nerfed Fighter (due to being 0th level instead of 1), penalizing a couple things. Possibly they have racial modifiers for the saves? I doubt that, though.

That comparison doesn't work. Sarenrae only accepts Good worshippers. Gorum accepts CE.

1) Paralyze, Daze (sorta, that one's weak but a cantrip), Heightened Sleep, Heightened Charm. On the defense, Blur, Invisibility, Mirror Image, False Life, ...

2) You know you can heighten the blasts, right? And you can place the fireball so the edge doesn't hit the PCs. Just ask your martials to try to not get surrounded, and that's easy enough. Resistances are down, and saves ... to put it bluntly, you can target any save, unlike other casters. Martials are stuck vs AC, while you get to pick one of three, and can hit many enemies at once. That makes a single blast, if done close to correctly, a very strong option.

3) Bards are buffers, too. I don't deny that. The Occult list is more focused on buffs and debuffs than wizards are.

4) I'll gladly take a Wizard in the party over a Bard, if it's one or the other. They get so many better options.

5) Well, at lower levels, that 21 damage ... look. Saves are to magic what AC is to martial attacks. But at that level, a martial with a +1 striking weapon will do maybe 2d12+4 = ~15 damage on a hit, 30 on a crit? You can spam Electric Arc for 3d4+4, or ~11.5 to two people each. Their crit fail is about the same as the martial's critical hit, but you do damage even if they save. More than the Martial can say.

__________

The Wizard buffs the party for tough solo fights and blasts at the hordes and has social spells. Who else can do that?
Bard? Social and buff. Not so many good blasts
Druid? buffs themselves for fights, has some good blasts, passable tanking. Not so social
Cleric? Social and good at tanking, defensive buffs. Some offense, but not much.
Wizard? Sure, the druid out-shapeshifts them. They can't tank. But they can blast and debuff ALL THREE SAVES, unlike every other class. They can also buff.

Wizard = versatile. Just like in 1e.

___________

As soon as my group starts playing in earnest (having some time issues), I will GLADLY stat up a wizard first-thing and play that.

I anticipate my contributions will be immense, more than any other caster could do.

That said, re the title question: yes, there was a nerf. But I think Wizard is still solidly a powerful class. Just not so plausible to play an all-wizard party with the nerfs to summoning.

Druids are the shapeshifters. That is their thing. Of course they'd get better stuff there.

If you don't buy the essence thing, that's your problem of expectation. Mental adaptation is no more than bleeding into mind from matter and life. Take a look at the spell lists; it's CLEARLY been set as a Life/Matter hybrid, skewed slightly towards Matter. Besides, it's not mental adaptation. It's reflex adaptation. Adjustment of nerves that aren't the brain is adjustment Life. Also the spells don't affect your mental stats.

As for tactics: said wizard also gets huge int and lots of int skills that other classes ignore. Your niches are intelligence and versatility. That high Str comes at the cost of a lot of survivability, too, since you could have put those points into Dex and Con.

In short, what you want would require Wizards to be better at being Druids than Druids are.

EDIT: if you want, say, Merlin from Sword in the Stone, then that shapeshifter fight would probably be two Primal Sorcerers, with Merlin taking the Wizard MCD and his opponent maybe taking a Witch MCD - assuming Witch is like what it was in PF1.

Responding to Nemo's response to my longpost

Regarding flight, Transmuter can learn the Fly spell in place of any one I noted. That said, if you want a Shapeshifter, then that's one of the Druid's niches (plural, yes, but they're smaller niches than what other casters have). Expect to be outdone. The design philosophy is that you can't beat someone at their niche at comparable level.

Glitterdust fails if you miss your target - they can move after turning invisible. See Invisibility does not miss.

I don't recall pointing to staffs as something big; I just took that for flavor and a bit more options. That said, they do get a wider selection of staves to use, presently. I just checked, too, and I merely mention some tactics with the staff, not touting it as something they can't do - the indented sections are things a Wizard does but Druid doesn't.

"Using spells for noncombat situations is very problematic because it is not reliable for RP reasons. Sure, you could Charm someone instead of talking, but is it really an option when everyone will see you do it? Or it will be obvious immediately?"
Easy answer: read the description for the spells. It may take a little arranging in larger areas, but enchantment got some buffs to make it less likely someone will tumble to it. Are they sure things? No, but neither is talking a sure thing. It's an option the party wouldn't otherwise have if talking fails. But if you really don't like those spells, swap them out! You can, after all. Snag a flight spell or something.

Anyway, if you're trying to use Physical Boost on yourself, you're bringing disappointment on yourself. That's not what it's for. You are the wizard. Use that buff on the Fighter or the Rogue. Sensory and defensive buffs are what you use on yourself. Physical Boost is neither.

Last complaint I'll address: Druid beating Transmuter Wizard at Transmutation. Fine, 11 more spells (35 to 46). Leaving aside that Druids have matter/life to wizard's matter/mind, and thus are skewed towards physical effects...
cantrip: same list
1st: Druids get Magic Fang and Shillelagh only. Both are basically Magic Weapon effects, one for shapeshifting and one for staves. Shillelagh is slightly stronger, but only works on your own staff instead of on the Fighter's Greatsword.
2nd: Animal Form, Enhance Victuals, Entangle, Shape Wood, Tree Shape. Two shapeshifts, one of which is a pure defense. Two more are obvious nature magic (entangle, shape wood). Enhance Victuals is sorta obsolete because of Create Food at the same level, and they both get it. I grant that Entangle is good, but Wizard gets a lot better set of Illusion spells, and an Enchantment that debuffs instead (Hideous Laughter). The utility of this one spell, though, is reduced by both having Web.
3rd: Wizards get Ghostly Weapons, which can save on a Rune, though not much. Also Shrink Item, utility not so much. Druids win with Insect Form, but that's a shapeshift.
4th: Dinosaur Form and Air Walk. Air Walk is a situationally slightly more useful Fly, but doesn't Heighten. Dinosaur Form is a shapeshift.
5th: Elemental Form and Moon Frenzy. Both are shapeshifts.
6th: I'm not sure why Stone to Flesh isn't arcane when Flesh to Stone is.
7th: same list
8th: Wind Walk.
9th: same list.
10th: Nature Incarnate and Primal Herd. Shapeshifts (one on others).

So, what do we take away from this list? Outside of shapeshifting - a Druid's niche - they don't get many useful Transmutions that wizards don't. I grant that Entangle, Wind Walk, and Stone to Flesh are wins for them. But they're the only true wins.

Why are they the best prepared caster? What makes them best? They literally have second smallest pool of spells to choose from. Sure, Arcane list may have (slightly!) more spells on it, but Wizards only get to use whats in their spellbooks. They prepare same as everyone else (yes, I know they have that one thesis, but you know what, not everyone wants to play that thesis).

Theses: Metamagic feat, trade lower-level spells for higher, swap spells, or get a familiar who can, I think, deliver spells for you. So, there's TWO theses that let them change things up a bit, and they're the only mage who can start with metamgic (outside Human, but then they're the only one who can start with TWO). True, they're limited by the spellbook, but they can add spells to it. A decent chunk of the lists are chaff, though, so they're missing out on a lot less than you're implying.

From the list of passable spells, they have the single GREATEST selection. How many good Reflex spells does a Bard get? How many good Will spells does a Druid get? Not many. The Wizard? Gets most of the good ones, from BOTH. The Wizard also gets a large number of other utility effects.

All they have is slightly more spells per day than most casters. And aside from that, they have NOTHING. Few more familiar powers maybe? Extra (useless) metamagic feats?

A 33% increase at odd levels and 50% on their top level at even levels is hardly "slightly". ANd metamagic is not useless. Reach Spell lets you be more safely behind your defenders and use, your Cantrips, such as Produce Flame, at a better range in wider environments. Widen Spell, I admit, would mostly see use for NPCs participating in war.

Their spell list has been reduced to be on par with others, which sounds good game balance until your realise Wizards don't have anything else besides their spell list. Even their Focus powers are very bland compared to many options other classes get.

Their spell list is not on par. They are the most powerful utility/attackers. Yes, Druids beat them in shapeshifting because of Wild Shape, better HP and saves, and some more buffs for their shapeshifted forms. But that is not a Wizard. A Wizard specializes in being the absolute most versatile.

Sure, they can have some illusion and blasting spells at the same time! Yay, that's the Wizard niche!

There's plenty of spells they don't have, same as every other class, and yet the other classes have other things they do. Wizards either need more range of spells (and not more small situational stuff either!), or they need to get something else. Focus powers would've been awesome if they worked more like Conjuration one, where they enhanced the spells of your school, so you could say, sure, others may have the spells Wizard have, but Wizard can make them better... And yet the answer was no.

No, the Wizard Niche is preparation. Adapting to anything. Illusion and blasting? No, it's a spell or two for EACH OF THE THREE SAVES, as opposed to ANY OTHER SPELL LIST which cannot reasonably do that. And then, they have the travel utility of a druid with their transmutations and the social and stealth utility of a bard with their enchantments and illusions...

You are grossly underselling utility and adaptability in this game. I've seen you complain specifically about the Transmuter before. I've built an Adventurous Transmuter who's DELIBERATELY taking a few sub-optimal options (Wayfinder Resonance Tinkerer, learning more spells for spellbook than they really will use, and more importantly magical crafting). I'm not seeing ANY of your complaints in the level 1, 4, 9, and 13 builds. I've not started the level 18 build, yet, but you know what?

Here's the build thus far. I'll add it to the Wizard Niche thread and my emporium when I've built the level 18 version.
The level 13 build has, with ring of wizardry, 35 spells total. It has a small number of attacks, a large number of combat buffs for the party (like the classic Transmuter), some out of combat utility, etc. It has EVERYTHING magical. No real melee presence, but that's Martial territory. And for a single spell slot, they can ignore wearing armor, saving the gold for a new spell (or for a different potent item... like a Wand).

Find me a Druid that has all this buffing potential. Find me a Bard that has nearly as much attacking power (especially fortitude).

So what if a Druid prepares more things that test Reflex, or Fortitude, or a Bard knows more things that test Will? Against a Cleric, that Bard's will save spells are next to useless. But the Wizard laughs and uses a wand to cast Cone of Cold. Or has some advance warning and prepares a couple fireballs instead. And that Druid will find themself unable to do much to the Rogue, who has better base combat abilities and can shrug off most things the Druid can cast at them. The Wizard just uses True Strike + Disintegrate or uses their good spell attack rolls to spam Produce Flame or something.

Other builds are less versatile because, well, fewer spell levels. But even they can do things. Level 1 can still do a can't-miss bust for heavy damage, can target reflex, can basically double a martial's damage output for two fights (hi, Drain Bonded Item), and can target AC with their crossbow. Level four, targets Will, Ref, and AC. Also buffs the party with Magic Weapon and Enlarge. Level 9 gets can't-miss, Reflex, AC, Will, and Fort, as attacks and/or debuffs. Also effects to buff the party.

Aside from very low levels, I doubt the wizard will run out of spells per day. At 4 round combats + 4 combats per day, ... I'm not doing the math for this. You have enough spells to target most things, and combats aren't supposed to last long enough to really drain you. Arcane Bond + extra buffs prepared + spammable cantrips = you can sustain your power if you conserve a little of it each fight.

THAT, Nemo, is the Wizard power. You don't get shut down. You do the shutting down. Other classes, they can get shut down or weakened before the fight begins. A Wizard, though? Be smart, and you can mitigate that on the rest of the party without ever getting personally countered.

However, they really OVERnerfed Wizards specifically. Wizards only have their spells (not even Bloodline powers like Sorcerers). Yet their spelllist is equal to others (I'm sorry, but Primal can do pretty much everything Arcane can and then some), and their special abilities are distinctly weak. Metamagic currently doesn't really exist (again, nerfed into oblivion), and their school powers are okayish if unimpressive (depends on which one, some have more use than others).

This is wrong on two counts. One, Wizards get School/Universalist powers and Arcane Thesis like Sorcerers get Bloodline powers. Which is to say, they both have to invest feats in it. Two, no, Primal does NOT do everything Arcane does. Arcane gets lots better will save spells, lots better illusions and enchantments.

Spells can bleed over into another thing. Doesn't make them really of that Essence instead of the main essences. And shapeshifting is changing a physical, living thing, so it's clearly of those two. The mental landscape, is, AT BEST, bleeding over to a little of Mental.

Hey, the Divine list's changes don't usually have much that changes the basic form, other than bigger and maybe add wings! No mental change there, and it's not an Essence they get. Does Occult, which gets neither relevant Essence, even have much in the way of those shapeshifts?

Arcane, meanwhile, gets Material and Mental, and they get some of the shapeshifts, too. Indeed not as strong in a straight-up melee, though (lower hit points, lower physical saves...). But since when was a classic wizard supposed to be in melee, anyway?

Utility. Wield your spells like a knife, not a bludgeon. I've decided my next build for my emporium will be a Transmuter; I'll try and remember to post it here, too, when it's ready.

first, keeping things still on the topic: I just remembered that with overlap between the schools, multiclasses are even harder to decide on. That said, I've seen a general sentiment of blasts in the top and utility in the bottom. I can't fault that plan, aside from noting that I like to have three elemental damages, at least one of which can both be spammed (cantrip, usually) and shuts down some regeneration effects.

I'm not sure if this will get easier or harder with more books. More options to find something decent for any build, but more to sort out every time...

_________

I highly disagree. This is one of the major causes of forever GMs and GM-player antagonism IMO.

Zeroth like Rule Zero: You're all on the same team, even though the GM's job is to provide opposition. That needs to be understood before all else. Lack of understanding THAT is what causes antagonism.

First: never said around EVERY combo. Some mild optimization keeps things difficult enough without causing problems.

Second: No, just modify a few encounters. Like, and I actually did this in pf1, making a character who has countermeasures to invisibility but NOT see invis or the like - Scent + Blind Fight. Didn't counter the Duergar martial's power, merely made the power less effective. But aside from being a brute with that power, it lost to another PC using their nova. Don't counter EVERYONE at once, just put some things in that make their really strong combos not walk over everything.

Balancing for more than one OP character is easier than just one: counter one player, and check a second, but the others can run wild. Then change from one fight to the next who's weaker. Everyone gets to shine! Just not any one person all the time.

If the party focuses on melee but has some ranged, then once in a while set them against a flier or two. Maybe give them a little warning once in a while.

If the party likes Fireball and Electric Arc, give some enemies a couple Resist Energy spells. But they don't have enough slots to guard at their most powerful, so they use lower-level slots and get some passable resistance to the attacks, but the effect isn't as destructive as it could be, either.

__________

Which brings me back to spell selection: I like to skew towards utility and debuffs and buffs and just snag a couple damaging cantrips, and maybe a few attacks just in case. It's whiteboarding, though, until I get a chance to try them out. I'm a big fan of magic-as-utility, but we need more books for that not to be meaninfful instead of a hunt to find a diamond or two in the rough.

First, the topic: Yeah, it's hard. My multiclass sample builds had trouble selecting spells that don't care about heightening because I don't see Signature Spell on the list of things MC Bard/Sorc get. That said, my general method is: for signature spells, try and find something that works at as many levels as possible. Then for everyone, if a spell has a really good effect with heightening, consider it there without any riders on it.

Regardless, it's very difficult to figure out what works, for that. The heighten marks on Archives of Nethys don't really give an indication of what to avoid or go for if you want a certain type of heightening.

_______________

For all those groups where players feel entitled to take everything without asking, this is a HUGE boon for the beleaguered Games Master :-)

Better fix: a book for GMs reminding them how powerful they are, that they're in charge, and ways to counter OP strats. (Puffin Forest link: starts at 40s, important bit ends at 52s) "You are the GM. You are literally more powerful than gods." And reminding them that outside organized play, they're free to sometimes swap out something the OP strat counters and instead put something in that checks it.

PF 1 example: Give each powerful spell an opposed spell that makes it unreliable - teleport trap for teleport, a powerful illusion for scrying, etc.

PF 1 example 2: someone can turn invis as an SLA. You have a miniboss fight coming up, and the miniboss has a partial check to invis, so take the opportunity and swap a few things to give the miniboss an ability that lets him hit invis enemies - blind fight, back then.

I don't deny that some things needed reining in. My group never really used Blood Money, but I can see how deadly that would be. Some things need clamping down on.

_____________

HOWEVER, what this does is beleaguer many more GMs with players asking for access to something thematic, but not technically in the list. For example, for wizards, some schools (*cough*divination*cough*) have a distinct shortage of decent spells that aren't at least Uncommon.

The issue isn't in how much power the GM has. It's in how the GM perceives that power. The issue is that we need to raise awareness of that... and, yes, rein in a few of the worst abuses, like using a Unique spell as if it were so common..

Page 279,
If you are
already using a d12, the size is already at its maximum.
You can’t increase your weapon damage die size more
than once.

So you can get 1d12+2, but that's about it. No point in multiclassing for deadly simplicity (also only crossbow deity released yet is Abadar, and he gives the regular one, not the heavy crossbow.)

Don't forget Zyphus, who refused Pharasma's judgment after an accidental death.

james014Aura wrote:

If a 10 is just barely enough, then Warrior needs a nat 20 base to do it. But, Warrior has +4 str as opposed to the flat 10 the skill used from assurance and gets +2 effective from Skills doing a disarm. Also +1 Heroism. Instead of nat 20, they need only a 13 to do it. 40% to end the enemy's ability to fight, for 5 actions (disarm 1, heroism was 2, and warrior's disarm was another, then one more action to pick up their weapon so they can't use it). Trip could be a 6th, but that's just a diagnostic to check their defenses (and give them a different debuff).

...

Again, that's a battle-ender. It's an I-win button. Yes, it takes two people to do it well, but you CAN do it, and it's something you can build to spam, unlike Baleful Polymorph or Phantasmal Killer.

I request you add three items to your analysis, before concluding it's the best thing since sliced bread:

1) opportunity cost - if the team didn't do disarm, what would they have accomplished instead?
2) contingency - if you have worse luck than expected, how do you save the encounter? I mean, if you keep trying until you succeed, chances are you die instead. Why? Because every attempt that isn't a critical does absolutely nothing long-term.
3) evaluation - what kind of enemy do you get a 40% chance for? I mean, is this enemy significant enough to really deserve the epithet "a battle-ender."

"It's an I-win button" only if the enemy is powerful enough.

1) For the minimal optimization (2 people investing in it), a third action aka the weakest part of their turn. If the enemy is too strong, that's ALL they use. If not, they have at least a 35% chance of winning in round one, probably more if the party has more buffs than that. Used: stuff you were going to use anyway, and one more attack. So, a third action and a first attack for a 35% MINIMUM of winning in one round, probably longer.

10% at 1-2, 20% at 3-4, 15% at 5-6 (Bulwark is -10% and starts around here, though, so I'll say the Fighter uses that), then 20% at 7-9, 25% at 10-17, get Apex immediately so 25% at 18-19, and 30% at 20.

Not as good as I hoped, but the sure bet option warns you not to try it in the first place, so you only use a third attack to learn that.

But, that's against someone with a good Reflex. You can use it to take a staff away from any Mage (except Bard) or a weapon away from a Champion (watch out for heavy armor, though) or a Barbarian. And then there's a couple bonuses you can stack with magic, to raise the odds to actually rather decent.

I don't purport it as an absolutely guaranteed win. Try fighting severely under-leveled enemies for that. I don't purport it anything other than a high-risk, high-reward option (that, *if successful* is a win) that's better against some enemies than others. It's more skewed towards victory or nothing than most spells are, now, but that appears to be the general design philosophy - the more powerful the option, the less likely it is to work. Attacks, likely to hit but only do HP damage. Disarm, ends fights but requires a crit, and doesn't do much if you don't get that.

Also, there are ways for everyone to target at least two different saves, and you can use Assurance with your third action to check if making the attempt in full is worth your time. If it isn't, then no big loss of action. If it is, you just gained really important information. And you don't lose much by making the investment of skill points, if you're a warrior or skill monkey. And the investment in disarming ALSO makes you able to target Fort, not just Ref.

____________

So, how do I really see it being used? On Humanoids and similar enemies
1) Bosses once you beat their minions. The action tradeoff expected value is generally good.
2) Capture people alive. Champion's best friend there.
3) Against slightly lower-level groups of enemies. A third attack and a warrior's first attack (and third action that wouldn't be very accurate outside certain builds) to disable an entire enemy. Raise it from each guy, say Rogue and Fighter, taking out one enemy per turn each to taking out two together and wounding a third.
4) Against enemies with fast healing / regeneration / ability to spam Heal for ludicrous HP totals (Clerics of Lamashtu, looking at you!)

Again, I acknowledge that some enemies are more resistant to this than others. But it's an option which shuts down a couple types of enemy and has powerful results if it works, and you can check if it's plausible to attempt for the low cost of an already-weak action.

Well, I contend it is useful as it is and MORE than ambitious enough. Let's take a classic team. Warrior, Skills, Arcane/Occult, Primal/Divine.

The two casters don't matter... actually, let's say they give a Heroism +1.

Warrior is anything that gets an option for +str at level 1. They take Athletics because that's their thing.
Skills just has lots of skill ranks. They take Athletics and Assurance to help the Warrior.

Skills attacks, then uses Assurance on two more maneuvers. Trip and then Disarm. If the Trip fails, they go for a Grapple instead. Let's assume it works, though. Disarm gets the exact same result, so it gives the +2 to disarm them in full.

If a 10 is just barely enough, then Warrior needs a nat 20 base to do it. But, Warrior has +4 str as opposed to the flat 10 the skill used from assurance and gets +2 effective from Skills doing a disarm. Also +1 Heroism. Instead of nat 20, they need only a 13 to do it. 40% to end the enemy's ability to fight, for 5 actions (disarm 1, heroism was 2, and warrior's disarm was another, then one more action to pick up their weapon so they can't use it). Trip could be a 6th, but that's just a diagnostic to check their defenses (and give them a different debuff).

So, 5 actions. 3 for future enemies. Utterly remove any target martial that uses weapons from the fight, or for just ONE action, realize it's not a good idea. If there's more, the Warrior can chuck the weapon away so a mage can pick it up and keep it away, and repeat with Skills.

Again, that's a battle-ender. It's an I-win button. Yes, it takes two people to do it well, but you CAN do it, and it's something you can build to spam, unlike Baleful Polymorph or Phantasmal Killer.

TL;DR: I posit they didn't make it more ambitious because it's already OP if you invest just a bit into it, with a skill that's not reasonable to invest in in the first place. Yes, it's high-risk that you wasted some of the actions, but it's spammable, and if the odds are bad, then you can just not do it after spending ONE action finding out.

Exacting Strike is a Press. Example 3 (EDIT: not 2, sorry. Miscounted) doesn't work, because you can't use it for the first attack, and it does nothing for the second. You need it for the third attack.

Also, with the bow example, you don't need to move, unless you're dealing with Volley, which shortbow doesn't have.

(EDIT 2: editing this in to say it looks like the first attack missed line in exacting strike has been edited out.)

So I heard Monks are the most maneuverable of combatants. Yes, these guys know quite a few tricks with maneuvers. I've added the Temple Guard, a human monk at levels 3, 7, and 11.

I'd like to argue that a couple Backgrounds are better than they're given credit for.

The Bounty Hunter Background should be Orange, not Red. By taking Assurance, you negate most of the penalty for builds without very high Wisdom, which means, while it needs support, it could work.

Farmhand should also be rated as Orange instead of Red. Assurance in Athletics makes for a very OP third attack; with investment in it, you can regularly use a good maneuver that's likely to work (100% or 0%, but more enemies lose to it than not). Disarm and Trip, basically. Granted, it takes a level (for Rogues) or two (everyone else) to come online, and requires a focus.

Laborer: I've done a few builds, and Hefty Hauler is virtually a must for martials. It should be at least Green over Orange. Also, Athletics is a powerful option (see my argument for Farmhand)

Scholar: Assurance in the knowledge skills is situational, but it does allow, with skill investment, for 100% guaranteed lower-level rituals to succeed without mental stat investment. It also gives a good set of choices for a skill, and those skills are all useful. I'd argue for Orange.

Since 2e classes are so front-loaded, I feel like characters should not get any initial proficiencies from their second class other than class or spellcasting DC.

Two proficiency tracks. Use whichever is greater: the better class's track using JUST that class's track, or something which corresponds to the total level on the weaker class's track. Fine tuning could be with an X level penalty or bonus or something.

A few classes might have some issues, but that seems like a good starting point to me.

Replying to Fuzzy-Wuzzy and Captain Morgan:

action 1: as cleric, cast a 1-action divine spell (Heal? Shield?) Non-cantrips only if not Cleric.
free action: Divine Weapon
action 2: cast a 1-action spell from wizard/sorcerer multiclass
free action: Bespell Weapon
action 3: attack with weapon

You can use a 2-action spell for one of those if you're under a Haste effect. Such as, from wizard or arcane/occult/primal sorcerer. Also Bespell weapon is lower level than Divine weapon, so Cleric/other caster.

It's not at once, but it's still the same turn. It looks like both last until the turn's end, not just the next action.

First: THANK YOU!!!

Second: the Sorcerer's Will save is listed as never progressing beyond Expert. I believe there was dev commentary saying they should have gotten Resolve at the same level as the Wizard.

EDIT, Third: Maximum skill proficiency neglects the Rogue, which has no indication of being locked to Trained at level 2.

EDIT, Fourth: should we assume the "all others" for spell DCs and attack rolls ignores multiclassing?

Inspired by Ravingdork's 1st edition emporium, I present to you my work on characters. Inspiration, quick NPCs, and any other use you can think of, go ahead.

Here's the index for my emporium

My opening four are:
The Trickster Thief, an Elven Rogue who dabbles in sorcerous power. As the "v1" in the title implies, I intend a few more builds along the lines of this, dipping into the other spell pools. It starts at level 1 (just a thief), then grows in arcane power as it levels. (1, 5, 10, 15, 20)

The Stout Defender, a Dwarven soldier. Rather than make multiple builds for for different weapons, I included stats for each of these. (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)

The Thug, just a shady human of malign intentions. (1, 4, 7)

The Cleansing Flame Priest, a Half-Elf Cloistered Cleric of Sarenrae, who starts as a healer who can defend the temple, then grows into a powerful force, both on the battlefield and in politics. This build assumes it's Easy for them to activate a Staff of Fire - Sarenrae gives half the spells in the staff to her followers, and they DO have the Fire Domain, after all. (3, 8, 13)

_________________________________

I also welcome suggestions for better organization, both on the index and in individual characters. I will also consider requests for what to prioritize next.

Enjoy!