|
It says to "Make an unarmed Strike", and that strike does count against the multiple-attack penalty.
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 01:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 08:39 |
|
|
Red Metal posted:It says to "Make an unarmed Strike", and that strike does count against the multiple-attack penalty. Oof, ok. I thought it didn't count as one without the Attack tag. Good thing I asked, that makes it seem less good in the long run.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 02:28
|
|
|
http://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=387 It's covered under the Subordinate Actions section. Notice how most (if not all) class feats and abilities that let you make a special attack (including Flurry of Blows) don't have the Attack trait.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 02:43
|
|
|
Red Metal posted:http://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=387 In my defense, FOB may not be tagged as an Attack, but it specifies in the ability text to apply the multi-attack penalty to the strikes, so that's where my thought process was drawing from.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 07:30
|
|
|
I'm gonna be running Extinction Curse for some friends soon, and it'll be my first Pathfinder 2e experience. I've got questions: * What virtual tabletop has the best integration with Pathfinder 2nd Ed? * How can I best compensate for us only having three PCs? Should I make the simplest DMPC I can to be the fourth PC, or should I try compensating by dropping extra monsters, and knocking "boss" type monsters down to 75% HP and damage? * Any suggestions on things the party should have? Sounds like someone specialised in Medicine is invaluable, but having someone who at least dabbles in it is also useful in case the specialist goes down. * Any general tips for a first time group playing Extinction Curse
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 20:29
|
|
|
Gort posted:* How can I best compensate for us only having three PCs? Should I make the simplest DMPC I can to be the fourth PC, or should I try compensating by dropping extra monsters, and knocking "boss" type monsters down to 75% HP and damage? I'm also running my game for three people and I went with the DMPC that I let the players control as they see fit and it has worked great. A straightforward fighter/champion works pretty well as one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 20:33
|
|
|
Gort posted:I'm gonna be running Extinction Curse for some friends soon, and it'll be my first Pathfinder 2e experience. I've got questions: * Foundry VTT, by far. It's a self hosted modular VTT, and the Pathfinder module has all of the Pathfinder 2 content in that it legally can -- which is basically everything but actual adventures, and some archetypes are renamed. It automates a lot of stuff if you want, and Active Effects in 0.7 is letting them add even more. * The GMG offers a few variants to deal with lower player count parties. The Dual Class variant would let the players each take 2 classes simultaneously with their character, which improves their options a lot and lets them shore up some weaknesses, but they'll still have relatively similar modifiers and bonuses, so it's not massively overpowered. If that might be too much, there's also the Free Archetype variant, letting them just take archetype feats for free alongside their regular class feats. Again, it increases the options without breaking the math. There's also ancestral paragon, which gives a lot more ancestry feats. These are described at https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=1327 If none of those feel right, there are various rules for scaling encounters. One simple solution would be more like putting a Weak template on most of the enemies. I will say there are a lot of fights in the EC path that are absolutely BRUTAL to the players. Like, the first adventure has a basilisk with a "fail 3 saves and you die" ability.. I have come close to a TPK multiple times running things, just because of the numbers involved. * For players, Medicine is invaluable. The best scenario is around level 3, someone getting Expert medicine and taking Assurance. This will let them auto-succeed on the heal roll for the basic amount of healing. Also, medicine RAW takes a LOT of time to heal. It's 10 minutes per person, and can only be done once an hour. I suggest fudging this a bit or being vague about the timing, otherwise it's gonna be tough imo. Aside from Medicine, Crafting is useful for repairing objects, especially Shields. The game has rules for item HP and hardness, and by god it likes to use them. At low levels, shields will probably break every combat, and it's a lot better if someone trained in crafting repairs it than untrained checks. * General tips PF2e generally: Move, attack, move. Do not run up to enemies and face tank them, that results in a bad time. The game is very tight mathematically, and due to the critical rules, a +1 bonus or penalty is a lot more important than it is in a regular game. +1 to attack not only increases your to-hit, but also your crit range. So things like raising a shield to gain 1-2 AC, feinting, or parrying stance can all be very useful. EC specifically: The circus is not actually a huge part of the adventure path as written. You can make it more so if you and your players want to do it more. All of the chapters have taken 2-3 sessions for my group so far, though we've had someone new to the game and a few character changes to slow things down. Like I said, it can be brutal, combat wise.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2020 14:55
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:Has anyone here given the oracle a try? How does it play in practice, now that the APG has been out for a few months? I currently play a level 2 cosmos oracle with a focus on medicine. I do like the curse mechanics as it adds a lot of flavour to my character. I haven't had much issue with the negative side of the curse yet. I expect to be in trouble anywas when I get grappled or shoved, so I try to take my distance. The extra resistance vs physical damage is really nice for those moments I do get hit though. I'm primarily playing a support role as the rest of my party consists of a fighter, rogue and ranger. Magic weapon has been really good to help the fighter hit hard and get us through some particular difficult encounters. I went with Blessed One on level 2 to give some additional healing options other than spells, but I'm not sure yet how to build my character at higher levels, probably depends on what the party needs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2020 09:26
|
|
|
One note if you decide to go with only 3 PCs: Boss monsters are more than capable of downing players very quickly during combat and that is much more dangerous in a team with three players instead of four. You need to be very careful with that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2020 09:35
|
|
|
Andrast posted:One note if you decide to go with only 3 PCs: Boss monsters are more than capable of downing players very quickly during combat and that is much more dangerous in a team with three players instead of four. You need to be very careful with that. Yeah, I've been in a lot of close call PFS games. Between not having a healer, and the groups usually only having about 4 people, there've been a few close ones.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2020 16:28
|
|
|
I've been checked out of Pathfinder stuff for years, but I look at summaries of the adventure paths every once in a while. When did they partially switch over to 3-volume paths? Have they talked about why? (I can guess, but I'd love to know the official reasoning.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2020 00:20
|
|
|
Mimir posted:I've been checked out of Pathfinder stuff for years, but I look at summaries of the adventure paths every once in a while. When did they partially switch over to 3-volume paths? Have they talked about why? (I can guess, but I'd love to know the official reasoning.) These are the first Pathfinder ones, but they did it first with Starfinder. Later volumes sell worse as people don’t complete 6 volume APs they start, so they thought there might be a market for shorter arcs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2020 00:37
|
|
|
Drone Jett posted:These are the first Pathfinder ones, but they did it first with Starfinder. Later volumes sell worse as people don’t complete 6 volume APs they start, so they thought there might be a market for shorter arcs. We're going right back to 6 volumes afterwards too
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2020 05:51
|
|
|
Blockhouse posted:We're going right back to 6 volumes afterwards too They did the same in Starfinder for a year before doing another three volume run.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2020 13:49
|
|
|
3 volumes is superior so you all can escape the crushing mediocrity and wasted premises before it gets too much
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2020 23:46
|
|
|
EVGA Longoria posted:* Foundry VTT, by far. It's a self hosted modular VTT, and the Pathfinder module has all of the Pathfinder 2 content in that it legally can -- which is basically everything but actual adventures, and some archetypes are renamed. It automates a lot of stuff if you want, and Active Effects in 0.7 is letting them add even more. Glad to see there's goons enjoying Foundry! Do you happen to know if theres a pf2e game going on the servers? (I'm hK on discord). All my groups want to play 5e but I'm dying to finally play pf2e 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2020 21:52
|
|
|
An inversion of the only 3 PCs question: how would you toughen encounters to account for 5 PCs in a 4 PC adventure path? I'm spitballing either 50% more monsters or giving monsters 50-100% more HP and +1 to all d20-related stats, depending on what feels fun for an encounter. A fifth player means more than 25% more player team power because they can more easily flank and focus fire on targets, besides greater access to synergies, I know.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2020 21:03
|
|
|
SuperKlaus posted:An inversion of the only 3 PCs question: how would you toughen encounters to account for 5 PCs in a 4 PC adventure path? I'm spitballing either 50% more monsters or giving monsters 50-100% more HP and +1 to all d20-related stats, depending on what feels fun for an encounter. you've got the right of it, but +50% more monsters is too much. Use the guidelines in the CRB and see if you can add more with the extra XP budget, or yes make something an elite as per the Bestiary. I'm presuming this is 2e.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2020 21:35
|
|
|
The second round of 2e Errata is out. Biggest changes IMO are alchemist buffs and adding a held / worn / stowed system for carrying items.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2020 22:03
|
|
|
When I run games with an extra party member, I just use maximum HP per HD for monsters instead of average (Bestiary lists average HP and then the hit dice and bonuses that's derived from). That's for 1e, no idea how 2e does monster HP.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2020 22:32
|
|
|
A question about traits, spells and objects. Casting Illusory Object as an opaque dome over a magical / mechanical object that can see and target with a blindness ray. Can the object see through it? Illusory Object has only the Illusion and Visual traits. The Visual trait has "A visual effect can affect only creatures that can see it. This applies only to visible parts of the effect, as determined by the GM," However, an object does not have a specific immunity to either Visual or Illusion trait effects. It does have a specific immunity to Mental trait effects and a caveat that objects with a mind are not immune to Mental Effects. Objects normally don't have senses either, if they do, should they be affected by sensory effects? I notice that on Nethys, the Mental trait is in a higher, general trait category than Visual, which is in Sense Traits alongside Auditory and Olfactory. Is there some hierarchy to the way traits should interact? Specifically, is the use of the word 'creature' in the Visual trait definition supposed to limit Visual effects to only affect creatures? Or, is it just simple language similar to how the word 'creature' is used in the Perception definition, even though an object may also have Perception?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2020 22:37
|
|
|
My ruling for illusions of most types is that the rules say how to disbelieve an illusion, the actions that might make someone/something treat it as not real, and the rules for when they are allowed to try and disbelieve. I stick by those rules, because illusions are useless if they constantly get pierced for free. The whole point of illusion magic is that it's inherently convincing. Things that are specifically immune to illusion obviously would get a pass, but otherwise you have to physically interact with the illusion in a way that would make it seem fake, or take a Seek action, either one of which would let you make a Perception roll to try and disbelieve. If the pepper spray security camera can't or won't take either of those actions, or can't succeed at the Perception check, it's gonna stay illusioned. Otherwise, there's no hierarchy I've seen that would lump in stuff like Illusionary Object under other traits like sensory and mental.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2020 22:56
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:The second round of 2e Errata is out. Biggest changes IMO are alchemist buffs and adding a held / worn / stowed system for carrying items. it's funny how those relatively minor changes do a lot for alchemists
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2020 02:33
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:My ruling for illusions of most types is that the rules say how to disbelieve an illusion, the actions that might make someone/something treat it as not real, and the rules for when they are allowed to try and disbelieve. I stick by those rules, because illusions are useless if they constantly get pierced for free. The whole point of illusion magic is that it's inherently convincing. Thanks, that's kind of what I thought, the illusion rules are pretty clear, meanwhile, our GM reckons since Illusory Object has the Visual trait and the Visual trait only affects "creatures that can see it", the totem sees right through it because it's not a creature. I'm a bit suss about even that. It seems a construct could be fooled by an illusion and this totem that shoots rays at targets it can see seems more like a mindless construct on a pole to me. He's also unhappy that Illusory Object is a 1st level spell and this is OP for a 1st level spell. As if module balance is my problem. As if Spell Save DCs don't rise with character level making a first level spell cast by a high level caster more powerful than the same spell cast by a low level caster.  Besides, given all the doubt, why not just let the totem use a Seek action or even a free action to Seek against my Spell DC... the totem is basically seeking for targets all the time anyway so bing bong it just goes back to scan mode when blocked by an illusion... 
clusterfuck fucked around with this message at 05:52 on Nov 11, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2020 05:17
|
|
|
I'm currently preparing Extinction Curse (plan on running it once my current DND5e campaign is over, around January). Any tips or changes you'd recommend for the first chapter? I added a part before the big show where the players can roam the camp and meet the different performers and Myron. I feel it's nicer to first show them the different characters, and later show them the underlying mechanics for their tricks instead of bombarding them with circus rules right at the beginning. I also removed the cockatrice, as I heard she can be quite hard and adds nothing of value. As for the campaign itself, I bought it on Roll20 and imported it to Foundry VTT, which I want to run the campaign in. This went over relatively well - the maps and journal entries are all there, even the lighting and walls have been imported, with doors added automatically. Nice! The actor Biographies weren't imported, as Foundry doesn't have a biography page. Also, and that's a stinker, the token art wasn't linked with the tokens, so I had to do all of that manually. ... and then the real work started. I thought buying a campaign online would get rid of most of the prep. But the adventure doesn't have tokens for any NPCs without stats. So a completely empty circus tent. No performers, no spectators. Urgh. I made around 50 tokens myself and added them manually. At least Foundry was helpful here; it has a wildcard option where I put 12 commoners into a folder and got a random one whenever I dragged the token onto the map. With some copy and paste, I filled the circus tent with over 500 spectators in less than 5 minutes. I even added two Kobolds in Trenchcoats as a small easter egg into the stands, but I doubt my players will find them(names hidden for them)  
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 07:03
|
|
|
I just got my players to imagine the stands were full of people. Gonna move to spoilers as people may be intending to play Extinction Curse: I GMed it straight a couple of days ago. It felt like a very combat-heavy chapter to me. The players couldn't go ten feet without running into something that wanted them dead, in the circus where they've lived and worked for years. You can definitely stand to cut a few combat encounters - the Cockatrice is a bit of a crap monster design, honestly. Either it turns someone to stone for potentially days, upending the adventure, or it does basically nothing. It's not connected to the plot at all. You could probably turn Bardolph the bear into some kind of social/nature challenge where he bursts out of his wagon and menaces the players, but doesn't immediately attack, giving the players a moment to come up with a solution. I wasn't super sure about how the Dream Pollen Pods were supposed to go - the text talks about them running out of pollen, but doesn't really specify when (unless I missed something) so I gave each pod only one shot. Otherwise, unless the players back out of range and shoot the pods from a distance, I could see that trap TPKing the party. Four shots at +12 for D8 damage every turn with a "turn on your friends" rider on top of it is brutal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 11:01
|
|
|
Question about the Heal spell: https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=148 Does the 3 action version heal enemies as well if they're in the area of effect? That's the first thing I want to establish. The second thing is also related to the Heal spell. My group will be doing Age of Ashes soon and one of the party members will be a Dhampir. I'm trying to figure out if they would take damage from the Heal emanation or if it just would not heal them. The wording of the Negative Healing trait is: "A creature with negative healing draws health from negative energy rather than positive energy. It is damaged by positive damage and is not healed by positive healing effects. It does not take negative damage, and it is healed by negative effects that heal undead." The way I see it is that because the Dhampir isn't actually undead it just wouldn't heal from the spell as opposed to taking damage. It feels like double penalty to not only not get healed but to get hurt. If I am not correct I may just rule that way anyway or I am considering giving the druid who would be doing the healing a downtime activity to learn to shape their spells to not harm the Dhampir. What do you guys think and what would you do in this situation?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 05:39
|
|
|
Heal says it "targets all living and undead creatures in the burst" and I think it's pretty thematic to rule that a dhampir is neither living nor undead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 05:50
|
|
|
Living is the default state of creatures unless they have another trait to override it. Dhampirs are living creatures with Negative Healing. An AoE heal spell does not affect them, in any fashion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 06:12
|
|
|
As intended, I'm pretty sure you're supposed to get hurt. Dhampir posted:You have the negative healing ability, which means you are harmed by positive damage and healed by negative effects as if you were undead. Dhampir (Bestiary) posted:Perhaps their most distinctive feature, however, is their connection to negative energy, which heals them, leaving them as vulnerable to positive energy as any undead creature. As written, it's a little more nebulous because of how negative healing is written.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 09:55
|
|
|
Counterpoint:Heal posted:You channel positive energy to heal the living or damage the undead. If the target is a willing living creature, you restore 1d8 Hit Points. If the target is undead, Dhampir ancestry posted:Despite being living creatures, dhampirs respond to positive and negative energy as if they were undead, making them unwelcome in many holy communities and often driving them toward necromantic arts. Negative healing posted:A creature with negative healing draws health from negative energy rather than positive energy. It is damaged by positive damage and is not healed by positive healing effects. It does not take negative damage, and it is healed by negative effects that heal undead. I don't know if it's clear for RAW, but for "what would you do in this situation," I would let the dhampir choose to not be affected. If I were the DM, it's RAW ambiguous and it doesn't seem like a powergaming gambit, so I would definitely err in favor of the players having it work in their favor. Elysiume fucked around with this message at 10:25 on Nov 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 10:17
|
|
|
This seems incredibly straightforward. Dhampir takes damage, but as they are a PC in your home game you are free to ignore any rules you choose. Taking damage from positive healing is very explicitly a thing they have going on so I don't really see how this is ambiguous at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 13:02
|
|
|
Yeah, "they respond to positive and negative energy as if they were undead" seems really, really clear.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 14:18
|
|
|
Zurai posted:Yeah, "they respond to positive and negative energy as if they were undead" seems really, really clear. Well if you read the whole rule it says "Despite being a living creature..." which makes it ambigous. I'd probably rule the Dhampir as a living creature who treats positive and negative energy like an undead. Therefore he can choose to be unwilling to recieve the heal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 15:56
|
|
|
Mise posted:Well if you read the whole rule it says "Despite being a living creature..." which makes it ambigous. It's not ambiguous at all. Despite literally means that the second part of the sentence overrules the first. Unless something is wildly different in 2e that I'm not aware of, specific trumps general. The general rule is that living beings are healed by positive energy. The specific rule is that, despite being living beings, Dhampirs are treated as undead for negative and positive energy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 16:03
|
|
|
Straight up RAW I think it's really clear and the Dhampir works just like an undead regarding the healing. In practice I'd probably make some houserules if that was really annoying for the players.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 16:05
|
|
|
Regarding the Dhampir rule. "Despite being a living creature..." means a dhampir is a living creature, right? The second part of the sentence means that positive healing is always modified for a dhampir and he can't change anything about it. But for our case that's not relevant. Heal says "any willing living creature" meaning a dhampir, as a living creature, can choose to be unwilling, in contrast to say a zombie which is always an undead creature meaning it can't choose to not take the effect from heal. Or am I getting it completely wrong?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 17:05
|
|
|
Mise posted:Regarding the Dhampir rule. They're living creatures for any purpose except positive and negative energy, which always treat them as being undead. Heal doesn't "see" a Dhampir as being alive, so it doesn't care about willingness. It sucks as anyone around the table, but it's really quite explicit that, for the purposes of positive and negative energy, Dhampir == undead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 19:08
|
|
|
Mise posted:Heal says "any willing living creature" meaning a dhampir, as a living creature, can choose to be unwilling, in contrast to say a zombie which is always an undead creature meaning it can't choose to not take the effect from heal. If you really want to split hairs then technically the rules only specify what happens to "a willing living creature" and "undead". They don't say anything about what happens to unwilling living creatures either way. Anyhow, I recently had to figure this out because one of my players in my first-ever PF2E campaign -- well, apart from running Little Trouble In Big Absalom as a sort of warm-up -- wanted to be a sparkly vampire. I agree that the RAW intent is that the dhampies definitely do take damage from Heal, and neither they nor the caster of the heal can opt out. I think it's clear that the intent with Heal is that it does both positive damage and positive healing, and you can only opt out of the latter. I think it's also clear that the intent with "you are harmed by positive damage and healed by negative effects as if you were undead" and the negative healing tag is that Dhampirs count as capital-U Undead whenever they are subject to positive/negative energy spells. Tag or no tag, living creature and all. In general: I think you're reading way more specificity into the phrase "living creature" than I think the people writing those two separate bits of text intended, they're not trying to make Dhampirs some sort of hard-to-parse third option. I also think you shouldn't worry too much about the exact rules-as-written in corner cases and do what is fun and makes sense for your group. Invent a Doodad of Positive Damage Immunity and give it to them if it's a huge problem and you really don't want to houserule.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 19:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 08:39 |
|
|
RAW, Dhampir are living creatures (they don't have the Undead trait) with the Negative Healing ability. This means that they are damaged by positive damage. But Heal only deals positive damage if the target is undead, which dhampir aren't. They're living creatures, so the positive healing effect goes through, although it doesn't actually do anything (either because the dhampir is unwilling and it never triggers in the first place or because one of the other parts of Negative Healing kicks in). Whether that's intended or not is impossible to say, of course.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 19:27
|
|