How are 2e player characters supposed to stack up to the skill modifiers of NPCs and monsters?


Rules Discussion

1 to 50 of 133 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.

How are 2e player characters supposed to stack up to the skill modifiers of NPCs and monsters? From what I understand, a level X PC is equal in overall power and competence to a level X NPC or monster. This is why four monsters of level X are an "extreme" encounter for four PCs of level X: both sides are evenly matched, and thus have a 50/50 chance of taking one another down. In other words, a 1st-level PC is supposed to be equal in overall power and competence to a 1st-level catfolk stalker from the bestiary, a 13th-level PC is a match for a 13th-level dryad queen (hamadryad), and a 20th-level PC is an equal peer to a balor or a pit fiend. I have faith that Paizo has hashed out the math to make this true for combat purposes, but does it really apply to skills?

This is actually relevant for skill-oriented challenges, which I believe Paizo is trying to emphasize as actually meaningful in 2e.

A 13th-level dryad queen (hamadryad) has Acrobatics +25, Athletics +19, Crafting +23 (+25 woodworking), Deception +30, Diplomacy +30, Intimidation +27, Nature +24, Performance +28, Stealth +25, Survival +24. The Deception +30 and Diplomacy +30 are beefy.

How high can, for example, a 13th-level PC's Perception get to counter that Deception? 13 level + 6 master + 5 Wisdom modifier = +24, and that is assuming master Perception and Wisdom 20. I cannot see how that is supposed to stack up with an equal-level skill monkey monster's own skills.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Uh oh... So something that I feared much did show up...

The Exchange

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Colette Brunel wrote:

How are 2e player characters supposed to stack up to the skill modifiers of NPCs and monsters? From what I understand, a level X PC is equal in overall power and competence to a level X NPC or monster. This is why four monsters of level X are an "extreme" encounter for four PCs of level X: both sides are evenly matched, and thus have a 50/50 chance of taking one another down. In other words, a 1st-level PC is supposed to be equal in overall power and competence to a 1st-level catfolk stalker from the bestiary, a 13th-level PC is a match for a 13th-level dryad queen (hamadryad), and a 20th-level PC is an equal peer to a balor or a pit fiend. I have faith that Paizo has hashed out the math to make this true for combat purposes, but does it really apply to skills?

This is actually relevant for skill-oriented challenges, which I believe Paizo is trying to emphasize as actually meaningful in 2e.

A 13th-level dryad queen (hamadryad) has Acrobatics +25, Athletics +19, Crafting +23 (+25 woodworking), Deception +30, Diplomacy +30, Intimidation +27, Nature +24, Performance +28, Stealth +25, Survival +24. The Deception +30 and Diplomacy +30 are beefy.

How high can, for example, a 13th-level PC's Perception get to counter that Deception? 13 level + 6 master + 5 Wisdom modifier = +24, and that is assuming master Perception and Wisdom 20. I cannot see how that is supposed to stack up with an equal-level skill monkey monster's own skills.

A Dryad queen sounds like something that should be better than an equal level pc at charisma skills. It’s in the same ball park as the equal lvl pc skill.


10 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Well having all NPCs/Monsters have identical skills by formula would probably be a little too predictable for players, so some skills being higher or lower than the theoretical max seems a good use of design space.

The 13th Level Dryad Queen does have exceptional Deception and Diplomacy, but that's probably the challenge with her, you are more likely to bandy words with her than fight knowing most PCs.
If you Recall Knowledge about her you'll probably learn that they are deceivers and charmers beyond mortal ken, at which point the sharpest member of the party had best equip some gear to help out and get a useful buff spell and that's the difficultly of the encounter.

Yeah she's higher than a PC, but that helps with variance of multiple PCs rolling against her. Given Perception is also initiative I expect a lot of PCs to be at least decent at it.


15 people marked this as a favorite.

I believe it's a feature that monsters surpass PCs at some specific area of their speciality. Otherwise all monsters of level X would have identical stat blocks.
No mortal can hope to outwit the literal faerie queen... unless said mortal is a high-level bard.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Players use skills to hit 1 known DC of interest.

This monster needs to use Deception to have a chance (but not guarantee) of fooling a party of 4.

There must also be spells that have a decent-but-not-absolute protection against deception.

Not enough evidence that anything is wrong here. Sounds more like something is right.


12 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Just checked all other level 13 monsters - the only others with Deception are the Gelugon (Devil) at +25, Adult Blue Dragon at +26, and Glabrezu (Demon) at +28, and generally skill modifiers float around 22-24 unless they're just a simple fighter with only Athletics +30. Looks like the Dryad Queen is intentionally very strong at skills. Most monsters don't have that skill trained at all, meaning their deception is utter garbage (raw charisma).

So it's very valuable to use abilities that reveal such information. Monsters feel really good in their specialties but not everything. Only monsters with thematic reasons to deceive seem to have the skill available.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

If the GM even makes The Dryad Queen take a check (the GM certainly doesn't have to say they're making a roll to deceive the players, and generally lets players control the PCs' opinions), she will still fail to deceive any player trained in Perception (aka everybody) on a Nat 1. Every class is at least Expert Perception by level 13, leading to a minimum Perception DC of 10 + (modifier: -1) + (proficiency: 17) = 26. Her roll of 31 = success would reduce to failure (the worst possible outcome for Deception(Lie)).

Your min-maxed high perception character has a DC 34, meaning they disbelieve lies 15% of the time. True, that's not much payoff in this case, but it works better against the rest of the bestiary. And after the first lie detected, you'd get +4(circumstance) vs future Lie attempts in the same conversation!

Edit: My bad, just realized players would request a Sense Motive check rather than the GM rolling Deception(Lie). Checking the rules on page 471 now...


Pathfinder Card Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

OK I'm back. Players make a secret check (probably all 4 will attempt.)

The Dryad Queen's Deception DC is 40.

To learn her "true intentions" you need critical success, which is only really possible for players atm with a Nat 20 and Perception +20. At level 13, character Wisdom will range from +16 to +24.

Beyond this, the Sense Motive skill is worded in a strange way. The failure outcome sounds more like success than the success outcome. So I'm going to make up an assumption: let's say that at success you get the impression that the opponent isn't being entirely forthright with you, but you're not sure whether they are just keeping a secret, trying to get on your good side, or intend to cause you to come to harm.

Alright, how can our players succeed against the monster DC 40 without a nat 20? Well, it's the same breakpoint. Beyond Perception +20, players get an increasing chance to sense something is wrong.

Now there's an important downside: the chance of critical failure. This causes "a false sense of the creature's intentions". At what point can a high perception character be sure they aren't crit failing vs DC 40 Deception? The answer is: They would need to be able to succeed on a nat 1, but for the result decrease effect. This means only characters with Perception +39... not happening!

So game mechanics dictate that with higher Perception, you're more likely to sense something is wrong, but you can never be 100% sure. Except against all enemies with garbage deception, once you hit the Perception +11-15 range. And high WIS teammates always have a chance to glimpse a foe's true intentions!

I'd appreciate any corrections!

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Colette Brunel wrote:
How high can, for example, a 13th-level PC's Perception get to counter that Deception? 13 level + 6 master + 5 Wisdom modifier = +24, and that is assuming master Perception and Wisdom 20. I cannot see how that is supposed to stack up with an equal-level skill monkey monster's own skills.

From what they've said, items to increase Skill (and Perception) bonuses still exist, though they cap at +3. So this is probably more like +26 as an actual PC max. +28 if they've got Legendary (which I believe some PCs do actually have in Perception at 13th...they'd probably only have Wis 18, but that's still a +27).

A +30 is still a worryingly high number even compared to that, especially since PCs cannot, in fact, get Legendary in actual Skills at 13th.

If numbers like that were common among monsters I would be legitimately concerned. However, while I don't have the books I was very concerned about this in the playtest, so I've been carefully examining the monsters they've previewed.

My conclusion is that the Hamadryad Queen is an exception to the norm. Possibly even an error. The Ghaele, of identical level, caps at +27, and has that in only one skill, with the rest at +26 or less. The 7th level Lillend hits +20 (and two over the max a PC of their level can hit)...but only in one Skill (Performance). The Succubus (also 7th level, leaked on Reddit) also hits +20 in Diplomacy at the same level, but that is again one skill alone. No other previewed monster I've seen shown exceeds PC skills for their level at all.

People at Paizo stated during the playtest that some particularly impressive monsters will have a bonus in one or two Skills slightly exceeding what PCs can usually get at that level (and this appears to have persisted into the final game), but the Hamadryad aside this appears to be restricted to a single Skill, and a +2 higher at most, and is not especially common. I'm fine with this, as long as it's particularly iconic skills and not especially common.

But the above is why I think the Hamadryad may be an actual error (or PCs of that level have a bonus I'm not aware of, I suppose), as those numbers exceed PC possibilities by significantly more than any other previewed creature.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

It does occur to me that the 'specialist bonus' I refer to above that takes a few creatures above PC level on a skill or two may be to keep up with PC spells, since it sounds like a few more of those add to Skills in the final game. If so, it's possible that such spells scale to more like +4 at 13th than the +2 they have at 7th, which would explain the Hamadryad Queen's greater bonus. I still think it's a tad too high, but maybe I'll change my mind once I see the spells.

For comparison, in the playtest, Discern Lies is a +4 bonus to, well, discerning lies, which would allow someone with the Perception modifier I described above to get to a +30 or +31 bonus and match the Hamadryad Queen. Whether that's the same bonus it gives in the final game I can't say, but it's an interesting basis for comparison...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Discern Lies is still a +4 bonus.

Liberty's Edge

MaxAstro wrote:
Discern Lies is still a +4 bonus.

Noted, and thanks for the info. :)

We'll need to look at how common other bonuses of about that size are, but if they're actually decently common in that size at that level (13th), then the Hamadryad Queen's ridiculous Diplomacy and Deception start looking a bit more reasonable, as long as such skills remain far from universal for 13th level foes (which seems pretty well established from the previewed creatures).

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
My conclusion is that the Hamadryad Queen is an exception to the norm.

Looking over my book I'm inclined to agree with this, especially since the Queen is Uncommon, so not a normal encounter to constantly run into.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
kogarou wrote:
Every class is at least Expert Perception by level 13,

And Fighter and Rogue are both Master at level 7.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
kogarou wrote:
Every class is at least Expert Perception by level 13,
And Fighter and Rogue are both Master at level 7.

Maaan I'm so happy to see Fighters and Rogues be straight up better than other classes at things that are universally desirable. Weak attempts at niche protection are OUT.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Fighter and Rogue are both sitting pretty from what I've seen thus far.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Rysky wrote:
kogarou wrote:
Every class is at least Expert Perception by level 13,
And Fighter and Rogue are both Master at level 7.

I was mistaken.

Fighter, Rogue, and Ranger get Master at 7th.

Rogue gets Legendary at 13th level.

(Ranger gets it at 15th)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sounds good to me, if everything was bound to pc expectations I would probably drop the system.

Having higher numbers also protects their usefulness a little when the inevitable feat, spell and class bloat comes.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Also anyone can use their deception instead if they have the Lie To Me feat. Fittingly enough this makes barristers top choice for negotiating with the fey.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Social situations where party aid is common on skills might also be a factor.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Malk_Content wrote:
Also anyone can use their deception instead if they have the Lie To Me feat. Fittingly enough this makes barristers top choice for negotiating with the fey.

I was just about to comment something like this. Since we now have options to use Deception instead of sense motive, the party's resident liar who's maxed out Deception has a higher chance at coming out on top in that check.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Arachnofiend wrote:
Rysky wrote:
kogarou wrote:
Every class is at least Expert Perception by level 13,
And Fighter and Rogue are both Master at level 7.
Maaan I'm so happy to see Fighters and Rogues be straight up better than other classes at things that are universally desirable. Weak attempts at niche protection are OUT.

My thoughts exactly.

Also, while Fighters don't get Legendary Perception, IIRC the class feature that gives them Master Perception also gives them a +2 to initiative checks - meaning they effectively get Legendary initiative, before anyone else can.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
MaxAstro wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
Rysky wrote:
kogarou wrote:
Every class is at least Expert Perception by level 13,
And Fighter and Rogue are both Master at level 7.
Maaan I'm so happy to see Fighters and Rogues be straight up better than other classes at things that are universally desirable. Weak attempts at niche protection are OUT.

My thoughts exactly.

Also, while Fighters don't get Legendary Perception, IIRC the class feature that gives them Master Perception also gives them a +2 to initiative checks - meaning they effectively get Legendary initiative, before anyone else can.

Yep.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Malk_Content wrote:
Also anyone can use their deception instead if they have the Lie To Me feat. Fittingly enough this makes barristers top choice for negotiating with the fey.

Except that PF2 barristers are nice guys (they get diplomacy).

What I don't get is this "stronger for their level" thing. Wasn't the change from CR to level meant to normalize what you could expect from each level? If it's a skilled monster, and it's skills are superior to other monsters of it's level, it needs to go up in level.

Silver Crusade

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Amaranthine Witch wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
Also anyone can use their deception instead if they have the Lie To Me feat. Fittingly enough this makes barristers top choice for negotiating with the fey.

Except that PF2 barristers are nice guys (they get diplomacy).

What I don't get is this "stronger for their level" thing. Wasn't the change from CR to level meant to normalize what you could expect from each level? If it's a skilled monster, and it's skills are superior to other monsters of it's level, it needs to go up in level.

All monsters of the same level being exactly same combat and skill wise is frankly bad and rather boring design. Also the Hamadryad has got some skills she's specialized in, she's not beating out all similar monsters in health, damage, spells, and special abilities as well.

Certain monsters have certain areas they excel in. Also she's Uncommon so she's even further than other monsters of the same level while still being in that range for that level.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It seems rather a rare case for monsters who do especially well in maybe one or two things, consider it a racial bonus

If the monster would have to go un in level everything else would be stronger and the 'signature skill' would be less impressive, also it would be more likely for a higher level party to confront the monster, so it would be even worse

Since it's rather rare I think it is a good design, so now and then a monster can really surprise you with its skills and make an more intersting opponent


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I think it's also no longer necessarily true even theoretically that an equal CR(SF) or level (PF2) opponent is an exact match for a single PC. Single level enemies are tuned to provide a certain challenge to a group of four PCs, and action economy being what it is that will make them tougher than a same level single PC.

It's not a matter of whether a single PC can always equal or outskill a same level opponent, it's a matter of whether it's a reasonable challenge (likely to succeed, but decent chance to fail) for the party as a whole. So social skills could be tuned to be higher in some cases because the PCs get four chances to beat the lie, and monsters are rarely providing aid to one another in the same way PCs might.


I guess, high deception and diplomacy don't affect the CR/level too much in an encounter sense. This might obviously be a wild guess as I do not have the bestiary yet and they might have additional abilities to profit off of the high skill bonus.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
vestris wrote:
I guess, high deception and diplomacy don't affect the CR/level too much in an encounter sense. This might obviously be a wild guess as I do not have the bestiary yet and they might have additional abilities to profit off of the high skill bonus.

They do not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Arachnofiend wrote:
Maaan I'm so happy to see Fighters and Rogues be straight up better than other classes at things that are universally desirable. Weak attempts at niche protection are OUT.

I hate that things that are universally desirable are niched out to certain classes. Why can't I have a cleric (or sorcerer or alchemist) with Legendary Perception? Its only the most important (non-skill, but really should be) skill in the game. Trapfinding isn't even locked behind the rogue anymore.

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

That's what having classes means. Also, as far as I'm aware, other than armor and weapons, the only profiencies that are class-locked are legendary ones.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Shisumo wrote:
That's what having classes means. Also, as far as I'm aware, other than armor and weapons, the only profiencies that are class-locked are legendary ones.

That crystalized a thought that I'd be having.

PF1 (with all the splat books) is only barely a class based system any more. Stating your characters class(es) says little to nothing about what you bring to the table, how your character plays, etc.

PF2 (at least at the moment) is much more of a class based system (or sub-class if you prefer). Your class comes a LOT closer to defining you than in PF1.

I'm not at all sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing (ask me 2 years from now). But its a thing :-)


Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
Shisumo wrote:
That's what having classes means.

This.


pauljathome wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
That's what having classes means. Also, as far as I'm aware, other than armor and weapons, the only profiencies that are class-locked are legendary ones.

That crystalized a thought that I'd be having.

PF1 (with all the splat books) is only barely a class based system any more. Stating your characters class(es) says little to nothing about what you bring to the table, how your character plays, etc.

PF2 (at least at the moment) is much more of a class based system (or sub-class if you prefer). Your class comes a LOT closer to defining you than in PF1.

I'm not at all sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing (ask me 2 years from now). But its a thing :-)

It is one of the trade offs required to have a semblance of balance.

I am currently learning Symbaroum which is a classless rpg and Conan 2d20 functions decently with some houserules (although some will be turned off by the meta currencies)

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xenocrat wrote:
I think it's also no longer necessarily true even theoretically that an equal CR(SF) or level (PF2) opponent is an exact match for a single PC. Single level enemies are tuned to provide a certain challenge to a group of four PCs, and action economy being what it is that will make them tougher than a same level single PC.

This is incorrect, per Mark Seifter and the other people at Paizo. It is intended that a 13th level monster be as powerful as a fully geared 13th level PC. This is done so you can use the PC rules to make adversaries if you desire. Looking at the monsters revealed thus far, this appears to be substantially true.

Now, they are also supposed to be the kind of threat you suggest if they're 3 or 4 levels above the PCs, but level's increased importance actually makes that as true for PCs as it is for monsters.

Xenocrat wrote:
It's not a matter of whether a single PC can always equal or outskill a same level opponent, it's a matter of whether it's a reasonable challenge (likely to succeed, but decent chance to fail) for the party as a whole. So social skills could be tuned to be higher in some cases because the PCs get four chances to beat the lie, and monsters are rarely providing aid to one another in the same way PCs might.

That's not necessarily true (a group of 3 or 4 monsters of equal level to the PCs is a very plausible 'boss level' encounter), but as I go into above, it's also not necessary to explain higher Skills in a few specific areas.

Paizo Employee Designer

12 people marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:


This is incorrect, per Mark Seifter and the other people at Paizo. It is intended that a 13th level monster be as powerful as a fully geared 13th level PC. This is done so you can use the PC rules to make adversaries if you desire. Looking at the monsters revealed thus far, this appears to be substantially true.

Roughly as powerful does not mean they work the same though. Could a 13th level PC take on a dryad queen? It might be a close fight (I'll give the PC the edge if they bring flame and iron, but the queen could still get lucky on a really bad PC saving throw and turn the tide), but they have different advantages and disadvantages. Based on near-universal playtest feedback on the matter, we're not interested in having the monsters try to follow PCs exactly as they level up and mirror your progresson. They do their own thing, and PCs are more likely to jump up in leaps and bounds at certain levels. For instance, I haven't checked the count, but I bet there are few creatures in the Bestiary at level 3 that can reach the skill modifier of an expert character with 18 in their ability score with a +1 skill item (ogre in Athletics is about the only I can think of immediately, and even then it doesn't exceed).

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Roughly as powerful does not mean they work the same though. Could a 13th level PC take on a dryad queen? It might be a close fight (I'll give the PC the edge if they bring flame and iron, but the queen could still get lucky on a really bad PC saving throw and turn the tide), but they have different advantages and disadvantages. Based on near-universal playtest feedback on the matter, we're not interested in having the monsters try to follow PCs exactly as they level up and mirror your progresson. They do their own thing, and PCs are more likely to jump up in leaps and bounds at certain levels. For instance, I haven't checked the count, but I bet there are few creatures in the Bestiary at level 3 that can reach the skill modifier of an expert character with 18 in their ability score with a +1 skill item (ogre in Athletics is about the only I can think of immediately, and even then it doesn't exceed).

For the record, this more or less matches my understanding of the situation, any imprecision in my language aside.

Also, I think the 3rd level Dryad actually does exceed PC levels of capability in Nature (with a +13...my math gives an Expert with a +1 item 4+7+1=12), as well as having a +12 Survival, but I'm perfectly willing to believe that's an unusual occurrence. :)


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Kasoh wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
Maaan I'm so happy to see Fighters and Rogues be straight up better than other classes at things that are universally desirable. Weak attempts at niche protection are OUT.
I hate that things that are universally desirable are niched out to certain classes. Why can't I have a cleric (or sorcerer or alchemist) with Legendary Perception? Its only the most important (non-skill, but really should be) skill in the game. Trapfinding isn't even locked behind the rogue anymore.

I think you just answered your own question. If you make getting legendary perception an option for every class, it becomes a none-choice for every class and might as well be given for free.

If, on the other hand, you want some classes to be better at specific mundane things to make up for, say, not having spellcasting, you need to lock it to those classes.

Martials currently have better saves, AC, and weapon proficiency to make them relevant in combat. Given that casters have pretty much the exact same skill access as martials, having a higher perception is actually the only niche martials can fill outside of combat. Its a good niche though-- bringing a ranger means you're much more likely to spot hidden traps, loot, etc, or catch an NPC in a lie.


Rysky wrote:
All monsters of the same level being exactly same combat and skill wise is frankly bad and rather boring design.

You don't need to make all monsters exactly the same to follow CR expectations.

The hamadryad really wouldn't even play that differently if it had a high, but less abnormally so, deception skill.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Squiggit wrote:
Rysky wrote:
All monsters of the same level being exactly same combat and skill wise is frankly bad and rather boring design.

You don't need to make all monsters exactly the same to follow CR expectations.

The hamadryad really wouldn't even play that differently if it had a high, but less abnormally so, deception skill.

No, because everything else is in line, but with this it has something that it can flex a bit, which I think makes for a much more interesting creature.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Captain Morgan wrote:

I think you just answered your own question. If you make getting legendary perception an option for every class, it becomes a none-choice for every class and might as well be given for free.

If, on the other hand, you want some classes to be better at specific mundane things to make up for, say, not having spellcasting, you need to lock it to those classes.

Martials currently have better saves, AC, and weapon proficiency to make them relevant in combat. Given that casters have pretty much the exact same skill access as martials, having a higher perception is actually the only niche martials can fill outside of combat. Its a good niche though-- bringing a ranger means you're much more likely to spot hidden traps, loot, etc, or catch an NPC in a lie.

Yes, given how important Perception is in this game, anyone who wants to become Legendary at it should be able to become Legendary. That's how skills work, but then they made Perception a non skill. I think its especially important since it covers social perception (sense motive) as well as finding traps, (and initiative, but whatever on that) two incredibly different niches inconveniently tied up in one ability.

If that possibility is so good that no one could pass it up, then it should have just been given as opposed to making haves and have nots, because all it does is make me annoyed at the entire system.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Kasoh wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

I think you just answered your own question. If you make getting legendary perception an option for every class, it becomes a none-choice for every class and might as well be given for free.

If, on the other hand, you want some classes to be better at specific mundane things to make up for, say, not having spellcasting, you need to lock it to those classes.

Martials currently have better saves, AC, and weapon proficiency to make them relevant in combat. Given that casters have pretty much the exact same skill access as martials, having a higher perception is actually the only niche martials can fill outside of combat. Its a good niche though-- bringing a ranger means you're much more likely to spot hidden traps, loot, etc, or catch an NPC in a lie.

Yes, given how important Perception is in this game, anyone who wants to become Legendary at it should be able to become Legendary. That's how skills work, but then they made Perception a non skill. I think its especially important since it covers social perception (sense motive) as well as finding traps, (and initiative, but whatever on that) two incredibly different niches inconveniently tied up in one ability.

If that possibility is so good that no one could pass it up, then it should have just been given as opposed to making haves and have nots, because all it does is make me annoyed at the entire system.

Hmm, how is this any different than martials being better at combat than casters, or certain martials having different levels of attack bonus/damage?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kasoh wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

I think you just answered your own question. If you make getting legendary perception an option for every class, it becomes a none-choice for every class and might as well be given for free.

If, on the other hand, you want some classes to be better at specific mundane things to make up for, say, not having spellcasting, you need to lock it to those classes.

Martials currently have better saves, AC, and weapon proficiency to make them relevant in combat. Given that casters have pretty much the exact same skill access as martials, having a higher perception is actually the only niche martials can fill outside of combat. Its a good niche though-- bringing a ranger means you're much more likely to spot hidden traps, loot, etc, or catch an NPC in a lie.

Yes, given how important Perception is in this game, anyone who wants to become Legendary at it should be able to become Legendary. That's how skills work, but then they made Perception a non skill. I think its especially important since it covers social perception (sense motive) as well as finding traps, (and initiative, but whatever on that) two incredibly different niches inconveniently tied up in one ability.

If that possibility is so good that no one could pass it up, then it should have just been given as opposed to making haves and have nots, because all it does is make me annoyed at the entire system.

Everyone being equally good at perception would be boring.

Liberty's Edge

Isn't there a General Feat to get Expert and then eventually Master in either a Save or Perception?

That seems sufficient to me for the Cleric who wants to work on her perceptiveness.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:

Isn't there a General Feat to get Expert and then eventually Master in either a Save or Perception?

That seems sufficient to me for the Cleric who wants to work on her perceptiveness.

Yep, Canny Acumen, works exactly as you say.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:

Isn't there a General Feat to get Expert and then eventually Master in either a Save or Perception?

That seems sufficient to me for the Cleric who wants to work on her perceptiveness.

And considering the cleric is more likely to have a higher wisdom modifier, they might have a higher perception modifier than the legendary fighter anyway.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

People get a little too hung up on the word legendary, I think. Legendary is a very grandiose word that makes it sound like a huge deal but in practice it's only a small bonus over master.

With tighter math those individual bonuses matter a lot more than they do in a game like PF1, but Garretmander is right, for skills that extra step of proficiency is just probably helping to keep pace with a lower modifier when compared to someone like the cleric anyways.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Rysky wrote:
Hmm, how is this any different than martials being better at combat than casters, or certain martials having different levels of attack bonus/damage?

Magic is a caster's thing, fighting is a martial thing. You pick a caster class based on the kind of spells you want to cast or the style of casting that appeals you and the same for martials. Style, theme etc. Nothing about any of those classes sells a theme or fantasy of 'being perceptive.' Being perceptive is just something the game requires you to be, and arbitrarily some classes are better at it, even though they're already good at things over other classes (Like Rangers hunting, or rogues and their extra skill increases)

I'm not a fan of Canny Acumen being the combination of 4 different feats so you have to pick a save or perception to increase, but whatever.

This is also an edition where tasks can be gated behind your level of proficiency and to date we haven't seen any of that for Perception, but I can't imagine its not going to happen.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's very frustrating and boring that you can't specialize in a skill enough to guarantee being better at it than any equivalent-level or slightly higher creature you encounter throughout your career. It's a slap in the face as a player that you've invested in something as much as possible but you're still worse at it because the game is designed that way.

1 to 50 of 133 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / How are 2e player characters supposed to stack up to the skill modifiers of NPCs and monsters? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.