syll's page

syll wrote:

Please, Please, PLEASE add a feat for Alchemists that allow them to apply their extracts to other players without the other player having to drink them.

I really like the Alchemist's flavor, but it was a huge frustration for me with the the class in PF1.

I'm personally fond of the 'hit your allies w/ a extract, dealing damage from broken glass, but providing the effects of the extract' approach that I've seen 3PP rules for. Something akin to a Spear-syringe with less punitive action economy is another (though less fun imo)option, or even converting extracts to being inhaled vice being drank as a third suggestion

But please, I would really like to be able to use my extracts on allies on my turn (using them on enemies would be cool too..)

Poisoner Gloves, free injects for all. I mean what else do you use Hand Slots for?

....Oh dears, how would that item work with Resonance?!?

The nasty problem with poisoner's gloves is this line right here "Each glove can be used once per day. Filling a glove is a full-round action that provokes attacks of opportunity."

Charabdos, The Tidal King wrote:

What about attacks of opportunity? Why can't every character do those from the get-go now? Why do only 2 classes get to "learn" that when previously anyone could do it?

Holy crap, you have the playtest document! Can you link it here, the rest of us have only been speculating on the tiny information we have.

I would love to be like you and know definitives.

2 pages ago, in this thread. Dev Mark Seifter's comment.

I would like to see Paizo opt for more diversity in their naming conventions. 'Race Traits' and 'Racial traits' caused a lot of confusion, and I would expect to see a lot more if there are Feats, Ancestry Feats, Class Feats & Background Feats.

As someone else mentioned a precedent of 'how many actions does that action cost?' will be similarly confusing.

A distinct name for each of those things (i.e. Feats, Lineage, Talents & Traits respectively, as an off the cuff example) being used to refer to these lists individually would be nice.

As addressed above, we don't have the specific rules in our hands at the moment, so it's not a complaint about the direction of the playtest.

That being said, no one is obligated to look on the bright side of things, and concerns about something like class restricted reactions is something that's absolutely fair to bring up, even if at the moment it's just from a teaser that was released. I'm sure there will be plenty more discussion about it as time rolls on.

It isn't from only the teaser, but also the podcast. Multiple times now they have said -Fighter- gets an AoO. The -Fighter- has a charge action.

It would be very easy for Jason or someone else from Paizo to allay these fears if they are misplaced and set folks (like me) at ease.

More importantly they have said, in this very article "Not everyone will have a reaction they can use during combat"

The more people who are aware of that, and unhappy with that, the less likely it is to show up in the final version.

Patrick Newcarry wrote:

Hythlodeus wrote:

wait, the 'reaction' is class based and not, say, roleplay based? I can't really decide WHAT my reaction is but have to select from a list of reactions available for the class I play? Do I understand that correctly? (might be the language barrier, who knows?)

I'm sorry, but if that's the case, that is extremely limiting, I don't see much fun in that

Instead of seeing the negatives in everything about this new edition, please look on the bright side of things. A great many updates are coming to the game, and complaining about it isn't going to get anyone anywhere. You don't have to play the new edition - no one does - but your point of view has been established, and you're de-railing productive conversation. I'm not trying to be a jerk, or start a fight, I'm just trying to keep the peace.

We're supposed to complain if something is bad. That's the point of a playtest.

Exactly. Telling someone who doesn't like the direction a playtest is going to keep it to themselves is not 'productive conversation'

Why does it take 3 actions to accomplish what you could do in 1 in 1E? (Draw weapon, move, leap)

That doesn't sound like "giving me the most out of my time" at all.

Why are fighters the only ones able to make an AoO?