![]()
![]()
![]() the only thing i don't like about the dedication is that it gives double slice at level 2. For the player that is a dual wielder, they probably already took that at 1st level if they are a fighter, so they would need to retrain it. At 4th level the dedication feats are dead to most, but the fighter class has twin parry, which is a nice chain to start. Seems like there is a decent choice for the fighter at least across most of the levels ![]()
![]() I feel like this is doable by 9th level. I think the range sniper ish feats are a bit of a trap here. If you want to simulate a 5e crossbow sniper all you need three things 1)Hunt Prey - you get it as ranger default
and probably
So for support spells take the following 5) Druid Dedication - gives you 2 cantrips
and Lastly an animal companion 7) Animal companion - 1st level ranger feat
So i would build a tengu something like this Str 10
I'm not sure your background or character story
General feats
This lets you take take Natural Ambition at 5th level. It gives you a first level ranger class feat So your class feats end up looking like this Class Feats
Assuming you have normal weapon runes, you will have a +1 striking crossbow at level 9. So 2d8 damage. Add Crossbow Ace and Precision from hunter's edge, you are doing 3d8+2 damage. At this level you could also have a elemental weapon rune. Up to 3d8+2 + 1d6. The damage is highly swingy because its all dice damage, but it's respectable. The mature animal companion can fight a little on it's own. and with three action economy, your standard turn will be shoot, move and reload, yell at your companion to fight... And you will still have 2 cantrips, and a 1st, 2nd and 3rd level spells slot for support. This hits all pòints of the character. As you advance, alternate feats between the 3 things, animal companion, sniping, casting 10) Deadly Aim
You won't be a busted caster, or a one shot sniper, or a beast lord that savages monsters with his brutal pets, but he will do all the things he did in 5e. Hope that helps a little ![]()
![]() Love the new system. I've played every edition of D&D from OD&D to 5e. Our group got back together for 3e. Played a 3/x campaign for 8 years. Played a 4e campaign for 4 years. Left us sour on long campaigns. Played 5e one shots twice a year for another 5. But now with PF2e, we are back playing twice a month. Ironically, the quarantine has helped us with the new system and getting gaming again. We started playing on Roll20 and quickly switched over to Foundry. Not being able to meet in person, made it easier to switch to online. Also Foundry is downright amazing with the system. Love the modular nature of it. It feels tactical in every way in combat, but not the same repetitive tactics that 4e power system brought. Character creation and options are already light years ahead of 5e. Whenever a new system comes out, I teach myself the system by going back and building the parties of our 20 plus year campaigns. With most systems, it takes a lot of reflavoring or close approximation to make the characters work. With PF2e I was able to build very satisfying versions of 90% of previous characters on day one. With the release of the APG, it will go to 98%.(Last Character is an ancestry that won't ever come officially to the PF2e. But if i take the Kobold and move a few things around, make it taller etc etc, it should work well) Overall super pleased with where the game is a year in. ![]()
![]() Ediwir wrote:
I can't Second this post enough! Just moved from Roll20 to Foundry. It's amazing. Super Slick. Amazingly easy. And getting more info every day. Simply the best program out there. ![]()
![]() About to run this for my group starting saturday via Roll20. I'm worried about a sufficient hook for the party members. Most of the players have played in Crypt of the everflame that i adapted for 2e and i am thinking about using the opening encounter in Mask of the Living god to start the PCs in Kassen and have them meet the pathfinder agent. Instead the agent will arraign for them to meet and gather Andoran traders who are smuggling arms into Nirmathas (per the clandestine support that Andoran offers per Lands of conflict). They have to take the arms to Phaendar to the market festival to meet drop them off to Aubrin when all hell breaks loose. The PCS would be a new formed militia group from Kassen, and i want to emphasis that Nirmathas is taking a lull in the war with Multhane to re arm up and recruit (As best as a country of libertarian militas can). I like this as it is not so abrupt and it ties into what my players know of the world in real life. However, I am worried that not making them from Phaendar itself will weaken their connection to trying to save the town. Any thoughts on opening scenes to flesh out play before all hell breaks loose? Thanks ![]()
![]() Alaryth wrote:
The damage bonus you get from runes on weapons is included in the automatic progression. It's called devastating attacks and you get an extra die at 4, 12 and 19. Am I missing other damage you are mentioning? ![]()
![]() I'm in the process of converting some npc codex NPCs to pf2. The issue I have run into is the level conversion. My understanding is pf1 level should convert to pf2 monster level basically 1 to 1. However the NPCs in pf1 of course we're built on cr = level -1. So should I convert them as cr of pf1 = creature level of pf2, or convert them as pf1 level = creature level of pf2? The cr= pf2 level seems to match up better that level to level in terms of stats. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. ![]()
![]() I remember reading that the extra dice from magic weapons was in part being split up with your proficiency to prevent the absolute need for magic items. I can't find anywhere that proficiency affects extra dice. Is the extra damage just the weapon specialization damage? So is the best you can get 4 weapon damage dice (+3 rune) and +8 from legendary specialization? I'm fine with that if that's true as that's functionally the average of 2d6 more but I'm unsure if in reading it right. Anyone know the answer? ![]()
![]() The Raven Black wrote:
Is there a way to give it cold trait and damage? As silly sometimes as water/cold admixture was in days of yore cold sorcerer is kinda of a staple. (Glances around nervously for Disney ip police) ![]()
![]() Mark Seifter wrote: Classes with solid heavy armor proficiencies, such as fighter and champion, will not skimp on proficiency with the lighter armors. So happy about this. Favorite pfs character of the past decade was a dervish style paladin of Sarenrae. Glad to see that might be possible out of the box ![]()
![]() Tridus wrote:
I think for Clerics spells you need to look at 2e D&d. Specialty Clerics could only cast spells from their gods domains called spheres. Your God didnt like fire.. You didn't get flame strike... Etc etc. I think you could divide gods domains into spheres for spell purposes. If you have the domain you are expert in it and it goes up as you level. Spells are one level less. The spheres related to the other domains in your gods portfolio that you didn't select you are trained in and go up slower. Honest I think limiting cleric spells based on what your God does is a good way to limit the CoDzilla nonsense of yore. When D&d got away from that is when Clerics became busted beyond belief. And I think it is super thematic and a nice way to differentiate your cleric from another. ![]()
![]() If we are talking radical rewrites of the spell system why not tie it into the proficiency system. Make every spell or power tied to a school/sphere Ala 2nd edition. You have a proficiency rank in every school appropriate for your spell list. The spell level of the spell is the base level for someone trained in that school. If you are untrained, the spell requires a spell slot of higher. If you are an expert it requires a spell slot lower. And that reduction continues until legendary. But getting to legendary in a spell proficiency requires specialization. So a legendary necromancer at 17 would make all 1-3 level necromancy spells into cantrips. Animate dead at the snap of a finger... Sure... You are a freaking legendary necromancer.... Seems about perfect to me. The legendary evoker could hurl fireballs all day. But at 17, that's hardly an issue. Your epic level... Be epic... This would require a paths of power style rewrite but it would be super flavorful and reward specialist. That being said I doubt we will see anything that radical.. I'll settle for arcanist. I think this is basically a modern assumption in New rpgs. Too much arcanist/5e/computer rpgs to put the vancian spell slots on a good place in light of these systems used elsewhere ![]()
![]() Shields appear with armor but seem by the wording to be separate from them. It mentions if you want a higher defense than your armor provides try adding a shield. This really only matters for the monk. I'm trying to build a spear and shield monk and I want the fast movement if I'm only carrying a shield. What does everyone think? ![]()
![]() Alchemaic wrote:
Some domains gave spells that were already on the divine list so they actually got nothing ![]()
![]() It ensures that character creation methods produce similar ranges. The default character building doesn't alow for the possibility of over 18. You get four set of raises and the best you can get to is 18. By putting in the cap it allows the potential option for other build methods( rolling dice etc) without breaking the hard limit the default method imposes based on the math ![]()
![]() master_marshmallow wrote:
they have mentioned that witch will get their own class so I think we will get more. And I think the increase in class Feats to class lists will make this options happen given time. That increase is sort of a given ![]()
![]() Can't agree with this more. Always liked stun/body split in champions and while this doesn't have the same problem ie unconscious foes it's even better. Allows for interesting options such as a party that's injured pushing forward on few hp but full stamina points. Simulates injured but heroic effort that straight hp doesnt ![]()
![]() 1) all casters become arcanist style. Can heighten on the fly. Sorcerers can use their limited special ability to heighten to raise a spell one level higher than effective than they can cast. 2) all players get 3 Ancestry Feats at 1st and when they would get an Ancestry feat they get an extra class feat 3) remove magic weapon bonus dice and make it tied to level 4/8/12/16/20 4) add heal to occult list 5) simple hand waive the lawful good restriction on paladins. Any pc playing a non LG paladin I would refer them code wise to the code of conduct found in the 1e Champions series of splat books 6) make up new Mc Feats and homebrew prestige chains But I'm pretty happy over all with it. I think the core math is better than most. I like dangerous combat and the economy reminds me of what was right with 4e without the duldrum of the power system Ps. Make a hero lab style character sheet... The old 1e hero lab sheet is simple but it's so easy to read. ![]()
![]() PossibleCabbage wrote:
True Story... Our cleric's player in our 8 year 3.5e game had a spreadsheet that selected spells for him based on questions he would ask during an augur with his God every morning. He'd burn a 5th level spell to speak to his God and ask generic questions like will I be leaving the plane or confronting the undead. Based on the gms answer the spreadsheet filled in his spells..... Super flavorful but obviously any system that requires an algorithm to select your spells is busted at the core. ![]()
![]() JWebbGarrett wrote:
Your thread reminded me to ask this. This thread is more of a poll style thread. Would you like this or not ![]()
![]() Another post reminded me to ask this: does anyone else think that the prepared casters should look more like the arcanist from 1e or casters from 5e D&d? Seems a logical and elegant solution to simplifying the game while keeping the flavor of memorizing/praying for spells. It allows easier heightening of spells a d allows those classes to still have access to huge amounts of spells to choose from each day, but the player needs to choose wisely. For those that don't know how this is done in 5e, casters memorize x spells a day, but don't memorize them into spell slots. When they are cast they choose the slot to cast it in so long as it's at least the minimum level of the spell. I know this would require at least the sorcerer to be reworked a little, but I feel the real flavor of the sorcerer comes from the bloodline options and maybe having more spells known than a wizard could memorize in a day. What does everyone else think? If you would like to see this please post below saying so. If not or you have concerns please post as well. I'd like to take the pulse of the crowd on this as I think it might be something that we still have time to change without requiring the design team to reinvent the wheel so to speak. Thanks. ![]()
![]() I'm all for this change. I firmly belive that 5e/arcanist got spell slots right for the first time in D&d. It allows for memorizing/praying to be part of the rote while aligning with the fictional narrative more. It's very hard outside of gamist theory and Vance actual stories to justify memorized spells into certain slots. ![]()
![]() Alchemaic wrote:
I watched the show. What Mark said was they weren't going to make things like Double slice free to everyone to take, because they don't think a one size fits all option is right. He mentioned they need to add more options, and will, like a rogue 2 weapon attack. He also mentioned that the ranger 2 weapon attack might be different from double slice to be more flavorful. Basically, once they add more content in the class feats, we will see support for more combat styles spread out among the classes, but not necessarily the same way for each class. ![]()
![]() Alot of complaints I have seen so far involve "I can't build x anymore". Part of my learning of any new system has been to build characters from other systems to see what can and can't be done. So I'm suggesting that we kick the modular nature of the new system by seeing what niche character types can be built. Here is the challenge. Post a theme/archetype/trope that you'd like to see pointed out in the playtest or that you think is missing in the playtest. I'll post a version of what I could work up. I encourage others to post versions as well. I'm aiming most characters for 5th level as that seems reasonable, as many complex characters in pf1 didn't really come online until at least a few Feats were gained. Obviously some character tropes might need higher levels but I think 5th is a good starting point. Let's see what we can do with the modular system as it is at the moment. ![]()
![]() Cantriped wrote:
Can you tell me where you found the 5th level pregens? I've been looking everywhere for them? ![]()
![]() I know some have mentioned that magic weapons are crucial to the game as is because you can't keep up with damage levels otherwise. What is the increase to damage was tied to your proficiency. Base damage is trained, 2 dice at expert, 3 at master, 5 at legendary(or possibly 4, but 5 feels more legendary). What does anyone think this would do to the math? ![]()
![]() I think alot of this maybe a function of the playtest having limited options. Yes each of the class Feats basically leads the players through the archetypes, but I sense that there will be more Feats etc in the full book/splat books that allow for more varied paths than the clearly layed out character arc. They mentioned this in the paladin blog that other styles etc would be included or coming shortly after release but the playtest only has a limited space so they are choosing the strongest archetypes to represent. Yeah they are tropes at this point but from a playtest standpoint the first thing you need to know is can you represent the stereotypes before you ask can I build the outliers. ![]()
![]() Not sure on how ac is calculated. I know each character has proficiency in armor types that gets added to the item bonus. Are we just adding the plus or because it's a proficiency do I add my level as well? For example a 10th level fighter in +1 chain shirt and 18 dex he has master in light armor, is his armor class 18 (+2 for armor, +1 for magic, +1 for master and +4 for dex) or is it 28 (+2 for armor, +1 for magic, +4 for dex and +11 for master proficiency) Thanks. ![]()
![]() I think it looks great so far. So much customization. And all the reaction to "x class only does this..." need to remember this is a playtest with limited options compared to 20 years of expanding splat material for 3.x/pf. Hard to be upset that I can't do X in a playtest that took them years to create in the previous editions. |