wegrata's page

224 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 224 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah i think it boils down to not offering unsolicited advice to randoms on the internet. Especially those with a large audience, and therefore getting a lot of unasked for feedback. Loving the game and wanting to talk about it are awesome, but forcing someone not interested in having the conversation isn't. Consent matters for everything, even conversation.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm hoping we get some interesting alchemical weapons in the book. We have the alchemical cross bow and bomb launcher. Maybe some interesting combination weapons involving alchemy somehow.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I hoping for more content like beastguns and beast gunner archetype. I love the fantasy of a character that specializes in making maximum use out of a class of objects.

Maybe weapons made out of some type of plane touched ore, and a group dedicated to perfecting making and wielding them.


Temperans wrote:

Nah regular and kinetic blasts should have the same proficiency which is why kinetic knight works as a class archetype. If you treat the blast as being solely a spell yeah you will have problems. But realistically it should be treat as a spell only in so much as you are casting a weapon to make a strike, meaning that mechanically it should be treated like a unique weapon type.

As far as provoking goes, you can just say that kinetic blade doesn't provoke AoO. Also if regular kineticist requires burn to use kinetic blade, then kinetic knight as a class archetype can modify it such that it doesn't.

Between kinetic blade not being subject of AoO, being melee only, and Kinetic Knight offering a way to do it without harming yourself, that should be more than enough compensation for it being able to get multiple strike a round no?

I think you and i talked about this in a different thread. For some stuff like this I really like the idea of the spell heightening increasing proficiency rather than damage, and relying on property runes for the damage increase.

Something like an advanced unarmed attack where at certain spell levels you go from trained -> expert -> master and still need handwraps

I could see a that deals electric damage,
Focus Cantrip 1 (Kineticists only)
1 action
Casting stat to hit
1d8 chose energy type damage
1 -> Trained
3 -> Expert
7 -> Master

I'd almost look at it as a one action cantrip This should be about in line with Produce Flame for DPR but different action economy and accuracy and doesn't change much else from what I can see.


Ravingdork wrote:
Squiggit wrote:
Primal only kineticist walls off a lot of their weirder options from PF1 and I'd be really disappointed to see it go in that direction. So I hope there's at least some flexibility there

Like what? You basically had the elements, void (essentially darkness and shadow), wood (as in plants), and healing.

That's all primal. The only thing that seems remotely arcane is aether/force, and you can practically roll that into the air/wind element since it was mostly just moving objects.

When I made my post about it being a class archetype for psychic, I was leaving aether as part is psychic, as it already had the telekinesis vibe.


Hoping it was clear from my other post but I agree with primal. I had that listed as part of my idea for the archetype.

The low level spell slots seem to cover utility and the primal list has the spells that match the old abilities from pf1.


What do we need for the psychic to handle it?

For me it's
Burn, which feels like a way to recharge focus points in 2e
Elemental blast
Amps for buffing your primary blast
Slots for utility talents

Swapping to primal feels right.

I dunno I love the kinetisist as a concept and play style, and they feel similar enough that I could see it as a class archetype


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Anyone else half expecting to see kineticist as a class archetype for psychic? Burn for brain drain, primal for occult, different amps?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was thinking about how to have a class use runestones as a component for it's class features. Something like an arcane smith archetype that can hold a one handed weapon and a property runestone in their offhand. While doing this they apply the rune to their weapon.


Castilliano wrote:
wegrata wrote:

One thing I'd be interested in seeing in a weapon summoning cantrip is it creating an advanced weapon unarmed weapon and rather than it automatically scaling damage, it scales proficiency and still uses runes.

Something like
summon sword cantrip 1
1 action
1d6 slashing damage (maybe d8? not sure)
Uses casting stat
Trained prof
Scaling
Lvl 3 expert prof
Lvl 7 master prof

Then you'd still have to participate in buying weapon runes and would still have some of the flexibility it presents.

fully open to damage type/die changes to be more balanced and effective.

Interesting, and well aligned with PF2 norms if a two-action spell and if by level you mean the Cantrip's level not the caster's. Those norms do allow sizable buffs when that buff is patching up a hole. So such a Cantrip would likely be useful for a spellcaster, though unlikely of any use for a martial.

Might even be able to toss in Weapon Specialization.
As for using the casting stat for an actual weapon, that's tricky territory so I'd lean toward no, that the Cantrip gives proficiency only, though damage of course would be the balancing factor.

Sorry missed a bit of it. It's one action, but lasts until the end of your turn. So at best 2 attacks with map, but that may be too much.

I'm not sure if the stat matters that much tbh. Your dex and casting stat will end up maxed and this way it's in line with spell attack rolls and feels more thematically appropriate as I envisioned it as an ephemeral short sword and force damage felt too strong, but I'm not strongly committed either way.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

One thing I'd be interested in seeing in a weapon summoning cantrip is it creating an advanced weapon unarmed weapon and rather than it automatically scaling damage, it scales proficiency and still uses runes.

Something like
summon sword cantrip 1
1 action
1d6 slashing damage (maybe d8? not sure)
Uses casting stat
Trained prof
Scaling
Lvl 3 expert prof
Lvl 7 master prof

Then you'd still have to participate in buying weapon runes and would still have some of the flexibility it presents.

fully open to damage type/die changes to be more balanced and effective.


I'm super excited about the possibility of Nexus. Using dnd beyond and Avare discord bot has been my favorite way of playing 5e online. I'd love a similar setup to that. Current my group(s), we have a weird setup, uses foundry, which is great for a vtt, but for theatre or the mind type stuff nothing really exists like our 5e setup for pf2.


Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
Trox are lovely, sweet and gentle creatures! I love them!

I love the gentle giant trope and beetles are such fascinating creatures.


As someone pointed out to me in a different thread I hope we get the Throx ported into pf2.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Perpdepog wrote:
wegrata wrote:

I'd like to see a beetle based ancestry. With heritages like the ironclad beetle and the long-horned beetle. Would be a neat concept for a insect ancestry that's not a thri-kreen

Edit: spelling

So something like PF1E's/Starfinder's Trox? I could get behind that. They even have various sub-species on their native home of Nchak.

I never played starfinder but after looking up Trox all I can say is very yes. Nearly exactly what I had in mind


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd like to see a beetle based ancestry. With heritages like the ironclad beetle and the long-horned beetle. Would be a neat concept for a insect ancestry that's not a thri-kreen

Edit: spelling


4 people marked this as a favorite.
nick1wasd wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:

I mean, you could also do the thing that the monk does where you choose between primal and occult (in the monk's case divine and occult).

The pyrokineticist, hydrokineticist, aerokineticist, and geokineticist would be primal, but the telekineticist, chaokineticist, arakineticist, elysiokineticist, and pyschokineticist might make more sense as occult.

There's no reason you can't make the class accomodate both Nature and Occultism depending on other choices, since that's just a choice of tertiary stats.

That is interesting since Primal and Occult stand opposite to one another as far as Essences are concerned.

Maybe the Kineticist should tap directly into the Essences : Material for those you identified as primal and Spiritual for those seen as occult.

This would also nicely explain why they are not casters, since they would not be relying on any Tradition.

I do appreciate someone else drawing upon the fact that Primal and Occult stand opposite each other. And I very much like the idea of them directly interacting with a single element instead of the Traditions as we know them. Really carves out the "weird, not-quite-magic" space they occupy, and I do hope that's what happens when they come back.

That juxtaposed against the thaumaturge is kinda interesting to me.

Kineticist drawing from the bottom of the stack if you will by interacting with the essences directly vs thaumaturge drawing from the top by taking a bit here and there from all traditions and therefore all essences.

Kinda neat conceptually for me


5 people marked this as a favorite.
beowulf99 wrote:


3. I really wish that Paizo would have taken the time to differentiate Pathfinder magic from classic Vancian magic. Focus spells are nice, and I like the changes made to existing spells generally. Like making Magic Missile and Heal variable action spells. I just wish that More spells were altered like that.

I'm hoping we get an updated words of power to demonstrate this. The new action system could work really well here.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

What do folks think about it being a will save vs class DC? Especially for debuffs type effects?

I guess it depends on the fluf for what makes the most sense. If I'm using my connection to divine the weakness or if I'm using it to create the weakness.

Like does the connection tell me the creature is weak to something or will be sickened by it or is th connection creating the weakness.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's magically enforcing a psychosomatic effect on a target. You're saying in a powerful magical sense, "this goo on my sword, well it affects you (werewolf) just like silver" and the universe and by proxy the werewolf says "okey dokey boss"

That's my take on it.


I think people are misunderstanding me. I didn't say spells were weaker, just that it was a common pool and that spells in general are stronger than caster feats. This shows up in the that on average caster feats are less powerful than martial feats. Just that it's on average asymmetrical, not bad just different budgets.


One thing in this I kinda find amusing is casters with spells is kinda what folks are asking for with feats.

Large pools that can be taken by multiple classes. Exactly what we get with spells.

The only real issue I see with casters is that a lot of the feats don't feel impactful or fun and people are wanting the things that make $CLASS unique to be impactful and fun. Take the comparison of bard to witch, bards unique abilities are more impactful than a witches, even when the witch has the occult list, the bard is viewed as more fun by many.

It's another place where casters and martials are designed differently, where martials get more of their power budget in unique class feats and features while casters its more in spells and spell selection, similar to 1e.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd really like to see Rougarous show up, and some kind of ogrekin/half-ogre. The last could be a versatile heritage I'd think.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

For my group it was the fun toys being used against us in a pivotal moment that was demoralizing.

The +10/-10 is fun to be in the winning side of but not on the losing, and it's especially prevalent in trivial and sever encounters.

I said it earlier in the thread, by the proficiency without level optional rule helped out a lot with it. We don't get to use crit ad much, but neither does the enemy.

It also helps summons feel less useless as you level up.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SuperBidi wrote:
YuriP wrote:
SuperBidi wrote:
PFS adventures are made with random players/characters. They have a strong potential in going south.
I read some PFS books and they have shorter adventures less encounters and apparently more easier. Could may useful for new players and others players that fell the APs too difficult?

PFS adventures are, overall, easier. But... What makes them sometimes hard is that they are far more random. The characters don't know each other, the players don't necessarily know each other, etc...

I've played once with a single martial in a 6-player party. It went fine, but these are the games that can spiral out of control very easily.
And even outside that extreme case, you may end up with a configuration that just doesn't match, or players that don't click together, or just flat out beginners/bad players that are crippling everyone.

One important thing to take into account in PF2 is that everything is super balanced. If one character doesn't meet the expectations, the game becomes far harder. When I was playing the first 2 levels of my Alchemist (level 1-2 Alchemist is a chore) I was really feeling it as most adventures where quite hard compared to those I was playing with more efficient characters.

In PF1, overpowered characters were sometimes making the whole adventure alone, so a weak character or even a straight useless character was not causing much issues.

Wouldn't that mean the design goal of making the difference between a well built character and a poorly built one being very small wasn't really hit


1 person marked this as a favorite.

What's really helped my group was the variant rule that removes level from proficiency. This helps both summons keep up and boss encounters from feeling "unfair".


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The example of the chain from a slave vs a tyrant, could come from an old legend/myth and your will combined with the known myth your ability. In my head there are two parts of this activity, knowing the lore and having your will enforce it in reality, this was represented mechanically by RK skills+charisma.

At least this is how my mind interpreted it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah but all of that happened over the course of the comics. In the beginning he was kind of a mix between this thaumaturge and a rogue.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I do think a unique lore skill would fit the bill better or even having a new action that's class DC vs will save rather than another skill check, but that's pretty much a focus cantrips named something else.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In this case since it's half recollection and half force of will is why it's charisma for the ability to represent force of personality on reality and recall knowledge to represent remembering the tale.

I think this fits, since your knowledge plays a bigger role as it will generally have a higher number.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's both though, your recalling is literally what causes the creation.

I kinda agree it could be int equally to charisma in my book, since it's a single act that is both recalling and creating.


I think it helps if you stop thinking of recalling an actual weakness, your recalling a mythical one and your act of recollection is what causes the weakness to affect it.

Lile I recall therefore its real.

Edit: spelling


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Golurkcanfly wrote:
wegrata wrote:
Golurkcanfly wrote:
wegrata wrote:

Yeah I'd almost like it changed to be a check against will DC of the target and be completely separate from the "common flaws" that anyone can exploit.

Like anyone can use fire against a troll, but a thaum can do fire and oil from some exotic plan that has a similar debilitating effect, but in this case it's the characters will making the oil have this effect rather than anything inherent to the troll.

Like it's the combination of the stories the character heard in their past and their unshakable belief in those stories that makes it, at least temporarily, a part of reality.

The oil and fire plan seems more like something an INT-based class would do, like an Investigator.

Right now it feels weirdly against the flavor of the Thaum, since it's actively encouraged to dump the stat that best represents knowledge and don't really care about actually using fire. The ability just makes you do the extra damage and doesn't actually simulate finding the right tool, just the result.

Bad phrasing on my part, the oil in this case wouldn't be flammable, it would be toxic on it's own without the fire, with the fire it would hit 2 weaknesses.

That would be interesting, but does kinda raise some questions with how it interacts with Recall Knowledge and where CHA comes into play.

I think this plays into the explanation, your belief in those old stories is what makes then true, not anything biological.

Pf has been pretty consistent with cha being the stat for that. I'd say recall knowledge up a to give it the feel of mixing force of personality to cause the effect.


Golurkcanfly wrote:
wegrata wrote:

Yeah I'd almost like it changed to be a check against will DC of the target and be completely separate from the "common flaws" that anyone can exploit.

Like anyone can use fire against a troll, but a thaum can do fire and oil from some exotic plan that has a similar debilitating effect, but in this case it's the characters will making the oil have this effect rather than anything inherent to the troll.

Like it's the combination of the stories the character heard in their past and their unshakable belief in those stories that makes it, at least temporarily, a part of reality.

The oil and fire plan seems more like something an INT-based class would do, like an Investigator.

Right now it feels weirdly against the flavor of the Thaum, since it's actively encouraged to dump the stat that best represents knowledge and don't really care about actually using fire. The ability just makes you do the extra damage and doesn't actually simulate finding the right tool, just the result.

Bad phrasing on my part, the oil in this case wouldn't be flammable, it would be toxic on it's own without the fire, with the fire it would hit 2 weaknesses.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah I'd almost like it changed to be a check against will DC of the target and be completely separate from the "common flaws" that anyone can exploit.

Like anyone can use fire against a troll, but a thaum can do fire and oil from some exotic plan that has a similar debilitating effect, but in this case it's the characters will making the oil have this effect rather than anything inherent to the troll.

Like it's the combination of the stories the character heard in their past and their unshakable belief in those stories that makes it, at least temporarily, a part of reality.


Anyone else get the idea to play one as a hoarder of "supernatural" bric-a-brac an it's through their sheer power of belief creates a weakness.
I'm planning on my character spending a lot of time procuring items from con artists they believe.


I can't wait for to play a blue automaton vanguard gunslinger with the sterling dynamo archtype on a quest to build new beast guns to integrate into his arm.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
keftiu wrote:
(Worth remembering that they’re ancestries, not races, in 2e - a small but very important vocabulary change!)

You're very correct, my mistake. Hard habit to break, but still a good one too.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
keftiu wrote:
Michael Sayre wrote:
keftiu wrote:
Gaulin wrote:
There was also a good amount of questions answered on the paizo events discord. Mark, Mike and Leo were great and answered basically everything thrown at them. I'm especially happy with integrated weapons and the example of an unstable option with a 'safe mode'.
The most important Discord tidbit to me was Luis seemingly implying that we’ll see the Meta-Regions of Arcadia.
I can confirm that the Deadshot Lands I mentioned during the Guns & Gears stream are the first named metaregion of Arcadia (but far from the last, if Luis, Daigle, and myself have anything to say about it!)
There’s literally nothing I want more from this company than Arcadia books. Looking forward to it!

I hope we get details on rougarou. I want a canine race that's not as cuddle as shoony


Guntermench wrote:
wegrata wrote:
So I'm super excited to use an investigator dedication with my magus. Combining one of the innovations with spell strike sounds like it could give some interesting options turn to turn. Do spell strike or someone with my special weapon/armor. What's most advantageous at this time.
Did you mean Inventor?

Yes I do. Sorry about that.


So I'm super excited to use an investigator dedication with my magus. Combining one of the innovations with spell strike sounds like it could give some interesting options turn to turn. Do spell strike or someone with my special weapon/armor. What's most advantageous at this time.


Arakasius wrote:

Not that we have a bard in our game but tbh if someone wanted to play it I think I would do two things.

1. Give wave casting instead of full casting.
2. Give some sort of mechanism to improve physical accuracy. It might be just give them master there but maybe give them master accuracy to hit on turns they do a composition or something.

I still think Bard would be a very powerful class but it would promote a better playstyle than what they have now which is pretty static.

I'd love seeing something like this but 3 spells/level for 3 levels. As a class archtype available to all casters.

Actually I'd like to see something like this in the vein of the 3.5 beguiler, warmage and conjurer

I could see this as allowing specialist of all classes in kind cool interesting way.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

Honestly I hope the niche protection in this edition goes away nearly entirely. I can't for the life of me figure out from a narrative sense why you have to be religious to be really skilled at the use of armor, or why no divine champions are of legendary skill with a sword.


Something my DM is planning to do is drop the level of the new shadow signet ring from 10 down to 3 and making it common.

This maintains the meta-game of casters (targeting weakest defence) but helps attack role spells.

Another thing that helps is looking for spells like sudden bolt that are good for a single target but don't require an attack roll.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deriven Firelion wrote:
You need a recharge action for spell strike? Hmm. That sounds like a pretty big limiter.

It's not too bad. Most focus spells recharge it, plus a few other feats give actions that do as well. So there probably aren't a ton of rounds when you'll be doing nothing to recharge.


You could use the relic rules as the basis for a build your own tattoo. We did that in my game. So far it's been fun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Curaigh wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:

The inquisitor seems doable with the same wave-casting model as the Magus.

Basically every one of the 4 magical traditions has 4 potential modes: Prepared full caster, prepared spontaneous caster, wave caster gish, focus caster.

Feeling old right now, but please explain

wave caster?
focus caster?
bounded caster?
prepared spontaneous caster?
Thanks.

Wave/bounded casting is what the new magus and summoner have. 4 spells max, 2 at top level you can cast and 2 at lvl-1

Focus would be only having focus spells and cantrips.

I think this is spontaneous full caster


I'm most excited to see what totally new things we'll see. I love a lot of the pf1 classes but I really want to see how this system can work with concepts designed from the ground up for it.


I'd love to see a class based around cantrips and focus spells honestly. Give it ways to regenerate focus during combat and give it focus spells like flaming fusillade that augment their focus cantrips.

I was initially leaning towards kineticist for this with burn being a mechanic to take damage and to cast focus spells when you're at 0 and gather power being an activity to regain focus during combat. Doesn't match 100% but could be fun.


Shisumo wrote:
Michael Sayre wrote:
Though it does bring up some interesting questions for the design team when the real meat of a thing that people want to see brought forward is a mechanical niche rather than a thematic one.
I do think there is a hunger for some kinds of mechanical niches that could be filled with a wide variety of thematic options. "I blast with magic every turn" is one, for example - it's not the only reason why people play 5E warlocks, but it's definitely a common one. Thematically, a 5E warlock looks a whole lot like a PF2 witch, but mechanically, "I blast with magic every turn" is still a missing concept in PF2. I'm less convinced that there's a strong desire for something as banal as "prepared occult caster" or "spontaneous primal caster," but in general, there are mechanics-first ideas that I think we are going to continue to see demand for until/unless they finally show up in PF2.

I'd like that kind of mechanical niche to be filled by an archtype rather than a class. Similar to the two weapon warrior, mauler, sentinel, etc...

If the niche is too large for an archtype, that's a good place for a new class though.

1 to 50 of 224 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>