Second Impressions After Play


General Discussion


11 people marked this as a favorite.

Monday I sat down to GM a brief one-shot with Pathfinder Playtest for my regular gaming group. I had 4 players with level 6 characters: a Monk, a Wizard, a Druid, and a Paladin.

During Character Creation, the Wizard player selected Fighter Dedication as his first class feat. As he explained, he had zero reason not to aim for Fighter Dedication, the prerequisites were easy to obtain, his class feats were weak, and none of the other archetype/multiclassing feats matched it in raw power. So the Wizard marched into the adventure in Chainmail. The Monk player (who was the newest player) focused hard on Wisdom over all the other stats, took Cleric Dedication for the flavor, and went with Tiger Stance as his primary weapon. The Monk was the most damaging character at the table. The Druid player took one look at the changes to wild shape and animal companions and selected the Order of the Leaf. They prepared primarily healing spells (more on that later) and fought primarily with Ray of Frost. The Paladin player decided to specialize in Unarmed Combat and put their class feats into Lay on Hands. They were slightly more accurate, but slightly less damaging than the Monk

The first encounter I created was 2 Clerics of Calistria. While admittedly a severe level encounter, the party was in no real danger, as they have all of 2 effective combat spells, a bunch of defensive spells, and piddly whips. What did happen, however was I learned one very crucial thing about how 2e works: In-Combat Healing is way to strong. These clerics had 7 4th level Heal spells per day, and with only one player able to make attacks of opportunity, they were able to heal with impunity. Each heal healed 7d8+4 hp with 1 action. Then they'd whip to chip down the party. Only the party had a Paladin with Channeled Life and was able to counter with his own healing to counter the chips. The fight (that would have probably taken half an hour or so in 1e) took 90+ minutes to resolve. The Clerics had an AC so high that the Paladin needed an 11 to hit (then a 15, then a 19), and when he did hit he dealt 2d6+4. The monk and wizard needed 12 (then 16, then Nat 20) to hit and did 2d8+3 and 2d6+4 respectively. The party would wail away at them for a couple rounds, then the clerics would step away from the Paladin, undo all the damage, and whip somebody. The Wizard burned a few spells on the fight, but realized eventually that his +1 Shortsword was more powerful in the long run than his small allotment of spells. As for the Clerics, they burned their combat spells in round one and round 3. Enervation 1 got saved against by the Monk, the rest either missed or were saved against.At no point during the fight was the party even remotely imperiled.

The 2nd Fight was against a pair of Driders. The Driders opened combat with a Fireball each. The Party Responded with a Channeled Life (he still had 2 left at that point) and the Druid's 3rd level Heal, almost completely canceling the effects of the spells. The Driders folded in less than half an hour, as they lacked the In-combat healing, however the party felt more threatened by the Driders as the Driders posed an actual threat with their jaw attacks up close and their spells at range.

After that the party engaged in some exploration mode content, which was very smooth and easily grasped. They bypassed the final encounter by throwing the Wizard under the bus, which was disappointing but understandable given how their impromptu party dynamics had come together.

At the end the feedback they gave I will sum up below

Spells were not powerful or plentiful enough to be worth more than just hitting people with weapons.

Cantrips scaling was cool, and appreciated (Especially by the Druid)

Everyone loved the combat actions and encounter/exploration mode shift system. Due to the combination of lack of AoOs and the penalties for iterative attacks the Party attempted a lot of "combat maneuvers" (athletics skill uses) just because.

Edit: The Party and I collectively realized that persistent damage and poison are BRUTAL because of how difficult they are to stop.

In my opinion, 2e is a good skeleton for a potentially great future game. Please take community input to heart.


I'd be interested to hear more about your Wizards experience, as that is the primary class I play and if 2e screws that up than nothing will make me switch. Also the paladin because that is the other major archtype I enjoy.

Couple of questions:

1: What spell selection did the wizard loadout? 6th level wizard has about 12 spells?, you probably don't remember but please provide a general feel if they were going for more of a magus build with the fighter dedication, or a blaster or control wizard or summoner or buffer or what were they using their magic to do? Did they specialize in a school or were universalist?

2: Was control magic effective in any of your encounters? It sounds like you guys just brawled with limited to no tactical considerations.

3: What do you mean by spells were not powerful enough? Not powerful in comparision to what the enemy was doing, not powerful enough compared to melee options, or just ineffective due to spell DCs? What combat spells specifically were you looking at, because you state that cantrips were "appreciated" but were they effective at replacing basic strikes or crossbow shots? You seem to indicate no, and that a wizard swing a shortsword was more effective.

EDIT: Cut question #4, sorry, read AoO and was thinking AoE in my mind.


AoO = Attack of Opportunity
AoE = Area of Effect

No one was able to hit the casters when they were casting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Unfortunately Combat Maneuvers take the multiple attack penalty. I think they should change it but RAW they do.

Page. 305 anything with the attack tag counts for and gets the multiple attack penalty.


Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Skaldi the Tallest wrote:

AoO = Attack of Opportunity

AoE = Area of Effect

No one was able to hit the casters when they were casting.

There wasn't some way to hold an action to attack the Clerics while they tried to heal?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
WatersLethe wrote:
Skaldi the Tallest wrote:

AoO = Attack of Opportunity

AoE = Area of Effect

No one was able to hit the casters when they were casting.

There wasn't some way to hold an action to attack the Clerics while they tried to heal?

Yes.

Disrupting Spells, pg 196 wrote:

If you take damage from a reaction triggered by any of your spellcasting actions while Casting a Spell or the Concentrate on a Spell action, your spell may be disrupted. If the damage you take is equal to or greater than your level, the spell is lost (sometimes referred to as “wasted”).

When you lose a spell, you’ve expended the prepared spell or spell slot, as well as all the spell’s costs and the actions the Cast a Spell activity required, but the spell generates no effect. If a spell is disrupted during a Concentrate on a Spell action, the spell is instead immediately dismissed.

Readying an action to attack when spellcasting begins would work, as a readied action is triggered as a reaction, meeting the requirements of this section.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xenocrat wrote:
WatersLethe wrote:
Skaldi the Tallest wrote:

AoO = Attack of Opportunity

AoE = Area of Effect

No one was able to hit the casters when they were casting.

There wasn't some way to hold an action to attack the Clerics while they tried to heal?

Yes.

Disrupting Spells, pg 196 wrote:

If you take damage from a reaction triggered by any of your spellcasting actions while Casting a Spell or the Concentrate on a Spell action, your spell may be disrupted. If the damage you take is equal to or greater than your level, the spell is lost (sometimes referred to as “wasted”).

When you lose a spell, you’ve expended the prepared spell or spell slot, as well as all the spell’s costs and the actions the Cast a Spell activity required, but the spell generates no effect. If a spell is disrupted during a Concentrate on a Spell action, the spell is instead immediately dismissed.

Readying an action to attack when spellcasting begins would work, as a readied action is triggered as a reaction, meeting the requirements of this section.

Unfortunately, from my reading of the Clerics' tactics, it wouldn't have mattered anyways since (much like in PF1e) avoiding getting attacked while healing is as simple as a Step out of range.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

What about Grapple? That'd shut down one of them so that AOOs can lock them down.


Shinigami02 wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:


Disrupting Spells, pg 196 wrote:

If you take damage from a reaction triggered by any of your spellcasting actions while Casting a Spell or the Concentrate on a Spell action, your spell may be disrupted. If the damage you take is equal to or greater than your level, the spell is lost (sometimes referred to as “wasted”).

When you lose a spell, you’ve expended the prepared spell or spell slot, as well as all the spell’s costs and the actions the Cast a Spell activity required, but the spell generates no effect. If a spell is disrupted during a Concentrate on a Spell action, the spell is instead immediately dismissed.

Readying an action to attack when spellcasting begins would work, as a readied action is triggered as a reaction, meeting the requirements of this section.

Unfortunately, from my reading of the Clerics' tactics, it wouldn't have mattered anyways since (much like in PF1e) avoiding getting attacked while healing is as simple as a Step out of range.

Not if you're using a ranged attack. I'm not saying you want to depend on the Wizard throwing a dagger, but it would work.

With four people flanking to make it at least very difficult to step away from everyone should also be possible. But it sounds like a Stride would have been just fine, so ranged it is.

Cyouni wrote:
What about Grapple? That'd shut down one of them so that AOOs can lock them down.

It wouldn't shut them down (except on a critical success), it would just impose the Grabbed condition a DC 5 flat check for every somatic and material component they cast. That's still an 80% chance to succeed at a self or ranged Heal.


Xenocrat wrote:


Cyouni wrote:
What about Grapple? That'd shut down one of them so that AOOs can lock them down.
It wouldn't shut them down (except on a critical success), it would just impose the Grabbed condition a DC 5 flat check for every somatic and material component they cast. That's still an 80% chance to succeed at a self or ranged Heal.

Well, it also makes them fully vulnerable to AOOs since they're not going anywhere, and if they can pull off a crit success, it's guaranteed not to happen. Didn't sound like these clerics had high Acrobatics or Athletics, so it'd be pretty hard for them to break the grapple.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
AshVandal wrote:

I'd be interested to hear more about your Wizards experience, as that is the primary class I play and if 2e screws that up than nothing will make me switch. Also the paladin because that is the other major archtype I enjoy.

Couple of questions:

1: What spell selection did the wizard loadout? 6th level wizard has about 12 spells?, you probably don't remember but please provide a general feel if they were going for more of a magus build with the fighter dedication, or a blaster or control wizard or summoner or buffer or what were they using their magic to do? Did they specialize in a school or were universalist?

2: Was control magic effective in any of your encounters? It sounds like you guys just brawled with limited to no tactical considerations.

3: What do you mean by spells were not powerful enough? Not powerful in comparision to what the enemy was doing, not powerful enough compared to melee options, or just ineffective due to spell DCs? What combat spells specifically were you looking at, because you state that cantrips were "appreciated" but were they effective at replacing basic strikes or crossbow shots? You seem to indicate no, and that a wizard swing a shortsword was more effective.

EDIT: Cut question #4, sorry, read AoO and was thinking AoE in my mind.

1. The Wizard went Evocation and loaded up on blasting spells. He was the most unsatisfied of the casters at the table.

2. The Druid did use Fear in the first fight and Grease in the 2nd fight. Fear was saved against, so it only gave Frightened 1. The Drider failed its Skill Check vs Grease and fell over, but the only person in reach its turn was The Monk, so it just stood up and attacked some more.

3. The Druid appreciated the cantrips. Most of his attacks in the combats were Ray of Frost. The Wizard just realized his +1 weapon made more sense for him than the Produce Flame he had prepped. Weapon power level easily outstrips spell attacks unless you fight a bunch of smaller creatures AoE can burn down.


Question: what were the Wizard's stats? Something seems to not be adding up here.


Wizard had 18 Str, 16 Dex, 14 Con, 18 Int, 10 Wis, 10 Cha. They started with 16 in Str, 14 Dex, 12 Con, 16 Int, 10 Wis, 10 Cha (to qualify for Fighter Dedication). This meant their To-hit roll with their +1 Shortsword was 6 Lvl+4 Str+1 Item for +11.


WatersLethe wrote:
Skaldi the Tallest wrote:

AoO = Attack of Opportunity

AoE = Area of Effect

No one was able to hit the casters when they were casting.

There wasn't some way to hold an action to attack the Clerics while they tried to heal?

Not really.

Even if they were able to ready an action to strike when they cast, they are still sitting ducks who don't threaten (sans Paladin), meaning there is little to no fear in standing there just casting spells.

Even while adjacent to them with this readied action (which takes two actions plus a reaction to do, which is basically the majority of your turn), you're getting at-best a single action out of them to not heal compared to your 2-3 actions that could've been better used to just beat the Clerics down (or provide some help to an ally to help them beat them down better).

This really only demonstrates that the Cleric healing powers are too strong and/or freeform. I think a once/round limitation on Channels would be appropriate to prevent this sort of "broken" cheese.

The fight would have probably been much shorter, but much more deadly, if they were Clerics who could Channel Negative Energy and touch the PCs 3 times in a round for high-end spell damage to PCs. I would be more curious about such a fight to see if it is a viable way to fight, as well as to see how strong it might truly be.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wasn't even using Heal more than once per combat with the Clerics, I never needed to. The Party's fighters had between a 55% and 60% shot of hitting once and basically no chance of hitting additional times. 7d8+4 was more than enough to outpace the damage output. The Heal averages about 35 HP, while a single PC will deal an average of 11-12 every other turn, so the 3 of them (+ Druid with Ray of Frost having similar chances to hit for an average of 8 on hit).
If I ran the encounter again against just one cleric, the Cleric can pop off 35 healing basically for free, while the party will be lucky to beat that number even when positioning themselves to flank the Cleric. All the Cleric has to do is avoid being boxed in by a party that only has one person who can AoO them (and even then, nothing stops them from just Striding across the room, taking that inaccurate AoO in said Stride) and continue stalling.

If a Cleric of Calistria actually prepped like they were going into battle, with combat spells instead of spells like Neutralize Poison, Enthrall, and Charm, they become FAR more dangerous while still effectively having 330~ HP unless you kill them outright in round 1


Most distressing. Although I've heard rumors that this seems to run contrary to what people who have actually played have experienced. I wonder if its because you ran your own encounters rather than Paizo scripted encounters.

Anyone else playtesting want to try and duplicate these encounters?


I ran the playtest adventure so far with a party of 3 (selfcontrolled to get a feeling for the difficulty before running it with players).

Compared to my experience the damage output of the Level 6 party seems really low. I guess having readied actions to cast/ranged combat them or weapons with reach + AoO could help with the problem encountered. Healing is absolutely beastly when there is no way to keep it in check.
A barbarian would have likely changed the encounter a lot with the right feats (No escape, Witchhunter and a reach weapon).

However lacking AoO's just create a free movement scenario where abilities like heal can shine, which can allow low level parties to defeat huge threats when applying heals every round. Or scenarios where it is easy to just walk to the Wizard/Sorceror and kill him for single powerful foes.

Heightened single target heal does too much, compared to the lower damage progression which is mostly based on magic weapons. All classes get feats/spells to combat large amounts of weaker foes but nothing that actually helps defeating more powerful threats + heal.
Harming/Healing 3 times a turn seems busted in general, considering the potential burst.

I felt weapon surge and magic weapon are really good amplifiers on lower levels, however that is cleric/paladin stuff too. Just for comparison 1st level magic weapon on a 60% hit fighter using a non magical short sword deals more single target damage than a fireball.

Direct damage spells seem really lackluster in front of a cleric but even without them there is always the unlucky roll that makes you feel bad as a caster (burst is bad, persistent damage/damage buffs are king here). In general I feel like buffing/debuffing (not much here at all for arcane) is the way to go atm as a caster as well as constricting movement. Even though all spells seem to be extremely weak especially against higher level opponents.


On further examination, the Monk had picked up the upgraded form of Tiger Stance. Had he used that he could have potentially enabled the party to outpace the Clerical Healspam, but I guess he didn't want to use it?

For this party I guess the Damage Optimization would have been the Monk using Tiger Slash, the Wizard picking up Power Attack (from Fighter Multiclass) instead of Quick Preparation and using a bigger weapon, and the Paladin...could try not being an Iroran?

It seems like abilities that stack damage onto that first attack are best?

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I had the opposite problem, ran the first level adventure and without a dedicated cleric healer the adventure just plain did too much damage for any lower tier healers to heal. The cleric seems to be what damage is balanced around and it's healing far outpaces any other classes ability. we had 2 backup hea;ers but between the alchemist having to double dip resonance to heal people, one from it to create the potion and one from them to drink it, and the palladin heal being only a d4 it really did not work out well.


Mandatory Healbots...

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

four the second adventure we are trying to run it twice. once with four players and an actual NPC healer that only does that. He won't engage in combat or do anything other than try to heal people out of combat. and once with five playing whatever they feel like. If the healbot fixes everything then but feels really neccesary then I will assume that I can run any party I just have to heal them after every fight. without using their precious resonance, or mybe one point to heal full out of combat with a certain amount of rest. I don't want to force party composition on my playersafter all this time where they didn't have to. That freedom of choice is very important to my group.

Scarab Sages

technarken wrote:


The first encounter I created was 2 Clerics of Calistria. While admittedly a severe level encounter, What did happen, however was I learned one very crucial thing about how 2e works: In-Combat Healing is way to strong. These clerics had 7 4th level Heal spells per day, and with only one player able to make attacks of opportunity, they were able to heal with impunity. Each heal healed 7d8+4 hp with 1 action. Then they'd whip to chip down the party. Only the party had a Paladin with Channeled Life and was able to counter with his own healing to counter the chips. The fight (that would have probably taken half an hour or so in 1e) took 90+ minutes to resolve. The Clerics had an AC so high...

How are they healing 7d8+4 with a 4th level slot? And if they were healing at range its 2 actions, so they were adjacent to each other right?


Luceon wrote:
technarken wrote:


The first encounter I created was 2 Clerics of Calistria. While admittedly a severe level encounter, What did happen, however was I learned one very crucial thing about how 2e works: In-Combat Healing is way to strong. These clerics had 7 4th level Heal spells per day, and with only one player able to make attacks of opportunity, they were able to heal with impunity. Each heal healed 7d8+4 hp with 1 action. Then they'd whip to chip down the party. Only the party had a Paladin with Channeled Life and was able to counter with his own healing to counter the chips. The fight (that would have probably taken half an hour or so in 1e) took 90+ minutes to resolve. The Clerics had an AC so high...

How are they healing 7d8+4 with a 4th level slot? And if they were healing at range its 2 actions, so they were adjacent to each other right?

They used heal as a 4th level spell

Quote:

Heal Spell 1

You channel positive energy to heal the living or damage the undead. You restore Hit Points equal to 1d8 plus your spellcasting ability modifier to a willing living target, or deal that amount of positive damage to an undead target. The number of actions you spend when Casting this Spell determines its targets, range, area, and other parameters.
• Somatic Casting The spell has a range of touch. You must succeed at a melee touch attack to damage an undead target.
• Somatic Casting, Verbal Casting The spell has a range of 30 feet and doesn’t require a touch attack when targeting an undead creature. An undead target must attempt a Fortitude save, taking half damage on a success, no damage on a critical success, or double damage on a critical failure.
• Material Casting, Somatic Casting, Verbal Casting
You disperse positive energy in a 30-foot aura. This has the same effect as the two-action version, but it targets all living and undead creatures in the burst and reduces the amount of healing or damage to your spellcasting ability modifier.

Heightened (+1) The amount of healing or damage increases by 1d8, or by 2d8 if you’re using the 1- or 2-action version to heal the living.

Simply by using the 1 action version (or 2 action), they heal for 1d8 + casting modifier + 2d8 * 3 (4th level spell) for a total of 7d8 plus casting modifier.


Luceon wrote:
technarken wrote:


The first encounter I created was 2 Clerics of Calistria. While admittedly a severe level encounter, What did happen, however was I learned one very crucial thing about how 2e works: In-Combat Healing is way to strong. These clerics had 7 4th level Heal spells per day, and with only one player able to make attacks of opportunity, they were able to heal with impunity. Each heal healed 7d8+4 hp with 1 action. Then they'd whip to chip down the party. Only the party had a Paladin with Channeled Life and was able to counter with his own healing to counter the chips. The fight (that would have probably taken half an hour or so in 1e) took 90+ minutes to resolve. The Clerics had an AC so high...

How are they healing 7d8+4 with a 4th level slot? And if they were healing at range its 2 actions, so they were adjacent to each other right?
2E Playtest Rules wrote:

Heightened (+1) The amount of healing or damage increases by 1d8,

or by 2d8 if you’re using the 1- or 2-action version to heal the living.

If I heighten the spell to level 4 I've heightened it 3 times, which adds 6d8 to the 1d8+4 it would have as a level 1. They targeted themselves with the spells, as they were willing living targets.

Scarab Sages

technarken wrote:
Luceon wrote:
technarken wrote:


The first encounter I created was 2 Clerics of Calistria. While admittedly a severe level encounter, What did happen, however was I learned one very crucial thing about how 2e works: In-Combat Healing is way to strong. These clerics had 7 4th level Heal spells per day, and with only one player able to make attacks of opportunity, they were able to heal with impunity. Each heal healed 7d8+4 hp with 1 action. Then they'd whip to chip down the party. Only the party had a Paladin with Channeled Life and was able to counter with his own healing to counter the chips. The fight (that would have probably taken half an hour or so in 1e) took 90+ minutes to resolve. The Clerics had an AC so high...

How are they healing 7d8+4 with a 4th level slot? And if they were healing at range its 2 actions, so they were adjacent to each other right?
2E Playtest Rules wrote:

Heightened (+1) The amount of healing or damage increases by 1d8,

or by 2d8 if you’re using the 1- or 2-action version to heal the living.
If I heighten the spell to level 4 I've heightened it 3 times, which adds 6d8 to the 1d8+4 it would have as a level 1. They targeted themselves with the spells, as they were willing living targets.

Oh, you are right, I was thinking that heightened was 1d8 per level, like D&D 5e. This actually makes heal worth heightening now.


Can you give some more detail on the final encounter? If the Wizard wasn't thrown under the bus, would the party have prevailed?


Thank you for the information, very clear and informative.

My sense is that the first encounter was partly an encounter design problem. Partly only, there's game balance issues in there too for sure.

If you ran some Pcs against a group of clerics that can heal each other in PF1 you'd have an incredibly long fight too in many situations: they can still take 5 ft steps and heal each other. Basically you put two enemies there that as a combination are incredibly tanky, with minimal damage output. Like two M1 tanks, but with the main guns removed.

Did the idea of grappling ever come up? In PF1 shutting casters down in a fight is always a high priority, and grappling is one of the most effective ways of doing it. More so than in PF2, where all you get from 'grabbed' is a 20% flat action failure chance. But at least that's something.

It makes me think of the value of the feat 'step up' combined with attacks of opportunity in PF1.


EberronHoward wrote:
Can you give some more detail on the final encounter? If the Wizard wasn't thrown under the bus, would the party have prevailed?

1 Young Blue Dragon.

A creature that on further examination would have annihilated the party, considering the fact that the Party had ACs in the low 20s. The Dragon pretty much effortlessly hits on their first attack and has a massive 40% Crit Rate. Oh, and it has reach. And a Breath Weapon that might as well be At-Will (see above) considering it recharges automatically on crits.

Even if I play it as an idiot and don't have it use its flight strategically it's still hitting more than hard enough.


Yossarian wrote:

Thank you for the information, very clear and informative.

My sense is that the first encounter was partly an encounter design problem. Partly only, there's game balance issues in there too for sure.

If you ran some Pcs against a group of clerics that can heal each other in PF1 you'd have an incredibly long fight too in many situations: they can still take 5 ft steps and heal each other. Basically you put two enemies there that as a combination are incredibly tanky, with minimal damage output. Like two M1 tanks, but with the main guns removed.

Did the idea of grappling ever come up? In PF1 shutting casters down in a fight is always a high priority, and grappling is one of the most effective ways of doing it. More so than in PF2, where all you get from 'grabbed' is a 20% flat action failure chance. But at least that's something.

It makes me think of the value of the feat 'step up' combined with attacks of opportunity in PF1.

In Pathfinder having clerics heal themselves has multiple downsides

1. Healing in 1e is nowhere near enough to outpace damage unless your party is flat not trying.

2. Healing in 1e automatically prevents you from doing anything else that turn. Unless you've got Quicken Channel/Spell (which come with hefty downsides of their own) at least.

3.Everyone can AoO in 1e, so the clerics aren't just avoiding the one guy who knows how to do it.

4.Grappling a caster in 1e effectively eliminates them as a threat for at least a round. As does Dirty Tricking them in the eyes. Or Sundering/Stealing their Spell Component Pouch/Divine Focus.

Even if I ran the fight as just one of the clerics, it would still have taken forever. The party attempted to Grapple, but as Grappling is an Athletics Check it was subject to Armor Check Penalties. I guess that's one way to make Monks the de facto combat maneuver experts.


technarken wrote:


In Pathfinder having clerics heal themselves has multiple downsides

1. Healing in 1e is nowhere near enough to outpace damage unless your party is flat not trying.

The party attempted to Grapple, but as Grappling is an Athletics Check it was subject to Armor Check Penalties. I guess that's one way to make Monks the de facto combat maneuver experts.

Yes, your point about damage output versus damage healed rates appears very true. It's swung more towards healing.

FYI: From page 176:

Quote:


Check penalty
You take this untyped penalty to Strength-, Dexterity-, and Constitution-based skill checks, except for those that have the attack trait.

The Grapple action has the attack trait, so it doesn't suffer from the armour check penalty.


Missed that part. Blame the book formatting. If these actions are not affected by ACP, then why not just have Combat Maneuver Bonuses on the sheet to make that a bit easier for players to remember?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
technarken wrote:
Missed that part. Blame the book formatting. If these actions are not affected by ACP, then why not just have Combat Maneuver Bonuses on the sheet to make that a bit easier for players to remember?

Yes i missed it the first time too. Some very key rules are hidden inside innocuous looking paragraphs in not immediately intuitive locations. The way combat rules are sliced up between the equipment and playing the game sections is odd.

I assume they moved away from CMB to separate out the Athletics and Acrobatics ways of doing combat manoeuvres. In PF1 your CMB is only BAB+STR. Which is bad for dex-based martials. Now you can do an Acrobatics - Escape check (dex) to get out of a grapple.

Admittedly you could do the same thing in PF1 with an escape artist check. But they've condensed skills down a bit and escape artist got rolled into other skills.

This new method means you can selectively add your skill increases into Athletics to improve your combat manoeuvres. Something you couldn't do before with just BAB. Although there were all the Improved Grapple feats etc.

I don't mind the change personally, i think it's a bit more narratively flavourful now, but mechanically no major change that I can see.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Yossarian wrote:


Some very key rules are hidden inside innocuous looking paragraphs in not immediately intuitive locations. The way combat rules are sliced up between the equipment and playing the game sections is odd.

I've noticed this as well at times.


technarken wrote:
EberronHoward wrote:
Can you give some more detail on the final encounter? If the Wizard wasn't thrown under the bus, would the party have prevailed?

1 Young Blue Dragon.

A creature that on further examination would have annihilated the party, considering the fact that the Party had ACs in the low 20s. The Dragon pretty much effortlessly hits on their first attack and has a massive 40% Crit Rate. Oh, and it has reach. And a Breath Weapon that might as well be At-Will (see above) considering it recharges automatically on crits.

Even if I play it as an idiot and don't have it use its flight strategically it's still hitting more than hard enough.

Cool. Thanks!

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion / Second Impressions After Play All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion