|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm inclined to prefer other routes for "A Wizard with a non-Wizardy weapon" than "let Wizards use weapons". Like "Arcane Bards" or "Rogues with Spells" or "bring back the Magus" all feel like better options to me.
The Wizard should be first and foremost an academic.
So your solution to the problem is to play another class or one that doesn't exist? Why have errata at all then?
And if wizards can't have SWP because they're flavored as scholarly, then why do Cloistered Clerics and Witches have it?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I personally don't find these to be big asks, and IMO, they're the minimalist approach while covering the main issues:
- Allow Mutagenist to select any Physical stat as their Class Bonus (The rest I think can 100% be done with more options for Mutagens and Class Feats or with Archetypes)
- Chirgeon treats Craft exactly as Medicine and Elixir of Life is added to its list of initial and Perpetual infusions
- Animal Companions (and those in animal form) explicitly state strikes and not "attacks" to allow Grapples, Trips, Escape, etc.
- Make Eschew Materials actually do something because I hate Ribbons that do literally nothing outside of extremely narrow circumstances (in this case, spells already prepared but without all your items)
- Explicitly state Downcasting is legal for Spontaneous Casters
- Battle Medicine hand requirement and interactions with other Medicine based abilities (Natural Medicine, Chirgeon)
- Natural Medicine actually does what it's supposed to do instead of taxing you skill increases across two skills (which defeats the purpose)
- Add Potency Runes for spells to make up for the loss in DPR/success vs. save based spells to Staffs/Wands/etc.
- Deafness doesn't matter and probably should
- Jumping doesn't indicate when you fall, whether it be at the end of your turn, end of your action, or at the end of your next action (per the Jump spell)
- Can Finesse Weapons perform Athletics checks with Dex instead of STR? I have seen Stephen McFarlane's quote during the playtest and I think confirmed here, but would like to know the case (and if that is the case, whether or not you can use Dex for ANY maneuver since Unarmed Strikes are Finesse).
- The Critical Hit thing, for those that need it I suppose
- Remove Darkvision from the game (Kidding... mostly...)
I'm inclined to prefer other routes for "A Wizard with a non-Wizardy weapon" than "let Wizards use weapons". Like "Arcane Bards" or "Rogues with Spells" or "bring back the Magus" all feel like better options to me.
The Wizard should be first and foremost an academic.
I mean, sure.
But there are other ways do that other than just cut out the option with no trade-off. A similar theme based argument could be made for druids and metal armour or a bunch of other themes, but they didn’t materialise in the system.
That is a poor example. Using metal armor or shields is an Anathema for all Druids and could result in them losing access to their Primal spell casting and other magical abilities.
Over all there are thematic restrictions all over the place. Barbarians, Champions, Clerics, Druids all deal with specific anathema.Wizards, Bards, and Rogues have very specific weapon proficiencies. There is a very specific set of monk weapons.
I personally would be fine if Wizards were proficient in Simple Weapons. I just think it's a bit much to act like they are in a unique position here.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are we not deliberating on the fact that the Druid only loses access to those features if "enough acts that are anathema to nature" are done?
To me, that's rather permissive wording I think and it's meant to help players engage with the GM in terms of how it should impact them. Its vague, almost certainly on purpose, so you can have the conversation with your GM, so saying that Druids can't use the best Shields outright is disingenuous at best and twisting the truth.
To me, the wording of "enough" tells me that you typically need to violate more than one, in other words at least two of these rules in order to lose benefits. This tells us that we CAN tell stories about Druids with Metal Armor or Shields but that they are almost certainly "walking the line" just as how you can tell a story about how a misguided Druid taught his Schoolchildren to speak and understand Druidic, and who had a fit of rage and destroyed a beautiful forest glade.
- Chirgeon treats Craft exactly as Medicine and Elixir of Life is added to its list of initial and Perpetual infusions
The "perpetual infusion" part is definitely unreasonable. That's unlimited free healing with no checks. In the time that it would take to perform a treat wounds check, you could provide 300d6 healing.
- Add Potency Runes for spells to make up for the loss in DPR/success vs. save based spells to Staffs/Wands/etc.
With casters generally reaching a higher proficiency in casting than martial classes do in weapons (even if it's late), I'm not really expecting this to get changed as a core rules thing. It just seems weird for casters to get 10th level spells and tie the Fighter for accuracy. Could be wrong though, as that's not an issue until 19th.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally don't find these to be big asks, and IMO, they're the minimalist approach while covering the main issues:
- Allow Mutagenist to select any Physical stat as their Class Bonus (The rest I think can 100% be done with more options for Mutagens and Class Feats or with Archetypes)
- Chirgeon treats Craft exactly as Medicine and Elixir of Life is added to its list of initial and Perpetual infusions
- Animal Companions (and those in animal form) explicitly state strikes and not "attacks" to allow Grapples, Trips, Escape, etc.
- Make Eschew Materials actually do something because I hate Ribbons that do literally nothing outside of extremely narrow circumstances (in this case, spells already prepared but without all your items)
- Explicitly state Downcasting is legal for Spontaneous Casters
- Battle Medicine hand requirement and interactions with other Medicine based abilities (Natural Medicine, Chirgeon)
- Natural Medicine actually does what it's supposed to do instead of taxing you skill increases across two skills (which defeats the purpose)
- Add Potency Runes for spells to make up for the loss in DPR/success vs. save based spells to Staffs/Wands/etc.
- Deafness doesn't matter and probably should
- Jumping doesn't indicate when you fall, whether it be at the end of your turn, end of your action, or at the end of your next action (per the Jump spell)
- Can Finesse Weapons perform Athletics checks with Dex instead of STR? I have seen Stephen McFarlane's quote during the playtest and I think confirmed here, but would like to know the case (and if that is the case, whether or not you can use Dex for ANY maneuver since Unarmed Strikes are Finesse).
- The Critical Hit thing, for those that need it I suppose
- Remove Darkvision from the game (Kidding... mostly...)
A lot of this, plus giving Mutagenists Medium Armor proficiency, and give all Alchemists Master proficiency to their weapons, bombs and unarmed attacks.
|
Gotta Herbalist Ranger that'd like to know if Natural Medicine'll be sufficient to hit those higher DC Treat Wounds checks by only having to increase proficiency with the Nature skill.
Or, failing/in addition to that, if additional Skill Feat support will expand on what Natural Medicine started? (Outside the scope of this thread...)
- Natural Medicine actually does what it's supposed to do instead of taxing you skill increases across two skills (which defeats the purpose)
I don't think this is very wise. Having Natural Medicine completely overtaking Medicine would make the latter skill useless, since Nature is a Recall knowledge skill as well, while Medicine's main purpose is healing and the occasional recall knowledge on fringe circumstances. I think it could be reasonable to add an extra line to it similar to "You qualify for Skills Feats that require Trained in Medicine, but not expert and above", this way you can pick Battle Medicine or other entry feats, but doesn't the same things that a medicine specialist would have access to.
The Chirurgeon on the other hand? I'm all for it. Its Class feature should completely substitute Medicine for Craft. It's only reasonable. I would like some Chirurgeon specific feats as well. It's staggering how this is a Class Path but has basically zero direct support, not even the Storm Druid is so bare bones.
- Natural Medicine actually does what it's supposed to do instead of taxing you skill increases across two skills (which defeats the purpose)
I don't think this is very wise. Having Natural Medicine completely overtaking Medicine would make the latter skill useless, since Nature is a Recall knowledge skill as well, while Medicine's main purpose is healing and the occasional recall knowledge on fringe circumstances. I think it could be reasonable to add an extra line to it similar to "You qualify for Skills Feats that require Trained in Medicine, but not expert and above", this way you can pick Battle Medicine or other entry feats, but doesn't the same things that a medicine specialist would have access to.
The Chirurgeon on the other hand? I'm all for it. Its Class feature should completely substitute Medicine for Craft. It's only reasonable. I would like some Chirurgeon specific feats as well. It's staggering how this is a Class Path but has basically zero direct support, not even the Storm Druid is so bare bones.
Impressive Performance already does this to Diplomacy, so why shouldn't Natural Medicine work this way? As it stands now, it is worse than useless.
Only if you don't mind people deciding they're just a bad idea if you ever want to block.Not actually errata, but a dev comment: "if you're bothered by shields, re-imagine non-sturdy shields as totems, icons, or holy symbols. That is, stuff you present towards the enemy but where it's natural they'd break if used to block with". Problem solved, no rules changes necessary.
Or you know, "Imagine them as realistic, normal shields, which were destroyed when used to directly block attacks in battle as opposed to deflecting them. You know, like real weapons and armor."
I'm not normally a simulationist, but the idea that all shields should be durable when used to absorb blows is... kindof silly.
In order - Merciful Elixirs is actually pretty amazing. Alchemist Medic path could be better, but its not completely awful at what its for.
My whole party just picked up shields in our Extinction Curse game (literally in a different internet tab ;) ) because Raising a Shield is totally worth it for people otherwise lacking for good third actions. Nobody plans on blocking with them.
- Chirgeon treats Craft exactly as Medicine and Elixir of Life is added to its list of initial and Perpetual infusionsThe "perpetual infusion" part is definitely unreasonable. That's unlimited free healing with no checks. In the time that it would take to perform a treat wounds check, you could provide 300d6 healing.
Because an elixir is tied to use, which inherently requires distribution, weight, drawing and interacting, etc i disagree with your direct comparison to healing in general.
Healing in terms of out of combat means a lot less than in combat. I’m perfectly comfortable for an eight level alchemist to do this.
- Add Potency Runes for spells to make up for the loss in DPR/success vs. save based spells to Staffs/Wands/etc.With casters generally reaching a higher proficiency in casting than martial classes do in weapons (even if it's late), I'm not really expecting this to get changed as a core rules thing. It just seems weird for casters to get 10th level spells and tie the Fighter for accuracy. Could be wrong though, as that's not an issue until 19th.
The math disagrees pretty much across the board. They are behind on proficiency at every level by at least one tier until level 15 where they go even and then at level 19 they break ahead of some current martials (APG might allow for higher proficiency).
It’s not about comparing them to martials, the spell attack roll spells lose to save spells outright.
This is specifically for spell attack rolls, That’s why I mentioned DCs. Currently DCs are better even if single target aoe/sos.
- Natural Medicine actually does what it's supposed to do instead of taxing you skill increases across two skills (which defeats the purpose)
I don't think this is very wise. Having Natural Medicine completely overtaking Medicine would make the latter skill useless, since Nature is a Recall knowledge skill as well, while Medicine's main purpose is healing and the occasional recall knowledge on fringe circumstances. I think it could be reasonable to add an extra line to it similar to "You qualify for Skills Feats that require Trained in Medicine, but not expert and above", this way you can pick Battle Medicine or other entry feats, but doesn't the same things that a medicine specialist would have access to.
The Chirurgeon on the other hand? I'm all for it. Its Class feature should completely substitute Medicine for Craft. It's only reasonable. I would like some Chirurgeon specific feats as well. It's staggering how this is a Class Path but has basically zero direct support, not even the Storm Druid is so bare bones.
At the very least an additional skill Feat should suffice then, but Versatile Performance does this but for multiple skills best performing skill and allows you to qualify for skill feats of all three skills in perpetuity by elevating just the one skill.
That’s a level 1 Class Feat, that allows you to take things like Battle Cry.
It’s also a matter of opportunity cost, a person can just invest into Medicine and it requires the exact same ability score (WIS). It’s just as easy to invest in Medicine and avoid Nature all together if that’s what you want to be good at, and spending a Skill feat is a reasonable spend IMO.
Should every skill get that shot? No. I think because Chirgeon has to spend a literal field focus on it, INT replacement makes sense and the power does too.
But natural medicine just makes it possible for a Druid and Ranger to contribute IMO.
Maybe a follow up feat, but based on Versatile Performance getting 3 skills and still being considered “weak” by some (I don’t agree there, I think it’s solid) 2 seems really unnecessary.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In order - Merciful Elixirs is actually pretty amazing. Alchemist Medic path could be better, but its not completely awful at what its for.
I'll take your word on this one, as I've not delved into them much myself, but I know people seem to be even more underwhelmed by them than by mutagenists.
To be blunt, that's very nice for you, but it still adds up to "If you have the Shield Block class feature, either don't use it, use a Sturdy Shield or expect to spend a bunch of money." I don't think any of these are reasonable.My whole party just picked up shields in our Extinction Curse game (literally in a different internet tab ;) ) because Raising a Shield is totally worth it for people otherwise lacking for good third actions. Nobody plans on blocking with them.
There are plenty of class features which aren't used all the time for various reasons - and plenty of other reasons not to use Shield Block, so I don't think non-sturdy shields being squishy is a huge deal for that reason.
My fighter, who is brand new to Pathfinder (he played some Advanced D&D back in the day) didn't blink an eyelid at the thought that shields were consumables to a fighter who wants to block a lot. I'm not sure why people think that something that can save your life should last for ever.
Think of it this way - a Minor Healing Potion costs 4gp and heals 1d8 damage, a Steel Shield costs 2gp and blocks 5 damage, and often can be used more than once for that. Doesn't seem like such an expense now.
If you want a magic item that does more than just block damage, don't use it like a consumable.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
- Chirgeon treats Craft exactly as Medicine and Elixir of Life is added to its list of initial and Perpetual infusionsThe "perpetual infusion" part is definitely unreasonable. That's unlimited free healing with no checks. In the time that it would take to perform a treat wounds check, you could provide 300d6 healing
Both Leaf Druids and Witches can provide infinite out of combat healing.
Both Leaf Druids and Witches can provide infinite out of combat healing.- Chirgeon treats Craft exactly as Medicine and Elixir of Life is added to its list of initial and Perpetual infusionsThe "perpetual infusion" part is definitely unreasonable. That's unlimited free healing with no checks. In the time that it would take to perform a treat wounds check, you could provide 300d6 healing
Maybe I'm missing a feat somewhere, but those both require the same 10 minutes to refresh. Perpetual infusions lets them do it at no cost, with no cooldown, 3 times every 6 seconds. Now if you don't care about timing, sure there's no difference. But I think time passing matters.
...
Except that Impressive Performance specifically substitutes Diplomacy on making an impression. Nothing regarding qualifying for Diplomacy Feats or substituting it for every instance. You can't use Performance to Gather Information neither make a Request.
natural medicine at least grants an extra +2 that is easy to meet on normal adventuring.
...Except that Impressive Performance specifically substitutes Diplomacy on making an impression. Nothing regarding qualifying for Diplomacy Feats or substituting it for every instance. You can't use Performance to Gather Information neither make a Request.
natural medicine at least grants an extra +2 that is easy to meet on normal adventuring.
I think we can agree of the directly impactful options involved with Diplomacy, a non combat skill, ‘Make an Impression’ is probably the most common and the most coveted of the actions. It’s literally the primary action associated with the ability IMO.
I’m not crazy about the +2 circumstance bonus, because that kind of conditional bonus is honestly just an unnecessary burden on the gm to determine when and where they get a +2 bonus to a skill based on criteria I can arbitrarily decree.
Even then you’re literally spending a feat to get what the Skill Training Feat can do for any skill all the time except it actually counts (skill training medicine actually means you have skill training medicine and a +2 + level bonus) and a “sometimes +2 that’s up to the gm”.
Counting that small rider as a big enough boon to merit the absolute massive investment it would cost to support both medicine and Nature in perpetuity? Eh.
After all it’s not like they get the potential medicine feats for free, they still have to actually take them, which is something and they have to keep advancing Nature.
Nature is a decent skill, but outside Recall Knowledge it doesn’t have a crazy amount of combat applications. I can’t speak for you but if you’ve had players constantly using Recall Knowledge that’s not been my experience in the slightest. As far as I’m concerned, Recall Knowledge could use a boost or two.
Maybe it could just get access to the higher actions or maybe a new skill feat gets the higher actions and the skill feat access, but all it does right now is let’s a Druid be good at Medicine until level 5 ish and then if they wanted to advance they have to start over and invest.
I mean I guess it’s fine, a small nitpick maybe, but if someone invests I think it makes sense to continue to reward and allow that investment.
Maybe I'm missing a feat somewhere, but those both require the same 10 minutes to refresh. Perpetual infusions lets them do it at no cost, with no cooldown, 3 times every 6 seconds. Now if you don't care about timing, sure there's no difference. But I think time passing matters.Both Leaf Druids and Witches can provide infinite out of combat healing.- Chirgeon treats Craft exactly as Medicine and Elixir of Life is added to its list of initial and Perpetual infusionsThe "perpetual infusion" part is definitely unreasonable. That's unlimited free healing with no checks. In the time that it would take to perform a treat wounds check, you could provide 300d6 healing
Yeah; at 7th level Leaf Druid provides 4d6+16 (~30hp) healing with a focus point, which is ten minutes to recover. Treat Wounds provides on a DC 30 check for Master, 2d8+30 (~39hp). A level 7 Rogue is looking at about… 70 health or so, so that's ballpark half their hp.
Alchemist would be providing 300d6 (~1050hp) for that ten minutes of work- well over an order of magnitude more healing. That's enough to heal an entire level 20 party from unconscious to max health, in the time any other unlimited resource takes to heal a level 7 character half their health.
(I think the underlying problem is that Mutagenist and Bomber can both spend feats to make their Perpetual Infusions useful, but there's no way to make unlimited Antidotes and Antiplagues useful for anything other than protecting a hundred commoners.)
Maybe I'm missing a feat somewhere, but those both require the same 10 minutes to refresh. Perpetual infusions lets them do it at no cost, with no cooldown, 3 times every 6 seconds. Now if you don't care about timing, sure there's no difference. But I think time passing matters.Both Leaf Druids and Witches can provide infinite out of combat healing.- Chirgeon treats Craft exactly as Medicine and Elixir of Life is added to its list of initial and Perpetual infusionsThe "perpetual infusion" part is definitely unreasonable. That's unlimited free healing with no checks. In the time that it would take to perform a treat wounds check, you could provide 300d6 healingYeah; at 7th level Leaf Druid provides 4d6+16 (~30hp) healing with a focus point, which is ten minutes to recover. Treat Wounds provides on a DC 30 check for Master, 2d8+30 (~39hp). A level 7 Rogue is looking at about… 70 health or so, so that's ballpark half their hp.
Alchemist would be providing 300d6 (~1050hp) for that ten minutes of work- well over an order of magnitude more healing. That's enough to heal an entire level 20 party from unconscious to max health, in the time any other unlimited resource takes to heal a level 7 character half their health.
(I think the underlying problem is that Mutagenist and Bomber can both spend feats to make their Perpetual Infusions useful, but there's no way to make unlimited Antidotes and Antiplagues useful for anything other than protecting a hundred commoners.)
Uh it takes an action to make and drink and if it’s not the alchemist, to give it to someone else that’s next to you.
And they have a L bulk, so 10 (your 300d6 is 30 bulk which no one person can even use) is 1 bulk which realistically unless alchemists get some kind of bulk help as well, means it’s limited.
So that’s 100d6 and everyone is effectively immobilized to receive potions and drink them, which means they can’t use their ten minutes to do whatever the hell they were doing.
It’s whatever, they can just as easily solve the problem another way, as I said, it’s a minimalist in terms of rule changes proposal. Add alchemical item to field study is less invasive than “create whole other ability”.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"You can use your proficiency rank in Performance to meet the requirements of skill feats that require a particular rank in Deception, Diplomacy, or Intimidation."
Except that Impressive Performance specifically substitutes Diplomacy on making an impression. Nothing regarding qualifying for Diplomacy Feats or substituting it for every instance.
Uh it takes an action to make and drink and if it’s not the alchemist, to give it to someone else that’s next to you.
Make three and drop them on your pack, and the party takes and drinks them.
And they have a L bulk, so 10 (your 300d6 is 30 bulk which no one person can even use) is 1 bulk which realistically unless alchemists get some kind of bulk help as well, means it’s limited.
Huh? Are bomber Alchemists tracking bulk for hypothetical bombs they're going to be using in the day's fights? I presume that most of the bulk for elixirs is reusable vials.
So that’s 100d6 and everyone is effectively immobilized to receive potions and drink them, to do whatever the hell they were doing.
100d6 per person, for up to three people. The problem is more dropping the time from ten minutes to a minute that can be interrupted at any point with no issues at all.
It’s whatever, they can just as easily solve the problem another way, as I said, it’s a minimalist in terms of rule changes proposal. Add alchemical item to field study is less invasive than “create whole other ability”.
Sure! I'm only saying that this simple fix causes more problems than it fixes, and so I don't think it's happening.
There are plenty of class features which aren't used all the time for various reasons - and plenty of other reasons not to use Shield Block, so I don't think non-sturdy shields being squishy is a huge deal for that reason.
My fighter, who is brand new to Pathfinder (he played some Advanced D&D back in the day) didn't blink an eyelid at the thought that shields were consumables to a fighter who wants to block a lot. I'm not sure why people think that something that can save your life should last for ever.
Think of it this way - a Minor Healing Potion costs 4gp and heals 1d8 damage, a Steel Shield costs 2gp and blocks 5 damage, and often can be used more than once for that. Doesn't seem like such an expense now.
If you want a magic item that does more than just block damage, don't use it like a consumable.
And an Arrow-Catching Shield costs 1350gp and blocks 6 damage. Not really saving your life by level 11, is it?
"You can use your proficiency rank in Performance to meet the requirements of skill feats that require a particular rank in Deception, Diplomacy, or Intimidation."
Except that Impressive Performance specifically substitutes Diplomacy on making an impression. Nothing regarding qualifying for Diplomacy Feats or substituting it for every instance.
I used Impressive Performance, not Versatile Performance. One is a skill feat, the other is a Bard class feature, two vastly different power levels. Impressive Performance can be directly compared to Natural medicine, while versatile performance can't (because it's obviously supposed to be MUCH better).
As far as I can tell all alchemical items do keep their bulk. So I guess they do have to track that bulk no matter how it is they were made.
*********************
Potential thing for errata/clarification:
* Do alchemical items created by using Alchemist features have bulk?
Is there any question that Alchemists are creating temporary bulk that's reduced again when they use the alchemical items? Bulk is also a measure of awkwardness to carry, so it doesn't need to be creating mass from nothing.
I used Impressive Performance, not Versatile Performance. One is a skill feat, the other is a Bard class feature, two vastly different power levels. Impressive Performance can be directly compared to Natural medicine, while versatile performance can't (because it's obviously supposed to be MUCH better)."You can use your proficiency rank in Performance to meet the requirements of skill feats that require a particular rank in Deception, Diplomacy, or Intimidation."
Except that Impressive Performance specifically substitutes Diplomacy on making an impression. Nothing regarding qualifying for Diplomacy Feats or substituting it for every instance.
It is a Bard Class Feat, of level 1, that does 3 times the skills... that's not a "Class Feature" and implying that Versatile Performance and an errata'd Natural Medicine are even close is a farse.
A level 1 Class Feat that does three times what the ask of Natural Medicine is much better.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And an Arrow-Catching Shield costs 1350gp and blocks 6 damage. Not really saving your life by level 11, is it?There are plenty of class features which aren't used all the time for various reasons - and plenty of other reasons not to use Shield Block, so I don't think non-sturdy shields being squishy is a huge deal for that reason.
My fighter, who is brand new to Pathfinder (he played some Advanced D&D back in the day) didn't blink an eyelid at the thought that shields were consumables to a fighter who wants to block a lot. I'm not sure why people think that something that can save your life should last for ever.
Think of it this way - a Minor Healing Potion costs 4gp and heals 1d8 damage, a Steel Shield costs 2gp and blocks 5 damage, and often can be used more than once for that. Doesn't seem like such an expense now.
If you want a magic item that does more than just block damage, don't use it like a consumable.
In fairness the Arrow-Catching Shield and the Forge Warden have been specifically called out by devs to need some attention, while they haven't said anything on shields as a whole.
I used Impressive Performance, not Versatile Performance. One is a skill feat, the other is a Bard class feature, two vastly different power levels. Impressive Performance can be directly compared to Natural medicine, while versatile performance can't (because it's obviously supposed to be MUCH better)."You can use your proficiency rank in Performance to meet the requirements of skill feats that require a particular rank in Deception, Diplomacy, or Intimidation."
Except that Impressive Performance specifically substitutes Diplomacy on making an impression. Nothing regarding qualifying for Diplomacy Feats or substituting it for every instance.
It is a Bard Class Feat, of level 1, that does 3 times the skills... that's not a "Class Feature" and implying that Versatile Performance and an errata'd Natural Medicine are even close is a farse.
A level 1 Class Feat that does three times what the ask of Natural Medicine is much better.
Here's the feat I'm talking about: IMPRESSIVE Performance
It is a skill feat like Natural Medicine. Obviously Versatile Performance is way stronger. That's the comparison you want to make, two feats of the same silo. Not a Class feat and a skill feat, they're designed under different power level guidelines.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I used Impressive Performance, not Versatile Performance. One is a skill feat, the other is a Bard class feature, two vastly different power levels. Impressive Performance can be directly compared to Natural medicine, while versatile performance can't (because it's obviously supposed to be MUCH better)."You can use your proficiency rank in Performance to meet the requirements of skill feats that require a particular rank in Deception, Diplomacy, or Intimidation."
Except that Impressive Performance specifically substitutes Diplomacy on making an impression. Nothing regarding qualifying for Diplomacy Feats or substituting it for every instance.
It is a Bard Class Feat, of level 1, that does 3 times the skills... that's not a "Class Feature" and implying that Versatile Performance and an errata'd Natural Medicine are even close is a farse.
A level 1 Class Feat that does three times what the ask of Natural Medicine is much better.
Here's the feat I'm talking about: IMPRESSIVE Performance
It is a skill feat like Natural Medicine. Obviously Versatile Performance is way stronger. That's the comparison you want to make, two feats of the same silo. Not a Class feat and a skill feat, they're designed under different power level guidelines.
Oh really? Class Feats are defined under different power guidelines?
It's almost like the comment I wrote said exactly that.
You also fail to realize that this feat is better than Natural Medicine because Natural Medicine does NOT give you access to Expert/Master/Legendary Actions that are allocated to Medicine and require that proficiency in Medicine.
So sure, let's make the comparison. Natural Medicine is much worse than this Feat.
And that's completely removing the context that this feat is obviously for Bards and it allows them to funnel like 90% of their abilities through a single Skill which they plan to increase at pretty much every level anyways in order to qualify for other abilities. Healing gets progressively worse as it breaks down in increments, Diplomacy to Make an Impression does exactly the same thing regardless of your Proficiency (which just increases your level of success).
So making a direct comparison of a strictly linear increasing Skill (Diplomacy) to a incremental progressional skill based on tiers of proficiency (Medicine) is a bad comparison.
Lest we forget that Natural Medicine doesn't allow you to do Treat Poison, Treat Disease, or Administer First Aid.
Oh and the "pièce de résistance", you still need freaking Healer's Tools to do Treat Wounds anyways....
Natural Medicine needs errata. How they go about it can be fine, but acting like this is some huge encroachment on the "power of a skill feat" is quite honestly ridiculous.
In fairness the Arrow-Catching Shield and the Forge Warden have been specifically called out by devs to need some attention, while they haven't said anything on shields as a whole.And an Arrow-Catching Shield costs 1350gp and blocks 6 damage. Not really saving your life by level 11, is it?There are plenty of class features which aren't used all the time for various reasons - and plenty of other reasons not to use Shield Block, so I don't think non-sturdy shields being squishy is a huge deal for that reason.
My fighter, who is brand new to Pathfinder (he played some Advanced D&D back in the day) didn't blink an eyelid at the thought that shields were consumables to a fighter who wants to block a lot. I'm not sure why people think that something that can save your life should last for ever.
Think of it this way - a Minor Healing Potion costs 4gp and heals 1d8 damage, a Steel Shield costs 2gp and blocks 5 damage, and often can be used more than once for that. Doesn't seem like such an expense now.
If you want a magic item that does more than just block damage, don't use it like a consumable.
There's also the standing question of what the special material shields are "for" - if you can make a Spellguard Shield out of Adamantine, for instance, you potentially sort out a lot of concerns.
There's also the standing question of what the special material shields are "for" - if you can make a Spellguard Shield out of Adamantine, for instance, you potentially sort out a lot of concerns.That's something I recently settle on house-ruling. Not exactly because I think shields 'need' the boost of precious materials, but because the effects of them across the board are very minor and their price equal when compared to other improvements a player might seek to purchase.
The house-rule being that I reduced precious material costs to roughly 20% of their listed prices across the board, putting the choice more in the terms of "should we buy a cold iron weapon or an elemental gem?" instead of "should we buy a cold iron weapon or +2 striking weapon?".
I wouldn't hold my breath that errata make that adjustment too, though.
I'm reluctant to target Special Materials Weapons a cost reduction wholesale, as I'm fairly certain that most creatures vulnerable to given materials give up a good deal of HP under the assumption that resistance will come up.
As is, SM Weapons are extremely expensive but devastatingly effective against things vulnerable to them, and finding one in the adventures loot is a real treat. As loot, they actually lure people out of their signature weapon comfort zone as well.
Shields and armor though feel like they were included just so they'd be in the book if anyone asked if they existed...
And again, I maintain that's unreasonable. It says "If you want to use this class feature, use this and only this shield." I don't insist you can do it repeatedly, but pretty quickly you can get in a situation where you don't even want to do it once.
There's no actual game design reason that the core rulebook needs multiple shields that fill the same role. Its perfectly fine for it to contain only a single blocking shield.
Adventure Paths have already added more than one non-Sturdy Shield that is viable for blocking with different mechanics than Sturdy Shields. Watch for more in supplemental material.
Clarification that a shield is not a weapon, so we can stop having a thousand threads about it.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Going back to the topic at hand
Battleforms and everything regarding them
- Is striking intended to apply or not? (There's a lot of reasons why it shouldn't, but it would be nice to have official clarification).
- Is weapon specialisation, sneak attack or rage damage intended to apply?
- Are property runes intended to apply?
- Can battleforms use maneuvers such as trip,shove,grapple,disarm & escape? (Currently they can't, the text prevents them using any attacks aside from the listed ones).
There's probably more I'm missing
Swarms
- A swarm can move through your space, but are you able to move through a swarm's space?
Yellow Musk Creepers and Thorned Cocoons
- What's the duration on the fascination from failure?
Other monster abilities
- The consistency isn't there between two similar abilities - see the Quetzalcoatlus' "Snatch" ability and the Roc's "Snatch" ability. Both are clearly intended to be the same, yet the Quetzalcoatlus' doesn't work as written (it can move up to half speed while it has a creature grabbed, but doesn't have any text saying this doesn't end the grab...)
Probably a lot of other things I'm missing here
Re: Alchemist and Wizard Weapon Prof
- I'm not expecting this to change because it's out of the purview of errata (which has mostly been for clarifications rather than buffs). Could be different for 2e though.
|
How can you possibly know if you're going to take damage if damage hasn't been rolled?
Because they already rolled and successfully hit. The rules seem arguably unclear on whether or not you have to declare the shield block before or after you know the magnitude of the damage. It doesn't specifically say so in the rules, but some GMs are requiring you to use a Hero Point for a reroll before you know the results of the original roll. I suspect those same GMs are the ones requiring you to declare a shield block before you hear the damage.
How can you possibly know if you're going to take damage if damage hasn't been rolled?Because they already rolled and successfully hit. The rules seem arguably unclear on whether or not you have to declare the shield block before or after you know the magnitude of the damage. It doesn't specifically say so in the rules, but some GMs are requiring you to use a Hero Point for a reroll before you know the results of the original roll. I suspect those same GMs are the ones requiring you to declare a shield block before you hear the damage.
As per dev, yes you must reroll before you know the results. Similarly, yes, you do know the damage before you choose whether to shield block or not. Both of those have been mentioned by devs already, and I wasn't even aware they were issues.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
- I'm not expecting this to change because it's out of the purview of errata (which has mostly been for clarifications rather than buffs). Could be different for 2e though.
We saw with the Alchemist update in the first errata that Paizo seem willing to also use them like "patch notes", something I am 200% down with.
Errata, even as a term, is inherently old media. We don't need to restrict game updates or balance changes like in ye old'en days.