kedrann's page

I personally prefer Bulk to Weight, though for me the simplified numbers is just a bonus.

What really matters to me is that I don't consider Bulk to be only a different weight unit. I consider Bulk to be a compound indicator depending on mass, volume and shape and therefore a better system to measure encumbrance.

Based on almost no information at all, I'm predicting(hoping) that poisons, at least some, will work like some spells, in that they will have a minor effect, maybe sickened 1, on a save, a more serious effect on a failed save, and a catastrophic effect on a critical failure. That would make them worth using. I have a feeling that that's the direction they're going with them.

I agree. The little we have in the First Look blog

Poisons, curses, and diseases are a far more serious problem to deal with, having varied effects that can cause serious penalties, or even death.

Combined to what we more recently learned about spells and degrees of success goes that way.

It also makes more sense in my opinion. Even if you manage not to die because of those curare-tipped blowgun darts, you're going to feel it.

Regarding the move difference between elf and dwarf: while it will be something to take into account, there will likely be options that make things less clear-cut. TheFinish's scenario could also likely be this:

Elf Wizard, Dwarf Fighter. Speeds 30 versus 20.

Round 1: Adjacent, Elf Wizard's Turn. He moves three (90). Eats AoO. Distance is now 90.

Dwarf's Turn: He runs for 4x speed (80). Distance is now 10.

Round 2: Elf Wizard casts a spell. Two Actions. Moves (30). Distance is now 40.

Dwarf's Turn: Sudden Charge (Moves 40 and strikes once), Strikes a second time.

Round 3: ...

The wizard could of course probably also run on the first round for 120 ft. movement but the goal of the above is just to point that things are probably not as simple as they may look at first sight.

Personally, I think the half-orc and half-elf should keep their own entries rather than being replaced with a generic 'half-blood' mechanic.

My main reason for it is something Golarion material has been hinting at and that is more prevalent in Starfinder: half-elves or half-orcs forming communities and developing their own culture as something different from either of their parent species.

I understand the point of view of people who want to keep setting-neutral but even in this case, the option to have those 'true half-elves' or 'true half-orcs' is something they can use (or not) in another setting than Golarion

More generally, I'm a big fan of the toolbox approach, probably because of the time I spent playing point-buy games à la GURPS some years ago. I think that the approach chosen keeps things codified enough for each ancestry to keep some fundamentals while opening up the rest to customization. It's also a good occasion to rebalance things. as eddv pointed out, some of the PF1 races sorely need it.

I suspect the backgrounds will be similar to the Starfinder themes, giving some additional features and maybe an ability boost

kedrann wrote:

Hostile NPC wrote:

[snip]

Nicely said. This is pretty much the logical reaction of the common Golarion folk in my opinion.

Also, I read some comments about 10 years being enough for a change. In our 21st century global village, yes, it is. By medieval standards where most people only have legends about what's happening in other countries? Rather think a century or two

Golarian isn't a medieval society. They have instantaneous methods of communication (Animal Messenger, Sending spell, Teleportation, etc), methods of seeking guidance from gods (augury, commune, etc) and a host of other options that no medieval society had. The technology available on Golarian is all over the map in terms of our timeline.

If Legend Lore starts bringing up Goblin heroes, people with power are going to notice.

I have to disagree. Many of the country descriptions I read are medieval in my opinion, typically for countries like Brevoy. Also, in my opinion, most common folks (and not people in power) have little access to magic and little interest about what happens beyond their village.

Sure, a king can decree, after hearing those stories, that goblins are not to be killed on sight. He may even be able to get it past his councilors who advise him not to take such a controversial decision, but at the cost of nobles immediately using it to plot against him. Even in Andoran, I can see bitter political fights on such a question.

In the end, it's a question of how each of us sees Golarion. My group is mostly composed of people with a background in history and we're probably more cynical about such matters than the average table.

This is just great. First, goblins attacked our flocks in their pastures and set up camp there. Second, we have adventurers come into town. Which, of course, means our economy is going to be absolutely buggered for the coming year and that rotten artificer down on Elm Street is going to be able to buy out another bloody politician.

Now of course we're going to have some bloody adventurer take a shine to one of the goblins we ask them to dispose of and opt to allow it to tag along with the rest of their bunch. No sirree, this is an awful idea and awful premise that in essence emancipates the goblin tribes after they have sullied our land and slain our kinsman. There is absolutely no way that we commonfolk should be subject to the abject whims of the powers that be when they decree that suddenly goblins should be regarded with a sense of normalcy.

This is an outrage. I am outraged. And I shall be petitioning the aristocracy to deal harshly with any suggestion that the goblinoid scum be forgiven or considered welcome on this material plane.

Nicely said. This is pretty much the logical reaction of the common Golarion folk in my opinion.

Also, I read some comments about 10 years being enough for a change. In our 21st century global village, yes, it is. By medieval standards where most people only have legends about what's happening in other countries? Rather think a century or two

I'm rather ambivalent about the Goblin being core. As someone who extensively DM'ed Planescape back in AD&D 2nd Ed. days, I'm open to diversity but our group usually applies the following rule: non-standard choices can mean that the character will encounter prejudice.

To give an example, a fellow DM from my group is very fond of Ustalav and the Cthulhu Mythos. He loves having us meet superstitious villagers (the kind that are more likely to think that the Sarenite paladin vouching for the goblin is in fact some fallen demon-worshipper).So, given the species' reputation, the survival probability of a Goblin PC is rather low there and may very well end with the group having to kill villagers to save their own lives.

So with the info we currently have, including the fact the timeline only advanced by a decade or so, I see no way to justify Goblins being accepted in most places. I'm willing to see what the dev will suggest but it's likely I will discourage players from taking it in my campaigns.

Regarding the mechanics, I like the principle of allowing greater customization. We will however need more to see how well it balances with the rest, so we'll see in August.

I really do love all the 'Having to raise my shield is terrible' talk. One way or another using a shield is active. Are you moving your body to get the shield in the right position to block an attack? You are actively thinking about and using it. Are you moving your arm to put your shield in the way of an attack? You are actively thinking about and using it.

Not to mention there is one other step here that people aren't getting yet. Swing, swing, block is not a bad thing in this edition. Forgoing that -10 swing is forgoing a 50% increased chance to fumble and possibly get slapped for it while increasing your AC by (lets say 2) 2 and decreasing your chance to be crit by 10%. That's not a terrible action.

Now we have Expert, Master, Legendary equipment that for weapons gives a +1, +2, or +3 to hit. Possible that will transfer to shield AC. Then suddenly that +2 for raise shield is not a +5 for raise shield and the chance to be crit went down 25%.

I fully agree with this. We don't know enough about the 'equipment' side of shields at this point and this may change a lot of things about the benefit of raising one's shield.

Regarding the changes of the fighter and what we can guess of the interactions with the new action economy and some things said about the combat maneuvers being improved, I like it a lot.

Two thumbs up for the Power Attack revision. I currently have a chainsaw-wielding Barbarian in the AP I'm DM'ing and I'm seeing problems with the P1 Power Attack all right

I'm liking it. I have some concerns about the execution but I'm lacking information about the following point to complete my opinion:

1) I remember seeing some hints that the item prices will change. Depending on how (and the related WBL in the new economy), this may change a lot of things about how Resonance works.

2) We have heard that they are redoing alchemical items and that there will be a skill called Medicine. It seems likely that there will be non-magical healing options. If alchemical items do not use Resonance and we have 'alchemical healing poultices', then the impact on potion will be limited.

So, wait and see for now

Still adapting from my transition from 3.5 to Pathfinder, I noticed a difference in the wording of Protection from Evil.

In 3.5, it protected against nongood summoned creatures
In PF, it protects only against evil summoned creatures

The question becomes:
- Is there a way to block elementals and other neutral summons?
- Is this voluntary or something that was forgotten?