|
No need for a Big Change in the laws of the universe as long as results that were possible with the old system are still possible, however unlikely, with the new system
And if it is only a very very rare case that becomes impossible, I do not care about it enough to require a gods-given edict about it
One thing I'm curious about is how the book explains resonance. Not the rules for it, but the non-mechanical metaphysics of it. I'm assuming there will be some explanatory text in the CRB if not the playtest book so I'm hesitant to commit to a heuristic before reading the book.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing in any fictional or in-setting thing I've read (and I've read most of the Pathfinder Tales novels as well as a lot of setting books) is made impossible by Resonance as it exists in PF2. Explaining the 'change' thus strikes me as a non-problem.
Just as we don't need to justify Sorcerer's getting their spells a level earlier, or what level Paladins get Lay On Hands having changed, because neither changes anything anyone in-world is gonna recognize, we don't need to justify Resonance for the same reason.
Now, explaining Resonance and how it works in-setting seems like a very good idea, and something they seem more interested in this edition in regards to magic, with the Essences explaining why the different types of magic are different, but you don't need to explain the edition change as such at all.
|
|
Back to this for a moment:
The point is that both groups across several novels are shown buying potions in quantity, using both wands, potions and other consumables, and do have other items they expect to work, whether they have several non-consumable items (which several of the characters do), and pop potions and wands like candy (which they do).
I just went through Nightblade doing word searches as well. No single person, of the mid-level party, seems to use more than 4 consumables over the course of the entire book. A few more are implied 'offscreen', but even that doesn't go anywhere near the level that'd be required to cause issues with Resonance, since the book takes place over more than a single day and everyone seems to be decently leveled.
The last ditch desperate plan in Nightblade also specifically revolved around the enemy taking and using a triggered magic item, despite using wands and and unknown amount of other stuff. That isn't a viable approach at all in PF2.
The enemy had used per-use items twice and was wearing maybe one non-per-use magic item that may have had ongoing effects. Assuming a high enough level enemy to give a party of adventurers including 9th level characters pause (indeed, if I'm speculating correctly, the foe was CR 8 probably plus a bonus for additional items) has at least 4 Resonance seems a reasonable assumption, and while technically a gamble, certainly isn't a very big one.
For more than a decade, the expectation of how things work in Golarion has been well fleshed out. Pausing the heroics for random accounting work hasn't ever been part of it, particularly since the accounting described would be of ?? for ?? purposes. Less heroics and more bookkeeping doesn't make for a good or interesting system.
Wand of CLW as the primary healing tool are pretty bookkeeping heavy. Also, while I'm not best pleased with additional bookkeeping (I am in fact, most displeased) it's not an issue that breaks or violates the setting in the least.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No need for a Big Change in the laws of the universe as long as results that were possible with the old system are still possible, however unlikely, with the new system
And if it is only a very very rare case that becomes impossible, I do not care about it enough to require a gods-given edict about it
Ok, I can think of a few offhand that have been impossible from my gaming. 100% impossible. One was using a wand of healing on wounded villagers we dug out of collapsed buildings: 12 charges off a wand at 2nd from a dwarf with an 6 charisma isn't possible. I've also see higher level characters go through enough wand charges/scrolls/potions to make it impossible. Heck, I have several characters that have enough items that they'd have to roll several times BEFORE I used any for charged items.
It's really not hard to hit that 'impossible' limit.
Nothing in any fictional or in-setting thing I've read (and I've read most of the Pathfinder Tales novels as well as a lot of setting books) is made impossible by Resonance as it exists in PF2.
I'm talking about personal experience, not fiction. Actual experiences that can't be replicated.
I'm not sure how you are getting any use out of potions by just holding them. And I did specify passive benefits that you hold. Using an activated ability requires more strain and covers all your wondrous item examples.But then you are making an exception for anything else you hold that requires resonance, so: potions, scrolls, wands, staves and any wondrous items that you hold (e.g. feather tokens, if they still have them in pf2), without really explaining why weapons are treated differently.From every fluff perspective, excluding weapons from resonance does seem counterintuitive. I would have added 1 to resonance and say you have to invest them all, though it might be that you are supposed to have a few (magical) weapons that can be deployed according to need.Not every fluff perspective. An aura tolerance idea of resonance would mean that passive benefits you wear would have a lot more impact than ones you hold.
Fair enough, I can accept that potions have to be ingested which would require resonance, but staves have to be invested even though they are a held item - and that's just for the passive benefits. Why are these different to e.g. swords? mechanically, it might make sense but thematically there shouldn't be exceptions.
The suggestion that the staff is more powerful doesn't really wash since most of its power comes from activated abilities that you are paying extra resonance for, while weapons can get very powerful runes which require no resonance (unless they have an activated ability). It should not be both.
Either we should eliminate investment for staves, or add investment for weapons. The ruling should either be:
(1) All worn items or activated items require resonance.
or
(2) All items require resonance for passive abilities plus resonance for activation.
This will either include weapons or exclude staves (for passive abilities), but provides a simple universal fluff that ties to the mechanics.
Fluff-wise you can say that worn items need to be "attuned" to the wearers aura (or in the case of (2) all items need to be attuned), while acivated items need to be "sparked" off their aura.
Actually, since the formula is simple, complicating it by adding 1 (why 1? why not 2? or 3?) would make less sense than simply removing resonance for staves.
Since casters most likely have nore strain on their resonance (just as likely to wear boots, armour (bracers), drink potions, etc. as a fighter, but uses scrolls and wands too), removing an extra cost of resonance might help balance things unless the plan was to nerf casters a little so that they rely more on spells.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, I can think of a few offhand that have been impossible from my gaming. 100% impossible. One was using a wand of healing on wounded villagers we dug out of collapsed buildings: 12 charges off a wand at 2nd from a dwarf with an 6 charisma isn't possible.
No, but you very possibly could've healed them all with one area charge, which would have a similar result for the (min Cha 8) equivalent character in PF2.
I've also see higher level characters go through enough wand charges/scrolls/potions to make it impossible.
This is very probably true. The hope is that, in PF2, doing so will not be as necessary, I believe.
Heck, I have several characters that have enough items that they'd have to roll several times BEFORE I used any for charged items.
Are you sure about that? All the examples I've seen anyone list so far only come close to this due to items that are nonexistent in PF2 and thus should not be counted.
It's really not hard to hit that 'impossible' limit.
If you're trying to? Sure, you can hit it easily. Going by PF1 rules? Yep, again, easy to hit (since you're often using underleveled consumables a lot of times). In actual PF2 play? Much harder to hit.
I'm talking about personal experience, not fiction. Actual experiences that can't be replicated.
Inevitably, a new edition will play differently. As long as it enables the same characters and end results, it shouldn't matter all that much if a few details change, IMO.
No, but you very possibly could've healed them all with one area charge, which would have a similar result for the (min Cha 8) equivalent character in PF2.
Not likely. We were digging them out and healing them as we found them. If we'd have stacked them up like cordwood until we got them all some would have died.
This is very probably true. The hope is that, in PF2, doing so will not be as necessary, I believe.
LOL You have a lot more hope than I do. ;)
Are you sure about that? All the examples I've seen anyone list so far only come close to this due to items that are nonexistent in PF2 and thus should not be counted.
Pretty sure, yeah. If I had to switch out an item that didn't exist, I'd likely pick one that DID with a similar function. Out of curiosity, where is the list of items that are nonexistent in PF2?
If you're trying to? Sure, you can hit it easily. Going by PF1 rules? Yep, again, easy to hit (since you're often using underleveled consumables a lot of times). In actual PF2 play? Much harder to hit.
I enjoy having a lot of minor items, like those items that let you cast cantrips or things like that. With the staff requiring a RP to use the cantrip, I can't imagine items like that do not use an RP. Why should I lose out on items like that? I personally could care less about getting the new shiny highest level items I could possibly get for my level if I can't have my fun items.
Inevitably, a new edition will play differently. As long as it enables the same characters and end results, it shouldn't matter all that much if a few details change, IMO.
Well I'm going to fight tooth and nail to get it as close to the old feel as possible. So far, I have serious doubts on the same characters OR the same results. If nothing else, the lack of archetypes that touch class abilities is a serious blow to that. [and I know they said it was possible, but I can only judge on what we're getting, not what we could get in some undefined future]
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As I understand it, a Staff of healing costs 1 RP to invest, but the cantrips can be cast all day long once invested.
That means a character with the staff invested in pf2 could stabilise all those wounded villagers, no problem.
As for items that don't exist, that we know of there is Cloak of Resistance, Amulet of natural Armour and Ring of Protection for certain (all replaced by Armour/Bracers). There may be others, but these were considered staples in pf1, forcing characters to invest heavily in them or lose out. There was even an alternate system (automatic bonus progression) in unchained that did away with these, so as far back as then it was flagged as a problem.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can see investing for staves and wands... but for weapons and armors too, though. There is cognitive dissonance there, and that makes for (repeat with me) *Suspension of Disbelief* - that's right kids!
Using resonance to drink a potion... that's... weird. Okay, so if I find a wounded, unconscious peasant and I wanna pour the potion in their mouth, they have to spend 1 point of resonance? That's very unlike how magic items behave in fiction, right? You just pour that potion.
Although if I want to drink 3 potions before a combat it's sort of nice that I can't... I mean, drinking too many potions should make them all react in your stomach, way I see it. Little tiny BOOM in your tummy, smoke wafting from your nose and ears, coughing and retching... and I would have the same effect if you mixed them in a lab without careful alchemical prepping - sure, might be possible to mix them and obtain some different substance, *in a controlled, contained environment*. In your stomach? Nah... maybe an alchemist feat. Maybe.
You know, I think 5e has the most elegant way to do it. Most items just work, no ifs, buts or wheretofores. Some you have to attune to before using them - spend something like 10 minutes trying them out, studying them, deciphering command words, that stuff. And, you can only attune to a limited amount of big items at once. 3 if I remember correctly. PF2 could play with this number - maybe an arcana Expert can buy a feat to be able to attune to more items replicating arcane magic - staves, the most powerful wands and rings, what have you.
Also, too many magic items cluttering the game? Characters who start to play like collections of magic toys instead of fantasy action heroes? Make magic items cost *a lot more*. To buy, and to craft. Make them *not the norm* (but for weapons and armors, which are already calculated in high level monsters' ACs, so even though they should cost a lot, make them very frequent loot, or easily upgradable - wait, runes already make them easily upgradable, don't they? I don't know).
And the other items? Well, the GM gives them out... according to the needs of the campaign and the social contract with the group.
Say you talk to the group and say, "Okay guys I was thinking very few magic items in this campaign" "AWWWW" "Okay, okay, let's say some magic items, not too many but a decent amount to keep you entertained, that about right?" "YAAAY!!!".
And the book gives you guidelines on how many magic items to give if you're going low-magic, average, high-magic, Eberron magitech, Golarion dungeonpunk and so on. And maybe the cost to craft and buy magic items changes based on these parameters.
I dunno guys, am I really naive or are things actually much simpler than what the devs team are making them? Feel free not to answer, let me enjoy my obliviousness ;)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not likely. We were digging them out and healing them as we found them. If we'd have stacked them up like cordwood until we got them all some would have died.
Depends on how large an area they were in. The area version doesn't hit everyone you can see, it hits everyone in an area. A couple or three charges could've very possibly saved everyone in an entire building in many cases.
LOL You have a lot more hope than I do. ;)
It's not uninformed hope. It's based on analysis of the items and features we've actually seen thus far.
Pretty sure, yeah. If I had to switch out an item that didn't exist, I'd likely pick one that DID with a similar function. Out of curiosity, where is the list of items that are nonexistent in PF2?
AoNA, Cloaks of Resistance, and Rings of Protection have no equivalents any more (well, Cloak of Resistance sorta does but it's been rolled into one item with magic armor). Magic shields and weapons take no Resonance to have or use. Stat-booster items no longer exist as less than a 14th level item.
That's armor alone left as a Resonance cost out of the 'big 6' in most cases. Other stuff may also well not have a Resonance cost, not everything does after all.
I enjoy having a lot of minor items, like those items that let you cast cantrips or things like that. With the staff requiring a RP to use the cantrip, I can't imagine items like that do not use an RP. Why should I lose out on items like that? I personally could care less about getting the new shiny highest level items I could possibly get for my level if I can't have my fun items.
There's no evidence that casting the cantrip has an RP cost beyond the 1 invested in the Staff. Indeed, based on what Mark Seifter said (ie: 'They're free') there is factually not such a cost per usage.
Now, it probably will cost 1 RP per item to have a bunch of cantrips-in-items, but cantrips have also gotten way more badass, so they probably should have some cost. And how many items like that did you even have? They aren't all that common.
Well I'm going to fight tooth and nail to get it as close to the old feel as possible. So far, I have serious doubts on the same characters OR the same results.
I'm pretty sure we'll get both.
If nothing else, the lack of archetypes that touch class abilities is a serious blow to that. [and I know they said it was possible, but I can only judge on what we're getting, not what we could get in some undefined future]
Uh...you didn't have any of those in the corebook in PF1. You also won't be able to make a Witch or an Oracle, but holding them to a standard of 'What we can do with 100s of books in PF1' is completely unreasonable for what we can do with the corebook.
As long as you can build anything you could with the PF1 corebook and maybe a few other particularly iconic options with the PF2 corebook, I think that's all that can reasonably be asked of them.
Like all things that folks have ideas about from fiction, fiction almost always provides examples of how it works the opposite way. While, for example, healing magic in Discworld would work it does take something out of the person being healed, magic being more like a shortcut in that world than merely doing something impossible. In a bunch of the fiction surround Old Mage the Ascension, potions may or not work based on the Tass, Quintessence, Primal Force, Credit Score, Faith, Will what have you of either the user and or imbiber. Even the classic example of LoTR has the use of the few magic items in existence being exhaustive.
They can also use Resonance as a way for groups to control how high or low magic they want their world to be. Want players to still be able to craft what they want (high magic availability) but still restrict use (low magic reliability) that is something you can do with Resonance as an extra knob to twist. I think the system as presented can get a little clunky with some specifics (although a lot of that was poor formatting and wording, Cloak of Elvenkind looking at you) but at its core it is really incredibly simple.
Think so? Should definitely re-read it, been a while now.
Yeah, Discworld has a lot of very quirky and peculiar laws of magic, I dearly love those books, but... I think that's... a possibility. Sure. Not my go-to way of doing things, but why the hell not.
Mage... Damn, I remember almost nothing about MtA... that one's very much tied to the setting though.
LotR, care to explain? I don't remember potions in LotR. I remember Aragorn using some flower/plant only his royal line was supposed to be able to use to heal some very sick people in Gondor, or something, but nothing relying on a resonance mechanic equivalent...
So what I'm saying, if PF's magic is broadly applicable it's a bit better than if it has to obey some weird stringent laws. I mean, if anyone and their mum and pet look over the magic items chapter and it's immediately intuitive because in most fiction it works that way, we gain converts, and we gain in simplicity and immediacy. If you need to invest 1 resonance in your staff but not in your sword and you spend 1 resonance everytime you activate your wand but not when you activate your cloak... can you dig? Exceptions are great, but too many, and without a fluffy explanation, and it's just arbitrary. And arbitrary things tend to not stick in people's minds.
Do you think I'm very off track? Please do tell me.
Agreed that resonance can totally be scaled up and down to simulate different availability and widespread use of magic items. Absolutely. I'd still use cold hard cash instead, and rarity of reagents, but, hey. I'm willing to compromise.
Yeah, I too think this system can be clunky. I don't really see the simplicity! I should re-read the blog posts about magic items and resonance to really be confident in my opinion. Right now it seems more clunky than simple, but I'll go check and get back at you in a bit.
There is a fair chance that with a Staff of Healing (or other method of casting Stabalize at will), and a 'minimal' investment in mundane Medicine; almost anybody can be an effective EMT now. That won't allow for full heals between encounters, but it will allow everyone to retreat under their own power. I feel good about the chances of there being a Healer archetype or some other way of effectively getting stabalize at-will (Hell, in PF1 it is a trait). It is unfortunate though that the minimum investment required to be an EMT is higher now than it was in PF1; where one trait covered the few who managed to avoid death by massive damage, and a level in any of a dozen classes (or a huge investment in UMD) granted the ability to use wands of either Infernal Healing or Cure Light Wounds without fail.
As an aside, it seems the playtest rules will currently allow an NPC village priest to provide meaningful aid during an emergancy using a Staff of Healing and a stockpile of lesser Healing Potions: Despite his personally pitiful Resonance pool, each of the commoners also has a pitiful resonance pool of their own that they've no reason to tap. So the priest goes about stabalizing nearby survivers with the staff, feeds them each a potion to get them ambulatory, and moves to the next area to repeat the process until his stockpile runs dry. Which is in keeping with the image I have of such a situation. Replace the priest with a PC adventurer and their staff might be even better (plus they can actually afford to use its charges), and that satchel might be a Bag of Holding (with hundreds of 'cheap' potions inside). However the RP costs will generally discourage PCs from using Activated items they have to pay RP for on NPCs (while encouraging us to try to tap NPCs like RP batteries).
So what I'm saying, if PF's magic is broadly applicable it's a bit better than if it has to obey some weird stringent laws. I mean, if anyone and their mum and pet look over the magic items chapter and it's immediately intuitive because in most fiction it works that way, we gain converts, and we gain in simplicity and immediacy. If you need to invest 1 resonance in your staff but not in your sword and you spend 1 resonance everytime you activate your wand but not when you activate your cloak... can you dig? Exceptions are great, but too many, and without a fluffy explanation, and it's just arbitrary. And arbitrary things tend to not stick in people's minds.
Do you think I'm very off track? Please do tell me.
I don't think players will have to learn all the exceptions.So long as the devs get the format right (and it will need to be changed on this front) they will have to learn 3 rules concerning Resonance expenditure.
If you item is Invested it takes 1 Resonance to do so, you then gain the effects under Invested.
If your item has Activated effects, it takes 1 Resonance to activate and gain the benefits under Activated.
If your item has charges under either of these columns, using it spends 1 Charge.
I don't see this as overly complex, especially as players who don't go deep on systems will need player aids to remember what their items do with or without Resonance and either they or the GM would have to create those aides (I fully intend to take the hassle out of this for anyone who cares by uploading card based player aides for all Magic items.)
Agreed that resonance can totally be scaled up and down to simulate different availability and widespread use of magic items. Absolutely. I'd still use cold hard cash instead, and rarity of reagents, but, hey. I'm willing to compromise.The benefit is you now have another variable to twist. You absolutely can limit cash or rarity and that will yeild a different feel.
I.E High Resonance, High cost/rarity = Magic items are rarer than standard but are innately more powerful/reliable.
Low Resonance, High Cost = Magic items are rare and must be used sparingly (classic low magic.)
Low Resonance, Low Cost = Magic items are easily available, perhaps because they aren't as useful as in other worlds.
High Resonance, Low Cost = Magic bonanza, get your high fantasy here!
You know, I think these forums could use an upgrade for their quotation functions ;P
But to the point: I went and re-read the resonance rules... and they don't actually seem all that complex anymore. I think I needed just a bit more exposure to them. Right now they're - no, not perfectly intuitive, but nothing terrible either. Definitely workable.
So, to reply: Yeah, the format seems to be a weak point here. I'm talking about traps/hazards, too. As long as there's additional text to explain some of that, or, of course, hard rules in the appropriate chapter of the book, it won't be a problem at all. The way we're seeing these stat blocks, we always need Stephen or Mark to specify quite a bit of stuff. I think in the end magic items could be fine as they are, more or less. I'd still prefer more accurate stat blocks for hazards but that's a wholly different thing we're not talking about right now. Anyways.
Yep, now I totally get how items work. It's just a matter of getting used to it, no big problem - you were right!
Oh, right, item cards - those will probably be a necessary step. In 1e and D&D 5e most items are so easy you can just tell the player what they do, bam, done. Here they're more complex. I don't like having to write down item cards, honestly... but it's okay. It's just a preference. As long as I can mostly do it during prep, perhaps write it down in a pdf and drive to the printer, no big deal. If it impacted the pace of the *actual game*, well, then I might have a few objections, but at the most somebody will want to go on a shopping spree and we'll write down an item card together, no skin off anyone's nose. It's cool!
Finally, resonance as another variable - yeah, I see what you're doing. Honestly? One dial too much for my needs - I usually run published settings, so I'm not so interested in fine-tuning items availability, BUT, yeah, it sure doesn't hurt! Can be useful for a lot of people who like to come up with their own worlds, or to tinker with published settings and adventures. Me, I'm more interested in customizing characters, both PCs and NPCs, all I ask is being able to fiddle with them to my heart's content.
Anyways yeah, I agree with you. It's a good mechanic, from what I can see. I'm down for it (Although! It uses level and Charisma: Cha as force of personality? Cha as... okay, how do you read that, fluff-wise?)
I hope the final playtest - and more importantly, the final 2e core books! - keep going this direction - streamlining and more customization. Then I'll be real happy! ;)
Replace the priest with a PC adventurer and their staff might be even better (plus they can actually afford to use its charges), and that satchel might be a Bag of Holding (with hundreds of 'cheap' potions inside).
I seriously hope HUNDREDS of potions will never happen to me! And my signature character is an Alchemist, so you can quote me on that! XD
But no, really, hundreds of potions seem excessive from how I'd like the world to work - a village priest could have 1-5 healing potions, an adventurer, maybe 10, 15 at most I would say. I hope the costs and distribution agree with me, and I *think* they will in the end... because going around with hundreds of potions? Really?... It's like they're colored water... so cheapens their magic.
I can see a snake's oil salesman putting up a booth with hundreds of "potions". Yeah, sure. Adventurers, even with bags of holding? God I hope not XD
You explain it the same way you explain hitpoints. Focus on what you want to tell the players, say that's the way it is, and quickly move on to the next topic.
You know what? Friggin' great suggestion. Thanks for unclogging my head from the usual "Whaz da offishul ezplanashun??!" garbage! ;)
You explain it the same way you explain hitpoints. Focus on what you want to tell the players, say that's the way it is, and quickly move on to the next topic.You know what? Friggin' great suggestion. Thanks for unclogging my head from the usual "Whaz da offishul ezplanashun??!" garbage! ;)In the history of D&D and PF, there have been dozens of things that don't make a lot of sense if you look at them too closely. And yet thousands of tables have still managed to play over the decades. How do they do that? The poor players must be so confused, it is a miracle that anything has ever been played.
We get it, you wear the sackclothiest sackcloth, have poured the most ashes over your head, and are the most offended by the edition change. You win the prize.
Wait, who you talking to? Me? B/c I just said I totes agree with you. I wasn't being ironic, I really agree.
Or if it was a rhetorical comment about nay-sayers who really loathe the idea of a 2nd edition... well, some are not just nay-sayers. I mean, I saw a guy today on the traps blog who just gave up and decided he still has too many APs to play with his group to change edition now. He might change his mind later on, but you can see where he's coming from in my opinion, can't you?
Then there are those who really won't give 2nd ed a chance... because because because. Because it's different. Heh. Not really paying attention to that ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You explain it the same way you explain hitpoints. Focus on what you want to tell the players, say that's the way it is, and quickly move on to the next topic.
The Core Rulebook explains hit points in two places.
Hit Points (hp): Hit points are an abstraction signifying how robust and healthy a creature is at the current moment. To determine a creature's hit points, roll the dice indicated by its Hit Dice. A creature gains maximum hit points if its first Hit Die roll is for a character class level. Creatures whose first Hit Die comes from an NPC class or from his race roll their first Hit Die normally. Wounds subtract hit points, while healing (both natural and magical) restores hit points. Some abilities and spells grant temporary hit points that disappear after a specific duration. When a creature's hit points drop below 0, it becomes unconscious. When a creature's hit points reach a negative total equal to its Constitution score, it dies.
Injury and Death
Your hit points measure how hard you are to kill. No matter how many hit points you lose, your character isn't hindered in any way until your hit points drop to 0 or lower.Loss of Hit Points
The most common way that your character gets hurt is to take lethal damage and lose hit points.What Hit Points Represent: Hit points mean two things in the game world: the ability to take physical punishment and keep going, and the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one.
Trying to write in that style, I present a 7th interpretation. I copied a lot of language from Logan Bonner's Paizo Blog: Treasures and Trinkets.
7) Resonance as an unflavored resource
Resonance is a resource all characters receive that enables them to use magic items. A character has an amount of resonance equal to his or her level plus Charisma modifier, minimum 1. Activating or investing an item costs 1 resonance.
Activating items follows a system of spending actions and 1 resonance to use the Command Activation, Focus Activation, or Operate Activation action. A potion requires its user to spend an Operate Activation action to drink it. Invested items are worn magic items that cost 1 resonance as the character dons them, after which they work continuously. Magic staves are hand-held invested items. Magic weapons do not require activation nor investment, they work without resonance. Some invested items and magic weapons have activated abilities whose activation costs 1 resonance.
Resonance is restored to its full amount the next day. Invested items must be re-invested.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Replace the priest with a PC adventurer and their staff might be even better (plus they can actually afford to use its charges), and that satchel might be a Bag of Holding (with hundreds of 'cheap' potions inside).I seriously hope HUNDREDS of potions will never happen to me! And my signature character is an Alchemist, so you can quote me on that! XD
...
I don't disagree, your expectation is pretty reasonable on all counts... but at 3 gp (or 30 sp) and L Bulk (or about 1 lb.)... unless there is an economic restriction on my ability to acquire them, there isn't much opportunity cost (or benefit admitedly) to carrying a hundred such potions for the 'save the village' scenario if I am already beyond the level where I still need them for myself.
That means a character with the staff invested in pf2 could stabilise all those wounded villagers, no problem.
Well if they had the staff... Not sure how that affects WAND use though.
As for items that don't exist, that we know of there is Cloak of Resistance, Amulet of natural Armour and Ring of Protection for certain (all replaced by Armour/Bracers).
Oh, THAT'S was what he meant? If so, I wasn't counting them. I'd REALLY go into the red with those added.
EDIT: I did add a cloak but it had abilities other than saves.
Depends on how large an area they were in. The area version doesn't hit everyone you can see, it hits everyone in an area. A couple or three charges could've very possibly saved everyone in an entire building in many cases.
We were digging people buried under rubble: the number of people you could see at a time was 1 ...
It's not uninformed hope.
I wouldn't call my lack of hope uninformed either. I've just drawn different conclusions at various points from the info we have.
There's no evidence that casting the cantrip has an RP cost beyond the 1 invested in the Staff.
I wasn't implying it did, just that an RP had to be used to get access to the cantrip. It's why I think that minor items that also give you access to cantrips will follow the same structure and cost an RP to use them for the day.
They aren't all that common.
You clearly don't love cantrip items like I do. There are quite a few if you did. In fact, there isn't a cantrip out there that you can't get in an item! ;)
I'm pretty sure we'll get both.
Oh, we'll get something that looks like those: I question is they will be fun/satisfying to me and how the nuts and bolts actually work. A fancy wrapping doesn't make coal for christmas any more enjoyable. For me, resonance on its face chips away at both IMO.
Uh...you didn't have any of those in the corebook in PF1.
TO be honest, by the time I seriously started playing pathfinder on a regular basis, they were a thing.
holding them to a standard of 'What we can do with 100s of books in PF1' is completely unreasonable for what we can do with the corebook
I don't think I am. THEY decided to add archetypes to the core book so I'm going to judge based on that. You can't say I shouldn't debate archetypes when they HAVE archetypes...
As long as you can build anything you could with the PF1 corebook
You and I are looking at this from different perspectives. From mine, they aren't going back to the starting point with the books: as such, why should my expectations be shackled by something they aren't doing?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't really see this as making things any easier. It seems needlessly complex and it is inflexible in some aspects. To be fair some parts are more flexible. Narrative wise I don't have much to say at this point I'm going to mostly stick to mechanics.
The good: If I'm not mistaken you can slot your items however you please. ie: You can wear 5 amulets.
The okay: Wands, rods and staves. While I didn't think the clw issue was a huge problem I know it was something I didn't like a whole lot. This is also kind of thematic.
The bad: So a DM has to now log the resonance of all NPC's? Did the dwarf that just fell over have enough resonance for a healing potion?
What about all the other slots? For PC's this might even be a problem.
Tracking all these points just seems not fun. I suppose with a well designed sheet that might be less of an issue.
I would propose a simpler idea; One shot consumables like potions no resonance. Make them cost ineffective. Weapons exempt. I don't want to have to attune myself to a sword I disarmed off the BBG before I use it to stab his face. It would slow down the game and if I couldn't do it cause I didn't have enough resonance then that would be disappointing.
Staves and wands...sure something close, no attunement just spend points when you use them. At wills no worries. :)
Armour and stuff you wear. Maybe you have so many "slots" based on your level or amount of resonance that dictates how many items you can equip?
So you have 5 "slots": 1 for a ring, 1 for an amulet, 1 for another amulet and 2 for your armour. So you can choose to have two or more amulets or a bunch of rings. Yes no multiple suits of armour. Note these are slots not resonance.
So this is more flexible and easier to implement as well as having less odd situations. Well in my opinion anyways. Maybe after I try the play test I might change my mind. Thoughts? :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't really see this as making things any easier. It seems needlessly complex and it is inflexible in some aspects. To be fair some parts are more flexible. Narrative wise I don't have much to say at this point I'm going to mostly stick to mechanics.
Are you, Lemartes, talking about resonance or about trying to interpret resonance?
Tracking all these points just seems not fun. I suppose with a well designed sheet that might be less of an issue.
I used to track the uses of X-times-per-day magic items in the margins of my character sheet. In the few cases where I used an electronic character sheet instead of a paper one, I had a separate pad of paper for tracking hit points and I wrote the uses on that. Tracking resonance does not seem different.
I would propose a simpler idea; ...
For the playtest, I am going to avoid houserules until my players rebel and present me with a consensus for a rule change. My scientific side wants to seriously playtest resonance as written to provide maximum information on which aspects work and which aspects need change. Given that one player is my wife and two others are my housemates, player rebellion would involve long talks the day after a game rather than disrupting a game session.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
Sorry I was a bit off topic. I was talking about resonance not interpreting it.
I modify sheets or add hand notes to them often. I think with a good sheet that issue might not be an issue...maybe.
Of course I will not do house rules in the playtest until after a few sessions so you get a comparison. I was proposing what I think before the playtest what would be better rules. That is why I said I might change my mind. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...Sorry I was a bit off topic. I was talking about resonance not interpreting it.
I modify sheets or add hand notes to them often. I think with a good sheet that issue might not be an issue...maybe.
Of course I will not do house rules in the playtest until after a few sessions so you get a comparison. I was proposing what I think before the playtest what would be better rules. That is why I said I might change my mind. :)
I hope the character sheets we'll get for the playtest will have room to track resonance, honestly! Least they could do!
Talking about sheets, you could start off using the resonance rules as is and writing down how they work on a small cheat sheet you'll either have on your cellphone, on your gm screen, or just within reach. I often write down cheat sheets. Doesn't help me much XD But sometimes they have their uses...
I also wanted to let you know weapons and armors have no resonance interaction, so you can totally disarm a guy, take the sword and impale him with it. What you *can't* do, by RAW, is disarming a wizard, take their *staff* and start bombarding them with fireballs, which is a pity imo ^_^
And one more thing - don't get into too much detail with npc's resonance. Who cares anyways? I mean, if they're one scene wonders just pop that potion and let them heal whatever it's worth. Of course if they're major npcs you might want to track resonance more accurately - use magic items cards for them as well in that case, that's my advice at least. Either that or you write down everything about their magic gear on their sheets.
Best of luck anyways, whatever path you choose!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Roswynn, I would like to think that the sheets will have a way to track resonance too. Granted I think I have a simple way to do that as far as attunement goes.
Thanks I wasn't sure about weapons and armour regarding resonance.
As for NPC'S I figured someone would say that and it's not a bad idea. However, most of the time I feel more fair as a DM accurately counting stuff like that. Best of luck to you too. :)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am quite certain I can consistently come up with explanations.
That would be easy.
But it is something the mechanics of the game are requiring me to do without offering any benefit, and certainly not remotely any improvement to the storytelling.
That is a huge strike against the idea.
And when there are really good games out there waiting to be played, a new system can't afford big stumbles like that.
I am quite certain I can consistently come up with explanations.
That would be easy.
But it is something the mechanics of the game are requiring me to do without offering any benefit, and certainly not remotely any improvement to the storytelling.That is a huge strike against the idea.
And when there are really good games out there waiting to be played, a new system can't afford big stumbles like that.
Huh, that piques my curiosity. Care to elaborate? Maybe I could give them a whirl with my guys.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Huh, that piques my curiosity. Care to elaborate? Maybe I could give them a whirl with my guys.
There are a really large number of excellent RPG systems out there for every genre and style of game imaginable. Far too many to list all of them.
What genre and style of game are you interested in? I can probably give a few recommendations.
Huh, that piques my curiosity. Care to elaborate? Maybe I could give them a whirl with my guys.There are a really large number of excellent RPG systems out there for every genre and style of game imaginable. Far too many to list all of them.
What genre and style of game are you interested in? I can probably give a few recommendations.
Nice! Okay! Pathfinder 2nd Edition! XD
No really, the 2nd of August can't be here soon enough.
Barring that... something d20. Something similar to 5e, but more crunchy.
Barring that, uuuh... well I love Eclipse Phase, but it's gonna be a bit before we play it. Only so many Fridays in a week.
I also have a soft spot for Exalted, but the rules are so terrible I gave up!
I spent most of today trying to create a coherent character for M&M and in the end I just finished her and put everything away. Even with an Excel sheet it's just a chore.
And I also love the Apocalypse World family of games, but also find the lack of premade settings a big turn off =/
I don't know, DMW. Surprise me!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oooh. Pathfinder stuff and Mutants and Masterminds aside, d20 is not my strength in terms of game knowledge/recommendations.
Going down from there, I can recommend a variety of FATE games if you're into that kind of thing. They're a lot more likely to have built-in or written up settings than PBTA games in my experience.
In terms of superhero games specifically (since you mentioned fiddling with M&M and giving up), Base Raiders and The Kerberos Club are both supers games using FATE, and both very interesting mechanically. They're a tad fiddly (they have a 'make your own skills' system whose costs involve a chart ala Charm Charts in Exalted...of course you can also just use normal skills, but that's mechanically suboptimal for various reasons), but not nearly as much as M&M.
Base Raiders is semi-post apocalyptic in a superhero world where all the heroes and villains died recently (semi because everyone else is mostly alive) and the PCs are expected to raid their bases for superpowers and other cool stuff and use those things to change the world. It's an interesting idea conceptually, sorta proactive superhero dungeon crawling (though you can ditch the dungeon crawls easily enough). I'm not the biggest fan of the art, and think the GM needs to set a power level cap in an obvious way the game neglects to (but is easy to figure out) but those are my only two real complaints.
Kerberos Club is more supernatural in some ways, or at least more strange and spooky. It's Victorian era and has a more detailed world and timeline. You're expected to work for the titular club solving weird problems, and while I remember it as good, I haven't read over it in a while so details are a tad murky. Still, Victorian superheroes with a fun system.
Both use more or less the same FATE variant. I could obviously recommend other stuff as well, but those are what leaped to mind.
Oooh. Pathfinder stuff and Mutants and Masterminds aside, d20 is not my strength in terms of game knowledge/recommendations.
Going down from there, I can recommend a variety of FATE games if you're into that kind of thing. They're a lot more likely to have built-in or written up settings than PBTA games in my experience.
In terms of superhero games specifically (since you mentioned fiddling with M&M and giving up), Base Raiders and The Kerberos Club are both supers games using FATE, and both very interesting mechanically. They're a tad fiddly (they have a 'make your own skills' system whose costs involve a chart ala Charm Charts in Exalted...of course you can also just use normal skills, but that's mechanically suboptimal for various reasons), but not nearly as much as M&M.
Base Raiders is semi-post apocalyptic in a superhero world where all the heroes and villains died recently (semi because everyone else is mostly alive) and the PCs are expected to raid their bases for superpowers and other cool stuff and use those things to change the world. It's an interesting idea conceptually, sorta proactive superhero dungeon crawling (though you can ditch the dungeon crawls easily enough). I'm not the biggest fan of the art, and think the GM needs to set a power level cap in an obvious way the game neglects to (but is easy to figure out) but those are my only two real complaints.
Kerberos Club is more supernatural in some ways, or at least more strange and spooky. It's Victorian era and has a more detailed world and timeline. You're expected to work for the titular club solving weird problems, and while I remember it as good, I haven't read over it in a while so details are a tad murky. Still, Victorian superheroes with a fun system.
Both use more or less the same FATE variant. I could obviously recommend other stuff as well, but those are what leaped to mind.
I'm sorry DMW, I talked about M&M but out of context: I love superheroes movies (the MCU mostly, and of course I'm a huge fan of Wonder Woman) - but I don't really like superhero *rpgs* - I was fiddling with M&M because I was trying to model an Exalted character with those rules, hoping they would've been a little less absurd than Ex3 (or 2 or 1 as for that). Didn't work of course - it's way too complex for me, too many moving parts. I think it's a great system for anyone a little smarter than me (no big feat) but I prefer slightly simpler games.
Still, Kerberos Club sounds pretty awesome. Victorian supers is something I could get behind. I'm gonna check it out.
Fate is another weird thing for me, though. In theory I love it, because it's simple and you can fit it to anything. It also has a variety of pretty cool settings. I really love Atomic Robo, it has excellent production values and it's a lot of fun to read.
At the same time the main mechanic is very anti-intuitive for me, mainly because I'm really used to checks that play like this:
Me: "Okay, roll Animal Handling guys!".
Morris: "Animal Handling... +3. Uh, 15?"
Auroch: "NATURAL 2O!!!"
All: "WHOA!!"
Me: "Well done, there!! Okay, Morris, your horse is really scared, the smell of the black, foul water must be very disquieting to her, but you do manage to keep her from bolting too much, even though she keeps neighing, like she's scared, and her pace is somewhat erratic. Meanwhile, Auroch, you were whispering to your horse and trying to calm him down, right?".
Auroch: "Yeah, I stroke his neck and tell him, really softly, 'It's alright, Thunder, just keep walking, focus buddy, focus...', and I keep trying to make him feel that I'm with him and he has nothing to be scared of".
Me: "Alright, very good. Something happens. You see, Thunder slightly turns his head towards you, and you catch his eye. He's making eye contact, and slowing down to a soft stop. He seems much calmer, and at the same time you can feel he's looking at you in a different way, perhaps like... a sort of bond was established. He breaks eye contact and starts off again, totally calm, trusting, silent and confident, and you pass by Morris and his horse, who are still having some difficulties, while any trace of fear has disappeared from Thunder, at least for the time being".
Morris, laughing: "The horse-whisperer!".
Auroch: "Cool!".
Me: "Morris, in the end you manage to reach Auroch and the end of the bridge too, but if there are indeed trolls around here, maybe Lightning's neighing could have alerted them... maybe. It's a thought".
Morris: "Hey Auroch, if they show up can you try to stroke their neck and tell them it's alright?".
(Morris and Auroch are my nicknames for my players).
Now, with Fate, this can totally work - you think of a possible "DC" for the overcome check and go from there, exactly the same. What bothers me about Fate though, it's that the overcome roll is 1 of 4 types of rolls you might need to make, and each roll has different rules, for instance if you wanna create and advantage you might end up making it and having a free invoke, or 2 on a "crit", or maybe giving a free invoke to the opposition on a botch, while an attack/defense roll has different results too. There's no unified check. That bothers me. I love aspects, and I think stunts are feasible, and quite flexible, and interesting, while skills are... often straightforward, but the idea that each skill can be used only for certain types of rolls and not for others... I mean, of course you won't attack with Drive, normally, right? But can't anyone try to ram another car?
It's like, they have this perfectly simple system, and they tried to attach all the possible complexities to it that make it so unelegant.
Other than that Fate is a great game, endlessly customizable, and I was thinking of trying to use that for Exalted (many people are doing precisely that, with mostly excellent results) - but I just can't get used to having to consult a damn table when somebody rolls. That's like, the opposite of what I want from a game.
My favorite mechanics are those that allow you to roll a d20, or 2d6, add your skill, and go from there. Similarly, in Eclipse Phase, you roll percentile dice under your skill, with a bonus or penalty sometimes. I can ask my players to tell me their roll and skill and from that you can have success, failure, exceptional success/failure, crit or botch. Done and done.
*sigh* Okay, this post has become really long and boring. I just felt like telling you one more thing - everytime I read your handle I think of this song from the musical Heathers, "Dead Girl Walking", when it was sung by Barrett Wilbert Weed, whom I absolutely love and worship, and that brings a smile to my face. I doubt many people here like musicals, but this is the song with lyrics (they deleted the live version from YT -_- ).
Okay, let's check out Kerberos Club now...
|
|
I'm sorry DMW, I talked about M&M but out of context: I love superheroes movies (the MCU mostly, and of course I'm a huge fan of Wonder Woman) - but I don't really like superhero *rpgs* - I was fiddling with M&M because I was trying to model an Exalted character with those rules, hoping they would've been a little less absurd than Ex3 (or 2 or 1 as for that). Didn't work of course - it's way too complex for me, too many moving parts. I think it's a great system for anyone a little smarter than me (no big feat) but I prefer slightly simpler games.
Fair enough. One of the great strength of superhero games is their ability to mimic other high-powered genres at need, since a proper superhero game has to be able to do, well, anything.
In fairness, this is also why they tend toward the complex.
Still, Kerberos Club sounds pretty awesome. Victorian supers is something I could get behind. I'm gonna check it out.
Well, I'm glad you find one of my recommendations interesting, at least. :)
You could probably do a solid job of mimicking large parts of Exalted with it (Perfect Defenses not so much, but most other stuff) just because the core mechanic for 'super powers' is to pick a skill and then make it transhumanly powerful (there are ways to get more off-the-wall effects, but that's the easiest).
Fate is another weird thing for me, though. In theory I love it, because it's simple and you can fit it to anything. It also has a variety of pretty cool settings. I really love Atomic Robo, it has excellent production values and it's a lot of fun to read.
At the same time the main mechanic is very anti-intuitive for me, mainly because I'm really used to checks that play like this:
.
.
.
Now, with Fate, this can totally work - you think of a possible "DC" for the overcome check and go from there, exactly the same. What bothers me about Fate though, it's that the overcome roll is 1 of 4 types of rolls you might need to make, and each roll has different rules, for instance if you wanna create and advantage you might end up making it and having a free invoke, or 2 on a "crit", or maybe giving a free invoke to the opposition on a botch, while an attack/defense roll has different results too. There's no unified check. That bothers me. I love aspects, and I think stunts are feasible, and quite flexible, and interesting, while skills are... often straightforward, but the idea that each skill can be used only for certain types of rolls and not for others... I mean, of course you won't attack with Drive, normally, right? But can't anyone try to ram another car?
I think that's treating FATE a bit too mechanistically. The listed things you can do with a skill are the only ones you can do routinely, but if you try and ram someone, rolling Drive for the attack seems totally kosher to me, and I've run a decent amount of FATE. Generally, the 'skill uses' are a good guideline to the kind of thing a skill is intended to do, but there can be corner cases and exceptions (especially, but not exclusively, if you invoke an Aspect for effect).
It's like, they have this perfectly simple system, and they tried to attach all the possible complexities to it that make it so unelegant.
Other than that Fate is a great game, endlessly customizable, and I was thinking of trying to use that for Exalted (many people are doing precisely that, with mostly excellent results) - but I just can't get used to having to consult a damn table when somebody rolls. That's like, the opposite of what I want from a game.
Fair enough. I feel like it's usually fairly intuitive most of the time (I don't think I've ever consulted a table like that more than once in a single session...and usually not even that), but Kerberos Club and Base Raiders, it's worth warning you, do lean a bit into the system you're talking about for skill creation.
My favorite mechanics are those that allow you to roll a d20, or 2d6, add your skill, and go from there. Similarly, in Eclipse Phase, you roll percentile dice under your skill, with a bonus or penalty sometimes. I can ask my players to tell me their roll and skill and from that you can have success, failure, exceptional success/failure, crit or botch. Done and done.
Fair enough. Those do tend to be the simplest mechanically, and the system getting out of the way of the story is almost always to the good. I'll try and think of something in this vein to recommend.
*sigh* Okay, this post has become really long and boring. I just felt like telling you one more thing - everytime I read your handle I think of this song from the musical Heathers, "Dead Girl Walking", when it was sung by Barrett Wilbert Weed, whom I absolutely love and worship, and that brings a smile to my face. I doubt many people here like musicals, but this is the song with lyrics (they deleted the live version from YT -_- ).
I personally love musicals, and that's hilarious. Not particularly representative of my life, but hilarious.
Okay, let's check out Kerberos Club now...
Good luck. :)
Hey DMW, am I the only one on these forums who really F#*~ING HATES THE QUOTATIONS CODE!!!? X(
... Okay, breathe... chill... it's alright. Om Mani Padme Hum...
Fair enough. One of the great strength of superhero games is their ability to mimic other high-powered genres at need, since a proper superhero game has to be able to do, well, anything.
In fairness, this is also why they tend toward the complex.
You're absolutely right. I do have a little experience with lighter systems that try to aim for something similar, and they regularly fall short (Tri-Stat is almost there, but still lacking - and they tell me not very balanced - while OVA, heh, you often need to invent whole new abilities from scratch - plus I don't like the core check mechanic).
At the same time, I think you could use Fate to make a superhero game and still have it be *much lighter* than that... for instance! Atomic Robo has megastunts allowing really outrageous, powerful characters. Or... lemme check... Wearing the Cape - I remember quite liking it when I read it... sure, I *particularly* liked the semirealistic take on supers, but, still, it didn't seem like a horrible mess of options.
Well, I'm glad you find one of my recommendations interesting, at least. :)
You could probably do a solid job of mimicking large parts of Exalted with it (Perfect Defenses not so much, but most other stuff) just because the core mechanic for 'super powers' is to pick a skill and then make it transhumanly powerful (there are ways to get more off-the-wall effects, but that's the easiest).
Oh, perfects are the least of my worries, really. I wanna capture the essence of certain charms, just that. Perfects could be really powerful defenses and I could leave it at that.
Also - interesting, transhuman levels of skills are exactly what Solars are all about.
I think that's treating FATE a bit too mechanistically. The listed things you can do with a skill are the only ones you can do routinely, but if you try and ram someone, rolling Drive for the attack seems totally kosher to me, and I've run a decent amount of FATE. Generally, the 'skill uses' are a good guideline to the kind of thing a skill is intended to do, but there can be corner cases and exceptions (especially, but not exclusively, if you invoke an Aspect for effect).
And yet you sometimes find a stunt expressedly thought up to *allow you to ram cars with Drive attacks* or similar stuff X( You see, I agree with you, I could definitely just take what I like about Fate and drop whatever I don't, and I'd be a much happier person as a result. But when a rulebook tells me how to do things... I try to do things that way. It's already hard sometimes memorizing the rules (depending on complexity), now I also have to decide which rules to use and which not to? They're not even signaled as optional (and even then, GURPS has *so f%$@ing many* optional rules it's a real mess to decide what you're gonna use and what not... there's really no way around it, it is *always* complex).
Fair enough. Those do tend to be the simplest mechanically, and the system getting out of the way of the story is almost always to the good. I'll try and think of something in this vein to recommend.
That would be awesomesauce. But, also, don't mind me too much. I've browsed dozens of games lately, looking for something to use with Exalted, and most of what I've seen, I haven't liked. I'm really a D&D fangirl! XD I'm just waiting for PF2, which I'm 99% sure I'll just love.
I personally love musicals, and that's hilarious. Not particularly representative of my life, but hilarious.
You love musicals!? Hah! That's not commonplace among male gamers, cheers buddy! And glad you liked! ^___^ It is both hilarious and *very sexy* live, that's why I wanted to find a clip of the recorded show, but, heh. And no, I didn't think you would've particularly related with the lyrics! XD But I love the storyline. And man, the reprise! I wish I could show you the whole show, it's so damn awesome. My favorite I think.
Anyways! XD Yeah, now that makes me think of bards, do you reckon they'll still be spontaneous charisma casters, or something's going on in that neck of the woods?
Roswynn, if you're more into a narrative style of play, and don't mind a lack of built-in flavour, I've been reading the Genesys rulebook for the past few days. It's tremendously easy to customize to any setting and includes some example settings and themes (including a superpower theme). I haven't played it yet, and the character options do feel a bit generic sometimes (due to it trying to design for everything between fantasy, steam-punk and sci-fi), but Fantasy Flights Star Wars RPG, which uses basically the same system, played really well with my group. Besides, there's rules to generate everything from custom items, to custom monsters, to custom talents, so in a way there's as much flavour there as you're willing to put in.
Huh... Genesys... I had a glance at it, but perhaps hurriedly came to the conclusion it wasn't for me. Built in flavor is not a problem at all, as you say there's as much flavor as you're willing to put in - and generic systems usually are very poor in flavor anyways.
I didn't know you could customize it so easily, and that you can create all that stuff!
Thank you, NimbleW - I'm gonna give it a good look this time. Tip of the hat.
Hey DMW, am I the only one on these forums who really F%%@ING HATES THE QUOTATIONS CODE!!!? X(
... Okay, breathe... chill... it's alright. Om Mani Padme Hum...
I have embraced the pain of markup languages. In 1989, as a graduate student in mathematics, I learned one of the first markup languages, TeX. The limited BBCode on these forums is child's play compared to TeX.
I have seen others' pain. In 2011 my technical director created a documentation template based on MediaWiki markup language. The template was not flexible, so I studied MediaWiki and added more markups to make my documents look good. My team leader tried to write documentation in the director's system and had the same distress as Roswynn. Thus, I became the official documentation writer for my team.
In 2013 I had the satisfaction of overseeing the end of the director's system as we exported all the documentation into a better-written document repository. That one used a TinyMCE pulldown menu for quotes and formatting. Or I could write HTML directly.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The thread Pregen previews over at ENWorld! announced the reveal of the pregen character sheet of Fumbus, Goblin Alchemist at ENWorld. This is an easy-learning character sheet, not a standard character sheet, so it spells out some class features as they would be written in the rulebook.
And Fumbus has some features related to resonance. His class features are advanced alchemy and studied resonance. The sheet does not describe studued resonance, but I presume it is the previewed alchemist ability that gives an Int bonus to resonance instead of a Cha bonus. Fumbus's Int 18 (goblins are smart!) would give him 5 resonance at 1st level. The sheet lacks an entry called resonance, so I cannot confirm this.
The sheet has a class feature block that says the following:
CLASS FEATURE
-----
You have the advanced alchemy class feature, which grants the following action. Though you have already spent most of your Resonance Points (RP) crafting alchemical items during your daily preperations, you still have 2 RP you can spend to make any of the alchemical items you know how to craft.[[A]] QUICK ALCHEMY
-----
Alchemical, Bomb, Consumable, Fire, Splash
Cost 1 Resonance Point
Requirements You must have alchemist's tools, the formula of the alchemical item you're creating, and a free hand.
-----
You create a single common alchemical item that is of your level or lower without having to spend the normal monetary cost in alchemical reagents or needing to attempt a Crafting check. This item has the infused trait, meaning you can Activate it without spending Resonance, but it remains potent only until the start of your next turn, at which point it becomes inert.
By the way, I hate the phrase "resonance point". The terms "hit point" and "spell point" are necessary since "hit" and "spell" mean something else in Pathfinder, but resonance just means resonance. I hate the abbreviation RP even more.
At first I worried that that "2 RP you can spend to make any of the alchemical items you know how to craft" meant that Fumbus had some kind of special resonance that could be spent only to make alchemical items. On further contemplation, I realized that it meant that Fumbus has spent most of his resonance already but he still had 2 left and the game expected him to spend those 2 on his Quick Alchemy ability rather than anything else.
Fumbus carries 8 alchemical items: 2 acid flasks, 4 alchemist's fires, and 2 minor elixirs of life--and no other magic items. The sheet give descriptions of 4 alchemical items: acid flask, alchemist's fire, cheetah's elixir, and minor elixir of life. None mention resonance, but the two elixirs have an activation line, "Activation [[A]] Operate Activation" and the flask and fire don't.
What does this mean for my interpretation of resonance?
It means that alchemists use up resonance to make alchemical items, both on the spot with Quick Alchemy and more slowly with regular alchemy. Quick Alchemy also says that that resonance can linger "infused" in the item for one turn. That easily fits (1) resonance as inner magical power, (5) resonance as liveliness, and (6) resonance as performance. I could shoehorn in (3) resonance as tolerance, arguing that mixing together alchemical reagents has a strain on the body, but the infused property does not fit. It does not fit (3) resonance as external magic power, since alchemical reagents are external magic power. It does not fit (4) resonance as attunement, since the alchemical items are not linked to anyone when they are created. Anything can fit (7) resonance as an unflavored resource, but I would need to add another line for another special case.
The thread Pregen previews over at ENWorld! announced the reveal of the pregen character sheet of Fumbus, Goblin Alchemist at ENWorld. This is an easy-learning character sheet, not a standard character sheet, so it spells out some class features as they would be written in the rulebook.
And Fumbus has some features related to resonance. His class features are advanced alchemy and studied resonance. The sheet does not describe studued resonance, but I presume it is the previewed alchemist ability that gives an Int bonus to resonance instead of a Cha bonus. Fumbus's Int 18 (goblins are smart!) would give him 5 resonance at 1st level. The sheet lacks an entry called resonance, so I cannot confirm this.
The sheet has a class feature block that says the following:
By the way, I hate the phrase "resonance point". The terms "hit point" and...CLASS FEATURE
-----
You have the advanced alchemy class feature, which grants the following action. Though you have already spent most of your Resonance Points (RP) crafting alchemical items during your daily preperations, you still have 2 RP you can spend to make any of the alchemical items you know how to craft.[[A]] QUICK ALCHEMY
-----
Alchemical, Bomb, Consumable, Fire, Splash
Cost 1 Resonance Point
Requirements You must have alchemist's tools, the formula of the alchemical item you're creating, and a free hand.
-----
You create a single common alchemical item that is of your level or lower without having to spend the normal monetary cost in alchemical reagents or needing to attempt a Crafting check. This item has the infused trait, meaning you can Activate it without spending Resonance, but it remains potent only until the start of your next turn, at which point it becomes inert.
Thank you for the warning, Mathmuse!
Btw, I'm quietly wondering how you craft a bomb with just 1 hand... anyone has any ideas?
As for resonance... definitely inner magical power, since it's usually based on Cha and that's the key stat for sorcerers, who are inner magical power personified. Of course Fumbus has learned to enhance it via his rather impressive intellect!
Thank you for the warning, Mathmuse!
I didn't see my information as a warning. But I do feel wary. Early in the PF2 previews, everything was hints of more to come. We readers were not given the whole picture, but we were comfortable speculating and waiting to learn more. Yet as I learned more about resonance, I have repeatedly changed my speculations. The concept kept changing directions. I eventually decided that resonance was half a dozen different ideas thrown together; hence, no single purpose of resonance could give a clear picture. I worried about explaining such a hodgepodge to my players, so I created this thread.
Btw, I'm quietly wondering how you craft a bomb with just 1 hand... anyone has any ideas?
Maybe it is like a glow stick. Two active ingredients just need to be mixed together, so break the partition, shake, and throw.
It was easier to envision when PF1 described the bomb-making process as "mixing various volatile chemicals and infusing them with their magical reserves." The ingredients would be safe until infused. As KingOfAnything said in comment #40, the PF1 alchemist infusing his aura into extracts and bombs appeared to be an inspiration for resonance. Yet if the PF2 alchemist does not use resonance for bombs, then half that inspiration is gone.
As for resonance... definitely inner magical power, since it's usually based on Cha and that's the key stat for sorcerers, who are inner magical power personified. Of course Fumbus has learned to enhance it via his rather impressive intellect!
Charisma is also the key stat for bards, who are performance personified, and for oracles, who are mystery personified. Charisma is also a primary stat for paladins, representing leadership, and for swashbucklers, representing panache.
Strength, dexterity, constitution, intelligence, and wisdom have a meaning independent of their classes. The only independent meaning for Charisma was a few Charisma-based social skills. Defining Chasima by its skills is like defining Strength by the Climb and Swim skills.
It is great that Paizo is giving Charisma a primary use independent of class features. It is disappointing that that use seems so annoying. Defining Charisma by a magic-item limit is like defining Strength by its carry-weight limit.
Hm, that is want we need, a way to add a Charisma bonus to the effects of magic items.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The way I see it:
Bombs are just alchemical items. Anyone can craft them, though they require expensive components and materials to stabilize and/or catalyze the reactive effects.
Alchemists are skilled at manipulating their aura to bend the chemical laws. In the morning, they have time to carefully craft bombs and elixirs, but use a little bit of magic from their aura to stabilize/catalyze the items instead of using expensive materials. This magic only lasts about a day, but by working carefully, they can create multiple items from a small amount of resonance.
With Quick Alchemy, the alchemist does not have time to carefully craft, and they perhaps are using the magic from their aura to substitute for more of the ingredients. One resonance is enough for just one item and such a bomb or elixir is more magic than chemistry, fading in a few seconds to become inert.
So you definitely still need Resonance to create a spontaneous bomb. Whether or not conventionally crafted bombs require Resonance when crafting is, as far as I know, still unknown.
Check out the Alchemist pregen. It specifically says that Fumbus has spent some of his resonance crafting items in the morning.
Maybe it is like a glow stick. Two active ingredients just need to be mixed together, so break the partition, shake, and throw.
That's a possibility. Either that or, even with one hand busy, you can spare a few fingers to mix a powder or uncork a vial...
As for resonance... definitely inner magical power, since it's usually based on Cha and that's the key stat for sorcerers, who are inner magical power personified. Of course Fumbus has learned to enhance it via his rather impressive intellect!
Charisma is also the key stat for bards, who are performance personified, and for oracles, who are mystery personified. Charisma is also a primary stat for paladins, representing leadership, and for swashbucklers, representing panache.
Well, I'm well aware tha cha is mainly social interactions, but usually in PF and D&D it's been used as the key stat to cast spontaneous, non-studied spells. Personal magic power, not derived from external sources. I think it's only reasonable the same concept of personal magic power applies to Resonance. That said, I certainly don't want to enter a pissing contest about what a stat should represent, how it does so, whether it should represent more, less, or something else - I'm fine with what we have.