Upon further reflection I think I agree with you.
And as for needing time to hammer out kinks, to test it in live waters, that's why they had a playtest, that they asked people to pay for, going by the copy of the playtest rulebook on my shelf.
Judging by the empty space on my shelf where a playtest book might go, I reckon you did that to yourself!
To answer your question though, it was to differentiate the books in terms of how they are used:
If you want a "quick" monster, you have the Bestiary. Instant drow/orc/goblin/vampire party. Or, a different "type" of drow/orc/goblin/vampire for an encounter. All standard fantasy tropes.
If you want a "unique" monster - and you have some time on your hands - you have the Game Mastery guide. Either to create a special monster you intend to use later, or, to memorize the algorithm of monster creation so as to have the best of both worlds.
This is a really elegant suggestion.
The analogy had not occurred to me before reading this.
The summary seems to be:
1) Make an effort to roleplay - ex. using accents
That said, I appreciate the discussion, as I tend to never not learn something new when I hear (read) others' points of view (and additional information, facts, theories, etc).
I would start with a Benchmark.
Prepared casters can perhaps choose a number of spells per day to prepare, which are then just freely cast with their mana.
A similar question: What % of prepared spells is "fair" to give up when comparing to Spontaneous casters?
Friendly suggestion to get the ball rolling:
Next question: Focus Points on a different track?
Final challenge question, if I may. How do you expect to "manage" what is arguably one of the main features of mana systems: Being able to "nova" at will?
Monk vs Barbarian:
1.5x ST 2-hand:
It would help if you'd have numbered them...
1) I think Monk needs one more something, but not this. Because, Barbarian.
2) No. Not even as a feat. Because Critical hit math. But, perhaps as a homebrew Fighter Stance?
3) Leaning towards no. I like the new "balanced" magic, and feel it is tenuous one. Largely because skills.
4) No. This would increase the damage output of spellcasters too much without resource expenditure.
5) Sure. Like, you can already do that. Can't you?
6) I am curious why you are proposing this, actually. Like, what is the reasoning?
7) Yes, but not for free: example
@Rainzax The problem with that is, it's an enormous nerf to those using the Divine List, for them most of their spells only work by alignment or based on whether or not a thing is alive or dead. That in and of itself is a huge issue that needs fixing.
Oh, certainly.On the spectrum of "Easiest" vs. "Hardest" change to make, this is perhaps the furthest left.
But, not entirely unfixable. If you went this route, you could consider a game mechanic whereby the Player and the DM work together to let foes, monsters, and villians qualify as "evil" for the purposes of casting those spells, where appropriate. Perhaps as a skill function of Religion?:
Critical Success: You may treat these creatures as "evil" for the duration of the encounter
By tapping into a supernatural inner reserve called ki, you can create magical effects. Certain feats grant you special spells called ki spells, which are a type of focus spell. It costs 1 Focus Point to cast a focus spell. When you gain your first ki spell, you also gain a focus pool of 1 Focus Point. You refill your focus pool during your daily preparations, and you regain 1 Focus Point by spending 10 minutes using the Refocus activity to meditate in order to reach inner peace.
When you first gain a ki spell, decide whether your ki spells are divine spells or occult spells. You become trained in spell attacks and spell DCs of that tradition...
My best guess is that only Celestials, Fiends, and Monitors will retain an "Alignment" and thus an interaction with spells that do aligned damage. Perhaps a re-naming as you mentioned (Radiant/Yin/Light vs. Necrotic/Yang/Dark).
Everyone else will, by default, be considered effectively "neutral" as concerns game mechanics.
Altogether with the net effect of the narrowing of the effects of spells/effects that explicitly interact with Alignment as a mechanic.
Or at least, that is how I would do it.
Agreed. One stipulation though: Consider having only 3 heads active at a time, randomly determined.
Because 5 seems like overkill. Unless you absolutely must have overkill. What more, 3 randomly active heads may be more "interesting" than 5 always-active heads. It'll keep your characters on their toes ("Oh no, I hope the Acid head doesn't get to go again"). Unpredictability is SCARY. Much better at demonstrating variety, too.
You can always power-up their attacks accordingly, and 3 stronger heads (at a time) seems more elegant to me than 5 weaker heads.
Minor monk fix here - alternatives to the Core monk included by trading out Flurry of Blows for other "1st level only" abilities, designed to open up the space a little more.
Early Path to Perfection
You have chosen to hone your martial technique, capable of delivering strikes that combine high speed with coordinated force. You may choose Strength or Dexterity as your key ability score, gain the Flurry of Blows ability at first level, and may choose from the Divine or Occult traditions for your Ki class abilities (if any).
Core monk preserved perfectly.
Opens up not having to prioritize Strength, allowing the monk to divest their abilities elsewhere without sacrificing combat functionality, including to Intelligence or Charisma to pick up more / different skills, or to double-down on the remaining physical ability scores and Ki powers to create a less-damaging less-maneuver-focused but more technical striker.
Opens up not having to prioritize Dexterity, allowing the monk to divest their abilities elsewhere without sacrificing combat functionality, including to Intelligence or Charisma to pick up more / different skills, or to double-down on the remaining physical ability scores and Ki powers to create a less-skilled and slower but similarly formidable frontline combatant.
You attack slowly and with determination, focused on penetrating your foes defenses with a single, well-placed strike.
Make an unarmed strike. You may use your Wisdom modifier in place of your Strength or Dexterity modifier when rolling to strike. You may give this ability the concentrate trait to do one of the following: Either remove the flourish trait, or, give this ability the fortune trait.
It's worth noting that, like Flurry of Blows, since these are 1st level choices, they are unavailable as multi-class options, preventing Wisdom-based casters from "cherry-picking" them from the monk's array of abilities.
Prerequisite: Flurry of Blows or Meditated Strike
The focused power of your flurry or meditation threatens to overwhelm your opponent. When you target the same creature with two Strikes from your Flurry of Blows, or with one strike with your Meditated Strike, you can try to stun the creature. If one of these Strikes hits and deals damage, the target must succeed at a Fortitude save against your class DC or be stunned 1 (or stunned 3 on a critical failure). This is an incapacitation effect.
To wrap, a minor tweak, presenting the option to trade out Flurry of Blows (a major opportunity cost offensively!) to instead allow greater variance in build, by allowing Wisdom to partially cover one of the many ability scores a monk generally needs to invest in (typically at the expense of Intelligence and Charisma) to function in it's niche.
Perhaps play the mechanics of a Ranger with a Crossbow, just flavor it as a "gun", until Gunslinger proper is released?
Or make one small change to Crossbow to make it "mechanically equivalent" to other martial ranged weapons and grant Fatal as a free trait?:
"Handgun" (Hand Crossbow) = Fatal (d8)
I like your proposed changes. They fix a lot of sore spots with the minimum amount of tampering, and not over-correcting. One very minor quibble I have is, while you're making changes, you might as well remove the mutagenist sentence about mutagens not brewed for you, as that doesn't do anything and can only lead to confusion.
I was wondering about that sentence, as their doesn't seem to be anything in the Mutagen section of the core rulebook precluding or dis-incentivizing sharing drinks.
Perhaps this is a holdover from a change made after the Playtest version of the rules?
Thanks for your suggestion!
When I first found out, it felt a little random, yes.
Then I discovered that Paizo goblins were incredibly popular, making them a bit iconic for the company, and that makes sense to me, as Paizo has to "carve out a niche" with respect to other RPGs. The Alchemist class is in a similar state, minus the controversy to their inclusion in Core.
The goblins I have adventured alongside have typically all had in their backstory "So I decided to escape the negative culture of my hometown, and explore different ways of thinking" or somesuch. And the players often sing songs and use phrases with peculiar grammer, such that, I find myself communicating back to them similarly. Indeed, it's fun to speak "Goblin-Common" with a Goblin.
So perhaps it'll take some getting used to, but it hasn't ever turned into a "Goblin ruins adventure acting like stereotypical depictions of evil goblins in past publications" scenario for me personally. And besides, that would probably be a problem with the player (than the character) in such an instance.
Ok I'll bite.
I'd like to see general archetypes that play with weapons traits. I think the design-space is blown wide-open there. Something like:
You have learned to turn your speed into power, even with a heavier blade.
Requirement: Trained in Performance, and you are wielding a slashing weapon with at least two of the following traits: agile, finesse, forceful, or sweep.
While you are in this stance, once per round as a free action, you may give your weapon the agile, finesse, forceful or sweep trait until the start of your next turn. If your weapon already has at least three out of four of these traits, you may instead increase it's base damage die by one step.
And perhaps a "greater" version granting two traits?
As to the last part, what if you added a Modification bit to said items?
For example, the Bark-Scratched Primal spell could apply a +1 bonus to learn or cast, or the Ankheg Gallbladder Acid Flask a +1 bonus to persistent damage.
That might get 'em to record which one was different because if they don't they miss out on the Modification!
You could also do negative Modifications too (-1 to learn/cast, -1 persistent damage) if you wanted too...
Ok how about this:
Alchemical "Sting" Salve
(Alchemy, Consumable, Tool)
These tiny vials of blueish-white substance are applied dermally to open wounds and areas of blunt trauma, and immediately begin working to re-seal torn flesh and dissolve into the bloodstream, creating a "stinging" sensation across the affected area of the recipient, and bolstering the immune system temporarily against ongoing effects.
Requirement: You have healer's tools.
Activate: Interact (AA) using healer's tools.
If you are trained in Medicine, you may combine two of the following actions into a single check: Administer First Aid (Stabilize), Administer First Aid (Stop Bleeding), Treat Poison, and/or Treat Wounds. If you also have the Battle Medicine feat, you may instead perform this as a single action (A) using healer's tools.
Minor: as described above.
1) Choose 5 dragons of appropriate combined CR
This method requires the least prep-work as you essentially run 5 creatures as if they were 3 at a time.
No no no.
When you pay cash, your change is in "gold" bills and "silver" or "copper" coins.
If you put ten units of a lower denomination together, you get a single unit of a higher denominational value.
It's actually addition using base ten, something humans, with their fingers and toes, are hard-wired for.
Which, is actually why I love the new Silver Economy and Bulk Encumbrance systems!
To be fair, Silver-based economy is basically fractions in disguise!
Too, "Light" items using Bulk system! And rounding!
All sneakily re-dressed!
Ok let's "PF2" the tension pool concept. Bear with:
1) Each time the party takes a 10-minute rest in a dungeon, roll a flat check vs DC = 10 + number of dice currently in the tension pool.
2) On a failure, add a die to the tension pool. On a critical failure, roll the pool.
3) Depending on how "high traffic" and how "noisy" the PCs are, vary the type of dice accordingly (ex. Main Hallway and PCs use Blasting Spells and Ki Shouting = d4's; Isolated Corner and PCs use Stealth Tactics and/or Take Out their Foes during First Round = d12's)
X) For larger and/or less populated dungeons, start the flat check base DC lower (at DC 5 or DC 0).
To be fair, unless someone posting here has tried both ways - Raising magic is Common vs. Raising magic is Rare - it is by definition "armchair".
That said, perhaps the existence and proliferation of this thread is proof to the validity of the claim it implicitly pupports?
Perhaps not in your games - perhaps so but you haven't noticed?
I can say this.
If rolling successfully to Recall Knowledge is worth an action, allocating resources towards Automatic Knowledge makes this a free action.
If you otherwise use all three of your actions per round, it may be worth considering getting a "fourth" (free).
Again, this is also DM-dependent. If the DM gives good information on a Recall, then it may be worth it.
Just trying to throw you a random idea you may not have considered (hence turning here). Cheers!
Pretty sure it's not a misprint folks.
Bulk, like Encumbrance, is an imperfect system, requiring a human to intercede when the system fails to adequately represent a situation.
There is no perfect system - only ones that lend themselves to more "usability" by virtue of minimizing compromises between opposing forces such as "realism" vs "gamism".
As a DM, if you want to turn up the "realism" notch regarding rations - perhaps because a Theme of your game is Dangerous Wilderness Survival - feel free to houserule Rations as "L per day" or "B per week".
For those who "hate" Bulk there is nothing I can say to make you "un-hate" it. Sorry!