Pregen previews over at ENWorld!


Prerelease Discussion

351 to 400 of 799 << first < prev | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

2 class feats and natural ambition again. I suppose it might do that?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Elleth wrote:
2 class feats and natural ambition again. I suppose it might do that?

Seems pretty likely. Interesting that for the three humans we saw, the Human Ancestry feats gave either Class feats (for Valeros and Seelah) or a General feat (Toughness for Kyra). I suppose the ancestry identity for humans in 3.x was a bonus feat and bonus skill ranks; so getting an extra feat of some type is on brand. In general, the humans seemed to have a number of trained skills, so perhaps that advantage is still present, as well.

It's interesting that both of Seelah's class feats go into boosting Lay on Hands. Training in Medicine and turning the D4s into D6s seems pretty good. Making LoH not provoke also seems good if eg you plan to use it on yourself when in a particularly nasty fight in lieu of taking that 3rd attack that's unlikely to hit (though as Seelah I'd want to raise my shield most turns I bet, so the tradeoff would be against my 2nd attack, but i digress). That said, the implementation seems a little clunky: remove the Manipulate tag from the Somatic action? So *most* somatic actions provoke, but this one doesn't anymore? I guess we'll have to wait until we get the rules to see how clear it is.


I hoped to see a different armor, but mail it is again. I hope there's more variety in the playtest.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Roswynn wrote:
I hoped to see a different armor, but mail it is again. I hope there's more variety in the playtest.

These are first level pregens; I'd imagine better heavy armor is not within a new PC's budget. In 4E a Paladin could start with Plate, but plenty of people didn't like that the suit of plate mail was only ~10 gp more than Scale, or that Fighters needed to a feat to gain proficiency with Plate. (The latter concern was addressed in Essentials with the Knight build Fighter)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I feel a bit confused as how that d20 icon next to the skills, saves, etc. works. It seems to indicate proficiency but it feels a bit weird, sometimes it's just the top dot, sometimes just the bottom one, and sometimes multiples. I wonder how that is supposed to be read.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Zaister wrote:
I feel a bit confused as how that d20 icon next to the skills, saves, etc. works. It seems to indicate proficiency but it feels a bit weird, sometimes it's just the top dot, sometimes just the bottom one, and sometimes multiples. I wonder how that is supposed to be read.

I'm pretty sure it's just a filler symbol, representing "This is your bonus to d20 rolls using this Skill/Save/Whatever." The "dots" aren't actually dots, just artifacts from the low quality of the image.


First World Bard wrote:

That said, the implementation seems a little clunky: remove the Manipulate tag from the Somatic action? So *most* somatic actions provoke, but this one doesn't anymore? I guess we'll have to wait until we get the rules to see how clear it is.

They could have the feat convert the somatic action to a verbal casing action. That would be elegant, but kind of go against the flavor.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Knight Magenta wrote:
They could have the feat convert the somatic action to a verbal casing action. That would be elegant, but kind of go against the flavor.

Yeah, having the Paladin instead of healing you with a gentle touch doing so by shouting "Stop whining! Stand up and fight!" gives off a different vibe. :)


First World Bard wrote:
Elleth wrote:
2 class feats and natural ambition again. I suppose it might do that?

Seems pretty likely. Interesting that for the three humans we saw, the Human Ancestry feats gave either Class feats (for Valeros and Seelah) or a General feat (Toughness for Kyra). I suppose the ancestry identity for humans in 3.x was a bonus feat and bonus skill ranks; so getting an extra feat of some type is on brand. In general, the humans seemed to have a number of trained skills, so perhaps that advantage is still present, as well.

It's interesting that both of Seelah's class feats go into boosting Lay on Hands. Training in Medicine and turning the D4s into D6s seems pretty good. Making LoH not provoke also seems good if eg you plan to use it on yourself when in a particularly nasty fight in lieu of taking that 3rd attack that's unlikely to hit (though as Seelah I'd want to raise my shield most turns I bet, so the tradeoff would be against my 2nd attack, but i digress). That said, the implementation seems a little clunky: remove the Manipulate tag from the Somatic action? So *most* somatic actions provoke, but this one doesn't anymore? I guess we'll have to wait until we get the rules to see how clear it is.

The implementation has a reason for working how it does, I imagine. Fighters (and martial classes who take the appropriate class feat) get an AoO on actions with the manipulate trait. There might be AoO features that trigger on any casting.

Most movement provokes a Fighter, but the Shift action doesn’t.

That said, Warded Touch seems like a very boring feat.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Elleth wrote:
2 class feats and natural ambition again. I suppose it might do that?

It seems that way, and I'm a little disappointed about it. I mean in PF1 humans were more prevalent than any other race because their build would come online earlier and it seems that thos will be the case again.

I was excited about General Training because it was a good way to keep humans on brand without having the same problem we had in PF1 but with the inclusion of Natural Ambition humans are an even better option since they can pick either feat depending on their needs.


First World Bard wrote:
Roswynn wrote:
I hoped to see a different armor, but mail it is again. I hope there's more variety in the playtest.
These are first level pregens; I'd imagine better heavy armor is not within a new PC's budget. In 4E a Paladin could start with Plate, but plenty of people didn't like that the suit of plate mail was only ~10 gp more than Scale, or that Fighters needed to a feat to gain proficiency with Plate. (The latter concern was addressed in Essentials with the Knight build Fighter)

I know, I know, I was hoping a half-plate? But that's too costly already, I'm pretty sure. Although I don't understand why they gave Valeros a breastplate and Seelah a mail, their equipment seems otherwise very similar...

Yeah, I didn't like 4e's affordable plate either, but in 4e there was a bunch of stuff I didn't like.

Wait a second, regarding fighters and plate, I was under the impression fighters still weren't trained with plate in PF2... misremembering?


masda_gib wrote:
Knight Magenta wrote:
They could have the feat convert the somatic action to a verbal casing action. That would be elegant, but kind of go against the flavor.
Yeah, having the Paladin instead of healing you with a gentle touch doing so by shouting "Stop whining! Stand up and fight!" gives off a different vibe. :)

XD Reminds me of 4e's warlord. I've never been too keen on non-magical healing.


For Retributive Strike I wonder if you are still your own ally.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Biztak wrote:

I mean in PF1 humans were more prevalent than any other race because their build would come online earlier and it seems that thos will be the case again.

I was excited about General Training because it was a good way to keep humans on brand without having the same problem we had in PF1 but with the inclusion of Natural Ambition humans are an even better option since they can pick either feat depending on their needs.

The devs have said that feat chains no longer have thematically inappropriate entries, so hopefully this less of an issue. For instance, I would be surprised if e.g. there was a feat chain like Point-Blank Shot / Precise Shot that all archers wanted and Humans could get quicker.

On the Natural Ambition front, it seems like that extra feat is granting something neat but not mind-blowingly good: I could probably do without Warded Touch or Reactive Shield if I got a neat Ancestry feat instead.
Finally, I think this will make taking Archetypes (and VMC, if that's the system we get) easier for Humans, since the opportunity cost of those options are the Class feats you aren't taking, making the Class Feats you do get more valuable. Once again, seems on-brand for Humans.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

That pickpokcket feat - I have the worst flashbacks of feats that allow you to do things anybody should be able to do. So trained thievery does not allow you to actually pick a pocket? I need a feat for that?
And I cannot wait for the discussion of what is closely guarded and what isn't, based on those examples.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Biztak wrote:
Elleth wrote:
2 class feats and natural ambition again. I suppose it might do that?

It seems that way, and I'm a little disappointed about it. I mean in PF1 humans were more prevalent than any other race because their build would come online earlier and it seems that thos will be the case again.

I was excited about General Training because it was a good way to keep humans on brand without having the same problem we had in PF1 but with the inclusion of Natural Ambition humans are an even better option since they can pick either feat depending on their needs.

Eh. It seems like 'Feat Trees' to 'get online' are mostly gone, making this more a bonus to breadth than depth. Which is pretty workable.

Roswynn wrote:
Wait a second, regarding fighters and plate, I was under the impression fighters still weren't trained with plate in PF2... misremembering?

Fighters are trained in all armor in both PF1 and, as far as we know, PF2. In PF1 they lacked Tower Shields (while Paladins had them), but we don't even know if those are a thing in PF2.

Xenocrat wrote:
For Retributive Strike I wonder if you are still your own ally.

Evidence suggests no.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Wow, lay on hands is terrible. D6+2 is an *upgraded* version? And she had to blow a second feat to make it not provoke AoOs?

Just...no. You'll be lucky to heal another character to half HP by blowing both uses of the ability.

Seelah is Valeros the lesser. I thought Kyra was pretty bland and uninteresting, but she at least had the hope of more interesting spells.

@DerNils- looks like. Plus she'll likely fail at it anyway, just to rub salt in the sound. I wonder if picking locks and disarming traps also require feats?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
DerNils wrote:

That pickpokcket feat - I have the worst flashbacks of feats that allow you to do things anybody should be able to do. So trained thievery does not allow you to actually pick a pocket? I need a feat for that?

And I cannot wait for the discussion of what is closely guarded and what isn't, based on those examples.

Thievery appears to cover lock picking and trap disarming. Part of the skill revamp is consolidating skills, putting some fringe/specialized skill uses behind skill feats, and giving you lots of skill feats.

Training in overcoming mechanical devices with tools does not obviously carry over to sleight of hand/distraction techniques used on a live person. This seems entirely reasonable as a skill feat, rogues with skill feats at every level won't notice, and others will appreciate rogues more.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Roswynn wrote:
Wait a second, regarding fighters and plate, I was under the impression fighters still weren't trained with plate in PF2... misremembering?
Fighters are trained in all armor in both PF1 and, as far as we know, PF2. In PF1 they lacked Tower Shields (while Paladins had them), but we don't even know if those are a thing in PF2.

Okay, thank you, I was confusing editions and also thinking of shields, I think.

Grand Lodge

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Fighters are trained in all armor in both PF1 and, as far as we know, PF2.

In PF1 they lacked Tower Shields (while Paladins had them), but we don't even know if those are a thing in PF2.

In PF1 Fighters were the only ones with Tower Shield prof.

I think it was touted as a specialized shield for the battlefield.


@xenocrat - I don't think so. It is very obvious from the description that "easy" pickpocketing is part of the main skill, while stealing "closely guarded" things isn't. This sounds like an extremely strange limitation to me, something I could have understood as part of skill mastery (trained - easy stuff, expert - dificult stuff, etc)
Now you will have people that are legendary in thievery but are unable to steal a wallet out of your pocket. That does not spell diversification to me, rather it sounds like a step back into the direction of "only rogues ever ...", because who else has a skill feat left over for that stuff?


QuidEst wrote:
That said, Warded Touch seems like a very boring feat.

In a feat chain you won't always get cool exciting feats, but most will be useful.

I'm not sure I'd be jumping up and down for assurance, but it's handy in some situations (enfeebled, sick and frightened but I need to climb that knotted rope to safety).

Also, 1st level, guys. Not exactly the realm of awesome blow and whirlwind attack.

Liberty's Edge

Gorignak227 wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:

Fighters are trained in all armor in both PF1 and, as far as we know, PF2.

In PF1 they lacked Tower Shields (while Paladins had them), but we don't even know if those are a thing in PF2.

In PF1 Fighters were the only ones with Tower Shield prof.

I think it was touted as a specialized shield for the battlefield.

You're right. Huh. Dunno why I misremembered that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
DerNils wrote:
Now you will have people that are legendary in thievery but are unable to steal a wallet out of your pocket. That does not spell diversification to me, rather it sounds like a step back into the direction of "only rogues ever ...", because who else has a skill feat left over for that stuff?

I hope that's not the case, and that Expert level thievery lets you do this. In this case, the pickpocket feat is for street urchins and the like that won't ever get to Expert level thievery but still need to steal a living.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DerNils wrote:

@xenocrat - I don't think so. It is very obvious from the description that "easy" pickpocketing is part of the main skill, while stealing "closely guarded" things isn't. This sounds like an extremely strange limitation to me, something I could have understood as part of skill mastery (trained - easy stuff, expert - dificult stuff, etc)

Now you will have people that are legendary in thievery but are unable to steal a wallet out of your pocket. That does not spell diversification to me, rather it sounds like a step back into the direction of "only rogues ever ...", because who else has a skill feat left over for that stuff?

You're right, I misread it. It sounds like you can cut a purse or take off a hat with Thievery, but for more closely attached stuff Pickpocket comes into play.

I think the assumption with Master/Legendary skills is that one of their key benefits is unlocking access to specialized skill feats. But we have to see exactly what is gated off by proficiency level vs. proficiency gated skill feats.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Gorignak227 wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:

Fighters are trained in all armor in both PF1 and, as far as we know, PF2.

In PF1 they lacked Tower Shields (while Paladins had them), but we don't even know if those are a thing in PF2.

In PF1 Fighters were the only ones with Tower Shield prof.

I think it was touted as a specialized shield for the battlefield.
You're right. Huh. Dunno why I misremembered that.

I hope the devs got rid of them. They were probably inspired by the pavise, but that's no shield, it's a piece of portable cover you stick in the ground in front of you (or better yet have your henchmen stick in there) to hide behind while you reload your x-bow.

Most plausible shields should just go from light wooden to heavy steel (-covered, is the assumption, or good luck wielding that thing in battle).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

While I like Seelah less than Fumbus, I think I can actually see myself playing a pally for once.
Which is nice, as I love their theme, but I hated their design in 5e for some reason I can't place and wouldn't have been likely to choose one in PF1.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Man, poor Seelah. Has to blow a Feat to get her Lay on Hands from d4 to d6, has to blow a Feat to make it so it doesn't always provoke, now it costs an Action, she can only use it twice per day, and the ammount healed is absolutely puny (especially when you consider how much more bloated PF2 HP is). Talk about a slam with the nerf bat, right to the face.

Oh and she gets no Smite Evil. You know, the Iconic Paladin ability.

The other previews were mostly mediocre, Seelah's the only one that's made me go "Wow, this sucks."


Xenocrat wrote:
DerNils wrote:

@xenocrat - I don't think so. It is very obvious from the description that "easy" pickpocketing is part of the main skill, while stealing "closely guarded" things isn't. This sounds like an extremely strange limitation to me, something I could have understood as part of skill mastery (trained - easy stuff, expert - dificult stuff, etc)

Now you will have people that are legendary in thievery but are unable to steal a wallet out of your pocket. That does not spell diversification to me, rather it sounds like a step back into the direction of "only rogues ever ...", because who else has a skill feat left over for that stuff?

You're right, I misread it. It sounds like you can cut a purse or take off a hat with Thievery, but for more closely attached stuff Pickpocket comes into play.

I think the assumption with Master/Legendary skills is that one of their key benefits is unlocking access to specialized skill feats. But we have to see exactly what is gated off by proficiency level vs. proficiency gated skill feats.

... I could see that. Not enthusiastic about it (I have trained thievery and yet can't pick a pocket) but palming a ring from someone's finger... eh, not too shabby. Might work.


First World Bard wrote:
DerNils wrote:
Now you will have people that are legendary in thievery but are unable to steal a wallet out of your pocket. That does not spell diversification to me, rather it sounds like a step back into the direction of "only rogues ever ...", because who else has a skill feat left over for that stuff?
I hope that's not the case, and that Expert level thievery lets you do this. In this case, the pickpocket feat is for street urchins and the like that won't ever get to Expert level thievery but still need to steal a living.

Wait though, why wouldn't a street urchin be able to get to expert thievery? What's stopping them? It's not legendary, it's just expert!

Maybe if you are "only" trained in thievery you really can use it only for the most basic tasks. And if you're a master but without the right feat you still can't pick pockets and palm worn rings.

That would certainly be something on which to give some sweet, sweet feedback.

Grand Lodge

TheFinish wrote:
Oh and she gets no Smite Evil. You know, the Iconic Paladin ability.

Wow, didn't notice that at first. Not getting smite is a pretty big deal.

I wonder if its an option you can take at level 1 or if its gated at a higher level now.
What is deific weapon? Is that the beginnings of smite evil?

Edit: re: deific weapon
I think that is the new deity's favored weapon.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorignak227 wrote:
TheFinish wrote:
Oh and she gets no Smite Evil. You know, the Iconic Paladin ability.

Wow, didn't notice that at first. Not getting smite is a pretty big deal.

I wonder if its an option you can take at level 1 or if its gated at a higher level now.
What is deific weapon? Is that the beginnings of smite evil?

Smite evil was sorta addressed in the pally blog I believe. IIRC its equivalent is a subset of the ability that lets you stick a holy ghost buddy spirit inside a weapon, shield, or steed. I think you get said ability at level 3 and it's one of the two things you loose if you Fall. I believe the other is spell points.

I think deific weapon is the ability that scales up Simple favoured weapons of gods to Martial status. So pally of a farming god can be awesome with a sickle.

Edit: got edit ninja'd


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Gorignak227 wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:

Fighters are trained in all armor in both PF1 and, as far as we know, PF2.

In PF1 they lacked Tower Shields (while Paladins had them), but we don't even know if those are a thing in PF2.

In PF1 Fighters were the only ones with Tower Shield prof.

I think it was touted as a specialized shield for the battlefield.
You're right. Huh. Dunno why I misremembered that.

Not the only ones: Fighters, Warriors, Arcane Archers (why!), and Stalwart Defenders are all proficient with the Pavise (aka Tower Shield).

I had forgotten that name for them until I read it above, so thanks Roswynn!


4 people marked this as a favorite.

My main Problem with skill feats like this is the same as with feats from the older Editions - not that it allows some People to do cool stuff, but that it disallows everybody else from even trying.

Imagine there is that sweet magic ring you need from the big bad, and you manage to sneak into his room and - sorry, can't even try to steal it. You took "improved disarm traps" because traps are everywhere, instead of pickpocket, sorry about that...

Grand Lodge

Elleth wrote:

I think deific weapon is the ability that scales up Simple favoured weapons of gods to Martial status. So pally of a farming god can be awesome with a sickle.

Edit: got edit ninja'd

I was just guessing about favored weapon and its good to hear the actual details, thx :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Roswynn wrote:

Wait though, why wouldn't a street urchin be able to get to expert thievery? What's stopping them? It's not legendary, it's just expert!

Maybe if you are "only" trained in thievery you really can use it only for the most basic tasks. And if you're a master but without the right feat you still can't pick pockets and palm worn rings.

That would certainly be something on which to give some sweet, sweet feedback.

Their level. I forget what level you can start to get Expert in skills, but your run of the mill street urchins are probably the equivalent of level 1 NPCs, who should be at best trained. Now that special street urchin with a lot of hustle that makes it to expert? That one probably has PC glow. :)

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
TheFinish wrote:
Man, poor Seelah. Has to blow a Feat to get her Lay on Hands from d4 to d6, has to blow a Feat to make it so it doesn't always provoke, now it costs an Action, she can only use it twice per day, and the ammount healed is absolutely puny (especially when you consider how much more bloated PF2 HP is). Talk about a slam with the nerf bat, right to the face.

Uh...at 1st level in PF1, she wouldn't have had Lay On Hands at all. And at 2nd level it would've been only 1d6 (less than the 1d4+2 of PF2 ignoring Feats), and only 3 times a day (making it do less healing in total than Seelah's two uses).

Comparing the 1st level version in PF2 to a higher than 2nd level one in PF1 seems inappropriate.

I bet by 5th, if it follows the Heal progression in dice, we're talking 5d6+3 (5d4+3 sans Feat) healing three times a day (more if you invest in other Spell Point stuff). Which compares very favorably with the 2d6 healing four times a day a PF1 Paladin has at that level. Upping it to 3d6 five times per day at level 6 makes the PF1 Paladin look slightly better, but the PF2 one still has a pretty serious edge if they've got d6s. PF2's AC buff from Lay on Hands is also a pretty shiny advantage.

As for the 'not provoking' Feat, it also apparently (based on comments from people who played in the demo games) lets you perform Lay On Hands while using a Heavy Shield, which was always an issue in PF1. Provoking in the first place is a legitimate downside, but healing others is now only one action rather than your Standard Action, so there's some trade offs there.

TheFinish wrote:
Oh and she gets no Smite Evil. You know, the Iconic Paladin ability.

As others note, they've clarified that Smite will be rolled in with Righteous Ally (ie: Divine Bond) and kick in at 3rd level. It will also be on all the time (though less numerically impressive than the PF1 version).

TheFinish wrote:
The other previews were mostly mediocre, Seelah's the only one that's made me go "Wow, this sucks."

I think you're looking at it in a very weird way.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Voss wrote:

Wow, lay on hands is terrible. D6+2 is an *upgraded* version? And she had to blow a second feat to make it not provoke AoOs?

1d4+2 is more than she did by default in PF1 (1d6.) Especially for it's minimum damage. 1d6+2 is just straight better, and that is on top of Hospice Knight granting a signature skill + trained proficiency.

Also, unlike the PF1 version, she can heal allies and still attack in the same round. (Before it was only a swift on herself.) The only disadvantage compared to PF1 is that it provokes, which Warded Touch removes. We are also talking about a human with only 14 CHA. A halfling or gnome could quite easily be higher.

Quote:
Just...no. You'll be lucky to heal another character to half HP by blowing both uses of the ability.

Amount Healed vs Total HP is way less relevant than Amounted Healed vs Enemy damage. The thing you really care about as a combat healer is keeping your allies from hitting 0. We know this is meant to be combat healing because it also provides an AC boost. We know from the various playtest demos that this healing amount is competitive (and in some cases can outpace) 1st level enemy damage.

Quote:
Seelah is Valeros the lesser. I thought Kyra was pretty bland and uninteresting, but she at least had the hope of more interesting spells.

Haha no. Retributive Strike is flat-out the best reaction I've seen, at least on a 1st level PC. It is significantly harder to avoid than an AoO. Sleeah is a far better tank than Valeros despite having lower AC because she can not only protect herself but bolster her ally's AC and punish enemy With Retributive Strike, either killing them outright and negating the attack or Enfeebling the enemy to reduce the damage and lower the odds of subsequent attacks. (And of course, has some light healing in case they do get hurt. Not as good as Kyra, but you don't need to be as good as a cleric for healing to be appreciated.)

Even as a level 1 character, Seelah has better tanking mechanics out the box than most PF1 characters ever had.

I will note that their respective reactions makes Sudden Charge a far better feat for Valeros than Seelah. Where Seelah wants to stick close to her allies, Valeros wants to get out ahead of them and try to intercept enemies.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Captain Morgan wrote:

A halfling or gnome could quite easily be higher.

A little birdie told me that Halflings will end up with an ancestry advantage to Wisdom instead of Charisma in the finalized playtest.

That said... now I have an image of a Goblin Paladin of Shelyn rattling around in my head.


First World Bard wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

A halfling or gnome could quite easily be higher.

A little birdie told me that Halflings will end up with an ancestry advantage to Wisdom instead of Charisma in the finalized playtest...

Oh really? Because I've been a (passionate) proponent of this very thing, but I've not seen it indicated by any official source (developer). I want you to be right. But why do you think it?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mbertorch wrote:
First World Bard wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

A halfling or gnome could quite easily be higher.

A little birdie told me that Halflings will end up with an ancestry advantage to Wisdom instead of Charisma in the finalized playtest...
Oh really? Because I've been a (passionate) proponent of this very thing, but I've not seen it indicated by any official source (developer). I want you to be right. But why do you think it?

There a comment from Mark about changes to the halfling since the preview for them. He said we'd be "wise" to keep our eyes peeled.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Mbertorch wrote:
First World Bard wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

A halfling or gnome could quite easily be higher.

A little birdie told me that Halflings will end up with an ancestry advantage to Wisdom instead of Charisma in the finalized playtest...
Oh really? Because I've been a (passionate) proponent of this very thing, but I've not seen it indicated by any official source (developer). I want you to be right. But why do you think it?

Herein lies the Wisdom that you seek.


Mbertorch wrote:
First World Bard wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

A halfling or gnome could quite easily be higher.

A little birdie told me that Halflings will end up with an ancestry advantage to Wisdom instead of Charisma in the finalized playtest...
Oh really? Because I've been a (passionate) proponent of this very thing, but I've not seen it indicated by any official source (developer). I want you to be right. But why do you think it?

Mark Seifter hinted at it in a thread, then confirmed when people noticed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

:')

Tears of joy, my friends. Tears. Of. Joy!

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to figure out how to break space-time so August 2nd will be here in the next 4 minutes...

BECAUSE I CAN'T WAIT!!!


One thing that struck me is that the description for Assurance (on Kyra's and Valeros's sheets) says "do not apply any of your bonuses, penalties or modifiers". That seems a bit weird, though maybe it works better that way because of stuff we don't know yet.


Cantriped wrote:

Not the only ones: Fighters, Warriors, Arcane Archers (why!), and Stalwart Defenders are all proficient with the Pavise (aka Tower Shield).

I had forgotten that name for them until I read it above, so thanks Roswynn!

No probs, the rules have always called it a tower shield though. Also, now that I remember, there actually were extremely long and rather wide shields used in duels, and those were not pavises at all... they had spikes at the top and bottom and were often, but not always, used 2-handed... thus a so-called tower shield might try to simulate that type too. I would never carry one around outside of dueling, but with the right bulk and penalties I could see them being part of the gear section, perhaps.

Really depends.

First World Bard wrote:
Their level. I forget what level you can start to get Expert in skills, but your run of the mill street urchins are probably the equivalent of level 1 NPCs, who should be at best trained. Now that special street urchin with a lot of hustle that makes it to expert? That one probably has PC glow. :)

Very reasonable. Agreed.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Khudzlin wrote:
One thing that struck me is that the description for Assurance (on Kyra's and Valeros's sheets) says "do not apply any of your bonuses, penalties or modifiers". That seems a bit weird, though maybe it works better that way because of stuff we don't know yet.

That's the whole point of assurance. You just get a basic DC result, not rolling or modifiers involved. It's for mediocre to poor skill bonus people who want to do basic stuff without worrying, even under terrible conditions or big penalties.

Assurance makes you into one of those professional athletes on a team sport who is low-key famous for not necessarily having much talent compared to the stars but managing to never hugely screw up and consistently making the basic plays.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Assurance means never Critically Failing while cooking breakfast and poisoning the entire party (my last GM was evil).


Cantriped wrote:
Assurance means never Critically Failing while cooking breakfast and poisoning the entire party (my last GM was evil).

"I have assurance, so I can just succeed at anything DC 10 and lower."

"Ooooh, I'm so sorry. It's a DC 11 today. Um... the fire is a little too hot... and... the bacon has started to go a bit off."


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I really like what they have done with the paladin mechanically, but I have some questions:

The wording in Warded touch is good. It explains very clearly what it does in making Lay on hands a somatic casting action instead of (presumably) a somatic manipulation action. I am still on the fenece about having action-types require so much wordiness to distinguish between these two types of actions, but it is looking like it is going to make a whole lot more sense when we see the play-test and if it still feels too wordy, maybe there are ways to revise it down further that wont be too disruptive.

But...(and the questions) what is up with pickpocket?

1st minor question: -2 on thievery with a feat that requires training in it and a +1 to dex? Clearly this factors in both the armor and holding a shield. Ok, so why would a paladin character ever pick pick-pocket as a skill feat, if they were going to be a sword and board paladin? I get that they want to really beef up the flavor of Seelah being a street urchin, but couldn't they at least then have made her a two-handed weapon paladin so the penalty to her skill feat doesn't make it essentially useless (assuming the paladin could ever find a use for it without falling.) The two-handed version of Seelah would make the Rebutitive strike a more significant reaction and wouldn't lay on hands require a free hand for at least the touch action, if not the somatic part of the casting?

major question: If the developers went to such lengths to define equipment as worn, ready or stowed, why would the pick pocket feat not directly interact with this terminology in explaining what it does. How often will NPCs be described as wearing a "loose ring" in adventures? I get that too focused of rules about what equipment can and cannot be stolen gets very excessive, but if you already have these categories of how items are carried or worn, maybe it makes more sense to make sure those categories make it clear enough on their own how difficult items would be to remove.

For example, it seems like the difficult of stealing an item would be directly tied to the length of time it would normally take a person to put on or stow that item. Couldn't our pick pocket feat interact with that terminology instead?

351 to 400 of 799 << first < prev | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Pregen previews over at ENWorld! All Messageboards