| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Apparently not everyone has seen this.
Here it is, presented to you on youtube --> p2e playtest video
Erik Mona pops in at the end like a rabbit out of a hat!?
.
|
Yeah, I'd missed this one. Thanks!
(Not directly related, but Jason will also be on Know Direction this evening, so we might get a few more tidbits there.)
Can we compile all the audio tracks and videos where Paizo employees have discussed PF2?
GCP playtest parts 1 and 2 and 3 and 4.
Know Direction interview with Erik Mona and Logan Bonner
GaryCon seminar on PF2 with Jason Bulmahn and Stephen Radney-MacFarland
Any more so far?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So animal companions only get 2 actions? That's the same as "slow" zombies.
It also takes an action from the owner to command their animal companion to do something. So when it comes to telling your buddy to toss you a potion, that's a free action, but when it comes to telling your trained pet to "sick 'em" it takes an action?
This is apparently to keep one player from "bogging down" combat with a ton of actions.
That's not cool. I would rather have to wait for a player to take his turn and his animal companion's turn than tell him, "You can't do that, even though it makes perfect sense that you could do that."
Maybe actual animal companions don't have this restriction, but that isn't what it sounds like.
I get what they are going for in an attempt to balance "pet" characters against other as one of the major balancing tools in PF2 appears to be action economy. However, I am never fond of expend an action to command your pet. As you mention, it doesn't make sense as one can speak short phrases as a free action so a basic command should really be a free action as all you're likely doing is something to the effect of pointing at an enemy and shouting "Get 'em!" I'd rather see it balanced by removing some other options from the class in some way. There's not enough information on the class yet to determine what other way of balancing this could work.. but I'd definitely prefer something other than the regular loss of an action.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer "spend an action to get two companion actions" as the balancing point. It sounds like we might be able to get one with a skill feat, which is a really low price. I would rather have it take up my action and only get two then, say, it takes no actions, gets three, and is so weak that it doesn't matter. If it gets two actions, and take one of yours, its attacks can still be relevant. I just hope that not spending an action on a round doesn't cause them to "deactivate", even if the default is inefficient, like "ready a counter-attack".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Companion should have all 3 actions so they behave like pretty much every other creature in the game. It's fine to spend 1 of your actions to put a command, which they will then perform until you give a different order or it becomes invalid.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Companion should have all 3 actions so they behave like pretty much every other creature in the game. It's fine to spend 1 of your actions to put a command, which they will then perform until you give a different order or it becomes invalid.
I like that companion creatures get 2 actions.
From a balance perspective it means characters with companion creatures have a net bonus of one extra action a turn when you make a command. Or two extra actions if your previous command is still in effect.
That’s way better than two whole turns.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would rather have it take up my action and only get two then, say, it takes no actions, gets three, and is so weak that it doesn't matter
Yeah, this occurred to me as well. The other thing to watch out for is that if you skimp on class features to balance out the improved action economy of the animal, then the pet class gets hit super hard if they can't bring the pet.
If it only takes one skill feat to get a pet, that is pretty cool. That makes me wonder what other combat relevant skill feats we will see. Perhaps mounted combat feats will get wrapped up in that as well? (Although part of me wonders if skill feats being relevant to combat doesn't defeat the purpose of skill feats as a separate resource pool in the first place.)
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We don't know it's only a single Skill Feat to get a pet (though it seems likely), and it probably requires Expert Nature as well, which makes the investment a bit higher.
Druids and Rangers also apparently get stuff to enhance such a Companion (probably as Class Feats), which is cool.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Have they ruled out the possibility of the PC granting one of his actions to his animal companion? That would let the companion do more without breaking the action economy.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Concerning flavor, I think it makes sense for a character to spend an action to direct his companion. The companion is of lower intelligence. You have to communicate more to it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wait... did he say that Kyra (the Cleric) got 4 "Spell points"?
Concerning flavor, I think it makes sense for a character to spend an action to direct his companion. The companion is of lower intelligence. You have to communicate more to it.
Also, for trained animals, the words are important, but the gestures too. Pointing toward a creature to shoot "Attack!" can make you miss an opportunity to hit with your sword.
|
|
Oooh, yeah, that make sense. So they kinda mixed together the channel ability and the spontaneous casting of heal. I like that. :3Wait... did he say that Kyra (the Cleric) got 4 "Spell points"?Inasmuch as she got 4 uses of the healing spell, yes.
Yeah, it appears to be something like that. It might also be enhanced by, or even exclusive to, Clerics with the Healing Domain, since she got a similar number of uses on her Fire Ray, and Kyra has always had Healing and Fire as her Domains.
Yeah, I'd missed this one. Thanks!
(Not directly related, but Jason will also be on Know Direction this evening, so we might get a few more tidbits there.)
No news from this - it was mostly getting to know Jason Bulmahn, rather than any reveals about PF2.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No news from this - it was mostly getting to know Jason Bulmahn, rather than any reveals about PF2.Yeah, I'd missed this one. Thanks!
(Not directly related, but Jason will also be on Know Direction this evening, so we might get a few more tidbits there.)
Towards the end he notes that Paladin Codes are gonna be more 'how to live your life' and less 'do not do x,y, and z' (including that Paladins can lie to save someone's life) and that Alignment would still matter to them, while avoiding answering whether you can have a CG one.
But yeah, there wasn't much aside from that.
|
|
No news from this - it was mostly getting to know Jason Bulmahn, rather than any reveals about PF2.Yeah, I'd missed this one. Thanks!
(Not directly related, but Jason will also be on Know Direction this evening, so we might get a few more tidbits there.)
I slightly disagree with that assessment. Check my most recent posts for a few bits that I found "newsworthy."
|
|
Noticed that kyra has 14 str, 12 dex, 18 wis, 14 chr.
Is channeling still based off charisma?
What do we know about channeling from the tidbits?
There doesn't appear to be channeling any more per se, but the 3 Action version of healing serves the same function and she has 4 uses of healing separate from her normal spells.
And healing looks to be based on Wisdom, since that's what it adds to the die to determine amount healed. Number of heals could be based on Cha, but I'd say Wis is more likely there too.
|
There doesn't appear to be channeling any more per se, but the 3 Action version of healing serves the same function and she has 4 uses of healing separate from her normal spells.
Hmm, i always thought channeling was the most fun part of the cleric.
I do like the additional healing play options, which serves the same function, but i do wonder what makes the cleric different than other classes who can cast heal spells.
|
|
Hmm, i always thought channeling was the most fun part of the cleric.
I do like the additional healing play options, which serves the same function, but i do wonder what makes the cleric different than other classes who can cast heal spells.
They may get very different heal spells, or lack the extra pool of uses. We really don't know how that'll work at the moment.
|
|
Noticed that kyra has 14 str, 12 dex, 18 wis, 14 chr.
Is channeling still based off charisma?
What do we know about channeling from the tidbits?There doesn't appear to be channeling any more per se, but the 3 Action version of healing serves the same function and she has 4 uses of healing separate from her normal spells.
And healing looks to be based on Wisdom, since that's what it adds to the die to determine amount healed. Number of heals could be based on Cha, but I'd say Wis is more likely there too.
Charisma bonus + 2 and an additional +1 at 3rd level and every odd level thereafter? Or something like that?
Yeah, it appears to be something like that. It might also be enhanced by, or even exclusive to, Clerics with the Healing Domain, since she got a similar number of uses on her Fire Ray, and Kyra has always had Healing and Fire as her Domains.Oooh, yeah, that make sense. So they kinda mixed together the channel ability and the spontaneous casting of heal. I like that. :3Wait... did he say that Kyra (the Cleric) got 4 "Spell points"?Inasmuch as she got 4 uses of the healing spell, yes.
Kyra’s PF1 Domains were actually Healing and Sun, so hearing that Sun was traded out for Fire actually makes me pretty happy since it will hopefully mean that PF2 Kyra will be less of a Healbot and *shudders* offensive Positive Energy channeler.
Speaking of which, Paizo! PLEASE make using Positive Energy against undead something actually worth investing in! Instead of just something that’s okay at early levels and completely drops off by level 5-7 and only becomes viable once Heal comes online. Positive Energy vs. Undead has too many extra hurdles to be worth investing in, and investing in it offers too little of a reward.
Undead having Channel Resistance AND having a strong Will Save makes them take very little damage from Positive Energy. When it feels like it should be the opposite. Undead should take EXTRA damage from Positive Energy and should have difficulties making their saves against it, if they should even get a saving throw. Please let Clerics be Undead Slayers that Pharasma would be proud of!
Also please let Daylighf actually be y’know . . . Daylight. I can’t count the number of times that my players have prepare it because they’re expecting to fight something like a Vampire only to find out that they wasted a 3rd Level Spell spot on just very mildly inconveniencing the monster(s).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Using healing on an area both heals your own party and harms undead, so it's better to that extent, at least.
Oh, and in the Glass Cannon podcast skeletons were actually vulnerable to positive energy and took extra from it. So you may well get some of what you want.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've copied the Google transcription of Erik Mona and Logan Bonner on Know Direction to this document.
This should help make it easier to search for specific topics in the YouTube video. The transcription isn't perfect, if anyone wants to edit it it is open for edits.
Towards the end of the video, the topic of ability scores are touched upon and it's hinted at that they're not generated the same way as before. Now they're determined from your choice of class, race and background. Does this mean that someone that makes the same choices as another player/character will have identical ability scores? I really hope that's not the case, though. Maybe we won't get an answer to this until the actual playtest is out.
Towards the end of the video, the topic of ability scores are touched upon and it's hinted at that they're not generated the same way as before. Now they're determined from your choice of class, race and background. Does this mean that someone that makes the same choices as another player/character will have identical ability scores? I really hope that's not the case, though. Maybe we won't get an answer to this until the actual playtest is out.
No.
Or yes.
Depends on what you mean. If I made the same point buy choices as somebody else with the same race, then I got the same ability scores. Ancestries (at least) have flexible ability scores, and I presume background and maybe even class will as well. Those flexible options will make up the differences between characters with the same ABCs.
A floating bonus at each stage would help alleviate my concerns. That way you would be able to play a character who's background is a little atypical for their class without getting punished on your stats.
|
|
A floating bonus at each stage would help alleviate my concerns. That way you would be able to play a character who's background is a little atypical for their class without getting punished on your stats.
Well Class is also pretty certainly gonna raise stats, but yeah with floating stuff at each stage you can have an Ancestry and Background with no inherent bonus to your most important stat and still wind up giving it bonuses at every stage of things.
A floating bonus at each stage would help alleviate my concerns. That way you would be able to play a character who's background is a little atypical for their class without getting punished on your stats.Well Class is also pretty certainly gonna raise stats, but yeah with floating stuff at each stage you can have an Ancestry and Background with no inherent bonus to your most important stat and still wind up giving it bonuses at every stage of things.
Can you make up an example illustrating how this could maybe work?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If Ancestry and Background grant floating bonuses that can be chosen from any ability score, then you can use your floating bonuses to boost your class's primary stat.
So let's say that you are playing an elf blacksmith who hopes to become a cleric.
Ancestry gives you +2 to Dex and Int and -2 to Con. You choose to apply your floating bonus to Wis.
Background gives you one bonus to either Str or Int and one bonus to any ability score. You choose Str for the first bonus and Wis for the second bonus.
Class gives you +2 to Wis.
At this point you have Str 12, Dex 12, Con 8, Int 12, Wis 16, and Cha 10. We think that you follow this up by adding +2 to each of 4 stats, in which case you can get your Wis score up to 18 even though neither your Ancestry nor your Background gave you an explicit bonus to Wis.
At this point, I have no idea how viable this character would be. Certainly, if I were building a PF1 character this way, I would be a bit worried about that Con score.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Can you make up an example illustrating how this could maybe work?
Certainly. Though David knott 242's post also works. But we actually have some Backgrounds now, so let's pick a specific one. So let's do the full thing. We'll make a Gnome Rogue, shall we?
So, as a Gnome you get -2 Str, +2 Con, +2 Cha. You add your floating bonus to Dex, since you're playing a Rogue.
Which gives you: Str 8, Dex 12, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 12
Now say that you always wanted to be a Pathfinder, so you take the Pathfinder Society Hopeful Background, which adds two bonuses, one to Int or Str and the other to any stat. You pick Int for the limited choice one, and Dex for the other.
Which gives you: Str 8, Dex 14, Con 12, Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 12
You pick rogue as your Class and gain +2 Dex.
Which gives you: Str 8, Dex 16, Con 12, Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 12
You then almost certainly get 4 floating +2s. You assign them to Dex, Int, Wis, and Cha.
Which gives you: Str 8, Dex 18, Con 12, Int 14, Wis 12, Cha 14
There, Dex 18 Gnome Rogue despite neither her Ancestry nor Background being Dex associated.
I see.
Hm, based on that, it looks like ability scores will be higher than all but the most optimized 25 point-buy characters. Not sure how much I'll like this or not, but it's interesting, though I do wish that class bonuses were semi-flexible, maybe between 2 (or 3) choices. Sure, most Rogues will want dex, and most Clerics will want wis, but I'd like a bit more flexibility, in case I wanted to play off type a little. But it's still not too big a deal.
Also, a bit bummed that I've got a feeling it will be following starfinder's mold of not having humans with ability scores under 10. Who knows, since we've only got scraps to piece together, which means, maybe they do, but I haven't seen any evidence
|
|
Hm, based on that, it looks like ability scores will be higher than all but the most optimized 25 point-buy characters.
That's actually not true. If you ignore race/assume human and thus assume at least one floating bonus all characters come in at 18-22 point-buy in PF1 terms (usually around 22 if you take the 18 the system lets you take).
They only exceed 25 point-buy for Ancestries doing roles they were ill suited to in PF1, and don't do so by exceeding humans in capability, just by having an 18 they could ill afford in PF1.
Not sure how much I'll like this or not, but it's interesting, though I do wish that class bonuses were semi-flexible, maybe between 2 (or 3) choices. Sure, most Rogues will want dex, and most Clerics will want wis, but I'd like a bit more flexibility, in case I wanted to play off type a little. But it's still not too big a deal.
They might be flexible for some Classes. We know they aren't for full casters (which are the only ones we've actually seen or been told), but fighter could easily have a choice of Str or Dex.
Also, a bit bummed that I've got a feeling it will be following starfinder's mold of not having humans with ability scores under 10. Who knows, since we've only got scraps to piece together, which means, maybe they do, but I haven't seen any evidence
This does seem likely. Allowing a single stat to drop by 2 in exchange for getting +2s to all other stats in the stage of chargen where you normally get 4 floating +2s is an easy, well balanced, house rule, however.
What is the latest video?