Pregen previews over at ENWorld!


Prerelease Discussion

1 to 50 of 799 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

ENWorld is previewing the 1st level iconic pregenerated characters they've used at conventions. Check out the first preview, for the Alchemist, here!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

What a cutie.


Holy shoot persistent damage looks annoying.
Plant monsters are gonna immolate.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Oh, no alignment.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Those icons for actions seem nice. I dislike not having a place for resonance on the sheet though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Its not the character sheet. Its the pregen sheet. Pregen sheets have always been a touch more graphical and elide a lot of information. (Ie in this case Resonance is mentioned on the back of the sheet for the one ability that uses it, and they don't expectes level 1s to have a lot of resonance consuming items... The sheet also skips skills they aren't trained in, etc).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Elleth wrote:

Holy shoot persistent damage looks annoying.

Plant monsters are gonna immolate.

The DC 20 flat check to end seems like a typo. That, or something that needs to get fixed in the playtest. :P


First World Bard wrote:
Elleth wrote:

Holy shoot persistent damage looks annoying.

Plant monsters are gonna immolate.
The DC 20 flat check to end seems like a typo. That, or something that needs to get fixed in the playtest. :P

I mean it's possible it's just missing a DC decrease over time or a "burn action to repeat check" situation.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
First World Bard wrote:
Elleth wrote:

Holy shoot persistent damage looks annoying.

Plant monsters are gonna immolate.
The DC 20 flat check to end seems like a typo. That, or something that needs to get fixed in the playtest. :P

Probably not a typo. In the glass cannon podcast playtest they got persistent bleed from bats and it was 1 hit per round until they made a flat dc 20 check. But I believe you can spend all your actions in a round to make a roll to end it sooner. Or they could just get healed, though that likely only works for bleed.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Dead Phoenix wrote:
First World Bard wrote:
Elleth wrote:

Holy shoot persistent damage looks annoying.

Plant monsters are gonna immolate.
The DC 20 flat check to end seems like a typo. That, or something that needs to get fixed in the playtest. :P
Probably not a typo. In the glass cannon podcast playtest they got persistent bleed from bats and it was 1 hit per round until they made a flat dc 20 check. But I believe you can spend all your actions in a round to make a roll to end it sooner. Or they could just get healed, though that likely only works for bleed.

The alchemists fire gives ways to put out the fire, and is only 1; I could see a flat 20 being fine for that. But for the persistent 1d4 Acid, with no other way to remove it? That seems harsh...

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Society Subscriber
First World Bard wrote:
Dead Phoenix wrote:
First World Bard wrote:
Elleth wrote:

Holy shoot persistent damage looks annoying.

Plant monsters are gonna immolate.
The DC 20 flat check to end seems like a typo. That, or something that needs to get fixed in the playtest. :P
Probably not a typo. In the glass cannon podcast playtest they got persistent bleed from bats and it was 1 hit per round until they made a flat dc 20 check. But I believe you can spend all your actions in a round to make a roll to end it sooner. Or they could just get healed, though that likely only works for bleed.
The alchemists fire gives ways to put out the fire, and is only 1; I could see a flat 20 being fine for that. But for the persistent 1d4 Acid, with no other way to remove it? That seems harsh...

It is a lot better if Dead Phoenix is correct and there is a general action to allow a reroll. Spending 1 or 2 of your actions to roll each round gives you a decent chance to end the effect quickly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
KingOfAnything wrote:


It is a lot better if Dead Phoenix is correct and there is a general action to allow a reroll. Spending 1 or 2 of your actions to roll each round gives you a decent chance to end the effect quickly.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding a Flat Check, then? IIRC, a flat check is *just* a d20 roll, which means a DC20 flat check requires a Nat 20 to pass, and I wouldn't call a couple extra rolls a decent chance.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Do you take the persistent damage on the attack that inflicts it? I assume that's the case, but I'm not 100% on the reading of the pregen sheet.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, mostly things will just die to persistent damage. Nat 20 to end is just unreasonable.

Other things of note:
18 int, only one bonus language.

---
Lore looks horrible as a skill. Too vague and too easily chopped up into useless categories. The 'additional lore' feat makes this seem even worse.

---
Quick alchemy seems.... unusable. Needs tools, instructions and a free hand? Tricky, without a third arm. Plus the item dies at the start of your next turn, and costs resonance for some reason.

---
Can't tell if other alchemical items cost resonance or not.

---
Quick Bomber needs a different name. It doesn't let you draw faster (is, free action) just more. Can you use bombs if both hands are full? How are you lighting fuses, mixing things or whatever?

---
Method of use: 'held' is gibberish. You aren't holding bombs or potions to use them. You're either throwing or drinking.

Icons are completely pointless over just writing 'action.'
Lack of consistency with quick alchemy action in title rather than description is just annoying.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Society Subscriber
First World Bard wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:


It is a lot better if Dead Phoenix is correct and there is a general action to allow a reroll. Spending 1 or 2 of your actions to roll each round gives you a decent chance to end the effect quickly.
Perhaps I am misunderstanding a Flat Check, then? IIRC, a flat check is *just* a d20 roll, which means a DC20 flat check requires a Nat 20 to pass, and I wouldn't call a couple extra rolls a decent chance.

You get twenty rolls in 5 rounds if you use all your actions. On average, you'll take something like... 10 damage? You'll take more damage if want to actually attack something on your turn, but it is not super crazy.

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
Oh, no alignment.

They've previously noted that this is a typo, not something intentional.

Voss wrote:
Yeah, mostly things will just die to persistent damage. Nat 20 to end is just unreasonable.

That DC 20 check is free and automatic, it is not intended to usually happen. You can probably spend an action and get a lower one (ala the DC 15 check shown for spending an action in the Glass Cannon Podcast).

Voss wrote:

Other things of note:

18 int, only one bonus language.

This matches Gnomes, who get a single bonus language at Int 14+. That's probably the standard rule now.

I'm more interested that he only has 3+Int skills as a baseline.

Voss wrote:

---

Lore looks horrible as a skill. Too vague and too easily chopped up into useless categories. The 'additional lore' feat makes this seem even worse.

Nah, it's fine. Lore is intentionally a catchall ala Profession. It being useful at things other than making money in downtime is a side benefit.

Voss wrote:

---

Quick alchemy seems.... unusable. Needs tools, instructions and a free hand? Tricky, without a third arm. Plus the item dies at the start of your next turn, and costs resonance for some reason.

The requirements other than a free hand just need to be in your possession. So you need one hand, not three.

Voss wrote:

---

Can't tell if other alchemical items cost resonance or not.

To create for free? Yes. To use? It's less clear on bombs, elixirs definitely cost Resonance (unless the alchemist made them himself, in which case both are unambiguously free for him).

Voss wrote:

---

Quick Bomber needs a different name. It doesn't let you draw faster (is, free action) just more. Can you use bombs if both hands are full? How are you lighting fuses, mixing things or whatever?

They've specified that bombs are one-handed weapons. You throw them and they break, causing them to blow up in the case of alchemist's fire. Acid is just a vial of acid and breaks on people.

Voss wrote:

---

Method of use: 'held' is gibberish. You aren't holding bombs or potions to use them. You're either throwing or drinking.

You need to be holding them to either throw or drink them. You thus need a free hand to do so. Held makes perfect sense to me.

Voss wrote:
Icons are completely pointless over just writing 'action.'

It does reduce word count, which is important.

Voss wrote:
Lack of consistency with quick alchemy action in title rather than description is just annoying.

I believe it's the difference between Class Feats and abilities and Items. All abilities will follow Quick Alchemy's model while items will be consistent with the Alchemical Items shown.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

20? I thought it was three actions per round?

About 12.5 damage in five rounds. Enough to drop a 1st level character, even if they don't take more damage. And they'll keep taking more as well, which presumable interacts with dying.

Still super dangerous for a throw away thing at low levels, and if its also setting the target's action economy on fire, then its way out of bounds for its cost vs effect.

Quote:
It does reduce word count, which is important

Only if it saves actual space, which this doesn't.

'Activation: operate activation action' would still take up a partial line of text, same as 'Activstion: icon operate activation'. And both are equally terrible from a grammatical point of view.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Voss wrote:
20? I thought it was three actions per round?

You get a free DC 20 check every round. Evidence also suggests that spending actions actually gives you DC 15 checks rather than DC 20 ones.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So it says due to using resonance during downtime to make items they only have 2 resonance to spend but what did they spend it on during downtime. It can't be quick alchemy or those would already be useless. That is really confusing.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Quick alchemy needs some clarifications, because right now it seems absurd to use in context, but as an ability, it seems like it'll be fairly potent for buff and utility effects, and using resonance isn't really anything special from the point of view that the ability is related to items like alchemists abilities and it's probably worth it because it's otherwise effectively an infinite charge wand/staff of every alchemical item the alchemist knows.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Voss wrote:
20? I thought it was three actions per round?
You get a free DC 20 check every round. Evidence also suggests that spending actions actually gives you DC 15 checks rather than DC 20 ones.

If the DC is lower when you spend an action to mitigate the damage, that seems fair.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
kaid wrote:
So it says due to using resonance during downtime to make items they only have 2 resonance to spend but what did they spend it on during downtime. It can't be quick alchemy or those would already be useless. That is really confusing.

Probably the Elixirs of Life he has on his person. Possibly also the Alchemists Fire and Acid bombs, though I suspect those come from mundane crafting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
kaid wrote:
So it says due to using resonance during downtime to make items they only have 2 resonance to spend but what did they spend it on during downtime. It can't be quick alchemy or those would already be useless. That is really confusing.

The pregen sheets skip daily preparation like spells and have it done in advance. If it weren't a pregen, presumably most of those alchemical items in the alchemists sheet were made as part of daily preparation spending 3-4 resonance as a rough guess based on stats, items, and resonance stated as left over.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
First World Bard wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Voss wrote:
20? I thought it was three actions per round?
You get a free DC 20 check every round. Evidence also suggests that spending actions actually gives you DC 15 checks rather than DC 20 ones.
If the DC is lower when you spend an action to mitigate the damage, that seems fair.

That's how it was handled for bleed damage in the Glass Cannon podcast. And I really can't imagine it being different for different kinds of persistent damage given the rest of the system.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Voss wrote:

20? I thought it was three actions per round?

About 12.5 damage in five rounds. Enough to drop a 1st level character, even if they don't take more damage. And they'll keep taking more as well, which presumable interacts with dying.

Still super dangerous for a throw away thing at low levels, and if its also setting the target's action economy on fire, then its way out of bounds for its cost vs effect.

It's your main "big" attack and costs you either resonance or 20 gp in PF1 equivalent currency. Compare to a spellcaster who spams a cantrip for comparable damage but with no limit on use. The extra effect on action economy seems fine in that context.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
kaid wrote:
So it says due to using resonance during downtime to make items they only have 2 resonance to spend but what did they spend it on during downtime. It can't be quick alchemy or those would already be useless. That is really confusing.

He has 8 Alchemical Items, probably all prepped for free with his Alchemist Class stuff. That probably cost 3 or 4 Resonance and is the equivalent of daily spell prep.


I am pretty sure to use quick alchemy as listed there it requires you to be a skittermander.


Also how many actions does it take to fire off quick alchemy. It looks like it has the symbol for one but do you need to have spent actions to draw your alchemy kit in one hand, the formula book drawn and opened to the correct page first?


Gorbacz wrote:
Oh, no alignment.

I did a delve as Fumbo at PaizoCon. Someone at my table asked about the lack of Alignment. Logan Bonner was our GM, he replied that no listed alignment was an oversight on the pre-gen sheet. He indicated that the pre-gens will still have alignments.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
kaid wrote:
Also how many actions does it take to fire off quick alchemy. It looks like it has the symbol for one but do you need to have spent actions to draw your alchemy kit in one hand, the formula book drawn and opened to the correct page first?

Mechanically speaking, nothing says you need to use the tools or book during the process, they just need to be on your person. In-universe you clearly do use them, but any such usage is with the 'free hand' required and done by the time the item is as part of the same action.

No other interpretation makes any mechanical sense at all,


Deadmanwalking wrote:
kaid wrote:
Also how many actions does it take to fire off quick alchemy. It looks like it has the symbol for one but do you need to have spent actions to draw your alchemy kit in one hand, the formula book drawn and opened to the correct page first?

Mechanically speaking, nothing says you need to use the tools or book during the process, they just need to be on your person. In-universe you clearly do use them, but any such usage is with the 'free hand' required and done by the time the item is as part of the same action.

No other interpretation makes any mechanical sense at all,

I assume that is what they intend but it just seems like you are juggling a LOT of things with your free hand in the same amount of time it takes to draw or swing a sword.

Designer

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
kaid wrote:
Also how many actions does it take to fire off quick alchemy. It looks like it has the symbol for one but do you need to have spent actions to draw your alchemy kit in one hand, the formula book drawn and opened to the correct page first?

Mechanically speaking, nothing says you need to use the tools or book during the process, they just need to be on your person. In-universe you clearly do use them, but any such usage is with the 'free hand' required and done by the time the item is as part of the same action.

No other interpretation makes any mechanical sense at all,

This is correct, if you needed to be holding those items to use the action, the Requirements would say that explicitly rather than just say you need to have them. I didn't originate these requirements so this may be off, but I've always pictured it as the fact that you're pulling just what you need out of your kit with your free hand.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Seriously though I really like how things like alchemist's fire should work against creatures weak to it. Weakness just seems really fun as an alchemist, and I kind of like how the elixir can be used to buff you even if healthy.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Voss wrote:

20? I thought it was three actions per round?

About 12.5 damage in five rounds. Enough to drop a 1st level character, even if they don't take more damage. And they'll keep taking more as well, which presumable interacts with dying.

A particularly frail elven wizard, perhaps.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

One thing that is interesting though other than some of the oddities in quick alchemy it looks like starter alchemists can run a pretty large amount of bombs/potions a day. Starting with 8 and can make two more during the day potentially is a pretty good amount of alchemy stuff going on through an adventuring day. And at least at low levels seems a reasonable combatant in melee especially if the target is flatfooted.

Designer

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Elleth wrote:
Seriously though I really like how things like alchemist's fire should work against creatures weak to it. Weakness just seems really fun as an alchemist, and I kind of like how the elixir can be used to buff you even if healthy.

Exactly! That 1 persistent damage is really quite nasty if you're weak to fire. A party with an alchemist can be pretty powerful against frost giants and the like (arm your dextrous allies, like the rogue and the ranger, with bombs for added fun! they cost no resonance to use)


4 people marked this as a favorite.

"Some goblins just want to watch the world burn." ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also if mark is still lurking can we get a bit of clarification on the acid bombs persistance. It is pretty clear on the fire bomb how to end it but having to roll a DC 20 flat check seems really nasty to clear the persistance.

I would guess if you are spending actions you can make that less difficult which is still useful as they frantically try to stop burninating they are more vulnerable to barbarian smashing.

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Elleth wrote:
Seriously though I really like how things like alchemist's fire should work against creatures weak to it. Weakness just seems really fun as an alchemist, and I kind of like how the elixir can be used to buff you even if healthy.
Exactly! That 1 persistent damage is really quite nasty if you're weak to fire. A party with an alchemist can be pretty powerful against frost giants and the like (arm your dextrous allies, like the rogue and the ranger, with bombs for added fun! they cost no resonance to use)

Confirmation that bombs don't inherently cost Resonance! I am overjoyed. That was one of the things I was actually worried about.

Thank, Mark. :)


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Elleth wrote:
Seriously though I really like how things like alchemist's fire should work against creatures weak to it. Weakness just seems really fun as an alchemist, and I kind of like how the elixir can be used to buff you even if healthy.
Exactly! That 1 persistent damage is really quite nasty if you're weak to fire. A party with an alchemist can be pretty powerful against frost giants and the like (arm your dextrous allies, like the rogue and the ranger, with bombs for added fun! they cost no resonance to use)

Confirmation that bombs don't inherently cost Resonance! I am overjoyed. That was one of the things I was actually worried about.

Thank, Mark. :)

It looks like you are either paying money to make them so no resonance or the alchemist is using their resonance to make their daily allotment so those bombs are already "paid for" so you can hand those to party members to fling if necessary.


Mark Seifter wrote:
Elleth wrote:
Seriously though I really like how things like alchemist's fire should work against creatures weak to it. Weakness just seems really fun as an alchemist, and I kind of like how the elixir can be used to buff you even if healthy.
Exactly! That 1 persistent damage is really quite nasty if you're weak to fire. A party with an alchemist can be pretty powerful against frost giants and the like (arm your dextrous allies, like the rogue and the ranger, with bombs for added fun! they cost no resonance to use)

Wait. Does persistent damage stack/ping separately? Because that sounds horrifying.

I'm also assuming precision damage is used for either weakness or to proc certain abilities like those of the rogue?


Elleth wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Elleth wrote:
Seriously though I really like how things like alchemist's fire should work against creatures weak to it. Weakness just seems really fun as an alchemist, and I kind of like how the elixir can be used to buff you even if healthy.
Exactly! That 1 persistent damage is really quite nasty if you're weak to fire. A party with an alchemist can be pretty powerful against frost giants and the like (arm your dextrous allies, like the rogue and the ranger, with bombs for added fun! they cost no resonance to use)

Wait. Does persistent damage stack/ping separately? Because that sounds horrifying.

I'm also assuming precision damage is used for either weakness or to proc certain abilities like those of the rogue?

That does seem to be the impression I get reading it that each persistent thing active is plinking separately. So you are really on fire or really burning alive via acid so on/so forth. But there may be other rules to cover that kind of stacking that we are not seeing.


Hmm, better than I thought, though, I try to adhere to "The key to a happier life is to lower your expectations" a bit deal, not to be too cynical, but it can help.

I can figure how all the numbers are derived, which is nice, I am only miffed at the reminder that TAC is still in, really seems they could trim that, like they did with Flat-Footed.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

If there is only a 1 or 2 point difference between AC and TAC ... ditch TAC.


kaid wrote:
Elleth wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Elleth wrote:
Seriously though I really like how things like alchemist's fire should work against creatures weak to it. Weakness just seems really fun as an alchemist, and I kind of like how the elixir can be used to buff you even if healthy.
Exactly! That 1 persistent damage is really quite nasty if you're weak to fire. A party with an alchemist can be pretty powerful against frost giants and the like (arm your dextrous allies, like the rogue and the ranger, with bombs for added fun! they cost no resonance to use)

Wait. Does persistent damage stack/ping separately? Because that sounds horrifying.

I'm also assuming precision damage is used for either weakness or to proc certain abilities like those of the rogue?

That does seem to be the impression I get reading it that each persistent thing active is plinking separately. So you are really on fire or really burning alive via acid so on/so forth. But there may be other rules to cover that kind of stacking that we are not seeing.

I mean I'm cool with separate damage types plinking separately, woe be to trolls. I'm just not sure how to feel if it turns out an alchemist can abuse TEAMWORK! to cause 3+3*same_weakness at the end of each turn. Thematically it could go either way (are they burning the same spot or different spots)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you look at the lower parts, it lists an "infused" trait for certain items, meaning you don't have to spend resonance for them. You can probably assume that some other things will have that, which can cut RP costs somewhat.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

At least we know that there are reliable healing consumables in the game now

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Just to clear a thing up. Alignment was accidentally left off those sheets. I meant to put it on for these previews.. but I forgot... again.

Ugg

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

13 people marked this as a favorite.

As an aside, the flat check is lower on the rolls you get from spending an action. I have rarely seen the persistent damage go more than a round or two with those rolls.

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
kaid wrote:
It looks like you are either paying money to make them so no resonance or the alchemist is using their resonance to make their daily allotment so those bombs are already "paid for" so you can hand those to party members to fling if necessary.

Yep. And that works for me.

Elleth wrote:
Wait. Does persistent damage stack/ping separately? Because that sounds horrifying.

I believe Mark said that it's not intended to go off twice on one turn, but someone with Weakness 5 would take 6 damage each subsequent turn. Ouch.

The Mad Comrade wrote:
If there is only a 1 or 2 point difference between AC and TAC ... ditch TAC.

It's only 1-2 points different for high Dex characters. For low Dex characters it can easily be a 4 point swing. Combined with all swings mattering more, that's actually quite a big difference (the equivalent of up to an 8 point difference in PF1).

1 to 50 of 799 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Pregen previews over at ENWorld! All Messageboards