What do you get when 7 dwarfs and a gnome decide to throw pie at a cleric? Find out on NVNG actual play
Good day to all you fine Pathfinder players the Nothing Ventured, Nothing Gamed Podcast group just dropped episode 4 of our actual play, so come on down and listen. Also help me figure out some names for 7 dwarfs who work in a mine
[Apple Podcast](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/nothing-ventured-nothing-gamed/id147 7064146)
[Google Podcast](https://playmusic.app.goo.gl/?ibi=com.google.PlayMusic&isi=691797987&a mp;ius=googleplaymusic&apn=com.google.android.music&link=https://pl ay.google.com/music/m/Ioy7bi4cblnguuzlnwqqylr7y44?t%3DNothing_Ventured_Noth ing_Gamed%26pcampaignid%3DMKT-na-all-co-pr-mu-pod-16)
The Azlanti empire did a lot of work on the magical properties of Aeon Stones, so likely any Azlanti seen with gems growing from their body had Aeon Stones implanted in them.
AHHHH That makes sense! I was questioning why do some of them have these gems and some depictions the people don't.
Those lovable scamps from New York are at it again in this weeks episode from your podcast group Nothing Ventured Nothing Gamed. In this weeks actual play of the Rise of Runelords, our band of intrepid adventurers just escaped from the dungeon below the Glassworks factory, and were found by Nathanial, who told us that some commotion was happening back at the Rusty Dragon. As the adventurers show up, and have a conversation with an up until now, an unknown person, who seems to have some issue with the Rusty Dragon's owner Amiko. Follow along with us as we parley with this new person, and also take time to have a rest from our trials and tribulations, on this episode of The Uncrowned
Appleplay: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/nothing-ventured-nothing-gamed/id1477 064146
Out crazy team of Adventures battle some monstrous foes in this weeks live play episode of our 2e Rise of Runelords AP. If you're interested in crazy combat, ridiculous RP and a good amount of chatting about rules come check us out!
Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/nothing-ventured-nothing-gamed/id1477 064146
In this weeks episode its us talking rules with our resident rules arbiter Steve. After some thought we gave him his own segment called Rules w.Steve. This week we correct and discuss any rules concerns, or errors from our prior Role Play sessions, as well as rules we glossed over for time sake. Listen, Steve, as he explains the rules, where to find them in the Core Rulebook, and soon to be, answering questions from the audience. If you have a rules question, or any question about Pathfinder 2nd Edition feel free to contact us at Twitter @NVNGPodcast, Facebook at @NVNGPodcast, or Instagram @NVNGPodcast, or email us at NVNGPodcast@gmail.com to get our take on your rules question.
Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/nothing-ventured-nothing-gamed/id1477 064146
Do you need help with character creation? Or just trying to figure out the other ways to make a character?
Are you thinking about getting into Pathfinder 2e and trying to figure out character creation? Or are you already building characters but want to double check your work? The Nothing Ventured Nothing Gamed podcast will be airing our 3rd episode which covers rolling, standard and voluntary flaw ways of character building. So check it out for a special Ramblings w.the Runelords character creation.
PODBEAN: https://feed.podbean.com/nvng/feed.xml or https://nvng.podbean.com/
ITunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/nothing-ventured-nothing-gamed/id1477 064146
Yup, we did the thing. My group loved Pathfinder 2e so much we made a podcast about it. If you're interested in a live play that goes over rules as we play, character creation and class dives, we also chat about Society play. So if you want to hear a bunch of New Yorkers being silly come check us out. The live play is us playing through Rise of Runelords (we figured its one of the best APs out there and we didn't want to spoil the new stuff). Also in our general chat called Ramblings with Runelords we answer questions so if you have rules questions just ask us. Below are all our links (were working on Apple and Google Podcast services)
These are our social Media so if you want to get into contact with us for questions or discussion topics
So what I am going to post is a collection of post from others on these forums to understand Encounter Mode to Initiative. I sent this out to my players and I saw their collective light bulbs turn on...hope this helps
So if a party is in a room and first wants to thoroughly search it for traps, then magic, then study the inscriptions - that's not really exploration mode. You're apparently having an encounter with that particular room. But if you're moving through a very large dungeon with monsters in only a few rooms and the party's mostly just walking through, trying to get this whole thing done today, then you use exploration mode. Or when the party is walking through the forest trying to reach the next village, you can use exploration mode.
Exploration mode gives you nice clear answers to "what was everyone doing just before the encounter started".
Here's how I could see it working. The most important point that I took away from reading the book is that exploration activities are not static. The players can (and are expected to) change them depending on what happens.
Here's an example of how I would use this. Assume a party of three: Fighter, Rogue, Wizard.
The party enters a dungeon complex. The Fighter goes first with his shield raised, the rogue wants to detect for traps. The first part of the dungeon is pretty barren. There's nothing that immediately interests the wizard, so he'll also use Perception to check for anything out of the ordinary.
Around the first corner, there's a hallway with paintings all around. Now the wizard will have to make a choice: He could either study the paintings as they walk (Investigate) or he could check for other interesting things (like secret doors and traps). If he's focusing on one, he's not focusing on the other. The party could let the rogue handle Perception while the wizard focuses on the paintings, or they could be very meticulous and have both do Perception before they even begin to examine the paintings. That will take more time, though. If time's not an issue at all, there's nothing to stop the party. But it's something that they'll have to make a conscious decision to do. "First we sweep the entire hallway for traps and other hidden things. When it's clear, we'll take a look at the paintings."
Final example: The party comes across an alcove with a statue. No perception necessary. The GM describes what it looks like, and asks what the players will do. The fighter wants to study it (Investigate), the wizard wants to detect magic. The rogue is anxious and says he'll stay out of sight for the moment (Hide). They find some info, and press on. The GM checks with the party whether they want to use the previous exploration tactics, or something else. And the group continues.
Again this is from many others on the forums just talking and shouting out ideas. I think a lot of what is here makes sense.
You can because one may be a familiar and the other is a companion. So make a gnome ranger and take animal accomplice (a free familiar) and then ranger the animal companion and now you have both a Liger Companion (because we live in a fantasy world why not a tiger/lion) and a tiny sparrow.
Grappling is fairly easy now in 2e (unlike that flow chart of doom), so the quick and dirty of Grappling: On your turn you take a single action to use the grapple action (yes its a single action so hit them with your sword a few times before you grab them). Next you will roll your Athletics vs their Fort DC (DC are 10 + the mod). If you succeed you give the opponent the grabbed condition (you are flat-footed and have immobilized condition. If you attempt a manipulate action while grabbed, you must succeed at a DC 5 flat check or it is lost; roll the check after spending the action, but before any effects are applied). And there you go. Additionally it is untrained so you don't have to be trained in athletics but it doesn't hurt to be trained in it.
So my friend pointed out a possible ranger feat combo and I said it didnt work and now we are trying to figure it out. So what is the combo: Hunt Prey + Monster Hunter + Monster Warden + Favorite Enemy. They said as be reading when you have the monster Hunter feat and you roll,initiative the favorite enemy says you can freely recall knowledge and if you crit succeed you give everyone +1. Then they start their turn and you can 3 times hunt 3 additional targets that are your fan.enemy and gain the +1. I argued that it wouldn't work because when you choose a new target for Hunt Prey your last target losses the Hunt Prey stuff. They said as it seems Monster Hunter's +1 would maintain because you have already pointed out the weakness and then moved it. Anyone have any thoughts on this
I have been looking through my book and I can't find what concentrate is or it's mechanics. I looked in the appendix and it says Concentrate (trait) an action with this requires a degree of mental concentration and discipline. What does that mean? Can I concentrate on 1 thing only? Does anyone know where I can find more info on it. Thanks
So lets go over the ABCs as Paizo uses that for character creation
Her stats as a Gnome Sorcerer Acolyte
With this character they aren't the strongest caster but they are ok, additionally with the idea your character would rely more on their talking ability which is Cha as to why I raised that to the highest.
Her Stats as a Human Cleric Scholar very similar to the Gnome
Here she doesn't have that negative to Str or that positive to Con but a well rounded character. With a 16 in Wis and Cha she is very well rounded. Those are my ideas on how you would build that character.
So I don't have the book and I am not really looking for a definite word for word answer from the CRB but how does one become a Hellknight? Is it a multi class or just a few feats? Also is it more of a lawful neutral champion? Thanks, I know I could have waited another week to find out but I just too impatient.
So funny story, my old campaign got to level 20 it was amazing but here is the thing story and RP comes from a dedicated DM and players. Players who become dedicated to caring for NPCs and the world around them which would make games more RP intensive. Also, I don't think the OP issue lies with the game but more with those playing with them. In my said level 20 game our bard died because an NPC who they had known and cared for since early on had poisoned their dinner. The bard failed their save and that was it, dead. It came out that the NPC's family had become thralls to a high level vampire and to save them she had to take out the bard. In the end the NPC died, her family died, and the vampire died. But again that came from the DM spending the time to seed the NPC into our campaign the player building a friendship and all of us being invested in the world. Its a two way street, as a player you gotta help the DM and as a DM you need to help the players. Also we only play bi-weekly so that gives our DM time to really work on the game.
I think if the DM hand holds the game is not lethal but that is with all TTRPGs. During the playtest my party didn't have any deaths except for the Demon chapter and the final fight. We are waiting to run 2e RoRL but we have been playing old society games and we've had a few deaths. Again I think we have to see the whole game before any judgment calls can be made.
Basically the subject is the question. I know they have said they will be adding classes as 2e continues but I know a few of my players already stated they want to try their hand at homebrewing a few classes. My choice and I know I am in the minority but the Cavalier, I was said to hear that so many people disliked the class but my first character I ever created was a Gnome Cavalier and I loved that little guy. So what would be your choice?
I've played in games where the idea was to fail forward and never really felt that the players lost agency. I was in a Dungeon World game and the rogue failed to pick a lock that we needed to get into a Barron's home to steal some paper work. The DM described how the moment the thief failed to pick the lock the door suddenly opened and standing there was a maid. TLDR basically we paid off the maid and we got the papers. That in my head is a really smart way to fail players forward, it was funny and could have escalated if we played it all differently. A thing an old DM of mine always said that stuck with me when I DM is never make a player roll if you aren't ready for them to fail. Take that as you want but usually when my players pick up the dice I have a quick backup as to how the fail could change to a positive without leading my players to feel railroaded.
They are releasing condition cards as a quick reference additionally there is a fanmade website where you type in the condition and it gives you the entire text. Having something to quickly reference the effect of the condition is nice but I don't think they are to difficult to work with. Coming from P1 the conditions here are very simplified and easy to manage.
So a conversation my local group was having was the idea that 2e has a chance to have a living world. The idea was that through orgamized play the DMs would submit a review pf their games and outcomes to Paizo and from their they could change the world. So say many groups failed to stop a demon lord Paizo would send out a bimonthly world update for players and DMs to update the world with. This obviously would be an optional patch for those who don't really want to change the world or those homebrewing, but we thought it would be something really fun for the rest of us. Have groups talking with eachother about their choices and trying to unanimously change the world. Thoughts on this idea? Thanks!
I'm running the playtest and a homebrew game at my local comic store and something alot of my caster keep saying was they wished their damaging Cantrips would work like the spell magic missile. After talking with them we are doing some really cool things with their Cantrips.
So that is the topic of this conversation, do you feel Cantrips and the spells should lean into using actions to do more damage, raise the DC check or anything else. For me I love the action economy and I think the creators should lean a little more on those 3 actions to spice things up. Well thats just my 2 cents
So I am a bit unclear with familiars and pets, if I were to make a gnome Wizard and take the familiar ancestry feat from gnome and then take the familiar class feat do I gain 2 familiars? Also that also work with pet companions like a Ranger druid class combo? Additionally I would hope Paizo to add in a spider companion because I love spiders and I think having a large spider to ride on. But am I understanding that I can have more than 1 familiar and companion? Thanks!
This past weekend 8/11-12 at the Cradle of Aviation museum on Long Island was the LI Retro Gaming Con. It was an amazing event where more than 2500 people came out. I volunteered to run the first section of Doomsday Dawn both as a way to get tons of feed back and to learn the game. I did run three four hour sessions and two shorter 2 hour session with the pregenerated characters and in the shorter ones I was able to go over character creation and they played with the characters they made. I got some great feedback about the game from all my groups (about 45 people in all) and here is a list of the things they liked about the game and those things which they didn’t, also understand that those playing ranged from first time every to having played for over 30yrs. Now I will admit this is still a new system to me and I am sure I made a few errors while running it but I will put these in bullet points and give a brief explanation of why they enjoyed or dislike these features.
*First thing everyone said was how they loved and found the Action economy was easy to grasp and made the flow of the game quick. From the aspect of GM I did find it really easy to follow the player’s turn and if arose a problem I could quickly make a ruling call based on the 3 Actions and keep the play moving quickly.
*A massive negative was the dying and unconscious process, in one of my games two players did fall to enemy attack, while the players were healed to 1 hit point by rule they were still unconscious and had to make the fort save against the DC. Now it was a goblin attack the players made 8 rolls and out of the 8 they couldn’t pass the DC and at that point I ruled that probability they should make the save sooner or later. This made the game come to a screeching halt and ruined the flow of the game. After this I ruled that if someone healed you and brought you above one that you would wake up but still retain the dying 1 condition.
*The new critical system was enjoyed by all. Really liking the ability to score a crit even if they didn’t roll a nat. As a GM I did have to do a little book keeping of all the players AC to make sure that I wasn’t scoring a critical hit/miss but when it came to the enemies it was very simple once they figured out the AC they could easily figure out that they scored a crit or miss.
*Something that my players who made characters didn’t like was the layout of the character sheet. There were tons of complaints about how clustered it was and how the important numbers were all the way at the bottom and weapons were at the top. On the other hand they all agreed the layout of the pregen character sheet was way better.
*When I did do character creation they players loved how easy it was to make a character and did enjoy the simplicity of starting at 10 for all the stats and growing or subtracting by 2. Additionally all liked the whole choosing ancestry feats (I had 2 players make Elves and both were completely different) which they all agree felt made them feel individual. A question that came up was why did the dwarf ancestry have what they felt was a free feat with Unburdened skill. I agreed that maybe all races should be given a single racial trait that does set them apart from the others and keep the feats. I did promise them I would make note of it and send it over so here it is.
*The shield raise action and shield spell were both heavily used and as a DM I did enjoy the dent feature and the players enjoyed damage absorption they had. Also I did notice that the players enjoyed having that autonomy with the shields raising and lowering; you could see the players actually feel like the shield did something other than being a static number bump.
*The trinket that they gain everyone liked. I think trinkets are a great addition because as they went forward I could add a few more in and not have to worry about the players becoming to crazy powerful to fast.
*Additionally something that did slow the game down was the fatigue system. Many of the players who were playing the Wizard would keep up the detect magic spell and under the exploration mode concentrating on the spell would cause them to become fatigued. As a GM I ruled that once they would drop the spell they would maintain the fatigue condition for their first round of combat and then it would fall away. 8 hours of fatigue is a bit too much since casters would focus on keeping their magical awareness up and to have such a penalty is a bit steep. Maybe in the spell add the fatigue tag to certain spells and that might balance this.
Overall these few things were my general impression by the players that sat at my table. I hope this information is received well. All in all I can say those players who were die hard PF1 did say that by actually playing the game they would be more likely to keep on testing it out and those who were new to the system or RPGs in general said they had a blast with the game and would definitely check it out. Well I am off to keep on playing and coming up with adventures for my players, keep up the good work and everyone be awesome to each other.
Yes I did get that 18 Int, so we do not get skill points as per PF1 and it is just 1.....well that changes a few things. That is a bit underwhelming and that my Int doesnt get me more makes me a bit sad. I understand why they went with 1 because we have a smaller skill list but maybe if they said going from untrained to train is 1 skill point and trained to expert is 2 and so on. Additionally I feel I should auto be trained in my Signature Skill. I think that would let Int play a bigger role and let players have more options. But hey thats my 2 cents.
I'm a bit confused if the AC is 15 and the player says 25 its a crit and if the player says 5 its a failure....I just don't get the difficulty here. I like the new crit/fail system and I feel it's a very simple thing to handle. Also as a DM I always took down the player AC and Hp so if I need to add crit AC and Fail AC isn't way to much in a normal sized party (4 or 5 players).
Honestly my group is still struggling with RP. We have an alchemist whos items are all RP so if they decide to take a ring or wand they get taxed again. The Cleric seems ok as of now but she hasnt gotten to much stuff and the barbarian which is a goblin is scared of all magic as per his backstory so he keeps,spitting and yelling when magic shows up. As a DM I find it useful but also very confusing. Because so many classes have powers that run of RP I find there is a lot of book,flipping at my table. Coming from a 5e game to this I am struggling not to start using their attunment system. I see why RP is useful and again a good idea it just needs a bit more twerking. But thats just My 2 cents and as always be amazing to each other.
I like the -2 as untrained but because of the adding level it seems after level 2 being untrained is a bit moot. That being said I saw a few things that I liked abd would support:
*changing the value amount so for me it would look like UT (-2), T (+0), E (+2), M (+6), L (+8). I feel the number jump should be dramatic to represent the character advancement as well as how a +6 you are now already more then halfway to a critical success.
*Also I liked the level restriction to move from E to M can only be done at 7th and M to L at 13th. This level cap also helps with that number jump you see in my choices.
I again think that Pazio has some great ideas that need a bit fleshing out and that is way we are here playtesting. Well thats my 2 cents and as always be amazing to eachother
Have people taken into account the new critical system? I think many people read a spell and go NOOOOO I'M NERFED BEYOND EVERYTHING!!! But if you look at the new critical system I feel it balances alot of things. Look at the Cantrip Produce Flame, d4 damage not great but if you roll 10 higher it goes to double d4 plus a persistant d4 which is really powerful. To get rid of persistent the enemy has to make a flat DC20 roll. Lets take a goblin commando with its 18 HP and say I crit he take 4 (say I roll a 2 which is double) and another 2 from the d4 persistent damage. That is 6 poimts of damage out the gate. Goblin rolls doesnt get a nat20 another d4 so another 2 now its 8pts. My turn I go I hit it again another d4 so 2 so the goblin os already at 10 damage. That is crazy strong. I really feel alot of people haven't taken into effect the new crit rules when looking at some of the stuff.
Hey all, so I was building a cleric and I noticed this class gets two differenf spell pools and maybe I am missing aomething but that feels a bit weird. Allow me to explain, in channel energy we get a pool of energy that is equal to our charisma mod + 3 ok not a problem but then we also get pool of spell points which fuel our Domain powers which is equal to wisdom (key ability mod). This just feels weird to habe 2 different pools of energy to track or am i crazy. I feel like maybe put the two pools together and use wisdom + 3 as your base pool. I dont know maybe its just me and maybe its because I now dont know where to list channel energy on my sheet and where to track this pool,of energy. Thoughts on it? And remember be awesome to each other