Avid Arnsen

rooneg's page

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber. Organized Play Member. 360 posts (642 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 9 Organized Play characters. 3 aliases.


1 to 50 of 171 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bob Jonquet wrote:
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.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ramanujan wrote:

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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Gisher wrote:
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 ;-)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

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 ;-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

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.)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
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! ;-)


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Colette Brunel wrote:
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.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Colette Brunel wrote:

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.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Colette Brunel wrote:
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.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Tarondor wrote:

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.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
totoro wrote:
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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dracala wrote:
rooneg wrote:
Note that the weapon proficiency feat currently gives you no way the bump that martial prof up to expert. The ability to do that is part of what fighter dedication gives you.
Actually, that's a Completely different Fighter Archetype Feat you need to take at lvl 12 at the earliest... SOOO... No, the Fighter Dedication Feat itself is Still lackluster...

Yes, but fighter dedication unlocks the option to take that later feat, and there is no similar option for the weapon proficiency general feat. You may not think that benefit is significant, but it is a benefit.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Zwordsman wrote:

On the fighter dedication topic.

It feels a tad odd all you get (off hand remember) is the martial weapon profiency. When that is just 1 general feat for a lot of characters. Most? (Idk about sorc/wiz/cleric off hand) have simple weapons.
I'm pretty sure the weapon profiency feat grants you all of martial if you know simple weapons.

I was debating whether to take Fighter + general feat. or just two general feats in order to get an advance weapon on an Alch. two general feats just feel a bit easier and less opprotunity cost.

Note that the weapon proficiency feat currently gives you no way the bump that martial prof up to expert. The ability to do that is part of what fighter dedication gives you.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

One thing to keep in mind: if you’re complaining about multiclass dedications being weaker than the class they’re from, well, that’s sort of the point. A fighter who dips into wizard dedication should not be doing the same stuff the actual wizard just got access to, that’s stealing the wizard’s toys. Dipping into another class should get you some of the stuff the real person who took that class was doing a few levels ago, not the stuff they’re doing now and not their class’s core cool thing they can do. That’s why you don’t get expert weapon prof when you take fighter dedication or why you don’t get the awesome combat stuff for hunt target when you take ranger dedication or why you don’t get DEX to damage when you take rogue dedication. This is all by design.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Got these at GenCon and they are legit my favorite thing I bought all weekend. They’re pleasantly hefty and all the players I gave them to during my games were delighted by them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I would very much like the region boon to unlock suck things, I’d love to give my dwarf a clan dagger, but the ancestry feat is a bit much for something that is essentially flavor text on the character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mystical Seeker wrote:
Well, I looked at the add character function in Organized play.. They have added 2nd edition, but still doesn't let you add a character, since the option for Faction is blank, and won't let you add/save until you choose a faction.

Actually, it gives you an error if you don't pick a faction, but the character does actually get created. You can't modify it without picking a faction though. Presumably this will get cleared up shortly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kerobelis wrote:
rooneg wrote:
Baby Samurai wrote:
Midnightoker wrote:

Third, the fact that Armor choice is now a flavor decision is amazing. To me, equipment has always been one of the stronger essences of flavor, so knowing that the Armor Specialization and balance Paizo has put in has created this feel is exciting!

Yeah, this seems another page they took from 5th Ed D&D; I also dig spellcasting modifier added to spell attacks (dropping TAC in the process), amongst other bits.
Umm, armor in 5e isn't just flavor, there's basically one optimal type of armor in 5e for any given character.

Which I believe is the same as PF 2E. Have high Dex, go light armor. Moderate dex, medium armor, no dex = heavy armour. All 3 styles add up to the ~ same AC (+6 for PF 2e I think, AC 17/18 for 5ed). Basically, whichever way you go, you have the same AC. Proficiency will be the difference.

In 3rd edition, you could get AC 18 with full plate but the best unarmored could get was 15 with DX 20. So there is a big difference.

The same is true regarding TAC. Just like 5 edition.

Yes, but in 5e you don't get into this position where you have multiple possible armor types for a given character that end up with the same AC/Stealth Disadvantage result. If you're a character with DEX 14 who wants to wear medium armor you either pick a Breastplate if you care about Stealth or Half Plate if you don't. There's no reason (other than money) to ever wear Scale or a Chain Shirt. If you're a heavy armor character you never have a reason to prefer Splint to Plate. If you have a flavor preference for Splint you will always end up with a lower AC.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Baby Samurai wrote:
Midnightoker wrote:

Third, the fact that Armor choice is now a flavor decision is amazing. To me, equipment has always been one of the stronger essences of flavor, so knowing that the Armor Specialization and balance Paizo has put in has created this feel is exciting!

Yeah, this seems another page they took from 5th Ed D&D; I also dig spellcasting modifier added to spell attacks (dropping TAC in the process), amongst other bits.

Umm, armor in 5e isn't just flavor, there's basically one optimal type of armor in 5e for any given character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Claudius16309 wrote:
I am registered to participate in 3 scenarios for Pathfinder 2 at Gencon this year, and I cannot seem to find enough information about them. Primarily, do I need to bring a developed character with me, or will pre-generated characters be provided? If I need to develop characters, does anyone know where I can find the rules and how to register them, if needed

If you're playing in 1-00 Origin of the Open Road it can only be played with pregens, so don't worry about it. For any other PF2 scenario you can either bring your own or use a pregen, which will be provided. If you want to build your own characters the rules will not be available until the first day of GenCon when PF2 releases, so you'll be making them at the convention.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Paizo Customer Service wrote:
We're sorry for the inconvenience! The tech team is working on getting this fixed, but we can assist you if you'd like to place your order in the meantime. We aren't able to start subscriptions for folks, so you would have to submit the order on your end of the system. Then, if the incorrect products are generated, you would just notify Customer Service either via this forum, by email, or by phone. Once we receive your request, we'd just remove the incorrect items and replace them with the ones you'd prefer to start with.

So, I emailed customer service last Wednesday and then again today asking for precisely this change to my recent Adventure Path and Campaign Setting subscriptions, but haven't gotten any response at all. Is there somewhere other than customer.service@paizo.com I should be reaching out to about this problem?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ed Reppert wrote:
Cydeth wrote:
Ed Reppert wrote:
Paksennarion was a soldier before she became a paladin. She almost certainly learned first aid.

I just want to point out that she also was incredibly unusual for a paladin in her setting. There was a whole school dedicated to finding and grooming paladin candidates, and she was considered unusual there.

The point being, she's not the best example for the argument, though I consider Paksennarion to be one of the best examples of paladins in general.

That's fair enough, I suppose. Though I wonder if that school found candidates among the general population who had no prior combat experience. I don't remember if that was mentioned in the books.

The candidates (for Paladins of Gird, anyway) typically came up through the grange system (i.e. local church branches), and thus were all well trained in combat by the time they got there.

That said, they were also quite clear about the fact that you couldn't really use their equivalent of lay-on-hands without some amount of medical knowledge to direct it, so presumably they taught their Paladins some first-aid ;-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
joshua neeley wrote:
So if I were to choose to pickup my subscriptions at gen con, and purchase the second edition material, and choose to have them ship with my subscription, would they be available for pickup at gen con? I might be a bit confused now...

I believe that's the case. I have several subscriptions and have chosen pickup at gen con and the non-subscription pf2 items I've ordered (the GM screen and the Plaguestone Flip-Mat) are listed in the stuff I'm able to pick up there.


12 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm looking forward to a game with more choice in character building than 5e but less weird complexity and cognitive overhead than PF1.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
ograx wrote:
I don't know if Jason Buhlman is joking or not but it looks like he's giving him heck on twitter for posting it.

He actually said he was joking: https://twitter.com/jasonbulmahn/status/1139678230896508928?s=21


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
kaisc006 wrote:
Mewzard wrote:

To me, from what I've seen, Pathfinder 2E's going to find a nice home as a healthy middle ground between Pathfinder 1E and D&D 5E. For Pathfinder 1E players who want something simpler without hitting 5E, and for 5E players who want something more complex, but not at Pathfinder 1E's level, this could be the perfect home to many players.

I highly doubt many people will jump from 5e to PF2. The math behind the systems, and it’s effects on the fantasy world, are way too different. If paizo wanted that market they would’ve kept bounded accuracy but added complexity to class choices and combat.

I'm literally a 5e player who's planning to play a lot of PF2, and I doubt I'm unique. There is a huge appeal to having something that is less complicated and weird than PF1 while allowing way more choice in character building than 5e does. PF2 seems likely to hit the sweet spot there.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

This is awesome! Way easier than referring to the images.

One slight issue, you've got the text for Ranger Resiliency listed under Basic Hunter's Trick. The actual text of Basic Hunter's Trick is "You gain a 1st or 2nd level ranger feat of your choice."


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Blake's Tiger wrote:
Potential volunteers: Don't be scared off. People are people, but most of my tables have been good, and I've had more than a couple that were pure delight. I had a family of six sit at my 1-99; they were the best fun!

Also keep in mind that GMing on release weekend for a new system is somewhat different than normal convention GMing. Yes, you're running a system that you don't know terribly well, but the players don't know it either and they're almost certainly not going to hold any mistakes against you. I ran SFS 1-00 on release day at a FLGS two years ago and it was a great experience despite the various things I screwed up. You do your best, be an ambassador for the new game you're running and most importantly try to make sure everyone has fun. I had such a good time doing it for Starfinder that I'm going to my first GenCon so I can do it for PF2.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Boomstik101 wrote:
Wow, I must be in the minority of people who pretty much loved everything about the playtest.

Honestly, I liked a lot of stuff about the playtest, or at least what the playtest was trying to do. If I didn't I probably wouldn't be here now ;-)

Boomstik101 wrote:
I really liked resonance since it made magic item cooldowns super low or non existent. I dont think my group has even come close to our resonance cap.

This here though, this is actually the problem with resonance. Most characters don't ever come close to hitting the cap, which means you do all this bookkeeping for something that hardly ever matters. It's extra work for very little benefit.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Captain Morgan wrote:

Someone dropped a summon water elemental last night that was able to trigger weakness damage against 3 greater fire elementals. It drew all of their agro accordingly and tanked over 100 damage before going down. It didn't last long, but it soaked up all of their actions that round. And it did manage to do some respectable damage before it was dropped too.

Summons seem good for what they always were good for. A versatile tool kit that act as flanking buddies or damage sponges. I've seen PF1 summons occasionally handle combats better than parties. My first pathfinder character was an Oracle with augment summons who did this quite frequently. But that was because I read,optimization guides before showing up and the other players didn't. That is not, nor should it be, what PF2 looks like.

My only complaint about summoned elementals in the playtest was that all of them had super cool thematically appropriate reactions that they couldn't use because summoned creatures don't get reactions. That was pretty disappointing. I'm hoping that if that remains there will be class feats that give you a way to fix it for a wizard or sorcerer who specializes in summoning.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lady Wrath wrote:
NielsenE wrote:
In the playtest, you could take the extra action granted by haste at any point during your turn.
Not that I don't belive you but just because I know at some point I'll be asked "Where does it say you can". Is that a listed rule somewhere or is it that fact that it never says you can't use it at any point on your turn that makes you believe you can.

The Quick condition starts as follows:

Quick Condition wrote:
You gain 1 additional action at the start of your turn each round.

As I read that, the "at the start of your turn each round" bit is telling you when you GAIN the action, it says nothing about when you can USE it.

That said, all this is Playtest rules, so who knows how it'll work in the final version of PF2.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
On the other hand, Classes that don't gain Martial Weapons benefit disproportionately from Fighter, which is actually kind of neat. A Fighter/Wizard has a bit more of an existing thematic niche than a Ranger/Wizard, so it's nice that there are incentives to do it that way.

I don't disagree about the thematic weight, but I do think it's a little unfortunate that it's pretty impractical for many types of characters to dip into fighter from Sorcerer or Wizard due to the lack of armor proficiency.

Unless the Armor Proficiency feat has changed from the playtest you're only getting 1 level of armor proficiency in return for a level 1 general feat. That's fine if you're trying to build a DEX based character, but it doesn't work at all for a STR based one. For that you're REALLY incentivized to go Sorcerer with a dip into Champion (and either a Weapon Proficiency general feat or one of the Weapon Familiarity ancestry feats).

Now you can still build plenty of characters via Wizard (or Sorcerer) with a Fighter multiclass feat, like nimble arcane duelists or especially archers (who may not care about armor proficiency at all), but we're probably pretty far from doing a heavy armor STR based Gish as a Wizard with a Fighter dip.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Captain Morgan wrote:
I think I like the direction the martial dedications are going. It reduces some of the overlap between the archetypes while making them more attractive to other martial characters. In the playtest casters got way more for dipping into fighter than a barbarian did, for example.

Yeah, the fact that it's now reasonable for the various martial classes to dip into another martial class is pretty cool (although dipping into fighter is of limited value for anyone who already has martial weapon proficiency until you pick up a second Fighter feat).


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Captain Morgan wrote:
rooneg wrote:
The martial multiclass archetypes definitely got nerfed relative to the playtest. None of them seem to give you proficiency in both Armor and Weapons anymore (not even a deity's favored weapon for Champion), so if you were planning on doing a single feat dip to turn your Sorcerer or Wizard into a Gish think again.
Ancestry feats can fill that gap though.

Oh yeah, there are plenty of ways to work around the problem, it's just a bit harder than it was for the playtest. Honestly, I think it's probably for the best, as easy access to both a martial weapon and heavy armor proficiency for a single 2nd level feat is pretty busted.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Halcyon_Janissary wrote:

Curious on your thoughts about whether a human could take the Natural Ambition Ancestry Feat more than once. This feat grants you an additional 1st level class feat.

My assumption is yes, but I've seen other instance of selectable ...things which specifically call out the ability to take them more than once, and Natural Ambition doesn'y have that; so now I'm leaning toward no.

Thanks!

Assuming you're talking about the playtest I believe the answer is no. Feats that can be taken multiple times explicitly say so (see the Assurance feat for an example of this), so if it doesn't say you can take it more than once you can't. (I assume there is also a rule that states this explicitly somewhere, but I can't find it off the top of my head.)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Another possibility would be tying the number of attuned items to Charisma...maybe 7 or 8 + Charisma Mod. That reclaims some of the Resonance use of Charisma without the annoyance, though it's admittedly a niche use.

The problem is less that it's niche and more that it's completely unimportant until you get a large number of wearable magic items, something that might never happen to many characters. Most games are relatively low level, I can't imagine running into that limit any time before level 10 at the earliest.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Arachnofiend wrote:
Was Create Undead a ritual in the playtest? If not I'm really happy about that change. Fully martial Graveknights are coming!

Create Undead was not in the playtest, but the existence of a ritual that lets you create undead was mentioned by the developers as something that would be in the core rules. So this is a nice confirmation, but isn’t terribly surprising (other than perhaps the fact that it’s a level 2 ritual).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jennifer Scott wrote:

#84

Barbarian Class Equipment Kit
Price 3 gp, 2 sp; Bulk 3 Bulk, 5 light;
Money Left Over 11 gp, 8 sp
Armor hide armor
Weapons 4 javelins
Gear adventurer’s pack (containing a backpack, a bedroll, two belt pouches, 10 pieces of chalk, flint and steel, 50 feet of rope, 2 weeks’ rations, soap, 5 torches, and a waterskin), grappling hook, 2 sheaths
Options greataxe (2 gp), greatclub (1 gp), greatsword (2 gp), or battleaxe and steel shield (3gp)

Awesome! I was hoping to get equipment kits.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
rooneg wrote:
I'm not entirely sure I buy the argument that PCs know the workings of their own Class. There's a spectrum here. Some classes are clearly things that exist in the fiction of the world (i.e. a Wizard is an arcane spellcaster who prepares spells in this particular way, etc). Some of them are not so clear cut (i.e. the difference between a Fighter and various other types of non-magical martial classes). PCs know the visible results of the inner workings of the world, that doesn't necessarily mean they even know what class they are.

This is true. But that actually makes them more likely to notice abilities that are distinctly abnormal, IMO. I'd expect a Fighter to know a lot about, well, combat, which is to say the combat abilities of all martial Classes.

I'd find him looking at someone who is in all ways a Barbarian except for this one thing that makes no sense as every bit as plausible as him doing the same with another Fighter.

The same applies to most other Classes, really.

So he's got some obscure archetype or feat I didn't know about. So what? There's hundreds of them.

Does he react that way to his first Urban Barbarian? Or whatever that fighter archetype that gets a familiar is?

This is a metagame problem that only exists because the player knows the ability doesn't exist for PCs.

It's the problem of players wanting the cool toy that's balanced for NPCs not PCs.

Exactly. The in-world explanation of this isn't "I know what a Barbarian can do, and that's BS", it's "This is a trick I've never seen before, I wonder how you do that". People who are skilled at something are mystified at the abilities of other people who are skilled at the same thing ALL THE TIME in the real world, sometimes it's something they figure out how to replicate given work and time (i.e. I'll take that feat next level), sometimes it remains completely beyond them.

Now I agree that it doesn't have to break verisimilitude to be a problem, low level NPCs with abilities that are just absurd for a PC are something to be avoided (I also hate it when 5e martial opponents get multiple attacks many levels before I do), but this isn't some sort of ironclad rule, it's more of a guideline and breaking it occasionally doesn't instantly mean that none of this makes any sense in-world.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Hillis Mallory III wrote:
All my playtest points disappeared... Meh.*Shrug* At least I will finally be able to play a goblin now. *grumble... moan*

This is a known problem with the website, they’ve said it will be fixed by the time you can actually use playtest points for something. None of the data is missing, it just isn’t displayed properly.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Just to counterbalance all the "if it's not for 1e it's crap" posts, I'll just say I'm absolutely going to pick this up, definitely the 2e version and probably the 5e bestiary.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Honestly, part of what I like about Paizo is that their licensing means that other people can build digital solutions themselves. I don't want the only digital tools for PF2 to be the one that Paizo builds, or the one that some company that Paizo gives a license to builds. I want a thousand flowers to bloom.

Now I'd like it to become easier for the digital solutions that third parties build to bridge the gap between "stuff that's in the SRD" and "stuff that's not in the SRD", if there was some easy way for the PDFs I bought from Paizo to be annotated or something so my online tool can extract the bits it needs to run a game that would be awesome. But it's in no way a showstopper.

Currently I'm actually running a game of 5e (Out of the Abyss) largely via D&D Beyond> it's fine. It's not a game changer though, and I'd be basically just as happy if I had PDF copies of the 5e books. Paizo is already at that point, and that combined with an SRD is definitely enough for me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Blake's Tiger wrote:
rooneg wrote:
Blake's Tiger wrote:
I would like the ability to download my PDFs of resources, adventures, and scenarios directly into my iPad, though, rather than making a pit-stop through my PC.
If you have a pdf reader app that can unzip archives (goodreader can do it) you can already do this today.
The $5.99 version or the $11,99 version?

I appear to have the $5.99 version, but it does let me download the stuff from paizo.com in Safari, then click "open in Goodreader", which gives the option to unzip the archive and read the actual PDF in Goodreader. No clue what fancy stuff the more expensive version gives you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Blake's Tiger wrote:
I would like the ability to download my PDFs of resources, adventures, and scenarios directly into my iPad, though, rather than making a pit-stop through my PC.

If you have a pdf reader app that can unzip archives (goodreader can do it) you can already do this today.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
WatersLethe wrote:
It's basically a slap in the face that I don't have a kobold plushie right now.

Honestly, do you know what's going to happen if I come home from GenCon and I don't have a Kobold Plushie for my daughter? I don't either, but I suspect it won't be pleasant.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Gary Bush wrote:
And all of us are full capable of running a table under PF1.

That is not true. I'm personally not comfortable running PF1 (I'm mostly a 5e DM with some experience GMing SF, but I'm volunteering to run 2e because it looks cool), and I suspect I'm not the only one in that position.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So with the better cantrips in PF2 why does Ezren still carry a crossbow? Just tradition?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Doktor Weasel wrote:
rooneg wrote:
I feel like Arcanist could just be a Class Archetype for Wizard, honestly.
I would have prefered Wizards to be Arcanists. But that ship has probably sailed.

Yep, same here. I'm just hoping for some version of the Arcanist in the not terribly distant future because I am really not interested in playing a vancian style caster.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
dirtypool wrote:
It points you to other books. An SG that comes out early in the production process can’t point to books that don’t yet exist. And if it comes out as early as being suggested here it potentially has the need for as much errata style revision as the core book.

Honestly, I'm not arguing for them writing one right now, I don't think it's necessary or helpful, but 2/3 of a page in 159 page book hardly seems significant, especially if you read page 117 and take note of how incredibly generic the references to the other books are. The rest of the book is full of specific choices from the core rulebook you might make when building a character, the stuff on page 117 that points to other books is on the level of "umm, there are more classes here, and if you like magic check out Ultimate Magic". You could replace it with a pointer to a web page that lists other books as they come out and honestly have more functionality than what is there now.

There's nothing preventing them from writing the PF2 version of the PF1 Strategy Guide the day after they release the PF2 core rulebook. It honestly doesn't need anything else in the line to exist if all you're looking to do is replicate the kind of guide they did for PF1.

That said, they probably shouldn't do it now because ideally the PF2 core won't be cryptic enough to require it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
dirtypool wrote:
No my points haven’t shifted, those are two arguments against. The issue of obsolescence is an argument against a PF2 version of the PF1 Strategy Guide which collated material from all the various classes races and archetypes into a single volume.

Umm, you do realize that the PF1 Strategy Guide doesn't touch stuff outside the Core Rulebook, right? It points you to other books for more info, but in a single section on page 117 that talks about what other hardcovers you might be interested in. There's no "Hey, if you want to build an Archer you might want to use Fancy Archetype Whatever from Random Other Book" going on. It avoids issues of obsolescence by strictly limiting itself to a tiny subset of the PF1 rules.

1 to 50 of 171 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>