tqomins's page

Organized Play Member. 338 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.


1 to 50 of 338 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

MaxAstro wrote:

I've been pretty vocal on these forums that I desperately, desperately want an X-Com style PF2e game.

Take some inspiration from Darkest Dungeon too - have the premise of the game be that you are managing a Pathfinder Lodge. That would be an absolute dream, to me.

Yes, absolutely.

rooneg wrote:
tqomins wrote:

This is very well done. Thanks, yall!

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

It costs two fame.


I hadn't seen that boon page before I guess—I was waiting for these character options before starting in on PFS2.

But this looks accessible enough. Excited to plan this character.

This is very well done. Thanks, yall!

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

... our movement on sanctioning. The organized play developers finished their pass on several of the books and now we are working on getting them formatted for publication. This is another task I hope to have completed by the end of the month.

Wonderful! Really looking forward to seeing this come online.

Tonya Woldridge wrote:

We are working on a permanent home for the A/R and hope to have it in place before the end of Jan. Once built, this system will allow us to update on a more frequent basis. Wireframing began this week and we plan to with us returning in the new year focused and ready to move the task over the finish line.

Tangential, but related, the org play team spent some time debating the best way to present A/R in the new edition and came up with a new plans that supports the system. Currently, the team is implementing this format on our currently completed sanctioning so that we can hang the text on the wireframe once it is ready. We also are looking at how to adjust our schedules to accommodate the more flexible system. Going forward, the org play team is building their schedule with regular time slated for the reviewing of books/prepping of text.

This is encouraging. I've stepped back from PFS while waiting on the first couple Lost Omens books to be sanctioned. And since that's the only game that works with my schedule currently, that means I haven't been playing any Pathfinder. Looking forward to getting back into it.

This is really interesting & innovative. Congrats, y'all!

1 person marked this as a favorite.
tivadar27 wrote:
Spamotron wrote:
tivadar27 wrote:
3Doubloons is ... maintaining the compilation of all the errors.
... it's unclear to me if devs are working based off of that list or the thread itself, if it's the second, then having separate threads seems preferable.

On Discord, if I recall, Mark indicated that they use the github as one source for their master issues-list.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for the update!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In addition to what everyone else has said, the designers have confirmed several times on here that you decide whether to shield block after you know the damage

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's honestly difficult for me to get excited for this when we still don't have the LOWG sanctioned for organized play and no word on when that might come. I stopped playing PFS and probably won't revisit until LOWG and LOCG are available for play

Very nice. Thanks!

Debelinho wrote:
champion works best with dex dump because of heavy armor prof

Not really. There's only a +1 AC difference between light/medium (+5) and heavy (+6) armor. So there are plenty of great champion builds that'll trade that 1 AC for the advantages of not bothering with heavy armor (e.g., speed). What I've quoted here ("best") is just not true.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Donovan Du Bois wrote:
Technotrooper wrote:
During the Paizo Friday Twitch stream, the devs promised an update addressing key critical issues (not every little error/typo) in the first printing of the CRB "soon."
Soon TM having the meaning of "Sometime between this exact second and the heat death of the universe".

I mean, sure, technically, but give us a little credit here. We are going to release a couple of important errata in the next few weeks, before the APG playtest to be sure.

Right now we are deep in GMG work and that has to take some priority. We will get out some updates as soon as we can without jeopardizing that books progress.

Hang tight folks, we will get you some answers.

That's understandable, of course, and maybe I'm misremembering ... but my recollection of what was said on the designer q&a stream, on previous streams, and elsewhere is that it sounded much more like we'd get a reasonably comprehensive first-pass errata document coming soon after release, not "a couple important errata" to happen in October

aka, you may have set expectations a little higher than this post attempts to dial 'em down to

and maybe I am misremembering! but I know I'm not the only one who got a certain impression from what's been said ...

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Luis Loza wrote:
Well, the information on the Othoban halflings is purely flavor. There's not an Othoban-related heritage nor is there an Othoban-related ancestry feat. If you can roleplay a time-displaced halfling who is particularly curious and keen on dressing well, you're good to go! However, it might be worth waiting so you can read the sidebar on halfling slang!

Oh, excellent!! I thought it was a heritage. But if not I'll just go ahead with it and retcon the rp when we get the book. Because time halflings! so cool! how could I not

2 people marked this as a favorite.

This is a great post. I'm very excited for the book

But now I'm a little anxious because I might have to save my first PFS character (halfling wizard/cleric) until I get the time halfling! :-|

I would really like if somehow we got a way to give class levels to monsters. I always liked how it made the world feels real. That illithid there? Might have wizard or fighter levels, like any one of the party members.

I put together some statblocks for a conversion the other day, and found it very easy to make monster npcs by grabbing a couple thematic abilities from the monster and doing a quick-and-dirty PC build

Since you don't need all the details you just skip stuff that's not thematically relevant or unlikely to come up. E.g., I only grabbed a couple class feats rather than picking out each one and skipped the skill feats and didn't bother with equipment but just grabbed appropriate numbers for the level.

It was all quick and painless and should do the job perfectly well for having monsters with class levels

Deadmanwalking wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
Already answered in thread. All classes should progress it with simple weapon proficiency.

This doesn't actually change things for Fighters, who remain at Expert in most weapons (including most Simple Weapons and certainly Unarmed Strikes) throughout their career, with only one Weapon Group advancing...until suddenly at 19th they're Legendary at everything.

Still, despite that being tad odd, it seems intended.

Yeah. The answer doesn't specifically fox the fighter thing but I think it makes the intent clear. the fighter thing *should* work how we all thought it should.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
tqomins wrote:
I'm generally just a little annoyed with unarmed attacks being all over the place like they are. Seems a better design would be to handle them like unarmored defense—they scale along with whatever else your class gives you. That would be better for all the same reasons the change to armor proficiencies from the playtest was a very good move: simpler all around, enables more concepts, doesn't have a real downside, prevents all these weird quirks.

Very happy to hear (on today's stream) that unarmed attacks should/will scale with simple weapon proficiency. Doesn't quite get the fighter quirk, but clearly that's the intent

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
I wouldn't put this in the same category, simply because nothing in the Fighter Class even suggests you should attack unarmed. The fact that you jump from Expert to Legendary is weird, but it's not a trap option since prior to that attacking unarmed is not actually encouraged in any way, making it much less of a trap.

That's fair. This one is a bit different.

I'm generally just a little annoyed with unarmed attacks being all over the place like they are. Seems a better design would be to handle them like unarmored defense—they scale along with whatever else your class gives you. That would be better for all the same reasons the change to armor proficiencies from the playtest was a very good move: simpler all around, enables more concepts, doesn't have a real downside, prevents all these weird quirks.

The monk has more than enough to make it the premiere martial artist—you don't need to make unarmed strike completely useless for most characters, and a trap for several, out of some fear that otherwise you'd step on the Monk's toes. Monks aren't threatened. (If nothing else, they're still the only one with powerful fist, much less the other stuff they get.)

But that's a bit of a tangent to a more general frustration, so I'll leave it there.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for this, DMW. These are some that have been bugging me as well.

the first (the one I think is an error) is that Sorcerers do not get to Expert with Unarmed (despite some Bloodlines giving Focus Spells entirely based on unarmed attacks) when they do with Simple Weapons, and Warpriests likewise do not get to Expert in Martial Weapons (despite getting Proficiency in them). These seem like errors because they are the only two times when a Class provides a weapon and encourages the character to use it then pulls the rug out from under them by not increasing Proficiency

This kind of thing is a big problem. But "the only two times" isn't quite right. I'm aware of at least two other such issues, both also having to do with unarmed attacks:

(1) Fighters can't apply their weapon mastery to unarmed attacks (as I explain here, for folks who don't see why that is). This both seems off, thematically, and also has the weird result that they start Expert in unarmed, it doesn't increase ... and then it leaps to Legendary at level 19

(2) Champions whose deities favor unarmed attacks are out of luck: their unarmed damage doesn't benefit from Deific Weapon and they can never raise their proficiency beyond Trained

9 people marked this as a favorite.

Erik Mona has a few interesting posts about this on reddit. E.g., this one:

Erik Mona wrote:
It’s not because of low sales. The Core especially is doing great on Amazon (better than the 1e Core at launch), Amazon often increases their discount when a book is selling well, and that’s what we’re seeing here.

Amazon's whole strategy is to leverage its massive network to sell at a steep discount nobody can compete with.

I didn't know about this particular pattern, to discount when something is doing well, but it definitely fits with their usual behavior.

(Which, obviously, Paizo has no input in or control over.)

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Angel Hunter D wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:

There is a marked theme with some of the uncommonings,restricted access expands stories. Teleport invalidated loads of stories, detect poison outright removes interesting detective work etc.

I can see why they'd want to restrict such things.

Or you could, ya know, write appropriate stories for the setting.

Is it even worth pointing out that the rarity toggles reflect the setting? This option or that option are not-common in Golarion, in the Inner Sea, in the setting for the PFS campaign. You want a different setting, play a different campaign

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Syries wrote:

By the way if you haven't looked over all the uncommon spells- just spells alone, not even other options- you'll see a good number of spells that were commonly found in PFS.

** spoiler omitted **

^ This list includes focus spells. Which are class powers accessible by class choices. It doesn't really speak to the purported "problem" here. There's plenty of good reason to prevent a Cleric from grabbing the "uncommon" focus spell granted by, say, a domain their deity doesn't have, or a sorcerer bloodline, or whatever

10 people marked this as a favorite.

Nah, this is a much better policy, i.e. a better decision overall for the campaign, than an alternative that would open up uncommon/rare items for wide use

Helps constrain power creep through elaborate builds using unexpected combos of uncommon resources

Lets the uncommon/rare options be more interesting/powerful bc they've got that rarity toggle to restrict them

Helps rewards of uncommon/rare options be more special and interesting

And really, most of the uncommon options are accessible via class choices so it's not like they're off the table

So sure, there may be some cases where you can't play a specific build bc a specific option is rarity restricted and you don't have a way to access it. But I don't see that becoming a huge issue of any sort. And looks to me like that cost is worth benefits like those above

Organized play isn't as flexible as home games. That's inherent in its nature and leads to perennial expressions of frustration (esp. hypothetical/anticipated frustration). But PFS seems to manage this kind of thing very well overall and I expect it'll actually be a lot better in the new edition

So, *shrug*

There's no need for "prestige" as a special term, and so it was dropped.

The "prestige class" concept will be covered via archetypes with more restrictive prerequisites for entry.

(Which is all PF1 prestige classes are anyway—multiclass with barriers to entry.)

See, e.g.,

Mark Seifter wrote:
Yes, the prestige term is gone, not the idea of having higher-level "prestige-ish" archetypes.

8 people marked this as a favorite.

While shields do look pretty useful for casters, and I'm sure it will come up now and then, I don't expect it to be too common. For a few reasons. Let's assume a caster who's trying to stay out of melee:

(1) Shield will get you *most* of the benefit of a steel shield, and you probably don't expect to shield block more than a couple times in a combat even when you're dragged into melee (combat lasting only 3-4 rounds).

(2) Many casters will be low-Str and constrained by Bulk limits. A shield is 1 Bulk, and a repair kit to keep it together is 1 Bulk. But a spellbook is 1 Bulk and a Waterskin (full) is 1 Bulk. So if you've got an 8 Str Wizard, you're already encumbered if you carry anything more than that. And many casters will be low-Str. Which is to say, again, that the marginal benefit of hauling around that stuff as opposed to just using shield may not be worth it.

(3) But the real reason not to bother is that very, very often you'll find yourself having a better use for all 3 actions. Casting a spell is mostly 2 actions, you've got useful cantrips so you'll probably want to be doing that every round, and that 3rd action will almost always be better spent on moving, on metamagic, on a focus spell, or on something else.

It wouldn't bother me if casters with shields became common. But I don't expect them to, for reasons like these.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

In addition to Lisa and Jason's comments, I thought this post from James was interesting:

James Jacobs wrote:

Selling out may make for some snappy ad copy, but it's a terrible thing to do, because that means you didn't make enough to supply demand and miss out on potential sales and annoy customers. Selling out of Starfinder at Gen Con a few years ago made it easier for us to pack up the booth at the end of the show, but it caused a lot of frustration and aggravation and second guessing and other ripple effects down the road that would have been avoided had we not sold out.

A book doesn't have to sell out in order to be "successful".

We don't make our actual sales numbers public, and I'm not at Gen Con to see how much of what we brought to the show sold (and the show's still going, too)... but from what I can see it seems to be selling quite well.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
ikarinokami wrote:
tqomins wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:
Proficiencies for Unarmed Strike sure look weird.
... Fighters start Expert and leap to Legendary at lvl19 with nothing in between, and can't use Weapon Mastery for UAS ...
I'm pretty sure unarmed combat works the same for fighters as any other weapon group. unarmed belongs to the brawling group.

I do think that's what was intended, and how I'd choose to run it as a GM. But the rules as written don't actually do that. Because (1) the Fighter's proficiency increases go to "weapons" in a weapon group, but (2) unarmed strikes are not weapons (even though they belong to weapon groups). So as a result, Fighter starts at level 1 as Expert in unarmed strikes, and has no way to increase that until level 19, when Versatile Legend swoops in and bumps that to Legendary.

Unarmed Trait:

Unarmed Trait wrote:
An unarmed attack isn’t a weapon, though it’s categorized with weapons for weapon groups, and it might have weapon traits.


Fighter Weapon Mastery (5th Level) wrote:
Choose one weapon group. Your proficiency rank increases to master with the simple and martial weapons in that group ...
Fighter Weapon Legend (13th Level) wrote:
Your proficiency ranks for simple and martial weapons increase to master. Your proficiency rank for advanced weapons increases to expert. You can select one weapon group and increase your proficiency ranks to legendary for all simple and martial weapons in that weapon group, and to master for all advanced weapons in that weapon group.
Fighter Versatile Legend (19th Level) wrote:
You are nigh-unmatched with any weapon. Your proficiency ranks for simple weapons, martial weapons, and unarmed attacks increase to legendary, and your proficiency rank for advanced weapons increases to master.

ChibiNyan wrote:

Also let's you cast with both hands occupied, right? I believe you don't need a free hand for somatic components, but yes for material.

The benefit is still marginal, though.


"Unlike when providing somatic components, you still must have a hand completely free."

That is also my perspective. It saves you 1L in bulk for the pouch, but that's it as far as I can tell.

It'll make sense in a campaign when you're worried about losing your stuff but otherwise I don't see the benefit.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

For perspective on proficiencies, check out my proficiency comparison chart

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Playtest in OCTOBER??? :-O

Reziburno25 wrote:
Might want to Include Ruffian as they get master in Medium Armor

Ah, will do. Thanks!

Deadmanwalking wrote:
tqomins wrote:
2) Alchemist only gets Trained, though mutagens seemed designed to encourage unarmed alchemist melee
Mutagenists get Expert. It's one of their features.

Ah, great. I see that now. Thanks for the catch!

Whenever your proficiency rank for simple weapons increases, your proficiency rank for unarmed attacks increases to the same rank unless it’s already better.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:

Excellent job here.

Proficiencies for Unarmed Strike sure look weird.

If MC adds proficiencies, it might add even more value to include them in your table :-D

Yeah, Unarmed Strike is in a very strange place right now. For example:

1) No way to raise UAS if your class doesn't hand it to you

2) Alchemist only gets Trained, though mutagens seemed designed to encourage unarmed alchemist melee

3) Champions of gods that favor UAS still only get Trained (this highlights a separate issue with Champions not advancing proficiency of favored weapon)

4) Fighters start Expert and leap to Legendary at lvl19 with nothing in between, and can't use Weapon Mastery for UAS

Mark suggested that some of this was due to some details falling through the cracks as different sections of the book were handed off between different staffers. So I'm eager to see what kind of errata/clarification we get for it.

My preferred would be if UAS worked like unarmored defense: your proficiency goes up along with whatever else you're getting. I'm hoping that was the intention and what we'll see

8 people marked this as a favorite.

To help with monster creation until we get the GMG, I put together a spreadsheet:

Basic data on all monsters in the Second Edition Bestiary

21 people marked this as a favorite.

Comparison of basic proficiencies between the classes

I found this pretty informative to put together. Let me know if you spot any mistakes.

P.S. here is the list of resources I've put together so far for Pathfinder Second Edition

11 people marked this as a favorite.

Basic data on all monsters in the Second Edition Bestiary

This data should be useful for system & build analysis and for reverse-engineering some monster creation guidelines

I input the data manually, and moved quickly to get this to you, so it likely contains some errors. Let me know if you spot any! (These are especially likely in the Attack & DC columns, since I was just skimming for the highest number there—it wasn't info in a fixed place like AC.)

And here is the list of resources I've put together so far for Pathfinder Second Edition

Yeah, you need the explorer's clothes. But that's fine:

(1) it's a *very* late-game thing (lvl 17—20);

(2) it fits with the overall standardization of AC (+5 from clothes/light/medium, +6 from heavy), maintaining consistent game balance/design;

(3) and Dex does so darn much anyway, aka what Bardarok said

For Witch, I'd try Wizard with an occult Sorcerer (Hag > Aberrant), I think, rather than Druid

14 people marked this as a favorite.

The list is complete!!

1) Absalom: Pathfinder Agent
2) Broken Lands: Aldori Duelist
3) Eye of Dread: Lastwall Sentry
4) Golden Road: Living Monolith
5) High Seas: Red Mantis Assassin
6) Impossible Lands: Student of Perfection
7) Mwangi Expanse: Magic Warrior
8) Old Cheliax: Hellknight Armiger
9) Saga Lands: Runescarred
10) Shining Kingdoms: Lion Blade

(Also, I was wrong! No Firebrands here. Interesting ...)

6 people marked this as a favorite.

CRB p.278, Critical Hits. This section misstates the rule for critical hits, saying that any nat20 attack roll is a critical hit.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

CRB 20, top-left under "Ancestry." The cross reference to the voluntary flaws sidebar gives p. 24, but the sidebar is p. 26.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Note that while Wisdom controls the Cleric's DC and spell attack rolls, you don't need to have 10+spell-lvl Wisdom to cast a spell of that level.

So you can play a low-Wis Cleric and just focus hard on buffing/healing allies (things that don't rely on Wis) and pump your Charisma for maximum extra heals.

Or if it's homebrew friendly as you say, just swap everything Charisma and Wisdom do for the Cleric and go with that instead of the divine sorcerer!

Samurai wrote:
How do you have access to the Lost Omens books already? And what is an "Iruxi"? It has given me that as an Ancestry twice now.

I threw those names in there along with a few options we know from previews to build and test the ability to add sources in the future.

Right now the only related data from those are the 3 Ancestries in the Character Guide (known from the product page and conventions) and 9 out of the 10 World Guide archetypes (known from the blogs, we'll get the 10th on Monday).

And yes, "Iruxi" is the new name for Lizardfolk, as part of Paizo's worldbuilding effort to give different groups their own names rather than the names that might be applied to them by humans/outsiders in-world.

10 people marked this as a favorite.

The Pathfinder Second Edition Core Rulebook has 46,690 possible combinations of Ancestry, Heritage, Background, Class, and Class Path—and that's before you add archetypes to the mix! If you add an archetype to your build parameters, you're up to 560,280 possible character options. That's ... a lot!!**

So what on earth should you build? Ask my character-suggestion spreadsheet! It'll give you new suggestions all day long. And if you prefer to roll physically, you can always pull 100 suggestions at once from the "d100" page to make a chart to roll on.


** And if you count the Wizard's Thesis as a "Class Path" choice, you bring the Wizard's number of choices up from 9 to 36 (= 9 schools * 4 theses), which bumps the overall numbers to 74,095 characters (without archetypes) or 889,140 characters (with archetypes) in the CRB. I haven't added in the theses yet, though, so I kept those out of my initial count.

P.S. The spreadsheet is coded so that it is very easy to expand as PF2 adds more content (including the ability to easily filter for the specific sources you want to draw on). I've already put in some options that we know are coming in the next few months in the world guides, and I'll keep adding to this for a while at least.

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Fireflash51 wrote:
Does the book explain how to handle chases?

Looks like that will be in the Gamemastery Guide, out in a few months. The relevant bit:

Product Description wrote:
• A catalog of subsystems to handle unique situations, from thrilling chases to researching mysteries to vehicle combat to elaborate duels to sandbox-style "hexploration" and more! Plus, a universal victory point system to help you design your own subsystems!

Doodpants wrote:

◈ Single Action

◈◈ Two-Action Activity
◈◈◈ Three-Action Activity
⟐ Free Action
⤾ Reaction

Those are good suggestions, thanks!

I'm using emoji in my statblock template, but I've added these to the notes section for folks who prefer them (or if I end up liking them better than the emoji when I start printing out characters)

I tried some unicode characters at first but they didn't "pop" enough in the statblock for my liking. (They weren't as good as these, though, I just grabbed the first that came to hand. So I will have to try these out.)

Joe Hex wrote:
I don't suppose The Wild Hunt made it into bestiary did they? Ever since they appeared in b6, I've been curious about who or what the Horned King is... Maybe a new God or Eldest?

Doesn't look like it, judging by the Bestiary spreadsheet Malk_Content put up here

1 person marked this as a favorite.
David knott 242 wrote:
Somebody elsewhere mentioned that Rogue Dedication gets you proficiency with light armor (and thus is a better deal than the initial Armor Proficiency feat), but I have not yet confirmed that in my own copy of the book.

No need to check the book. We've already seen all of the multiclass archetypes, and the Rogue multiclass does indeed grant training in light armor.

1 to 50 of 338 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>