I will say I feel like potions should work differently. I can kind of see it both ways. like a chemical tolerance thing instead of Res.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No magic items until 5th level? That sounds unreasonable to me, and contrary to any AP or campaign I've played, and highly unlikely even based on random loot generation.
No magic items until 5th level? That sounds unreasonable to me, and contrary to any AP or campaign I've played, and highly unlikely even based on random loot generation.
I guess I'm mostly counting wearable items. I do see consumable by then and other little items. occasional +1 weapons so I guess i should of said 3rd level. but your kind off point.
I disagree with you on the random loot generators most of the ones I've found set that sucker to 4th level and You can hit it quite a few times before something magical pops out.
It is kind of rare to be able to use more than 1 potion at level 1 though because you don't have much money at level 1 and you level up really fast.
Look at the Well-Provisioned Adventurer trait once. You start with
#1 scrolls of comprehend languages (2), scroll of detect secret doors, scroll of glitterdust, scrolls of identify (2), scroll of mount, scroll of rope trick, thunderstone, wand of mage armor (16 charges).
or
#2 oil of bless weapon, potions of cure light wounds (2), potion of protection from evil
or
#3 bead of blessing (as a lesser strand of prayer beads without the bead of healing), holy water (2), scrolls of cure light wounds (2), scroll of endure elements
There are also multiple other traits that give cash.
That's kind of how I feel about PF1. Hardly any of the quirky items ever get used, because they can be sold to buy stuff that actually helps you out in combat, or because they take up the slots that are needed for a cloak of resistance or other 'mandatory' item.
I can see this: I tend to go for characters that can get away without some of the 6 because of it. I'm all for axing the 6 and slots.
I frankly don't tend to see magic items until about 5th level.
That seems quite late.
How are you getting magic items at level 1?
See above. Even without a trait, items start at 200gp [Sleeves of Many Garments].
If your already playing outside the norm
Ah... I play a lot of AP's and they aren't exactly stingy with items and consumables...
I really don't think I use 10+ consumable items in one pathfinder day. in a party of 4 surely not 40 consumables. That just seems ridiculous.
You can get locked out of further checks, so you can't count on ANY extra. :P
I guess I'm mostly counting wearable items. I do see consumable by then and other little items. occasional +1 weapons so I guess i should of said 3rd level. but your kind off point.
I disagree with you on the random loot generators most of the ones I've found set that sucker to 4th level and You can hit it quite a few times before something magical pops out.
Random magic is rare, but you can buy magic items. At level 2 you typically have a wand or +1 armour, and some potions / scrolls. By level 3 you probably have a +1 weapon or similar. This is how the WBL system is intended to work.
Random magic is rare, but you can buy magic items. At level 2 you typically have a wand or +1 armour, and some potions / scrolls. By level 3 you probably have a +1 weapon or similar. This is how the WBL system is intended to work.I guess I'm mostly counting wearable items. I do see consumable by then and other little items. occasional +1 weapons so I guess i should of said 3rd level. but your kind off point.
I disagree with you on the random loot generators most of the ones I've found set that sucker to 4th level and You can hit it quite a few times before something magical pops out.
By 3rd, I try to get a minor bag of holding, some magic armor and whatever other minor goodies I can get.
Are we sure how scrolls are gonna work yet? I haven't seen much about them. It possible I just missed something.
what book are those traits in I have never seen them before?
Anyways to much is supposition. I can't really say what to expect exactly until I get my hands on the full document. Maybe it needs an extra 3 Res at the start or an extra 10 Its to hard to say without seeing everything as a whole. (Ahh see I brought it back around to the thread topic^^)
Yeah yeah and if your crafting them its sooner and easier. by level 5 how many items are you expecting to have and be taking up actual resonance and how many are you expecting to be consumables?
Are we sure how scrolls are gonna work yet?
With potions and wands using RP, I'm willing to bet the farm on scrolls using them: IF they didn't, they'd just be the systems new CLW wand...
what book are those traits in I have never seen them before?
Adventurer’s Armory 2: It's a trait that gives various packages. There is also Rich Parents [900 starting gp, Ultimate Campaign, Advanced Player's Guide, Second Darkness Player's Guide] and Chosen Child [+900 gp, Dragon Empires Primer] and they stack for 1800gp possible for starting gp. There are also ones with lesser gp like
Coin Hoarder [+500gp, Dwarves of Golarion].
That true that do have to work of rp. I just wondering if they would have that option of using a spell slot like I hear them saying about staffs and maybe wands.
Hmm interesting traits Its kind of a trade off I suppose for a big bonus early and nothing later on with those. If its a game only staying at low levels those aren't bad.
Hmm I own adventurer's armory 2 even... I guess I never check out traits that often I think our whole table tends to ignore them for the most part. there so many of the dang things.
Hmm interesting traits Its kind of a trade off I suppose for a big bonus early and nothing later on with those. If its a game only staying at low levels those aren't bad.
Yep it's a trade off: they shine for tough games starting at 1st. Sometimes survival is more important than some bonuses. ;)
Personally I'll take an overt amount of positivity and happiness over too much cynicism and unhappiness any day of the week, but I do think that excitement and hopefulness shouldn't completely drown out genuine and critical discussion.
The problem is that right now it's kind of difficult to have said genuine and critical discussion without having the full playtest rulebook to argue over, only bits from blogs, interviews, podcasts and people's experiences from cons and such - which are good, but still only at best good for speculation.
I too would like to "examine the whole", if I had the whole to actually examine.
That's always the problem with discussing almost anything pre-release (especially something as big and potentially ground-breaking as a new edition of an RPG, as opposed to, say, yet another splatbook) - you lack the full information on the subject matter so you fill in the blanks (of which there are still many as far as PF2e goes), and everyone fills in those in their own unique way, so discussing things without misinformation or huge personal bias getting in the way is nigh-on impossible.
Luckily it's 'only' one more month of us existing in this weird state of flux before we get to dive deep into the playtest.On a tangentially related note: this isn't Paizo's first such public playtest (though it's certainly their most ambitious one), if I remember right?
Broadly speaking, how did they handle it for Starfinder (or, if anyone here was around for that, Pathfinder 1e)?Starfinder did not have a public playtest.
For PF1e, there was a series of alpha builds (PDF only), and then a print beta. there were sub forums for the different parts of the rules, and i believe there were some updates even beyond the beta. The beta rulebooks did also have some alternative ideas for systems as sidebars to look at - I'll grab it out when I get home for some examples.
The two play tests are sort of different because in pf1 people knew the basic chassis was staying the same and parts of it were altered, and you could analyze how the alterations interacted with that chassis you were experienced with. This is, good or bad, a different kettle of fish than that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sigh pessimists... XP (almost forgot the emoji)
But seriously the thing that gets me is when people keep hammering there opinion in over and over posting it on multiple threads and acting like it is the only correct opinion and anyone that doesn't see that is stupid. I don't care what side you are on that crap gets under my skin. I see them try and do this thing like "well everyone else in the world thinks your wrong so you must be wrong!" It makes me give the biggest eye roll where I have to actually hold the eyes in to keep them from coming out.
oh an personally what I do is igther use an I statement something like Oh I think this is X or I offer suggestions for improvements or compromises.
If someone really thinks an aspect is detrimental to the game and they want to see it improved or changed, why would they not want to bring that thing up whenever that aspect is discussed?
If someone really thinks an aspect is detrimental to the game and they want to see it improved or changed, why would they not want to bring that thing up whenever that aspect is discussed?Sigh pessimists... XP (almost forgot the emoji)
But seriously the thing that gets me is when people keep hammering there opinion in over and over posting it on multiple threads and acting like it is the only correct opinion and anyone that doesn't see that is stupid. I don't care what side you are on that crap gets under my skin. I see them try and do this thing like "well everyone else in the world thinks your wrong so you must be wrong!" It makes me give the biggest eye roll where I have to actually hold the eyes in to keep them from coming out.
oh an personally what I do is igther use an I statement something like Oh I think this is X or I offer suggestions for improvements or compromises.
First. when did I say "when the aspect is discussed"? I've seen people literally spam it on every single thread that even vaguely reminds them of there issue.
second I don't think your thinking of the same kind of situation as I am. let me help you get on the page with an example of someone who I felt went crazy with it. Now this example is with the star finder person whose name I don't remember we will call person X he was compeltly sure that the solarian was vastly behind in damage and the only way to play one effectively was to multi-class with warrior he posted that opinion on almost every single thread I saw and start acknowledging it as fact. Even after someone ran the math and proved not only that his way was wrong but weaker in fact people still would say well isn't that class's damage sub par. so its spreading dis-information sometimes.
but also To answer your question because at some point people get tired of hearing it and just tune it out. Which is really the best case scenario.
Expanding on the note that i am annoyed by this negativity is not because of the mere uttering of opinion, but its that its so often is either just straight up "I am dissapointed" and nothing more or followed a spiel of how this will ruin their life.
There is a way of going forth with opinions that dont drain everyone around you, "This is awesome" and "I am dissapointed" as the sole point in a post is arguably equally draining depending on your mood and outlook.
Lets take the controversy of Resonance, i like the idea of a "pool" of "Equipment points" instead of slots that you use, one whereas its more interesting than just a hardcoded slot system. Though i have no good ideas on how they would sort out the wand system as i share opinion with Vidmaster7 on that wands and cheap scroll takes the attrition aspect of casters out of the picture and null what was supposed to be a balancing weakness to martials.
As of PF2 where martials are scaled up and spellcasters down, then perhaps this wand "fix" is overkill when you consider overall power?
So expanding on your skepticism and your dissapointment/awesomeness would lake scrolling down the forum page a lot less "noisy" so to speak.
See I like the way you did that it feels constructive and people can have a good conversation with that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just want to note, I was running a PF1 practice combat for some players yesterday:
Even the 1st level NPC warriors start with at least 1 consumable magical item (a clw potion), and many of the Iconic Characters have between 1 & 3 consumable magical items (a potion, or a few scrolls) at 1st level. Just because players are not usually stupid enough to buy potions and scrolls at 1st level (given that they can just take them from NPCs) doesn't mean that 1st level characters aren't expected to have them.
Likewise any number of 1st level scenarios include a partially charged wand (or two), and a cloak of resistance or a ring of protection.
By 3rd level, the entire party is assumed to be wearing two or three or three pieces of the Big Six appropriate to their level (usually weapon, armor, and cloak)*.
*with the caveat that munchkins put off their +1 armor until they can afford whatever their Best In Slot armor is (Mithril Breastplate for example).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In PF2 I think we can expect to have found at least one (and likely both) of our potency runes by 3rd level. Because either the NPCs will need them just as much as we do, or because the treasure tables will include them, or enough raw wealth to buy the outright.
I don't recall seeing it mentioned, but I have a strong feeling that PF2 will be adopting Starfinder's lower resale value for loot: Meaning that treasure will more often need to be in the form of actual wealth, or else as art objects and gemstones with "trade-good value".
I doubt selling your old gear will be nearly so cost effective a way of upgrading it... like in old AD&D, we will instead we will stash them as hand-me-downs for our resonance batteries (I mean Cohorts, Followers, Hirelings, and/or Companions).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Merlin, do you feel the same way about PF2 Power Attack? In PF1, Power Attack was a go-to, always on, everyone has it feat. The math says it's always worth it.
The math is true, however the rest of the statement isn't correct. You wouldn't know it looking at the forums.
I do appreciate, however, the same people arguing that forum consensus is a bad metric to judge anything on, use the same metric to plug a point when it is convenient.
|
I just want to note, I was running a PF1 practice combat for some players yesterday:
Even the 1st level NPC warriors start with at least 1 consumable magical item (a clw potion), and many of the Iconic Characters have between 1 & 3 consumable magical items (a potion, or a few scrolls) at 1st level. Just because players are not usually stupid enough to buy potions and scrolls at 1st level (given that they can just take them from NPCs) doesn't mean that 1st level characters aren't expected to have them.
Sure...but 1-3 sounds like it's very much in the range of 1st level PC amounts of Resonance. In fact, the actual range appears to be 1 to 5.
Likewise any number of 1st level scenarios include a partially charged wand (or two), and a cloak of resistance or a ring of protection.
The Cloak and Ring no longer exist in PF2, and the Wand also falls under the 'within 1st level character Resonance tolerances' for the most part.
By 3rd level, the entire party is assumed to be wearing two or three or three pieces of the Big Six appropriate to their level (usually weapon, armor, and cloak)*.
*with the caveat that munchkins put off their +1 armor until they can afford whatever their Best In Slot armor is (Mithril Breastplate for example).
Cloaks of Resistance no longer exist and Weapons take no Resonance, so that's maybe 1 Resonance spent this way by 3rd level in PF2 (assuming armor costs Resonance which is speculative).
Do we know at all if items like tanglefoot bags will use resonance or not?
|
|
Do we know at all if items like tanglefoot bags will use resonance or not?
We do not. We know at least some alchemical items won't (several of the listed examples state they do not, indeed they're more common than those that do), but bombs (which tanglefoot bags count as) appear to be their own category with a slightly different format and it's unclear whether they take Resonance.
Personally, I suspect only 'potion' style alchemical items that you drink for an effect will have Resonance costs, but that's pure speculation.
Do we know at all if items like tanglefoot bags will use resonance or not?
We know that smoke sticks and sleep poison don't cost resonance. Bombs don't have an activation listed, so its unlikely that they would. Tanglefoot bags are sort of between smoke sticks and bombs being combat utility items, so I'd expect them not to cost resonance. It's possible that they would be effected by the alchemist's empower item ability, but we don't yet know what resource is being used by alchemists to invest bombs.
So, we don't know really.
Do we know at all if items like tanglefoot bags will use resonance or not?We do not. We know at least some alchemical items won't (several of the listed examples state they do not, indeed they're more common than those that do), but bombs (which tanglefoot bags count as) appear to be their own category with a slightly different format and it's unclear whether they take Resonance.
Personally, I suspect only 'potion' style alchemical items that you drink for an effect will have Resonance costs, but that's pure speculation.
Thanks for the answer - I figured you'd know better than myself as you seem to be tracking the various dev comments pretty well.
Without that knowledge I'll not speculate more than suggesting the idea that 'magic items at low levels' could be very different if alchemists fire/acid flasks/holy water/tanglefoot bags use resonance. Given the list of alchemical stuff - it is possible for a martial to have a batman belt using these.
|
|
Thanks for the answer - I figured you'd know better than myself as you seem to be tracking the various dev comments pretty well.
Without that knowledge I'll not speculate more than suggesting the idea that 'magic items at low levels' could be very different if alchemists fire/acid flasks/holy water/tanglefoot bags use resonance. Given the list of alchemical stuff - it is possible for a martial to have a batman belt using these.
Totally. Having those cost Resonance seems punitive and unnecessary and I'm very much against it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...
Yes, yes, I've read all the same blogs you have.
Unless you are a Bard or Sorcerer the range will be more like 1-3 at 1st level (assuming a minimum of 1); with the exceptions having 4-5). To say the range is "1-5" is a little deceptive. Having an 16+ CHA is a huge investment from what we know of the available ability scores distributions at 1st level. Especially considering that CHA will otherwise retain it's entirely situational value: good for bards and sorcerers, helpful for the party face, but otherwise a safe stat to neglect.
And yes, some items that we would have gotten early just don't exist. Cloaks of Resistance were folded into your Armor Potency rune. And the system will no longer assume we need the ring or amulet (which would have gone to the party wizards at that level anyway in lieu of the armor potency which is available to them now)
So instead of having up to two or three of the Big Six, I expect you will have all three of the Big Three 3rd level:
Armor Potency (because +AC & Saves).
Weapon Potency (because it almost doubles your starting damage, and converts it into a nice, consistant bell-curve).
Your cache of Potions/Wand of Healing (Which I assume you save your last RP for; because not dying is better than dying).
At 3rd level, that leaves "most characters" with between 0* and 3 freely spendable RP for the whole adventuring day.
*A 3rd level dwarven barbarian could have as little as 2 RP/Day, meanwhile a halfling rogue could just as easily have 5 RP/day.
Thankfully the specialist will have up to 7 RP*... at the cost of having other abilities relatively suck. However their party will treat those 2-4 "extra" RP like a party resource, so really they didn't really get anything back personally for the opportunity cost the system forces them (or someone else in the group) to pay.
*Or up to 6 if they use a Staff of Healing instead of Wands.
That just looks a lot like a systemically imposed "15-minute Adventuring Day" to me. Heaven forbid anyone invest in anything other than their armor's Potency Rune, or activate anything other than an AoE Heal-stick (except to have a potion forced down their gullet).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That just looks a lot like a systemically imposed "15-minute Adventuring Day" to me. Heaven...
Thankfully we've seen actual live play! They adventured for much more than 15 minutes at levels 1 and 2, all while rolling absolutely badly! Because we are ignoring a bunch of other stuff, like active damage mitigation being available from Level 1, the fact that apart from potions you can try multiple times to use something like a wand, easier ability to stay out of harms way for squishier characters and still act offensively off the top of my head.
If Resonance was the ONLY change, or course it would cause problems. But it comes with a bunch of others that drastically changes the reality resonance is a part of.
this is the only reason I am still giving resonance a fair shake in the playtest,
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's not get too semantic about how many minutes their adventuring day actually lasted. We both should know that I was simply refering to it being a system that encourages the party to stop for Rest after the first meaningful encounter depletes their extremely limited (and hardcoded into the system) daily resources. In AD&D it was caused by limits on clerical spell slots, in PF2 it will be caused by Resonance.
Consider that the playtest group was only willing to 'nova' their RP when the GM flat out told them there was only going to be one encounter that day. Otherwise, no group with a collective brain would be willing push on with zero RP remaining, even if the plot demanded it. Meaning a GM would have to railroad them into continuing the adventure, at risk of a systemically encouraged TPK, or pace the 'game' exactly as the developers' intended, no faster, no slower... even if that pace is inappropriate to the setting or plot.
Do we know at all if items like tanglefoot bags will use resonance or not?We do not. We know at least some alchemical items won't (several of the listed examples state they do not, indeed they're more common than those that do), but bombs (which tanglefoot bags count as) appear to be their own category with a slightly different format and it's unclear whether they take Resonance.
Personally, I suspect only 'potion' style alchemical items that you drink for an effect will have Resonance costs, but that's pure speculation.
Thanks for the answer - I figured you'd know better than myself as you seem to be tracking the various dev comments pretty well.
Without that knowledge I'll not speculate more than suggesting the idea that 'magic items at low levels' could be very different if alchemists fire/acid flasks/holy water/tanglefoot bags use resonance. Given the list of alchemical stuff - it is possible for a martial to have a batman belt using these.
Man sometimes I think deadman knows better then some of the developers. (no offense to the developers!)
If it is just 1 per level +charisma and that doesn't seem like enough they could always just do it 3 +1 per level + charisma that should cover things pretty well.
Let's not get too semantic about how many minutes their adventuring day actually lasted. We both should know that I was simply refering to it being a system that encourages the party to stop for Rest after the first meaningful encounter depletes their extremely limited (and hardcoded into the system) daily resources. In AD&D it was caused by limits on clerical spell slots, in PF2 it will be caused by Resonance.
Consider that the playtest group was only willing to 'nova' their RP when the GM flat out told them there was only going to be one encounter that day. Otherwise, no group with a collective brain would be willing push on with zero RP remaining, even if the plot demanded it. Meaning a GM would have to railroad them into continuing the adventure, at risk of a systemically encouraged TPK, or pace the 'game' exactly as the developers' intended, no faster, no slower... even if that pace is inappropriate to the setting or plot.
Well, the design goal is certainly that you are pushed by the story into continuing ("Save your friend who might be being tortured!"), but pushed by resource management into resting, and you have to balance this out by using your resonance and other daily resources sparingly. What the typical party will be able to manage in a day isn't obvious to me, but Paizo should be able to tweak the numbers to get it close to the traditional four encounters.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be completely fair (which I mentioned the last time I brought it up personally), Jason did cut out a fair number of encounters. Still, there were more than enough encounters to count as a threat that it still proves the point.
this is the only reason I am still giving resonance a fair shake in the playtest,
That just looks a lot like a systemically imposed "15-minute Adventuring Day" to me. Heaven...
Thankfully we've seen actual live play! They adventured for much more than 15 minutes at levels 1 and 2, all while rolling absolutely badly! Because we are ignoring a bunch of other stuff, like active damage mitigation being available from Level 1, the fact that apart from potions you can try multiple times to use something like a wand, easier ability to stay out of harms way for squishier characters and still act offensively off the top of my head.
If Resonance was the ONLY change, or course it would cause problems. But it comes with a bunch of others that drastically changes the reality resonance is a part of.
No. The more I hash out the things I hate about it - the more I appreciate the things it does seem to do right.
Personally - if I can answer some of the reservations I have about it now - before I start playing - I won't need to waste time with that before I move forward. I have serious questions about how it will play out - and serious reservations about how my players who hate trackers will like this - but it'll get tested for my stress points, and whatever requests the Paizo team puts out - at least by my group.
Outside of alignment restrictions - there isn't anything that is an instant 'remove from the game' for me - I am pretty sure that regardless of what side you might be on - everyone can at least acknowledge that my decision on alignment carries years of experience and isn't a gut reaction to '2e is bad' :)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally.. all I have to go with is what is in the blogs so far. I admit that there may be other things happening that balance out my complaints, but a holistic view implies you can see the entire system, which I can't.
Hopefully my view will change when the playtest documents are published.
Boojum
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well you don't need a holistic view of the system to try and take a more whole view of the system. You just need a holistic view of all the blogs (and various other bits like the banquet speech I suppose) rather than the one thing at a time approach. You still (as in it happened in the Sorc thread) have people making assumptions based on things that don't exist anymore, like BAB or check penalty to spells when judging a PF2 feature for example.
Unfortunately my concerns about resonance only heighten when I look at the bigger picture. Not only does it limit magic items and consumables, but also activates class abilities (in at least 1 instance) with no concrete information to mitigate those concerns.
Whilst I have minor concerns (extending that first level feeling trying to avoid front loading, multiclassing, the new economy) none of them hit quite so many triggers as resonance - it really does impact quite a substantial part of the game.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whilst I have minor concerns (extending that first level feeling trying to avoid front loading, multiclassing, the new economy) [...]
As someone who's played with 5 of the playtest classes so far (sorcerer, fighter, ranger, monk, and paladin) and GM'd for the rogue, paladin, fighter, alchemist, cleric and wizard, my personal experience is that PF2 does the opposite of extending the first level feeling; I think a first level PF2 character feels a lot closer to about a 3rd level PF1 character in terms of having things to do and feeling like you're playing the character you set out to play. Of course, you'll have to make your own decisions on that front, but no one I've talked to who's played the game has felt like the characters were stripped down, and generally people have felt that the opposite was true, that they're actually getting a better selection of meaningful options right out of the gate.
One of the biggest differences that gets overlooked, IME, is that while you don't have a bunch of racial traits adding small numeric bonuses, that's because this is a system that focuses on expanding capabilities over stacking small numbers to "beat" the game's math. You're also pulling more relevant abilities from a broader number of sources; many weapons offer an additional bonus or effect that will come up pretty regularly, your starting abilities have the additional vector of Backgrounds adding to your loadout, some classes, like the Fighter, got bumps to their number of skills known, etc.
Whilst I have minor concerns (extending that first level feeling trying to avoid front loading, multiclassing, the new economy) [...]
As someone who's played with 5 of the playtest classes so far (sorcerer, fighter, ranger, monk, and paladin) and GM'd for the rogue, paladin, fighter, alchemist, cleric and wizard, my personal experience is that PF2 does the opposite of extending the first level feeling; I think a first level PF2 character feels a lot closer to about a 3rd level PF1 character in terms of having things to do and feeling like you're playing the character you set out to play. Of course, you'll have to make your own decisions on that front, but no one I've talked to who's played the game has felt like the characters were stripped down, and generally people have felt that the opposite was true, that they're actually getting a better selection of meaningful options right out of the gate.
One of the biggest differences that gets overlooked, IME, is that while you don't have a bunch of racial traits adding small numeric bonuses, that's because this is a system that focuses on expanding capabilities over stacking small numbers to "beat" the game's math. You're also pulling more relevant abilities from a broader number of sources; many weapons offer an additional bonus or effect that will come up pretty regularly, your starting abilities have the additional vector of Backgrounds adding to your loadout, some classes, like the Fighter, got bumps to their number of skills known, etc.
That's good to know - I have never enjoyed AD&D/3/PF first 3 levels so that is promising on at least one front then.