schnoodle's page

The theoretical bonus to PDF subscription is early release PDF. Which, is basically what they already sell their subscriptions on -- otherwise, there's very little reason to buy directly and not from a FLGS. I'm with what someone else said: PDF-only subs might actually benefit local game stores, and bring in more subscription income overall.

Paizo really ought to endeavor to meet customers halfway. I mean, you still have to email them to cancel your subscription. Even barring a recent FTC Rule in the US, it's just pretty anti-consumer to put barriers to stopping automatic charges to a card.

I'm happy to support Paizo, but I would be happier to do so with practices that are more friendly to my own sensibilities and wallet. I plan to unsubscribe from everything after Divine Mysteries, because I am not comfortable spending so much on books I'm not incredibly hyped for. If it was PDF prices, I'd remain subscribed instead of "spot-"subscribing.

When will the subscription let us "Start with Divine Mysteries" instead of the Tian Xia stuff?

I LOVE a lot of these, but sniper still struggles because of the single shot rifles for very, very little upside in comparison to others. Hair trigger nerf is amazing though, it actually makes a lot of sense too! If only I could actually use it with Sniper reliably, it would be like keeping an enemy in my sight...

After some thought, my biggest issue actually comes out to be: instead of adding stuff for the subclass to supplement/build upon Sniper weapons, it feels like they built all the weapons around the Sniper subclass. So it's really inaccessible for anyone else to use even at a rudimentary level.

For instance, one of my character ideas is to be a sniping Mechanic. I don't want to be as effective as a Sniper, but I'd like to have a reason not to just use a laser rifle. The fatal 1d10 is not worth the tradeoff of unwieldy and mag 1 reload 1 for anyone but a Sniper, *maybe*.

An entire weapon group shouldn't be built around a single subclass. The subclass should build upon existing options, like every other subclass does.

I LOVE a lot of these, but sniper still struggles because of the single shot rifles for very, very little upside in comparison to others. Hair trigger nerf is amazing though, it actually makes a lot of sense too! If only I could actually use it with Sniper reliably, it would be like keeping an enemy in my sight...

Witchwarper doesn't have the aforementioned weapon increase at level 11 on the pdf

Good changes, but god sniper operative is just looking less and less appetizing. No reactions with any of the Snipers, unless you can manage to reload the Seeker Rifle.

I’m a bit concerned about how it sounds like they really want a negative for taunting, when it’s already eating an action and you are getting hit, ideally. Ultimately, if you’re making the effective AC to hit the people you’re protecting the same as your own, there’s still no reason for the creature to not just ignore you, as everyone is on the same level at that point and the others are still priority.

I understand the fear of it being overpowered, but what good is the class if it can’t do its main function? in my humble onion, I would rather a more interesting interpretation like fascinated and must attack you or something.

I appreciate this article a lot, but something stuck out -- aren't Starfinder and Pathfinder different continuities? I was fairly certain this was established a while back.

Who made the Nephilim? That's an amazing piece, I love everything about it.

EDIT; nevermind, I thought I had seen it once before: back in a 2020 book, I think the APG? Pedro Kruger Garcia is the artist.

Why does the orc look like a green human with tusks and slightly pointy ears, when they used to look like this?

schnoodle wrote:

Matthew Jaluvka wrote:

schnoodle wrote:

Everything is nice, except...

Cantrips losing modifiers is awful. One thing that I adored about pf2e, coming from 5e, is that even my low rolls did a decent amount of damage. Every player I talked to from the community I come from felt the same way, too. Now that's gone, it's right back to wonderfully terrible feeling cantrips of 5e, where you just low roll constantly and have no bonus.

Whiteboard math is great and all, but most players aren't math nerds who see a number and think averages. They see low dice rolls and feel like they did nothing in comparison to the martials.

I wish there was a place to give this feedback before it all went to print, but alas.

what about rolling high on the 3d4 cantrips

is that just something you've decided can't happen

If you want to assume that then sure. But otherwise — if we're talking about a 1d6, with +4 modifier: a range of 5-10 is going to produce better emotional attachment than a 2-12. the minimum being more than double is pretty big, and the high being only 2 more in exchange... Yeah, no, I'd prefer the consistency.

3d4 is a range of 3-12, and you have more chances of it being higher than 5 on 3d4 than you had to roll a 1 on 1d6...

The chance to roll a 1 on 1d6 is 16,6666666...%. The chance to roll lower or equal to 5 on 3d4 is 15.625%.

For one, the issue isn't an already existing cantrip (Needle Darts). It's those being changed.

Second, you're proving my point. The whiteboard math is fine, but in the moment — what players actually feel when they see numbers — doesn't care about whiteboard math. The low low outweighs the high highs, especially when you can compare the difference of a high and low rolls the spell previously was capable of.

schnoodle wrote:

Everything is nice, except...

Cantrips losing modifiers is awful. One thing that I adored about pf2e, coming from 5e, is that even my low rolls did a decent amount of damage. Every player I talked to from the community I come from felt the same way, too. Now that's gone, it's right back to wonderfully terrible feeling cantrips of 5e, where you just low roll constantly and have no bonus.

Whiteboard math is great and all, but most players aren't math nerds who see a number and think averages. They see low dice rolls and feel like they did nothing in comparison to the martials.

I wish there was a place to give this feedback before it all went to print, but alas.

what about rolling high on the 3d4 cantrips

is that just something you've decided can't happen

If you want to assume that then sure. But otherwise — if we're talking about a 1d6, with +4 modifier: a range of 5-10 is going to produce better emotional attachment than a 2-12. the minimum being more than double is pretty big, and the high being only 2 more in exchange... Yeah, no, I'd prefer the consistency.

Everything is nice, except...

Cantrips losing modifiers is awful. One thing that I adored about pf2e, coming from 5e, is that even my low rolls did a decent amount of damage. Every player I talked to from the community I come from felt the same way, too. Now that's gone, it's right back to wonderfully terrible feeling cantrips of 5e, where you just low roll constantly and have no bonus.

Whiteboard math is great and all, but most players aren't math nerds who see a number and think averages. They see low dice rolls and feel like they did nothing in comparison to the martials.

I wish there was a place to give this feedback before it all went to print, but alas.