When is the next blog?


Prerelease Discussion

651 to 700 of 847 << first < prev | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | next > last >>

AnimatedPaper wrote:

Skill unlocks and skill feats are the biggest thing I see (besides saves, which you already mentioned). If it takes your rogue/ranger until 13th level to perform tasks your friendly neighborhood fighter was doing at level 8, some challenges might be inappropriate.

If your proficiency in armor and weapons doesn't limit the quality of the armor and weapons you can use, like you don't actually have to have expert heavy armor proficiency to wear expert heavy armor, then simply missing the +1 will probably not be a huge deal breaker. If you do (which a quick reread of the various blog posts doesn't answer, but I'll assume you don't), you're potentially locked out of level appropriate weapons and armor for several levels until you stick with one class long enough to get to Master, and you might never get Legendary.

Skill unlocks, skill feats, general feats, and ancestry feats wouldn't change though. Neither would ability score boosts. Just class feats and class features. The rest of this follows the same progression.

I'm preeeetty sure your weapon and armor proficiency doesn't impact what items you can use. Your Crafting proficiency limits the quality of items you can craft, and your level limits what TYPES of items you can craft, but if you find or buy a legendary +5 longsword at level 1, we have no reason to believe you can't use it.

The nice thing about everyone using the same progression is it is actually really easy to accommodate for people hopping between classes. Your character level still gets added to everything anyway. So now all you need to look out for is making sure specific features are balanced with each other. A ranger could take 3 levels of Fighter to get master weapon proficiency early... So you need to make sure the Ranger features are good enough to justify not doing that.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Captain Morgan wrote:
AnimatedPaper wrote:

Skill unlocks and skill feats are the biggest thing I see (besides saves, which you already mentioned). If it takes your rogue/ranger until 13th level to perform tasks your friendly neighborhood fighter was doing at level 8, some challenges might be inappropriate.

If your proficiency in armor and weapons doesn't limit the quality of the armor and weapons you can use, like you don't actually have to have expert heavy armor proficiency to wear expert heavy armor, then simply missing the +1 will probably not be a huge deal breaker. If you do (which a quick reread of the various blog posts doesn't answer, but I'll assume you don't), you're potentially locked out of level appropriate weapons and armor for several levels until you stick with one class long enough to get to Master, and you might never get Legendary.

Skill unlocks, skill feats, general feats, and ancestry feats wouldn't change though. Neither would ability score boosts. Just class feats and class features. The rest of this follows the same progression.

Slight misunderstanding here: when I said skill feats, I meant what skill feats you can select, not when you select them. To reuse my earlier example, if you have to get lvl 7 in some class before unlocking master skill proficiency, you can potentially get very far in several skill focused classes without gaining the skill tasks that should be a signature part of your character. Of course, that was always possible, since no one is forcing you to spend your skill feats on master level skills.

Although, now that you mention it, how sure are you that you'd get the feats in the same rate as always? It would depend on how it is written, but do you always get an ancestry feat at 5th character level, no matter if its a Rng2/Rog3 or a Ftr5? Or do you actually need Something 5? I could see both, and that they mentioned you only consult one chart for multiclassing strongly suggests an agnostic progression would be the case. There's some corner cases where that would work oddly, like Fighters and Rogues getting more of certain types of feats at nonstandard levels.

complete tangent, but I wonder if Sorcerers get more ancestry feats than most characters? It would fit some character concepts

Everything else I agree with, more or less. Especially with class level adding to proficiency making it easy to bounce between classes; I foresee no issues on that score.


AnimatedPaper wrote:


Slight misunderstanding here: when I said skill feats, I meant what skill feats you can select, not when you select them. To reuse my earlier example, if you have to get lvl 7 in some class before unlocking master skill proficiency, you can potentially get very far in several skill focused classes without gaining the skill tasks that should be a signature part of your character. Of course, that was always possible, since no one is forcing you to spend your skill feats on master level skills.

I don't THINK any skill proficiency levels are class locked, nor are skill feats class locked. There will be class feats that impact skills, but having skill feats that are class locked violates a major design goal.

The things that seem to be class locked (or at least much harder to get outside of class progression) are armor and weapon proficiency above trained. So you don't need to be Fighter level 7 to get Master in athletics, but you need to be level 3 to get master in a weapon group. (Presumably other martials get other class features to keep their DPR competitive despite lesser weapon proficiency.)

Quote:
Although, now that you mention it, how sure are you that you'd get the feats in the same rate as always? It would depend on how it is written, but do you always get an ancestry feat at 5th character level, no matter if its a Rng2/Rog3 or a Ftr5? Or do you actually need Something 5? I could see both, and that they mentioned you only consult one chart for multiclassing strongly suggests an agnostic progression would be the case. There's some corner cases where that would work oddly, like Fighters and Rogues getting more of certain types of feats at nonstandard levels.

Well, let's look at the character sheet. We have the same basic feat progression for all characters according to that. I think there will be some variance with how many class feats different classes get, and rogues will get extra skill feats probably listed in the bonus feat section. But every indication is that the basic skeleton is constant, regardless of (multi)class.

All that being said, I'm not saying they WON'T do something like Unchained VMC instead of traditional multiclass, or something else completely different. The only thing I'm banking they won't do is something like we have for archetypes where you trade class feats for the feats of other classes; that structure makes no sense because most of the exclusive class feats we have seen (as opposed to shared stuff like Sudden Charge or Double Slice) specifically requires the respective class features.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Captain Morgan wrote:
(Presumably other martials get other class features to keep their DPR competitive despite lesser weapon proficiency.)

So far this appears to be exactly correct. Barbarians have Rage, which is a flat damage bonus, Rangers have reduced iterative penalties, and Rogues have Sneak Attack.

So looking at all of those first three using a Greatsword at 1st level for three actions, we have the following:

Fighter: +6/+1/-4 for 1d12+4 damage. Subsequent turns identical.
Barbarian: Rage Action, +5/+0 for 1d12+6 damage. Subsequent turns +5/+0/-5.
Ranger: Action to Target, +5/+1 for 1d12+4 damage. Subsequent turns +5/+1/-3.

So, vs. AC 16, DPR on those three over three rounds is as follows:

Fighter: 33.075 damage
Barbarian: 33.125 damage
Ranger: 30.45 damage

So Ranger is a bit behind Fighter using a two-handed weapon, but Barbarian is right on par (TWF DPR will favor the Ranger more heavily due to the synergy between their trick and Agile weapons). Rogue almost certainly can't sneak attack with a two-handed weapon, which is why I left them out (and their DPR probably lags a bit, but they have skill options to balance that out).


Yeah, I wasn't entirely sure if that math would bear out when Fighters get Master weapons at 3rd. (Assuming that hasn't changed since the fighter blog, which was one of the first.) Partially for the raw numbers, and partially because I think that might unlock critical specializations or something.

But it stands to reason the martials are vaguely balanced with each other. It may be that single classing is generally stronger, as it often was in PF1. But theoretically getting access to rage should vaguely balance out if a fighter wants to delay their weapon progression to dip barbarian.

Liberty's Edge

Captain Morgan wrote:
Yeah, I wasn't entirely sure if that math would bear out when Fighters get Master weapons at 3rd. (Assuming that hasn't changed since the fighter blog, which was one of the first.) Partially for the raw numbers, and partially because I think that might unlock critical specializations or something.

3rd is a very likely level for other martial Classes to get Expert, staying one degree of Proficiency behind Fighter, IMO. Maybe with the exception of Rogue.

And it does seem likely that either Expert or Master unlocks the Critical Effects by weapon type stuff (I'm betting Master)...but Barbarian gets those on all weapons while Raging as a Class Feature around the same time Fighter gets Master. Ranger probably gets something else, though I have no real idea what.

Captain Morgan wrote:
But it stands to reason the martials are vaguely balanced with each other. It may be that single classing is generally stronger, as it often was in PF1. But theoretically getting access to rage should vaguely balance out if a fighter wants to delay their weapon progression to dip barbarian.

I suspect certain builds might be better at certain things, but DPR is much easier to even out in PF2 due to structural and math similarities between Classes, so I suspect it'll be at least 'ballpark' even. +/- 10-20% for relatively optimal characters of various Classes rather than the huge swings common in PF1.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Is the Paladin competitive on the DPR scale ?

Liberty's Edge

The Raven Black wrote:
Is the Paladin competitive on the DPR scale ?

Depends on what one means by competitive. At 1st level, their 3-round DPR looks like 28.35 with a Greatsword, so lower than the other three but not cripplingly so, and we lack any data on what offensive class features a Paladin might have at 1st, and we know they can get additional stuff at 3rd via Righteous Ally. Plus they have healing stuff, of course.


I feel like that question might be a smidge to early to really tell.

Liberty's Edge

Vidmaster7 wrote:
I feel like that question might be a smidge to early to really tell.

Absolutely. Certainly beyond 1st level. I only even made the comparison because we know the main offensive bonus specific to three Classes at 1st level.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
(Presumably other martials get other class features to keep their DPR competitive despite lesser weapon proficiency.)

So far this appears to be exactly correct. Barbarians have Rage, which is a flat damage bonus, Rangers have reduced iterative penalties, and Rogues have Sneak Attack.

So looking at all of those first three using a Greatsword at 1st level for three actions, we have the following:

Fighter: +6/+1/-4 for 1d12+4 damage. Subsequent turns identical.
Barbarian: Rage Action, +5/+0 for 1d12+6 damage. Subsequent turns +5/+0/-5.
Ranger: Action to Target, +5/+1 for 1d12+4 damage. Subsequent turns +5/+1/-3.

So, vs. AC 16, DPR on those three over three rounds is as follows:

Fighter: 33.075 damage
Barbarian: 33.125 damage
Ranger: 30.45 damage

So Ranger is a bit behind Fighter using a two-handed weapon, but Barbarian is right on par (TWF DPR will favor the Ranger more heavily due to the synergy between their trick and Agile weapons). Rogue almost certainly can't sneak attack with a two-handed weapon, which is why I left them out (and their DPR probably lags a bit, but they have skill options to balance that out).

What was the math you used to generate the DPS? I was trying to recreate your numbers and I must be making some mistake, I wasn't factoring in crits, but my numbers still looked too low...

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Calculating over three rounds perhaps? I just confirmed the expected fighter damage.

DPR = 0.55*(6.5+4) + 0.3*(6.5+4) + 0.05*(6.5+4) + (crits->) 0.05*(6.5+4)*3 = 11.025

11.025 * 3 rounds = 33.075

Liberty's Edge

Jinjifra wrote:
What was the math you used to generate the DPS? I was trying to recreate your numbers and I must be making some mistake, I wasn't factoring in crits, but my numbers still looked too low...

As KingOfAnything notes, I just did three rounds.

Bear in mind that crits are a bigger amount of the DPR in PF2 because there's no confirmation rolls. You can actually just add the chance of a crit directly to the chance of hitting at all, because the DPR works out the same that way (I personally find this a time and effort saver).

For example, the Fighter is 10.5 x (.6 + .35 + .1), so 10.5 x 1.05 = 11.025, and then multiply that by three.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Jinjifra wrote:
What was the math you used to generate the DPS? I was trying to recreate your numbers and I must be making some mistake, I wasn't factoring in crits, but my numbers still looked too low...

As KingOfAnything notes, I just did three rounds.

Bear in mind that crits are a bigger amount of the DPR in PF2 because there's no confirmation rolls. You can actually just add the chance of a crit directly to the chance of hitting at all, because the DPR works out the same that way (I personally find this a time and effort saver).

For example, the Fighter is 10.5 x (.6 + .35 + .1), so 10.5 x 1.05 = 11.025, and then multiply that by three.

Thanks, I see what I did now. I left out the crits and screwed up the probability rolling 10 - 20 is 55% not 50%.

So if I was going to use a monk using dragon tail for 1d10 you would get

+5/0/-5 for 1d10+4 damage. Subsequent turns would be +5/0/-5/-5

and the 3 turn average is 28.975 which is pretty close to the paladin. If there is a d12 style the monks comes out at 32.025


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
Yeah, I wasn't entirely sure if that math would bear out when Fighters get Master weapons at 3rd. (Assuming that hasn't changed since the fighter blog, which was one of the first.) Partially for the raw numbers, and partially because I think that might unlock critical specializations or something.

3rd is a very likely level for other martial Classes to get Expert, staying one degree of Proficiency behind Fighter, IMO. Maybe with the exception of Rogue.

And it does seem likely that either Expert or Master unlocks the Critical Effects by weapon type stuff (I'm betting Master)...but Barbarian gets those on all weapons while Raging as a Class Feature around the same time Fighter gets Master. Ranger probably gets something else, though I have no real idea what.

Well, one thing we know about Weapon Critical Specialization... Gnomes can get it as early as level 5 through their Ancestral Feat. I'm expecting the same for the other races. (Elf, Dwarf, Halfling, etc..) So that can fit Fighters getting it at Level 3.


Iron_Matt17 wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
Yeah, I wasn't entirely sure if that math would bear out when Fighters get Master weapons at 3rd. (Assuming that hasn't changed since the fighter blog, which was one of the first.) Partially for the raw numbers, and partially because I think that might unlock critical specializations or something.

3rd is a very likely level for other martial Classes to get Expert, staying one degree of Proficiency behind Fighter, IMO. Maybe with the exception of Rogue.

And it does seem likely that either Expert or Master unlocks the Critical Effects by weapon type stuff (I'm betting Master)...but Barbarian gets those on all weapons while Raging as a Class Feature around the same time Fighter gets Master. Ranger probably gets something else, though I have no real idea what.

Well, one thing we know about Weapon Critical Specialization... Gnomes can get it as early as level 5 through their Ancestral Feat. I'm expecting the same for the other races. (Elf, Dwarf, Halfling, etc..) So that can fit Fighters getting it at Level 3.

Where can I look to find the gnome ancestry feats as revealed, again?

I'm still mostly new to pathfinder and the default lore so I'd like to know what to expect from ancestral weapons (so I can start spitballing lore).

Liberty's Edge

Jinjifra wrote:

Thanks, I see what I did now. I left out the crits and screwed up the probability rolling 10 - 20 is 55% not 50%.

So if I was going to use a monk using dragon tail for 1d10 you would get

+5/0/-5 for 1d10+4 damage. Subsequent turns would be +5/0/-5/-5

and the 3 turn average is 28.975 which is pretty close to the paladin. If there is a d12 style the monks comes out at 32.025

Yeah, that all looks about right. Though I believe Dragon Tail has the property where it adds additional damage to subsequent attacks, which would add to damage

Elleth wrote:
Where can I look to find the gnome ancestry feats as revealed, again?

They're shown on-page in the PaizoCon Banquet video.

Elleth wrote:
I'm still mostly new to pathfinder and the default lore so I'd like to know what to expect from ancestral weapons (so I can start spitballing lore).

Gnomes have kukri and glaive as martial weapons. Their Exotic Weapons are speculative at the moment, but you can probably guess them to include the gnome hooked hammer (for legacy reasons) and almost certainly the gnome ripsaw glaive (since that makes glaive as one of their martial weapons make sense). Other PF1 possibilities include the battle ladder, flick mace, pincher, and piston maul.


Thank you. I can't say I was expecting any of those.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hello, Friday. How are you?


Do we know what today's blag is?


Today's blog is going to be about (1d100 ⇒ 32) animal companions.


I don't know where else to put this question, so I'll ask here:
In the alchemist blog, it mentionsthe popularity of the Oracle and how that will be discussed later. So, has it been, yet? Or is it possible that a Divine origin Sorcerer will stand in for it?


Mbertorch wrote:

I don't know where else to put this question, so I'll ask here:

In the alchemist blog, it mentionsthe popularity of the Oracle and how that will be discussed later. So, has it been, yet? Or is it possible that a Divine origin Sorcerer will stand in for it?

We have gotten nothing on an Oracle. We have next to nothing on the sorcerer. I think the only details on the latter were about them still being spontaneous casters and how that intersects with heightening spells.


I'm pretty excited for Monday's probably-Sorcerer blog! Nervous, too. I'm playing a level 16 Sorc right now, and I'm going to miss that feeling of unlimited low- and mid-level spells.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Jinjifra wrote:

Thanks, I see what I did now. I left out the crits and screwed up the probability rolling 10 - 20 is 55% not 50%.

So if I was going to use a monk using dragon tail for 1d10 you would get

+5/0/-5 for 1d10+4 damage. Subsequent turns would be +5/0/-5/-5

and the 3 turn average is 28.975 which is pretty close to the paladin. If there is a d12 style the monks comes out at 32.025

Yeah, that all looks about right. Though I believe Dragon Tail has the property where it adds additional damage to subsequent attacks, which would add to damage

Elleth wrote:
Where can I look to find the gnome ancestry feats as revealed, again?

They're shown on-page in the PaizoCon Banquet video.

Elleth wrote:
I'm still mostly new to pathfinder and the default lore so I'd like to know what to expect from ancestral weapons (so I can start spitballing lore).
Gnomes have kukri and glaive as martial weapons. Their Exotic Weapons are speculative at the moment, but you can probably guess them to include the gnome hooked hammer (for legacy reasons) and almost certainly the gnome ripsaw glaive (since that makes glaive as one of their martial weapons make sense). Other PF1 possibilities include the battle ladder, flick mace, pincher, and piston maul.

I just looked it up and dragon tail has backswing which increases accuracy after a miss. Which if it means you get a plus one to hit if you miss the previous round means it brings his DPR up to 29.6875, which isn't much.

If you lower it to an ac of 15 though you can see the backswing come into effect a lot more of 31.825 DPR without it calculated in and 34.30200625. Basically when backwing allows you to hit on 19-20 instead of just a 20 for the last hit the DPR improvement is a bit more dramatic.

To calculate the new percentages for this I just multiplied the chance of missing the previous round with .05 and added to the chance for hitting. So for AC 15 you get

(9.5 * .55) + (9.5 * 0.3225) + (9.5 * 0.083875) + (9.5 *.05) * 3

and

(9.5 * .55) + (9.5 * 0.3225) + (9.5 * 0.083875) + (9.5 * 0.09580625) + (9.5 *.05) * 4

Its kinda cool to see how much a single point of accuracy effects your overall damage when its only there around half the time.


Captain Morgan wrote:
Mbertorch wrote:

I don't know where else to put this question, so I'll ask here:

In the alchemist blog, it mentionsthe popularity of the Oracle and how that will be discussed later. So, has it been, yet? Or is it possible that a Divine origin Sorcerer will stand in for it?
We have gotten nothing on an Oracle. We have next to nothing on the sorcerer. I think the only details on the latter were about them still being spontaneous casters and how that intersects with heightening spells.

Yeah, I knew we hadn't gotten Sorcerer. I just thought it was interesting that the Alchemist blog specifically says something about the popularity of the Oracle, and then states that there will be more about that in a later blog. Which there hasn't yet. So I was just wondering if people maybe thought it would be in the Sorcerer one.

Liberty's Edge

Oracle as a Sorcerer (Or Spontaneous Arcane) Archetype would actually be a really cool way to handle the Class.

The first Dedication Feat could introduce the Curse, Mystery, and change their available Spellcasting to pull from the Divine list instead. The Mystery could in effect wholesale replace their Sorcerer Bloodline.

Additional Feats could tackle letting PCs choose from a list of Revelations applicable to their chosen Mystery and others which would improve how their Curse functions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Themetricsystem wrote:

Oracle as a Sorcerer (Or Spontaneous Arcane) Archetype would actually be a really cool way to handle the Class.

The first Dedication Feat could introduce the Curse, Mystery, and change their available Spellcasting to pull from the Divine list instead. The Mystery could in effect wholesale replace their Sorcerer Bloodline.

Additional Feats could tackle letting PCs choose from a list of Revelations applicable to their chosen Mystery and others which would improve how their Curse functions.

I don't think it is likely but I would enjoy if the sorcerer's spell list was bloodline dependent.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Bardarok wrote:
Themetricsystem wrote:

Oracle as a Sorcerer (Or Spontaneous Arcane) Archetype would actually be a really cool way to handle the Class.

The first Dedication Feat could introduce the Curse, Mystery, and change their available Spellcasting to pull from the Divine list instead. The Mystery could in effect wholesale replace their Sorcerer Bloodline.

Additional Feats could tackle letting PCs choose from a list of Revelations applicable to their chosen Mystery and others which would improve how their Curse functions.

I don't think it is likely but I would enjoy if the sorcerer's spell list was bloodline dependent.

Oh. Oh, I like that.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Traps. Traps. Traaapps. And okay, hazards in general.

I did not expect that.


Hazards are definitely part of exploration mode but I didn't expect them to occupy the entire article. XD Oh well, looks good. I guess we'll get the rest later, probably after Druid.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So pretty mild blogs this week with ranger and traps. Maybe something more spicy on Monday? Occult Bards anyone?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bard or Sorcerer is next. Personally I'd prefer if they mashed them together since they're both Spontaneous Charisma-Base spellcasters.

That way they can save one of the blog slots for something silly like a T-Rex Archetype by JJ.


Sorcerer is certainly next. They pretty much have to do it before the bard because they're the keystone spontaneous caster.

I'm actually hoping the Druid ends up a spontaneous caster as well finally, because we never actually did see their spellcasting rules at Paizocon...


That would assume that the Bard is a spontaneous caster.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Meophist wrote:
That would assume that the Bard is a spontaneous caster.

Mark Seifter mentioned a Bard having spells known, so they're pretty clearly spontaneous.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Mark Seifter mentioned a Bard having spells known, so they're pretty clearly spontaneous.

Ah, missed that.


Fuzzypaws wrote:

Sorcerer is certainly next. They pretty much have to do it before the bard because they're the keystone spontaneous caster.

I'm actually hoping the Druid ends up a spontaneous caster as well finally, because we never actually did see their spellcasting rules at Paizocon...

Didn't we see that the druid starts out being able to prepare all common 1st level spells?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Captain Morgan wrote:
Fuzzypaws wrote:

Sorcerer is certainly next. They pretty much have to do it before the bard because they're the keystone spontaneous caster.

I'm actually hoping the Druid ends up a spontaneous caster as well finally, because we never actually did see their spellcasting rules at Paizocon...

Didn't we see that the druid starts out with all common 1st level spells known?

We did. Druids are clearly prepared casters.


Anybody else thinking the halfies may not follow the human stat bonus structure anymore? With all ancestries getting aflexible ability boost, having 3 "generic" core races seems unnecessary.

I'm thinking +2 STR and -2 CHA would be really consistent with the lore around half orcs, but I'm not sure where the 2nd fixed boost goes if we aren't allowed to do a second physical stat for CON.

Half-elves are supposed to mix elven grace and beauty with human impulsiveness, so I'm thinking +2 DEX/CHA, -2 WIS.

Both of these arrays have the advantage of being fairly unique to the core races. Goblins share those stats, but I'd say being a goblin is about as far away from being a half elf as you can get, so I think that is OK.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Captain Morgan wrote:
Anybody else thinking the halfies may not follow the human stat bonus structure anymore? With all ancestries getting aflexible ability boost, having 3 "generic" core races seems unnecessary.

I think they'll either have two flexible bonuses like a Human, or one set bonus (probably Str for Half Orc and Cha for Half Elf), and one floating bonus but no penalty.

Either of those seems plausible.

Another possibility is that they'll get one set stat, a penalty, and two floating stats (though that strikes me as powerful and unlikely). If they do get penalties, I'd bet on Con for Half Elves following their Elven parents, and, as you say, Cha for Half Orcs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
Anybody else thinking the halfies may not follow the human stat bonus structure anymore? With all ancestries getting aflexible ability boost, having 3 "generic" core races seems unnecessary.

I think they'll either have two flexible bonuses like a Human, or one set bonus (probably Str for Half Orc and Cha for Half Elf), and one floating bonus but no penalty.

Either of those seems plausible.

Another possibility is that they'll get one set stat, a penalty, and two floating stats (though that strikes me as powerful and unlikely). If they do get penalties, I'd bet on Con for Half Elves following their Elven parents, and, as you say, Cha for Half Orcs.

One set bonus with no penalty actually seems pretty reasonable. It offers a new mechanical choice while still paying homage to the flexibility of the human ancestry.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

At one point in the PF1 playtest, they did experiment with giving Half-Orcs Str +2, Wis +2, Int -2.


If the old Reincarnation spell is to account, and assuming that the half races get 1 fixed bonus and one floating one, I think Half-Elves will end up with DEX and Half-Orcs with STR as the fixed bonus. Not mental stats (very likely never), since tampering with them (especially penalties) always open a can of worms...


Mondays, am I right?
What's up with Mondays?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bardarok wrote:
Themetricsystem wrote:

Oracle as a Sorcerer (Or Spontaneous Arcane) Archetype would actually be a really cool way to handle the Class.

The first Dedication Feat could introduce the Curse, Mystery, and change their available Spellcasting to pull from the Divine list instead. The Mystery could in effect wholesale replace their Sorcerer Bloodline.

Additional Feats could tackle letting PCs choose from a list of Revelations applicable to their chosen Mystery and others which would improve how their Curse functions.

I don't think it is likely but I would enjoy if the sorcerer's spell list was bloodline dependent.

That would be AWESOME. A lightning sorcerer who actually uses LIGHTNING instead of fireballs, and a lot of storm-related spells. Restricted, but powerful in their bloodline's abilities.

The oracle-sorcerer parallel is very good too, Themetricsystem, I dig.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
1of1 wrote:

Mondays, am I right?

What's up with Mondays?

It's just another manic Monday, that's what's up with Mondays.

Also I don't care if Monday's blue =)

But yeah, today. HYYYYYPE!!! (imagine those annoying vuvuzelas now)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, we’re only three weeks from the playtest! I’m glad I have the blogs and a new season of my anime of choice to tide me over.

Sorcerer is definitely my peak hype for class previews, though.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Sounds like somebody has a case of the Mondays.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Roswynn wrote:
Bardarok wrote:
Themetricsystem wrote:

Oracle as a Sorcerer (Or Spontaneous Arcane) Archetype would actually be a really cool way to handle the Class.

The first Dedication Feat could introduce the Curse, Mystery, and change their available Spellcasting to pull from the Divine list instead. The Mystery could in effect wholesale replace their Sorcerer Bloodline.

Additional Feats could tackle letting PCs choose from a list of Revelations applicable to their chosen Mystery and others which would improve how their Curse functions.

I don't think it is likely but I would enjoy if the sorcerer's spell list was bloodline dependent.

That would be AWESOME. A lightning sorcerer who actually uses LIGHTNING instead of fireballs, and a lot of storm-related spells. Restricted, but powerful in their bloodline's abilities.

The oracle-sorcerer parallel is very good too, Themetricsystem, I dig.

Storms would be nice. I'd just like to see an abandonment of earth/stone equals acid and water equals cold.

If the game system can't manage that, then the four elements need to actually be fire, acid, lightning and ice , rather than fire, air, earth and water.

Though the better option is realizing a damage type isn't the point of an element themed spellcaster.

651 to 700 of 847 << first < prev | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / When is the next blog? All Messageboards