PF2 Playtest Panel


Prerelease Discussion

151 to 200 of 321 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

Captain Morgan wrote:


It sort of is being marketed as Exalted though. The higher power curve is part of the selling point and ways it is different than the game dominating the market right now.

That said, the Legendary stuff seems awfully high level for it to cause you issues. I mean, if you can play through the first 4 books of an AP without hitting it... At that point, you just need to evaluate what makes sense for your group. Alternatively, there will be a lot of modules you can run at lower levels.

I'm not really seeing how PF2 is being marketed as Exalted.

That said, if you think 5e is a lower power curve, I respectfully think you are mistaken. I'm no 5e expert but when a magic-using option is built into almost every class and bards are level 9 casters, I don't think that equals a lower-powered game, flatter math or no.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd say 5e is lower powered, but lower powered doesn't mean less magic is present. Presence of magic doesn't determine how powerful characters can be in the setting.

Diego Rossi wrote:

Actually mi Deities and demigoods say that the Gray Mouser is a 11th level fighter / 3rd level magic user/ 15th level thief and has a dexterity of 19, that is 10 wishes beyond the max for an human in that edition. Fafhrd is a 15th level ranger / 13th thief / 5th bard.

It is a big stretch to say that they are 6th level in this edition.

BTW. They have the protection/blessing of two extra planar beings and of two deities.

Level 11+3+15 in one system != level 29 in another. I very much doubt that Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser would be able to defeat Cthulhu in a straight 2 vs 1 fight.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Weather Report wrote:


Also, as has been researched/proven, most people do no play over around level 10, and that is still obscenely powerful in D&D (again, especially post AD&D). I find in 3rd Ed/PF1, once 4th-level spells hit the table, things already start going wonky.

I can't speak to other campaigns or the research you cite, but let's say it's accurate and most campaigns don't play past 10th level. Wouldn't it make more sense from a business standpoint to extend the sweet spot and avoid campaign-breaking/tsunami-style changes so that people would play across a wider range of levels?

It makes no sense to me to cram the story tropes used by most modules, campaign settings, and even adventure paths into an ever-shrinking range of levels to accommodate an ever-increasing power curve that, if your assertion is correct, few people play.

Sovereign Court

19 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
John Lynch 106 wrote:
I still hold out hope that we will get something recognizable as Pathfinder. Everyone who plays it claims it is. But these previews sure sound like we're getting D&D 4th Edition: Returns. Right down to classes being split into Arcane, Divine, Primal and Martial power sources.

Having spent five continuous hours playing it at PaizoCon, I can confirm that it still felt like Pathfinder... just more versatile and even more exciting. Choosing between running in and swinging my scimitar, casting a quick heal or a three-action healing pulse, or shooting a ray of fire added a lot to the level 1-2 experience. There was one time when I slapped Valeros with a quick heal, then ran into a fight and swung my sword, all in a rapid fire sequence.

I spent half a year playing D&D 4e, and this didn't feel any more like that than PF1 did. I look forward to hearing about your group's playtesting - hopefully they'll have a similar experience. ^_^

John Lynch 106 wrote:
You say spell list, I say power source. Tomato vs tomato.The reuse of the word primal is close enough to raise eyebrows at my table at least.

I was using "primal" for druids and rangers at least two years before D&D 4e was released. It's a word with powerful undertones, simple and easy to remember, and that doesn't have a lot of other baggage.


BPorter wrote:
Weather Report wrote:


Also, as has been researched/proven, most people do no play over around level 10, and that is still obscenely powerful in D&D (again, especially post AD&D). I find in 3rd Ed/PF1, once 4th-level spells hit the table, things already start going wonky.

I can't speak to other campaigns or the research you cite, but let's say it's accurate and most campaigns don't play past 10th level. Wouldn't it make more sense from a business standpoint to extend the sweet spot and avoid campaign-breaking/tsunami-style changes so that people would play across a wider range of levels?

That's sort of what they went with for 5th Ed, with BA. I think there was an example that in 5th Ed, 15 average guards can still be a problem for a high-level fighter, not so in PF2 (they are designing it so your high-level fighter can easily dispatch such a group).

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Kalindlara wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:
I still hold out hope that we will get something recognizable as Pathfinder. Everyone who plays it claims it is. But these previews sure sound like we're getting D&D 4th Edition: Returns. Right down to classes being split into Arcane, Divine, Primal and Martial power sources.

Having spent five continuous hours playing it at PaizoCon, I can confirm that it still felt like Pathfinder... just more versatile and even more exciting. Choosing between running in and swinging my scimitar, casting a quick heal or a three-action healing pulse, or shooting a ray of fire added a lot to the level 1-2 experience. There was one time when I slapped Valeros with a quick heal, then ran into a fight and swung my sword, all in a rapid fire sequence.

I spent half a year playing D&D 4e, and this didn't feel any more like that than PF1 did. I look forward to hearing about your group's playtesting - hopefully they'll have a similar experience. ^_^

John Lynch 106 wrote:
You say spell list, I say power source. Tomato vs tomato.The reuse of the word primal is close enough to raise eyebrows at my table at least.
I was using "primal" for druids and rangers at least two years before D&D 4e was released. It's a word with powerful undertones, simple and easy to remember, and that doesn't have a lot of other baggage.

*nods* We were using Primal back in Eberron, because oh gods and goddesses the way Divine stuff works in that setting...


I am fine with druid magic being "primal", it's a concept I had for them many years before Pathfinder 1e. I have always thought of druids (and ranger) as nature based magic instead of divine anyway.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Milo v3 wrote:

I'd say 5e is lower powered, but lower powered doesn't mean less magic is present. Presence of magic doesn't determine how powerful characters can be in the setting.

Diego Rossi wrote:

Actually mi Deities and demigoods say that the Gray Mouser is a 11th level fighter / 3rd level magic user/ 15th level thief and has a dexterity of 19, that is 10 wishes beyond the max for an human in that edition. Fafhrd is a 15th level ranger / 13th thief / 5th bard.

It is a big stretch to say that they are 6th level in this edition.

BTW. They have the protection/blessing of two extra planar beings and of two deities.

Level 11+3+15 in one system != level 29 in another. I very much doubt that Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser would be able to defeat Cthulhu in a straight 2 vs 1 fight.

But a top level of 15 in AD&D 1 is more than a level of 6 in Pathfinder 1. The Gray Mouser will easily beat a PF1 level 6 wizard or fighter.

Conan was able to kill a centuries old wizard when he was a young thief inexperienced in the civilized lands. Don't sound as "6th level rogue".

The Gray Mauser was able to use a scroll that killed several wizards in a large area and, together with Fafhrd he destroyed a house sized construct just to cite a couple of things. A bit best than 6th level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Diego Rossi wrote:


But a top level of 15 in AD&D 1 is more than a level of 6 in Pathfinder 1. The Gray Mouser will easily beat a PF1 level 6 wizard or fighter.

Conan was able to kill a centuries old wizard when he was a young thief inexperienced in the civilized lands. Don't sound as "6th level rogue".

The Gray Mauser was able to use a scroll that killed several wizards in a large area and, together with Fafhrd he destroyed a house sized construct just to cite a couple of things. A bit best than 6th level.

So your issue is that characters that could kill powerful wizards when inexperienced, wipe out several wizards using one scroll and destroy building sized constructs are fine, but it would be unrealistic to be so terrifying to someone that you could scare them to death? I think perhaps your metric for evaluating power levels is out of whack.


Evilgm wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:


But a top level of 15 in AD&D 1 is more than a level of 6 in Pathfinder 1. The Gray Mouser will easily beat a PF1 level 6 wizard or fighter.

Conan was able to kill a centuries old wizard when he was a young thief inexperienced in the civilized lands. Don't sound as "6th level rogue".

The Gray Mauser was able to use a scroll that killed several wizards in a large area and, together with Fafhrd he destroyed a house sized construct just to cite a couple of things. A bit best than 6th level.

So your issue is that characters that could kill powerful wizards when inexperienced, wipe out several wizards using one scroll and destroy building sized constructs are fine, but it would be unrealistic to be so terrifying to someone that you could scare them to death? I think perhaps your metric for evaluating power levels is out of whack.

I don't think Diego was ever advocating against the scare them to death thing; that was BPorter. I think Diego was just offering corrections on the tangent on how these literary characters stack up in a level system.


Scaring someone to death sounds more like a monster ability then a class ability or at least the use of the Intimidate skill.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Diego Rossi wrote:
BPorter wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
BPorter wrote:
Since APs go beyond those levels, not really a viable option.
Considering once you reach legendary you've already left the territory of Conan and Gray Mouser by 7 levels, why are you wanting to play any adventures that go past 6th level to begin with? You want an experience to match what Pathfinder 1e would have as levels 1 to 6, APs should already be a problem for you.

Just no. Gygax in his inspiration and Paizo staff every time they talk about Swords-and-sorcery are not stipulating that Conan, Fafhrd, or the Gray Mouser are 7th level. Given the number of adventures that they've had, they must be on the slowest XP track ever created, and I'm a fan of PF1's Slow XP track!

How's this - to better emulate just about every source of relevant fantasy fiction, movies, and media of the last century, I'd rather a Conan like character run the gamut of levels 1-15 instead of further escalating the power curve ever upward to the point that the game breaks that much sooner. Yes, that means casters get pulled back vs. martials having to be demigods at level 7 to deal with the caster/martial disparity.

And no, current APs do not outstrip legendary sword-n-sorcery heroes by level 7. Yes, the oversaturation of magic definitely starts to affect the game by levels 11-15, but 7-10 is still in the realm of heroic, yet mortal protagonists.

Last time I checked, PF wasn't being marketed as Exalted.

Actually mi Deities and demigoods say that the Gray Mouser is a 11th level fighter / 3rd level magic user/ 15th level thief and has a dexterity of 19, that is 10 wishes beyond the max for an human in that edition. Fafhrd is a 15th level ranger / 13th thief / 5th bard.

It is a big stretch to say that they are 6th level in this edition.

BTW. They have the protection/blessing of two extra planar beings and of two deities.

So Fafhrd can grapple elephants with one hand tied to his back as routine task, drink poison carelessly, and swim under lava for half a minute? seems totally unrealistic for the literary character.


Diego Rossi wrote:
BPorter wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
BPorter wrote:
Since APs go beyond those levels, not really a viable option.
Considering once you reach legendary you've already left the territory of Conan and Gray Mouser by 7 levels, why are you wanting to play any adventures that go past 6th level to begin with? You want an experience to match what Pathfinder 1e would have as levels 1 to 6, APs should already be a problem for you.

Just no. Gygax in his inspiration and Paizo staff every time they talk about Swords-and-sorcery are not stipulating that Conan, Fafhrd, or the Gray Mouser are 7th level. Given the number of adventures that they've had, they must be on the slowest XP track ever created, and I'm a fan of PF1's Slow XP track!

How's this - to better emulate just about every source of relevant fantasy fiction, movies, and media of the last century, I'd rather a Conan like character run the gamut of levels 1-15 instead of further escalating the power curve ever upward to the point that the game breaks that much sooner. Yes, that means casters get pulled back vs. martials having to be demigods at level 7 to deal with the caster/martial disparity.

And no, current APs do not outstrip legendary sword-n-sorcery heroes by level 7. Yes, the oversaturation of magic definitely starts to affect the game by levels 11-15, but 7-10 is still in the realm of heroic, yet mortal protagonists.

Last time I checked, PF wasn't being marketed as Exalted.

Actually mi Deities and demigoods say that the Gray Mouser is a 11th level fighter / 3rd level magic user/ 15th level thief and has a dexterity of 19, that is 10 wishes beyond the max for an human in that edition. Fafhrd is a 15th level ranger / 13th thief / 5th bard.

It is a big stretch to say that they are 6th level in this edition.

BTW. They have the protection/blessing of two extra planar beings and of two deities.

I could easily see 14 level character being human in adnd(ACK which is a pretty gritty realistic system has 14 as a level cap), not much so in pathfinder/3.5.

This also has to do with sword and sorcery character being more broadly talented than dnd characters. Which makes sense usually sword and sorcery charatcers went solo (or at least didnt form parties of 4+ people of equal ability). So conan could easily have fighter and thief levels. Note that these games had no skill system and that usually the sword and sorcery characters didnt have the magic items loadouts dnd characters have.


Literary sword and sorcery characters would probably be just represented by things like (fighter/rogue) gestalt or things like the slayer class.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Dragon78 wrote:
Scaring someone to death sounds more like a monster ability then a class ability or at least the use of the Intimidate skill.

it's an Intimidate based Legendary skill feat (so the hell knight commander can literally scare malcontents to death, their corrupt hearts bursting in terror) or similar. You are just that terrifying.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

This is a game with levels. High level characters are the equivalent of high level monsters, more or less.

If Fafhrd is the equivalent of CR 25, then Fafhrd is the equivalent of the Tarrasque. I don't think that's anything close to the way those characters are portrayed in the books. Or close to a Balor, or a great wyrm.

Now, I can see Fingolfin, Finarfin and Feanor, who could defeat platoons of Balors in Silmarillion, to be lvl 20. Or Beowulf, who killed a giant with bare hands. Or Cu Chulainn, who destroyed an army. I don't see Fafhrd doing things like that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rob Godfrey wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
Scaring someone to death sounds more like a monster ability then a class ability or at least the use of the Intimidate skill.
it's an Intimidate based Legendary skill feat (so the hell knight commander can literally scare malcontents to death, their corrupt hearts bursting in terror) or similar. You are just that terrifying.

R. Lee Ermey was one level short.


BPorter wrote:
Last time I checked, PF wasn't being marketed as Exalted.

No, the Exalted are much more restricted. Resurrection is largely impossible in Exalted; in PF1 for high level characters it is a 6-seconds work & some cash.

_
glass.


glass wrote:
BPorter wrote:
Last time I checked, PF wasn't being marketed as Exalted.

No, the Exalted are much more restricted. Resurrection is largely impossible in Exalted; in PF1 for high level characters it is a 6-seconds work & some cash.

_
glass.

Besides that the exalted could pretty much mop the floor with pathfinder characters, seriously solar exalted are op by definition


2 people marked this as a favorite.
gustavo iglesias wrote:

This is a game with levels. High level characters are the equivalent of high level monsters, more or less.

If Fafhrd is the equivalent of CR 25, then Fafhrd is the equivalent of the Tarrasque. I don't think that's anything close to the way those characters are portrayed in the books. Or close to a Balor, or a great wyrm.

Now, I can see Fingolfin, Finarfin and Feanor, who could defeat platoons of Balors in Silmarillion, to be lvl 20. Or Beowulf, who killed a giant with bare hands. Or Cu Chulainn, who destroyed an army. I don't see Fafhrd doing things like that.

To be fair high level characters with the high level magic items are equivalent to high level monsters.

I don't think the example with grey mouser is supposed to stack levels its basically adnd multiclassing so that character was sth like level 18 in adnd(which is even less in pathfinder).

Also there is a difference between tolkien Balor and dnd Balor. As there is a difference between adnd balor and pathfinder balor. In any case the tolkien balor can't cast greater teleport or cast implosion and proprable could be assigned an ac lower than 36.

But in any case, semantics aside the main point of your post stands. Fafhrd wouldn't be able to deal with a pathfinder balor head on.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
gustavo iglesias wrote:
thflame wrote:

You should also halve the benefit from stats, seeing as only even numbers matter. The difference between the strongest level 1 fighter (which will be about 90% of all STR fighters) and a level 20 fighter, is a +2 bonus. (+3 if he gets a magic item).

Well, in combat, not really. The difference between the lvl 1 fighter and the lvl 20 fighter is +22 to hit, which also means anything a lvl 1 fighter can hopefuly hit with a 20, a lvl 22 fighter insta-crit with 2+. That means when a lvl 20 fighter attacks the same ogre than the lvl 1 fighter does, he'll do more than twice the damage, not counting magic weapons. That's a lot of difference, and much more than it was in PF1, assuming again no magic weapons. A lvl 1 fighter with a 2h sword in PF1 with STR 20 would do 2d6+7, while a 20 lvl fighter would do 2d6+15 (with str 30). In PF2 a lvl 1 fighter with str 18 does 1d12+4, and a lvl 20 fighter with str 22 does 2d12+12. I don't count feats (like improved specialization, improved critical or power attack) because we don't know exactly which feats the PF2 fighter gets.

In PF2 accuracy matters a lot, because accuracy gives you damage (thanks to the crit chance) and lvl gives you accuracy.

This is one thing that I think will change how people play a bit over time. There is a LOT of benefit for maximizing your accuracy to not just succeed but to try to get critical successes. It also makes taking swings at dubious chances to hit a lot more of a risky tactic than in PF1.

The twin slice thing looks like it would play really well for people going for a crit build. Two chances to fish for crits at full accuracy is pretty damn nice. I think it is going to play out that two handers are good for solid consistant damage probably a bit higher by default than dual wielding but dual wielding gives you heightened chances at crit hitting so if you build yourself to make use of that it should be very powerful.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Someone has problems replying to posts in this thread? Firefox say, "La pagina che si sta cercando di visualizzare non può essere mostrata in quanto non è possibile verificare l’autenticità dei dati ricevuti." (Italian)

Translated: "The page you are trying to visualize can't the show as it wasn't possible to verify the authenticity of received data".

Curiously I can post normally if I cite a post.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't know why people are upset about a legendary ability where you can scare someone to death in PF2 when in PF1 you can already do things like pin a creature 4 size categories larger than you like the Tarrasque.

We're already at that level of fantasy.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
gustavo iglesias wrote:
Now, I can see Fingolfin, Finarfin and Feanor, who could defeat platoons of Balors in Silmarillion, to be lvl 20. Or Beowulf, who killed a giant with bare hands. Or Cu Chulainn, who destroyed an army. I don't see Fafhrd doing things like that.

Your rating seem way, way off. Fingolfin or Finarfin or Feanor can mop the floor with our level 20 character wile drinking and discussing of philosophy.

Beowulf or Cu Chulainn are weaker, but still mythic characters.
Our, non Mythic, level 20 PCs are on the level of Arthurian heroes and villains. Or, more correctly, wuxia characters.

They can survive thinks that will kill a normal human, but normal, real life, humans have survived 8.000 meters falls with a sprain and a lot of wood splinters in the skin, or a Viet Nam war hero that survived: "seven major gunshot wounds, twenty-eight shrapnel holes, and both his arms were slashed by a bayonet. He had shrapnel in his head, scalp, shoulder, buttocks, feet, and legs, his right lung was destroyed, and he had injuries to his mouth and back of his head from being clubbed with a rifle butt. A bullet shot from an AK-47 entered his back and exited just beneath his heart."
I have some problem reconciliating that with comments on the tone of "humans are level 4 at most".

Sure, there are instances where the game rules allow them to do superhuman things, like surviving 18 seconds while immersed in lava. But a few days ago near my home 2 workers where hit directly by molten iron. They where helped as soon as possible, but that was surely more than 18 seconds (the average time a level 20 character can survive in molten lava, as it do an average of 70 hp of damage each round). They are still alive, albeit in a critical situation.
In a world where you can cure that wound with magic it is not surprising for level 20 to survive that.

You want a more "realistic" game, well, it isn't this game.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Intimidating someone to death, I see a Chuck Norris joke here.


I’m looking forward to Rogue getting a mini-capstone at 15, being the first class able to take a legendary skill feat. I’m hoping for Perform to have a really cool option.


QuidEst wrote:
I’m looking forward to Rogue getting a mini-capstone at 15, being the first class able to take a legendary skill feat. I’m hoping for Perform to have a really cool option.

Member?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Diego Rossi wrote:

You want a more "realistic" game, well, it isn't this game.

Not at all. I'm all on board with martial heroes diving into lava willingly in order to reach for the Really Important McGuffin they need to save.

It is just that Conan wasn't able to do that in his books. Therefore, claiming than Conan should be lvl 15+, just because the books are awesome, miss completely the point of levels in PF, and put a straight jacket into martials, because the "end goal" of said characters is based on 5th lvl characters

She-lob is just an Ogre Spider. It is an spider that is dangerous because it is the size of an elephant, Huge. That is it. Aragorn would have problems with it 1 vs1. He did have problems with a troll. He did have problems with a dire wolf. Nazguls are just Wraiths. Incorporeal beings that are impervious to normal weapons and drain your life essence with their touch, but that can die if hit by the proper weapon, even when faced by a not so impressive fighter.

The only time Aragorn faced what would be considered a high level threat in PF CR system, something with more tricks in his sleeve than "I am a bit larger than a common creature", was VS the Balrog. And they ran, because the Balrog completely outclassed them. Because he is NOT in a Balrog level. Or Smaug level. Or Ungolianth level.

Actually, many fans complained when Legolas killed a fancy Dire Elephant, because they thought (rightly) than Peter Jackson went much more over the top than Tolkien, and the cinematic version of Legolas (who still has to run from Balrog and can't face things like Smaug) was too wuxia for the Lord of the Rings mood.

Now, about your molten iron anecdote: being spilled with lava does 2d6 damage per round. Being INMERSED in lava does 20d6. I am not talking about high level PF heroes that are touched by a spill of lava and survive, Anakin Skywalker style. I'm talking about characters that do scuba diving under lava and survive. Full, complete inmersion in lava for 12 to 18 seconds, holding their breath, completely under the lava. If I write a fan fiction about Conan, Fafrhrd, Sir Lancelot or Aragorn right now, and I include a scene where they dive into a pool of lava, and swim across it in 2 rounds, would you think I am honoring those character backgrounds? No? What if I wrote that about Achilles? Or Hercules? Or Beowulf?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
gustavo iglesias wrote:


Now, about your molten iron anecdote: being spilled with lava does 2d6 damage per round. Being INMERSED in lava does 20d6. I am not talking about high level PF heroes that are touched by a spill of lava and survive, Anakin Skywalker style. I'm talking about characters that do scuba diving under lava and survive. Full, complete inmersion in lava for 12 to 18...

You want to play an incredibly different game than literally every PF/D&D player I've ever met. I think it's called The Superman RPG.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
BPorter wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:


Now, about your molten iron anecdote: being spilled with lava does 2d6 damage per round. Being INMERSED in lava does 20d6. I am not talking about high level PF heroes that are touched by a spill of lava and survive, Anakin Skywalker style. I'm talking about characters that do scuba diving under lava and survive. Full, complete inmersion in lava for 12 to 18...

You want to play an incredibly different game than literally every PF/D&D player I've ever met. I think it's called The Superman RPG.

I don’t think that’s a discussion of “want” so much one of how PF1 works. A high-level PF1 character can take a round or two of lava immersion, because it’s only about 70 damage.


QuidEst wrote:
BPorter wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:


Now, about your molten iron anecdote: being spilled with lava does 2d6 damage per round. Being INMERSED in lava does 20d6. I am not talking about high level PF heroes that are touched by a spill of lava and survive, Anakin Skywalker style. I'm talking about characters that do scuba diving under lava and survive. Full, complete inmersion in lava for 12 to 18...

You want to play an incredibly different game than literally every PF/D&D player I've ever met. I think it's called The Superman RPG.

I don’t think that’s a discussion of “want” so much one of how PF1 works. A high-level PF1 character can take a round or two of lava immersion, because it’s only about 70 damage.

It's a big difference between "lava is mechanically weak as written" and "lava submersion is a feature".

Also, since this is a new edition, I don't view 3.5 lava mechanics as a sacred cow. Falling damage is being made more lethal in PF2, for example.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
BPorter wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:


Now, about your molten iron anecdote: being spilled with lava does 2d6 damage per round. Being INMERSED in lava does 20d6. I am not talking about high level PF heroes that are touched by a spill of lava and survive, Anakin Skywalker style. I'm talking about characters that do scuba diving under lava and survive. Full, complete inmersion in lava for 12 to 18...

You want to play an incredibly different game than literally every PF/D&D player I've ever met. I think it's called The Superman RPG.

That's something that a lvl 20 fighter can do in PF1. Diving into molten lava does 20d6.

You think it's "not a feature", but just that the mechanic is weak. However, the same fighter can survive being Crushed by a 100 ton dragon, pinned under his weight, and survive. He can be chewed multiple times by the jaws of a tyranosaurius rex, which is something that can exert 12000+ pounds of strength. He can drink cyanide like if it were soda. With the propper feats or class features (like riposte), can litterally parry the blow of a Titan's greatsword which weights several tons.

You may not like what PF1 (and DnD) work at higher level, and you can choose to either not play those levels, or "mentally block" what is happening in the table. But when your halfling fighter is trading blows with a colosal thanatotic Titan, you are effectively beyond Sword and Sorcery territory, and firmly into Wuxia. Tarzan can not fight Godzilla. Lvl 20 pathfinder characters can.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
BPorter wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:


Now, about your molten iron anecdote: being spilled with lava does 2d6 damage per round. Being INMERSED in lava does 20d6. I am not talking about high level PF heroes that are touched by a spill of lava and survive, Anakin Skywalker style. I'm talking about characters that do scuba diving under lava and survive. Full, complete inmersion in lava for 12 to 18...

You want to play an incredibly different game than literally every PF/D&D player I've ever met. I think it's called The Superman RPG.

He's hardly alone. One of my favorite personal moments and demonstrations of why I love Pathfinder involved a Brawler getting Fly and Enlarge Person and then supplexing a dragon into another dragon. And that was level 8 in an admittedly high optimization game.

Pathfinder letting you become a gosh darn super hero is a big part of the system's appeal, and how it differentiates itself from other games on the market. Paizo is wise to heed this, and wiser still to have it be tied to the level/proficiency system. That way, people who like being super heroes can do it at high levels, and people who don't can just keep their games in the low level range. Or otherwise tweak proficiency options.

I'll also note that PF2 looks to be an improvement on this front. In PF1, it was possible to build someone godlike in at least one area, while the other party members were still playing mortals. And I'm not just talking Caster/martial here. Caster/Caster disparity and martial/martial was very much a thing. The tighter math of PF2 means that this is much less likely to occur. And a big part of how they are making characters still feel distinct despite this is by including more esoteric options like scaring people to death.


A lvl 20 swashbuckler with a masterwork rapier and no magic boosting gear (which he is expected to have), has about +28 to hit. With -6 to hit, because of the size difference, he has +22 to attack, no magic involved. He has equal odds to parry and ripost a rune giant greatsword if he makes his attempt against the 2nd or later itterative attack. With magic items, like a +5 rapier and +6 Dex, he can parry and riposte any of the attacks with good odds, and automatically succeed vs the 3rd attack.

Parry and Riposte. With his rapier. Against a greatsword which weights a couple of tons.

Go again and look at that picture. I don't know how you can see that fight, and believe you are playing Sword and Sorcery.


Sounds like sword and sorcerer to me;)

Shadow Lodge

Who says martials can't do amazing things, am I right? ((Kinda joking))

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dragon78 wrote:

Sounds like sword and sorcerer to me;)

i loved when he was captured and the bar finds out..and every one of them went to save him :)

such a fun movie


All this talk of diving into molten lava makes me wonder, would people actually rule it with simply 20d6 fire damage or what-have-you; I mean, if a 15th-level human character, sans magic, did a cannonball into a pool of lava, I would adjudicate/rule them instantly dead.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Weather Report wrote:
All this talk of diving into molten lava makes me wonder, would people actually rule it with simply 20d6 fire damage or what-have-you; I mean, if a 15th-level human character, sans magic, did a cannonball into a pool of lava, I would adjudicate/rule them instantly dead.

I've seen lava vs PC a few times and it's ALWAYS been by the rules: 20d6 damage. If a DM killed me off like that, it'd be the last time I played with them... :P


graystone wrote:
Weather Report wrote:
All this talk of diving into molten lava makes me wonder, would people actually rule it with simply 20d6 fire damage or what-have-you; I mean, if a 15th-level human character, sans magic, did a cannonball into a pool of lava, I would adjudicate/rule them instantly dead.
I've seen lava vs PC a few times and it's ALWAYS been by the rules: 20d6 damage. If a DM killed me off like that, it'd be the last time I played with them... :P

What a shame, I would hate the integrity of the campaign to get thrown out the window like that, a character jumping into a pool of lava, splashes about and rubs it all over for 6 seconds or more, but, hey, he's okay, because he has X hp, that is one special approach.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Let me say this:
I really like how super cool awesome "mundane" characters can get in PF2. I like legendary skill abilities. I think it is a really interesting bit of design space. I think its cool. Moreover, I think it is an interesting way to balance martials and spellcasters.

5e DnD throttled the hell out of their high level spells to make the game balanced between martials and spellcasters at higher levels. In that game, you generally never have more than one slot for spell levels 6+. I do not find that to be a particularly satisfying way to balance the game.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Weather Report wrote:
graystone wrote:
Weather Report wrote:
All this talk of diving into molten lava makes me wonder, would people actually rule it with simply 20d6 fire damage or what-have-you; I mean, if a 15th-level human character, sans magic, did a cannonball into a pool of lava, I would adjudicate/rule them instantly dead.
I've seen lava vs PC a few times and it's ALWAYS been by the rules: 20d6 damage. If a DM killed me off like that, it'd be the last time I played with them... :P
What a shame, I would hate the integrity of the campaign to get thrown out the window like that, a character jumping into a pool of lava, splashes about and rubs it all over for 6 seconds or more, but, hey, he's okay,. because he has X hp, that is one special approach.

It’s all selective realism anyway. You let them jump into the lava rather than onto the lava, for instance. It’s three times as dense as a person, and very viscous. I do it too- fireproof fiends taking lava baths even though they should just sit on the surface.

Paizo Employee

4 people marked this as a favorite.
BPorter wrote:


That said, if you think 5e is a lower power curve, I respectfully think you are mistaken. I'm no 5e expert but when a magic-using option is built into almost every class and bards are level 9 casters, I don't think that equals a lower-powered game, flatter math or no.

In 5E, a 10th level fighter who gets jumped in the woods by 16 CR/level 2 bandits has a very real chance of being brutally murdered by bandits. In the current version of Pathfinder, a 10th level fighter who gets jumped in the woods by 16 level 2 bandits will laugh as he skips unharmed through a swarm of arrows before stacking up bandit bodies like firewood.

At a very fundamental level, 5E backpedaled certain aspects of character power to the earlier days of the game, where characters like Conan legitimately were high level characters. Pathfinder on the other hand, has (at least so far) embraced the more 3.5 feel of fantasy roleplaying embodied in things like the 90s Forgotten Realms novels, fighting anime like Shura no Toki or Rurouni Kenshin, or older "man out of natural environment" stories like Edgar Rice Burroughs' Barsoom series where John Carter is leaping about and tearing other mortals asunder in a manner that is simply inconsistent with the capabilities of older pulp heroes like Conan.

So from the perspective of "What kind of creatures can I expect to face and defeat, and in what numbers" perspective, 5E is a legitimate step back in power from the capabilities present in 3.X games and inherited by Pathfinder.


I'm not surprised at all in how Double Slice works, mathematically it dwarfs Power Attack, with its trade-off being what happens to your third action.

I do not like action taxes on martial characters to initiate a combat style, this means the new feat abilities you have may not work either if they are all going to require an expenditure of actions.

With the clunky design they seem to be forcing, action economy will be worse in this edition of the game than in the previous. The difference? A paradigm shift in which combat methods are superior. Used to be Power Attack, now its Double Slice (since I'm pretty sure you can use weapons to grant yourself a shield bonus as well).

The maths are not aligned:

Spoiler:

f(Power Attack)= 2dx + STR + bonuses
f(Double Slice)= 2dx + 2STR + 2bonuses

hence f(Double Slice) yields an extra amount of damage equal to what you lost from using Power Attack (which made Power Attack bad in the first place) except now Double Slice gives you just as good a chance to land two crits! This means Power Attack is even worse, and will rely on good dice rolls to matter in the long run, since the average difference on something like an 8 and a 12 (from dice) is gonna add up to only around 3-6 damage per turn. So unless by 3rd level you can guarantee those dice adding up above 6 every time (legendary proficiency at 3rd level plus 18 STR) then Power Atttack is hereby cemented as a mechanically induced mathematical trap.

This gets even worse when you consider that the rate at which martials progress with weapon proficiency is meant to score critical hits more often, rather than to bind accuracy to level, per the developers.

If you manage to combine Double Slice with the new mechanics for shield use and shield bashing, then we have our one-true style, based on the numbers. Those tactical feats had better be pretty f*cking amazing.

Honestly, I'm a fan of everything in this edition but the classes and combat system. Everything out of combat aligns with my house rules so much I'll only have to relearn the d20 engine, which isn't even hard.

In combat though, relearning how the best tactics work to design encounters around is not going to look very fun. I want the combat styles to be equal and different, not blatantly favoring one style, which makes me sad as RAE in PF1 did this so well.

Let's not forget that agile weapons are a thing and you can use them with your TWF antics to reduce that -10 to what? a -4 on your secondary attack?

I am disappoint.


QuidEst wrote:
Weather Report wrote:
graystone wrote:
Weather Report wrote:
All this talk of diving into molten lava makes me wonder, would people actually rule it with simply 20d6 fire damage or what-have-you; I mean, if a 15th-level human character, sans magic, did a cannonball into a pool of lava, I would adjudicate/rule them instantly dead.
I've seen lava vs PC a few times and it's ALWAYS been by the rules: 20d6 damage. If a DM killed me off like that, it'd be the last time I played with them... :P
What a shame, I would hate the integrity of the campaign to get thrown out the window like that, a character jumping into a pool of lava, splashes about and rubs it all over for 6 seconds or more, but, hey, he's okay,. because he has X hp, that is one special approach.
It’s all selective realism anyway. You let them jump into the lava rather than onto the lava, for instance. It’s three times as dense as a person, and very viscous. I do it too- fireproof fiends taking lava baths even though they should just sit on the surface.

Cool for adjudicating saving throws, I am talking about having your PC jump off a cliff onto sharp rocks below, because you know your character can survive the 11d6 falling damage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:

I'm not surprised at all in how Double Slice works, mathematically it dwarfs Power Attack, with its trade-off being what happens to your third action.

I do not like action taxes on martial characters to initiate a combat style, this means the new feat abilities you have may not work either if they are all going to require an expenditure of actions.

With the clunky design they seem to be forcing, action economy will be worse in this edition of the game than in the previous. The difference? A paradigm shift in which combat methods are superior. Used to be Power Attack, now its Double Slice (since I'm pretty sure you can use weapons to grant yourself a shield bonus as well).

The maths are not aligned:** spoiler omitted **

Honestly, I'm a fan of everything in this edition but the classes and combat system. Everything out of combat aligns with my house...

Well, since magic items now multiply damage dice, power attack will tend to be the better option when you are wielding two handed weapons like greatswords and great axes. On a +5 weapon, the difference in expected value between a 1d8 weapon and a 1d12 weapon is 12 whole damage points and that is on top of the fact that you can still make a second iterative attack at a -5 rather than a -10 (in those admittedly somewhat uncommon situations where a "third" iterative attack is available).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Weather Report wrote:
graystone wrote:
Weather Report wrote:
All this talk of diving into molten lava makes me wonder, would people actually rule it with simply 20d6 fire damage or what-have-you; I mean, if a 15th-level human character, sans magic, did a cannonball into a pool of lava, I would adjudicate/rule them instantly dead.
I've seen lava vs PC a few times and it's ALWAYS been by the rules: 20d6 damage. If a DM killed me off like that, it'd be the last time I played with them... :P
What a shame, I would hate the integrity of the campaign to get thrown out the window like that, a character jumping into a pool of lava, splashes about and rubs it all over for 6 seconds or more, but, hey, he's okay, because he has X hp, that is one special approach.

IMO, "the integrity of the campaign to get thrown out the window" happens by ignoring the rules: the pathfinder world DOESN'T work like ours does. People don't go from perfectly healthy to KO'd in real life but do in pathfinder. People don't skydive off of cliffs without any protection in real life but pathfinder characters can repeatedly fall hundreds of feet, land on their feet and do it again...

So by imposing your perspective of real world physics instead of the game worlds rules of reality is what wrecks 'game integrity': It's no better to instant kill from a random meteor than it is to do so from lava as both are 100% DM fiat and not in the rules.

Paizo Employee Designer

24 people marked this as a favorite.

A 1st level fighter with Power Attack and a greatsword will do an average 10.5 damage with 1 action, 17 damage with both actions and Power Attack. If using longsword/shortsword and Double Slice (you take a penalty if neither weapon is agile, so longsword/longsword isn't going to outperform), that would be 8.5 damage with 1 action, 16 damage with both action and Double Slice. If you keep up all your + weapons, Double Slice pulls slightly ahead with magic weapons until Power Attack gives +2 dice, at which point Power Attack is back in the lead, barely, and Double Slice overtakes at the end when your modifiers get better, combined with further magic weapon dice. Double Slice also has an advantage when you have +damage buffs coming in from other sources. Two-handed weapon is always significantly better if you can't afford both actions. It seems reasonably balanced to me, and importantly to me, there aren't huge amounts of feats required like with TWF in PF1.


Excaliburproxy wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

I'm not surprised at all in how Double Slice works, mathematically it dwarfs Power Attack, with its trade-off being what happens to your third action.

I do not like action taxes on martial characters to initiate a combat style, this means the new feat abilities you have may not work either if they are all going to require an expenditure of actions.

With the clunky design they seem to be forcing, action economy will be worse in this edition of the game than in the previous. The difference? A paradigm shift in which combat methods are superior. Used to be Power Attack, now its Double Slice (since I'm pretty sure you can use weapons to grant yourself a shield bonus as well).

The maths are not aligned:** spoiler omitted **

Honestly, I'm a fan of everything in this edition but the classes and combat system. Everything out of combat aligns with my house...

Well, since magic items now multiply damage dice, power attack will tend to be the better option when you are wielding two handed weapons like greatswords and great axes. On a +5 weapon, the difference in expected value between a 1d8 weapon and a 1d12 weapon is 12 whole damage points and that is on top of the fact that you can still make a second iterative attack at a -5 rather than a -10 (in those admittedly somewhat uncommon situations where a "third" iterative attack is available).

Plus Power Attack has some (unknown) level of scaling as you level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

One way I approached mortal PCs surviving lethal environmental effects is to RP it. Hit points are abstract and represent more than physical endurance, but also luck, blessings, agility, and whatever other heroic traits one can think of.
So, if one were trying to avoid the fall or the lava or whatnot, it'd be like when Rambo fell out of a helicopter in First Blood, grabbing branches along the way and softening his blow as best he could. Now if he'd chosen to swan dive out of the helicopter, I'd consider that a self-inflicted coup de grace.
Same thing with PF/DnD. Gygax gave the example of a 4th level fighter NOT taking several sword thrusts to the heart to kill, but turning such thrusts into glancing blows. Somebody intentionally taking a sword thrust to the heart (don't worry, even critting I have enough h.p.) would be asking for a coup de grace too. But I remember Shatterstar having to put his sword through his chest to appease a villain. He did so, but his knowledge of anatomy was used as justification for his survival. That would totally be okay.
I'd put diving willy-nilly into lava in the same boat. A PC forced into lava gets the 20d6 as they struggle who knows how, but heroically! But I'd have a hard time respecting a player who disregards even minimal verisimilitude & story just to flaunt their high h.p. count. "Look at me do the backstroke" wouldn't necessarily lead to insta-kill, but then again, I doubt I'd keep a player like that around into the higher levels anyway.

151 to 200 of 321 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / PF2 Playtest Panel All Messageboards