| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A single encounter that burns every single one of your focus points is most likely an atypical encounter. I suspect the case of "at some point during the adventuring day there is room for one ten minute rest" is far more common.
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
It actually being 15 minutes is, of course, an exaggeration, but players nova-ing all their resources away and then resting even if they've only spent an hour or two in-character doing stuff today is a very real thing.
Yes, a GM can use logic to restrain it to some degree, but only in some situations and to some degree, and a system that offers additional inducements to not do this is a good thing.
And, for the record, based on how it was phrased, I really am pretty much positive that it's only 1 Focus per 10 minutes, not all Focus. Carina only having one to start with makes it impossible to be certain, but it was generally phrased as 'one Focus' or similar things which is not the phrasing I'd expect unless this is the case. This makes the time commitment to refill a Focus pool a lot more meaningful.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The rules may provide us a lot of flavor to work with, but the fact is their job is first and...I don't like the perspective of "if you don't like a CLASS FEATURE, change it as GM to suit what you believe it's the best", specially when we're talking about the Core Rulebook only.
I understand when subsystems (like hero points) are left behind to suit table preferences, but not class features.
Still, I'm a Paizo fan and I'm sure they'll deliver the best game they could've made.
I don't think a mechanical change is necessary at all here. 10 minutes +1 action is indistinguishable from 10 minutes. Carina isn't praying to Pharasma for anything as gamey as focus points. She's saying a 10 minute prayer to give her the power to heal the wounded. Being able to to spend 10 minutes focusing magical divinity to heal a wound is very close to how magical healing is portrayed in fiction. The only difference is that usually in fiction this is depicted as gradually happening. Carina would be praying over a wound for 10 minutes and having it gradually close up, as opposed to praying for 10 minutes and then the wound healing up in one instantaneous burst. But these games don't have a great way to do gradually manifesting spell effects, and having to tick off hit points even more piece meal would be deeply unsatisfying and slow the game down.
I think it is fair if you don't like the expectation that PCs walk into most battles at full HP, although this doesn't really make this especially more likely than 5es short rest, IMO. Still requires you to spend 30-60 minutes sitting on your butt, and having this tied to first aid or Lay on Hands makes significantly more sense than just resting during that time, especially if you take an HP = meatpoints perspective. But I think calling it silly is unfair. If you get your power bestowed from a practically limitless divine being, and you are a Champion of Good, there's nothing silly about that deity answering your 10 minute prayers for healing on a consistent basis. If anything it makes more sense than only being able to pray to regain spell slots once per day.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
TL;DR The idea of 15m adventuring day sounds more like inapplicable theorycrafting than anything else, and if I'm wrong and people do that then I honestly feel sorry for anyone who has to deal with those players.
As Deadmanwalking said, the "15m" part is a little hyperbole, but one or at most two fights and then calling it for the day isn't uncommon for players in campaigns. It gets worse when players can teleport into and out of dungeons.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think a mechanical change is necessary at all here. 10 minutes +1 action is indistinguishable from 10 minutes. Carina isn't praying to Pharasma for anything as gamey as focus points. She's saying a 10 minute prayer to give her the power to heal the wounded. Being able to to spend 10 minutes focusing magical divinity to heal a wound is very close to how magical healing is portrayed in fiction. The only difference is that usually in fiction this is depicted as gradually happening. Carina would be praying over a wound for 10 minutes and having it gradually close up, as opposed to praying for 10 minutes and then the wound healing up in one instantaneous burst. But these games don't have a great way to do gradually manifesting spell effects, and having to tick off hit points even more piece meal would be deeply unsatisfying and slow the game down.The rules may provide us a lot of flavor to work with, but the fact is their job is first and...I don't like the perspective of "if you don't like a CLASS FEATURE, change it as GM to suit what you believe it's the best", specially when we're talking about the Core Rulebook only.
I understand when subsystems (like hero points) are left behind to suit table preferences, but not class features.
Still, I'm a Paizo fan and I'm sure they'll deliver the best game they could've made.
It does get a bit weird when you tie it together with the last 10 minutes not doing any healing, but then you can do instant healing at some later point.
It is mechanically distinct from praying for 10 minutes to heal because that wouldn't the quick in combat healing or other uses of focus points.
Well, again, it doesn't really seem any more weird that you can pray to 10 minutes for your god to recharge your powers than only being able to do it once per day. And in the case of non-divine classes, meditating to recenter yourself, resting to restore magical stamina, or what have you seem equally appropriate. (It certainly seems about the same as 5es short rest recharging abilities.)
I think the only reason the 10 minute thing seems weird is because we are so used to the artificial constraint of once per day spell slots, which are arbitrarily limited to once per 24 hour period even if you slept 8 hours more than once or lowered your sleep time with a ring of sustenance or what have you. I suppose juxtaposing the two with each other kind of lamp shades how weird our basic assumptions are, so one could make a case that pairing the two next to each in the same system isn't the best call.
Customer Service & Community Manager
|
| 22 people marked this as a favorite. |
The way I kind of pictured it in my head (regardless of the specific rules) was like a field nurse or medic going around to the wounded. Instead of dressing wounds or other physical triage, Carina would be holding her hands on/over/near the patient while she prayed fervently to Pharasma for about 10 minutes, probably while the patient sat looking or feeling fairly uncomfortable (unless they too worship Pharasma). At the end of about 10 minutes, Carina places a hand on the wound and the patient rapidly feels about 6 HP better than they did before. I like to imagine a good deal of this is personal style based on the character. If you're into the roleplaying or descriptive storytelling aspects of ttRPGs, Champions who can lay on hands (or other characters who can use medicinal magic) have a lot of freedom or room to develop their own personal bedside manner and customs for how they go about healing people.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The way I kind of pictured it in my head (regardless of the specific rules) was like a field nurse or medic going around to the wounded. Instead of dressing wounds or other physical triage, Carina would be holding her hands on/over/near the patient while she prayed fervently to Pharasma for about 10 minutes, probably while the patient sat looking or feeling fairly uncomfortable (unless they too worship Pharasma). At the end of about 10 minutes, Carina places a hand on the wound and the patient rapidly feels about 6 HP better than they did before. I like to imagine a good deal of this is personal style based on the character. If you're into the roleplaying or descriptive storytelling aspects of ttRPGs, Champions who can lay on hands (or other characters who can use medicinal magic) have a lot of freedom or room to develop their own personal bedside manner and customs for how they go about healing people.
Yes, your interpretation of Carina's ability is certainly better than just the RAW, the same way "I attack!" is disappointing compared to the players who really get into describing the actions involved with style and vibrancy, or "I try to persuade her!" in respect to actually talking in character.
Anyways - DMW was saying that a champion can pray 10' for 1 Focus. Personally, I think that is okay - I can work with that, I believe. Most of all with a little roleplaying at least now and then, which my players shouldn't be too reluctant in providing, if I know them.
(Hey, best wishes for the campaign!).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here’s a novelty idea, why don’t we move this discussion and perhaps the last few posts to https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42jkn?Lets-focus-on-Focus ?
Here’s a novelty idea, why don’t we move this discussion and perhaps the last few posts to https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42jkn?Lets-focus-on-Focus ?
You're right of course. An alternative would be for me to shut up about this, at least for the moment, and let you fine ladies and gents get the thread back on track.
Starfinder Design Lead
|
| 21 people marked this as a favorite. |
I always hear talk of the 15 minute adventuring day but, like, does that ever really happen?
Yes, it does.
For many of those players, they can't understand why you WOULDN'T play that way. After all, the character knows how their abilites work. The character's life is at risk. Why wouldn't the character use all the most powerful renewable resources they can at the drop of a hat, then refuse to take any more risks until those resources are renewed?
Unless there is some strong narrative reason that's a bad idea, it simply makes sense to many players.
It's not my preferred playstyle, but it is widespread and I understand the thinking behind it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Going into a fight when you are not at full means putting your character's survival at risk. The lower the resources left, the greater the risk. Risking your character's life might be fun, but actually losing your character not so much. Even worse is causing the end of your friend's PC, not to mention a TPK.
So, yes, sometimes retreating and recovering is the best in-character course of action, even if it does not feel sufficiently heroic to the GM.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
In a monotheistic society, most people would believe in and worship one god. The existence of other gods would be denied. Golarion isn't that. In a henotheistic society, most people would acknowledge the existence of other gods than their own, while worshipping only their own. Golarion might be that, but I don't think it is. In a polytheistic society, people would believe there are multiple gods, and would probably worship more than one of them. I suspect *that* is Golarion. My point is that I don't think a native of Golarion would feel uncomfortable at being healed by a priest or paladin of a god other than her own, unless that god was of an opposite alignment to her own. Pharasma's Neutral, so that last bit wouldn't apply to her.
That's my take, anyway. YMMV. :-)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In a monotheistic society, most people would believe in and worship one god. The existence of other gods would be denied. Golarion isn't that. In a henotheistic society, most people would acknowledge the existence of other gods than their own, while worshipping only their own. Golarion might be that, but I don't think it is. In a polytheistic society, people would believe there are multiple gods, and would probably worship more than one of them. I suspect *that* is Golarion. My point is that I don't think a native of Golarion would feel uncomfortable at being healed by a priest or paladin of a god other than her own, unless that god was of an opposite alignment to her own. Pharasma's Neutral, so that last bit wouldn't apply to her.
That's my take, anyway. YMMV. :-)
Specially Pharasma, who is represented in almost every settlement in Golarion since they tackle the social responsibility of dealing with the dead.
Only like.. Gebbites, Urgathoans and people from that one anti-religion country would have an issue! Certainly not Player Char material most of the time. (Maybe some fiend worshipers too)
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In a monotheistic society, most people would believe in and worship one god. The existence of other gods would be denied. Golarion isn't that. In a henotheistic society, most people would acknowledge the existence of other gods than their own, while worshipping only their own. Golarion might be that, but I don't think it is. In a polytheistic society, people would believe there are multiple gods, and would probably worship more than one of them. I suspect *that* is Golarion. My point is that I don't think a native of Golarion would feel uncomfortable at being healed by a priest or paladin of a god other than her own, unless that god was of an opposite alignment to her own. Pharasma's Neutral, so that last bit wouldn't apply to her.
That's my take, anyway. YMMV. :-)
Specially Pharasma, who is represented in almost every settlement in Golarion since they tackle the social responsibility of dealing with the dead.
Only like.. Gebbites, Urgathoans and people from that one anti-religion country would have an issue! Certainly not Player Char material most of the time. (Maybe some fiend worshipers too)
That's the thing with Pharasma. She's also the goddess of birth and the goddess of prophecy. So, a cleric of Pharasma is just as likely to be a midwife as she is a mortician.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's the thing with Pharasma. She's also the goddess of birth and the goddess of prophecy. So, a cleric of Pharasma is just as likely to be a midwife as she is a mortician.In a monotheistic society, most people would believe in and worship one god. The existence of other gods would be denied. Golarion isn't that. In a henotheistic society, most people would acknowledge the existence of other gods than their own, while worshipping only their own. Golarion might be that, but I don't think it is. In a polytheistic society, people would believe there are multiple gods, and would probably worship more than one of them. I suspect *that* is Golarion. My point is that I don't think a native of Golarion would feel uncomfortable at being healed by a priest or paladin of a god other than her own, unless that god was of an opposite alignment to her own. Pharasma's Neutral, so that last bit wouldn't apply to her.
That's my take, anyway. YMMV. :-)
Specially Pharasma, who is represented in almost every settlement in Golarion since they tackle the social responsibility of dealing with the dead.
Only like.. Gebbites, Urgathoans and people from that one anti-religion country would have an issue! Certainly not Player Char material most of the time. (Maybe some fiend worshipers too)
That... that sounds astoundingly like a real-life example from rural Sardinia. Not sure you can find anything intelligible about acabbadoras, but essentially they fulfilled the role of midwives and euthanisers up to apparently the early 60s.
Like. It’s a thing.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
That... that sounds astoundingly like a real-life example from rural Sardinia. Not sure you can find anything intelligible about acabbadoras, but essentially they fulfilled the role of midwives and euthanisers up to apparently the early 60s.
Like. It’s a thing.
I had a look, and nowhere it talks about midwifing, so who knows. As for euthanizing, some anthropologists think that's a folkloric exaggeration and the accabadoras simply stayed with the dying to comfort them and help them in their last days, while they assumed the roles of bringers of death only in the contos de forredda (hearth tales).
Maybe the truth lies between the first and the seventh cup of Mirto ;)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
In a monotheistic society, most people would believe in and worship one god. The existence of other gods would be denied. Golarion isn't that. In a henotheistic society, most people would acknowledge the existence of other gods than their own, while worshipping only their own. Golarion might be that, but I don't think it is. In a polytheistic society, people would believe there are multiple gods, and would probably worship more than one of them. I suspect *that* is Golarion. My point is that I don't think a native of Golarion would feel uncomfortable at being healed by a priest or paladin of a god other than her own, unless that god was of an opposite alignment to her own. Pharasma's Neutral, so that last bit wouldn't apply to her.
That's my take, anyway. YMMV. :-)
I think the implication was more along the lines of "Um, is she giving me last rites here? Am I dying?" than not accepting Pharasma.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That... that sounds astoundingly like a real-life example from rural Sardinia. Not sure you can find anything intelligible about acabbadoras, but essentially they fulfilled the role of midwives and euthanisers up to apparently the early 60s.
Like. It’s a thing.
I had a look, and nowhere it talks about midwifing, so who knows. As for euthanizing, some anthropologists think that's a folkloric exaggeration and the accabadoras simply stayed with the dying to comfort them and help them in their last days, while they assumed the roles of bringers of death only in the contos de forredda (hearth tales).
Maybe the truth lies between the first and the seventh cup of Mirto ;)
lol. Maybe! I’m mostly getting informations on that from friends & family of friends, so definitely not historians. But mainly, it’s the concept that matters.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
But then, is it really a choice? Or is it the illusion of choice? Sometimes I really think the game hasnt really changed beyond DnD Basic and all these options are just an illusion.At first I was moderately negative on Treat Wounds only healing one target, because I'm a big fan of "patch the party up over a 10 minute rest".
But then I realized this is probably an "open the design space" move, and there is a 90% chance there will be a Skill Feat that bumps it back up to multiheal.
So I think it's a good change.
All choice is illusion, in game design. Good game design just hides the illusion.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
All choice is illusion, in game design. Good game design just hides the illusion.But then, is it really a choice? Or is it the illusion of choice? Sometimes I really think the game hasnt really changed beyond DnD Basic and all these options are just an illusion.At first I was moderately negative on Treat Wounds only healing one target, because I'm a big fan of "patch the party up over a 10 minute rest".
But then I realized this is probably an "open the design space" move, and there is a 90% chance there will be a Skill Feat that bumps it back up to multiheal.
So I think it's a good change.
You've become quite the expert on it since the Playtest, haven't you? Even Mark complimented you. Kudos! ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That... that sounds astoundingly like a real-life example from rural Sardinia. Not sure you can find anything intelligible about acabbadoras, but essentially they fulfilled the role of midwives and euthanisers up to apparently the early 60s.
Like. It’s a thing.
https://mysardinianlife.com/2012/05/18/la-accabadora-the-woman-of-death-sar dinian-folklore/
The forum software seems to be putting a space in the "Sardinian" part of that link. :-(
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
All choice is illusion, in game design. Good game design just hides the illusion.
I disagree with this on a very fundamental level. This feels like a flippant throwaway line that just doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
Theres's an oft-repeated quote from Sid Meier that games are a series of interesting decisions, which I at least think holds true for strategy games, and for tabletop RPGs.
The choices can be cosmetic, or flavor, or any number of non-mechanical things, and your point holds decently well. There's real truth there. A good story or flavor description can make a dull mechanic or weak option more appealing. Another example is a set of choices, all of which are destined to lead to a crashed boat conveniently kicking off a campaign (or just dead characters).
But false choices are a real game design trap. It's actually one of the strengths of class-based systems with bundled abilities that you can include trade-offs in the actual choice of your character's abilities, and therefore players can't just choose from every ability from any class to end up with only the "best" abilities (best being context-dependent) such that playing any other character would be a mistake (for that context). It's why it matters that skill feats aren't designed to compete with class feats in the selection process, and the trade-off to give up being able to climb better vs. healing or stealth or something is relevant.
If taking the skill feat is effectively mandatory (which I'm not saying is true or untrue), it would be a false choice, and it would feel bad to pick the skill and not be even vaguely effective with it. That's a valid thing to be concerned about as a player. It was lame when you *had* to play a rogue to disable magical traps, because any other choice was mechanically incapable, no matter how high your disable device got. Parties having effective healing through skills is partly trying to address an otherwise "false choice" to not bring a cleric along. But if skill healing is too strong, then someone picking picking a cleric for the flavor and desire to heal the party is going to feel bad that it was a meaningless choice because the rogue is better at healing because of their seemingly endless skill feats.
These are tough design challenges and it's a huge disservice to the devs to call them illusory choices.
Edit: Typos, another example. If other typos escaped, I apologize, I'm on a mobile device.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
That... that sounds astoundingly like a real-life example from rural Sardinia. Not sure you can find anything intelligible about acabbadoras, but essentially they fulfilled the role of midwives and euthanisers up to apparently the early 60s.
Like. It’s a thing.
https://mysardinianlife.com/2012/05/18/la-accabadora-the-woman-of-death-sar dinian-folklore/
The forum software seems to be putting a space in the "Sardinian" part of that link. :-(
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
All choice is illusion, in game design. Good game design just hides the illusion.I disagree with this on a very fundamental level. This feels like a flippant throwaway line that just doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
Theres's an oft-repeated quote from Sid Meier that games are a series of interesting decisions, which I at least think holds true for strategy games, and for tabletop RPGs.
The choices can be cosmetic, or flavor, or any number of non-mechanical things, and your point holds decently well. There's real truth there. A good story or flavor description can make a dull mechanic or weak option more appealing. Another example is a set of choices, all of which are destined to lead to a crashed boat conveniently kicking off a campaign (or just dead characters).
But false choices are a real game design trap. It's actually one of the strengths of class-based systems with bundled abilities that you can include trade-offs in the actual choice of your character's abilities, and therefore players can't just choose from every ability from any class to end up with only the "best" abilities (best being context-dependent) such that playing any other character would be a mistake (for that context). It's why it matters that skill feats aren't designed to compete with class feats in the selection process, and the trade-off to give up being able to climb better vs. healing or stealth or something is relevant.
If taking the skill feat is effectively mandatory (which I'm not saying is true or untrue), it would be a false choice, and it would feel bad to pick the skill and not be even vaguely effective with it. That's a valid thing to be concerned about as a player. It was lame when you *had* to play a rogue to disable magical traps, because any other choice was mechanically incapable, no matter how high your disable device got. Parties having effective healing through skills is partly trying to address an otherwise "false choice" to not bring a cleric along. But if...
Generally gaming philosophy aside, I would be shocked if Medicine skill feats became a "false choice." While Qundle is a good healer, he's currently being outshone in it by Carinna, at least for out of combat purposes. She can heal the same target 6 times in an hour to Qundle's one, and Qundle has a chance of failure and critical failure. Qundle might be able to tip those scales in his favor with later skill feat investment, but we don't know what options open up for Lay on Hands and Carinna is probably not built for healing anyway with 12 CHA. And if a Paladin with 12 CHA can cover your group for out of non-time sensitive healing, I'm sure a cleric can cover you.
So it looks like there will be multiple options for covering your healing needs, with each probably having its own advantages and disadvantages. The idea that this is moving into false choice territory feels perplexing. I mean, I suppose if you plan on being your party's only healer it might make a lot of sense to invest heavily in those medicine skill feats, but that's just because healing is gonna be a role someone needs to fill eventually. Having multiple ways to fill it seems like the ideal solution.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you have 1 healer, what happens when that healer goes down? I've always thought a secondary healer vital. Better still if everyone can do a little healing, in case there's only 1 left standing.
If you have 1 healer, what happens when that healer goes down? I've always thought a secondary healer vital. Better still if everyone can do a little healing, in case there's only 1 left standing.
Once back in 3.5 i was the healer guy, we had nothing else to heal at several points. If i did go down everyone was f!!@ed as 1 point per level per day is almost useless xD
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you have 1 healer, what happens when that healer goes down? I've always thought a secondary healer vital. Better still if everyone can do a little healing, in case there's only 1 left standing.
If you have 1 tank, what happens when that tank goes down? Redundancy is useful for almost any role in the party, but not always practical given you can't usually double up on EVERY role in a given party, and sometimes character concepts don't align for the most optimal party balance.
For healing specifically, the healer going down is why you make sure everyone has a potion. Regardless, I don't see how that takes away from the point. Whether you want 1 healer or 4, you still have multiple options to achieve that goal, which makes it hard to paint Medicine skill feats as a false choice.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you have 1 healer, what happens when that healer goes down?If you have 1 tank, what happens when that tank goes down?
The healer heals them.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
You've become quite the expert on it since the Playtest, haven't you? Even Mark complimented you. Kudos! ;)All choice is illusion, in game design. Good game design just hides the illusion.But then, is it really a choice? Or is it the illusion of choice? Sometimes I really think the game hasnt really changed beyond DnD Basic and all these options are just an illusion.At first I was moderately negative on Treat Wounds only healing one target, because I'm a big fan of "patch the party up over a 10 minute rest".
But then I realized this is probably an "open the design space" move, and there is a 90% chance there will be a Skill Feat that bumps it back up to multiheal.
So I think it's a good change.
I've been fascinated by/studying game design since way before the playtest, honestly, the playtest was just a rare experience of being able to talk to highly skilled designers about what makes them tick. And no, I'm really not an expert. I'm well familiar with the theories, but pretty awful at the implementation. :)
I disagree with this on a very fundamental level. This feels like a flippant throwaway line that just doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
Theres's an oft-repeated quote from Sid Meier that games are a series of interesting decisions, which I at least think holds true for strategy games, and for tabletop RPGs.
The choices can be cosmetic, or flavor, or any number of non-mechanical things, and your point holds decently well. There's real truth there. A good story or flavor description can make a dull mechanic or weak option more appealing. Another example is a set of choices, all of which are destined to lead to a crashed boat conveniently kicking off a campaign (or just dead characters).
But false choices are a real game design trap. It's actually one of the strengths of class-based systems with bundled abilities that you can include trade-offs in the actual choice of your character's abilities, and therefore players can't just choose from every ability from any class to end up with only the "best" abilities (best being context-dependent) such that playing any other character would be a mistake (for that context). It's why it matters that skill feats aren't designed to compete with class feats in the selection process, and the trade-off to give up being able to climb better vs. healing or stealth or something is relevant.
Well said. Of course it was a pithy line; I don't think there's any single line that can sum up game design as a whole. :P
To expound on what I mean, then: Choice, in a game, exists within the bounds of the game. If a game is well-designed, it will account for your choices and take steps to make them feel meaningful - hiding the illusion, as it were. If a game is poorly designed, that won't be the case. In other words, how meaningful a choice you make is has nothing to do with the choice itself and everything to do with whether or not the designer predicted you would make that choice. There simply isn't enough time in the day to account for every possible choice every possible player could make.
Obviously in some kinds of games, especially PVP-type games, this can become less true because the actions of the players shape the "meta" of the game more than the actions of the designers. Although good designers will still know how to influence even that.
Which is all to say that in my opinion the developers making design choices clearly designed to influence player choices actually results in making those choices more meaningful, not less. Having a feat that people who want to be awesome healers are almost always going to take allows the designers to predicate types of gameplay experiences off of that feat. If the designers have a good idea what choices people are going to make and why, they can make those choices more meaningful.
I completely agree with you about the danger of false choices, though. I think false choices mostly come about from design overfocus: One aspect of a choice gets much more attention than another, resulting in option "A" being much more meaningful than option "B". Power Attack is a good example of this - it's not just that Power Attack is a really good feat that leads to lots of other good feats; it's that the alternative choices to Power Attack often aren't as good and don't lead to as many good things. Rather than fixing Power Attack by saying "this choice is overpowered, let's nerf it/get rid of it", you could also fix it by making the feats that compete with it more meaningful.
In summary, I feel like moving multiheal to a feat helps Paizo refine the game experience they want healers to have and is only a bad idea if there aren't other feats that compete with it in a meaningful way, such that getting it always feels like you are making a choice. Even if it's the choice you were always going to make. :)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Zel's claw natural weapons have the Agile property but NOT the finesse property. This means you can't use Dex to hit with them anymore. This is really big if it's consistent for all Claws.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Zel's claw natural weapons have the Agile property but NOT the finesse property. This means you can't use Dex to hit with them anymore. This is really big if it's consistent for all Claws.
Cats are suddenly much less dangerous, at the very least.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Zel's claw natural weapons have the Agile property but NOT the finesse property. This means you can't use Dex to hit with them anymore. This is really big if it's consistent for all Claws.Cats are suddenly much less dangerous, at the very least.
Still holding on to the hope that this is on a case by case basis and my kittens can remain deadly!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Grappling rules are still pretty weird. Partial grabs now?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nat 20s (and probably nat 1s?) are now +1 (or -1?) success level, rather than auto-crits or auto-crit-fails.
Mostly indistinguishable from the old rule, but easier to state. Like the old rule was "a natural 20 is a critical success if a +20 on your roll would cause it to succeed." So the only difference is when people are fighting way out of their weight class.
I guess there could be implications of "100,000 level 1 archers take out a scary dragon just from sheer weight of math" but it's easy enough to avoid these situations in play.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Grapple targets Fortitude saves.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t mean to derail and it might just be me but I have no issue with the idea (and any mechanics that enable it) of thousands of level 1 characters (an army) being able to take out a dragon or other high level nasty. It makes sense to me and is another reason that said big bads don’t blatantly rule the world (other than PCs and other high level NPCs stopping it.) Meh, different strokes I suppose.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t mean to derail and it might just be me but I have no issue with the idea (and any mechanics that enable it) of thousands of level 1 characters (an army) being able to take out a dragon or other high level nasty. It makes sense to me and is another reason that said big bads don’t blatantly rule the world (other than PCs and other high level NPCs stopping it.) Meh, different strokes I suppose.
It works mostly the same way it did in the playtest, but the new rules has 2 different use cases, if you would critically fail on a 20, you now only fail, where before it would be a success, and the reverse is true now with natural 1s, so that if you were so good at a task you would critically succeed on a 1, it would be just a success, actually preventing the armies taking on minor demigods scenarios.
Director of Game Design
|
| 18 people marked this as a favorite. |
Zel's claw natural weapons have the Agile property but NOT the finesse property. This means you can't use Dex to hit with them anymore. This is really big if it's consistent for all Claws.
Turns out this was probably an error, the claws are finesse weapons. Fortunately, I don't think it would have made a difference the way he was rolling.
|
Customer Service & Community Manager
|
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the implication was more along the lines of "Um, is she giving me last rites here? Am I dying?" than not accepting Pharasma.My point is that I don't think a native of Golarion would feel uncomfortable at being healed by a priest or paladin of a god other than her own, unless that god was of an opposite alignment to her own. Pharasma's Neutral, so that last bit wouldn't apply to her.
That's my take, anyway. YMMV. :-)
I intended it to be more like: how awkward it might be to have someone stand or kneel next to you talking, but not talking to you, asking their deity to heal your wounds and stuff? 10 minutes is a surprisingly long time to have someone monologuing next to you. Like, what's the proper etiquette here? Can you talk to other people while they're praying? Is it rude if you eat dinner while their praying over you? Should you say anything? What if they start saying stuff about you to their deity that you feel may be incorrect or troubling (Pharamsa heal this mortal creature's wounds and save them from an early grave so that I have more time to convert them to your cause! ) It would presumably be less awkward for another follower of the same deity because they are likely to be more comfortable engaging in spiritual matters with a fellow worshiper.
|
Customer Service & Community Manager
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's the thing with Pharasma. She's also the goddess of birth and the goddess of prophecy. So, a cleric of Pharasma is just as likely to be a midwife as she is a mortician.In a monotheistic society, most people would believe in and worship one god. The existence of other gods would be denied. Golarion isn't that. In a henotheistic society, most people would acknowledge the existence of other gods than their own, while worshipping only their own. Golarion might be that, but I don't think it is. In a polytheistic society, people would believe there are multiple gods, and would probably worship more than one of them. I suspect *that* is Golarion. My point is that I don't think a native of Golarion would feel uncomfortable at being healed by a priest or paladin of a god other than her own, unless that god was of an opposite alignment to her own. Pharasma's Neutral, so that last bit wouldn't apply to her.
That's my take, anyway. YMMV. :-)
Specially Pharasma, who is represented in almost every settlement in Golarion since they tackle the social responsibility of dealing with the dead.
Only like.. Gebbites, Urgathoans and people from that one anti-religion country would have an issue! Certainly not Player Char material most of the time. (Maybe some fiend worshipers too)
Maybe this is getting a little bit too far off into the weeds, but IRL there's also Death Doulas and I could definitely see a worshipper of Pharasma serving their community in that role.
The International End of Life Doula Association (INELDA)Healthline: How ‘Death Doulas’ Can Help People at the End of Their Life
Wikipedia: Death Midwife.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Zel's claw natural weapons have the Agile property but NOT the finesse property. This means you can't use Dex to hit with them anymore. This is really big if it's consistent for all Claws.Turns out this was probably an error, the claws are finesse weapons. Fortunately, I don't think it would have made a difference the way he was rolling.
PRAISE ASMODEUS!! Uh, I mean, The Living God!
|
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
A great wyrm red dragon with 39 AC fighting a hoard of 300 lvl 1 town guards.
A town guard will likely have some strength. Let's give them +4 str bonus. +1 to hit for level. +2 for being sufficiently proficient with their weapon. That's a total of +7 to hit.
They roll a natural 20 and with a +7 that's a critical miss. Except a natural 20 increases it one level, so it's just a miss. None of the lvl 1 guards would even make a dent on it.
All of that makes sense because a CR 22 dragon should roflstomp an army of lvl 1s every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
The dragon would crit every one of them unless it rolled a natural 1. At that point it just hits them normally. Again, makes sense. This is an ender of worlds dragon.
They are the thing of nightmares. Now imagine how people would view the heroes who could take one down? High level players are virtually gods from the viewpoint of an average commoner.