Samurai's P2 changes


Homebrew and House Rules

101 to 140 of 140 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Draco18s wrote:

Just sort of skimming, wanted to wordsmith this section on crafting:

Quote:

Crafting begins at a base amount of time of 4 days, but you subtract the level of the item you are

crafting from your own level to modify that amount of time. So a 5th level character who is an Expert
at Crafting is creating a level 4 item, so he subtracts 1 day for a total of 3 days. The Minimum amount
of time it takes is 4 days if you are Trained, 3 days if you are an Expert, 2 days if you are a Master, and
1 day if you are Legendary.

to

Quote:

Crafting begins at a base amount of time of 4 days, but from there modify by adding the level of the item and subtracting the crafter's own level. So a 5th level character who is an Expert

at Crafting is creating a level 4 item, so he subtracts 1 day for a total of 3 days (4 + 4 - 5 = 3). The Minimum amount
of time it takes is 4 days if you are Trained, 3 days if you are an Expert, 2 days if you are a Master, and
1 day if you are Legendary.

I certainly could have explained it better than I did. Is something like this clearer:?

You are a 5th level character with Expert Crafting and you want to craft a Lifting Belt (pg 613), a level 4 item. The base crafting time according to the book is 4 days, but you subtract the level of the item you want to craft from your character level (5-4=1) to get a modifier to that time. So the Crafting will take (4-1=3) days. If he had instead wanted to craft a Hand of the Mage (pg 611), you would start with your character level and subtract the Item level (5-2=3).However, because there is a minimum Crafting time based on your Expert proficiency rank (min 4 days at Trained, 3 days at Expert, 2 days at Master, and 1 day at Legendary), it will still take 3 days to craft the Hand, despite the Item being much lower than your character level.

The modifier can also increase the amount of time it will take if you try to craft an item higher than your level. For instance, if the same crafter as above wanted to make a Ring of Climbing (pg 614), a level 12 item (5-12=(-7), so you would add 7 to the base 4 days, for a total of 11 days.

I hope my idea is more fully explained now, I'll try to go back and re-word the document as well.


What's the reasoning behind the change to Weakness?

The effect is smaller as you level up but it's quite a nerf to early levels when fighting certain creatures. It also negatively impacts alchemists.

Not sure if I like it or not but I'd like to hear your reasons for using it.


Samurai wrote:
I certainly could have explained it better than I did. Is something like this clearer:?

My comment is more that "4, subtracting the value (X, subtracting Y)" is harder to read than "4 plus Y minus X" (or "4 minus X plus Y") and mathematically works out the same.

Compare:

Quote:
The base crafting time according to the book is 4 days, but you subtract the level of the item you want to craft from your character level (5-4=1) to get a modifier to that time. So the Crafting will take (4-1=3) days.
Quote:
The base crafting time according to the book is 4 days, but you now apply a modifier, adding the level of the item you want to craft and subtracting your character level (4+4-5=3).

Then you can tack on a "...to a minimum number of days based on your crafting rank: 4 days for Trained, 3 days for Expert, 2 days for Master, and 1 day for Legendary."

Sovereign Court

Draco18s wrote:
Samurai wrote:
I certainly could have explained it better than I did. Is something like this clearer:?

My comment is more that "4, subtracting the value (X, subtracting Y)" is harder to read than "4 plus Y minus X" (or "4 minus X plus Y") and mathematically works out the same.

Compare:

Quote:
The base crafting time according to the book is 4 days, but you subtract the level of the item you want to craft from your character level (5-4=1) to get a modifier to that time. So the Crafting will take (4-1=3) days.
Quote:
The base crafting time according to the book is 4 days, but you now apply a modifier, adding the level of the item you want to craft and subtracting your character level (4+4-5=3).
Then you can tack on a "...to a minimum number of days based on your crafting rank: 4 days for Trained, 3 days for Expert, 2 days for Master, and 1 day for Legendary."

The number of days that it takes to craft an item is your class level minus the item level, which can increase the time beyond 4 days as I showed with the higher level item, but typically decreases the time because you are crafting something lower than your own level. That reduction in time, however, has a limit based on your rank. So if a character is crafting a level 1 item, for instance, it would still take 4 days at Trained, 3 days at Expert, etc; it can't drop the time below the minimum. But your method still seems to get the same end result, if you find that easier to do in your head.

Sovereign Court

JerkyGunner wrote:

What's the reasoning behind the change to Weakness?

The effect is smaller as you level up but it's quite a nerf to early levels when fighting certain creatures. It also negatively impacts alchemists.

Not sure if I like it or not but I'd like to hear your reasons for using it.

I felt the weakness rules seemed tailored to the Alchemist and Wizards only getting 1 or 2 points of splash damage, and that was then increased in some creatures by 10 or 20 points by the weakness rules. That seemed very artificial and strange to me, that a candle flame added the same amount as a fireball to a target with Fire Weakness 20. So Fire Weakness 20 now adds up to 20 points, to a max of doubling the attack's damage. (If I had my way, Weakness would probably simply double the damage suffered, no max, but I'm trying to retain the RAW at least a little bit, and this way some creatures can be stronger or weaker than others by having a higher or lower Weakness rating.)

With my revised splash damage rules being 1 step lower than the main target damage, now Weakness can be based on the attack's damage rather than a flat amount whenever it is hit with any damage of that type. Bombs and splash spells like Acid Splash can now do a bit of damage to both the main target and those in the splash area, especially when that damage is doubled due to a weakness.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Samurai wrote:
The number of days that it takes to craft an item is your class level minus the item level, which can increase the time beyond 4 days as I showed with the higher level item,

4+X-Y can still make larger numbers than 4.

4+12-6 = 10.

Seriously, this is basic algebra. 4+X-Y and 4-(Y-X) are the same thing.

Quote:
That reduction in time, however, has a limit based on your rank. So if a character is crafting a level 1 item, for instance, it would still take 4 days at Trained, 3 days at Expert, etc; it can't drop the time below the minimum.

That minimum is applied after the modifier, its not applied to the modifier itself.

4+1-5 = 0 (min 3) is still 3.

Quote:
But your method still seems to get the same end result, if you find that easier to do in your head.

I'm saying that most people will find that "4 plus X minus Y" easier to compute in their head as it doesn't require a set of parenthesis to evaluate first. You just do 4 plus some value X minus some other value Y, apply a minimum, and you're done. The text-parsing order and the mathematical evaluation order are the same.

Sovereign Court

I had basic algebra way back in Jr High, about 35 years ago now! :)

As I said, the (algebraic) method you used works too, maybe I'm just the weird one whose mind works differently. I had multiple strokes during major heart surgery back in 2018 and I haven't been quite the same since... (at least I can walk again without needing a walker all the time, so I am getting a little better over time).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Samurai wrote:

I felt the weakness rules seemed tailored to the Alchemist and Wizards only getting 1 or 2 points of splash damage, and that was then increased in some creatures by 10 or 20 points by the weakness rules. That seemed very artificial and strange to me, that a candle flame added the same amount as a fireball to a target with Fire Weakness 20. So Fire Weakness 20 now adds up to 20 points, to a max of doubling the attack's damage. (If I had my way, Weakness would probably simply double the damage suffered, no max, but I'm trying to retain the RAW at least a little bit, and this way some creatures can be stronger or weaker than others by having a higher or lower Weakness rating.)

With my revised splash damage rules being 1 step lower than the main target damage, now Weakness can be based on the attack's damage rather than a flat amount whenever it is hit with any damage of that type. Bombs and splash spells like Acid Splash can now do a bit of damage to both the main target and those in the splash area, especially when that damage is doubled due to a weakness.

That was my thought as well. I also like the fact it allows for varying degrees of weakness and seems relatively well balanced as is.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, LO Special Edition, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

I like this modification to crafting, however you decide to do the math.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just uploaded a new version, 1.58. I made several small changes and additions, mostly based on comments here on the forums.

I clarified that using the Parry ability doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity, and that skill substitutions include both the new skill number and the rank value of the new skill (those were both borrowed from Staffan Johansson's "common sense changes" post).

I clarified how higher grades of Silver and cold iron work (they multiply the Weakness of the target by either 2 or 3, potentially allowing for more bonus Weakness damage).

I revised and lowered the limit on number of Elixirs of Life that a single person can take each day (Once that day's Elixir's total Item bonus exceeds their Con mod, they can't benefit from any more that day. This change was needed because I had added Elixirs of Life to the Chirurgeon's Perpetual Alchemy features, but upon reflection, the limit that I had given was too high).

Finally, due to an issue the Champion in our party is having, I stated that when a Champion or Fighter gets the Armor Expertise feature at 7th and 11th levels respectively, in addition to the Medium and Heavy Armor benefits, all Light armors now gain the Comfort trait for them so they can now sleep in some better Light Armor than just Padded (a very minor benefit, but potentially quite useful).

Use the same download link above if you want it!

Sovereign Court

Just uploaded a new version, only 1 change this time: due to a discussion somewhere else, I decided to give the Wizard Trained in all Simple Weapons. The Sorcerer, Druid, Monk, and everyone else gets at least Simple Weapons instead of just a subset of them, and not being Trained in all Simple Weapons means you would first need to buy Trained in Simple Weapons, and only later could you then buy Trained in Martial Weapons. This adds an unfair additional step for Wizards vs every other class, and it's not like any of the "non-Wizard" Simple Weapons are massively better than the weapons already given to the class. Better to just simplify the class and say they are Trained in all Simple Weapons, IMHO.

Just noticed it has been a while since I posted the link for the file; here it is again.

Sovereign Court

Another new version today, same link as above. This time I increased the file's version number to 1.59 because there were significant changes.

By far the biggest, IMO, was that I created the Sturdy Shield rune. It modifies any existing shield with specific bonuses, and can be moved from 1 shield to another like a normal rune.

Sturdy Rune (new shield rune): These removable runes can be added to any other shields, including wooden, steel, precious materials, and specifically enchanted shields, and any size shields (to create a Sturdy Buckler for instance). They modify the regular listed shield’s stats. The level and GP cost remains as listed for a Sturdy shield.

A Minor Sturdy rune adds +3 Hardness, +40 HP, +20 BT.
A Lesser Sturdy rune adds +5 Hardness, +60 H0 HP, +30 BT.
A Moderate Sturdy rune adds +8 Hardness, +80 HP, +40 BT.
A Greater Sturdy rune adds +10 Hardness, +100 HP, +50 BT.
A Major Sturdy rune adds +12 Hardness, +120 HP, +60 BT.
A Supreme Sturdy rune adds +15 Hardness, +140 HP, +70 BT.

I know that the numbers are not an exact match to some of the listed Sturdy shield's HP's, but I thought the symmetry of the above was more important that 2 ort 4 HP more or less either way.

I made a few other changes here and there too, including to some of the Precious Material shields, in order to make each more unique and special.

Always interested in your feedback! Great gaming.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Same link as above, I increased the version # to 1.60.

I added some new Indestructible shield rules. This is something I've been thinking about for a while now. These rules are entirely optional (as are all my rules changes), and don't really depend on my other rules changes.

Optional Rule: Indestructible Shields: If you don’t want to have destructible shields, use the following rules instead. (Weapons, armor, and other items don’t take damage when hit, weapons that are used to parry don’t suffer damage, and shields are not priced as consumable items, so this would only be consistent IMHO. But only use if you wish). The "official" rules change remains "shield and user each take 1/2 the remaining damage after Hardness."

If you are wielding a shield, you can use the Raise a Shield action to increase your AC by it’s AC bonus until the start of your next round. If you have the Shield Block class ability or feat, you can also use the raised shield to try to prevent some damage if an attack hits you. Make a Fortitude save vs the attack roll that hit you. If the shield has any special abilities, the Fort save activates them on a Success or better roll. For the Shield spell, the caster makes a Will save instead of Fort, using the same results below.

Crit Fail: Block ½ the Shield’s Hardness (rd down) in dmg, loose the shield bonus to AC until Raised again
Fail: Block the Shield’s Hardness in dmg, loose the shield bonus to AC until Raised again
Success: Block the Shield’s Hardness in damage, shield remains Raised
Crit Success: Block the Shield’s Hardness x2 in damage, shield remains Raised

As always, I'm interested to hear your thought. I didn't really want the shield block to simply be an automatically successful reaction, but I didn't want it to be extremely difficult either, so I decided on requiring a save vs the attack roll. I initially had thought Reflex would be the best for that, but the Champion is only Trained in Reflex, while he is Expert in Fort. The Fighter is Expert in both Fort and Ref, while the Cleric and Druid are only Trained in both. So I decided Fort is the better save to use, symbolizing the ability to brace the shield for the attack rather than swiftly interposing it. The Shield spell uses the caster's Will save instead, also playing to the caster's better save.

Sovereign Court

Thanks to some great feedback, I slightly altered the indestructible shield rules. The Fort save DC is now the enemy's attack bonus + 10 instead of the actual result of their attack roll. That simplifies things quite a bit. For instance, if you are trying to block a Goblin Warrior's Dogslicer, it was a +8 attack bonus, so the DC of the block is 18. I also gave a couple of examples of how the ability works with certain feats that the characters may have, such as Paragon Guard and Quick Block.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nicely done regarding the homebrew rules for shields, Samurai! The Fortitude/Will save option is sweet. I will drop that into my sessions ASAP.

I wonder if anyone has insider info to share about shields in the upcoming Advanced Player's Guide...

Sovereign Court

Tavaro Evanis wrote:

Nicely done regarding the homebrew rules for shields, Samurai! The Fortitude/Will save option is sweet. I will drop that into my sessions ASAP.

I wonder if anyone has insider info to share about shields in the upcoming Advanced Player's Guide...

Thank you! Be sure to let me know how your game goes, and if you have any questions, comments, or suggestions. I always enjoy hearing feedback on how my rules changes are working for other games!

I have no info on the APG myself, but I have already ordered it on Amazon.

Sovereign Court

Just 1 update today, I made changes to the Snowball spell from the Lost Omen's World Guide, due to a thread here on the forums. It should now compare well to the Hydraulic Push spell, and further differentiate the spell from Chilling Spray.


Any post-APG changes, Samurai?

Sovereign Court

JerkyGunner wrote:
Any post-APG changes, Samurai?

I'm working on them slowly. For instance, I'm combining the APG Toxicologist into my own since I had a version as well. I was hoping to add the 2nd errata doc's changes as well, but I have no idea when that's coming out.

Is there something you are looking for specifically, or think I should take a look at?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Samurai wrote:

Is there something you are looking for specifically, or think I should take a look at?

No, just curious as I enjoy reading your changes :)


I love quite a bit of your changes, but out of curiosity, why the changes to Chilling Darkness?

Sovereign Court

Intoxicated Illithid wrote:
I love quite a bit of your changes, but out of curiosity, why the changes to Chilling Darkness?

I made a change to Chill Touch (It now only requires a Fort save, not an attack roll + a Fort save. I felt 2 ways to avoid the spell, a missed attack and a successful save, was too much for a regular damage touch range cantrip), but I don't see any change I made to the Chilling Darkness spell just below it on that page in the CRB.


The document im looking at states that you've changed the scaling on Chilling Darkness from 2d6/2d6 to 1d6/1d6.

As far as alchemist I like your changes but I feel they fail to answer the primary issue with Alchemist. A lack of resources early. Bombers simply outright run out of ammo.


Samurai wrote:
Intoxicated Illithid wrote:
I love quite a bit of your changes, but out of curiosity, why the changes to Chilling Darkness?
I made a change to Chill Touch (It now only requires a Fort save, not an attack roll + a Fort save. I felt 2 ways to avoid the spell, a missed attack and a successful save, was too much for a regular damage touch range cantrip), but I don't see any change I made to the Chilling Darkness spell just below it on that page in the CRB.

Chill touch doesn't require an attack roll. You automatically touch a target with a spell when it has a range of touch unless the spell specifically states otherwise.

Sovereign Court

kripdenn wrote:
Samurai wrote:
Intoxicated Illithid wrote:
I love quite a bit of your changes, but out of curiosity, why the changes to Chilling Darkness?
I made a change to Chill Touch (It now only requires a Fort save, not an attack roll + a Fort save. I felt 2 ways to avoid the spell, a missed attack and a successful save, was too much for a regular damage touch range cantrip), but I don't see any change I made to the Chilling Darkness spell just below it on that page in the CRB.
Chill touch doesn't require an attack roll. You automatically touch a target with a spell when it has a range of touch unless the spell specifically states otherwise.

Is that a general rule in the game or something? If so, where is it stated?

Sovereign Court

Intoxicated Illithid wrote:

The document im looking at states that you've changed the scaling on Chilling Darkness from 2d6/2d6 to 1d6/1d6.

As far as alchemist I like your changes but I feel they fail to answer the primary issue with Alchemist. A lack of resources early. Bombers simply outright run out of ammo.

What is the version number of my house rules you are looking at? My current version # is 1.61. It includes a fix for the number of Alchemist reagents (In my rules it now says that Alchemists get 10 + Int mod + 1/2 their level in infusions each day. This means a lvl 1 Alc. will go from about 5 or less infusions each day at 1st lvl up to about 15 in my rules. I added 1/2 level instead of level because the benefit is mostly needed at earlier levels, and Perpetual Infusions at 7th level+ don't require Infused Reagents at all)

As for the Chilling Darkness, maybe at some point I had changed the scaling because Fireball increases by +2d6 per level heightening, and C.D. scales by +4d6 per level heightened. I think I removed the change because upon further thought, it only applies the Evil damage to Celestials (which PCs should not typically be fighting anyway) If it worked against any good aligned creature, that would be too much damage, but since this is pretty much only a single target, Good-aligned Celestial killing spell, I must have removed the change at some point.

Anyway, so you don't need to search for the link, here is the latest version: HERE


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Samurai wrote:
kripdenn wrote:
Samurai wrote:
Intoxicated Illithid wrote:
I love quite a bit of your changes, but out of curiosity, why the changes to Chilling Darkness?
I made a change to Chill Touch (It now only requires a Fort save, not an attack roll + a Fort save. I felt 2 ways to avoid the spell, a missed attack and a successful save, was too much for a regular damage touch range cantrip), but I don't see any change I made to the Chilling Darkness spell just below it on that page in the CRB.
Chill touch doesn't require an attack roll. You automatically touch a target with a spell when it has a range of touch unless the spell specifically states otherwise.
Is that a general rule in the game or something? If so, where is it stated?

The "Attack" trait and the fact that spells that require attack rolls specifically call it out.

https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=35

Versus

https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=236


Ruzza wrote:

The "Attack" trait and the fact that spells that require attack rolls specifically call it out.

https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=35

Versus

https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=236

Thank you for highlighting this! I gimped myself unknowingly for weeks.

Thanks, Roll20...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, LO Special Edition, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

Touch Range says "A spell with a range of touch requires you to physically touch the target. You use your unarmed reach to determine whether you can touch the creature. You can usually touch the target automatically, though the spell might specify that the target can attempt a saving throw or that you must attempt a spell attack roll. If an ability increases the range of a touch spell, start at 0 feet and increase from there."

Sovereign Court

Ruzza wrote:
Samurai wrote:
kripdenn wrote:
Samurai wrote:
Intoxicated Illithid wrote:
I love quite a bit of your changes, but out of curiosity, why the changes to Chilling Darkness?
I made a change to Chill Touch (It now only requires a Fort save, not an attack roll + a Fort save. I felt 2 ways to avoid the spell, a missed attack and a successful save, was too much for a regular damage touch range cantrip), but I don't see any change I made to the Chilling Darkness spell just below it on that page in the CRB.
Chill touch doesn't require an attack roll. You automatically touch a target with a spell when it has a range of touch unless the spell specifically states otherwise.
Is that a general rule in the game or something? If so, where is it stated?

The "Attack" trait and the fact that spells that require attack rolls specifically call it out.

https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=35

Versus

https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=236

But the Chill Touch spell in the book has the Attack trait right in the list under it's name. Apparently they removed it in the errata v1, along with many other spells where its wrongly had the tag.

I can make a more general listing in my notes to cover all of them instead of specifically calling out not to make an attack roll for Chill Touch.

I think I made the more specific note before the Errata was made and didn't remember to remove it. Thanks everyone for pointing it out to me.

Edit: There, made the change, you can DL at the same link above.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, LO Special Edition, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

Archives of Nethys has the errata entered on the spell description, so no Attack trait.


You nerfed Heal into the ground. This makes me very sad.

Sovereign Court

Intoxicated Illithid wrote:
You nerfed Heal into the ground. This makes me very sad.

I don't think so. It applies the caster's casting stat mod no matter how many actions are used to cast.

So, yeah, a 2-action Heal is a bit weaker, only getting about a +3 or +4 point bonus instead of an automatic +8. But that is applied to the 1 action Heal and 3 action Heals as well as the 2 action heal. So, if you do a 3 action heal, everyone in your party gets 1d8+4, or more with Heightening, instead of just 1d8.

Using RAW, the 2 action Heal is the only one anyone ever uses if they have a choice because of the huge bonus, unless the whole rest of the party is gathered around and are all injured. In all our games the Cleric only used a 3-action Heal once, other than that, only the 2 action version.

Sovereign Court

Ed Reppert wrote:
Archives of Nethys has the errata entered on the spell description, so no Attack trait.

Yeah, but if I buy the book, I don't bother looking it up on AoN, or checking what has changed or not throughout the game...


Samurai wrote:
Intoxicated Illithid wrote:
You nerfed Heal into the ground. This makes me very sad.

I don't think so. It applies the caster's casting stat mod no matter how many actions are used to cast.

So, yeah, a 2-action Heal is a bit weaker, only getting about a +3 or +4 point bonus instead of an automatic +8. But that is applied to the 1 action Heal and 3 action Heals as well as the 2 action heal. So, if you do a 3 action heal, everyone in your party gets 1d8+4, or more with Heightening, instead of just 1d8.

Using RAW, the 2 action Heal is the only one anyone ever uses if they have a choice because of the huge bonus, unless the whole rest of the party is gathered around and are all injured. In all our games the Cleric only used a 3-action Heal once, other than that, only the 2 action version.

Does the casting stat get multiplied with heightening on the two action heightening though?

As in does a 2nd level 2 action heal do 2d8+Double casting stat?

Sovereign Court

Intoxicated Illithid wrote:
Samurai wrote:
Intoxicated Illithid wrote:
You nerfed Heal into the ground. This makes me very sad.

I don't think so. It applies the caster's casting stat mod no matter how many actions are used to cast.

So, yeah, a 2-action Heal is a bit weaker, only getting about a +3 or +4 point bonus instead of an automatic +8. But that is applied to the 1 action Heal and 3 action Heals as well as the 2 action heal. So, if you do a 3 action heal, everyone in your party gets 1d8+4, or more with Heightening, instead of just 1d8.

Using RAW, the 2 action Heal is the only one anyone ever uses if they have a choice because of the huge bonus, unless the whole rest of the party is gathered around and are all injured. In all our games the Cleric only used a 3-action Heal once, other than that, only the 2 action version.

Does the casting stat get multiplied with heightening on the two action heightening though?

As in does a 2nd level 2 action heal do 2d8+Double casting stat?

Yes, the same rules apply. If it would have provided 2d8+16, it now gives 2d8+2x casting mod, and so on, no matter how many actions are used to cast. Heightened adds +1d8+ casting mod per level heightened. The only changes are that it replaces the flat +8 with casting mod, and it applies no matter how many actions used to cast the spell.

And the same rules apply to Harm, to keep positive energy clerics and negative energy clerics equal. So a level 1 Harm spell does 1d8+ casting mod negative damage (or healing to undead) no matter the number of actions, and if Heightened it adds another 1d8+mod per level. It's just 1 action = touch, 2 actions = 1 target 30' rng, and 3 actions = all targets in 30'

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Here is the latest version of my house rules, now including the new second edition Errata: Samurai's House Rules 1.6+ w/Errata 2

I'm still slowly working on the APG. There are a few early notes in here, but I'll update it more as I go.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, LO Special Edition, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

Does this document include all the crb errata, and are they all in green?

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ed Reppert wrote:
Does this document include all the crb errata, and are they all in green?

Yes, I believe everything I wanted to use is there. I think there were a few things I decided to do differently, and those are not in green. But they have been changing thing without declaring it, without listing the changes that are new, so I might have missed some things.

Sovereign Court

Here is the latest version of my House Rules document: Samurai's House Rules

I never got around to tweaking all the stuff in the APG. My Pathfinder 2e gaming group fell apart because the GM and all the other platers decided to go back to playing Pathfinder 1e instead, so this may be the final version of my rules for quite a while.

This version, 1.62, includes adjustments for the spellcaster's class DC to increase at 5th and 13th levels, to match the martial classes advancement pace. In many cases, I also pushed something they normally got at those levels (like a saving throw bump or weapon specialization) back to 7th and 15th levels so that they still get something at those levels too. (I hate "dead levels", and those are not typically "class defining abilities" for casters the way their spell attacks and DCs are.)

Thanks to everyone who gave me advice, ideas, and feedback on the rules since I started writing them!

101 to 140 of 140 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Samurai's P2 changes All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules