Search Posts
Reflecting upon this, a lot could have been solved by us going “how do we want to approach this?” Granted, it kind of slows things down, but if we had ‘table talked’ we might have performed better. Anyway, I apologize on my part and thank SB again for the game.
I'd be down for an Elder Scrolls game. Nice chance to play some PF1 as well.
Very interested. I can bring in a Bard, Cavalier or Inquisitor.
I’d be interested!
Done that!
For background, I picked Deputy. My ancestry feat is General Training. I used it to pick Dirty Trick.
Will do. Pm’ed you.
Okay, meet D'osh Kala: D’osh Kala Gunslinger 1
I'm interested and could submit a character right now.
If not, I have a Vindicator Ranger of Zevagzieb ready to be played as well!
I’m interested. I have a single handed sword human fighter and an aiuvarin triggerbrand gunslinger I could apply for that frontliner position. If you allow playtest content, I could also come up with a Guardian.
I’ve been out of these forums for a while and I’d like to ask if there’s any news on Battlecry’s release date? Took a look at the Products page and found nothing. Isn’t it supposed to be up of they’re aiming for a Gencon release?
Wrapped up a test with a level 6 Commander (Apologizing in advance for any mistakes, because my native language is portuguese). My party was myself (playing with a shortbow, Deceptive Tactics, Battle Medic, Guiding Shot, a Folio with Strike Hard!, Form Up!, End It! and Reload!), a Guardian, a Fighter and a Triggerbrand Gunslinger. Ran through four encounters (moderate against four lvl -2 foes, severe against two level +1 creatures, moderate and severe against an appropriate number of equal level creatures). My overall impressions of the class were very positive. Strike Hard really shines on a party that has a Fighter or a Gunslinger, but there were instances in which I commanded the Guardian to strike as well. Reload! did wonders for my Gunslinger, freeing up their action economy. I remember that one of the encounters feature a couple Boggard warriors, so the Banner helped us succeed against their terrifying croaks. Drilled reactions helped the Fighter and Gunslinger to benefit from my commands while also using their reactions (I remember the GS used Fake Out a lot). Deceptive Tactics didn't see much use. It's a nice 1st level feat, but setting a Diversion or Feinting didn't really fit into my action economy. I wonder if having more ways for the Commander to use deception (maybe something to feint for your allies or combining it with the Rogue or Swashbuckler's overextending feints) would help, maybe a feat chain? I liked being able to use int for Battle Medicine and to use Warfare for initiative. I got to trigger End it once and it felt very thematic. Everyone at the table loved it. For suggestions: 1) I felt that the Commander should have more tactics prepared. I took the sixth level feat for the extra tactic, but, even then, three felt like too little. 2) This character I made was a retread of my Warrior Muse Bard. Overall I enjoyed it more, but I feel that Strike Hard should have a small boon attached to it even in its base form, maybe just a +1 to damage (doesn't need to compare to CAnthem)
3) During play, my fellow gamers suggested that I command them to perform other maneuvers (Grapples, Disarms and Trips) not part of the current Tactics. It would be nice to get Tactics attached to them as well, maybe similarly to the ones involving shoving and repositioning.
I understand your point and kind of agree, but at the same time I find myself wishing for the Commander’s tactics to improve (I’m of the opinion that Strike Hard could use a rider - maybe small damage bonus). Then again, some classes already suffer from that. You get better versions of damage spells, activities that end up replacing your Strikes (Snagging Strike, Double Slice, Slam Down and its inproved version to name a few), etc. I don’t know if the existence of better versions of base tactics is harmful in itself.
It recently occurred to me that there is a part of the Commander class fantasy that could be better represented in the rules.
But another facet that also represents class may be that of the Commander who blows a horn (think Boromir blowing the horn of Gondor or the classic American officer sounding commands through a trumpet). I know one could argue that these would be just warrior muse bards, but I feel that there is space for Commanders to also employ sound instruments, whether through a feat that shapes the banner’s area or extends it temporarily or a dedicated item.
My problem with the class in a nutshell: if I'm giving up my almost entire turn and my chassis mostly lacks defense or direct contribution, then I want a lot more than "my friend can make 1 more basic Strike" as one of my two special abilities I can prepare. Because if the result is not at least as good as the sum of its parts, what is the point of playing a support? In this case I could just build an actual martial character and achieve a vastly superior result for my party. Overall, I’m loving the concept of the commander. I just think it needs a bit more oomph. I think Strike Hard! would become more enticing if it had a rider, like Arcane Cascade bonus to damage or half int. That way, the Commander could spend their actions to give their allies better versions of their actions. Also, a way to command other activities, like a Spellstrike (maybe as a three action, level-locked or once per battle) could be great
I feel like there's room for something between the power level of Strike Hard and the master tactics (Ready, Aim, Fire and Demoralizing Charge). Maybe adding another charge or attack command with a rider as an expert tactic. I know this will probably be the case, but I'm hoping for more expert tactics once the book releases.
So, watched most of it. Mark pointed out that the focus point change will have huge implications to the point that he thinks that it'll change the meta. He also noted how spell schools were very OGL/D&Desque, pointing out how their removal could potentially add breadth and design space. Spirit damage was also noted as significant. On the cantrip topic, which is the contentious subject, mark infers that their goal was probably removing ability scores to simplify. The d4 values (2d4 for ignition and 3d4 for the needle cantrip are probably Paizo working with the new numbers, rather than a straight nerf because they thought casters were OP) One thing both he and Jessica pointed out was that the preview's goal was to make RoE playable/usable, so its to soon to make any assumptions.
Don't know if this is the place to ask this question, but seem to recall having heard it mentioned that there would be a 'guide' of some sorts to go with Rage of the Elements while we wait for Player Core. I think it was during the Jason-Logan adress when Player Core was announced - if memory serves me right, one of them even mentioned an example 'when we refer to the ignition spell, we are refering to this'. Will it be available alongside Rage of the Elements?
Wow, very hyped for this book... I have to admit I've been off the loop on my Paizo news. Seem to recall this was supposed to contain some alchemist errata, although looking at the table of contents for alchemy unleashed, it seems to be just items. Or was the errata meant to be a CRB errata?
Hi y’all I am playing an Alchemist and a question came up during our last session. The Quick Alchemy action says the item it creates ‘ has the infused trait, but it remains potent only until the start of your next turn’. So if I use Quick Alchemy to create a mutagen or elixir with an effect that lasts for 1 minute like a lesser bestial mutagen, does it end at the end of my turn or does it keep its effects as normal and I get until the end of my turn to drink it? I imagine the correct answer should be the second, but is there any rule that supports this interpretation? My GM said they’re okay with ruling it this way but would like to know if there is any specific text in the rules…
I will keep hoping. The Inquisitor/Arbiter/Confessor/Avenger is probably the most requested class now that the Kineticist is being made. The design space is there. We just need an opportunity to present itself (:
So, not to speculate too much, as this doesn’t mesn anything but I have a friend who has Kingmaker for 2e and they let me peruse the Companion guide. Was surprised to see that Jaethal is now a Champion rather than an Inquisitor, while Kanera and her sister remain Kineticists without the rules. Curious to why they changed her to a Champion since she didn’t have a Statblock. Maybe Paizo eventually moves away from the name Inquisitor (or the class altogether)…
For me, I'd want a mix between 4e's Avenger and PF1's Inquisitor. I know that NPCs are never indicative of how Paizo intends to do things, but someone on reddit pointed me to this NPC in SoT that was an Inquisitor of Wakena. Took a look at the sheet (the NPC is named Worknesh). It had a one-action judgement, a few intimidation abilities and one of them gave bonuses to their allies. Also noted that their judgement and abilities seemed to be centered around their deity, which was... interesting. The class would be huge if that were the case, though.
I don't recall much about the 1e Kineticist, but from playing the Kingmaker CRPG I kind of wish there was a feat to add traits to the blast so that Kineticists could make maneuvers with them.
Gonna make more than one prediction and say we’ll see the Inquisitor this time around coupled with a divine, but reworked Shaman (think it’ll be divine because of the spirit + life as opposed to matter +life in SoM) Next year’ll be Kineticist + Shifter and in 2024 we’ll see APG2 or Mythic to mark the edition’s five year anniversary (:
Having had the chance to read Dark Archive, personally, I would like to see a couple new martial classes, maybe a Warlord-like class that is to the Marshal what the Monk is to the Martial Artist...
I've also been looking at the APG previews for the Pathfinder Savage Worlds game and a few extra feats and orders for the Cavalier archetype wouldn't be bad to include with this product as well.
My watch continues. I just saw that my card was charged yesterday, yet I haven’t received a shipping notification. Is this normal or should I contact CS?
Can check it out at paizo.com/paizocon.
Uh, so now that the schedule has been released… I suppose Michael’s announcement will be on the Secrets of Golarion panel?
I’m all for seeing more Class Archetypes. I know the system is still new, but hope Paizo expands on them. Considering the initial suggestion of Warpriest, Alchemist and Witch, what do you think they’d be like? I mean, I could see Alchemist exchanging reagents or item types for a better proficiency with Bombs or a better way to use Mutagens on themselves. The Warpriest and the Witch, though, I do not know so well… I think that with Class Archetypes, the design space could be maleable enough that one could tinker a lot with some features.
People keep asking for changes to feats, classes ..., but errata are not that. I don't think we'll ever see errata to the extent that we saw with the latest CRB errata. Like it or not. The other books are suplements, even if the APG is counted as one of the core four. That said, I sympathize with those claiming for a Witch buff. I think the Witch is in a tight spot in that its overall kit can be seen and felt as lacklustre. If you pick the other contentious classes, like the Alchemist or the Warpriest, you still have a nice chassis that can be optimized with some system mastery. Heck, a class archetype changing some alchemical item types or uses of divine font for other goodies could even provide players with so called 'fixes'. The Witch, not so much, IMHO. But then, I only had one Witch player in my table and I let them keep playing with the playtest version since they felt they liked that iteration of the class better.
Gotta admit I was expecting more. I don't know, I guess Paizo is not so willing to change much or these classes/feats/rules work the way the design team intends them to and we're missing something. Hoped that we had some other way to get errata other than waiting for new printings. I have hopes that Paizo eventually does a book with Class Archetypes for every class to allow some of those issues to be addressed in a way that is more controlled. Perhaps then players will be able to exchange proficiencies and or class features for more viability on some builds.
I’m all for a divine or primal book At this point, I think it’s unlikely that we’ll get a third rulebook this year unless it contains material that doesn’t require public playtesting… Assuming Paizo keeps their model, Paizocon would have the announcement of next year’s ‘bestiary’ and Gencon would have the playtest and next august release… They could change things up though
So, like many, I've been having a blast playing Elden Ring, particularly using the multiple versions of Carian Slicer, Piercer, Greatsword, etc. Going back to my weekly campaign, I just realised that PF2 has no spells that let you conjure weapons. The closest thing we could get is Soulforged armaments, but those are tied to Wis and divine casting... This is a common trope, with games like Skyrim and even Dnd with its shadow and fire blades coming to mind. Here's to hoping that we see some of these spells in PF2 one day (:Maybe as a modification available to Spell Tricksters (something like 'you change the spell to resemble a weapon and attack with it') or as their own spells
Do we know the names of all archetypes in the book? I remember a few of them spoiled here, such as the Undead Master, but was wondering if we got a list during Paizo Live...
Hi all, I'm a forever GM who's been playing their first PF2 campaign (as a player... I've GM'ed a homebrew 1-20 PF2 campaign right before this one). I have a greataxe wielding Inexorable Iron Magus and we're very close to reaching the 6th level. Turns out that, although I've been enjoying my time going nova and dealing tons of damage, I'm finding myself thinking about giving my Magus some time off and bringing in a new character. The group's Bastion just changed characters to become an Animal Instinct Barbarian, so I'm looking towards other concepts. However, there are just so many options. I was wondering if I could get your opinions on what could fit with my party. We're six players. Myself, a Warpriest of Chaldira, a Forensic Investigator, a Tyrant Marshall of Asmodeus, the Animal Barbarian and a Stars Oracle. Any cool concepts or build/archetype ideas that could maybe fill a niche in my group?
1) Bounded-casting classes of other traditions. Maybe shifter as the primal one and Inquisitor as the divine one. 2) More frequent errata. 3) More support for existing classes 4) More skill feats. 5) Mythic rules
What I'd like the most was if it were a book that expanded on the options for existing classes with class archetypes. What I think it'll be: a thematic book akin to SoM, G&G and DA. Could be that it'll contain just a single class instead of two as Paizo slows down on the new class department. That said, I'm with keftiu in wanting the Inquisitor, the Kineticist, the Shifter, the Bloodrager and the Shaman to eventually make their way into PF2, either as classes or as class archetypes or subclasses.
I agree with the OP. While getting new classes, mechanics and thematic expansions is nice, I feel there is still potential to expand the existing classes with new feats, subclasses and class archetypes. Would love if we got a new barbarian instinct (bloodrager?), cleric doctrine and a dual wielding magus hybrid study in the future.
Hello, I'd like to cancel my adventure path subscription. I want to keep the Rulebook subscription.
Basically, the thread's title. I know Striker's Scroll alows a Magus to attach a scroll to their weapon to Spellstrike with it. The Scrollstaff seems to do the same thing, albeit with the Magus having to craft the scroll into the staff. I was wondering if the rules on the Scrollstaff, that include allowing the caster to Cast a Spell from the imbued scroll would allow a Magus to use it with Spellstrike, since it includes the Cast a Spell activity?
Just to add to the discussion, Paizo tends to go for underpowered with the playtest and then fine tune the class once it releases. Not saying this is the case, but we've seen this with the Magus, Summoner and will likely see it with the Gunslinger and Inventor. That is to say, I think their power level will be closer when the class is published. I also find the whole trained Perception throughout the entire career to be weird. Have we any confirmation on whether it was a slight akin to the Inventor's unstable mechanic or the way the class is intended to be playtested?
While the Inquisitor is the class that I want to see ported into 2e the most, I think that it is totally possible to build an Inquisitor using Thaumaturge as a chassis. IMHO, if the class was Wis based, it'd pretty much be a better way of building an Inquisitor with the current ruleset than, say the Cleric with Investigator dedication and vice versa that those that don't feel the Inquisitor has a set niche advocate for. Would be even more viable if there was a Divine Pact feat. The Thaumaturge pretty much summarizes the monster hunter aspect and mechanics of the 1e Inquisitor Class. Wouldn't be surprised to see the Inquisitor as a Thaumaturge Class Archetype. Or perhaps this allows the 2e Inquisitor to have a different niche, perhaps leaning more into smiting bounded caster role.
Mark, I've also gotta jump in here to congratulate you and the team for this class. I'm only on my first detailed read-through and already have so many ideas for different characters. Looking forward to playtesting!
Hmm. I suppose we'll have to consider a lot of variables, but while I can see the 'you convince the universe to help you themes', I also think that sorting and collecting esoterica could be more of an intutitive and perhaps Wisdom-based thing.
|
