|
Clerical Terrors posted:Should note that there aren't that many touch range spells in 2e that are worth getting close to enemies for, and I'm pretty sure every spellcaster has access to the Reach Spell class feat which let's you cast them at range. Shocking Grasp got remastered into Thunderstrike which is now ranged by default anyways. With the notable exception of Magus most 2e spellcasters have very little reason to deliberately put themselves in striking ranges of enemies. As a current Magus player, this is why I still can't really complain about the amount of melee range touch spells that went from attack rolls to saving throws in the remaster. For literally every other caster in the game, you really need the increased reliability that comes from saving throws if you're going to risk casting something like Vampiric Touch.
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2023 16:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 08:06 |
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:Being a move action, standing up does provoke an AoO/RS, but only after you've completed the standing up action. So standing up cannot be disrupted. Oh! I didn't know this. Not to mention the target wouldn't be Off-Guard for the AoO which can be very crucial. I learn some new quirk in the system every week!
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2023 16:28
|
|
|
Dexo posted:I do think that the manipulate trait stuff is confusing as hell, as far as like doing the nested tagging like they do it. Hey, do you happen to have a page number for that rulebook excerpt?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2023 18:00
|
|
|
Manipulate doesn't seem that confusing because it refers to, well, any action you'd use your hands for, but the drawback of the Trait system-- which overall is fantastic at keeping things concrete and clear-- is that it's easy to miss or forget a trait if it's not one of the primary 2-3 for that object/action.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2023 19:12
|
|
|
Megazver posted:Anyone try Pathwarden, the minimalist OSR-ish PF2e hack? Just bumping this- I get the sense nobody's familiar but it seemed interesting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 00:37
|
|
|
Infinity Gaia posted:Hey, do you happen to have a page number for that rulebook excerpt? 474
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 01:32
|
|
|
So I got a copy of the player core for my partner. And then my partner leaked that they had bought a set with the player core and the GM core to be delivered for Christmas. So I gave the player core I bought to two of my players. Only it appears that somebody stole the package that my partner ordered, so now I don't have the books but my players do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 01:43
|
|
|
Dexo posted:474 Appreciated, my DM was asking for it when I brought it up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 02:34
|
|
|
marshmallow creep posted:So I got a copy of the player core for my partner. And then my partner leaked that they had bought a set with the player core and the GM core to be delivered for Christmas. So I gave the player core I bought to two of my players. Only it appears that somebody stole the package that my partner ordered, so now I don't have the books but my players do. The gift of the magus or something. That actually sucks though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 02:43
|
|
|
 How many piggies can the Lich fry with a 5-foot wide line attack? How much of a square needs to be "covered" by an area to be considered within an area effect anyway? Does piggy B on the left get hit? On the right example, I would say intuitively that both pigs are hit, but there is a very confusing set of reference templates in the rules that make this arrangement seem invalid (https://2e.aonprd.com/Images/Rules/Rules354.png)
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 04:05
|
|
|
two on the left. One on the right
Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 07:16 on Dec 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 04:21
|
|
|
Scoss posted:
Easy way to remember it: a 5 foot wide line is always 5 feet wide. Fot the left, hitting B and C means that line would be 10 feet wide at that spot, and on the right its a similar deal. For another way to think of it, you basically have to stagger step lines at an angle, and there's no way to hit A and B on the right example via any method of staggering in that direction. In the spot above A on the right example, you would either go right or down as you move away from the caster, you can't do both Piell fucked around with this message at 04:35 on Dec 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 04:30
|
|
|
Scoss posted:
because it is invalid your intuition would be a line that covers not one line of 5ft squares, but three lines of 5ft squares
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 04:30
|
|
|
I thought the idea was that you had to be able to draw a line through creature, in a five foot square it needed to bisect the square so 2 corners were on each side of the line bisecting the target.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 05:48
|
|
|
It has been strangely hard to google up an answer to this: Do monsters take a penalty to demoralize checks against players if they don't share a common language? Like if a Skeleton that only speaks Necril has a listed intimidate skill bonus. A very strict reading of the Demoralize actions says that they should, but I don't recall ever coming across anything in the Bestiary that talks about intimidation feats, so it feels weird for all monsters to just be inherently bad at being scary, including things which are absolutely scary by their very nature. I have been ignoring the penalty on the reasoning that generally any monster with a listed intimidation bonus is inherently frightening, but I'm curious what the RAW is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 08:03
|
|
|
The general rule is that you get a penalty for not sharing a language, and I'm not aware of any exceptions to that rule specifically for monsters, so it should still apply.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 11:25
|
|
|
If anything I'd figure the intimidation bonus is there to make up for the difference, but at the same time they could just include "creature ignores penalties to demoralize for not sharing a language" in the stat block
Clerical Terrors fucked around with this message at 12:27 on Dec 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 11:44
|
|
|
Also that feels like a thing I could buy about how Paizo approaches their worldbuilding- sure we’d consider ghouls and orcs naturally intimidating…but on Golarion those are just people who suffer from an unfortunate disease and another ancestory.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 12:07
|
|
|
Yeah, I think if a creature is actually supposed to be inherently intimidating, it would have the Frightful Presence creature ability.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 16:06
|
|
|
Scoss posted:
Nevermind you have that picture, I didn't click your link and my solution was what was causing the original confusion. My fault. The way I think about it is every line effect has a slope on the x/y axis. It has to have a consistent rise and run and the line can only effect one square at once on either the x or y axis depending on the direction of the line. gurragadon fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Dec 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 16:47
|
|
|
If they didn't want a penalty for not speaking the language then the monster should have paid the feat tax and gotten intimidating glare 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 19:45
|
|
|
Scoss posted:so it feels weird for all monsters to just be inherently bad at being scary, including things which are absolutely scary by their very nature. My players run away from monsters plenty, I don't even have to make a demoralize check. Intimidation is more of a performance, flex, or stunt, which a typical skeleton wouldn't be good at. People run away from skeletons because they are skeletons, not because they are good at going "grrr" or "boo".
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 19:55
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:My players run away from monsters plenty, I don't even have to make a demoralize check. Intimidation is more of a performance, flex, or stunt, which a typical skeleton wouldn't be good at. People run away from skeletons because they are skeletons, not because they are good at going "grrr" or "boo". What are you talking about? Skeletons are great at that stuff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2023 04:30
|
|
|
Usually specifically scary things will have an ability that causes frightened, instead of relying on Demoralize.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2023 06:50
|
|
|
Am I understanding animal companion mounts correctly? If you pick a Large companion and "mature" it with a feat, it is both a mount for a medium size character and gains an action that it can use to stride or strike even if you don't give it a command. Is there anything stopping you from mounting up and relying solely on the mount's free action to stride (with probably significantly more speed than your actual character) while you spend all of your own actions on whatever else? Granted, Large animals do not necessarily fit easily into dungeons, you are a juicier AoE target, and if you provoke the GM's wrath it isn't as sturdy as a player, but that still seems pretty good for any character who doesn't necessarily want to get stuck into melee but is happy to stay around the periphery of combat. Hell it sounds good even if you do want to ride your Riding Drake in closer without spending your own actions so you can hit monsters with your sword more. Scoss fucked around with this message at 02:26 on Dec 31, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2023 00:01
|
|
|
Scoss posted:Am I understanding animal companion mounts currently: There's nothing else to it, you've just enumerated the upsides and downsides to a mounted combat build. I suppose you could also say that feat investment is a downside, in that there might be class features that you want to take more. Also keep in mind that your companion choice is restricted to things with the Mount trait, which generally have worse support actions compared to what you can pull off with a dedicated companion. Since commanding gets you two actions instead of one, a purely ranged character that doesn't need to move as often might get more out of having an independent companion that they can get in some free attacks with. Also, a mount is worse if you're stuck in melee, since mount and rider share MAP and you can only use the free action to Strike or Stride, compared to a separate companion having independent MAP and being able to flank with you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2023 02:18
|
|
|
You can ride an animal companion without the mount trait. It just can't use non-land Speeds, and can't move and support in the same turn while you ride it. (Rules Link)quote:You or an ally can ride your animal companion as long as it is at least one size larger than the rider. If it is carrying a rider, the animal companion can use only its land Speed, and it can't move and Support you on the same turn. However, if your companion has the mount special ability, it's especially suited for riding and ignores both of these restrictions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2023 02:36
|
|
|
Those restrictions are bad enough that I’d hesitate on it, is the thing
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2023 02:48
|
|
|
Mister Olympus posted:Also, a mount is worse if you're stuck in melee, since mount and rider share MAP and you can only use the free action to Strike or Stride, compared to a separate companion having independent MAP and being able to flank with you. it also means you basically turn off being able to use reach weapons (but you can grapple somebody if you're mounted, you can even suplex them) otoh if you're a redeemer or liberator paladin your reaction covers a significantly larger area when you're mounted, while paladins don't want to be because ranged reprisal lets them step but it doesn't let their mount step; mounted combat is a land of contrasts atelier morgan fucked around with this message at 04:24 on Dec 31, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2023 04:21
|
|
|
Apologies if I'm posting a lot of random questions and thoughts, I'm not in any other PF2 or tabletop channels to pick people's brains so you folks get to see it. My players are approaching level 4 and it will soon be the Magus player's "turn" to get a cool magic item intended for him. It will 100% be some kind of magical one handed weapon with a striking rune. For our Investigator, I homebrewed up a magical rapier with a neat activated power that I am confident he will be excited about (see a previous post ITT). The Magus player in question has actually had a homebrew magic +1 longsword for nearly two full levels that also has an activated power --cast a version of the Gale Blast cantrip once per day for a single action -- but he has never used this power a single time, even during the "horde" encounter that I specifically designed shortly after he got the sword to give him a chance to show it off. I know that to some extent the design of the class itself encourages this, but the Magus player is hyper focused on getting off spellstrike and only very reluctantly doing anything else at all that isn't going to make the next spellstrike happen faster. Is Gale Blast for one action not appealing enough? Does Magus just have too much action pressure to numerically justify using a fun item power? Does the player in question prefer sticking to a very narrow flowchart or loop of optimal combat actions rather than doing something fun or expressive? I think it's some balance of all of these things. Either way, once bitten twice shy and I think it would be a mistake to waste time thinking of any one or two action power that I could add to a magic sword unless I make it so obviously overpowered that his gamer gremlin brain can't ignore it, and that doesn't seem like good design. So, I am either looking at a free action ability if I think the problem is action economy, or something even totally outside of the combat framework that maybe is meant to be more of a narrative or exploration power (the same player has a hard time getting a hand on the ball outside of combat so to speak, very much "I pull out my sword and wait patiently until I get to hit something"). One of my initial thoughts for a free action power is some limited version of the Dual Handed Assault feat (https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=371) on a Katana, maybe the sword becomes supernaturally light and deadly for a moment and can make the next strike as if using the 2-hand damage dice without losing any benefit from having an empty free hand (he's a Laughing Shadow Magus). Once per day? As for more narrative powers, I thought it might be fun if the sword was slightly "cursed" and has an insatiable appetite for blood, constantly whispering to the holder that it wants to be bathed in the blood of Great Beasts. I was going to have them be drawn to slaying a nearby hydra and push the sword into its heart, after which the sword is "unleashed" and gains its striking rune, and from then on it will glow and rattle around in its scabbard like Sting or something whenever a large ferocious creature is nearby. That setup also seems like a slam dunk for planting a seed for future fun regarding "hey is this semi-sentient sword actually evil as gently caress?" I have also been reading over the Relic(https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=1096) rules and they seem super cool and maybe helpful in this specific case, but I feel like I would need to give relics to all of my players to be fair and I'm not quite prepared to do that just yet. If anyone has thoughts about that system though I'd love to hear. Scoss fucked around with this message at 09:09 on Dec 31, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2023 09:05
|
|
|
If the relic rules were around in abomination vaults they'd absolutely have relics in it, so I backported them. Even though I tailored them pretty neatly to my players' builds, they've had varying levels of interface with it. If you're going to hand them all out, I think you want to identify which players are better about using consumables and limited-use abilities judiciously, and the players that are nervous about moving outside of a sustainable action loop. Give the former active abilities, and the latter passives, or something with a focus point-equivalent cooldown.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2023 10:15
|
|
|
It would be contingent upon the magus's cantrip pool that they use for spellstriking, but my first instinct since you mentioned semi-sentient things was a weapon that had the psyche of a dead Psychic shoved into it. Said brain pattern is obviously really pissed about being welded into a sword and its hostility bubbles up whenever it's used as a magical conduit to cast a spell it knew in life - that is, once per day, if your next action is to Cast a Spell that is a cantrip that can be Amped, you can use a free action to have the sword get pissed off and amp the spell. The idea of getting to use a mega-spellstrike with a loving Amped Kyrosiris fucked around with this message at 17:42 on Dec 31, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2023 17:39
|
|
|
Scoss posted:Apologies if I'm posting a lot of random questions and thoughts, I'm not in any other PF2 or tabletop channels to pick people's brains so you folks get to see it. Eventually, your Magus is going to desperately want a Spellstrikers Staff (https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?ID=2258) to provide a bunch of true strike spell slots and the free action effect is maybe a nice idea to look at for a place to start. And a Striking/Shifting combo to get him used to the idea of changing up his weapon would also probably be a neat thing to introduce, with the goal of getting him the staff upgrade in a few levels.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2023 17:58
|
|
|
Mister Olympus posted:Those restrictions are bad enough that I’d hesitate on it, is the thing Mounts are good for champions and other heavy armor users with both movement penalties and melee builds. The champion in my game is heavy enough that the mount is encumbered and also takes a movement penalty, but it is still much faster then him trying to walk.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2024 01:34
|
|
|
Do Automatons Dream of Ghoul Fever? I believe I'm interpreting correctly, but can Automatons be affected by disease/ghoul fever?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2024 04:19
|
|
|
The Slack Lagoon posted:Do Automatons Dream of Ghoul Fever? Yep. Just like how a Poppet with no internal organs can get a lung disease.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2024 06:17
|
|
|
The Slack Lagoon posted:Do Automatons Dream of Ghoul Fever? Ghoul fever is a state of mind, and soon enough a way of (un)-life
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2024 06:35
|
|
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/1901kx3/golems_are_going_away/ No more golems/golem antimagic. Good loving riddance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2024 16:27
|
|
|
Chevy Slyme posted:https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/1901kx3/golems_are_going_away/ booooo golems were fun
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2024 16:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 08:06 |
|
|
sugar free jazz posted:booooo agreed
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2024 17:02
|
|