One of the types of spells that is being introduced in the the second edition of Pathfinder is the focus spells, that are exclusive to the class and you can cast it with the use of focus, an limited resource that you can get back by spending 10 minutes doing something characteristic to the class like Wizards studying the spellbook, Clerics praying and so on.
Now it comes the question, what kind of activities that give benefits outside of regaining the focus would be valid?
Wizards trying to learn one new spell from an scroll qualify as studying the spellbook to regain focus?
The animal Druid would regain the focus by using treat wounds in their animal companion?
If your answer is yes what other type of activities you think that classes can use to regain their focus?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think this is a flat “no”
I would take it to mean that the person trying to regain focus cannot do anything else. It is about regaining focus therefore the character should have to do just that - focus. No distractions
Let’s face it , this is 10 minutes out of an adventuring day and the focus method is purely thematic.
If there just happens to be a weird overlap like a cleric of sarenrae arguably having their religious deific obedience being “healing the sick” that should not mean they mechanically heal people in that 10 minutes. It would just be general bedside assistance / mopping brows etc
Anything else seems to be trying to manipulate the system away from what is intended by the design
Last i heard, regaining focus had a specific activities one could do; the Champion doing some form of prayer or paying respect. Any stacking of 10 min activities as we currently know of will have to be subject to houseruling.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I think there are probably pretty specific rules for this (which amount to 'No, you can't multitask this').
There seems to be a slight exception for Divine characters doing something that basically counts as prayer in their deity's book (a Pharasmin performing funerary rites, for example), but that seems to be the only place there's any leeway.
Indications are also that Sorcerers can do whatever they want and just regain 1 Focus every 10 minutes, but that's not exactly leeway so much as a specific benefit given to Sorcerers.
There was a mention of the druids focus activity being "Be one with nature". I somehow really like how unspecific that is and how much RP freedom that leaves.
Our party nature-girl will read that as "roll in the dirt", "take a dump in the wood" and so on.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mark has confirmed the "Refocus" activity is how you recover focus. What you do during Refocus is determined by your class, but you can't use two activities at the same time, so no way to cheese it.
(source: Pathfinder RPG Discord group, 2e_general, refocus)
Whatever activity it is, it's not resulting in incidental benefits. Those 10 minutes gotta be fully dedicated to recovering the focus, not doing something else that's helpful. The cost of this powerful ability is those 10 minutes of your time.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Rules As Written
as opposed to
Rules as Intended.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't what the RAW is, but I think for clerics and paladins in particular, there is story story and thematic reasons to allow them to preform useful actions while refocusing.
This is a very minor effect, and so giving a hyper-specific, weaker version of a sorcerer ability shouldn't take anything away from sorcerers and it shouldn't unbalance which gods you pick. It a very minor cost for a major benefit.
It draws you into your god's particular religion. Any cleric can show reverence to their god and pray, that isn't very interesting. Having your cleric of Sarenrae heal as they refocus or a cleric of Nethys identify magic items, or a cleric of Torag repairing his shield, isn't ground-breaking, but it does establish what kind of cleric you are.
And by allowing these very obvious mechanical benefits, it allows for subtler ones. A cleric of Shelyn could refocus by sharing folk-songs with the caravan you are travelling with and the GM can sprinkle in some rumors that you hear.
It is much more interesting than simply sitting in a corner for 10 minutes praying and going to the next person and asking what they would like to do while they sit in the corner for 10 minutes. The 10 minutes is just a way to ensure you don't refocus in combat, while keeping a nice standard for some other post-combat actions, and providing a lore reason for why you an encounter-based resources when "combat" isn't really special in lore.
Sure, there may be sometimes where those 10 minutes are really important, but I think that is fringe and I think it can lead to some good moments in the story. People will remember the one time they manage to shave off 10 minutes and just barely beat the ticking clock and not the 100 times it didn't really matter.
I don't agree. If a cleric wants to spend time RPing to show what kind of cleric they are, they need make the effort to do that, and not simply game the system on regaining focus points.
10 minutes of dedication isn't a high ask. Wanting to get more out of just seems greedy (and for clerics, disrespectful of the power they're throwing about)
It's also mechanically a can o worms kind of precedent, in the sense of 'what else can you bundle together to game the system?'
So if an ally dies and a cleric of pharasma buries the body and whatnot, would that be enough for a refocus?
So if an ally dies and a cleric of pharasma buries the body and whatnot, would that be enough for a refocus?
Signs point to yes.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So if an ally dies and a cleric of pharasma buries the body and whatnot, would that be enough for a refocus?
In Oblivion Oath, Carina, the Champion of Pharasma, took some time to align the corpse of the
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I could see an interesting drift on the rules for refocusing could be used as a currency for taking advantage of RP opportunities. Might work similarly to Fate Points from Fate or Willpower in World of Darkness.
May not work for an organized play thing, but maybe in APs or Modules.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I see a sharp divide between "praying last rites over the fallen" while gaining a Focus Point and "using my skills to heal somebody" while gaining a focus point.
One is thematic and RP focused.
The other, sure it can be thematic, but it interacts with the crunch side of the game.
At my table, you won't be combining any "refocus" activity with any other of the "do this for 10 minutes between fights" activities.
My opinion is that the game is about making choices. I love that the cleric has to decide whether or not to regain a focus or using skills to heal a party member. I love that other party members are incentivized to invest in the skills that those party members with Focus abilities might traditionally be expected to perform.
Maybe both the cleric and the fighter's shields are damaged, and the rogue took a licking, so the fighter and the rogue work on the shields while the wizard (who had an easy fight) applies a salve to the rogue and the cleric prays to regain their focus...
I'm really excited for the codification of these rules. The gentleman's agreement that I'll be proposing at my table is that by and large, your 10 minutes post-fight will be sacred and you can have it unmolested (occasional stories might not allow for it), but if you try for a second 10 minute break for whatever reason, the random encounter table is coming out. Which I am fine with! That's the risk they're taking, and they'll be taking it consciously. Some results on that table will be "nothing happens" and it'll work out for them. Most results will force them to use up the benefit they were hoping to gain by taking a second 10 minute rest. And some will really beat them up.
Can't say how much I'm looking forward to this rules system :)
Hey, as long as it works at your table it’s all good right?
As I wrote before, I really like the hard choices aspect of limiting what you can accomplish in your little break after a fight. I also don’t like the potential of “oh hey well if the cleric can pray AND heal, why can’t I loot the room while fixing my shield?” Or “I will pray, heal this guy, and loot all at once” because if doing 2 things at once, why not 3 things?
Now, if you have a mind to hand wave the timing of all of that anyways, then it makes no difference whatsoever. If it doesn’t matter to your group how long a party has to themselves between battles, then I see no need to be overly particular with what/how/when different characters do any particular thing.
That's more or less how I explained it for my games. You can do anything that is thematic to your class, so long as it doesn't yield any mechanical benefit beyond the focus point. The Druid can relax/meditate in nature, or just play with her animal companion. The bard can play music or clean his instrument ,ect ect. The "activity" you are doing is "re-focusing". Doing something such as healing the party would have your mind focused on that, and not on re-focusing.
Ruling it that way also allows room for, to give an example, "you can repair your own shield while you refocus" to be a class feat for Clerics of Torag.
Yeah, I like that idea. You are making a choice in how to invest your limited feats.
I heard sorcerers get to refocus without the activity.. that’s cool and I think it’s neat that they have a bonus there. I suspect sorcerer players will have lots of fun looting the room while the rogue heals people because the Cleric is busy praying :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is an option that will allow players to continue through an adventure/dungeon without requiring them to head out, or back to town, to recharge.
I played 2e at Paizo Con and had the chance to play Ezran. Will say I felt a crap ton more effective being able to recharge my focus between fights.
It was an intro game, so I am sure a few rules were smudged, but in the end it allowed me to reuse magic missile multiple times through the dungeon. The limits I believe were I had a feat that allowed me to use a focus point to re use a spell I had already cast that day. The 10 minutes was essentially some 'me' time. I wasn't the person making decisions for the group so while they were 'discussing' what direction to go I said I was regaining my focus and went with the party when it moved.
The other option was just using Magic Missile once and sitting on it. My cantrips were nice, but they weren't going to pull the damage that Valeros or Fumbus were with their standard attacks.
As the person that will be running the game for my household allowing my kids to feel like they are contributing to the adventure is more important than making sure they aren't doing absolutely anything else when regaining a focus.
Not sure exactly what the Cleric did to regain but Kyra was doing the same as I was.
It is an option that will allow players to continue through an adventure/dungeon without requiring them to head out, or back to town, to recharge.
I played 2e at Paizo Con and had the chance to play Ezran. Will say I felt a crap ton more effective being able to recharge my focus between fights.
It was an intro game, so I am sure a few rules were smudged, but in the end it allowed me to reuse magic missile multiple times through the dungeon. The limits I believe were I had a feat that allowed me to use a focus point to re use a spell I had already cast that day. The 10 minutes was essentially some 'me' time. I wasn't the person making decisions for the group so while they were 'discussing' what direction to go I said I was regaining my focus and went with the party when it moved.
The other option was just using Magic Missile once and sitting on it. My cantrips were nice, but they weren't going to pull the damage that Valeros or Fumbus were with their standard attacks.
As the person that will be running the game for my household allowing my kids to feel like they are contributing to the adventure is more important than making sure they aren't doing absolutely anything else when regaining a focus.
Not sure exactly what the Cleric did to regain but Kyra was doing the same as I was.
Your post is interesting and illuminating
However I do want to pick up on the comment about not putting out the basic damage of Valeros or Fumbus
Is the assumption that Ezren should be? Does he not have spells with effects other than raw damage ? Or is he all about the raw numbers - which incidentally should probably be lower than a fighter at basic shouldn’t they since fighters don’t have as many options to replace them with spells that do even more impressive things...
Perhaps it is just because it was a playthrough. But if it was all about everyone doing exactly the same damage in slightly different ways (sword, bomb , spell) then that is sounding worryingly like elements of 4E
(I am going to assume it is just the nature of the pregens)
Ezren had the problem where his spell list had way too much direct damage on it and not much of any spells that most players would consider core to the wizard experience in 1E. I wouldn't be surprised if that problem persists in 2E.
Ezren had the problem where his spell list had way too much direct damage on it and not much of any spells that most players would consider core to the wizard experience in 1E. I wouldn't be surprised if that problem persists in 2E.
You mean as a problem for all wizards or just how the pregenerated one has been made?
I believe in the playtest non damage spells kind of got powered down due to degrees of success
And I imagine he is also low level which is always a poor representation of wizards
What are you considering key to the wizard experience ?
Looking at the playtest there is Color spray, sleep , ray of enfeeblement and grease which were always pretty stand out low level wizard spells. I don’t see anything obviously missing from core and the spell list will probably be bigger from the playtest
I haven’t looked all the way down the list though!
I guess a factor might be how many spells they get before forced to rely on cantrips (albeit ones that scale). It seemed like less than before...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I meant the way Ezren specifically was built in his 1st edition character sheet. The only combat relevant spells he has prepared at 1st level in his PF1 rendition are Burning Hands, Magic Missile, and Acid Splash. His spell book has some more reasonable choices in it but Ezren's definitely one of the least impressive iconics.
I meant the way Ezren specifically was built in his 1st edition character sheet. The only combat relevant spells he has prepared at 1st level in his PF1 rendition are Burning Hands, Magic Missile, and Acid Splash. His spell book has some more reasonable choices in it but Ezren's definitely one of the least impressive iconics.
And that is saying something because some of the iconics are really not great. I remember seeing that the artwork was done before the rules were refreshed which is why there are some weird ones - I think ranger with a crossbow springs to mind because isn’t it just bows and two weapons in core ?
And how no one ever really uses two different weapons for two weapon fighting because you really needed weapon focus to help offset the penalties
I believe it was said in one of the 2E plays (Oblivion Oath maybe) that you can "do you focus regain activity" while doing other things if it makes sense to be doing them at the same time. 1 hour Heal check plus pray to deity at the same time, etc.
|
|
I meant the way Ezren specifically was built in his 1st edition character sheet. The only combat relevant spells he has prepared at 1st level in his PF1 rendition are Burning Hands, Magic Missile, and Acid Splash. His spell book has some more reasonable choices in it but Ezren's definitely one of the least impressive iconics.
I actually did a thorough analysis of the Iconics as per their PFS stats based on this set of guidelines, which can be found in its final version here. Admittedly, this analysis was at 4th and 7th levels rather than 1st.
Ezren comes out pretty well, actually. His offense isn't ground breaking or anything, but the fundamental math of many of the other Corebook Iconics is so bad he looks fine in comparison. He's certainly miles better than Harsk, Lirianne, or Reiko.
Ezren comes out pretty well, actually. His offense isn't ground breaking or anything, but the fundamental math of many of the other Corebook Iconics is so bad he looks fine in comparison. He's certainly miles better than Harsk, Lirianne, or Reiko.
Less familiar with Lirianne, but wow yes on the other two. Harsk's issue was that his fighting style (crossbow) as dictated by his artwork, is poorly supported in Core. As I remember, Reiko's chief sin was having a 10 CON. Kinda happy they commissioned new art to show off Valeros with a shield and Harsk with two axes.
|
|
Less familiar with Lirianne, but wow yes on the other two. Harsk's issue was that his fighting style (crossbow) as dictated by his artwork, is poorly supported in Core. As I remember, Reiko's chief sin was having a 10 CON. Kinda happy they commissioned new art to show off Valeros with a shield and Harsk with two axes.
Reiko also doesn't TWF or indeed do anything to up her DPR in any way (well, beyond having Weapon Finesse), making it terrible even with Sneak Attack. And Lirianne has the same problem as Harsk with less justification (like him, her ranged combat Feats do not include the ability to attack more than once per turn or any other meaningful DPR enhancer).
I meant the way Ezren specifically was built in his 1st edition character sheet. The only combat relevant spells he has prepared at 1st level in his PF1 rendition are Burning Hands, Magic Missile, and Acid Splash. His spell book has some more reasonable choices in it but Ezren's definitely one of the least impressive iconics.I actually did a thorough analysis of the Iconics as per their PFS stats based on this set of guidelines, which can be found in its final version here. Admittedly, this analysis was at 4th and 7th levels rather than 1st.
Ezren comes out pretty well, actually. His offense isn't ground breaking or anything, but the fundamental math of many of the other Corebook Iconics is so bad he looks fine in comparison. He's certainly miles better than Harsk, Lirianne, or Reiko.
There is some interesting stuff in there, notably :
- the later iconics are better than the earlier ones. I don’t think that is indicative of a power creep just better iconic building
- the ranged DPS characters are some of the worst by your calculations despite the general view that ranged dps is the most effective form on average in 1E
Did you do the APG iconics ? I assume the cavalier doesn’t hold up unless he charges and for some reason I feel like Inquisitor is pretty bad but since you did level 7 perhaps bane swings it (albeit only for a few rounds )
|
|
There is some interesting stuff in there, notably :
- the later iconics are better than the earlier ones. I don’t think that is indicative of a power creep just better iconic building
This is substantially correct. It's worth noting that Mark Seifter did the ACG ones, which are the best, and that he had extensive experience actually playing PFS.
- the ranged DPS characters are some of the worst by your calculations despite the general view that ranged dps is the most effective form on average in 1E
Side effect of the nature of the standards, which base damage numbers off of a full attack (thus ignoring the main weakness of melee builds). Also of none of the ranged characters being a well designed Full BAB character (Lirianne and Harsk are just badly built...Adowyn is fine but a 3/4 BAB character, and so on).
Did you do the APG iconics ? I assume the cavalier doesn’t hold up unless he charges and for some reason I feel like Inquisitor is pretty bad but since you did level 7 perhaps bane swings it (albeit only for a few rounds )
I did not. They were not readily available and PFS legal when I did that analysis. Or I couldn't find them. Or something like that. I have them now, and they mostly look fine.
Slightly more in depth analysis:
Imrijka is actually fine offensively when using her resources (+10 to hit for 1d8+7+1d6, which she can hit with divine favor, flames of the faithful PBS, and Judgment at 4th is actually ridiculous), and solid though not exceptional defensively. Her 7th level version is utterly terrifying offensively with Bane. She has to use resources to operate offensively, but that's just how Inquisitors work. Her Save DCs are terrible, but one can't have everything.
Alain's defenses are a tad low (okay his AC is fine, his Saves are not great). His personal offense is anemic without charging, you're correct, but adding in his horse's DPR it actually is Green by that guide even when just standing and fighting. Challenging hits Green on its own as well if he fights alone. Combined, the two are actually quite solid, but he will underperform a bit when not Challenging and lacking his steed.
Alahzra's Fort Save is bad, as is her AC when not using Mage Armor (and Shield of Faith at 7th). Her Save DCs are very solid offensively, though. She looks fine.
Balazar's AC is fine. His Reflex Save is bad but his Saves are otherwise fine. His Save DCs are fine at 4th, and his buffing pretty good at 7th. His damaging offense from his Eidolon or summoned creature is pretty awful, though. None of that pouncing eidolon with lost of attacks stuff here.
Short version: They actually all look fine (except maybe Balazar). The current versions were made after the ACG and OA Iconics, though, so that makes sense.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's worth noting that Mark Seifter did the ACG ones, which are the best, and that he had extensive experience actually playing PFS.
Mark is a hero.
|
|
For the APG iconics, what about Freiya ?
Ah. I was going down a list and missed her hiding at the bottom.
Feiya's fine. Her Saves are solid, her AC is fine with available buffs (which does mean both Mage Armor and Shield of Faith), her Save DCs are mediocre ignoring Evil Eye, but if she takes a turn to set them up, they become quite good. So she's fine, lack of the Slumber Hex (which is awesome but not actually required) aside.
It is an option that will allow players to continue through an adventure/dungeon without requiring them to head out, or back to town, to recharge.
I played 2e at Paizo Con and had the chance to play Ezran. Will say I felt a crap ton more effective being able to recharge my focus between fights.
It was an intro game, so I am sure a few rules were smudged, but in the end it allowed me to reuse magic missile multiple times through the dungeon. The limits I believe were I had a feat that allowed me to use a focus point to re use a spell I had already cast that day. The 10 minutes was essentially some 'me' time. I wasn't the person making decisions for the group so while they were 'discussing' what direction to go I said I was regaining my focus and went with the party when it moved.
The other option was just using Magic Missile once and sitting on it. My cantrips were nice, but they weren't going to pull the damage that Valeros or Fumbus were with their standard attacks.
As the person that will be running the game for my household allowing my kids to feel like they are contributing to the adventure is more important than making sure they aren't doing absolutely anything else when regaining a focus.
Not sure exactly what the Cleric did to regain but Kyra was doing the same as I was.
Your post is interesting and illuminating
However I do want to pick up on the comment about not putting out the basic damage of Valeros or Fumbus
Is the assumption that Ezren should be? Does he not have spells with effects other than raw damage ? Or is he all about the raw numbers - which incidentally should probably be lower than a fighter at basic shouldn’t they since fighters don’t have as many options to replace them with spells that do even more impressive things...
Perhaps it is just because it was a playthrough. But if it was all about everyone doing exactly the same damage in slightly different ways (sword, bomb , spell) then that is sounding worryingly like elements of
...
Apologies on the late reply, just getting home from work.
The games ran at Paizo Con had pre generated characters. I don't remember alot of buffing spells, I know I had Shield but that was for myself and was a 1 action spell. Used it a few times but never to any real effect.
The play through was basically the Beginner box made up for 2e and the GM made a few changes for flavor that was really neat.
In the end it was a bunch of combat encounters, and Ezren had mostly combat spells prepped but unlike Fumbus I was not willing to cast burning hands through the group to get at the enemies. Fumbus on the other hand had no problem hitting us all with splash damage.
Where did we get this information?Do we know if a 10 minute rest recovers all focus points or just one point?We know it's a single point per 10 minutes.
In the Paizocon, Sorcerer have a feat that let them recover more focus points per 10 minute intervals.
well they could just meditate now and then
Darn, that will make it hard to do a Campion of Irori if they have a limited pool and slow recovery of them.
It's a "once per encounter" kind of thing. While you probably can't use it in every room of the dungeon, you can probably use it sever times in each adventuring day. Also each time you take a new FP ability it increases your FP pool by one, so while you only get one back every 10 minutes, you may have a pool of 3 or 4 per day.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Darn, that will make it hard to do a Campion of Irori if they have a limited pool and slow recovery of them.It's a "once per encounter" kind of thing. While you probably can't use it in every room of the dungeon, you can probably use it sever times in each adventuring day. Also each time you take a new FP ability it increases your FP pool by one, so while you only get one back every 10 minutes, you may have a pool of 3 or 4 per day.
Also, what's the big deal with resting for 20 minutes to get 2 focus back? How often can you hang out for 10 minutes but not 20?