| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First stuff gained from the Oblivion Oath stream:
New Backgrounds: Field Medic and Guard
New Heritages (?): Gnome - Chameleon
Dwarf - Death Warden
Goblin - Unbreakable
Custom Ancestry: Iruxi (Lizardfolk) - Heritage (?): Riverland
I put a ? beside what appear to be Heritage names. They are in parenthesis by the ancestry entries for each character. I'm guessing they are Heritages.
Dwarf death warden is.. odd. Did Dwarves have something like this in their golarion lore?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dwarf death warden is.. odd. Did Dwarves have something like this in their golarion lore?
There's the Death's End tomb guardians of the Pahmet (mentioned in Heroes from the Fringe), the dwarves of Kovlar who still live near haunted Saggorak (Dwarves of Golarion), plus Barrow Warden and Barrow Scholar dwarves from Horror Adventures. It wound up being a pretty good number.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Barrow Scholar and Barrow Warden are both Alternate Dwarf Racial Traits, so yeah, there is a P1e connection there.
EDIT: Ninja'd by Mark!
|
Dwarf death warden is.. odd. Did Dwarves have something like this in their golarion lore?There's the Death's End tomb guardians of the Pahmet (mentioned in Heroes from the Fringe), the dwarves of Kovlar who still live near haunted Saggorak (Dwarves of Golarion), plus Barrow Warden and Barrow Scholar dwarves from Horror Adventures. It wound up being a pretty good number.
Pahmet! My husband played one in our Mummy's Mask game. Really enjoyed that character.
But let's please keep this thread mostly as an index, and take specific chat about the Oblivion Oath stream to other threads so it's easier to follow this one!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don't think this was posted here yet...but there is a Basic action called Sense Motive that uses Perception. Joe, you may want to add a link which points to the Garycon thread where Mark Seifter talks about this in the final game.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don't think this was posted here yet...but there is a Basic action called Sense Motive that uses Perception. Joe, you may want to add a link which points to the Garycon thread where Mark Seifter talks about this in the final game.
Here's the post about Sense Motive, for reference:
Perception, so it's a basic action rather than a skill use.Anyway, on Sense Motive, everyone here is correct. However, they are also right about that sort of bespoke nameless "Perception check vs. weird behavior that isn't lying" being a thing, so for the final, we wound up calling that thing "Sense Motive" and giving it reverse success conditions of Lie when used against Deception, kind of like how Seek and Hide/Sneak have reverse success conditions.Thanks for replying Mark, although I'm a little confused. Is Sense Motive a use under Deception or a use under Perception.
It was during the playtest when Champions first became a thing and we got the NG/CG paladins, they said that the evil ones would definitely be in the first batch of books. They also said they MIGHT try and work the neutral ones into the CRB, but they probably won't (and didn't) make it
Huh. I expected the design of Champions to be such that only the name would really differ across the good/evil spectrum. The idea that evil ones are going to be designed separately doesn't exactly inspire confidence w/ respect to the prospect of reigning in bloat. But I guess we'll see. :)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Huh. I expected the design of Champions to be such that only the name would really differ across the good/evil spectrum. The idea that evil ones are going to be designed separately doesn't exactly inspire confidence w/ respect to the prospect of reigning in bloat. But I guess we'll see. :)
If they stick with the way it was set up in the playtest, it really is mostly the same.
Every Alignment probably gets a different Reaction, and you get a different Power based on the Good/Evil axis (Lay on Hands for Good, presumably Touch of Corruption for Evil...something else for Neutral, one presumes).
There'll probably be a few Alignment-locked Class Feats as well, but the core chassis seems identical (the Reaction and Power aside).
|
It was during the playtest when Champions first became a thing and we got the NG/CG paladins, they said that the evil ones would definitely be in the first batch of books. They also said they MIGHT try and work the neutral ones into the CRB, but they probably won't (and didn't) make itHuh. I expected the design of Champions to be such that only the name would really differ across the good/evil spectrum. The idea that evil ones are going to be designed separately doesn't exactly inspire confidence w/ respect to the prospect of reigning in bloat. But I guess we'll see. :)
The Champions share the bulk of their design. What changes between them (at least as of the last playtest update) is the tenets, Champion's reaction (plus class feats and features that improve it) and Champion power (though all Good Champions share Lay on Hands). They're more like subclasses (like Barbarian totems or Druid orders) than separately designed classes
Huh. I expected the design of Champions to be such that only the name would really differ across the good/evil spectrum. The idea that evil ones are going to be designed separately doesn't exactly inspire confidence w/ respect to the prospect of reigning in bloat. But I guess we'll see. :)If they stick with the way it was set up in the playtest, it really is mostly the same.
Every Alignment probably gets a different Reaction, and you get a different Power based on the Good/Evil axis (Lay on Hands for Good, presumably Touch of Corruption for Evil...something else for Neutral, one presumes).
There'll probably be a few Alignment-locked Class Feats as well, but the core chassis seems identical (the Reaction and Power aside).
Thanks for the info. Sad to see the various alignments didn't make core, but such is life.
Also...do neutral champions really need to be a thing?
"I'm here in the name of...meh."
;-)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Huh. I expected the design of Champions to be such that only the name would really differ across the good/evil spectrum. The idea that evil ones are going to be designed separately doesn't exactly inspire confidence w/ respect to the prospect of reigning in bloat. But I guess we'll see. :)If they stick with the way it was set up in the playtest, it really is mostly the same.
Every Alignment probably gets a different Reaction, and you get a different Power based on the Good/Evil axis (Lay on Hands for Good, presumably Touch of Corruption for Evil...something else for Neutral, one presumes).
There'll probably be a few Alignment-locked Class Feats as well, but the core chassis seems identical (the Reaction and Power aside).
Thanks for the info. Sad to see the various alignments didn't make core, but such is life.
Also...do neutral champions really need to be a thing?
"I'm here in the name of...meh."
;-)
Without darkness there is no light, and without light, what would the world be? Freedom is the right of all different beings, yet without laws there would be anarchy. I fight for balance
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for the info. Sad to see the various alignments didn't make core, but such is life.
It probably would've been a tad overkill on page count for the Champion, but it is unfortunate we lack them. Still, it's almost certainly a temporary problem.
Also...do neutral champions really need to be a thing?
"I'm here in the name of...meh."
;-)
As TheGoofyGE3K notes, they'll probably go the balance route. I'm personally ambivalent about a True Neutral Champion, but LN and CN variants seem very necessary to me, so I'm willing to deal with it for the sake of symmetry.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Without darkness there is no light, and without light, what would the world be? Freedom is the right of all different beings, yet without laws there would be anarchy. I fight for balance
Gary Gygax INTENSIFIES!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Could we take the champion discussion to another thread? Trying to keep this one at least semi-focused :-P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well from the stream, now it appears that you can cast a spell without problems when you are grabbed (even if it has a manipulate action)
Well from the stream, now it appears that you can cast a spell without problems when you are grabbed (even if it has a manipulate action)
Keeping in mind that Sorcerer can substitute somatic components for material ones- so we don’t know anything about material components yet.
Well from the stream, now it appears that you can cast a spell without problems when you are grabbed (even if it has a manipulate action)Keeping in mind that Sorcerer can substitute somatic components for material ones- so we don’t know anything about material components yet.
Unless they changed, both have the exact same traits (Manipulate, Spellcasting)
If you're grabbed you must succeed at a DC 5 flat check to perform a manipulate action.
It seems Somatic Spellcasting is no longer a manipulate action, because Owen's character did not hat to make the flat check to cast, only to draw his dagger after casting.
If you're grabbed you must succeed at a DC 5 flat check to perform a manipulate action.
It seems Somatic Spellcasting is no longer a manipulate action, because Owen's character did not hat to make the flat check to cast, only to draw his dagger after casting.
Casting a damaging spell may have an Attack trait, which I believe may not require a flat check to succeed in order to complete the action.
| 20 people marked this as a favorite. |
They did that wrong on the stream, since somatic casting indeed has manipulate. Also technically the zombie's grab ended because it didn't spend one action to automatically keep it active. I didn't mention it yesterday since no one was speculating on that yet and I figured might as well let it pass in that case. That was the only inaccuracy I caught in the entire stream, which makes it probably the most accurate one we've run so far. Getting a little something wrong is inevitable.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Getting a little something wrong is inevitable.
Although we at Paizo prefer to downplay its importance in 2e and make aeons more relevant, Mark ;)
Yeah, I had been wondering about the zombie maintaining it's grapple but didn't say anything. Good to know the manipulate bit was wrong.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
We finally have confirmation of something folks have been speculating about for a while: "Touch AC is gone" in PF2.
Hm. Is SR still a thing?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hm. Is SR still a thing?
I'd be shocked if it was. In the playtest it was replaced with a conditional bonus on saving throws against magic. Adding it back in would add a lot of complexity that I doubt anyone was really jonsing for specifically, and it would mean crowding every spell's text with "Spell Resistance Yes/No" and that eats into page count.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
I *loathe* spell resistance. That's all I have to say about that.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think having targeted spells suffer mischance from concealment is probably a better compromise, as well. You can achieve the same thing without introducing new mechanics and calculations.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
No TAC and no SR is good. Nice to see Paizo trimming the mechanical fat from the system. Bloat is a lot easier to deal with than clunky rules. Maybe Antimagic Field won't be in the system anymore either... I can dream. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No TAC and no SR is good. Nice to see Paizo trimming the mechanical fat from the system. Bloat is a lot easier to deal with than clunky rules. Maybe Antimagic Field won't be in the system anymore either... I can dream. :)
I doubt we will lose that because it represents a pretty distinct narrative element, unlike TAC and SR. But at least it will be simpler to calculate when it happens, since it really only removes the item bonsues for the most part. Well, I suppose potent items do exist at higher levels, too, but it still feels simpler than losing enhancement bonuses to ability scores, enhancements bonuses to weapons and armor, enhancement bonuses to damage, natural armor enhancements, deflection, luck...
Even just the damage reduction is easier. "Roll 3 less dice" feels much easier to parse than calculating how much of your damage bonus came from magic rather than strength, 1.5 strength, power attack, studied combat, etc.
Please take these conversations elsewhere!
My bad.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
From the Twitch Stream Elves vs Demons (now on youtube)
The highest level monster in the PF2 Bestiary #1 will be Treerazer. A size huge dinosaur demon who hates trees, elves, and all things green and good in the world.
He will fill the role of the Tarrasque in the Bestiary (kind of implies that the Tarrasque will not be in PF2 or at least not Bestiary 1)
Already an existing Golarion thing so you can look him up on the Golarion wiki.
(kind of implies that the Tarrasque will not be in PF2 or at least not Bestiary 1)
Is that a retcon? IIRC the Tarrasque was worked into Golarion lore by having it be one of Rovagug's Spawn. Of course, Rovagug could have any number of kids so we might be best off highlighting ones that are more unique to Golarion.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah... NEVER saw a fight vs it. It was a good constant to compare all teh D&D/Pathfinder versions, but yeah, I don't think anyone will suffer not having it...
Uh... Wasn't there a "Tarrasque Form" lvl 10 spell in the playtest? (Would pretty much confirm it's still a Golarion thing.)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah... NEVER saw a fight vs it. It was a good constant to compare all teh D&D/Pathfinder versions, but yeah, I don't think anyone will suffer not having it...
Uh... Wasn't there a "Tarrasque Form" lvl 10 spell in the playtest? (Would pretty much confirm it's still a Golarion thing.)
Nature Incarnate can transform the caster into a Kaiju but not the tarrasque specifically.
|
|
Nature Incarnate can transform the caster into a Kaiju but not the tarrasque specifically.Yeah... NEVER saw a fight vs it. It was a good constant to compare all teh D&D/Pathfinder versions, but yeah, I don't think anyone will suffer not having it...
Uh... Wasn't there a "Tarrasque Form" lvl 10 spell in the playtest? (Would pretty much confirm it's still a Golarion thing.)
Ah yeah. You're right. I misremembered. Still one of my favorite new spell.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's simply because the Tarrasque is Rovagug's herald, and why statting a single herald in the bestiary and not all of them? Better to leave them all for a book in the vein of Inner Sea Gods. Also they're really trying to get away from their 3.5 roots, and a creature unique to Golarion works much better for that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alternatively They plan on doing a bunch of Spawn of Rovagug at once, along with specific spawn rules, rather than introducing a single one right now. Treerazer is a demon so presumably doesn't need any new rules for his type of monster.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Joe does good work here and this thread would be fantastic as the dedicated update thread that it is intended to be.
I hate to suggest it, but a copy paste reminder to move discussions to a different thread on each update might help new posters keep the thread clear.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's a good idea, thanks.
Anyway, discussion of this week's Oblivion Oath, including a few rules reveals, picks up HERE
REMINDER: Please keep discussion of PF2 information out of this thread, so we can keep it focused as an easy-to-follow list of updates/reveals. Thanks!!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is confirmed that Sneak Attack damage is doubled on a critical hit. Explains the 4d6 maximum.
|
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
!!!
PF2 PRD drops on Day 1: August 1, 2019 @ 7am PST
REMINDER: Please take any discussion to other threads, so we can keep this one focused as an easy-to-follow list of updates/reveals. Thanks!!
|
|
!!!
PF2 PRD drops on Day 1: August 1, 2019 @ 7am PST
REMINDER: Please take any discussion to other threads, so we can keep this one focused as an easy-to-follow list of updates/reveals. Thanks!!
How can we be sure this refers to the PRD itself and not merely the day PF2 arrives ?
Still I greatly appreciate your efforts in this thread :-)