rooneg's page

I looked at mine. Interesting that for my GenCon tables I get 13 AcP but no GM credit. The GenCon tables should have 12 AcP.

You may notice that tables where you’re being credited for an extra AcP also are not counting for your total number of tables of PF2. All the tables I’ve GMed (which happen to all either be from GenCon or from a local premier con, so all five give more than the base amount of AcP) are giving me one more AcP than they should and none of them are being counted towards my total PF2 tables run.

Nice guide. I did notice one error though. In your evaluation of Alchemist Dedication you say that you’re not trained in Alchemical Bombs. That’s not true, the dedication does give you training in bombs. Now it never goes beyond trained, and if your Dex isn’t high you may be terrible with them, but they still seem like an okay low level option to me if your Dex starts at 16.

Also, you seem to think Automatic Knowledge is a daily effect, it’s actually once per round, any number of times per day. It’s still kind of bad though due to the need to invest in assurance on an otherwise useless skill to have assurance on and the fact that you only succeed on recall knowledge with assurance on below level threats so it’s rarely going to do much at all.

Nice guide. I did notice one error though. In your evaluation of Alchemist Dedication you say that you’re not trained in Alchemical Bombs. That’s not true, the dedication does give you training in bombs. Now it never goes beyond trained, and if your Dex isn’t high you may be terrible with them, but they still seem like an okay low level option to me if your Dex starts at 16.

In addition to what people have already said, Dispel Magic also tends to be useful for dealing with magical effects that are written in to adventures. You know, magical traps or bits of terrain that do bad stuff to the PCs. My Sorcerer in Age of Ashes has not regretted having it as a Signature Spell.

Just a quick question that came up while trying to build a character from Cheliax. The regional languages on page 232 don't include Infernal, despite the Lost Omens World Guide saying citizens of Cheliax speak it. The Guide to Organized Play also fails to list it as a cultural language that's available to anyone. Is this another oversight like Erutaki and Varki, or is it not intended to be available to PFS characters from Cheliax?

also from what i read, the bloodlines spells granted to you are in fact your signature spells at each of those levels. so you cannot make chain lighting your signature spell because its not in elementals bloodline spells.

That is incorrect. Your signature spells are entirely independent of your bloodline spells. You can select a bloodline spell as a signature spell, but you don't have to (and often it would be a terrible choice since not all bloodline spells scale when heightened).

Corvo Spiritwind wrote:

Bit sidenote, speaking of PF2, any idea if there is any Play by post presence on these forums? Looking to get into it digitally, but things are too hectic for voice sessions.

Yes, you can find the play-by-post forums right here. There haven't been too many P2e games start up yet that I've seen, though.

FWIW, there seem to be plenty of PF2 PBP games on Discord (the Roll for Combat discord server has tons of them, for example).

Claxon wrote:

I wont disagree that athletics and knowledge have their uses, I just argue that's its not worth investing something as significant as ability points into to get a few more that never advance.

Especially if you're human or pick up human ancestry for Clever Improviser.

Untrained improvisation is also a general feat any ol' ancestry can pick up.

Oh, no argument on either of those from me. There are few builds where I think boosting INT is the best way to get more trained skills, but I will go out of my way to make sure I've got ways to get a level bonus to those skills, either by becoming trained or something like Untrained Improvisation.

How many skills are you worried about being only trained in?

Personally I want to be at least trained in Athletics for basically any character because it sucks to have to jump through hoops to avoid swimming and climbing even easy things. I also find it useful to be trained in skills used for knowledge checks because you often are put in situations where everyone in the party can attempt the check and being trained means your shot-in-the-dark roll at least has a chance of succeeding.

To insert while in Microsoft Word, select the Insert section on the ribbon. Select Symbol and then "More Symbols...". That brings up a dialogue box where you can scroll through all of the symbols in your data set.

An easy way to find specific symbols is to type in the 4-character Character Code:
2666 ◆ [Black Diamond Suit]
25CA ◊ [Lozenge]
I am unable to locate ↺ so far. Perhaps Tender Tendrils can provide the character code for this symbol.

It appears to be Anticlockwise Open Circle Arrow: https://www.compart.com/en/unicode/U+21BA

b) For rebuilds, I see it as pretty amzing to have that offered at all. The campaign has traditionally been very cautious about post-level 1 rebuilds. The un-limited (and fairly cheap) under level 5 option, is a huge boon (no pun originally intended) for us. That they offer the 5 and up one as well, at increasing cost is still a nice relaxing of the rules, but at a steep enough cost that people won't show up week to week with a different build.

I guess I just don't see the problem with someone showing up week to week with a different build. You're already playing in a campaign where the players at a given table can change arbitrarily from week to week, what does it really hurt if someone decides to blow some AcP on multiple rebuilds? I mean yeah, I think it's a waste, but fundamentally is it really more disruptive than that spot at the table being filled by a completely different person with a completely different character?

pauljathome wrote:

Michael Sayre wrote:

The overall rewards for everyone have increased.

Uh,that's not really true. [...]

Sure it is. Did you get three race boons a year just for GMing regularly on your way to 5 stars before? Because now if you're an active GM you do, plus your bonus points for convention GMing. If you do 7+ slots at a major con, you get an ancestry boon's worth of points plus a free rebuild and three free resurrections. And if you don't want/need an uncommon ancestry you've got e.g. many lifetimes' worth of free resurrections.

At the end of the day this is one of the most generous programs we've ever had. The World Guide is a core assumption. Every weekly player gets enough points for a new ancestry over the course of the year and a twice-monthly GM who GMs a con can clear three. A highly active GM who runs weekly games and attends multiple cons might clear a year with 6 or more. And that'll apply to every GM, not just the ones who make it to GenCon or get lucky on an RSP roll.

The problem is you're using the word everyone, when there are definitely patterns of playing/GMing that now get demonstrably lower amounts of awards. I'm one of them. I've GMed at GenCon and the level I GMed at now results in fewer rewards than I got under the previous system. I typically GM at a local con (historically I did this for AL, but I intend to do PFS going forward because I like your system better) and the rewards I'll get under the new system are way lower (due to the "premier" and "premier plus" being the only cons that scale up more than home games) than the rewards I would have gotten under the old system.

On average this system may result in more rewards for your population of players and GMs, but it does not do so for everyone and it does not do so for me. I'm not an active week to week PFS GM or player, so for me it definitely results in fewer boons, and that was not something I was expecting when I signed up for this system site unseen last year by volunteering for last GenCon. I signed up expecting to be able to qualify for at least an ancestry boon for PFS2, and based on the numbers I can see I'm actually 8 points short. Fortunately I have no burning desire to play a Leshy, Iruxi, or Hobgoblin, so I'll bank the points and move on with my life, but it's still missing expectations for me.

If we’re using Gen Con as a benchmark, it’s always been required that you volunteer as a top “tier” which is 7+ slots most years to qualify for the top GM boon. At 16 points per slot, that’s 112 points. More than enough to get all but the hobgoblin boon, which in past years would have been considered a charity auction level reward and only available to a single, or very small number of people. You could add the eighth block to get the hobgoblin now, or you could just roll some local area points to make up the other 8 points.

The incentive program is not going to be the “best fit” for everyone, but it is the best we have and generally supports both local and convention play. As TOZ said, OPF leadership would be happy to hear about ideas for other meaningful rewards because we are always looking for ways to incentivize various play models. If you are looking for open use of all Paizo produced content, then you are looking for a home-style game. PFS/SFS is a campaign like any other where the GM, in this case Paizo, gets to decide what is acceptable for their campaign and then the players, all of us, get to decide if it is a campaign we want to participate in. For most, it is, but for some, it is not, and that’s okay. Every campaign cannot be all things to all people. It’s unfortunate that some will not play PFS because of these limitations, but we eternally grateful for the size and scope of OPF which is arguably the largest campaign that has ever existed.

Explore! Report! Cooperate!

The reward for 4 slots at last GenCon was an uncommon race boon that let you build a Ghoran, a Kobold, or a Lupine. Now maybe that isn’t “top tier”, but it sure feels like it’s equivalent to the Leshy or Iruxi. I’m not asking for the Hobgoblin, but 4 slots translating to some type of ancestry boon like it previously has seems pretty reasonable to me.

rooneg wrote:

Michael Sayre wrote:

We aimed to have these costs land in a place where we could be reasonably confident that anyone going all in to GM at a major convention would walk away with enough points to buy a new ancestry, regular GMs who travel to a major convention and do a 4 slot commitment will likely gain enough bonus points that they'll probably walk away with enough points for a new ancestry, and a player who plays twice a month will still unlock an uncommon ancestry once a year.

GMing 4 slots at GenCon (a Premier Plus convention) gets you 48 points. That's 32 point short of the cheapest ancestry on this list. Even if you assume they also played in another 4 slots that's still short of the 80 points needed. Are you assuming those 4 slots worth of points are combining with other points they've earned from GMing at home? [...]

Yes. They've just gained points equivalent to 3 months of weekly play for a player when running 4 slots and the rewards given to them just for GMing in general are greater than they were in the previous campaign. Being a regular GM at any game store is still enough to buy you all three ancestry boons listed above with points to spare. If you add in 4 slots at a convention like GenCon you can clear 4 uncommon ancestries with points to spare and if you go all-in at a con you're guaranteed an ancestry. The overall rewards for everyone have increased.

Except that not all of us GM PFS outside of the occasional con. In effect you’ve raised the price of those boons, they now require us to GM regularly outside of cons in addition to volunteering our time to make conventions possible.

We aimed to have these costs land in a place where we could be reasonably confident that anyone going all in to GM at a major convention would walk away with enough points to buy a new ancestry, regular GMs who travel to a major convention and do a 4 slot commitment will likely gain enough bonus points that they'll probably walk away with enough points for a new ancestry, and a player who plays twice a month will still unlock an uncommon ancestry once a year.

GMing 4 slots at GenCon (a Premier Plus convention) gets you 48 points. That's 32 point short of the cheapest ancestry on this list. Even if you assume they also played in another 4 slots that's still short of the 80 points needed. Are you assuming those 4 slots worth of points are combining with other points they've earned from GMing at home? Because that's a pretty significant change from the way things worked with PF1 or SFS, where convention GMing was itself enough to qualify for these sort of awards.

The boons look great, but I do have to say that I think the prices on the ancestries look about twice as expensive as I'd expect them to be. If running 4 slots of PF2 at GenCon (and playing in 4 more!) isn't enough to qualify for an ancestry boon then either the boons are too expensive or you're not giving out enough AcP. And that's at a premier plus convention, the absolute best case scenario for earning points.

Also, I'm kind of curious on the increasing prices. What's the reasoning behind making things like resurrections or rebuilds more expensive each time you do it? Does the base price reset each "season", or does that carry over?

Narxiso wrote:

I think kukris are pretty bad for rogues, as it doesn't scale with proficiency at level 5 and requires another feat at 13 (8 levels with 2 lower attack) to increase proficiency past trained. Unless I'm mistaken, as the increased proficiency in Gnome Weapon Familiarity says martial and simple gnome weapons and kukris don't have the gnome trait

I was under the impression this was errata'd in the first round that came out.

The only change to Gnome Weapon Familiarity in the errata was granting access to Kukris in addition to uncommon Gnome Weapons.

rooneg wrote:

Excellent guide! I'm looking forward to using it while planning out my next character.

One question: Can a Champion even take Godless Healing? I don't think you can build a Champion who doesn't have a patron deity.

Not yet, but there's a potential for a "Champion of Mortality" later on for a Rahadoumi Champion. Not sure how they're going to excise the "deity" language from the class for that cause, but they'll find a way.

Sure, you could maybe do that at some point, but right now it's kind of hard to justify a three star rating for a feat that no Champion can actually qualify for.

Excellent guide! I'm looking forward to using it while planning out my next character.

One question: Can a Champion even take Godless Healing? I don't think you can build a Champion who doesn't have a patron deity.

This is very well done. Thanks, yall!

Now I just need to get my hands on this Secondary Initiation boon for Knights of Lastwall for a character. If anyone knows how I can get that please let me know.

It costs two fame.

Some of the wild shape spells say they are Dexterity based, so the GM knows how to handle ability drains. So it's clearly in the ball park. Would you calculate your unarmed attack bonus differently for theses forms?

Hmm. Good question. I missed those two spells when I made my first pass through. I think the answer is probably yes (so you could use Dexterity for Soaring Form and half of Elemental Form, but not the rest), but even then I'm not entirely sure. I guess you could argue against it because none of their attacks are actually Finesse, but I'm guessing the explicit Dexterity reference probably overrules that. It feels like it should have some clarification though, along with the various other "how does wild shape work?" sort of questions people are waiting for clarification on.

As for if the dependency is needed, I'm not 100% sure it is anyway. You're certainly giving up a couple of points of attack modifier for some levels, but it's not all the levels (maxing Strength helps you for your level 2 Animal Forms, for example, but not your level 3 ones). You still get benefit from it if you're casting specific form spells at specific spell levels (as opposed to using the maxed out version from your focus spell), since those will likely be lower level and thus your higher attack mod may more often end up coming out ahead, but how often will that come up? In the end, I think it's totally reasonable to dump STR, it's just also reasonable not to dump it (especially because your very first combat form will benefit from maxed out STR).

Hey Charon, just wanted to say that I'm a huge fan of this sheet. I've switched all my characters on to it over the past few weeks and it's a big improvement over paper.

One question I had was if you'd considered including a tab for stuff like your character's commonly used wild shape forms. It'd be awesome to be able to fill in a few of the base numbers and have it give you the final modifiers.

I've put together a guide for the Druid class

Gortle's Guide to Druids.

I like this guide a lot, but I think you're being a bit optimistic on how to calculate unarmed attack modifiers.

The fact that the only unarmed attack listed in table 6-6 is a fist (and thus is finesse) doesn't mean all unarmed attacks are finesse. I think it's kind of a stretch to use the finesse on fist to justify always using your DEX modifier when calculating what modifier to replace the spell's specified attack modifier with. I mean literally all the spells call out their attacks as being Strength based, none of the actual unarmed attacks in the various forms are finesse, and the rules for calculating attack modifiers are pretty clear on only using DEX when you're using a weapon that has finesse.

There are plenty of things that are unclear about how wild shape meshes with other parts of the game, but this doesn't seem like one of them to me.

That would leave you with a feat benefit that was INCREDIBLY strong to take at level 2, but then became useless when your main class proficiency caught up. It seems like a great way to get people to learn about retraining.

It would also make it possible to totally steal the Fighter's thunder from levels 2 through 4 (1 through 4 if you're an Ancient Elf). Multiclass Dedications aren't supposed to make you as good as another class at their core thing, that's why you don't start getting 1st level spells until you pick up the second feat in the dedication and why stuff like inspire courage doesn't come online until incredibly late in the game for multiclass Bards. This would let you have a Champion who's as good at hitting people with a sword as a Fighter at level 2, which is pretty uncool to the Fighter.

Also you can use create undead in legal play so long as your infamy does not reach (3), and these books can be found but it would be in specific locations (Evil Churches)(Evil locations) & (Tombs) at GM's Discretion

You seem to be under the impression that these rituals are the sort of thing the GM can just drop in to a module. That's not how PFS works. As I understand it until there's some PFS legal adventure where the rituals you want are made explicitly available there isn't a legal way for your character to get it.

Honestly, I think it's difficult to say much about how the PFS2 system works because the AcPs we've been accumulating literally cannot be spent on anything and exactly when that will be possible and what the price for any particular thing remains unclear. I do think the bonuses to GMing at conventions is weirdly small (25% bonus at "Premier" conventions, 50% at "Premier Plus", no reward at all for GMing at a non-Premier con, the AcPs you get are identical to what you'd get for running it at home).

Is this update also going to correct the Achievement Points issue where GM sessions show up as 1 point instead of whatever they're actually supposed to be? Or is it limited to Playtest Points?

So, I’m mostly okay with the campaign mode only thing, but I do wonder about the keepsake thing. I get that the idea is to replicate a more normal “divide up the loot” style thing, but PFS doesn’t do that in other places, so why do it now? Beyond that, I have literally zero clue why the rules for it go in the sanctioning document as opposed to in the organized play rules site, you know, the thing that exists because it’s easier to update and the place a player might look for an explanation long after they receive the chronicle and almost certainly don’t have the rest of the doc.

Also, yeah, this should be replayable and there needs to be a bunch of clarification on how partial plays work, it’s 16 hours of content, not everyone is going to show up for the whole thing.

My PF2 Half-Elf with the 10 Intelligence started with Common, period. Despite the fact that he has Elven ancestries...

This could be read as 'why don't half-elves have both Common and Elvish'? But I note that the Half-Orc is in the same boat.

This is an error in the Core Rulebook. Humans (and thus a Half-Elves) are supposed to start with common plus one other language plus your int mod extra languages, which would let you take elvish.

Most of mine are there just fine, but it looks like I'm missing a couple of tables I played in (one of which is one of NielsenE's) and one that I GMed. I also think people were a bit overzealous with the "adding in the -2001 for the character" part of things, because I got multiple copies of 1-03 that I GMed assigned to my -2001 character even though I'd left the character number off all but the first table of that module that I GMed. Email sent with details and photos of the docs.

For what it’s worth all of my issues were quickly resolved, everything looks great now.

Most of mine are there just fine, but it looks like I'm missing a couple of tables I played in (one of which is one of NielsenE's) and one that I GMed. I also think people were a bit overzealous with the "adding in the -2001 for the character" part of things, because I got multiple copies of 1-03 that I GMed assigned to my -2001 character even though I'd left the character number off all but the first table of that module that I GMed. Email sent with details and photos of the docs.

Sandra Wilkinson wrote:

GMs receive a race boon, but PFS2 GMs receive the same award as GMs of a home game

You have to consider that GMs at conventions are likely earning many more AcP than a local gameday because they are running multiple sessions in a short period of time. The points earned roughly replicate the value of receiving a race boon under the PFS(1) system.

I don't really buy this argument. "You get more points because you spent more time running games" isn't something special about a con, it's just a reflection of the time invested. Most GMs could run more games at home if they wanted and not have to pay for travel and lodging.

I'm really saddened to learn Red Mantis Assassin still requires evil. They have such cool abilities.

That said, as an eternal GM I rarely get to play a character, so I guess it wont impact me much. Still a little sad.

One of the boons auctioned off for charity at GenCon this year gives you a background that allows you to be a renegade Red Mantis Assassin, which opens the archetype up to a Lawful Neutral character. So when the book drops presumably there will be at least one non-evil character with the archetype wandering around in Pathfinder Society games. Sadly, it went for a stupidly large amount of money, so I won't be the one using it.

rooneg wrote:

I don't know about something on the scale of a pseudodragon or a faerie dragon, but the enhanced familiar feats can give you 4 traits for your familiar, which lets you build a pretty convincing version of some of the cooler familiars. My gnome is going to have a cotton topped tamarin with darkvision, speech, a climb speed, and usable hands, which seems like it should be enough to get in a lot of amusing trouble ;-)

I love Tamarins! My favorite type is the Golden Lion Tamarin. My local zoo is part of the breeding program to keep them from becoming extinct. They are just wonderful animals.

They're pretty spectacular animals, our local science museum has a bunch and my daughter used to spend a lot of time watching their antics. I went with a Cotton Topped Tamarin because clearly my gnome is going to have to dye its hair different colors ;-)

Jack Brown wrote:

rooneg wrote:

I saw a neat trick at GenCon. There's this set of square stackable coins from Campaign Coins that comes exactly 10 to a pack. Our GM left the stack out in front of him where we could all see it and every time we found a treasure bundle he removed a coin from the pile to make it clear that we'd gotten it. PFS modules have 10 treasure bundles worth of loot available, so it works out perfectly.

Roomeg, would you mind sending a link to these?

I might be the GM in question, as I picked up the Dwarven Tower set from Campaign Coins. The Soldier set has 10 solid square coins in 3 different sizes, that stack into a neat tower. Link

You are indeed the GM in question, and thank you for running that table of 1-01, it was a lot of fun.

Weirdly, the Campagin Coins website seems to only be selling 10 of one particular size. At GenCon they had a pack that gave you 10 coins in three different sizes to give a nice pyramid effect, but I can't seem to find it now.

I saw a neat trick at GenCon. There's this set of square stackable coins from Campaign Coins that comes exactly 10 to a pack. Our GM left the stack out in front of him where we could all see it and every time we found a treasure bundle he removed a coin from the pile to make it clear that we'd gotten it. PFS modules have 10 treasure bundles worth of loot available, so it works out perfectly.

I don't know about something on the scale of a pseudodragon or a faerie dragon, but the enhanced familiar feats can give you 4 traits for your familiar, which lets you build a pretty convincing version of some of the cooler familiars. My gnome is going to have a cotton topped tamarin with darkvision, speech, a climb speed, and usable hands, which seems like it should be enough to get in a lot of amusing trouble ;-)

If you need additional evidence, note that the Valeros pregen has Double Slice for precisely this reason.

(FWIW, I don't think this is a particularly edge case case, as you say, shields are literally listed in the weapons table. This clearly works.)

Thanks!

I made a whiteroom comparison where a level 6 (triple shot minimum) Fighter and Ranger, both Archers shoot unimpeded assuming:

Both use a +1 striking composite shortbow.
Both have 18 DEX and 14 STR.
Fighter has Point Blank Shot, Double Shot and Triple Shot.
Ranger has Hunted Shot, Flurry Edge and Quick Draw.
Both target a AC 22 opponent.

1st Round:
Fighter: Point-Blank Shot, Double Shot = 18 avg. damage
Ranger: Hunt Prey, Quick Draw, Hunted Shot = 16 avg. damage

Following Rounds:
Fighter: Triple Shot = 21 avg. damage
Ranger: Hunted Shot, Strike, Strike = 20 avg. damage

I'd say damage wise its very similar. You would choose Fighter if you want more martial versatility or Ranger for overall exploration utility and mobility.

I feel like you're missing some stuff in your analysis. If your Fighter is going to get away without spending an action to draw their weapon I'm not sure why your Ranger needs to use Quick Draw for it. That said, if the ranger is using Quick Draw they should have an extra attack on the 1st round. Also, if the Fighter is going to invest in Point-Blank Shot how do things change if they use a Longbow? How does this all change if you're outside of Point-Blank Shot range?

Hey, it's been a few days, just wondering if someone had a chance to take a look at this.

Also... I keep reading and re-reading the rules, and... I can cast Ray of Frost 3 times for 3 attacks, each dealing 5d4 points of cold damage... or Produce Flame 3 tmes for 3 attacks, each dealing 5d4 points of fire damage..., both at 10th level.

All the offensive cantrips take two actions to cast, you're not going to be casting them more than once in a round.

Blake's Tiger wrote:

Yeah, it was specific to kukris and gnomes. Also elves without Weapon Familiarity and the elven curveblade.

Now I'm sad for all those kukri-less gnomes. I was so excited that they had finally fixed gnome weapon proficiency into something useful by offering glaives and kukris in addition to standard gnome weapons. It meant that people had a reason to pick up gnome weapon proficiencies. Oh well, let's hope that there will be some access provided later.

Don't worry, they also gave them access to the only 1 handed d8 weapon with reach in the game, so they sure get something! ;-)

Again, I can understand why a buffer is nice at lower levels. I cannot understand why they are different across ancestries, though, in a front-loaded way. Anything that is front-loaded like this and only really relevant at the lower levels come across as weird design to me; I do not see a point to something that is only really relevant at the lowest of levels.

Dramatically more games are played at low level than at high level. That will continue to be true even if high level play works better in 2e because inevitably some games that start at low level will end before reaching high level. Additionally, people are typically introduced to the game via low level play, and if it sucks they will not continue to play, so making an extra effort to ensure that low level play is fun has a disproportionate impact. That’s the point.

When I'm playing something like PFS or 5e's AL I typically try to bring a suitable miniature for characters I'm likely to play. That can range from HeroForge custom printed miniatures for characters I really like to random prepainted miniatures that are close enough or for Starfinder I often use lego minifigs because it's pretty easy to find suitable scifi themed minifigs. Honestly though, just bring something, exactly what doesn't matter. I've seen people use everything from spare change to dice to heroclix (a good way to get your character referred to as "Batman" for the entire game), the point is to have something on the board that's recognizably yours, even if it doesn't resemble your character that much.

That said, even if you bring nothing at all you can probably work something out. When I GM I typically bring a bunch of random prepainted miniatures covering a wide variety of character types, and that's not terribly uncommon in my experience.

What does it accomplish for some options to have an expiration date?

Is there some hidden nugget of game design that makes the system function better by having Armor Proficiency investments mostly be valid from 1st to 12th, only to become sidelined by 13th?

If nothing else it opens up design space for other things that do scale up. The Fighter and Champion dedications include high level feats that scale arbitrary weapon or armor proficiency up to expert. The fact that it's actually super awkward to find that sort of scaling is in fact part of what makes those dedications valuable. Now does that mean I think nobody other than a Champion multiclass should ever be able to scale up to expert armor proficiency? No, but I also don't think it should literally just come along with the Armor Proficiency feat, or just be a General Feat that anyone can take at 13th level because the existence of such a feat means that Champion Dedication gets worse.

Why is it okay for characters to benefit in full from Armor Proficiency investments at lower levels, only for such investments to become null and void by 13th level?

Because sometimes choices are good at one level but not so good later. Not all choices are required to be equally awesome for all levels in the game. I get that you seem to feel like this game should be played such that only the most optimal choices are ever made, but the game isn't only made for you.

I'm a wizard. I'm trained in Arcana.

I'm a scholar. I'm trained in Arcana, Nature, Occultism, or Religion -and- get the Assurance feat with that skill. So now I'm in the anomalous position of being Assured in, say, Occultism, while only being ordinarily trained in the thing I'm supposed to be best at.

Wouldn't it have made more sense to let me apply the Assurance feat to Arcana, Nature, Occultism, or Religion, independently of the skill chosen through Scholar?

Page 26 of the CRB says "If your class would make you trained in a skill you’re already trained in (typically due to your background), you can select another skill to become trained in." That means you can just take Arcana and Assurance (Arcana) from Scholar, then pick something else to replace the Arcana from being a Wizard.

rooneg wrote:

pauljathome wrote:

For example, I'm currently trying to build a "know it all" character. The only reasonably viable options I'm seeing are Wizard who multiclasses into bard for bardic knowledge (wizard feats seem largely "meh" to me so this can happen by level 4) or a high int Bard. Bardic knowledge seems all but essential for this as, at least in PFS2-01, lore skills and ONLY lore skills cone up a LOT.

A high INT Rogue who multiclasses into Bard could also be good for this, because in addition to being able to pick up Bardic Lore at 4th level you can really easily become trained in a huge number of other skills, not to mention having heaps of skill feats to work towards getting Assurance and Automatic Knowledge in the big 4 monster identification skills.

You're absolutely right.

I didn't include that because
1) one answer on how to make ANY skill focused character is "rogue" (let's face it, that Nomadic halfling linguist is very likely a rogue) :-)
2) I'd already decided I wanted a spellcaster and forgot that when posting :-(

I'm less than convinced that assurance is much use in general. Far too often you just assuredly fail. And at 2 skill feats per skill it's expensive even for a rogue.

Yeah, I'm not super convinced that Automatic Knowledge is actually worth it (I mean seriously how often do you actually have target numbers to identify real threats that Assurance can hit?), but it's a neat build and I want it to be good ;-)

I never said the cleric was terribly built. Please enlighten me. How could I have suggested to my player a better way to build the cleric? Give me a spell that would have changed the way all of the encounters to date in the fall of plaguestone would have gone better if he had just chosen to prepare them. Or how could he adjust his attributes for better effect? Maybe his skill choices were wrong. I'm dying to know what he did wrong and I will dutifully report to my player that you have a solution to his (and my) observation that the cleric just didn't have any options that made him escape from under the shadow of the fighter and the barbarian.

I feel like you're basing your appraisal of the class on a few introductory encounters where the cleric found that they weren't as good as the Fighter at hitting wolves with weapons, which seems like a poor way to do it. Of course they're not as good as the Fighter at hitting wolves with weapons, the fighter is literally the best at hitting wolves with weapons, it's their whole reason for existing. What clerics get is a whole bunch of additional flexibility that the Fighter can't even come close to having. Expecting them to have that additional flexibility and still be as effective in combat as classes who basically devote all of their abilities to being awesome in combat is rather unreasonable.