If it does not say the damage changes it does not change. It's a fluid game mechanic. And if he grows unless the ability says that he grows proportional it just stays the same.
Worse part was that going 1 size in the later parts of the game was huge. And going from small to medium normally was almost useless.
Yeah another example is the the thing that paladins(and clerics with a feat) get in the playtest increasing the die size by one when wielding a simple weapon from their god.
From what I recall it was mentioned during the playtest period as highly likely that rangers would get focus spells as an option, but I don't think there has been any confirmation since the PF2 rules have been finalized.
I think there was a confirmation they would get some but they didn't say if it would be in the CRB. So they might not have some at august 1st. But i doubt it wouldn't be in the gods book.
I justified with the creature wants to make sure my commands are correct so it does not take full advantage of it's speed instead having to match my pace. While summoned creatures s basically the opposite most times they are bound to me so they fight my commands off.
But yeah the minion rules will be kept from the way the dev team is talking, 20+ minions each with a full turn will not be a thing anymore.
Staffan Johansson wrote:
I can agree with this, every Healer should be on the same footing with things that can help and boost him above that. I can see a few classes healing a bit more being but those should be choices for them to become better at that niche
Stone Dog wrote:
Do we know if the class paths are mandatory or is there a default cleric?
Well from the way they are talking i think there is no default cleric, you are always a cleric with X path even if one path is clearly the 'default' one. Like rogues in the playtest, there was 3 types clearly one is the common rogue(The one with dex to damage) but there were two more and you had no choice to not pick one.
The one that lets you pick a general feat calls out that you can take multiple times so i don't think you can do it. It would make no sense for one to call it out and the other to ignore it.
To the plushy dungeon with him!
Thundarr the Barbarian wrote:
I just keep thinking now that they got their names by randomly looking over words on a parchment and choosing the ones that look the coolest before forcing a weak peddler to translate their new terrifying common names.
Reach i think changes when you grow to large but that's on the barbarian feat already. The damage change only happens to your rage bonus, a huge creature greatsword will deal 1d12 like the one from a small creature
Lightning Raven wrote:
I always felt in pf1 it was even worse, lost your death-ward item. Oh yeah you are dead, lost your +save item guess who is killing the whole party today?But yeah i am biased in that cause i want magic weapons that do matter, even if i do like the idea of a slower progression if you lack the weapon. Something like gaining the striking rune bemefot but with -4 to -5 levels(The first kicking at level 8 or 9 instead of 4) with a feat or ritual to get them to the same level.
I think is plausible that more features like paladins 'smite' and fighters 'PA' become viable adding dies for conditions or actions in feats. And that you gain small increments of damage with class, like the barbarian feature that came out in the spoiler.
Lightning Raven wrote:
I can understand that even if i do enjoy adding dice to magic weapons, i just like the concept of money being able to buy some power after all. But i do hope some general feats or some rituals make it possible for a char to instead of using weapons or armor gain those bonus without using weapons and stuff.Maybe a vow of poverty-like feat that you gain stuff for donating instead of buying and the bonus go up as you level being able to be changed with a ritual that takes some small objects you get from the people you donate to.
Erk Ander wrote:
Striking grants 4 total dice, in the playtest you got 5 extra dice for a total of 6.
Well they do have good option specially the monk with ki powers, stances, special strikes and even grappling
Yeah monk can do some cool kung fu stuff now. Like walk around a lot with a veil of shadows, some ki blasts. A few things like that ^^
Edit: Damn ninja'd
Is this power progression i am so happy... This is the best.
One thing I that interests me about this is if striking takes the same slot as flaming, and if those are still constant d6. If so, then we get to make a choice like in Monster Hunter World, where big raw d12 weapons want striking, but a weak d4 dagger would be better with elemental first.
That actually makes it interesting, i mean probably it will be 3 runes max like it was before. But someone might instead of getting striking go for a greater rune that gives elemental damage all 3 times getting +xd6 of acid, +xd6 of fire and +xd6 of good. Would be pretty nice even if they were less than the +3dX from striking.
Possibly the +2 is the attack bonus from being Master quality. They might have just decided "+2 greater striking greater frost greatsword" looked better than "greater striking greater frost master greatsword."
I would rather have a master greater striking greater frost greatsword than a +2 greater striking greater frost greatsword. But i guess they might have went with +2 instead of master.Edit: Also went to look on 'Treerazor sheet' that was posted somewhere in this forum. It seems that indeed +5 just means +5 to hit so damage does not scale with that. Since with his teeth he has +43 and with the axe he has +45(Could also be that he just scales differently but i would rather believe that's how runes work for now.)
So i was looking over the thread where they are currently talking about the spoiler #XXX, and i noticed there is the striking rune... But i also noticed that this one:
Charon Onozuka wrote:
I find my players almost never buying consumables, so having trinkets and wands that can be used 1/day might make the idea more apealable to them.
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
I once thought it was better when you had all the freedom in creating npcs/monsters... Then i tested starfinder monster/npc creation. That thought went away pretty easily when i could create a monster in like 5 minutes and he was both chalenging and customizable.
Alright, I'm just gonna ask because I can't make sense of it all. Why can't new Magi be full casters off the Arcane list? What, other than "that's how it was in PF1!" should be stopping the theoretical new Magus class from being a full 9th level spell user? I get being a Focus Caster, you curtail a special set of things they can do that would make sense for them and no one else, but if they did make them full 9ers, what would be wrong with that? ALSO, there's the "free action" thing for a reason, silly forgetful people who wonder how Spellstrike would work :P (FREE ACTION SYMBOL; Whenever you cast a spell with an attack roll, you may deliver it with a weapon instead of your hand)
To me it is because the whole 'free action magic' attack is already quite big, getting high proefs in both armor,weapons and magic is also something that would cost the class, then getting magic 9 levels on top is quite scary. I don't think it's impossible to make them but it's quite hard to keep balance with them on the game in my mind.
Tech progression is weird when you get magic.
Well most of the times i did see that, might been just my tables. I mean people had more spells, but they used one or two a lot more than the rest and lower spell slots were mostly replaced for something that made you more flexible.
Yeah... But i meant instead of using utility spells and putting buffs one time they were actually using the buffs during the fight and then using bows or crossbows. I guess it was because of the spell limit and cantrips being subpar to weapons.
I always felt that in PF1 actually since most times you would do a weird metamagic combo so you needed a good spell for it xDPf2 normally i saw wizards and clerics buffing and using weapons most times.
I hope that everyone get a free floating feat like the fighter that can be up to half your level rounded up, most feats that seem bad tend to have one or two good uses but are so overshadowed by others that letting a floating feat happen can help a lot.
Agreed but what i am wondering is how will battle medic scale up, will it scale normally or there will be feats to also make it more reliable?
Not gonna lie, Twin Feint feels kind of lackluster given how prevalent the flatfooted condition is. Rogues in the playtest games I ran never had a problem inflicting it or getting it from their party members. So committing a feat to make two attacks as two actions, one of which has full penalties but gets the flatfooted that you could've gotten on both attacks by moving into a flank or, like, amping up your Intimidate skill seems like it'd be mediocre.
I also hope it does a bit more. If it combines both damages into one it would already make the attack quite a bit better, but for now we only know it make the opponent flatfooted for the second one xD
Chief Cook and Bottlewasher wrote:
If you have 1 healer, what happens when that healer goes down? I've always thought a secondary healer vital. Better still if everyone can do a little healing, in case there's only 1 left standing.
Once back in 3.5 i was the healer guy, we had nothing else to heal at several points. If i did go down everyone was f*%$ed as 1 point per level per day is almost useless xD
By one hour rest I meant the 1 hour you are bolstered from treat wounds.
I do this since i let players create a new character at (lowest player level - 1)... Weirdly enough it made people hate being the highest leveled char since they get no extra exp.
There's d6 deadly too.
Fatal is worse than deadly in most cases. Remember deadly adds 1 if expert, 2 if master and 3 if legendary.While fatal changes the dies and then adds one.
I am already using that :P
Vali Nepjarson wrote:
I am sorry but the book but the book already shipped to printers...
Actually this question comes up a lot. They way spells lack a description makes most of players do this mistake too... And the erratas of the playtest do not help.But they said PHB will be more approachable.
I went with + half level as many of the Heritages already used that mechanic. The resistances were right in with Arctic Elves and Inflammable Goblin. Since that is in keeping with what we already have, I don’t think it is too far out of line. Now if it was an attack bonus or on all defenses other than a corner case…yeah, that would be way too much.
Resistencies is a thing. There's no checks with resistencies after all. But +5 on any check makes crits 25% more likely now and failures 25% more likely to happen.With the tighter math even +2 to any kind of check is already a huge problem as it increases the chance of success massively.
How about instead of adding +level, add +half level if you are untrained and give a circumstance/conditional bonus of +1(Scaling to +2 in some way.) when trained or more. That solves a bit
Bold plushies are best plushies.
Well kobold are know miners and mining is definitely str and while I do agree +2/+2 seems to not fit kobolds. But I do hope they change kobold -2 to something other than str or con...