|
The "succeed at another fort save or die" one might be some kind of poison, rather than a spell.
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2018 06:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 07:51 |
|
|
This is Paizo, we would never give high level fighters a save or die. Hell even 3.5 did that in Tome of Battle, but not Paizo! The idea that a PC dark wizard can inflict shaken on the boss but not panicked with a fear spell is OK I guess. Dominate is straight up buffed (remember, you can get a save if the controller makes you do anything you wouldn't normally do, and that's pretty much arguing with the DM). Really no one would care as much about save or dies if game designers tamped down on the HP inflation, but as HP keeps rising across editions people start going for save or dies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2018 06:06
|
|
|
So by sticking with the 3.5 classic of "Fighty-people make Attack Rolls, and Spellcasters make other people make Saving Throws", then they've neatly made it so Wizards don't have to deal with critical misses, while making Fighters twice as likely to. How surprising.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2018 08:04
|
|
|
"On a successful save, you aren't controlled, but you still lose an action on your next turn" So much for the idea that spellcasters are toned down in PF2. Now they get to gently caress with you even if you do succed your save-or-lose.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2018 10:04
|
|
|
Dominate Person is a 5th-level spell, which means a character gets access to it at Wizard 9. 15 base INT, +2 from racials, +2 from ability score increases, +6 from Big Six items, and you'll have a final INT of 25, for a modifier of +7. That comes out to a Will save of [10+5+7] = DC 22 A level 9 Fighter would have a base Will save of +3, a base Wisdom of 12 that maybe hasn't been increased yet so the modifier is still +1, and a +3 resistance bonus from Big Six items. That's a final Will save of d20+7 Under the old system, the Fighter would have a: 30% chance of rolling a 22 or higher and thus avoiding the effects of the spell entirely. 70% chance of rolling a 21 or less and suffering the full effect of Dominate Person, which is that you'd be dominated for 9 days Under the new system, the Fighter would have a: 25% chance of rolling a 12 or less and suffering the full effect of Dominate Person, which is that you'd be dominated for 9 days 45% chance of rolling a 13 to 21 and suffering Dominate Person, but with a chance to save against it again every round 30% chance of rolling a 22 or higher losing 1 out of your 3 Actions next turn (but otherwise being able to avoid Dominate Person's normal effect) code:Whether or not this actually works out to be any kind of advantage at all would depend on how long on average it would take the Fighter to break out of the Dominate Person given a 30% chance to break it per round, and compared against the average combat length (which I assume would be on the order of perhaps 4 to 5 rounds total). If you shoot this against the Fighter on round 1 and they still sit-out half the fight or more, the gains would be marginal - you (as the GM) would still have gotten a huge benefit from it, and you don't have to worry about the opportunity cost of blowing that spell slot because there's always more monsters where that came from. On the player side, if you shoot this against the Fighter-type NPC on round 1 and they still sit-out half the fight or more, then again you're still getting a lot more leverage out of it. The fact that they're only getting a 3-4 round disable instead of a 9-day disable doesn't matter if you only need those 3 rounds to win the encounter anyway. It's also interesting how this model would hold-up when applied against Hold Person, which already gives the target a chance to save against it with every round as its standard effect.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2018 15:07
|
|
|
I like that critical failures on attack rolls are gone.UrbanLabyrinth posted:So by sticking with the 3.5 classic of "Fighty-people make Attack Rolls, and Spellcasters make other people make Saving Throws", then they've neatly made it so Wizards don't have to deal with critical misses, while making Fighters twice as likely to. How surprising. Critical misses appear to have been removed. Orange Devil fucked around with this message at 15:22 on Mar 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2018 15:18
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:I like that critical failures on attack rolls are gone. If you mean "you always miss on a 1", then no, they said that's still a thing and a 1 is always a miss. "So with certain strike, a failed attack roll isn't actually a miss—your fighter is so skilled that you still get a glancing blow on a failure and miss entirely only on a critical failure!" If you mean "really bad things happen on a 1", that was always a house rule, it was never actually an official part of Pathfinder. The closest Paizo ever came was their critical fumble deck, and they released that for 3.5 before Pathfinder existed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2018 18:34
|
|
|
The funny thing is that D20s already have a degree-of-success/failure roll - its called the damage roll. Why add a second system?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2018 18:41
|
|
|
Idran posted:If you mean "you always miss on a 1", then no, they said that's still a thing and a 1 is always a miss. Isn't that whole thing a fighter special ability? Like your rogue and barbarian and whatever other attack rolling friend can still critically miss?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
Azhais posted:Isn't that whole thing a fighter special ability? Like your rogue and barbarian and whatever other attack rolling friend can still critically miss? Oh, you're half-right, I grabbed the wrong part of it. quote:Let's take a look at an example that combines two of these rules: the results of a basic attack called a strike. So on any attack, a critical miss doesn't actually have any worse effect as a miss like always. It's just that a fighter is always guaranteed to do damage unless it's a critical miss.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2018 22:10
|
|
|
Hypothetically changing crits from 20/1 to +10/-10 is a good change because it reduces the negative effects of blind luck and adds actual variability to your rolls rather then purely binary outputs. That said, without actually knowing how well tuned the math is, speculation is pointless. If battle math is as janky as it is in 3.x already, for example, then all you've done is ensure that all primary attacks are eventually crits, as attack rolls are overwhelmingly higher then defense stats in 3.x. If the math goes the opposite way, all you've done is reduce the importance of weapon choice, as you're going to be doing minimum damage too often. You get the idea. It's putting a lot of faith in "getting the math right and tight," something Paizo is...let's go with "not so much known for." Of course, if they're KEEPING 20 and 1 as auto-crit failures, then all they've done is made the game more complicated, a phrase I expect to see or hear or think a lot regarding Pathfinder 2e. As for saving throws, the problem has rarely been how they're decided(I mean, there's problems with it, but that's not the CORE problem) and far more often with what they actually do. Save or X spells are bad because of how often they're so completely disabling. Even level 1 spells can completely remove you from the fight. The problem isn't how you roll the saves, the problem is that these spells are fight enders in the first place. So, again, speculation here won't mean much without knowing if the actual spells and what they do have changed significantly. Of course, then you hit yet ANOTHER problem where those spells often HAVE to be extremely potent for them to be viable from a player viewpoint. Really, the issue is that PCs and NPCs play radically different roles in a game and shouldn't be bound to the same mechanics, and that simulationist design will always fail, but there's no getting out of THAT pit, so we just see if they can try to mitigate the failings.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Dominate Person is a 5th-level spell, which means a character gets access to it at Wizard 9. How does your hypothetical Wizard have a +6 item when the minimum level you're supposed to have access to one (when it would cost half their wealth or less) is 11th?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2018 00:35
|
|
|
There are wizards who don't take Craft Wondrous Item?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2018 02:17
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:"On a successful save, you aren't controlled, but you still lose an action on your next turn" Yeah i'm guessing in practice this will be a huge caster buff with crit saves being required to fully negate an effect, so a save-or-die/lose is going to be a successful spellcast 95% of the time.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2018 06:48
|
|
|
I wouldn't be surprised if an anti-magic archetype ignored the on-success effect, and buffs after crit succeeding a save against a spell. But I may be expecting too much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2018 07:16
|
|
|
The Bee posted:But I may be expecting too much. The Bee posted:anti-magic archetype you dont say
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2018 07:36
|
|
|
NachtSieger posted:you dont say There are already anti-magic archetypes like the spellbreaker for the inquisitor in pathfinder. They just aren't very good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2018 09:09
|
|
|
Andrast posted:There are already anti-magic archetypes like the spellbreaker for the inquisitor in pathfinder. They just aren't very good. I'm assuming The Bee wanted good anti-magic abilities, not complete garbage, yes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2018 09:21
|
|
|
NachtSieger posted:I'm assuming The Bee wanted good anti-magic abilities, not complete garbage, yes. I can dream. In all seriousness, shifting the degrees of success like that could be a good way of mediating the effects of bad rolls. If you're the rogue, and you're Good at Stealth, then your crit fails become fails, your fails become successes, your successes become crit successes, and maybe you get a special bonus on a crit success.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2018 16:05
|
|
|
Goblins! Monday, April 2, 2018 Ever since the goblin song from page 12 of 2007's Pathfinder Adventure Path #1: Burnt Offerings, goblins have been a key part of what makes Pathfinder recognizable as Pathfinder. When we first started looking at what would become the ancestries in the Pathfinder Playtest Rulebook, we knew that we wanted to add something to the mix, to broaden the horizon of what it meant to be a hero in Pathfinder. That naturally brought us to goblins. The trick was finding a way to let you play a goblin who has the feel of a Pathfinder goblin, but who is also a little bit softer around the edges—a character who has a reason to work with a group of "longshanks," as opposed to trying to light them on fire at the first opportunity. Let's look at an excerpt from the goblin ancestry to find out a bit more. As a people, goblins have spent millennia feared, maligned, and even hunted—and sometimes for understandable reasons, as some rural goblin tribes still often direct cruelty, raiding, and mayhem toward wandering or vulnerable creatures. In recent decades, however, a new sort of hero has emerged from among these rough-and-tumble tribes. Such goblins bear the same oversized heads, pointed ears, red eyes, and jagged teeth of their crueler kin, but they have a noble or savvy streak that other goblins can't even imagine, let alone understand. These erstwhile heroes roam Golarion, often maintaining their distinctive cultural habits while spreading the enthusiasm, inscrutable quirkiness, love of puns and song, and unique mirth that mark goblin adventurers. Despite breaking from their destructive past, goblin adventurers often subtly perpetuate some of the qualities that have been characteristics of the creatures for millennia. They tend to flock to strong leaders, and fiercely protect those companions who have protected them from physical harm or who offer a sympathetic ear and sage advice when they learn of the goblins' woes. Some goblins remain deeply fascinated with fire, or fearlessly devour meals that might turn others' stomachs. Others are inveterate tinkerers and view their companions' trash as components of gadgets yet to be made. Occasionally, fellow adventurers find these proclivities unsettling or odd, but more often than not goblins' friends consider these qualities endearing. The entry in the Pathfinder Playtest Rulebook has plenty more to say on the topic, but that should give you a sense of where we are taking Pathfinder's favorite troublemakers. In addition to the story behind the goblin, its ancestry entry has a lot of other information as well to help you make a goblin player character. It includes the base goblin ability boosts (Dexterity and Charisma), ability flaw (Wisdom), bonus Hit Points (6), base speed (25 feet), and starting languages (Common and Goblin), as well as the rules for darkvision (an ability that lets goblins see in the dark just as well as they can see in normal light). Those are just the basics—the rules shared by all goblins. Beyond that, your goblin's unique ancestry allows you to choose one ability score other than Dexterity or Charisma to receive a boost. Perhaps you have some hobgoblin blood and have an additional boost to Constitution, or you descend from a long line of goblin alchemists and have a boost to Intelligence. You could even gain a boost in Wisdom to negate your flaw! Then you get into the goblin ancestry feats, which allow you to decide what type of goblin you want to play. Starting off, let's look at Burn It. This feat gives you a bonus to damage whenever you cast a fire spell or deal fire damage with an alchemical item. On top of that, it also increases any persistent fire damage you deal by 1. Goblins still love watching things burn. Next up is one of my favorites, Junk Tinkerer. A goblin with this feat can craft ordinary items and weapons out of junk and scrap they can find almost anywhere. Sure, the items are of poor quality and break easily, but you will never be without a weapon if you have this feat. We could not have goblins in the game without adding the Razor Teeth feat. This grants you an attack with your mouthful of razor-sharp teeth that deals 1d6 piercing damage. To be honest, the target of your attack should probably also attempt a Fortitude save against whatever you ate last night that is still stuck between your teeth, but we'll leave that for the GM to decide. Finally, there is the appropriately named feat Very Sneaky. This lets you move 5 feet farther when you take an action to sneak (which normally lets you move at only half your normal speed) and potentially renders your target flat-footed against a follow-up strike! There are plenty of other goblin feats for you to choose from, but that's all we have time for today. Come back on Friday when we'll look at some of the feats from the other ancestries in the game!
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 04:06
|
|
|
Listen Paizo, I don't know how else to say this, but a series of awful feats won't make me suddenly care about your totally original do not steal goblin fetish
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 05:05
|
|
|
So goblins are still evil but you can play as a noble savage goblin that's "one of the good ones."
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 05:08
|
|
|
What I'm finding interesting is that you can get a bonus to any ability score, and I'm hoping that's a thing they do with all the races. The problem is that letting any race get any stats is an ability that's been kicked around for decade(s?) and so far that's the only actually good idea I've seen out of Pathfinder 2. Time to hope some other company buys D&D I guess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 07:54
|
|
|
Naturally there are tons of people in the comments complaining about allowing a monster race ruining their verisimilitude. The Paizo forums are a cesspool.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 07:58
|
|
|
Zerilan posted:So goblins are still evil but you can play as a noble savage goblin that's "one of the good ones." As a goblin IRL I think Paizo should do a better job representing my community. Really though, I think it's a fun idea to add goblins to the core, but it doesn't make a lot of sense in the setting as written until now (which they can obviously change going forward, though I think they'll have to do better than just 'yeah you're Drizzt'), and it's definitely going to lead to some lovely disruptive characters. Both from the goblin players and from players who decide their characters hate all goblins. I'm reading the comments out of curiosity, and I kind of agree with the person who said hobgoblins would have been a better fit, even if the reality that they're not as iconic would have more or less defeated the purpose. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 10:28 on Apr 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 10:16
|
|
|
Goblins are the gnomes of pathfinder. gently caress gnomes. That said, it's like Darkvision, which is ofcourse still in: an easy thing to completely ignore. Orange Devil fucked around with this message at 11:06 on Apr 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 11:02
|
|
|
I like the boost/flaw language, I hope this means something other than +/-2 to ability scores.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 12:55
|
|
|
Goblins get a bonus to Charisma, plus a feat that lets them construct lovely items out of lovely parts. Because that's totally a racial unique ability that nobody with the Craft skill could ever accomplish, and definitely worth expending a feat. As if I needed further proof that I've slipped into the Weirdest Timeline...
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 19:06
|
|
|
I can't think of any single occasion when a DM has said "Sorry, nobody will sell you [absurdly common equipment]."
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 19:21
|
|
|
Maybe they're gonna turn goblins into 40k orks
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 19:27
|
|
|
I know its a super impractical racial, but it also sounds really fun and flavorful. So of course it goes up against clear winners Stealth Real Good and Be Better at Fire.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 20:26
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:Goblins get a bonus to Charisma, plus a feat that lets them construct lovely items out of lovely parts. Because that's totally a racial unique ability that nobody with the Craft skill could ever accomplish, and definitely worth expending a feat. I'm pretty sure it's to blend them towards how they play in Starfinder.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 20:30
|
|
|
Is there a reason these things have to be feats instead of "things you just have because you're a goblin? "
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 20:42
|
|
|
moths posted:Is there a reason these things have to be feats instead of "things you just have because you're a goblin? " No. They're once again in the age-old d20 mistake of making people choose between things that will help them succeed at the point of the game and "flavor."
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
Because number of feats is how you know they did game design.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 20:57
|
|
|
Cool that there's a feat that lets you make inferior weapons and armor. Wouldn't want to let the base crafting skill get too powerful.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 20:59
|
|
|
They could have just made it a skill only accessible to goblins. And then given it some upside to make it occupy a different space than Craft, ie: no cost materials and a "break whenever it's funny" catch. I feel like this is how they get you house-ruling. It's like the garbage card they put in every MTG starter deck to get you into improving stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 21:09
|
|
|
Oh yeah that bite feat which gives you a free shortsword. Yes, yes, great investment of a permanent character resource.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 21:09
|
|
|
dont even fink about it posted:No. They're once again in the age-old d20 mistake of making people choose between things that will help them succeed at the point of the game and "flavor."
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 21:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 07:51 |
|
|
"Quickly make crappy stuff that will break if overused" should just be a general use of the Craft skill, so that characters have at least some reason to actually take it in games without downtime.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 21:52
|
|
