Even addressing a single major topic per week would have been perfect ( starting from its release in august 01 2019, now we will be sticking with just minor issue ). Not to say that, from what I heard within this board, on the 1e there was a FAQ tag ( in order to enlighten the most important questions which needed to be addressed ) which now is gone.
I don't know.
It's my first time following an RPG that much, and I recognize that now I might be complaining a lot, but have to admit that my expectations were a lot higher.
I get the sentiment but ultimately
1) there is no immediate money to be made from it. At least that is the way some people see it. But the reality is a quality product keeps and attracts players.
2) its very hard. Not many people have a detailed understanding of it. Putting fixing typos aside, the actual problems they have fixed so far have caused as many issues as they fixed. Examples - level 10 spell slots and attack rolls.
3) it annoys people no matter what you do after a while as some people come to justify and love the quirks.
As a result many gaming companies don't really try to put out errata. They just produce new stuff and try to marginally rebalance any problems with that.
Really as a system PF2 is actually at a fairly good standard.
But for the record the problems they need to fix are:
1) Clarify the unarmed attack modifier for Battle Forms, what is it?
2) Clarify Additional Damage, what is it?
3) Fix the Wild Shape +2 Status bonus
4) The AC of STR based animal companions at mid to high levels
5) Level 10 spell slots
I would like to mention some individual spells. But I guess they are not so important.
Things they should do over time with new material:
7) Fix the alchemist - yes I know it has its defenders, maybe a few good feats could help it.
8) Add a few more interesting feats to the Wizard and Cleric.
9) I wouldn't be adverse to a +1 item showing up to help casters attack or increase their spell DC.
But for the record the problems they need to fix are:
1) Clarify the unarmed attack modifier for Battle Forms, what is it?
2) Clarify Additional Damage, what is it?
3) Fix the Wild Shape +2 Status bonus
4) The AC of STR based animal companions at mid to high levels
5) Level 10 spell slots
I would like to mention some individual spells. But I guess they are not so important.
Things they should do over time with new material:
7) Fix the alchemist - yes I know it has its defenders, maybe a few good feats could help it.8) Add a few more interesting feats to the Wizard and Cleric.
9) I wouldn't be adverse to a +1 item showing up to help casters attack or increase their spell DC.
Gortle,
I agree 100%, but at the same time, most of these are fairly niche issues that rarely come up and can't be just handwaived by a DM. And that is why there is no rush. It's a 500 page book with 18,000 moving parts, there are bound to be corner cases. The idea that they are incompetent (not your word someone else's) because they haven't fixed it is absurd.
most of these are fairly niche issues that rarely come up
Some of them are, but Wild Shape is one of the druid's main class paths. So that's a least a little bit of a big deal.
Though on that same token I don't even really understand what Gortle is asking for 1, 2 and 3 on his list. So... yeah.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gortle,I agree 100%, but at the same time, most of these are fairly niche issues that rarely come up and can't be just handwaived by a DM. And that is why there is no rush. It's a 500 page book with 18,000 moving parts, there are bound to be corner cases. The idea that they are incompetent (not your word someone else's) because they haven't fixed it is absurd.
For a regular game its no big deal. Chat with the GM.
But its a royal pain for PFS. It is the reason that I haven't built a martial/druid wildshaper for PFS yet (I DO have a straight druid and a cleric/druid but for both of them wildshaping is just a minor part of the characters arsenal, NOT their main shtick). I just don't want to derail the game every time as I discuss with the GM how he handles things while running the risk of having to change my character if his rulings are unacceptable to me.
I think I was the source of the "incompetent" statement. To be clear, I'm NOT saying that Paizo was incompetent to not address this. I'm saying they were incompetent to have a second printing of the Core Rulebook that is materially different from the First Printing + Errata, all while NOT saying which is actually the "right" version. While one mistake may not prove incompetence I stand by my claim that this was a REALLY stupid and trivially avoidable mistake
But its a royal pain for PFS.
Or when you have multiple DM's.
most of these are fairly niche issues that rarely come upSome of them are, but Wild Shape is one of the druid's main class paths. So that's a least a little bit of a big deal.
Though on that same token I don't even really understand what Gortle is asking for 1, 2 and 3 on his list. So... yeah.
1) Just needs to happen so we can be definitive about item bonuses, ability scores and even whose unarmed attack we are talking about. It is really important for the build of Wild Shape Druids. Which because you can take multiple Druid orders is most of them.
2) Is because it appears everywhere but is nowhere explained outside a blog post. Again most misapplied in battle forms
3) Is a balance problem for fighter druids.
4) Can be avoided by just taking DEX Animal companions but I really like my Bear and why do they cut off half of the Animal Companion design space?
5) level 10 slots are broken - example level 19+ cleric's don't get any divine font by RAW. Level 1-18 do. You can fix it by taking a specific feat, but clearly it a rules problem at that level that nullfies the design space.
Yes problems are not the whole game just sections. The core of PF2 is good. But these are real problems that are not limited to one spell or feat. They affect builds or classes.
If you need more details ask a specific question.
But its a royal pain for PFS.Or when you have multiple DM's.
Yes I can work around these things myself. But my normal play group had diverse opinions like this forum. For wildshape druid's I just can't give a difinitive answer.
It is very disappointing when they screw up build categories like Dex based trips. They caused that problem with errata.
Level 10 spells are for the most part a curiosity. But they looked at this area and left it broken.
It is not that big an issue for the system as a whole. But they need answers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The sentence about constant abilities comes AFTER the other sentence, in my mind that overrides the earlier sentence. It is that simple.
Just as a general principle, any time you're reading a rule and say "Oh ignore that line" I feel like you're approaching it from the wrong place. Picking and choosing which lines we consider valid doesn't make sense.
Instead: your items continue working, but the special statistics of your wild shape attacks can only be modified in certain ways. Your striking rune never turns off, it just doesn't alter your wild shape damage. This is internally consistent with both rules and makes mechanical sense, since wild shape damage is already augmented.
I'm really struggling here, essentially Wild shape druids can't cast spells in battle-form so that's not an advantage; you are near the monster so you can be hit; how can you be effective as a martial class without the perks permitted to other martial classes. Wild Shape druids ARE a martial class. Yes, feel free to challenge that assumption but based on the style of play required by the battle form, I don't see how any other interpretation is logical. Yes, some of the forms have a ranged attack but not all.
I mean, just because you have Wild Shape doesn't mean that has to be the first thing you do in every combat. You still very much have a full caster spell list; fill it with Heals for between combats or take good opening plays to use on the first round (aoe blasts, control spells, etc) before cleaning up with your wild shape form.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are strong arguments either way. Until we receive official word, it's up to the GM.I read through this thread and I am still confused; it seems from some of the posts others are still as well. Back to the original posters question:
Striking Rune on Handwraps do or don't apply when the druid is using a Wild Shape form?
No. The rule is clear. Its not up to debate.
The rule is black and white. You can't modify the special statistics. Damage dice are a specifed statistic. (They are most certainly not an allowed status or circumstance bonus)
I have not seen an argument for it at all, just some people who want it. Other things are debated but this one is not.
Striking runes on Handwraps never apply to battle forms.
Yeah, striking runes pretty clearly don't apply. That's why the various battleform have increasing damage dice as party of the spell's progression.
Compared to another fighter who is getting a to hit bonus from some where else, no he is not.
Compared to a Monk who isn't often getting a status bonus. It is +4 to hit. That causes balance problems.
Compared to another fighter who is getting a to hit bonus from some where else, no he is not.
Compared to a Monk who isn't often getting a status bonus. It is +4 to hit. That causes balance problems.Disagree. The monk doing less damage is more a problem with the monk class's lackluster damage options than with a wild-shape fighter. A wild shape fighter's damage is definitely strong, but it isn't balance-breaking compared with other non-monk martials with damage boosts and a buff spell.
Monks seem to be good with action economy, having multiple strikes per action with flurry, multiple moves with feats and spells like ki rush or winding flow, moves that span multiple moves for other characters with stride speed boosts, and other abilities that take away actions from enemies like stunning fist, tripping, or grappling. Whether this ultimately makes up for lack of damage is up to debate.
Wild shape is a buff spell. That's it. It's no different than a fighter with heroism or a fighter with inspire courage or a fighter with bless. It can be dispelled. It can disrupted. It costs actions to active. Multiple consecutive fights will leave the fighter without a casting of wild shape. It locks the fighter out of different weapons to bypass resistance or proc weakness.
I don't mind your points, I've made them all myself. Yes if there are buff available in the party there is not much difference. But if there isn't the problem still exists even when you compare it to a giant instinct barbarian instead of a monk. +4 to hit difference just makes it hard for the GM to balance things. I've GMed it and its not great.
The +2 status bonus for wild shape druids is just wrong. It is almost impossible to get as a normal druid (there are two individual levels only it happens and only for particular spells not others) so it normally only applies if you are using lower level spells. But why do you do that - for your scouting form? Most of the time you will be using your top level form. It really only helps multiclass characters you may have higher proficiency and are stuck in the lower forms. It like it is a special class ability designed for dablers.
They should just remove it, and allow wild shape druids to use the best attack value of any of their known forms. Problem solved.
|
|
it normally only applies if you are using lower level spells. But why do you do that - for your scouting form?
I find it useful in two cases
1) With From Control. As you say, generally for scouting. But also useful if you've got a whole series of fairly minor combats back to back with little time to rest between encounters. Admittedly this transforms you into a sub-par martial but there ARE times when being a sub-par martial is better than spamming Electric Arc every round. And wild shaped druid combined with Animal Companion is still doing ok (how ok depends, o course, on the original topic of this thread, how magic items interact with wild shape)2) You're in an area where space prohibits you from assuming your larger battle forms. Sure, you're damage goes down but at least your to hit remains competetive
Given that the cost for a druid is pretty low (max out Str and to hit Runes if the GM thinks the latter works) its not a bad tradeoff. Lowish cost, lowish gain.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Given that the cost for a druid is pretty low
I wouldn't call the cost low. I really prefer to have some Charisma on my druid to do other things.
(max out Str and to hit Runes if the GM thinks the latter works) its not a bad tradeoff. Lowish cost, lowish gain.
Which by the way is the validation that item bonus are supposed to be included in the battleform attack modifier calcuation. Because even when you add them in, your Druid's attack bonus never exceeds the attack bonus specified in the battle form spells themselves. That attack bonus is clearly the balance point that the designers choose. It lines up very consistently with all the spells at the same attack number as a standard martial character gets.
In fact there are only two spots(one level only for two different spells) in that spectrum where a druid can exceed that number - and only by 1 - and its because the attack number given in the battle form spell is one lower in that case for no particular reason.