|
Fidel Cuckstro posted:It'd be interesting (maybe!) to see a class guide for PF2 that explains the classes primarily in terms of their expected 3-action economies. it's tricky because sometimes there's variance based on subclass choices. for example, anything with the option to take an animal companion is committing one action to commanding it most turns, unless you're doing a mounted build. using guns or crossbows commits you to finding a way to deal with reloads, and probably isn't as compatible with an animal companion--and therefore, say, a crossbow ranger reloading might not want to grab a weird dog. setup actions and loops might be different depending on what you need; a magus is probably recharging spellstrike with a focus spell, which is different from an investigator using devise to determine whether they strike this turn or not, which is different from a champion setting up smite evil or raising a shield, even though these could all be classified as filler/setup actions for class gimmicks. maybe this is an argument for a guide explaining the basic concepts behind the three-action system and how to work with it, running through the logic of general truisms like "plan your build around some turns demanding that you burn an action for movement" or "don't stack too many action taxes together to make your central damage output function" Mister Olympus fucked around with this message at 10:09 on Oct 20, 2023 |
#
?
Oct 20, 2023 10:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 08:09 |
|
|
Mister Olympus posted:it's tricky because sometimes there's variance based on subclass choices. for example, anything with the option to take an animal companion is committing one action to commanding it most turns, unless you're doing a mounted build. using guns or crossbows commits you to finding a way to deal with reloads, and probably isn't as compatible with an animal companion--and therefore, say, a crossbow ranger reloading might not want to grab a weird dog. setup actions and loops might be different depending on what you need; a magus is probably recharging spellstrike with a focus spell, which is different from an investigator using devise to determine whether they strike this turn or not, which is different from a champion setting up smite evil or raising a shield, even though these could all be classified as filler/setup actions for class gimmicks. Yeah it might more be "here's the common action economy models, and the classes/sub-classes that roll up in to them." Like, and I won't pretend this made a character I was hacking away with actually better, but it was eye-opening to me how to think about a Warpriest when I realized I was never going to really get spells that took less than 2 actions, and most everything would have concentration/etc traits. Like...maybe that should have been obvious to me, but I'm a dummy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2023 12:16
|
|
|
Is the 3d4 damage on Needle Darts what the model for the remastered cantrips will be like? At first I thought wow, that's a lot of damage, but it's 3-12, vs 5-8 for something like ray of frost. Trading lower minimum damage for higher max damage and an average around the same for both?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2023 16:02
|
|
|
They mentioned they want to move away from spellcasting modifier on cantrips, so probably.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2023 16:18
|
|
|
The Slack Lagoon posted:Is the 3d4 damage on Needle Darts what the model for the remastered cantrips will be like? At first I thought wow, that's a lot of damage, but it's 3-12, vs 5-8 for something like ray of frost. Trading lower minimum damage for higher max damage and an average around the same for both? Yeah, I think they are going to be along the lines of needle dart. They released that core remaster preview awhile ago that had spells in it and it had the ignition cantrip. quote:IGNITION [two-actions] CANTRIP 1
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2023 16:46
|
|
|
Hey what's the better system to run a Banshees of Inisherin campaign, 5e or Pathfinder2e ?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2023 17:20
|
|
|
I think pf2e is a better system generally but I haven't seen BoI It gives more clearly defined things to do within the ruleset for combat and out of combat stuff, especially feats and skill training. I think that means less work for the GM generally of just making things up when a player wants to be sneaky or clever. Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 17:52 on Oct 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2023 17:45
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:I think pf2e is a better system generally but I haven't seen BoI Ok, the cleverness is important for whoever plays Colm, but debatable for Padraic. Also probably important for the Banshees.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2023 17:59
|
|
|
Can you spoiler describe how the campaign will generally work? I don't care about movie spoilers but it seems good not to ruin that somewhat recent movie in a completely unrelated thread
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2023 18:10
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:Can you spoiler describe how the campaign will generally work? I don't care about movie spoilers but it seems good not to ruin that somewhat recent movie in a completely unrelated thread I'm just joking- the movie's a meditative character study on people living on a boring and lonely island. I don't think it'd make sense to run in almost any system. I just thought the name was funny as sounding like a D&D campaign or module.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2023 18:17
|
|
|
Oh I figured they were like a gang or something since the guys from In Bruges were hitmen
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2023 18:33
|
|
|
Fiasco could do it
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2023 19:56
|
|
|
You could absolutely run a Banshees of Inisherin game in Fiasco. I can also see an argument for 12 Candles or Dread, although that might involve introducing actual banshees.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 01:33
|
|
|
Yeah, have the four playable characters be Padraic, Colm, Dominic and Siobhan and that's a Fiasco session there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 01:46
|
|
|
Do alchemists get any sort of benefits to throwing bombs ever? Sort of starting to understand the args a few days back about alchemists being underpowered...
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 04:34
|
|
|
the ideal use case is that they can just use quick alchemy to grab whatever element happens to be a weakness in the encounter, but that doesn't account for the plenty of monsters with no weakness. they're better at throwing bombs than a non-alchemist, but not good enough to make bombs competitive with spells, let alone with some tricks that someone with the good weapon progression could get. alchemists are extremely a support class
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 04:41
|
|
|
Skunk Bombs are extremely good and an excellent perpetual infusion target, add something like Debilitating bombs to it and you're throwing out a ton of debuffs. Alchemists take way better advantage of them than any other class since quick alchemy DC scales with your class DC.
Andrast fucked around with this message at 10:16 on Oct 21, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 10:12
|
|
|
Fidel Cuckstro posted:Do alchemists get any sort of benefits to throwing bombs ever? Alchemists are better at throwing bombs than handing them out IF the bomb includes a saving throw and you care about the DC; this is because they can use quick alchemy to give a low level bomb a high level DC (see Skunk Bombs). They can also use Debilitating and Sticky bombs to add significant persistent and splash damage that others can’t. The problem is, since these work off of quick alchemy, and these features don’t scale with bomb quality, the best way to use these features is to use your perpetual items to activate them, and hand over your high level bombs to the fighter to throw for you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 14:52
|
|
|
Andrast posted:Skunk Bombs are extremely good and an excellent perpetual infusion target, add something like Debilitating bombs to it and you're throwing out a ton of debuffs. Alchemists take way better advantage of them than any other class since quick alchemy DC scales with your class DC. shame you have to stick with alchemist for 7 levels before they get cantrips
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 16:31
|
|
|
I'm sure people have suggested much smarter solutions, and I won't be able to try any homebrew solutions out myself until a start doing non-Pathfinder Society stuff, but seems like giving Alchemists an accelerated proficiency to bomb throwing, and maybe a weapon or two that can specifically launch bombs (like a slingshot), would solve a lot of the problem.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 17:32
|
|
|
Alchemists with the feats that increase splash damage (which is the way they throw pre-made bombs better than anyone else), sticky bomb, and the dual weapon archetype do optimized fighter levels of damage. You can't just give them extra proficiency. The biggest problem with the class is that most of their feats are math fixes while everyone else gets actually cool options. It needs a nearly complete rewrite to be as well designed as the other core classes. From what I heard, consumables were massively nerfed during the end of the original playtest due to player feedback (people were unhappy that you couldn't use infinite consumables so they lowered their power while making them spammable) and they didn't have enough time to iron out the Alchemist"s new problems that resulted from the changes. Considering most people never use consumables, it sounds like a really dumb change. Knowing you can only use 3 elixirs per day, or whatever it was, would probably encourage my players to maximize them if they were a big deal. Edit: Another change made due to player feedback was doubling the bonus from proficiency. People didn't feel like +1 felt big enough, so the team doubled it to make people happy while adjusting NPC attacks, AC, and saves to compensate. The unintended side effect? Spellcasters feeling extra awful at levels 5 and 6 and there being awkward breakpoints where higher level monsters are way scarier than expected. Edit 2: Doubling proficiency bonuses is also why all those general and ancestry feats that give non-scaling proficiency feel so bad. Edit 3: The playtests did help create one of my favorite RPGs, just in case it sounds like I'm being overly negative and nitpicky. KPC_Mammon fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Oct 21, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 17:58
|
|
|
Half of that sounds like Paizo backing down from their ideas because they were worried they weren't palatable to their audience, and half of that feels like the feedback wasn't even bad, they just didn't have time to really iron it out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 19:28
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:From what I heard, consumables were massively nerfed during the end of the original playtest due to player feedback (people were unhappy that you couldn't use infinite consumables so they lowered their power while making them spammable) and they didn't have enough time to iron out the Alchemist"s new problems that resulted from the changes. I don't know, I think this was the right choice. The reason people don't use consumables is because they don't like consuming resources that don't automatically refresh, even if it'd be much more efficient. Alchemist takes a specific kind of player to be played well, but it'd be even more niche if you had to overcome the elixir problem for literally their entire career. Still, here's hoping their second pass at ironing out Alchemist's problems works out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 20:11
|
|
|
Yeah, instead of calling it dumb it would be better to say that I'd personally prefer a sensible cap (the one they used was charisma modifier + level, which becomes meaningless at higher levels) so that I can run automatic bonus progression and handwave consumable cost entirely. I hate wealth based progression in my RPGs but I had some very bad experiences with stingy GMs who didn't give remotely enough loot while doing nothing to change encounter difficulty. I could see other people with better experiences being fine with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 20:32
|
|
|
Chevy Slyme posted:Alchemists are better at throwing bombs than handing them out IF the bomb includes a saving throw and you care about the DC; this is because they can use quick alchemy to give a low level bomb a high level DC (see Skunk Bombs). They can also use Debilitating and Sticky bombs to add significant persistent and splash damage that others can’t. Fighter gets the extra martial weapon proficiency, which is good, but they still take two actions to draw and then throw a bomb. Unless you literally act as a bomb caddy and hand them bombs during battle. Alchemists can take a quick bomber feat which is a worse version of Quick Draw that only works for bombs so they can draw and throw a bomb as one action. Rangers and rogues can take the Quick Draw feat, and after the remaster they will both have proficiency in martial weapons which includes bombs. So while the fighter will have that bonus to hit and crit, these guys can do it in half the actions. There's nothing in the description of bombs that says they can't be used for precision attacks, right? So a precisian ranger can conk their prey real good with a bomb and get their precision damage. Will post-revision rogues be able to sneak attack with martial weapons? That would be hilarious. Alchemists fire to the kidney!
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 20:32
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:Yeah, instead of calling it dumb it would be better to say that I'd personally prefer a sensible cap (the one they used was charisma modifier + level, which becomes meaningless at higher levels) so that I can run automatic bonus progression and handwave consumable cost entirely. I hate wealth based progression in my RPGs but I had some very bad experiences with stingy GMs who didn't give remotely enough loot while doing nothing to change encounter difficulty. I could see other people with better experiences being fine with it. Yo, I used to be one of those GM's and I apologize on all their behalfs. I am trying to be better.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 20:35
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:Alchemists with the feats that increase splash damage (which is the way they throw pre-made bombs better than anyone else), sticky bomb, and the dual weapon archetype do optimized fighter levels of damage. You can't just give them extra proficiency. Uh, do you have any math on this? Because based on everything I've worked out previously this seems extremely absurd. I admittedly haven't tried to work out the net effect of persistent damage much because it's extremely variable with its 30% chance to end every round (or 55% chance to end before even dealing damage if the target burns an action), but the part where it can't stack with itself in the same damage type means that even if you could assume a full 3 rounds of damage or something per effect you couldn't expect to ramp it up with stacking multiple hits. You could try to rotate between multiple damage types to keep as many stacks of persistent damage up as possible, but with your lower attack bonus than any martial character (and inability to benefit from flanking due to using ranged weapons) means that you're not super likely to even land one type of persistent damage most turns. Across the entire level range of 1st-20th, against a same-level creature with 'moderate' expected AC before any circumstance/status bonuses/penalties are factored in, the average chance to hit with your first Strike of the round will be 75% for a Fighter, 65% for any other standard martial class, and 55% for an Alchemist. Even abusing quicksilver mutagens only brings that up to around 60%. Also Quick Bomber is unfortunately a unique action that doesn't work with Double Slice + Dual Thrower, so to throw two bombs with Double Slice (which would only net you a +3 to the second throw because bombs aren't agile) you'd need to spend actions drawing or crafting bombs anyway (only one action for two bombs at 9th with Double Brew). Quick Bomber also doesn't work with Haste for the same reason, which is another thing that needlessly holds the Alchemist back.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 21:27
|
|
|
yeah IDK I like my idea of giving those guys a little slingshot. Going to pat myself on the back for that one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 21:40
|
|
|
I have seen the math on it, using the really good graphing website someone made for pf2e. You alternate elements, sticky bomb lets you apply a rainbow of ongoing damage debuffs so it scales up really fast. For dual weapon warrior you get a familiar, which hands you two bombs for one action, if you aren't using quick alchemy. At low levels you should get a familiar anyway for extra reagents. edit: I can't link the data because I saw it on one of the pf2e character optimization discords and finding it gain would probably take an afternoon. I can link a useful tool though: https://bahalbach.github.io/PF2Calculator/ And anecdotally, I had probably my crunchiest player running an alchemist for Outlaws of Alkenstar from levels 1 through 10 and they were MVP nearly every single session once they reached level two or three. This was after the Alchemist's somewhat recent rework, but they were extremely powerful and versatile, singlehandedly preventing multiple TPKs. And despite this, the player told me afterwards that even though the class was clearly really good they never wanted to play one again. Since all of the feats were math fixes they had no choices in character creation or leveling up. Since crafting didn't do anything for the class the choices they did make ended up weirdly non-thematic. They had an alright time, but the class is so restrictive that there wasn't really any other space to explore. Which is why I don't think the solution is just a proficiency bump. They need at least half of their feats ripped out and the class rebalanced without them. Either make those feats innate or give them other bonuses. KPC_Mammon fucked around with this message at 22:49 on Oct 21, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 22:15
|
|
|
Ah, forgot about Valet. Regardless, other than acid flasks at only 1 damage per hit ever and up to 4d6 persistent the rest only ever get up to 4d4 persistent damage, and other than blight bombs those all deal only up to 4 damage per hit. Splash feats, Sticky Bomb, and Weapon Specialization bring a blight bomb from an Alchemist up to 4d4+2 [12] damage on a hit, 4d4+11 [21] persistent damage on a hit, and 11 splash damage on anything better than a critical failure. A Fighter with a typical agile melee weapon is looking at 4d6+8+7 [29] weapon damage, likely plus another 3d6 [10.5] elemental damage from standard property runes if they're just going for damage. You have to assume the target both survives long enough and doesn't recover soon enough to inflict 2 or more rounds of persistent damage for the Fighter to not out-damage you on a single hit with most of your bombs, even before factoring in the Fighter's massive attack bonus advantage or any of the other feats or features they might have, including Haste or a Speed rune granting an extra Strike every round which an Alchemist couldn't benefit from. I am highly suspicious of any chart that would put the two on the same footing doing something silly like forgetting that Agile Grace or Two-Weapon Flurry exist, or assuming that the Fighter has to waste an action to Stride despite the compared Alchemist spending a full 3 actions on Command + Double Slice every round. The biggest issue with the Alchemist's design to me is all the clunky action taxes. Allow an Alchemist to use Quick Alchemy to brew an elixir as part of the same action that they administer/drink it, and create a poison and apply it to their weapon or create a bomb as part of the same action to Strike with either. Roll all of these into separate methodologies if you have to. Quick Bomber/Quick Draw and a quiver of pre-poisoned arrows can already do most of this for anyone in the party, so let the Alchemist do it for themselves in a way that lets them actually use their drat Additive feats and Perpetual Infusions without extra action taxes that make you feel like you should've just gone full vending machine instead. Vanguard Warden fucked around with this message at 23:57 on Oct 21, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 23:38
|
|
|
Vanguard Warden posted:Wouldn't a familiar need to draw a bomb with one action, and then hand it to you with another? It wouldn't be able to do that twice in a round, then. Even with Manual Dexterity it only has two limbs, so it can't carry more than two bombs without needing to pull something out of a pack. https://2e.aonprd.com/Familiars.aspx?ID=38
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 23:52
|
|
|
Has anyone ever used the Research subsystem? (https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=1205) In my game, my players have just accidentally freed an ancient evil baddie largely inspired by the monster from The Thing and a bit of The Mummy. They know it can shapeshift and that it sucks victims dry like a capri-sun pouch, and it probably is undead, but otherwise they only know that it's dangerous and need to find more information to figure out how to deal with it. My thought was that they could assemble their "library" from various clues they've amassed so far-- rubbings of warning inscriptions from the ruin where they freed the creature, samples of goop from dead bodies, notes about warding magics they encountered, maybe some blood or tissue samples from related persons of interest. I know they are fully clued in on the sort of genre they're playing with here and one player is already looking forward to having some kind of opportunity to do the Hot-Wire-Into-Petri-Dish scene from the Thing, so I think they would be into having some kind of focused opportunity to learn about the creature's weaknesses/characteristics/origins, and it's good grist for encouraging them to go out and explore to maybe find clues. I'm open to any general advice or suggestions for how to make what ultimately amounts to a bunch of sequential knowledge skill checks a little more dramatic or interesting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 23:53
|
|
|
if the rest of your players aren't as invested in the research for its own sake you can always have some goons bust in to try and steal one of their clues there are a bunch of random feats and lores linked to secret societies in pf2 and having one devoted to this creepy crawlie fits with the mummy atelier morgan fucked around with this message at 23:58 on Oct 21, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 23:56
|
|
|
Scoss posted:I'm open to any general advice or suggestions for how to make what ultimately amounts to a bunch of sequential knowledge skill checks a little more dramatic or interesting. Let them use something other than knowledge. The research system assumes they have access to a library, let them use social skills to get help from staff or other readers, occult to hold seance with the spirit of the library, or willpower/fortitude to power through too many books and scrolls. It is a skill challenge based around a location, ripe with RP opportunities. Alkenstar had a Research encounter, it included a magic hourglass you could zone out and watch to see glimpses of the future.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 23:59
|
|
|
Fuuuck, I had a fun character concept for a thaumaturge but they don't fit into the party in my current campaign. I really want to play one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 00:20
|
|
|
ZZT the Fifth posted:Fuuuck, I had a fun character concept for a thaumaturge but they don't fit into the party in my current campaign. I really want to play one. Just do it anyway. If anyone complains throw trash at them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 00:28
|
|
|
Facebook Aunt posted:Just do it anyway. If anyone complains throw trash at them. Oh no, thematically they're fine. Party-comp wise, I'd be abandoning the closest thing we have to a Defender to instead play a Face/Support.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 00:32
|
|
|
Scoss posted:Has anyone ever used the Research subsystem? (https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=1205) I've tried to run Malevolence, which is a haunted house module that they retrofitted from one of the author's home game to be a showcase for the Research system and it was absolutely miserable. It could wotk if used sparingly, I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 00:34
|
|
|
ZZT the Fifth posted:Oh no, thematically they're fine. Party-comp wise, I'd be abandoning the closest thing we have to a Defender to instead play a Face/Support. thaum having level 1 pseudo attack of opportunity (weapon) or pseudo champion's reaction (amulet/bell) access puts them right up there just behind fighter and champion, though?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 00:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 08:09 |
|
|
ZZT the Fifth posted:Oh no, thematically they're fine. Party-comp wise, I'd be abandoning the closest thing we have to a Defender to instead play a Face/Support. Could you take one or two defender oriented implements? What levels are you running? I have a Thaumaturge in my party who spent a general feat for heavy armor, which will be plenty tanky until level 11. Whip + weapon implement has been really effective at locking down targets. He still has a regalia, scroll thaumaturgy, and insane social skills, so he also provides versatile support.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 00:40
|
|