|
Lord Koth posted:If you fail a defensive cast, you just fizzle the spell, you don't get attacked. People getting AoOed due to casting is because they're casting something like Scorching Ray or Acid Arrow in melee - spells that have a ranged attack roll, and anything with a ranged attack roll provokes. Or because of a very specific high level fighter exclusive feat I'm not certain is even in the game (haven't looked). I attacked it once for shits and giggles. It has 36 AC and a breath weapon than did 70 damage, so yea, stay away. EDIT: and on diffculty, I feel it's mostly the attack rolls/AC of most monsters which are boosted. Damage is usually fine, but with stuff like BAB 8 leopards in the middle of Act 1 for no reason, it's just too many attacks that hit to deal with.
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 05:30 |
|
|
What is the relationship between Demoralized (caused by Intimidate checks) and shaken, frightened, and panicked? Good old 3.X and its ten thousand status effects.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:03
|
|
|
Nothingtoseehere posted:
One of the superbandits in the surface map of the mites and Kobalds map in Ch1 does 2d6+14 per hit on normal. The 2d6 is from the greatsword, ok fine, what the gently caress is his str?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:07
|
|
|
Normal should probably be without any insane boosts for anything and then harder difficulties with all the magical bonuses from nowhere. If they had gone with that and an extra harder setting I doubt everyone, myself included, would have complained so much.Keeshhound posted:One of the superbandits in the surface map of the mites and Kobalds map in Ch1 does 2d6+14 per hit on normal. The 2d6 is from the greatsword, ok fine, what the gently caress is his str? Poil fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Oct 2, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:12
|
|
|
Poil posted:Normal should probably be without any insane boosts for anything and then harder difficulties with all the magical bonuses from nowhere. If they had gone with that and an extra harder setting I doubt everyone, myself included, would have complained so much. 28 seems pretty nutty for a bandit at level 3. What are they the hulk?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
SuperKlaus posted:What is the relationship between Demoralized (caused by Intimidate checks) and shaken, frightened, and panicked? Good old 3.X and its ten thousand status effects. Demoralizing someone is just a usage of Intimidate that causes the Shaken condition, it's not a condition itself. Shaken gives a bunch of -2 penalties to a bunch of stuff but they're still in the fight, frightened is "run away if you can," panicked is "run the hell away screaming, dropping anything held as you go, or curl up into a ball if you're stuck." I'm not sure if there's actually a mechanical difference between frightened and panicked in the game. Keeshhound posted:One of the superbandits in the surface map of the mites and Kobalds map in Ch1 does 2d6+14 per hit on normal. The 2d6 is from the greatsword, ok fine, what the gently caress is his str? Assuming 20 STR, you can do it with a 5th lvl fighter with just one feat. +7 from STR for two handing a weapon, +6 for Power Attack, +1 for Weapon Training. If he's only got 18 STR you can actually do it at 4th lvl fighter with two feats - +6 from STR, +6 from Power Attack, +2 from Weapon Specialization. If he's not a fighter... eh. Probably possible but don't want to go through the various permutations.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:18
|
|
|
willing to settle posted:Someone give me a cool build that doesn't depend as much on resting constantly as a wizard but can still do interesting things outside of hitting for big numbers. Aasimar Angelkin Monk (Scaled Fist) 1\Paladin (Divine Hunter) 2\Sorcerer (Draconic Bloodline) 2\Dragon Disciple 8\Eldritch Knight 7 16 Str, 14 Con, 14 Dex, 10 Int, 7 Wis, 19 Cha Key feats are power attack and crane style. While this doesn't get access to 8th and 9th level spells, it does let you buff yourself and toss around crowd control with okay numbers, while still hitting stuff with a 2 hander for almost lol-damage and having good defensive stats. Because you max charisma, you get to be persuade monkey and rock a super good UMD score, opening up lots of options for consumables if you want to do that. Edit: Normal difficulty is basically regular pathfinder, but with ~4 extra to all relevant derived numbers. Setting Enemy Difficulty to weaker is closer to PnP stats than Normal difficulty. And no matter what difficulty you set it to, all the enemies have more feats than they do in PnP. Cynic Jester fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Oct 2, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:18
|
|
|
Keeshhound posted:One of the superbandits in the surface map of the mites and Kobalds map in Ch1 does 2d6+14 per hit on normal. The 2d6 is from the greatsword, ok fine, what the gently caress is his str? A full-BAB class who is level 4 and has 18 strength, using Power Attack with a greatsword, does 2d6+12 damage. If he's a raging barbarian or is a fighter with weapon specialization, there you go. Edit: beaten, and with more math to boot Prism fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Oct 2, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:18
|
|
|
My point was that it's not really appropriate for an area where the +14 alone is likely to be about 1/3rd the HP of one of your frontliners.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
Honestly the game is designed for grognards. Please lower the difficulty in regards to enemy ability and DC checks to affect enemies. Leave damage alone if you want a challenge but don't want to delve deep into the nuance of Pathfinder mechanics, especially when the game doesn't exactly explain things to you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:32
|
|
|
The fact that it inflates stuff over raw is kinda weird for normal. I'm used to most P&P games slightly nerfing stuff compared to raw P&P on normal instead.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
I can agree with that. You would think that the default would not have 18 strength bandits as an 18 strength for humans represents the near pinnacle of that attribute. An average bandit should have a 10 or 12 and top out at a 14 or maybe higher if it's representing a relatively unique threat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:It's Perception. If you cheat it up to absurd numbers, you discover lots of stuff from further away. So it just uses highest passive Perception in the party or makes individual rolls for each member?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:43
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:Demoralizing someone is just a usage of Intimidate that causes the Shaken condition, it's not a condition itself. Shaken gives a bunch of -2 penalties to a bunch of stuff but they're still in the fight, frightened is "run away if you can," panicked is "run the hell away screaming, dropping anything held as you go, or curl up into a ball if you're stuck." I'm not sure if there's actually a mechanical difference between frightened and panicked in the game. Thanks, you're a good dude. Anybody further know if Dazzling Display makes one Intimidate check and compares it to each enemy's defenses, or if it makes one check per enemy? I think I want to be an Inquisitor with Dazzling Display / Cornugon Smash / Dreadful Carnage. The Glory domain would let me crank my Persuasion even farther but it's only really a synergy if Display makes one check. That way I could Glory myself before rooms, open fight with a Display, and have fun.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:46
|
|
|
On that subject, you're not really supposed to build standard enemies with the rules used for players, anyway. This is getting into amateur game design a little bit, but the role of the player characters (or party npcs) are drastically different from that of the enemies, to the point that they really shouldn't be using the same rulesets except in special cases.
Keeshhound fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Oct 2, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:47
|
|
|
I noticed that in the ending of the tutorial when you defend yourself from the purple gnome's slander with diplomacy he is the one making the skill roll if his skill is the highest (which it likely is). Lmao.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:49
|
|
|
I just found the enraged owlbears. Holy heck those guys hurt even on easy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:50
|
|
|
Keeshhound posted:On that subject, you're not really supposed to build standard enemies with the rules used for players, anyway. This is getting into amateur game design a little bit, but the role of the player characters (or party npcs) are drastically different from that of the enemies, to the point that they really shouldn't be using the same rulesets excepr in special cases. I feel like this is how we ended up with Pathfinder: Kingmaker enemies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:50
|
|
|
Glenn Quebec posted:I feel like this is how we ended up with Pathfinder: Kingmaker enemies. Well, the other part of it is that the whole exercise is predicated on the assumption that one of the two groups is going to survive the encounter more often than not, and it's not supposed to be the bandits.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:55
|
|
|
I thought 3.x/PF were pretty big on using the same rules for enemies and players unlike 2e which just kinda eyeballed numbers that looked good and didn't really apply them to anything else and 4e which had pretty strict formulas for how strong enemies should be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:56
|
|
|
So apparently you can get instantly killed if someone lands a hold person on you and you fail a save against a dexterity poison. Hold Person sets your dexterity to 1, and the poison takes it to 0, killing any character instantly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:57
|
|
|
SuperKlaus posted:Thanks, you're a good dude. Anybody further know if Dazzling Display makes one Intimidate check and compares it to each enemy's defenses, or if it makes one check per enemy? I strongly suggest taking at least 1 level of Rogue Thug archetype for Frightening feature which lets you push past shaken condition into, well, frightened. 2nd level can also give you skill focus in Persuasion and 3rd is Dex to damage if you swing that way. Also keep your eyes on Shatter Defenses feat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 22:58
|
|
|
Just the feat I was wondering about  Got any idea about Dazzling Display one check or several?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
Keeshhound posted:On that subject, you're not really supposed to build standard enemies with the rules used for players, anyway. This is getting into amateur game design a little bit, but the role of the player characters (or party npcs) are drastically different from that of the enemies, to the point that they really shouldn't be using the same rulesets except in special cases. yes that's good game design, this is a Pathfinder game, heir to the legacy of D&D 3.x which largely took the opposite approach the game having a retrograde "grognard adversarial DM"-vibe seems like part of the fun though LGD fucked around with this message at 23:06 on Oct 2, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 23:03
|
|
|
Gorelab posted:I thought 3.x/PF were pretty big on using the same rules for enemies and players unlike 2e which just kinda eyeballed numbers that looked good and didn't really apply them to anything else and 4e which had pretty strict formulas for how strong enemies should be. Yeah, this is kind of the thing. "Players and NPCs have different roles and should be designed differently" is one of those newfangled game design principles that Pathfinder (as a tabletop ruleset) was created specifically as a backlash to. 3.x was one of the more "simulationist" versions of D&D and Pathfinder followed very closely in those footsteps, because its audience demanded that it do so. The idea is very much that there should be rules describing and governing all sorts of situations, and they should be generally applicable when possible, so monsters have the six basic stats and alignments and skill checks and sometimes even class levels that work just like the players' do. All of which is to say that yeah, monsters and players aren't really supposed to be under similar stat frameworks, but in 3.x they generally were. The reason that Kingmaker's enemies got weird buffs is, I can only assume, because the translation to the PC ended up with things being too easy and it was somehow not acceptable to just add more monsters to encounters. Or because all their beta testers were munchkins that do char-op in their sleep and the feedback was skewed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 23:16
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:So apparently you can get instantly killed if someone lands a hold person on you and you fail a save against a dexterity poison. Hold Person sets your dexterity to 1, and the poison takes it to 0, killing any character instantly. Isn't only Con supposed to kill a character at 0? 0 Dex should just immobilize you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
Dallan Invictus posted:Yeah, this is kind of the thing. "Players and NPCs have different roles and should be designed differently" is one of those newfangled game design principles that Pathfinder (as a tabletop ruleset) was created specifically as a backlash to. 3.x was one of the more "simulationist" versions of D&D and Pathfinder followed very closely in those footsteps, because its audience demanded that it do so. The idea is very much that there should be rules describing and governing all sorts of situations, and they should be generally applicable when possible, so monsters have the six basic stats and alignments and skill checks and sometimes even class levels that work just like the players' do. I'm going to guess it's the beta testers, just because in general the type of people who are loudest about games like this are those who are really really good at them. Like PoE2 PoTD being undone on launch sucks, but it also probably affects a very small minority. Who are very loud.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 23:38
|
|
|
Agnostalgia posted:Isn't only Con supposed to kill a character at 0? 0 Dex should just immobilize you. Yupp. Kingmaker kills you at 0 no matter which attribute it is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 23:41
|
|
|
This game is objectively worse than PoE and DOS in more or less every way, but... But... I can't help but love it. I love it a lot. I definitely love it more than DOS. PoE, I don't want to say it's true... but it might be. I think I had D&D brainworms all along and I just didn't know it. Pray for me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 23:57
|
|
|
Xalidur posted:This game is objectively worse than PoE and DOS in more or less every way, but... But... I can't help but love it. I love it a lot. I definitely love it more than DOS. PoE, I don't want to say it's true... but it might be. I don't know why you gotta act like it can't also be a good game. It's weird yo In particular a lot of things are better than in Pillars, especially the whole kingdom management thing--the fort in PoE is really lame and forgettable, I think
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2018 00:06
|
|
|
The kingdom management stuff is the main place where I'd say it excels, because honestly most CRPGs just kinda do it at a very cursory level.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2018 00:08
|
|
|
World Famous W posted:So is Magus just hosed and doing combat casting just going to cause attacks of opportunity forever? Cause I'm about to drop mine and reroll again. As mentioned above, use touch attacks but not ranged touch attacks. Personally I didn't even bother with spell combat at low levels. My 1st level slots were exclusively for casting Shield.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2018 00:15
|
|
|
I think I might be bad at rules.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2018 00:18
|
|
|
LGD posted:yes that's good game design, this is a Pathfinder game, heir to the legacy of D&D 3.x which largely took the opposite approach Tbh the grognardiness is a huge part of the appeal to me. Feels like a modern MS-DOS game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2018 00:30
|
|
|
I made several Magus until I settled on an aasimar with the bestial type. Eldritch Scion and the undead bloodline. Primary stats: 16 16 15 10 10 14 All feats concentrate on survivability. Toughness, Dodge, armor focus. Then weapon focus. Once I get to medium armor I'm gonna start leveling in fighter, at least twice to get the legit fighter stuff.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2018 00:35
|
|
|
waiting for the hot fix to the hotfix.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2018 01:01
|
|
|
yeah i love this dumb game now fix it so i can play more and have my kingdom destroyed by trolls again
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2018 01:16
|
|
|
also this game made me inspired to check out the actual pathfinder campaign it's based off of and wow it has way cooler monsters in it
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2018 01:16
|
|
|
There were also a lot more weirder classes to play like being a literal stone mummy, a bloat mage and Ooze Activists THE SLIME LORDS. Course, those are third party classes so they'd probably be costly to put in. Also, out of all the versions of a hotfix to not work, it had to be the Windows Version.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2018 01:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 05:30 |
|
|
Can anyone tell me off hand if harder difficulty means you get more EXP? I haven't noticed it so far but I'm curious if by rerolling and blitzing through the early game on Story Mode to get back to where I was, if I'll be losing out on EXP. E: On experimentation, no, it does not. Good. Sky Shadowing fucked around with this message at 02:06 on Oct 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2018 02:00
|
|
