shroudb's page

3,630 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,630 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Imo, the most middle ground, is requiring 1 hand free for the manipulate action (which no longer does) but no kit and certainly no 2 free hands.

I can't ever imagine that they intended for a quick, 100% in combat healing, to require you dropping both shield and weapon, or requiring like 2 full rounds of sheathing and unsheathing.

It can be styled in a myriad different, not immersion breaking, ways than "wiggling fingers". From combat tourniquet, to injections, to pastes, and etc.


Sapient wrote:

Thinking more about the Blade Divine Ally. The list of runes you select from is pretty solid. But how often will you know what kind of foes you will be facing? Ghost Touch, for example, can be vital in a fight. But do you typically have forewarning that you will need it?

I guess Shifting will be the default, as it at least allows you to change between damage types.

Well, you get to switch daily.

So depending on where you are and what are your objectives, you can easily adapt it.

It's usually pretty telltale when you go to fight Undead.

And if it's not a "dedicated undead" area but just 1-2 random encounter ones, then you don't lose much if for just 1-2 fights you don't have the "optimal" rune.

Later on, Holy and Flaming are also pretty solid for "default" option.


Sapient wrote:
shroudb wrote:


For this I think the most "optimal" is monk MC with Flurry and monk weapons.

I guess that depends on how seriously you take the Diety's favored weapon thing. Does Deific Weapon require Champions to use your god's weapon? Or does it just help you make use of them if you so choose? Do the gods really expect Champions to use their favorite weapons? Or just carry it? I find the idea of most of the Gods loving particular weapons to be silly myself.

I also like some Litanies. It is a good use an action, I would guess.

I'm still undecided about multiclassing. There is only one Class Feat level that seems poor to me (at least up through 10). Divine Grace is good at 2, but I'm no crazy about the options at 4. Maybe one of the oaths will fit a given campaign well. All of the Divine Ally options at level 6 are good. And at level 8, you are building on your character concept.

Deity weapon is not important at all.

as a "class feature" it exists so that if you want to play with it, and it's a simple bad weapon, it isn't completely terrible imo.

for ceremonies, parades, rituals and such, you can already have one favored weapon for your "official attire" (probably embelished AF as well) but i do not think that the Deities expect their champions to use subpar weapons in actual combat just for their looks.


Melfast wrote:
Melfast wrote:
Zwordsman wrote:

As an additional note. Mutagenist + that lv 2 mutagen eating feat. Means they can be pretty good at skill monkey moments. Item bonuses for basically any situation.

Spending 1reagent for 3 typeps. Means you can spend like 2 or 3 reagents on mutagen and have 1 or 2 for every kind of situation you're character is skilled in. (Or all of them if you have pathfinder agent dip)

You can immediately end it after via that lv 2 feat (and net a small hp heal). This workrs rather amusingly with pepetual if you chose one that is widely ueful for skill moments.

Presumably, for the pepetual mutagens (andf or higher level longer lasting mutagens) the bonuses/debuffs would apply during exploratory sequences.

Itemb onuses to s kills aren't impossible to get or anything. But I do think that is worth mentioninng.

So whatever replacement or changes take place shouldn't close off the idea of a "skill mutant"
==================

On that draft from the previous post.
If it something like that, I almost would want it to be reaction ability instead. And not last an hour, instead last 1 min or some factor of the mutagen you consumed's duration.
Instead of being a riding "extra hp" effect. and it wouldn't be worth 1 action in a fight itself.
But as a reaction to taking HP damage, it would be quite unique and useful. Also it fits thematically that once your adrenelaine started kicking up it messes with the left over reagents in your body.

Funny thing, I originally had it as a free action that lasted a minute. I made it longer since it is once per day and the False Life Spell is 8 hours. I ended up taking the action cost and traits from the Revivifying Mutagen Feat. Making it a reaction to taking damage may work, too, and further distinguish it from The Revivifying Mutagen Feat. One minute on a reaction seems right, and the reaction is probably better for the Mutagenist then spending a regular action.

Changing it would look like this:

...

seems extremely weak from like level 5 and onwards.

Maybe something like "2*Mutagen level+Int" sounds better balance wise. It starts at 6 which is about the same as a Shield cantrip damage mitigration, and scales approprietly for a "once per day save my butt" reaction.


Champion, especially if he plans to go with Smite, and doubly so if he wants both Smite and shield, needs as much action economy enhancers as possible.

For this I think the most "optimal" is monk MC with Flurry and monk weapons.

You can go with Ranger as well, weapon+shield spikes/boss twin takedown. It comes online much earlier and cheaper (feat wise), but it's worse in the sense it loses 1 action per target, so you'd need to hit like 2-3 turns each enemy to be of great value.

P.S.
I do feel some Litanies are amazing even if they're 1 round btw.


albadeon wrote:

I have and would again totally argue that ammunition is not a weapon (and if you think of sling stones or even irl bullets, I think it's blatantly obvious that they are not weapons themselves but rather something to be fired from a weapon).

And as I've argued above, the rules do support my view, even if they may be ambiguous enough to support multiple views :).

It doesn't really matter though, as I think we can all agree that the intended rules are that ammo and traps should be able to be poisoned.

Where exactly the exact text of the rules needs to be modified to better reflect this, I honestly don't care.

You've argued your point, yes.

That doesn't make your argument correct though.

As far as I can tell, ALL discussions about if "ammunition is a weapon" degrade into both factions being sure that their argument is the Raw one.

This makes only one thing clear:

That RAW supports actually none, and that even in the most official of rules reading (pfs) it's 1000% up to GM to rule if it's one or the other until clear errata about the issue is made.

The only things we know about ammunition are:

A) they appear in the weapon table WITHOUT something telling us they are not weapons.
B) they are consumables
C) there are weapons using them. Said weapon's damage is based on their ammunition.

The above is the only RAW about them.

And obviously, since there are like 3 threads about that, it can be read in multiple ways.


SuperBidi wrote:
HammerJack wrote:

The argument that you can't run an official table where the poison goes on the arrow because it isn't RAW would hold more water if there was an undisputed consensus that ammunition is not a subset of weapons.

There is not.

There is not a single line considering that ammunitions are weapons. Not one. Just astrological computations about their positioning in a table. With the same logic, unarmored would be an armor. And anyway, the current debate is: Can a DM apply his own house rules during a PFS game?

albadeon wrote:
That is assuming the arrow that hit actually had poison applied to it. One dose of poison is enough for one attack, so if you only poisoned one arrow, the poison only works when you shoot that arrow, obviously. Again, "poisoning the bow" will not get you more than one use out of that dose of poison. I'd rule that as poisoning one arrow, not poison all arrows shot by that bow (or even all arrows in the quiver).
The player used one dose of poison and hits with the second arrow, for example, following RAW. What do you do?

Not really though.

Being in the same table IS enough in the absence of restrictive language (like unarmed). At least by strict Raw.

It is as "astrological computations" as saying that "those aren't the rules for PF 2 just because they are in a book merely called pathfinder 2 rulebook".

The only other thing that is the table and ISN'T a weapon is specifically called so (unarmed).

And "unarmoured" IS NOT on the "Armour table".

In fact there's a whole separate "unarmoured proficiency" right above the "armour" table.


Zwordsman wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

[

And if you use it on yourself, you go from the highest AC class in the game to even harder to hit.

As a sidenote, I think the spell specifies that only allies get the Status boost to AC. In P2 I don't think you are your own ally anymore. So I think it will only heal the Champion, not AC boost.

I gotta agree, it is pretty fan fricking tastic for saving allies IMO though. 2AC can be hust huge benefit in many cases.

Well at least i"m pretty sure you don't count as your own ally. Would be nice though, a lot of abilities would get tastier. There was a thread about counting as your own ally back in August I think.

I'll have to go dig that up on my break and double check.

indeed.

in pf2 you specifically AREN'T your own Ally anymore. it is spelled quite clearly.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Zapp wrote:

So your question to Q1 would be four actions, one to draw and three to apply. Got it, Shroud!

(of course noone in their right mind will attempt this in time-critical situations like combat without the Rogue feat Poison Weapon, which cuts down the number of actions required from 4 to 1)

Do you have an opinion (or comment) on the possible melee/ranged imbalance?

That is, do you allow PCs to pre-poison as many arrows as they can afford, in the way you simply can't do with a single blade? Do you justify this using a game rule or "common sense"? (Thanks to or despite the rules)

i personally see no issue with poisoning ammunition.

does that favor the ranged over the melee?
sure. So what?

It makes sense to me, and poisons aren't that big of a deal either way, they are either extremely expensive, or (if by an alchemist) cost precious resources to use

the alternative, "poison a bow" sounds terrible to me, not like "it's bad for immersion" but more like "it shot Immersion on the head, covered it with concrete, and dumped it into a lake".


2 people marked this as a favorite.

it doesn't provide them.

it says "all common items in THIS chapter"

that's in the Gear chapter, not in the Treasure chapter (that's where all the alchemical/magical items are)

for reference:
"Basic Crafter’s Book: This book contains the formulas
(page 293) for Crafting the common items in this chapter."


I'd say that you need to have the poison in hand to poison something.

General rule is you need to be holding the items you use unless they say otherwise. Poison doesn't specify that it can be used if not in hand, so it can't.

Case in point, "drinking" a potion is an interact action. You still need to have them on hand, or draw them with a separate Interact action.

"Potions
A potion is a magical liquid activated when you drink it, which uses it up.Potions have the potion trait. You can activate a potion with an Interact action as you drink it or feed it to another creature. You can feed a potion only to a creature that is within reach and willing or otherwise so helpless that it can’t resist .You usually need only one hand to consume a potion or feed it to another creature. "

As for the "free hand" required, I think it's more like in the spirit of the last sentence in potions as well, it's the hand that's holding the poison.

If it required a separate hand, it would be like "Oils": one hand holding the item, the other hand free.


K1 wrote:

Indeed, but even if in a scenario which sees a Monster of your same level, the extra armor effect is not worth the extra healings, at least to me.

I knew about the feat which enhances the healing on your mount, but I see 2 Major problems here:

- shield and weapons divine allies are way better
- you have to waste a class talent ( because let us be honest, if you Pick something like that you are wasting not only your divine ally but a class feat too ).

It is Sad to have a skill which heals less at lvl 19 than what you can do by multiclassing cleric or druid or bard by lvl 14

what?

one "costs" you 1 feat, and it's replenishable, thus usable multiple times per day.

the other costs like 4 feats+ and it's only usable once per day.


Mellored wrote:
Squiggit wrote:

Giant Instinct Barbarian is at 24.65 with those same numbers doing rage > strike > strike, which is pretty comparable to the champion.

A flurry ranger doing hunt > command bear (strike, support) > twin takedown with sawtooths does like, 22ish.

Yea, but the champions 22 was against the champions favored enemy.

Which was the origional question. Could paladins outdamage fighters with their special boost. Answer is no.

Quote:
What this mostly seems to be showing is that fighters are a little busted.

Well, they can't do anything else besides damage so they better be good at it.

Champions still have lay on hands, and a better reaction.

you're neither adding the persistent damage nor the weaknesses those enemies usually have though.

they "usual" answer is "yes, they do outdamage fighters when those conditions are met"


Mellored wrote:

So at level 9.

Fighter: Power Attack, Furious Focus
** spoiler omitted **
= 27.05

Champion: disrupting, smite evil
** spoiler omitted **
22.525

Champion is still a good bit behind.
If the enemy has weakness 10 the champion pull slightly ahead.

Once more, if you have to Smite, then you've already gained "defender" benefits from it.

So yeah, in that occasion he's a bit behind but he also simultaneously provided tanking for the group.

If we assume that neither the fighter nor the paladin provided defensive benefits, to even the field there, then the paladin has 1 more action.

That 1 more action, at the very least, is moving to get flank, and have exactly the same "attack bonus" as the fighter.


Mellored wrote:
Joyd wrote:
Out of curiosity, has anybody actually modeled how much damage paladins built with an offensive inclination actually do, or is it just being taken as a given that they're bad at dealing damage?

Quick run of a level 10 fighter vs a level 10 paladin, beating up a level 10 evil/undead (30 AC).

Both wielding greatswords with +2 Striking

Fighter attack : Power Attack, Furious Focus, Certain Strike
** spoiler omitted **
= 39.2

Champion: Blade Ally (disrupting), Smite Evil, Radiant Blade Spirit (holy)
** spoiler omitted **
= 27.9

Assuming I did that right, the paladin will do a quite a bit less damage than the fighter even against undead. Fighters +2 to hit/crit is just too much to overcome.
Though, I didn't count weaknesses, spells, reactions, needing actions to move or other such stuff. So the difference is not quite as bad.

I do wonder how well a bow-paladin would do. Retribution is a lot easier to get if you can stand back a bit.

At level 10 the damage of a power attacking Fighter spikes.

So I don't find it a good reference point.

Fairer would be imo level 12 when Paladin also gets their equivalent to power attack (Blade of justice)

Also very noteworthy is that "smite evil" could easily be on from previous rounds. If it's not, then there's already added defensive benefits from the Paladin since it means that the opponent was forced to attack the paladin already.

So we have 4d12+11+1d6 +4 persistent (persistent averages at +12 over 3 rounds) + 1 reaction attack from everyone around you.

Even at -2 attack compared to fighter, the free reaction attack and the extra +12 damage from persistent,and the +6 from smite, and the free d6 from flaming/disrupting, all weight favorably for paladin.

It's more conditional, but when those conditions are met, it out damages him.


Helmic wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I mean, the champion having a bunch of shield feats just means "if you don't want a shield, take feats other than those feats." There are multiple valid choices at each level, after all.

Except doing bog-standard strikes is a poor use of your action economy if you can help it. Champions are martials and will be hitting with their weapons. Without feat support for their weapons, they're actually not a whole lot more lethal with their weapons than a Wizard that took a weapon familiarity ancestry feat. Those shield feats meanwhile give you something to do with your actions when you've used up your focus pool.

Other martials either will be doing special actions that add additional effects to their strikes (Fighter, Ranger) or will have stances or conditional modifiers for their strikes (Barbarian, Rogue, Monk). It's not enough to just hit things.

A good chunk of the Champion's tactical options are tied up in shield use. It's not so much that an MC archetype wouldn't be able to provide some actions to make forgoing a shield worthwhile, but a Champion would have trouble avoiding a shield

It's usually the opposite.

Due to having to spend an action to raise a shield, you'll probably just use Strike for offence as a shield champion.

On the other hand, that same action can be used for smites, litanies, their (much better) "power attack" and etc.

The shield feats are, not surprisingly, focused on defense, not offense.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Brew Bird wrote:
shroudb wrote:

I would prefer they focus first on the errata of the actual book they have out atm rather than the playtest for the next one...

I mean, didn't they already say that the errata will be before the playtest?

Where did they say that? I didn’t know there’s been much mention of errata.

there hasn't been much, if any, mention about fixes, except for some off-comments. i was refering to one of them.

can't exactly recall when or where (in which media).

that's what you get with them spreading all news over 10 different media and not having them centralized somewhere.

but i remember them saying something along the lines of "we will release fixes before the APG" but can't remember if it was "before the APG" or "before the APG *playtest*"

i sure hope the latter one.

i mean, what's the point to trying to playtest something when the base platform already has several errors in it.

p.s.
either that, or i'm going senile and start imagining things...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

ALL DC are defined as "their Check modifier+10"


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I would prefer they focus first on the errata of the actual book they have out atm rather than the playtest for the next one...

I mean, didn't they already say that the errata will be before the playtest?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

legendary caster:
+7 stat (24)
+28 proficiency
=
+35

so, his DC is 45 (with 24 ability score, not with 22)

Normal level 20 Npc save:
16 stat and Master proficiency:
+3
+26
+3
=
+33

Weak level 20 save:

a level 20 npc with expert is a save and a 14 in an ability score:
+2 stat
+24 proficiency
+3 item
=
+29

Strong level 20 save:
+6 stat
+26-28 proficiency
+3 item
+1 circumstance
=
+36-38

i do not see any issues with those numbers.

I expect a spread of around 35-80% success rate for a caster depending if he targets a Strong save or a Weak save.

seems fine.


let's say you have a +1 striking and a normal weapon.

with twin it is:

1st attack with magic weapon: +0
1st attack with offhand weapon: +2
2nd attack with magic weapon: +1
2nd attack with offhand weapon: +2
and etc

you usually will have the same runes on both weapons (due to doubling rings) so it usually is:
+0/+x/+x/+x
where X is the number of dices you roll.


The Raven Black wrote:
There has been some discussion on whether Bard replacing verbal with instruments makes the spells castable while raging. Ditto for Composition spells such as Inspire Courage.

i think a Dev had commented that it doesn't work, not sure though, memory a bit fuzzy.


SuperBidi wrote:
shroudb wrote:
Snare specialist removes cost for 4-8 daily snares.

True, reading it again, it does. I missed something.

shroudb wrote:

The way I see it:

1 setup
1 step/stride
1 shove

Is perfectly viable, 3 actions to do the burst of a max level spell is not shabby at all.

You're right, you can use the step/stride to position yourself for the shove.

Still, one issue is that you need to succeed at shoving, otherwise the enemy (as long as it's not stupid) can back off.
Also, one nice use is against stupid enemies. I don't think a zombie can understand that you just set up a trap.
So, I agree with you, with Lightning Snares, they look playable. Still, it's sad to get it that late.

12 is not that late since the edition is designed to more easily allow max level. I'd say it's midgame.

But even before that:

Even at 3 actions, imo, they are still usable.

Apart from the regular uses (choke points, camps, ambushes, etc) the way I see them is as a delayed spell.

You set them on one round, you trigger them on next. It's not like the Shoves/throws do nothing else, they still reposition/damage the enemy.

And at "end game" having up to 16, 1 action massive damage spikes is extremely effective.

A neat thing to note is that:
Your already setup snares don't "expire" after they are set.

You can entrench a position in a few days to make it hell for enemies to intrude/approach/pass.


What I would do to keep it inline with the rest Instincts:

Start with the fury Instinct as a template.

Use those numbers for the extra damage and resistance (choose appropriate types).

Instead of "free class feat" you gain "Blood magic". (you gain a higher level class feat but lose a bit of flexibility)

Blood magic: As Arcane Sorc MC without the skills but with "spells gained from Blood magic have the Rage trait".

New feats:
6: Basic Blood magic. (as basic sorc spellcasting). The spells chosen gain the Rage trait. (stronger than basic spellcasting due to the trait addition, but comes a bit later to make it inline with the other Instinct feats)

12: expert blood magic. As expert spellcasting+Breadth. Spells gain the rage trait. (much stronger than a mc feat since it's 2 feats for the price of 1 AND gives the trait on said spells)

Keep in mind that at level 11+ you get what you were trying with the auto casting since you get to use a "Rage trait ability" alongside your Rage action. So you can choose a spell and cast it.

This way you gain:
1)The ability to cast your spells without wasting actions for Moment of Clarity
2)2 feats over going barb/mc sorc (3 if you include clarity)
3)the ability to cast a spell alongside your rage action at 11+

I think those are inline with the rest instincts, slightly towards the strongest side, but not by much.


I feel that for a Bespell build, a monk is also worth checking.

Bespell affects ALL attacks on a round. And Monks have both the ability to attack more times per round via Flurry AND proc Bespell 1-2 times per fight for free via Ki strike/other powers.

Plus, they can either go with a stance and hold the staff in one hand and still attack with the other, OR go for monastic weapons and use Shifting rune as above.

Something like:
1: stance/monastic
1: (human, or general 3) Ki strike
2: wizard dedication (or Stunning fist if you allow Ancient Elf heritage)
4: basic spellcasting
6: basic arcana (can't recall if there's a wizard feat giving a focus, else probably something like a familiar)
8: advanced arcana (Bespell)
10: stance maneuver/wind jump
12: Expert spellcasting/meditative focus
14: the one you didn't pick from above

There are a few maneuvers that shine with true strike since they have critical success riders (fatal, bleeds, etc)
Plus, if you go with something like wind stance (at 10) you can proc Bespell and go for the wind stance aoe, adding the d6 vs all the targets.


Muzouka wrote:
Does the cantrip granted by Otherworldly Magic get heightend even if you don't have a spellcasting class?

Yes.

All cantrips autoheighten unless they specifically say they don't.


lemeres wrote:
shroudb wrote:

no, they aren't completly seperate.

as you pointed out, there are times where you can fit a bit of control alongside damage.

but it does require specific scenarios happening, like starting next to the opponent with all of your 3 actions and saving your reaction for damage and etc.

usually, you have to decide between a 2 action attack like drag OR flurry. And even then, having the option to grab instead of an attack and still fitting in a stunning fist that may steal 1 more action from your opponent, is what i would call "switching to control".

Ah, I forgot about the advantages of assurance athletics. Hmmm... other stances can use a similar trip tactic while having other damage boosters.

But I like that wolf drag covers a different situation that the assurance trip does (higher level enemies/enemies with high reflex saves for their level). So wolf stance can be far more reliable with knock down. Great set of options.

So you might need your reaction for something other than stand still? What are of the good reactions available to monks (assuming no multiclass)?

well, shield block is accessible to everyone and monks can use shields, although it takes an action to use it.

then you have the various reactions from ancestries. From +saving throw, to orc ferocity, to goblin scuttle.

and in most of my builds, i do tend to pick MC in something, although, if there was one class that can easily go without, it would have been monk. So many great options that you can safely pick a great one in each level.


Maxwell D'Ahmagge wrote:

Eh, it's so-so.

If you want to move an enemy then you get to shove the opponent with your Strike value, rather than your Athletics value. So you are likely to get +2 or +3 out of it. This is valuable if you want to move him out of a choke point, or knock him off a cliff/pier (if 5' movement will do this). And it makes him flat-footed for any following attacks, so you don't get a full -5 when you swing on him next.

The 'flat-footed until the end of your turn if you fail' is kind of a sop to people who failed: it doesn't help other party members. Without this, I'd rate the feat as poor.

But note the requirements: you must be using a two-handed weapon, & the creature must be your size or smaller.

With an Athletics/Shove, it can be done to a creature one size larger than you... but you must have a free hand or a weapon with the Shove trait. Such weapons include Light Mace (Agile & Finesse = Rogue), Warhammer (1 handed) and Greatclub (2 handed).

Note: This is a feat with situational usage. Power Attack (frex) is usefull any time you have two actions left.

it's a free action shove, with a flat footed on top, that autosucceeds if you hit with your strike.

and if you miss with your strike, it makes htem flat footed to boot.

it's pretty great for so early on due to the action economy saver, it actually makes shove much more useful rather than situational useful (since you won't be "trading" your strike for it, but just getting it on top of it)


Hiruma Kai wrote:
shroudb wrote:

True strike+Pick is <3

Don't forget that you can sacrifice a spell slot at daily prep for extra True Strikes.

And a Power attack crit from a Pick... Well, let's say it hurts.

I admit those pick critical hits are scary.

I'd probably do something like a bastard sword (or dwarven waraxe if I could find a good way to get the max proficiency with it) myself.

shroudb wrote:
Access to heroism, even if limited times per day, helps keeping the pick crits consistent even against boss AC.

Out of curiosity whats your source of heroism? Ally caster in the party? Trick Magic Device and some Occultism or Religion?

The pick allows a shield though, as opposed to two handing a bastard sword, so there's this upside. I generally really like shields.

As for heroism... That's brainfart on my part forgetting that it's not in the Arcane list.

Nevertheless, haste is almost as good, since it allows a power attack+true strike even on rounds you have to move around.


SuperBidi wrote:
shroudb wrote:

Imo, snares are worth the 1-3 actions to setup (later on Rangers can setup it in 1 action) since they do amazing damage.

As an example, the level 12 snare deals an average of 63 damage with a basic ref save.
A single target Spell of that level, disintegrate, deals just 66 and has to go both through spell attack AND basic Fort save for that.

Having, as a ranger, 4-8 "max level spells" worth of damage isn't bad at all.

Compared to strikes, you'd need around 50 or so average damage per round to reach that much damage.

It does need a build that you can move/throw baddies on them though.

To put an enemy into a snare, you need:

- 1 action to move to position
- 1-3 actions to setup the snare
- 1 action to move away from your position (as nothing states you can make Snares on an adjacent square, so you create the Snare on your position)
- 1 action (minimum) to move the baddy inside the Snare

So, even with Lightning Snares, it's hard to use.
Also, nothing states that the Ranger doesn't pay for Snares. Snare Specialist just says you can deploy Snares in a few actions, it doesn't state it costs you nothing to do so. I've I missed something?

Snare specialist removes cost for 4-8 daily snares.

The way I see it:
1 setup
1 step/stride
1 shove

Is perfectly viable, 3 actions to do the burst of a max level spell is not shabby at all.

Even at 3 actions setup (5 actions in total) its still decent, and as mentioned, you could set, and an ally can Shove in the same round.

You can also check my Master Yeeter build in the weird builds thread for Ranger/Monk that yeets (whirling throw) his opponents into his snares.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
puksone wrote:
shroudb wrote:

I've built exactly a character like this:

Fighter/wizard miner.

He has his divination staff shifted to a pick, and goes crit fishing like crazy.

Access to heroism, even if limited times per day, helps keeping the pick crits consistent even against boss AC.

I was debating Bespell, but feats are kinda tight to pick it up as a mc feat.

True strike+Pick is <3

Don't forget that you can sacrifice a spell slot at daily prep for extra True Strikes.

And a Power attack crit from a Pick... Well, let's say it hurts.

Does the wiz gets something that a sorc doesn't get for teh build?

I am planing to play a fighter/sorc.

double charges on his Staff compared to sorc.

plus, better spellcasting for MC.

as written, spontaneous MC you only get 1 spell (per level) that you can cast. While with prepared MC you still cast only the one/two spells (per level), but you can switch them daily from all within your collection.


A few corrections in addition:

You can't have 24 cha clerics.

Heroism is in the occult list as well, so Bards and Sorc will probably be better (can reach 24 cha, bard has useful abilities for such a setup like dirge and etc)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:
Grimmzorch wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Draco18s wrote:

20 foot by 20 foot by 20 foot, by the way, is also not 400 5-foot cubes.

its 64 5-foot cubes.

I'm a graphic designer. Math isn't exactly my strong suit. XD
For visualization purposes 20cubic feet is the interior space of a medium size refrigerator.

It's also roughly the space of ten human adults.

People often underestimate cubic footage because they unconsciously include the empty space many objects have.

But that's not the way it works. Imagine just about any object or creature. Now imagine it being liquefied or turned into dust. That puddle or pile of dust more accurately represents that thing's cubic footage. That's why an adult human is generally considered roughly 2 cubic feet.

The problem imo with trying to visualise it as "10 humans" is that's almost impossible to visualise 10 humans fit so tightly that there 0 wasted space in between them.

IF you actually manage to visualise them so tightly packed that there 0 dead space... Then you actually have compressed them enough to fit in a refrigerator.

So, easier to just imagine the refrigerator from the get go^^


I've built exactly a character like this:

Fighter/wizard miner.

He has his divination staff shifted to a pick, and goes crit fishing like crazy.

Access to heroism, even if limited times per day, helps keeping the pick crits consistent even against boss AC.

I was debating Bespell, but feats are kinda tight to pick it up as a mc feat.

True strike+Pick is <3

Don't forget that you can sacrifice a spell slot at daily prep for extra True Strikes.

And a Power attack crit from a Pick... Well, let's say it hurts.


SuperBidi wrote:

The way it works:

- Buying poisons or snares is very expensive. It's better to either be an Alchemist/Ranger or to use items you find during the adventure.
- Poisons have to be prepared in advance and applied in advance to work. They don't cost combat-actions, which is their main asset. They are not overwhelming but a nice bonus during the first rounds of combat. Applying poison during combat is not worth it.
- Snares can also be prepared in advance, but you need to be able to access to the combat area beforehand. It happens very rarely. During combat, it's 3 actions to prepare a snare, and then you need a way to put an enemy into it (shove for example). Anyway, for 3 combat-actions, they are once again not worth it, as you could do better by just attacking.

So, poison is nice to have, snares are hyper situational. Clearly, poison is better to have than snares.

Imo, snares are worth the 1-3 actions to setup (later on Rangers can setup it in 1 action) since they do amazing damage.

As an example, the level 12 snare deals an average of 63 damage with a basic ref save.
A single target Spell of that level, disintegrate, deals just 66 and has to go both through spell attack AND basic Fort save for that.

Having, as a ranger, 4-8 "max level spells" worth of damage isn't bad at all.

Compared to strikes, you'd need around 50 or so average damage per round to reach that much damage.

It does need a build that you can move/throw baddies on them though.


Castilliano wrote:
shroudb wrote:
Castilliano wrote:

You can build most of a Dragon Disciple now via Barbarian or Sorcerer, depending on which aspect you wanted to emphasize. I'm not sure what more Paizo could add that they would add, since we won't be seeing stat bumps.

Maybe Draconic Frenzy (like dragons have)? Senses? Longer durations?

I agree claws aren't meant to be primary for a full-caster, nor should they ever be comparable to full casting. So if you want a good dragon-claw PC, start w/ a martial chassis & take the Sorcerer MCD. Since the claws are finesse, a Rogue-Thief works great in this instance. The other martials need a bigger weapon die, but the Rogue's bonus damage is balanced for having a lower die.

do note that Thief doesn't get his "dex to damage" with natural attacks or unarmed, since they aren't weapons.

He only gets dex to damage with actual "weapons".

Sad face... :(

Don't yet understand Paizo's reasoning of separating the unarmed & weapons. Likely there's a loophole I haven't seen that they're closing because that's a specific difference from PF1 (& earlier) in many cases.

probably because you can get much higher damage (trait depending) on unarmed than with one handed weapons.

It's in this weird spot where you can get almost two-handed damage with some of them, and yet still have both your hands "free".

In PF1, the natural attacks were one of the worst thing ever imo, with people trying to grab horns and bites and whatnots to fit into 7+ attack routines.

So, my guess is that in PF2 they want to control that.

So, if they go with a philosophy of "look guys, natural attacks can get busted, so we need a way to police what one can do with them", then making certain that only things they specifically want to work with natural attacks work with them, is one such way.

As you mentioned Thief rogue. If dex to damage worked for unarmed, it would make "monk MC" almost a mandatory pick if you wanted damage, since getting "d8 finesse, agile, backstab, free hand, trip" weapons for the cost of 2 Feats is so far above every weapon in the book so far.

now, it's still a nice MC, getting 2 attacks in 1 action at level 10 plus a great attack to go alongside it, but it's not that one-sided since you'll be losing a bit of damage from losing Dex to damage alongside it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
lemeres wrote:
shroudb wrote:
Personally, i think a little more well rounded build, maybe a Wolf style dex monk with some strength, is more universally useful because he can switch from a pure damage, to a "control" build in the blink of the eye, and his defences will naturally be higher (at least in the earlier levels) so he can stand his ground and maybe get more attacks in.

Are those necessarily separate? Wolf drag can reliably make an opponent go prone. And that sets up an attack from Stand Still because standing up is a move action. Also, you can fit in a flurry (you have an agile weapon and the enemy takes a -2 from being flat footed while prone).

I feel like the question is whether you are going for a mobile style with flurry and stunning fist, or on a wolf drag+flurry for the most attacks. You can debuff in either circumstance.

no, they aren't completly seperate.

as you pointed out, there are times where you can fit a bit of control alongside damage.

but it does require specific scenarios happening, like starting next to the opponent with all of your 3 actions and saving your reaction for damage and etc.

usually, you have to decide between a 2 action attack like drag OR flurry. And even then, having the option to grab instead of an attack and still fitting in a stunning fist that may steal 1 more action from your opponent, is what i would call "switching to control".

But as i said:

the beauty of such a style/feat choice, is exactly that:

it's so flexible in what you can do in a round. It won't reach the damage of a strength based Dragon monk going all out, but it's not that far behind for all the tools it can get and use imo.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pumpkinhead11 wrote:
shroudb wrote:

4.:

your choice of hitting with the "actual Claws" that deal the damage as per Sorc power OR hit with the monk unarmed attack that's merely called claws (but it's actually just fist/fingers) and do the monk damage.

Traits used for each attack are as gain for their respective attacks.

With Tiger Stance, or better yet Wolf Stance, you can’t actually hit them with ‘one or the other’ without using meta game logic/reasoning. The Claws will protrude from the fingers and inevitably conflict. Mountain or Crane stance specifically limit your attack pattern, and Dragon Stance could be reasoned as ‘one or the other’.

Neither Tiger or Wolf stance have restrictive language. Only Mountain and Crane have that. As for "not using the claws" ofc you can. Do you also disallow someone punching if he has claws?

So, for tiger/sorc, you CAN actually use one or the other.

but:

yeah, didn't go in with the "you can ONLY hit with that" stances attacks thing, mainly because i was trying for a more generic responce concerning "can i combine 2 different attacks into one" in which the answer would be "no, but you can use either".

I do agree, that with the specific language some of the stances have, you are directly disallowed to Strike with ANYTHING other than said Strikes. But those stances are only the minority.


4.:

your choice of hitting with the "actual Claws" that deal the damage as per Sorc power OR hit with the monk unarmed attack that's merely called claws (but it's actually just fist/fingers) and do the monk damage.

Traits used for each attack are as gain for their respective attacks.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Castilliano wrote:

You can build most of a Dragon Disciple now via Barbarian or Sorcerer, depending on which aspect you wanted to emphasize. I'm not sure what more Paizo could add that they would add, since we won't be seeing stat bumps.

Maybe Draconic Frenzy (like dragons have)? Senses? Longer durations?

I agree claws aren't meant to be primary for a full-caster, nor should they ever be comparable to full casting. So if you want a good dragon-claw PC, start w/ a martial chassis & take the Sorcerer MCD. Since the claws are finesse, a Rogue-Thief works great in this instance. The other martials need a bigger weapon die, but the Rogue's bonus damage is balanced for having a lower die.

do note that Thief doesn't get his "dex to damage" with natural attacks or unarmed, since they aren't weapons.

He only gets dex to damage with actual "weapons".


3 people marked this as a favorite.

For pure damage, Dragon style is probably the best.

You can go full damage and use mobility as your defense (move/flurry/move) alongside defensive feats like Winding path and Guarded movement to be mostly safe from everything as you waltz back and forth.

A few ki powers, notably ki strike and either blast or the one that lets you pseudo-fly, and increased focus recovery. As well as "passive" stuff like brawling focus and stunning fists.

Personally, i think a little more well rounded build, maybe a Wolf style dex monk with some strength, is more universally useful because he can switch from a pure damage, to a "control" build in the blink of the eye, and his defences will naturally be higher (at least in the earlier levels) so he can stand his ground and maybe get more attacks in.


most of those can be answered by:

1)because half+ of the alchemist feats are feat taxes with 0 flavor and only trying to be a math fixer for an incredibly weak core class/class features. (100% opposite of pf2 philosophy)

in conjunction with:

2)see 1

and finally with:

3)in combat poisons are utterly terrible. "Pre-buffing" poisons is meh at best, but at least usable. Until level 13 that is. Because why print high level poisons? (that we were told that would be in the final version during the playtest, but whatever)


FlashRebel wrote:
Saros Palanthios wrote:
In addition, the classes that grant animal companions also all have feats that give your companion take extra actions-- Druids can take Mature Animal Companion at lvl 4; Rangers can take Companion's Cry at lvl 4 and Mature Animal Companion at lvl 6; and Champions can take Imposing Destrier at lvl 10.

Mature Animal Companion doesn't grant an extra action: it lets the animal companion act on its own when not directly commanded but it only does one action.

I understand what the minion trait is about : it's a way to let players have creatures under their control without stretching encounters too much or breaking the action economy.

To be fair, I was messing around trying to create a rogue with druid archetype feats to get an animal companion and thus always have a flanking partner available. The mounting part was mostly a bonus.

well, at level 6, you can get gang up and constantly flank with your mount.

the upside of the mount is that it's basically +1 action /round compared to a non mount in every round that you need to move (since with 1 move from your mount you also gain basically a "free" move as well)

the downside is it sharing your MAP and etc.

so there are tradeoffs, better action economy vs better attacks.


Blave wrote:

I'm not talking about exploration activities. I even said most GMs would not allow Guidance to cover an hour(s) long activity. That includes myself as a GM.

I was more thinking about stuff that takes a minute or two. Maybe an Intimidation check for Coercion or something like that. By RAW, you make the check at the end of that minute which would make Guidance awkward to use. I'd just let a character cast it before that minute starts.

ah i thought you were talking about exploration, sorry.

For long duration activities, i would personally rule case by case.

Regardless of "when" you make the roll (which by definition of a game, you will have to make once and not like a dozen of times), there are some activities that actually rely on continuously trying to achieve success throughtout the duration of the activity, so it still seems sketchy to me to allow a "last second cast to augment" those checks.

but in some (few) occasions, i may houserule something like a "sustained casting of the spell" to cover the whole activity.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Blave wrote:
shroudb wrote:
"Duration: until the start of your next turn"

It also says "You ask for divine guidance, granting the target a +1 status bonus to one attack roll, Perception check, saving throw, or skill check the target attempts before the duration ends."

I read that only as "you must roll the check before the end of your next turn". The activity you're using the check for could still go beyond the duration, i.e. you don't need to actually finish the activity during the duration.

i would never allow a "1 turn check" to be an 8hour+ long duration activity.

a check that is supposed to span an activity repeated over multiple of hours is not done in mere 6 seconds of time. It is done in all this time combined. (regardless if it's just 1 roll)

That's like saying "here, for the next 6 seconds you're a bit better in Perception. So you should use those 6 seconds to scout for 4hours ahead".

(Plus, in *most* exploration activities, you don't even "pre-roll", but you roll only when something appropriate for said roll occurs)


Blave wrote:
shroudb wrote:

Guidance has a time limit for the check as well.

You can't apply it to checks that take more than the duration of the spell.

Nothing in the spell says that.

Only the Imperial Bloodline's Acestral Memory focus power does have such a caveat.

"Duration: until the start of your next turn"


Guidance has a time limit for the check as well.

You can't apply it to checks that take more than the duration of the spell.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bigguyinblack wrote:

Which is why I said in my earlier post "...Then if you are lucky some of your allies go after you but before the enemies..."

My point was that there is a time frame where the enemy is still frightened 1 and you can effect your allies with Inspire.

No.

Compositions specifically END all ongoing effects if you cast another.

Dirge:
Enemies around you are Frightened 1.

It ENDS this effect.

So the very instant you cast another composition, the Frightened 1 effect is removed.

To put it in another way:

ALL round duration effects normally expire at end of round.

So, "+1 status bonus to attack/damage" (from Inspire), as an example, would last until the end of the round.
Frightened 1,as another example, would last until the end of the round.

That's the general rule.

Composition SPECIFIC rule ENDS "ongoing effects".

It doesn't let them expire, it directly cancels them.

Else, every single composition would be able to overlap.

Note the specific language :

" any ongoing effects from your previous composition spell end immediately"

Frightened 1 IS, by definition, an ongoing effect.
So it does end immediately.


Quietpaw wrote:
This sounds like a great ruling, thanks! Would you require the same actions and roll checks vs Fort against a willing target or an unconscious or paralyzed one? My group has played 6 times already and in 2 or 3 sessions already we have encountered pulling and repositioning questions with no clear CRB answer. One player ran out of breath underwater and the others wanted to grab and pull him out to the surface. Another player got paralyzed by a ghoul and someone wanted to drag him back out of melee range. And in a third case players tied ropes on each other and wanted to pull each other back to safety or up to a ledge after falling. How would you handle the action economy and move speeds here? Underwater had extra difficult terrain since water already slows you down. In this case it was still water so I didn't require Athletics to move.

Reposition hasn't come up on any of my sessions.

as a quick guess, since i haven't thought about it:

Paralyzed: Like dragging a 6 bulk "weight", more if he has a lot of bulk/armor on him. He's not resisting, he's just heavy.

Underwater drowning: Probably normal shove. eYou'd still need to beat a Fort DC (drowning victims sadly do try to pull you under/resist strictly due to reflex) AND i would probably rule for something like "crit fail makes THEM grapple you down"

Ledge falling: oof... i'd say "follow the leader exploration activity" but the thing is, if someone does fall, and the rope is not tightly pinned on the wall itself, it might provoke saving throws from the rest to not get dragged down instead. On the other hand, an "expert climber" would probably secure his rope to the surface unless for some reason he explicitly doesn't want to do so (he wants to pull the rope back up as an example)


Bigguyinblack wrote:

But you can cast Dirge of Doom and say a spell. Then if you are lucky some of your allies go after you but before the enemies. On the enemy turn they stay Frightened 1. Then on your turn you can Inspire. And any allies that go after you but before the enemies are both inspired and fighting frightened enemies.

Also note that you can use Lingering Composition on Dirge of Doom. It isn't perfect since enemies just need to move away from you to negate it but there will be times where that isn't practical for them.

the moment you cast Inspire, the ongoing effect of "frighten 1" will disappear.

and yes, lingering on Dirge is amazing, but it's not that clear cut win over Inspire.

to me, Dirge is best in prolonged battles and Inspire in shorter ones.

Thing is, on the first few rounds, your targets can be easily Intimidated, after the intimidation is over and they are immune, THEN it's time to Dirge.

So, on a fight that will last like 3-4 rounds, Inspire will usually have you covered with a +1 and Intimidate with a -1 on the focus targets.

After those rounds elapse, THEN you switch songs.

1 to 50 of 3,630 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>