Magical weapons in PF2 are actually magical.


Skills, Feats, Equipment & Spells

151 to 161 of 161 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

breithauptclan wrote:
Lycar wrote:

But yes, even though FUNCTIONALLY, technology and magic perform the same in both genres, giving PCs the option to do thing they could not without and make them more powerful overall, the FEELING is different.

I wonder if it has to do with the escapism we seek in our games. In real life, technology is king. Hands down. If you have the better hardware, your chances of victory are disproportionally higher. So maybe it somehow does feel acceptable to have tech be useful in a sci-fi setting.

But on the flipside, when we do fantasy, we want to get away from real life as far as possible. And that includes reliance on technology. We want to be able to be awesome WITHOUT it. And given that magic subs in for technology...

Thanks for writing that better than I could. The mechanic is very similar in the two games, so from an abstract game mechanics perspective it should work in an equivalently effective manner.

But the feeling is much different. The same mechanics that work fine in one setting fall flat in the other.

That is what I am trying to point out.

This should feel fun for me. Thanks to shenanigans from my players, I'm gearing up to run a pretty much entirely non-tech based futuristic fantasy setting, so blending a sci-fi theme into fantasy trappings should work great for me.


graystone wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Eh gives those members a chance to shine at something they are usually only competent at. The one complaint about that Is the monk actually would need his magic items to shine in that situation and that does seem wrong.

I'm not sure how you would figure out what the party is fighting if you expect to challenge a 1d12 damage character and a +3 8d6 damage character. Or is the fighter just expected to do nothing while the casters deal with everything as weapon use is pretty much everything they do.

PS: I'm with you on monks... Lame.

Vidmaster7 wrote:

Really though even still everyone is going to be hindered from there usual tactics by lack of magic.

Are they? Sorcerer's can be any spell list and don't need a book so every spell they normally cast, they can in this situation. I wouldn't be surprised to see tattoo/birthmark holy symbols in the actual game so I'd expect clerics to cast fine and even if they don't, channel alone lets them heal just fine. Bards can improvise an instrument easy enough to fill in almost every component of casting [like a leaf whistle].

Vidmaster7 wrote:
If you took away all the magic you shouldn't expect it to play out the same way. The idea usually for doing something like that is to make the players try a different way of doing things.

Depending on your party makeup, the casters might not be hampered in the least. :P

breithauptclan wrote:
graystone wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Ah so it keeps disarm as a realavent tactic too.

Ah... Only for NPC's vs PC's. For PC's it's 1000% useless: at best a kind DM might make them use up an action. However, damage is based in the monster/NPC and NOT the weapon, so they can just punch or hit with anything to deal the same damage with the same to hit as the equipment listed is really all for show and loot.

Maybe I am reading this wrong. If so, forgive me.

In the Starfinder NPC/Monster creation rules, the damage listings are only for natural weapons on

...

In this situation I would expect the martials to tackle grapple and disarm instead of trying to attack without weapons. I suppose a sorcerer can get by most restrictions since they don't need a spell book (I'm not sure on the current situation with spell components are they still a thing?) This is kind of a unique situation so I wouldn't expect every character to be equal in this situation some will shine and some will not but its not like this is a permanent state. I'm ok with some characters being better in some situations then others. The barb that did natural attacks can look better for awhile in this specific situation then the one with a big sword that's fine as long as the end of the day they all get there stuff back.

I do however wish the monk would work in this case since
I feel that's the entire point of the class to be mister I'm still bA without items.

That alone does make me consider wanting to do maybe a half and half thing half of the effectiveness from items and half from class. I don't know a good way to divide it. maybe limit potency to +3 dice and gain some elsewhere and maybe we can give the monk more like +4 dice from class and less potency have the magic fists thing give some potency maybe.

I'm not for taking away all power for magic weapons but if you showed me a compromise between magic and skill I wouldn't be drastically opposed to it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
You assume that there are level 10 commoners. NPCs aren't built by PC rules.

The way current adventures are designed, every NPC has the same level as the PCs. There's even a PFS adventure with level 10 rabbits - since the PCs are level 10, so are the rabbits. If a level 10 adventure features commoners, they will be level 10 commoners - because "level 10 commoner" doesn't mean "commoner with 10 levels", but "commoner encountered by level 10 PCs". Maybe they won't be called "level 10 commoners", but the DCs to convince or intimidate or deceive them will be level 10 DCs, and their combat abilities will be level 10.

In the other hand, as you explain, level 10 commoners aren't build by PCs rules. Level 10 commoners have +20 to hit (more than an optimized PC with a +3 weapon) and 3d+X damages with any weapon - because that's how level 10 NPCs work. They can't use magic sword at all - their accuracy would become too high, and they have already 3d of damages and there's no rule to apply a magic weapon on that.

In other words, if a level 10 fighter encounters a dirt farmer, the dirt farmer can't grab a magic weapon at all - and he doesn't need it in the first place. This is how the whole system is designed.

This makes your initial point moot. "Being able to deal the same damages as anyone" doesn't feel very "magical".


Gaterie wrote:

In the other hand, as you explain, level 10 commoners aren't build by PCs rules. Level 10 commoners have +20 to hit (more than an optimized PC with a +3 weapon) and 3d+X damages with any weapon - because that's how level 10 NPCs work. They can't use magic sword at all - their accuracy would become too high, and they have already 3d of damages and there's no rule to apply a magic weapon on that.

So tell me, how does an expert with +17 in his good skills and +13 in his bad skills have trouble killing a level 0 zombie, in this scenario?

(PS: This is a level 7 scenario.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
vidmaster wrote:

I do however wish the monk would work in this case since

I feel that's the entire point of the class to be mister I'm still bA without items

Agreed. To be fair, it's not purely a paizo issue. it's hardly the first d20 system that has failed to make the monk still ba without items. I still wish it'd be done though.

The magic=technology argument even falls apart with monks since the real life monks they're based on tend to eschew technology in favor of developing their minds and bodies as much as possible and pursuing enlightenment.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Just to head back to the topic direction, last night in Mirrored Moon I got swallowed. I suddenly couldn't use my +2 Greatsword (or any weapon with Bulk >= 1). I had to cut my way out without that, and was left with ineffective backup weapons.

We didn't get anywhere on that until the Wizard also got swallowed and thus I gained access to hits +2 dagger (I don't know why he took that as a starting item, but it actually worked out in this scenario at least give us a chance at getting out). While low rolls didn't help that cause, damage wise the gap between 3d12+4 and 1d6+4 (with my bite, which was my best backup option) is huge. The 3d4+4 on the +2 dagger was also a significant jump over the bite.

That was my first run in with "you can't use your primary weapon" in PF2, and frankly it kinda sucked just how hard I got shut down despite having a secondary attack available. Without a potency rune, it effectively wipes several levels off your combat ability.

Lets put it this way: my level 9 18 STR Fighter using his Goblin bite is doing the same damage per hit as my level 7 14 STR Cleric was by hitting something with a +1 staff in one hand. One of those is having an easier time hitting than the other... but then one of them also has Heal and the other doesn't. For what is supposedly the most trained combatant on the field, that's comically inept.

I could have used a mundane dagger or something but that would have been even less, and a shortsword would have been comparable.

(For the record, we failed to cut ourselves out in time and TPKd, although DM fiat let us escape if we want to continue the playtest.)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Cyouni wrote:
Gaterie wrote:

In the other hand, as you explain, level 10 commoners aren't build by PCs rules. Level 10 commoners have +20 to hit (more than an optimized PC with a +3 weapon) and 3d+X damages with any weapon - because that's how level 10 NPCs work. They can't use magic sword at all - their accuracy would become too high, and they have already 3d of damages and there's no rule to apply a magic weapon on that.

So tell me, how does an expert with +17 in his good skills and +13 in his bad skills have trouble killing a level 0 zombie, in this scenario?

(PS: This is a level 7 scenario.)

I don't know why PCs are needed at all, since literally anything else of their level is better than them - and everything they encounter, including rabbits, seems to match exactly their level.

Spoiler:
Right now PF2 is a good system to play Rugrats RPG. ie, you can play a bunch of newborns discovering their racial abilities who fantasize they're fighting dragon while they are actually fighting the cat. Every commoner has the same level as them, since every adult downplay his real capability to play fair with a bunch of babies - they use simple language, don't go too fast when trying to catch them for play, etc.


Gaterie wrote:
you can play a bunch of newborns discovering their racial abilities who fantasize they're fighting dragon while they are actually fighting the cat

Hey, now. Cats are vicious and deadly killing machines. Just look at what happened to this poor commoner


RazarTuk wrote:
Gaterie wrote:
you can play a bunch of newborns discovering their racial abilities who fantasize they're fighting dragon while they are actually fighting the cat
Hey, now. Cats are vicious and deadly killing machines. Just look at what happened to this poor commoner

Yeah, there should be a rule where Tiny creatures can only deal damage to a Small or larger creature if it is paralysed or dead, etc, or the Tiny creatures are in a Swarm.


Swarm of Cats!


Bluenose wrote:
Swarm of Cats!

Total, break out the venery!

151 to 161 of 161 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Player Rules / Skills, Feats, Equipment & Spells / Magical weapons in PF2 are actually magical. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Skills, Feats, Equipment & Spells