Search Posts
Strong characters are supposed to be really strong. Wizards are busy altering reality because their Intelligence is really high. I don't think it's a stretch that someone with 16-18 Strength can do strong-person-things. Bonus points if the character is spending their Skill Increases in Athletics to actually be really good at Athletics.
Interesting, the stuff you're mentioning is actually just stuff from D&D 3E / PF 1E, in this case :P But it doesn't make the praise any less valid! I like the fact that Runes can be MOVED. Getting a +3 Greatsword when I like to dual wield is no longer a letdown - I can just move the +3.
With the latest Errata, the Level 1 Mutagenist feature does almost nothing. Here are its 3 mechanical benefits: 1. You start with the formulas for two 1st-level mutagens in your formula book, in addition to your other formulas. 2. You can gain the benefit of any mutagen, even if it wasn’t specifically brewed for you. 3. Whenever your proficiency rank for simple weapons increases, your proficiency rank for unarmed attacks increases to the same rank unless it’s already better. Number 1 is worth what, 2 gold? Number 2 doesn't seem to do anything, because the consensus I've gotten from the community is that mutagens no longer key off of a particular target (and I hope we keep it this way, because the idea of trying to pre-brew each mutagen at the start of the day seems awful, not to mention it means finding mutagens as loot would do nothing unless you had a mutagenist). Number 3 literally does nothing, with the latest errata that Unarmed Attacks count as Simple Weapons for Proficiency. I have a new player who's playing a Mutagenist in my PF Game. Should I tell them to stop playing the class and play something else? I don't want my new player to feel bad for play a character with a blank class feature.
Two Actions and a Reaction all just to avoid one attack doesn't seem particularly strong. It seems pretty niche honestly. I'm inclined to believe that this does work, except upon further reading of Ready, it looks like you can't prepare two types of actions. So you'd have to prepare Step OR Stride. However, it does look like you could just choose "A creature attacks" as the trigger, and choose which attack to trigger off of.
I mean, Attack of Opportunity works when the target declares that it will move, thus spending the move action, but obviously before the movement occurs, since that's how a melee Strike is able to still hit. It seems like Ready should allow moving in response to an attack action, before the attack occurs. And if you're out of the attack's range, then it follows that the attack should just miss.
Can I Ready with the following: Trigger: A creature makes a melee attack
or Trigger: A creature makes a ranged attack
or Trigger: A creature attacks
The goal would be the Step/Stride out of range of a melee attack, or Step/Stride out of range or Line of Sight of a ranged attack. Since the creature already made the attack, they still "used" the action, but since I moved out of a valid targeting range, the attack doesn't hit me. We know that with Attack of Opportunity, the Reaction resolves BEFORE movement if someone attempts to Stride away, and that they still "use" the action, so they can't change their minds afterwards to instead use that action on something else (like Strike or provide a component for a spell). So does this work? Can I use this to effectively evade attacks, and force opponents to waste actions?
Two questions: - Can I just bring a bunch of small objects (let's say a bag of marbles), drop them as a Free Action on the first round, and just hurl those for the rest of the encounter?
So I was reading the Paizo Blog post, Adventure Marches On And I noticed this
And I was reminded of the D&D 4E Power, Tide of Iron:
Now obviously the maneuvers are still different. Notably:
I do get what both powers are going for. They essentially take Bull Rush (a Combat Maneuver in PF 1E, a Skill Check in PF 2E, an At-Will Power in D&D 4E, and a Variant Combat Actio in D&D 5E), and then turn it into a Power (or I guess feat, cause everything's a feat in PF 2E now), allowing someone to get both the benefit of doing weapon damage along with pushing someone into a different square. I want to be clear. I'm not against this. If anything, it makes me more excited to play PF 2E. I really liked D&D 4E. Regardless, the honest question I have is: how much effect did D&D 4E have on the development of PF 2E? I'll leave a note of one other, subtler difference between Brutish Shove and Tide of Iron, that I suspect makes it harder to notice that the two have similar design spaces: Brutish Shove has its flavor text baked into the effect line, while Tide of Iron just describes the mechanical effect, and separates out the flavor text into its own line (it's not even included on the D&D 4E wiki, I had to get it from my own D&D 4E PHB). I believe the design goal of doing this is to make Brutish Shove feel like the lines of a book in-universe describing the ability (similar to how many Spells in D&D-like games apart from D&D 4E describe their magical effects). D&D 4E just gives us the mechanical effect in the effect line, and does not evoke the feeling of reading a text of describing a maneuver from within a fantasy universe. It's a subtle difference, but I wonder if it will make people "accept" the maneuver better (along with making everything into Feats, and avoiding the use of the term, "Power").
This is important mainly for PFS legality, which explicitly lists Bloodroot as a legal poison for characters with the Poison Use ability. There are two versions of Bloodroot, and normally I'd be fine with just taking the later version, but in this case, the conflict is between Core and Ultimate Equipment: Bloodroot in Core:
Bloodroot in Ultimate Equipment:
The Confusion effect is a MASSIVE improvement. Which is the correct version for the purposes of PFS (and just, which is the correct one for PF in general?)
The Spell Component Pouch is a gamist mechanic designed so that players do not need to account for utterly mundane material components like sand or butter. Consider the Spell Component Pouch to essentially be a borderline magical object that doesn't actually radiate a dweomer (magic aura) of its own, and you'll be fine. As long as you have one, you can draw from it as much mundane material components that you need do not have a specified GP cost.
This is not the right section. It should be moved to the Rules Forum. Given that. The answer is that the GM looks at the improvised weapon in question, and tries to compare it to an item that is roughly the same size or build of an item that already exists. A thrown rock that fits in your hand, about the size of a fist? It probably does about the same damage as a Dagger, which does 1d4 damage. So I'd say the rock does 1d4 damage. Maybe 1d3 if the rock is small or you don't think the rock should do that much, or maybe 1d6 if it's kinda big or maybe it's a really sharp rock or something. Improvised Weapons are a classic example of expected table variance in Pathfinder, and no one can tell you the definitive right answer, other than giving you a sort of ballpark estimation. However, I'll tell you right now I think a thrown rock that fits in your hand does 1d4 damage.
This is the greatest argument against RAW interpretations that I have seen, ever. I am favoriting your post just because that argument made my day. Thank you so much.
The Divination (Foresight) one is by far the strongest school for Martial characters dipping into Wizard. The ability to never miss the Surprise Round is amazingly useful. Also, the ability to manipulate your dice rolls (the Prescience ability) is incredibly helpful for a character who rolls a lot, like a Fighter. Also, I definitely agree that getting a Familiar who increases some stat (Will and Initiative are both the really big ones) is the way to go. I actually really like the idea of getting a Will-familiar so that you get an effective +4 to your Will saves. Very nice for a Fighter type.
I know that wizards aren't very common in PFS play which naturally makes me want to build one. I've recently decided on a favorite - an Elven Wizard & Spellbinder who selects the elemental void as his specialization. I haven't been able to figure it out yet (browsing the truly exhaustive list of banned options for PFS), so I figured I'd ask here: is either the Spell-binder or the Void mage illegal for PFS play?This sounds vaguely familiar... And yes from what I can tell completely legal. I want you at my table. So that you can buff the abomination of a fighter I'm considering. Dual-wield scorpion whips plus whatever buffs you grace me with. Whoa... thinking about Quickened Metamagic already. That's certainly thinking far ahead... And Spell Perfection, which you can't get till 15th Level... where the max level for normal play is 12... Not saying it's a bad idea, just telling you that that's a long way's away. Also, have you looked at the trait Magical Lineage, from the APG? If you're into Metamagicking stuff, that's a great place to start.
Never, because there are no rules for detaching limbs in Pathfinder. Which should actually already prevent these Enhancements from ever working with an Amulet of Mighty Fists and Natural Weapons because there are no rules for detaching limbs. I think the more pertinent question is where on earth do you read the rules for Throwing and Dancing weapons and draw the conclusion that you can conjure ghost fists or air blasts. The thing is, you're using flavor to remove a downside, which is losing a limb. There is nothing in the Throwing Enhancement which allows you to swing your sword and generate a energy blast in place of actually throwing your sword. Why should an Amulet of Mighty Fists plus Natural Weapons get any special treatment by the rules?
This sort of thinking worries me deeply, because I really don't feel it's the correct approach to take in playing a game like Pathfinder. All the things you've mentioned have other inherent rules interactions. What happens if I throw my fist into some square I can no longer reach? So does the Amulet just stop working? Is that to simulate the idea of losing one's weapon? What if I attack an enemy in the air? Do I need to go to the square up there, or to the one 'on the ground'? What constitutes self aggrandizing oneself? Can I do it in a zone of silence? Also, does doing this provoke an Attack of Opportunity? Because picking up a weapon from the ground always does. What if I attacked an enemy that was walking on some hazard like Acid or Lava or Water or floating over a Pit? Where does my fist go then? Is it damaged, like a normal Thrown Weapon would be? Also, if I somehow manage to lose my Weapon, can I use a Wish spell to bring it back? I can see arguments for both sides. Jiggy was bringing up the stolen weapon problem simply because it's the easiest example of why doing something like this just isn't a good idea. But more importantly, it's the fact that you're blatantly trying to get around the problem of having to give up your limbs and not having an easy way to reattach them to your body without some sort of heavy duty magic or surgery, that is the real problem with doing something like this. This is not reflavoring. It is creating a new mechanic.
Uh, pretty often. My Archers and Gunslingers have learned that shooting while in Melee is the quickest way to have their weapons disarmed and possibly stolen. I've definitely had bad guys try to steal weapons if they thought they could get away with it, and it seemed like it was in character for them (for instance, a band of thieves attacking a bunch of Pathfinders in an alleyway).
I'm afraid that the point of these Enhancements was that the weapon itself was the one physically going over and doing these things. By 'reflavoring' these Enhancements, you have actually removed the most significant downside to the interaction between these Enhancements and Natural Weapons. Reflavoring is fine, but getting rid of real mechanical downsides (in this case, physically losing a limb by having it removed from your body and tossed) constitutes 'changing mechanics.'
As cool as these ideas are, I'm pretty sure they just don't work in the RAW-only land of PFS on the basis that you're adding new mechanics to the game. There are no rules for a ghost fist that is magically generated thanks to Dancing. It says the weapon itself must be the one to do the fighting. Similarly, Throwing weapons require that the weapon itself lunge over and do the damage, not a magical strong gust of air. Let me try and change my position a little. If you want to add Dancing or Throwing to your Natural Weapons, then by all means, go ahead. But you need to have some easy way to dislodge these body parts from your body. Assuming that these Weapon Enhancements allow you to just sorta pluck them off and toss them with ease, you'd have the difficulty of actually putting them back on, not to mention that you'd most definitely suffer at least 1 point of Bleed Damage each turn until someone performed a DC 15 Heal Check or cast a healing spell on you. Then, even if the weapon had Returning, there's nothing in the magic of Returning that allows you to reattach a limb to your body. A missing limb would require a Regenerate spell in order to replace it.
What abilities would not be allowed on an Amulet of Mighty Fists? As far as I can tell, you can add any Weapon Enhancement abilities (that are legal for normal weapons in PFS) that you want, and you also don't need to have the initial +1 in order to get there. Some people don't like it or house-rule it away, but you can indeed have a Flaming Frost Shock Amulet of Mighty Fists for 36,000 GP. Speed is the problematic one, of course (the general consensus seems to be that you can only benefit from Speed once per round for adding to the number of attacks you have, in total), but that's been a problem ever since people have been debating over whether dual-wielding two Speed weapons lets you make two extra attacks as opposed to one extra attack. Otherwise, though, I don't actually know what Weapon Enhancements pose a problem for Amulets of Mighty Fists. By the way, in answering your question, I came up with the weirdest idea - get a Spell Storing Amulet of Mighty Fists for 4000 GP. Put a useful spell inside it and if you need to activate it, just punch yourself and have it cast on you.
Trying to balance PFS can be incredibly hard. Take it from me. I lead a group of about 15-25 players that runs the gamut from hyper-optimized Casters with all sorts of Controlling nonsense and Martials with DPR that can one-shot final bosses, to people who barely understand what the difference is between a Standard and a Move Action is, to this very day. The simple fact of the matter is that it's not PFS's fault. It's Pathfinder's. Pathfinder is a game where not all the classes are balanced, not all the mechanical interactions are entirely fair, and combats can be incredibly swingy due to the prevalence of powerful spikes in damage and save-or-suck effects. Also, the game is highly skill-based, and as such, there's a huge difference between a highly skilled player and a not highly skilled player controlling the same pregen. Earlier PFS scenarios, to be quite frank, were often far too easy. It was not uncommon at Tier 1-2 to have enemies that had a piddly +1 to their to-hit versus AC. Scenarios like this often over-compensated in favor of those who chose not to cheese the wazoo out of their characters, but instead chose to build characters focused more on concept rather than DPR or highly efficient Spells. And people just sort of accepted this. However, as PFS grew and, as with all things, people began to 'figure out' the inner workings and general standards of the campaign (PFS is a highly human-focused campaign, for instance, so certain builds of characters become far more viable because oftentimes the enemies you fight are Human NPCs with PC Class levels), people inevitably started to build 'stronger' characters who were more prepared for the challenges ahead. To be honest, I don't know what PFS can actually do to fix this, short of creating 'hard mode' and 'easy mode' versions of scenarios (they already kinda do this by allowing people to 'play up' or 'play down'). The very premise of PFS is that you can play with a random group of people from any of the classes controlled by players with varying skill levels (sorta like real life, really). I honestly think that we all just have to learn to deal with it, and adapt to the situation by realizing that the later scenarios are starting to be built with an eye toward the more optimized characters as opposed to the less-optimized ones. However, I do believe that a great deal of this can be fixed by actually following the darn script of the scenarios and playing the enemies suboptimally as written. Seriously. So many enemies and big bads do tactically terrible things like drinking a healing potion in the middle of battle, and 'smart' GMs will ignore this, leading to player deaths and an amped up difficulty. There's actually a really good chance that if players are dying with Level 1 Pregens in Tier 1-2 scenarios, the GM is taking NPCs and playing them way too hard (read: playing them in a way contrary to their tactics written in their stat block).
A question from another board: "What are the consequences of failing a fly skill check? For example: A wizard casts Fly, intending to fly up a vertical mine shaft, but rolls miserably, failing to reach the fly vertical DC of 20 and the hover DC of 15. He cannot fly horizontally due to being in a mineshaft, he cannot stay since he failed his hover DC, and its only if you have wings *and* fail by more than 5 you plummet..." I always assumed that if you flew by means which did not involve wings (such as by the Fly spell), you could simply float on your turn in your square in the Initiative without having to make a check. But now I'm not so sure.
I dislike GMPCs. However, sometimes they are necessary if you have an incredibly small group, such as a two-person group. I dislike that PFS requires a GM-controlled 4th character if there are only 3 people. Let 'em take the challenge on, I say. And of course, if you have four or more people, they have no business existing. However, I will say this. I think focal characters that the GM roleplays to interact with the party (for instance, an eccentric businessman that hires the PCs to do some missions, and demands that he comes along for the ride and observes them as they fight through monsters, or an NPC that the party often talks to all the time and that the GM will communication a good deal of the story's information through) can be a great narrative tool, when used correctly.
If a creature opens a door and sees a Hypnotic Pattern, assuming the Hypnotic Pattern still has Hit Dice "left over" (perhaps it actually hasn't effected anyone yet) can the creature be affected by the spell, assuming it was cast several turns earlier? (Perhaps an Illusionist was keeping it up hoping to trap people by its effect once they entered in.) Also, does Protection from Evil protect against Fascination effects like Enthrall and Hypnotic Pattern?
I hide my question in a Spoiler from Carrion Hill! Carrion Hill: Can the Spawn of Yog-Sothoth grapple more than one creature at a time? I mean come on. It's a gigantic eldritch horror spawned from the Cthulhu Mythos. Also it has 4 limbs and each limb has grab... Could the Spawn use two limbs to grab a creature without the -20 penalty, and then do it again at least, say, 3 more times (it would have 2 limbs each time, to try and grapple). Also, if it could, could it spend a Standard Action to maintain multiple Grapples, or would it have to release 2 people? If it couldn't do any of the above, could it at least try to grapple multiple people with its limbs at a -20 penalty to each attack roll?
Nope. They vary wildly. I distinctly remember my 20-person playgroup complaining that PFS was too easy. Then I started picking the really difficult stuff, and they suddenly stopped complaining (mainly post-mid-Season 3 stuff, and a few random tough things in 1 and 2).
I will only keep track of them if they have some way to be healed. Otherwise, they are immediately dead once they reach negatives. Though if the players want to interrogate them or something, I'll usually say they're just unconscious. Really, don't fiddle with the numbers too much, if it drags out combat. Once they're negative, they're gone, usually.
|
