Recovered links edition

>>IF YOU ARE ASKING A QUESTION, PLEASE SPECIFY WHICH GAME YOU'RE PLAYING<<<

Previous thread: >>95924632

/pfg/ (pathfinder 1e) link repository: https://pastebin.com/RSt0rF0T
/p2g/ (pathfinder 2e) link repository: https://pastebin.com/1zySxwm3
/sfg/ (starfinder) link repository: https://pastebin.com/5yp9s2U3
/s2g/ (starfinder 2e) link repository: https://paizo.com/store/pathfinder/rulebooks/core
/3eg/ (D&D 3.X) link repository: https://pastebin.com/VMRsxB2m
/pacgg/ (pathfinder adventure card game) link repository:
https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_games_considered_the_best
The T̶r̶o̶v̶e̶ Vault (seed, please!): >implying

>>CHECK THE SHARE THREAD FOR MISSING MATERIALS<<

TQ: Should Spell Trickster be scuttled and the feats made available to all classes with spellslots, pickable in addition to your feats? Should there be a cost?

>>95978319 (OP)
>Should Spell Trickster be scuttled and the feats made available to all classes with spellslots, pickable in addition to your feats? Should there be a cost?
This question could be about over half the archetypes in the game and my answer would be "nuke them and spread their feats to those classes they're suitable for", because too many archetypes lock feats that are 1000% fitting to either be a universal class feat, or at minimum exist on a specific class. I will die on a hill saying that Maneuvering Spell from Sixth Pillar should just be a level 10 Magus feat.

In 2e, what are some decent Arcane support spells? Heightened Haste is good, but what else can I have a support NPC wizard be spamming on the party during a fight? It's a one-off so I don't think there's any 10th level spells that'd be off-limits if it keeps things fun for everyone.

Why do people hate 2e so much? Surely it's better than the alternative.

>>95978856
I don't hate 2e otherwise I wouldn't bother posting about it or playing it twice a week. I am, however, a hater for Paizo, stretching back to before 2e was even a twinkle on the horizon, and it's extremely easy to make fun of them for printing raw dogshit constantly.

>>95978368
I'm of the opposite mind. I think fighter shouldn't be a class and its feats should be in archetypes instead.

Probably a dumb question but is it worth having a ranged option if possible? I'm playing a melee orientated Rogue but having a shortbow on the side seems worth it.

>>95978319 (OP)
>TQ
Not really, as Spell Trickster already have a lot of logistical issues that made it hard to expand, and being available to every class would only further compromise what they could do with them.
>Modified Spells really could have just been new spells entirely most of the time.
>They have to be attached to the most commonly used spells in order to be worth the feat pick, they aren't general use like most metamagics. And that incises the "Only Six Good Spells in 2e" debate, imaging if Electric Arc or Wall of Stone got mods and the skub that would create.
>They have to be tied to spells, existing like metamagics would necessitate clamping down on their theoretical power because they can unbalance spells
>They require a lot of page space thanks to their prerequisites, modification of pre-existing text, and their own powers. They don't really have many good places to fit them in. Remember, this was an archetype originally made for the Advanced Players Guide but had to get kicked to a Lost Omens book that was mainly items because it took too many pages.
>They still have the same "issue" as metamagics for most people: they are generic additions to spells that have no character or attachment to your class. They aren't special or interact with the class mechanics, so even if they were available to everyone, most people wouldn't take them and woe at the state of caster feats as usual.

It makes sense but spell mods really just struggle to find a place. Other spell modification mechanics like catalysts or even staves have similar issues, the logistics don't match well with player behaviors. I'm glad they exist but I don't envy Paizo in figuring out WHY or HOW they should continue to exist.

>>95980018
Depends. Switch-hitting isn't the greatest of plans in 2e (assuming 2e) thanks to budgetary concerns, but it helps to build wide than tall in the game as well. Your side weapons don't need to be fully decked out, use them as you see fit.

>>95978856
If the alternative is literally no games then you might have a point.

>What are you doing here then?

My story is a common one. My friend group unfortunately became obsessed with 2e for reasons I just do not understand and now we play it far, far more often than I would like. I just come here because 2e fans have turned every other place on the internet into a hugbox where you aren't allowed to criticize the system.

>>95980018
Get doubling rings and/or blazons and an air repeater to keep up with switch hitting.

>>95978856
A lot of it is just skub and edition warring for edition warring's sake. It is still /tg/, sometimes you just gotta remember it is barely above /v/ in terms of the sane-people-to-shitstirers ratio. If a TORtanic is possible, they will try to summon it.
But there are also good portions of community that either feel ignored or actively excised from Paizo despite their years of dedication, don't appreciate their casualization and streamlining of the d20 fantasy space for the 5e audience, hate how Paizo approached the culture shift of the '20s in general, or just hate 2e as a product or how it is designed. Or some combination of the above. Even if you really love 2e like I do, you have to accept that it came dancing on the grave of 1e and there's nothing it can do barring removing the Pathfinder brand to illustrate it is a new foundation and the future of Paizo --and it is arguable that would even fix most of the skub. To a point, it isn't a game made in good faith. Even to resolve many of 1e's genuine issues and barriers of entry that kneecapped its growth, 2e is far too radical a change to rationalize such, beyond the idea that coasting on the 3.X license and rules was doomed to fail eventually. And there are just portions of 2e's design just made out of spite like casters' hit rates...

It is a lose-lose scenario where it is a game that offers nothing to the pre-established fanbase of Paizo but also have to exist as is because there was just no reasonable future with such a fanbase. Even if you ignore the capped growth of 1e and the flop that was Starfinder1e, the OGL drama proved that WotC does have a target on Paizo and would be genuinely happy if they could scoop up a lot of their revenue, if not kill the company entirely. And trying to adjust the 3.X ruleset to a reasonable standard kills a lot of enjoyment factors of that ruleset. So even in terms of edition changes naturally creating spite from autists that hate change, 2e does little to help itself.

I think I'm finally happy with the Magus combo point homebrew. Might try my hand at something resembling 1e Magus at a later date since I saw someone had made just that before Paizo's current version was implemented in SoM.
As always, feedback is welcome. https://scribe.pf2.tools/v/pXr5PJM8

>>95980371
Oh right, here's the 1e Magus https://scribe.pf2.tools/v/3jTqpw6h

>its another pacgnigger edition
Wow, we had a sane and usable thread for a while there. Shame the russoid had to go back to shitting it up again.
Kill all orcs.

>>95980684
qrd on the pacg autism? I know fighterfag likes to non-sequitur into it whenever she's losing an argument but I don't know the wider lore behind it.

>>95980018
It's better to have the option than not. It can be expensive though.

Reposting

For PF1e the ranger's favored terrain, planes are an option. Is it a choice between transitive, inner, and outer planes? Or are they specific like heaven, hell, the abyss, and the shadow plane?

>>95978856
Most of the hate is from 5E players-- 'You are betraying D&D!' is something I've seen ironically posted, brand loyalty is insane

3.pf1 players are fine with PF2E existing; it's a different meta or didn't plan on playing another system anyways

>>95978856
I dont hate 2e, infact i very much enjoy it. I just fucking hate Paizo because the system is solid in spite of them. They constantly make retarded design decisions for the sake of some ethereal "balance" and constantly want to pander their design to culture war brainrot.

I know some faggot is going to start pissing and shitting that im a chud but im not even talking about the troon stuff or how gay golarion is as i could honestly care less. But actively changing the mechanics of ancestries because the designers suddenly believe in the newest far left flavour of the week social issue of......innate ancestral boosts are racist because of eugenics?

Shit like that and the clear hypocrisy of not having samurai or ninja when we have pirate and viking archetypes just boils my piss. The list just goes on and on.

>>95980157
>I just come here because 2e fans have turned every other place on the internet into a hugbox where you aren't allowed to criticize the system.

People are bad at criticism and often conflate it with opinion. Saying PF2E is too crunchy or spell casters are bad is low IQ opinions that deserve to be discarded

Criticizing how spells don't have projectile trait with range increments or line of effect being jank. Good criticisms because it's based on something factual

>>95981063
>Criticizing how spells don't have projectile trait with range increments
This doesn't really make much sense either. There's no "projectile" trait at all, and spell (attacks) are hard-capped in range to provide balance among physical range options. Spells do more damage while bows and guns can attack further out.

>>95981063
>spell casters are bad is low IQ opinions
Spell casters are bad.......at the most important section of the game that everyone will play. Plus all the trap options and retarded assumptions paizo make on how you should play casters without actually telling you in the book didnt help either.

>>95981063
>>95980931
This is kind of what I mean though.

"Everyone who doesn't like 2e is just a DnD fan" or "every criticism I disagree with is just from dumb people!"

Passive aggressive hugbox shit meant to stifle discussion and actual criticism hidden behind a very thin veneer of objectivity.

You give the game away when you say people criticizing the design of 2e spellcasters aren't basing their arguments on facts and try to divert away to more insignificant issues to pretend to be objective.

I guess the broader question would be... why care so much that people have problems with the system? Like honestly ask yourself why that bothers you as much as it does to the point that you declare anyone doing it an idiot. Is that normal behavior at all? The answer is no. Not at all. Not even slightly. That's brand warrior behavior and nobody should be a brand warrior.

>>95980783
I don't know the full lore, like why pacg and whatever. I just know it's forced by one mentally ill cunt.
Whenever the russian gets the change to make a thread, a worthless link that just pads the length of the OP is forced in. No actual useful information or anything of relevance to the thread, as you can see.
Last couple were reasonably sane and given that the last thread to get the pacg shit shoved into it had fallen off the onsite archive, I had a glimmer of hope that we'd be seeing normal threads from here on out, but I guess not.
PSA: If you make a /pgg/ thread, cut that shit out if the last OP had it. The russian gets off on seeing it there.

>>95981120
Spellcasters are very strong in the meta, stop being bad

If you're a crafting class playing you have the right to complain lol

>>95981133
Trying to do 3.pf rocket tag or 5.5e DPR meta from other systems is going to leave you disappointed, you will have to realize you playing a different game someday

>insignificant issues

Range is a big problem for some spells and not being able to cast Message through glass is silly. Line of Effect and what is a projectile should have been tied up into traits is what I'm saying

>Like honestly ask yourself why that bothers you as much as it does to the point that you declare anyone doing it an idiot.

I'm trying to be helpful and I didn't call anyone an idiot yet, you idiot. You have can have thoughtless opinions and be generally smart

>>95981230
>Trying to do 3.pf rocket tag or 5.5e DPR meta from other systems is going to leave you disappointed, you will have to realize you playing a different game someday
There's that passive aggression again. You claim you're trying to be helpful and yet you feel the need to misrepresent the actual issues people have.

>>95981240
I'm never passive aggressive, I'm active aggressive

Tell me the actual issues, lay it on me

>>95981133
Outside of the universal truth that people are awful at discussing and arguing things, there is an actual reason to get overly defensive -- multiplayer games die when people quit playing them. 2e tries to challenge a lot of pre-built assumptions of d20 fantasy game design. If too many people take them personally and quit as a result, the game dies, regardless of how good it is. Yeah, people do get overly defensive over this game, but no one cares about the "rational and thought-out" argument over easy-bake headlines. See how people still argue about 1e "Feat Taxes" and "Ivory Tower Design" and you see why Brand Warrior Behavior propagates in this space.

When your main challenger is the uber-accessible D&D5e and most people have more an issue with the corporation behind it than game design faults (see how people still stick with 5e14 over 5e24 despite it literally being a better game), you do end up having to deal with a plurality of people that have no idea what they are talking about overwriting any constructive conversations. People don't want this game to be seen as a fad like Daggerheart or Tales of the Valiant, or have no place in an era where narrative games are the only real challengers in the space. So you have to counter the negativity and general malaise with being loud. You can't just let dumb critique roll off because that is all what people will remember of the game in this day and age?

>>95981230
>Spellcasters are very strong in the meta, stop being bad
Spellcasters as a whole? No, not even close. Exclusively Bard, Resentment Witch, Cleric, and MAYBE a primal sorcerer if your GM ever throws encounters with 20+ individual enemies at you.
Everything else spellcasters offer can be wholly replicated by a multiclass archetype on a fighter or rogue.

>>95981255
I'd love to hear what spells you think are the best

>>95981255
>Everything else spellcasters offer can be wholly replicated by a multiclass archetype on a fighter or rogue.
No. The lower scaling, the less slots, the expensive upkeep of spells and scrolls cutting into your weapon and armor budget, a multiclassed martial with caster MC is absolutely not a replacement for a real caster 9 times out of 10. At most they can support themselves better and relieve a caster of being a buffbot, but they aren't the ones tossing out big Slows and Fears or Fireballs out with any real OOMPH.

I would genuinely take the idea that the system and the meta is better off with NO magic casters in the party (4 Fighter Party) at all then the idea that a martial is a better caster than a caster. Even Wizard, FUBAR'd as they are, is worth more their salt than a Fighter stretching their neck to cast Electric Arc semi-competently.

>>95981262
off the top of my head?
haste, slow, fear(and similar spells), heroism, synesthesia, foresight, heal, shock to the system, dispel magic

>>95981252
They've been reiterated time and time and time again in these threads and I think you know that. And if all you took from those is "people just literally want 1e again" it shows that you're either engaging in extremely bad faith or didn't read them. I'm leaning toward the former given observed behavior in this thread.

>>95981286
>Fighter stretching their neck to cast Electric Arc semi-competently.
Why do you think that's what the fighter is doing? The archetype caster is using spells that don't require rolls or saves, and if you're pushed to your limit enough that you're running out of slots, then your GM is putting you in a situation where an actual caster would be worse off because they'd probably just be fucking dead.
If you need to cast something that requires an attack or save, that's the bard/cleric's job. Any spell they can't cast isn't worth bothering with except in extremely rare edge cases, and even then some creativity can push the martials on top in a way that casters just can't do in the opposite situations.

>>95981299
It's okay to be new. No summons, being afraid of incapacitate or terrain/wall spells is a dead giveaway

Slow is generally out classed compared to Laughing Fit, targeting fort saves with a range of 30 is just meh-- the absolute worst save to target for control spells
Haste is very mid because if you cast it on yourself you don't get the extra action until next turn and can't use it for non-Strike/Stride actions that won't fit for most action econs. Good choice if you have an ally that can actually benefit from it, typically the point man with agile weapons

>>95981230
>Spellcasters are very strong in the meta, stop being bad
I am the best caster player at my table and shit just isnt fun. I work twice as hard to be as useful as a retard with a sword. I have very little actual versatility with the action economy. My AC, saves and HP are all shit for no fucking reason other than its a sacred cow from a previous edition but i get none of the pro. Most of my feats are shit and i have to pick the same 10 or so spells every campaign because the rest are all dogshit. This shit is just fucking boring.
>>95981299
Ah the old Meta list. Why am i not surprised.

>>95981348
Send us your character sheet

>>95980921
I don't want to keep bugging my GM before our first session, anyone?

>>95981310
Just articulate your point or gtfo

Your don't have to be melodramatic in this autism containment zone

>>95981347
>Haste is very mid because if you cast it on yourself
Why would you ever do that.
Why would you even mention doing that.
I give a list of buff spells and the first thing you think of is using them on yourself.
What?

>>95981063
Casters feeling bad to play is much more important than "ummmm, technically they're balanced so nothing needs to change"

>>95981390
A good buff can be casted on more than 1 party member
Heroism is an example of a good buff

>>95981347
>Slow is generally outclassed compared to Laughing Fit
Fundamentally the same thing.
>being afraid of incapacitate bad
>having to dedicate a max rank slot in order to maybe get rid of a weak enemy the fighter can kill in one turn is a good thing actually

>>95981395
Yes, everyone except a cuckold fullcaster benefits from haste.

>>95981359
Who is this us? Its you and only you nigga. Why do you need to see my Wizard's character sheet when its going to be the same fucking level 5 wizard thats been played a thousand times by others? My current character sheet isn't going to change the fundamental problems casters have.

>>95981394
I grew up using crossbows and dying to house cats as a wizard, and it was fun

But if you're playing badly maybe you need to get gud, kneel, and ask for spell recommends

>>95981402
>Fundamentally the same thing

Denying reactions and targeting Will is a big difference, also it can be sustained for many turns

>>95981423
Send us your spell load outs nerd, you have more than one right?

>>95981456
>also it can be sustained for many turns
Slow just straight up lasts for as long as Laughing Fit can be sustained.

>>95981409
PF2E haste is no where near as good as other systems and rank 3 is a very competitive spell slot

An Arcane/Primal caster is much better off trying to deny an enemy action(s) than giving one party member a single very restrictive action, no matter how much the flurry ranger screams for it. Ask them to buy you a wand/scroll of it I suppose, maybe inscribe on your shield or robe if you're a bro

Occult is better off having Heroism prep'd, since it allows you to do things your party normally might not be able to do(such as reaching a certain math threshold) rather than just extending what you can already

>>95981518
If they fail or crit fail, true, odds are a fort save is going to be a success on something you'd actually want to slow such a big ass giant

Slow spell is whiff city, feels bad

>>95981456
Why would I want spell recommendations to die to cats?

>>95981550
That's 3.pf and earlier editions

PF2E has free cantrips and meaty HP pools, if you die to housecats in this system I don't know what to tell you

>>95981563
You're the one trying to sell this experience to me.

>>95981456
>Send us your spell load outs nerd, you have more than one right?
What kind of a massive autist makes multiple spell loadouts instead of keeping general evergreen spells at the ready unless you know the type of challenges your facing for the the following day?

Again, the spell list does nothing to change the various reasons i dont like casters and you just kind proved the point that you have to be a try hard giga autist with multiple spell loadouts to enjoy playing a caster.

>>95981595
Here's the Spellbook.

>>95981620

>>95981544
How do we fix haste

>>95981595
> What kind of a massive autist makes multiple spell loadouts

Nerds that play prep casters do ya filthy casual

>>95981723
There aren't enough good spells in the game to bother making multiple spell loadouts. So you are either lying or yes you are indeed a giga-autist who spends way too much wasted time and effort on a task while the fighter just needs to choose the most obvious feats for his build and will 7 times out of 10 be more useful than you in combat.

>>95981758
>7/10
try 99/100

>>95981620
>>95981628
I can see why you're struggling. The lack of wall, terrain, teleport, illusion and summons hurts; along with some of the better damage/(de)buff spells. It's getting late but I could make a shopping list of spells

I hope you have a tailwind wand at least

>>95981758
>There aren't enough good spells in the game to bother

You need to eat some humble pie and learn to analyze spells better

There are different modes of play and many monsters have spells they get completely shut down by if you happen to have it or exploit their weaknesses for shittons of damage. If you're looking for evergreen spells you'll probably get wrecked by one that is immune to it and feel useless eventually, only some buffs/heals are truly evergreen

>>95981817
A fighter can just die to bad luck, casters have guaranteed effects they can deploy
If you can't carry a fight as a caster dumping spell slots you're bad, gonna be real

Have the people who think all casters are bad, seen Resentment Witch?

I think 2e is fine, what I hate about it is the de-mystified magic items. Magic items should be and feel magical. Most magic items are absolute shit past the level you get them at.

>>95981957
They don't actually play the game.

>>95982048
I ended up just going the OSR route and turning on automatic rune progression, taking magic items off the market, and handing out very high level items at relatively low levels like staff of arcane might and pilferer's gloves, quickstrike scimitars. That sorta jazz.
And a bunch of stuff I've written up like ports of the old stat tomes. You read it and it just gives you a months retraining credit if it matches your key ability, a week if it doesn't.

>>95978319 (OP)
Why are 2e casters so boring. The game wants me to play support, I want to blast not make the fucking martials dick bigger

>>95981957
>uuummm you cant say caster gameplay is bad when this one broken subclass exists! I am very smart!
Its always funny when brainlets own themselves in 4k.

>>95981847
Ah yes the old Schrödinger's wizard where if you have access to every spell and know everything that is going to occur in the upcoming adventuring day then wizard is the best class in the game! If you have such incredible insight of the future, you should be playing the lottery and not wasting your talents playing magic elf games dude.

>>95981683
Remove action restrictions, lower duration

>>95982949
That would make it the absolute go-to spell for casters. It should just have a status bonus to AC and dexterity based checks.

>>95981383
>>95980921
according to https://www.aonprd.com/ClassDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Ranger
i think you specify a specific plane each time, because the nature of a plane is different enough between them to resemble a material environment, but that's my take

>>95978319 (OP)
thanks for the links brudda

What are good mature animal companions in Pf2 for mount for casters? Int ones to be precise. No legacy content, and I'm playing halfling.
I was thinking about
>Elk
it's frightening, but it's 30ft movement and you need to be adjusted to enemy.
>Oozeform Chair
sound fun, but Im not sure how many times I'm going to grab something 15ft away. Especially when I have telekinetic hand. And it's slow. imprecise sense is a neat bonus
>Rootball Chair
Reach, 30ft movement, ignore difficult terrain and if I wish to invest more I will have leap with and glide
>Chetamog
40ft,ignore difficult terrain, sences, if I invest in it it will have climb
>Yzobu
40ft, and it has something similar to rising shield if enemy can smell it.

Any of them any good?
I will take any other recommendations.

>>95981620
>>95981628
Anon, I'll be honest, Wizard isn't a great caster choice AND you picked a bunch of really boring spells. Some of which aren't better than alternative options. Just at a glance, I'd add Illusory Creature, Brine Dragon Bile, Dehydrate, Horizon Thunder Sphere, Befuddle, Live Wire and Time Jump. Rank 2 has a bunch of fire spells I'd consider over most of the things you have there too. I'm also assuming you're 5 or 6, genuinely the worst time in the game for casters. It legitimately does get more fun at 7+ and I have no idea why Paizo designed it that way.

>>95982948
>not having multiple spellbooks
ngtmi

Recall Knowledge, research subsystem and talking to quest NPCs. Read the quest handout ffs

>>95981620
>>95981628
Just remembered-- you're suppose to know at least 10 cantrips at level 1, go buy cantrip decks noob

>>95983414
As long as you're not facing too many PL+2-4 it's alright, since creatures above level 7 have the midgame bump in saves/AC. As a GM I tweak the numbers by -2 if I decide to send one though with a bump in HP

Most monsters you should be facing ought to be PL-4-0 though, throwing a level 9 at a level 5 party is not recommended

>>95982876
Here's Mathfinder's ranking of blasters, bless his autistic soul

>>95983414
It is level 5 and my argument was never casters are unplayable. My argument was caster gameplay is boring and feels awful if you want to do anything other than being the Martial's fluffer up until level 7 which is pretty much most of a campaign.
>>95983422
Anon. All your doing is shining a spotlight on how much extra effort it is to be on the same or lower power level to a man with a sword. Cute Freiren pic though, cant wait for season 2.

>>95983899
You don't read your class page or know how to analyze spells, you don't even know how many spells your class starts with

Of course you're going to have a bad time no-booking as a wizard, this is on you for being a baddie

>>95984078
Why do i need 10 cantrips when i have EA and TP?

>>95984291
Bro you have no Light.

>>95984291
You deserve to be a fighter's slave

>>95984399
Bro......my entire party has darkvision.

>>95984545
No you don't this isn't fivee.

>>95983506
I simply cannot grasp why his autistic soul decided to put imperial sorc second to last, when it has possibly the best focus spell for a caster in the game

>>95984571
This is a blaster ranking.
Being able to affect one (1) enemies save is about as weak an ability as you can get while still calling it beneficial.

>>95984560
>Dwarf (Me)
>Elf Dhampir
>Kobold
>Fetchling (who spams darkness)

>>95984624
Gross you play at a freak table.

>>95984620
you using it on a boss, the only one (1) enemy that matters, you can clear trash mobs without it

>>95984640
>Paizo Thread

>>95984544
you mean he DOESN'T deserve to be a fighter's slave

>>95984694
Yeah no shit retard.
If this was a MAKE YOUR GM RAGE WHEN YOU KILL HIS BBEG in Pathfinder 2e clickbait vid then yeah you'd put le mathy cheaty spell at the top.
It aint.
Kys.

>>95984694
Bosses are unlikely to TPK a party if you have a decent healer(s) and hero points, they just don't have the actions to do so unless they have a crazy spammable AoE

It's the triple elite encounters you have to worry about

>>95984733
This is true, has shitty spells for being a good buffbot

>>95984695
Funnily, human mogs most races mechanically

>>95984763
why are you so assblasted? is that because I doubt opinion of your favorite contentmaker (who is a massive faggot and redditard btw) or because you are that contentmaker, in which case I want you to know that you are a massive faggot and redditard

>>95984803
still it's massively increases chances of ripping out massive chunk out of one of them

>>95984859
Never beating those hyper optimized autismo allegations anytime soon.

>>95984890
I haven't even busted out my loads outs and graphs yet

But I get paid so it's all good

>>95984867
>esl fails the reading comprehension assignment
>then fails the writing assignment
Jfk. Then again I'm glad you guys are usually too embarrassed to attempt to actually play.
Being exposed to boring categorical errors in reality and not just on imageboards would be miserable.

>>95984867
Players over estimate how often they encounter actual boss level creatures, they'll often just struggle with an elite if they get bad luck and think it was a boss

In the course of a week, we had like 3 posts on the subreddit of newbies asking if they can use DEX for Finesse Athletics Maneuvers and every time it makes me beyond pissed at Paizo more than any schizo post about casters here ever could.

Imagine making the game MORE unintuitive and bricking like 3 different weapons. This shit is my "we can't have weapon cords because a dev hurt himself swinging a mouse around" moment.

>>95985108
You don't have to do what they say if its retarded, that's the first thing they had the one instance of foresight to write into the rules.
>inb4 why should I fix this sucking chest wound rule for them
>I'd rather stab myself with a fork each time it comes up than be an unpaid book janny

>>95985108
skill-not-attacks are weird raw, should have had their own trait. Attack trait and Attack Rolls are two different things.

You can house rule that they use either an attack bonus or skill check bonus, whichever is greater. I don't think it would break anything?...

>>95985181
Then they should clarify that it's Strikes.
Skill actions with the attack trait are attack rolls for all other purposes.

>>95985153
Rule 0 is a very important and good rule to remember, but that doesn't mean I can't be mad at the people who are paid to make decisions that make the game worse.
>>95985181
Semi-related, there are just a lot of stuff in 2e that should just have different names. Paralyzed, Unholy, Raise A Shield, "unique familiar ability", Inventor. Sometimes it feels like there's just an ESL-dude on the naming convention team that actively wants to make things confusing and unintuitive for people with reasonable expectations of how mechanics work.

>>95985263
What's confusing about inventor and shields?

>>95985289
Do you mean the class Inventor or the feat Inventor? I don't know which one you are talking about~.

And as for Raise A Shield, one of the oldest "critiques" of the system is people complaining about their super warriors' arms getting tired and lowering their shields every round. It really should be called Guard or Defend, and Shield Block should be called Deflection to make it feel more like you are deflecting a blow and not...doing what you expect the shield to do in the first place.

going into a pf2 game my character has been authorized to take any feats from any ancestry. what are some funny feat combos i could take that otherwise wouldn’t be possible? ancestry paragon is also in play

>>95985302
Ah I see, the class should have been called Tinkerer imo

You're sustaining the raised shield narrative wise, most shield builds get it baked into other action though-- but the fortress and toward shield do in fact weigh as much as a couple of gnomes

>>95985108
There's still so many people mad about DEX being strong in other editions that they're willfully blind to how overpowered STR is compared to it in 2e

>>95985727
How is STR op?

More archetypes should have the Skill Mastery feat than just Rogue and Investigator archetype, and Marshal is one of them. This is my 100% honest belief and I don't care that it would make already good archetypes better.

>>95985937
It should be a skill/general feat.

do you guys like the animal companion my friend drew

>>95978856
it butchers a lot of the customization i enjoyed; oracle's the best example-- choosing your own mystery AND curse allowed for some fantastic flavour combos. now every flame oracle is the same p much

>>95985108
>>95985727
At this point just let finesse work on Athletics maneuvers, and then make it easier for Strength to utilize Bulwark to avoid needing Dex. It'd be a win-win for everyone.

>>95986041
Edward?

>>95985362
Hafling+Catfolk luck feats

>>95985727
I wouldn't call STR overpowered (honestly I would argue WIS is more an issue), but definitely overcentralizing. You definitely feel the lack of options when you dump it more than any other attribute.

>>95986041
As a big fan of 1e Oracle (the class that got me into Pathfinder at all) and a heavy critic of the premaster take on the idea...ehhhhhhhhh, I kinda side with the curbing of the customization. There wasn't much point in using the heavier curses or making narrative sense out of what you were doing. Sure, no point in caring about balance in 1e, you already playing one of the best classes. But there was so many non-interactive or non-interfering curses added, choosing one that hampered you at all was strictly a flavor move as much as running a bad spell list. And personally, it was hard to argue you were any kind of 1e Oracle than just...1e Oracle, least without archetypes.
Remastered 2e Oracle does have a bit of a worst-of-both-worlds issue with still being a bit too generic a caster and lacking the customization in curses and curse effects, but I still think the overall package and strengths outweigh what was lost between the first two ideas. If there was anything that could be changed, I would argue they should have kept the Mystery Benefits from the Premaster Oracle to maintain the flavor and build variety. And that would pretty much fix the last major issue with the chassis as a whole.

>>95986131
I don't get the recent complaints about the difficulty of obtaining Bulwark. Yeah, the level 1 curve from Half-Plate + Armored Skirt to Full-Plate is goofy, but Bulwark is a good, balanced trait. I'm not sure what people are getting hung up about beyond Mighty Bulwark requiring an archetype.

>>95986225
the midget catfolk breeding project is REAAAAL

>>95986144
Naw, it's supposed to be a ground sloth. But i see it kek

>>95986260
>I'm not sure what people are getting hung up about beyond Mighty Bulwark requiring an archetype.
Honestly it's almost entirely that for me, along with a little bit of side eyeing that one vesk feat. Bulwark isn't really hard to get, plate armor is right there in the CRB, but the game has expanded its scope heavily, and Armor in general has been pretty static.

>>95986260
I don't think it's strength but rather melee. I think melee is just generally powerful at low level and can score easy bonuses like flanking since few monsters have reactive strikes

Mid and high level they start meeting the teleporting big guys with reach, reactive strike with improved grab, hard control spells and auras. Melee has to either tank up or become sneaky somehow, investing a lot more in defense than turret mode characters

Ranged characters can easily stealth from cover and hardly draw aggro

>>95985887
>How is STR op?
It gives so much just by focusing solely on it, especially with the one super compressed (and extremely useful) skill it has. If you were planning on being melee, you can just dump DEX and then get back the only benefit of DEX you care about.

On the other hand, when using DEX, not even ranged martials can dump STR without sacrificing consistent damage.

>>95986260
>but Bulwark is a good, balanced trait
3 ability boosts as a trait is not balanced at all

Reminder to bully your bulwark martials with trip and disarm.

>>95985108
I'm thinking of implementing a houserule in my own game that would allow you to make Athletics maneuvers with DEX if the respective trait is on your weapon, which I think would be a decent boost... but I don't think any of my players who want DEX will be investing in manuever stuff. Maybe the rogue but I expect her to be feinting and sneaking before she ever goes in for a trip. Looking back I'm a bit surprised at how few times something like this has even come up while I was a player.

>>95986724
Dex characters action econ is very tight, tend to be ranged/switch hitters/two-weapon and would need very certain weapons. Monk might be the only character to get a lot of use out of it but it would be a bigger buff to enemies

But the difference between a dex and str character is likely just a +1 or +2 at worst; ability modifiers are just way easier to get

>>95981386
I instead chose to leave the thread and let you yourself prove that you argue in bad faith and there's no point in engaging with you honestly. Good job doing all the work to prove my point for me.

>>95986627
>Martial eats enemy actions
Still doing their job. That's what petty GMs will never understand. They Trip me and I go "oh noooooooo" and act devastated when in reality I'm smirking that you spent an entire action and are now -3 just to do something I can get out of as a free action next turn.

So yes please keep "bullying" us.

>>95983136
Works for me, thank you!

>>95987125
What if the GM uses uneven ground?

>>95987235
That's even better because that just means my party has more of a chance to get get into advantageous positions while the GM hyper focuses me because a reddit tier list said Fighters/Barbarians/Champions are OP.

Now it's even harder to get to the backline.

>>95987076
That's what I thought

>>95987280
>while the GM hyper focuses me because a reddit tier list said Fighters/Barbarians/Champions are OP
this is precisely why i play backline characters. go ahead and have fun tussling with the big pile of hit points, i’ll be over here charging an inner radiance torrent for a couple rounds cause i know you aren’t gonna stop me

>>95987534
>Want to prove that you're not just baiting arguments and arguing in bad faith
>"Heh, I know. I'll hit him with a cool 4chan one liner"

Good job proving my point for me again. Might as well just post a Wojak next time.

Perhaps a giga chad meme?

But what you don't understand is acting like a loud, gigantic faggot will only make the 2e playerbase look more obnoxious which means less new blood that will want to interact with it.

Every time you have a meltdown over someone saying casters are bad and the game is poorly balanced, it actually turns off potential new players. Every time you behave like a /v/tard desperate to "win" an argument over actually having a discussion, it just makes the 2e fanbase look that much worse.

I would love to have an actual discussion about 2e and its many issues, unfortunately you've proven over the last 2 or 3 days that you're intellectually incapable of giving such. Not because you're dumb, but because you're immature. And ironically, that immaturity has made you the system's worst enemy, doing far more damage to its image and the image of its community than a thousand WOTC shills.

>>95987766
I know you're beefing with the other anon, but
>system's worst enemy
That's Paizo's job. Watch how they'll butcher Commander and Guardian in a month.

>>95987797
Can't wait for Guardian to still have no actual real purpose or functioning mechanic, and to still have delayed attack proficiencies and weapon specialization even though the armor shit felt like complete ass

>>95987766
I'm not the one having a meltdown lol

>>95987915
>Smug anime girl.jpg
Hey, I tried to warn you. The more of an obnoxious /v/tard you act like, the more you turn people off from the system. If you don't want to take the advice, that's on you and fine by me but that only benefits me in the long run.

>>95987967
You still haven't even told us your issue why you can't git gud

>>95987797
She sounds like a bipolar ex I had, it's funny to watch ngl

>>95988014
>>95988082
>You still haven't even told us your issue why you can't git gud
Saar...

Also "git gud" another /v/tard term. Really not beating the allegations.

But I've already answered that. I'm not interested in bad faith discussions with fragile people who take attacks on the system as personal attacks.

You are right that I am talking to a brick wall though.

So I'll ask something I've been meaning to ask for a long time.

You shit up this general a lot but do you even play the game? I would like to see one(1) character sheet of a character you made. Just one.

In all seriousness, I really hope you don't come here just to shit stir and be annoying because that would be really, really sad.

>>95988093
I'm actually a GM of a 2 year long campaign and play in two others

>>95988093
NTA, but a lot of people on this board mindlessly attack games for shits and giggles, same as everywhere else on this site.
It makes it hard to take criticisms seriously, because they are as likely to be groundless as to have merit. If you said you had an negative opinion based on your tastes, I can easily accept that.
Most present their opinions as unvarnished fact, tho.

>>95988145
Your inability to follow basic instructions is a little concerning but not surprising. I guess all the harping on about other people's intelligence was just projection after all.

I clearly said character sheet and not "ultra cropped screenshot"

But hey! You said you played in two games so that SHOULD be an easy task for you.

Alternatively, post one of your NPCs from the game you GM. That's more or less a character sheet and I'd accept that.

Will she be able to post one(1) single character sheet or will she try and deflect and weasel out of it again? Stay tuned.

>>95988181
Indeed, it's weird how people just like to make random shit up about PF2E

>>95988241
Here you go schizo shebeast

Itfucking amazes me that people complain so much about anime pics in here nowadays. This general used to be anime centraal in the beginning of it´s existence.

Anyway, I´m looking for non-AP tian xia campaigns. Has anone here ever run one?

>>95988279
We need to stat her to nullify the tourist vibes

Is she a Sorceress with a magus dedication? What level would Dragon Slave be?

>>95988278
Awesome! It only took you two attempts to get it right! Proud of you. You sure got huffy at me asking for proof you actually play the game for some reason but you got it... eventually.

Tell me about the character. What does she do? What's her role in the adventure?

>>95988279
>>95988307
Nobody criticized anime. Just the obnoxious behavior of posting smug anime girls which is basically the same as posting a wojak. You're trying to start fake arguments again.

>>95988307
>What level would Dragon Slave be?
Given that Dragon Slave is the (2nd) most powerful black magic spell in existence, 8th or 9th level.
May as well ask what level Ra Tilt would be.
>given that Slayers is based on the Japanese version of 2e AD&D, these questions answer themselves
>better to ask about less powerful spells like Astral Bind

>>95988346
Nazmi is the most trusted advisor of the Ruby Prince Khemet the 3rd, she helps foresee future events especially regarding the stars-- a Rasputin type sphinx. She hates the Katapesh Pactmasters who the party had a deal with and they needed her for a ritual in an ancient pyramid in one of the ruined cities to bring it back to 'life'

You're a bitch so I don't really want to tell you more though, you have negative charisma sadly. Would you like to spend a hero point?

>>95988347
It was based off of Sword World RPG which was written by the same guy who made Records of the Loddos Wars. AD&D2e never made it to Japan if I remember correctly

>>95979301
But what about characters that
1) are good at fighting, wear heavy armor, and use martial weapons
2) don't use magic
3) don't have retard anger problems and spend one action to fly into an unthinking rage at the drop of a hat
4) don't have huge egos and a need for flashy techniques
5) aren't servants of the gods
I don't want to play your fucking imaginary braingame where I can't just play "knightman" or "functional human being with a greatsword." Your idea is shit. Fighter is a sick class.

>>95988457
>The 2e Edition Warrior who killed the general accusing anyone else of having negative CHA
Pot, kettle etc.

>You're a bitch so I don't really want to tell you more though
Yeah I know. Pathfinder 2e sucks and is really boring so I look for excuses to avoid talking about it too. I fully 100% agree with the thing you just said.

That said, it *is* funny to me that asking you to be constructive made you a little sulky and flat out admit you'd prefer to argue and shitfling over actually posting about your setting.

Someone daring to say "the caster experience in Pathfinder 2e is not fun for the average person" makes you see red for some reason. I think you should really examine why that is.

If you have a play group already and you have fun, then why does it matter to you if other people rightfully hate the system? That shouldn't bother you at all and yet it does. It really, really does.

I gotta be honest, the fact that you care THIS MUCH about what other people think of the system, you flat out admit you prefer shitposting and being annoying to actual discussion and how cagey and evasive you're being makes me doubt you actually play games. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

I'm actually glad you mentioned Hero Points since the Hero Point is actually the perfect example of why this system sucks. A Fate Point that gives you a worse result and doesn't behave like advantage is really terrible design at its core and speaks to the many, many larger issues this system has where anything fun is sacrificed on the altar of balance. Someone in another thread was arguing that a resource you only have one of per session acting like advantage would be "broken" which I 1000% disagree with. But unlike you, I won't hurl insults at someone and misrepresent their position just because they have a different opinion than me about a board game.

You should try it sometime.

>>95988457
I had thought Sword World was based on 2e AD&D?
Well, learn something new every day.

>>95988641
The altar of "perceived" balance I should say. The distinction is important.

>>95988614
How do they turn into superheroes like everyone else without magic?

>>95988648
...By being strong and focused on martial prowess? What even is this question?
"Why can level 1 wizards turn into level 20 wizards?"

>>95988641
I just don't want to talk to you because you're crazy and weird lol

>>95988641
>rightfully
>present their opinions as facts
Thank you for proving my earlier point.

>>95988672
The simple fighter starts facing divine beings and beasts of incredible power, but decides to face them head on and not use the aid of magic. He dies. Every time. Whoops!

>>95988687
Hmmm, kill yourself.

>>95988687
In the games where this applies, magic users end up in the same position, outside a spare handful of poorly designed games.

>>95988614
The fighting man is a man of struggle; he fights for someone, something or even just himself. He goes through the Hero's Journey as a unwitting medium of destiny

I do think fighter should have more fortune effects

2e
Can any of you help me figure out what the use of Shove is for a pc? The best case scenario I can think of is either shoving an enemy away from an ally. But the ally could just step and even then that implies said ally will not just run back into danger to keep striking. Or shoving an enemy off a cliff but the biggest issue with that is you lose any loot on said enemy. That might not be a big issue if your GM is giving the party loot outside of encounters but for GM's running APs, enemy loot seems to be the majority of loot given. If you have reach advantage of the enemy, stepping is always better since you get the same benefit but without triggering MAP. If the enemy has the reach advantage, you are just fucking yourself and any party member who was also in reach of the enemy.

>>95988940
The onlyway I really use it is to break grabs. Vampire has my boy in his foul clutches, I shove the wretch away from him so my ally is out of their reach and they're forced to let go.

>>95988940
You don't always want to be in striking range of an opponent, anon; controlling space is an important part of tactics.

>>95988940
Shoving/pushing a melee creatures is very good, it means they often lose an action if they have to get back into range. Using Assurance on a melee mook to shove it into another more dangerous creature's space is big brained move since shoving creatures into the same space as another causes some interesting things to happen...

>If two creatures end up in the same square by accident, the GM determines which one is forced out of the square (or whether one falls prone).

Shove also has a lot of interesting feats with Monk and Mauler. I think shove is very underrated and you can get pretty creative with it depending on the encounter

>>95989000
>>95989004
not him but why wouldn't you just step away
it does the same thing
>>95988971
unfortunately my party has a grappler who has convinced the table that shoving either part of a grappled pair of characters moves both characters so for me it's even more useless
the only thing it's good for is ledging people or otherwise pushing them into hazards, and the crit success effect also knocking them prone
I took brutish shove and everything and had to spend one of our rare downtime weeks retraining that shit

>>95989024
You have to think as a team, Step is very default and selfish-- also way less fun. Let the squishes step away while you shove deeper into the hordes

Shove can cause prone, help allies not trigger reactive strikes, break them out of grapples, push enemies into hazard damage, throw them off cliffs, trigger traps and rearrange the map to make it more ideal for AoE

If you're a tank character, you should want good shove, reposition and trip options imo

Bola shot is so fucking good.

0 penalty ranged trip that still deals damage and can slow for a pittance of a cost. Good in almost every situation. Utterly destroys any encounter in which a GM wants to use a dragon or other fast flying enemy and tries to make use of their speed and verticality.

>>95989132
Yeah it's nuts, a lot of new players don't use consumables, talismans and special ammo enough

>>95989132
genuinely needs size limitations on knocking prone
absolutely mundane bolas knocking a 20-ton engine of destruction dragon out of the air just because "it doesn't say there's any restrictions it's just vs reflex DC" is some video game idiot shit

Got inspired by the streamer's willingness to keep it pushing despite being sick, so I knocked out her sheet way earlier than originally planned.

>>95989880
Nice work. Always looking forward to your next sheet. You think you will do any of the exHololive talents in the future? Only asking since Saba just debuted and made me think of that.

>>95989149
Because the retards at Paizo made runes fundamental to character growth meaning your always saving up for the next potency or striking rune. Add onto that the mega-elixir effect where players will hoard consumables beyond the point of needing them because you never know if a better opportunity comes.

>>95988641
I think casters are ass too but your getting way too upset about this. Just homebrew to taste like me or play a fucking martial lol.
>>95988457
Then again this anon is the cringiest tryhard faggot ive seen on this general in a while. I almost miss Fighterfag lmao!

>>95988641
>Reddit spacing
>Gets huffy when casters are criticized
Give it up, AAAPajeettery!

>>95988809
>Progress all weapons except advanced at the same rate
>New L19 feature: Once per hour roll any check twice and pick highest

>>95990154
That is bitch basic fear and anxiety kicking in, as well as players not remembering shit they have if it isn't immediately relevant.
Want to test it? GIVE players an abundance of consumables that are not heal potions, and they still won't use them.

>>95990547
Im just describing simple human psychology. Paizo's design staff being comprised of anti-social autists completely fumbled the ball all over 2e when it comes to basic game table psychology.
>Here are magic items and you can invest 10 of them!
Most magic items are math fixers with a minor effect latched on which are both a chore to remember and write down as well as being entirely unfulfilling as loot.
>Here are 100s of consumables
Man these are really fucking expensive for 1 time items. I should skip or sell them so i can get permanent items.
>We balanced magic around failure and made spell attack math bad so you don't use those spells.
Watching my spells fail all the time with a minor effect feels very unfulfilling. I better just play fighter so i can succeed and kill things.
>Familiars arent allowed to feed people potion's even if they have hands.
..........

>>95990547
I think that adventure paths suffer from the problem of consumables not getting used because they generally offer dogshit but my players are very good about using consumables - It's just that that only really keep and use some specific ones that they know are good. And are often low level, cheap and evergreen.

Shit like retrieval prisms for getting up from being knocked out seamlessly. Kip up, use the weapon-attuned prism and you're back to being able to fight for 0 actions and -12gp. Cat's eye elixirs (7gp) are strong the whole game, the lowest rank of blood boosters (9gp) retain worth at all levels, potions of emergency escape (3gp) on the entire group are insane for if you really really need everyone to get the fuck out of somewhere. And all the nice and cheap silver bullet scrolls you can get on casters.

>>95988809
Fighter should have more "heroic moment" feats or features in general. It is very strong but incredibly sauceless. The class is screaming for class archetypes to give it more identity but all we have is one really shit one that barely changes anything.

>>95988614
Guardian is coming out soon
I also have a homebrew ranger CA for this purpose, it's basically a watered down fighter. Gets +2 to hit their hunted prey, heavy armour, society and warfare lore instead of nature and survival.

Speaking of consumables, mistform elixirs are probably the single most underrated item in the entire game

>>95991054
They're ok. Way less useful if your casters have revealing light. Which they should.

>>95991118
It's fine, it's mathematically impossible for your rogue to not crit succeed the save.

>>95990176
>Then again this anon is the cringiest tryhard faggot ive seen on this general in a while

Shucks, I do my best

>>95990547
Indeed, most players are horrible with loot and gold. You can give them the most overpowered items and they'll ignore it for a dozen session while it rots in the party stash

Most GMs should use Treasure by Encounter

its insane to me that abp isn't the default rule
also spellcasters should get spell attack bonuses at the same levels as weapons get + runes, and spell dc bonuses at the same levels as striking runes

>>95991281
People like getting loot and progression

ABP gives skill monkeys a huge bump in gold/investments slots and breaks some classes such as alchemist, I do not recommend using it if you have smart ass players
This is why most GMs will use Automatic Rune Progression, but I find as a GM just dropping more loot is more fun

>>95991054
I think retrieval prisms being the most underrated item in the game like >>95990606 You can also attach it to potions, scrolls and whatever you want to avoid hand econ taxes for drawing an item

The belt is real good too

>>95991281
I wonder where this majority of playtesters are who wanted an artificial number treadmill of loot and genuinely got excited for math fixer items.

>>95991479
I don't think trading action taxes for gold taxes is a good basis for a system

>>95991934
Items are the best way to make adjustments to characters, cater to play styles and solve balance issues at the table

But if your GM doesn't like prisms you can make them uncommon/rare

>>95991918
This isn't what play testers wanted. This was Paizo having an incredibly vague questionnaire during the playtest. People wanted magic weapons to have a substantial sway on a character's power. What Paizo got from this was "make items fundamental to character growth while the players have to pay for it" when most likely what people meant was "i magical items to be powerful".

5e unironically does magic items better and when i give them out i just hand people the 5e version that's been converted. (I also know down the investment limit to 3 or 5 with a general feat)

>>95992145
>5e unironically does magic items better
>BG3 completely gutted the default magic item system
>no DM runs default, often porting over 3.pf rules
>worst crafting system/downtime ever written
>magic item stores do not exist
>all players don't even get items from dungeons there is so little loot
>nonsensical prices and rarity
>gold is basically meaningless

Magic items are either character defining god-tier apex math-fixing items that gives you invisibility, triples your speed and flying or a meme that produces mayo; often they're on same roll table

Out of all things, 5E did magic items and crafting the worst of any system

Another thing ruined

>>95992066
Clunkiness feels like a shitty way to balance things. Nor does getting rid of clunkiness feel like an interesting play style to aspire to

>>95991351
you don't GET loot without ABP though, the only purpose of gold without ABP is buying fundamental runes to not fall behind. it's a miserable fucking experience
with ABP you can buy whatever you want. you can send money frivolously, you can be a rich adventurer. you can commission golden statues of yourself, you can spend gold on lavish feasts and buying rounds of beer at every tavern, you can actually fuck around with buying and building structures, you can fund your sister's exhorbitant medical treatments, you can whore and carouse and actually be rewarded for your adventuring outside of Do The Good Deed For Free, Hero :))) shit
aside from that, if you pick up a cool unique weapon, you can just use it. you don't have to fuck around with runes at all. all those Specific Magic Weapons you get are actually useful

if every single fuckin piece of gold you get is going towards keeping up on math you aren't getting loot, you're getting EXP 2, and not even in the XP-for-gold way where you get both because you get filthy rich in those games and can send that money how you want to as well. fundamental runes are just fundamentally shit

>>95992448
Typical ABP enjoyer word salad, painful to read. You obviously are new and don't know downtime, crafting and your GM doesn't use the proper loot tables(or you keep failing quests)

You can upgrade runes and scrap them from enemy weapons

>>95992581
I hope you kill yourself soon

>>95992616
You must imagine suicide fairly often if you think that's insulting, should probably get that checked out for real

But you stated Specific Magic Weapons don't have fundamental runes when they explicitly say they do and think the party won't spend gold on wands of Heroism. You are a newbie and should be more humble

>>95992658
I'm telling you to kill yourself because you can neither read nor communicate a disagreement over a RPG rule without being a condescending faggot. you aren't fit for life. do the world a service and kill yourself

>>95992681
You don't even know the rules and type like deranged child running off with an idea they overheard, someone just acting like a normal adult is automatically superior to you

>>95992709
>You don't even know the rules
NTA but you can't point even one thing from what he said that is not according to rules.

>>95988307
Funny you bring this up, I've statted a bunch of Slayers spells for my 2e campaign already.

Thoughts on this for Dragon Slave in terms of balance and source accuracy?

>>95992238
That list is 100% correct but i was focusing on how the magic items are designed and how you only get 3 of them so they actually feel special.
>Magic items are either character defining god-tier apex math-fixing items that gives you invisibility, triples your speed and flying or a meme that produces mayo; often they're on same roll table
Hyperbole and skill issue. Most items are pretty cool and normal. Maybe you should just be more stringent with the magic items you give and maybe not give the godfucker 9000 to the level 5 fighter.
>Out of all things, 5E did magic items and crafting the worst of any system
Nobody is talking about crafting and i would take the worst excesses of 5e's magic items over 2e's Godfucker 9000 that gives me a +2 item bonus to perception to see god's fucking on a full moon with a once per day ability that lets me tickle a god's balls with a non-scaling DC that i'll have to upgrade after a level or 2 and then im forced to buy the Godfucker 9001 which allows me to stroke the shaft instead.

>>95992815
> aside from that, if you pick up a cool unique weapon, you can just use it. you don't have to fuck around with runes at all. all those Specific Magic Weapons you get are actually useful

See picture

>if every single fuckin piece of gold you get is going towards keeping up on math you aren't getting loot, you're getting EXP 2, and not even in the XP-for-gold way where you get both because you get filthy rich in those games

Striking runes are 65gp and potency runes are 35gp, if you craft it then they're even cheaper and many items can take advantage of Doubling Rings to replicate runes. A party of four should have gotten 3175 gp worth of stuff from 1-6 according to the Treasure by Level table

Obviously him or the GM isn't doing loot correctly or he is trying to buy runes way ahead of the curve. I recommend loot by encounter table, since most GMs do not do exp RAW or have a hard time keeping track of how much they've handed out

>>95992948
>if you craft it then they're even cheaper
Unless the rules were changed recently, crafting something works out to the same time investment as Earning Income so it's not actually cheaper

>>95992948
NTA but the Striking runes are at level 4 so im not quite sure why you added 2 more levels other than to be a sneaky boy and make his argument seem more ridiculous than it actually is.

So if we look at this when you SHOULD get the runes thats 1425 with runes. Divide that up and thats 365 gold plus change over 4 levels. Then theres the case of actually playing the game which nobody on this board seems to where you have to pay for services, vehicles, mounts, etc. That doesnt leave much for any major magical items not that it really matters because most magic items in the early game are ass anyway.

>>95992935
I DM'd 5e for nearly half a decade, most items are either garbage, mathfixer or broken. Little inbetween.
Thanks to 'magic items are optional, but expected' wish-washy of the rules, giving any magic items out can easily break the balance of encounters and cause drama over favoritism
I just want to be able to make a loot horde where everyone gets something instead of the same five meta items but not have to worry about stacking half a dozen different types of bonuses like in 3.pf, I believe pf2e strikes a good balance

If you'd like, I could provide a list of cool magic items since it sounds like you're lost in the sauce

>>95992999
You can gather components i.e other runes you've looted to contribute to the total cost, what qualifies is up to the GM
There are also variant rules for crafting in TV that are very nice, such as Deconstruct

https://2e.aonprd.com/Actions.aspx?ID=1904

>>95993073
You can sell stuff and scrap. The treasure by level is an expected minimum, if you give out more loot GM Core tells you to set up gold sinks such as homes and guildhalls

>>95992935
5e also has a million 3rd party supplements with cool items whereas pf2e's balance just doesn't allow anything usable

>>95993073
>That doesnt leave much for any major magical items not that it really matters because most magic items in the early game are ass anyway.
Yeah, that gets to me quite a bit whenever this stuff comes up. It's weird to argue runes take up too much budget while also saying there's nothing to buy in the early game. Beyond wands and scrolls, what exactly are people buying that is so fundamental that they hate runes eating up "so much" of their budget?
Even on a principal standard, that you shouldn't be forced to buy your own character progression (despite it being a staple of the d20 fantasy space and sort of the point of magic items to begin with), I still struggle to see a reality where the average player BURNS through the extra gold. There isn't even a dedicated moneysink built into the rules like 5e's new Bastion system (crossing my fingers something like it is in Battlecry!), so I would probably argue that money just doesn't exist. I totally get not like mathfixers or PF2e's Red Queen Race approach to character progression, but I do think most people overrate how much the economy hurts the game experience. Even in a world with more must-take magic items that need to be crafted and spent gold on, I just don't see the economy not adapting to such or the players treating that as Gold-As-Progression.

...Striking Runes do feel weird though and sort of tie into the HP bloat (perception) issues.

>>95993135
>Thanks to 'magic items are optional, but expected' wish-washy of the rules, giving any magic items out can easily break the balance of encounters and cause drama over favoritism
That is sort of expected when you hear the idea of "magic items". 2e's general "once per day you can do a funny trick" ethos will never sink well compared to "fairly cheap armor that completely denies critical hits as a mechanci" as an effect. It is hard to argue against the idea magic items should be potent in a high fantasy setting, so people don't care if they are broken.

>>95993225
NTA but it's kind of simple
>players want fun items
>extremely slim pickings because most of it is bad
>item design revolves around math fixers
>economy revolves around math fixers and consumables
>blame runes for shitting up the whole parts of the system

>>95993150
There are no rules on making magic items in 5E, so all 3PP is eye balled and vibed
There is very little design space and attunement slots are hyper competitive. Since you only have 3 attunements they are competing with Boots of Speed, Cloak of Protection, an ability booster or a magic weapon

So, the only design space you have really is wondrous items

>>95993225
>"fairly cheap armor that completely denies critical hits as a mechanci"
Tanks in 5E get replaced by spells, so that cool armor really doesn't matter much lol

Being crit immune in PF2E would be entirely broken but there is the Fortification rune exists.
On the topic of tanks-- I enjoy shields a lot, shields are more than +2 ac duck taped to your character they are a weapon and something you maintain. Shields that explode when they break, small bucklers for swashbucklers, big fortress shields that provide cover to allies or being able to throw them like captain america with augments and spikes

>>95993225
>buy your own character progression (despite it being a staple of the d20 fantasy space and sort of the point of magic items to begin with
people don't want to buy power they want to find power and buy pleasure
and buying +1s isn't a "staple"

>>95993391
Just play a class that isn't very item dependent and do more side quests for gold instead of blaming the game like a crybaby. Blame your GM if anyone

>>95993325
That's why you put the cool 5e items in PF2e

>>95993225
>here isn't even a dedicated moneysink built into the rules like 5e's new Bastion system

There are a lot of downtime activities that can be expensive such as retraining, learning spells and investments.
There are subsystems in the GM Core too that will eat up large amounts of gold if the GM decides. Leadership, research and influence are big ones I use

>I do think most people overrate how much the economy hurts the game experience

It's a mix of new ex-5E GMs not following loot rules(since 5e didn't have any) and players wanting to play item dependent classes since they're the most approachable. Old school GMs are very used to handing out loads of loot

>>95993514
I would love to read some of the conversions, especially BG3 ones. Most the fun magic items in 5E never see the light of day

>>95993554
>BG3
Ew. What a blight.

>>95993315
Players do have a habit of focusing on the details and ignoring the big picture, even I fell for that talk for a good while. But I even I find it a bit of a puzzle to think on stuff that I would want to have. It would usually be a mathfixer to begin with, if not an item one stage higher than my current progression...

>>95993391
>people don't want to buy power they want to find power and buy pleasure
The solution to that just sounds to be give them out as treasure and ban the sale of such. Maybe it should be pointed out in the GM Core, but this seems to be an incredibly easy thing to fix.
>and buying +1s isn't a "staple"
+1 weapons I can see the case for, but +1 magic items and gear? Yeah, I usually see this stuff as fun stuff to buy.

>>95993315
>item design revolves around math fixers

Armor Potency and Resilient runes are the only required ones by all classes to stay on curve that I would call mathfixers. Others are class and build dependent
If you baked in free Striking runes and removed weapon potency weapon users would still make the curve, melee would have a harder time with PL+4s like AC blasters do though

>>95993914
Skill bonus items are only required for skill based builds and classes, as skill prof bonus is ahead of the curve of saves/DCs but the critical failure of many skill-attacks is really bad

>>95993914
>But I even I find it a bit of a puzzle to think on stuff that I would want to have. It would usually be a mathfixer to begin with, if not an item one stage higher than my current progression...

Fun & weird items are always the first to get vendored at most tables in any TTRPG, often to hide it from the goblin players, because they're viewed as disruptive that takes away from whatever is going on or just can't be integrated very well; never finding the right time to use it
I've homebrewed many fun items you can do wizard engineering with, but the moment they start to talk or act a bit cursed, it's vendor trash-- breaks my heart

Interesting items that interact with each other and the classes mechanically while not being too loud, always remain the most popular. Ones that might derail a campaign are disliked by veteran players

>>95990057
I really wanted to do stuff for ex-Holo talents when they started dropping out, but a lot of them (and by that I mean basically all of them) seem to have completely dropped any sort of semblance of an epic fantasy feel in their lore compared to their old "lives". Like, don't get me wrong, Dooby's whole introduction to why she's on an eternally moving train was fleshed out and cute, but it gives me very little for what I could do for a character what fights good. Nimi's would likely be the most straightforward, as there just straight up is already a Tapir as a real creature and Paizo thankfully didn't drop the ball and gave it pretty on-brand abilities.
Saba, though? We've only just seen her and more than all of them it's basically completely just "a girl living on the beach with animalistic features", which gives me VERY little to work with.
I dunno, maybe these girls got overwhelmed at the prospect of trying to appear "bigger and better" than how they were portrayed in their old line of work, so they didn't even try and went in the complete opposite direction instead? It's hard to say.
What I WILL say, however, is that now that I'm almost done with 3AM and South Side related content (I've only got one streamer left that I planned on doing), I was actually planning on doing the rest of HoloEn. I already have plans for basically all of Advent, and Justice I feel will be similarly pretty easy since it basically already feels like an adventuring party, though ironically I feel like the hardest one to figure out will be Liz. She gives me "Magus" vibes but I really hope there's some kind of character archetype or option out there that will help me give a mechanical justification for the flame she has eternally burning on her bosom. Oh well, that's a problem for future me.

>>95993998
Okay, but that's still a huge chunk of the gear. Especially when weapon runes are required even for unarmed martials and even Kineticists need their math fixer items.
Another reason I said it revolves around them is that when you look at unique armor and weapons, it's easy to see how much of their power budget goes into granting you those same, expected number increases.

>>95994342
I know what you're trying to get at but ABP/ARP is not worth it in progression campaigns unless you really want to save the fighter and the skill monkey a few dollars for some reason-- who are already strong enough as is.

It breaks a lot of little things:
>makes many spells worthless such as Mystic Armor
>Mutagen alchemist gets flushed down the toilet
>Investment slots get freed up for some classes while others still have to run the same game plan
>ABP also needs to be applied to monsters, else PCs will nearly always win initiative for example since it gives skill bonuses
>It also makes disarm entirely worthless for both players and monsters.

ABP/ARP, not worth it, GM should just drop more loot

>>95994624
None of that stuff worked well to begin with.
>I know what you're trying to get at
What I'm getting at is that a system shouldn't be made around mandatory +1/+2/+3 items to spare yourself from designing actually interesting items. Ironically, it makes the work harder because the design space for it becomes super narrow.

>>95994757
Actually, Paizo is perfect and never wrong, you're an idiot.

I think there are plenty of good magic items in the system, but too many are locked behind uncommon and rare tags or adventure paths. Then you have shit like Retrieval Belt which should cost like 50 gp because it helps alleviate a lot of people's issues with consumables (they cost your whole turn to use between pulling them out and using them). Or even better, just make it a game mechanic that you can interact to pull out an item once per round.

>>95994813
That would be an undue buff to Alchemist, which is a very strong class already. Unnecessary and born of unfamiliarity with the game.

>>95994757
>item bonus bad

What about mandatory ability modifiers? Why stop at item bonuses and just say modifiers bad?

>>95994789
Paizo deserves to be shat for adding the horrible variant rule of ABP

>>95994840
>Alchemist
>Strong
What bizarro works am I in, what have you done with /pgg/?

Anyway if the point of ABP/ARP is to remove needing to buy the mandatory item bonuses, why in the absolute fuck would you make them stack with other item bonuses in ways that don't match the "normal" game? That was always a boneheaded thing that didn't feel intentional and like they just added a new bonus type that was intended to be "also an item bonus but not called one" for no real reason.

I don't use ABP because it makes my players happy when they kill someone and take their +2 weapon right after they hit level 9.

>>95994813
Retrieval Belt doesn't even help the action economy unless you have so many consumables that you can't just wear them.

>>95995000
The action is to put things into the belt, it's a free action to retrieve from it. So it definitely does help the action economy, one action to draw and drink a potion when it usually would be two. Assuming you have a free hand, if not then it's probably not something you should bother with,

>>95995020
Oops I read that wrong. Sorry about being an idiot.

>>95988641
Shut up Darko. You're a furfag.

>>95994858
>What about mandatory ability modifiers?
Those are bad actually. How is it interesting to max KAS + boost DEX, WIS and CON on every character because the math expects you to?

>>95995150
>when you recognize one of your unhinged players in /tg/

>>95994813
>Retrieval Belt
>helps alleviate a lot of people's issues with x
>sounds just like Shadow Signet
Why bother designing good items when you can just design an annoying system and then print items that make it less annoying?

>>95995160
You can get away with not doing that, especially for STR Heavy Armor users. But yeah, between that and the stats not being balanced to even make you think about maxing other stuff for reasons other than flavor. Your class already decides what your saving throws are, you may as well just completely decouple it.

>>95995160
>>95995473
>Str: Can be dumped if you hate weapons and armor
>Dex: you can dump dex for str but not both, balance checks and reflex saves are commonplace
>Con: If you're long ranged you can get away with lower hp
>Wis: you never dump, critically failing wisdom saves is brutal and going last in initiative can be spell disaster
>Int: only one person really needs it in the party, but you do really need an int character
>Cha: if you don't care social encounters, stealth, demoralize, influence and hate money

All in all, never dump wis is the only rule

>>95995891
Low wis isn't that disatrous if you're going to be avoiding notice to get stealth as initiative. And if you generally get decent proficiency in it. Rogues are pretty good at ignoring wisdom.

Not enough casters fuck with avoid notice by the way. You get great initiative on something like a bard/sorc/wizard/witch compared to what you'd be getting from perception if you just invest in stealth. You're probably already going as hard on dex as you can for AC anyway.

>>95995979
Wis saves mostly, very common AoE save that can hit even the backline and hard control spells. Fears are super common for enemies to have and can get nutty at mid-high levels

Stealth is really good for casters, I think Charisma casters have the easiest time with stealth since they can use Create a Diversion reliably to then sneak away

>>95995979
Sounds like a neat mechanic that's for some reason limited to only one attribute and skill

>>95996296
>limited to only one attribute and skill
simply have a reasonable GM
I dumped the hell outta wisdom AND dex and I roll perception for initiative like 20% of the time at most

>>95996296
The only one you have any RAW agency over outside of initial class selection, anyway.

But I don't know, I think people don't try to get better initiative with their skills often enough either. When I was playing a sorcerer, every time I came across sentient folks that were probably hostile I'd give them some form of "Please can we talk this out like adults" and I'd always ask if I could hit diplomacy for initiative; my GM always said yes and I'd always say yes to a player asking there even if the enemies were going to attack regardless and you could easily do something similar with intimidation/deception/performance. On my current character if I suspect an encounter on the other side of a door, I try to specify that I'm kicking that shit down/open so I can try to claim athletic initiative.

But I'll concede that this is all "GM, may I?" stuff. It's a flaw of the system but you can still try to use it to your advantage and I think most GMs are inclined to say yes to things as long as they make some sort of sense.

Honest dogshit opinion: pathfinder kobolds look like d&d kobolds smacked with a frying pan until flatfaced

>>95996354
I really like them, I think making the kobolds and goblins bigheaded freaks deterred a lot of the degenerates that usually want to play them and opens them up to people that just want to be weird little guys.

>>95996370
>>95996354
They did the same thing with Goblins too

>>95996354
>>95996370
With remaster Kobolds taking on different properties based on the energies absorbed by their eggs, I'm giving them a bit more variety. As much as I like coomer goblins, I'm fine with the bigheads since it gives them some unique flavor compared to other settings. I just wish hobs didn't get saddled with it too, they didn't have them in 1e. I think it makes them look goofy when they should be a bit more intimidating than normal gobs.

Fucked up that we still don't have playable bugbears. They're making nonsense like conrasu up instead of giving us the ambush predators we all want. They even reprinted bugbears in monster core so it's not like they got snapped away with the OGL.

>>95996296
You can use any skill for initiative technically if the GM allows, but the default is perception

Social, stealth and perception are the big ones. Sometimes knowledge for research/debates, athletics/acrobatics for chases and survival for hexcrawls

I asked my players for performance for a gladiatorial match once

>>95996436
Yeah, the point being made here with stealth is that it's literally also codified in the rules. If your exploration activity is avoid notice, you get to use stealth for initiative, no questions asked. You don't have to be the guy saying "please may I use arobatics, I was performing a backflip as I walked into the room".

I agree with using any skills where appropriate and being kind of lenient in how you rule what's appropriate but stealth+avoid notice is always effective and it's the best way to gain agency over your own initiative if your proficiency there doesn't scale like a rogue. It's actually a meaningful decision on rogue if they want to avoid notice for surprise attack or leverage their good perception for searching instead. The searching gets even more important if you have a psychotic GM that actually enforces the RAW minimum proficiencies for skills, shit like saying you literally cannot detect a trap if you're a cleric with +5 wis, you need master perception to even make the attempt.

>>95996490
I want my bloodrager gladiator to use performance if I formally challenge an enemy to a cage match

>>95996419
Here you go, it has the bugbears also a Foundry
module

https://scribe.pf2.tools/v/2qF7WjsY-pathfinders-guide-to-eberron

>>95992917
Beyond based

Make it a two-round charge up so you can make it even beefier at rank 10, it needs to blow up a village at least

You can make a joke 'this can only be cast at the end of an session or story arch'

I think cleric domains might just be the most unbalanced shit in the game. There are so many of them, there's no way to keep all this on the same level. So you have some like draconic/fire that are just fine with both spells; so many that are almost useless across the board and then you have stuff like might/pain where both spells are extremely strong and you should fit your character to a god that has them instead making someone around their faith first.

And there area a lot of very legitimate domains like indulgence where the initial spell is sick but the advanced one is worth very little. They're fine but why wouldn't you design the advanced spell to be good too unless you're just making trap options.

Cleric is so fucked up, it has a realtively high skill ceiling but also a pretty high skill floor, a heal font can just carry you to being useful but if all you're relying on is being a 3 slot divine caster with a font, you're going to be stable but rarely shine.

>>95996809
This shit was a problem in 1e too, some gods just blow to be a cleric of because their domains are complete garbage, and I don't think paizo has ever had the faintest interest in trying to actually fix that

>>95996809
Every spellcaster should start with a general battle oriented focus spell to spam. The problem with domains is exactly what you pointed out. They are random as fuck and the power levels are a fucking mess.

New AP supposed to release today, anyone knows what time the pdfs are usually live?

I have to make a new character for a pf1 campaign since my old one died but I can't decide, I built five of them already.
Current party is god wizard, support oracle, melee 2h fighter and sneaky inquisitor.
Someone wants to choose for me?

What are the best PF1E books that are good for PF2E?

>>95998970
you've got everything so double up on melee martials and be your fighter's brother-in-arms
or be a pussy and build a ranged character I guess

>>95999058
Mostly the GM-focused ones, I steal ideas and tables from them for 2e pretty often

>https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo71kxl

>We expect Pathfinder and Starfinder products to remain unavailable through book trade channels for several months as Paizo determines our next steps and this matter works its way through the bankruptcy court.

>As many of you know, Diamond Comic Distributors declared bankruptcy on January 14th.

What da fuq have they been doing for the months since January?!

>>96001862
What happened was that the books produced was already in Diamond's warehouse. Paizo just had to wait and see if Diamond Distributors were going to give back their books. They didn't see them just liquidating ALL their assets on the cheap and leaving the book stores and FLGS high and dry.

Unrelated note, looked at the Battlecry! page to see any updates and...
>You'll also find archetypes that allow you to raise a small battalion of undead soldiers
Has that always been there? Feel like that kind of makes Necromancer a little too redundant.

>>96001965
Those aren't their assets though. They're Paizo's.

>>96002155
From what I read, that's the debate here. DD says that because no one is disputing their contracts and their weird creditor deal, the books are their assets. Because they declared bankruptcy, all the books they bought "on credit" have no debts associated, so they effectively "bought" them. So they can just sell them to pay for bankruptcy dues. Everyone has up to July 21st to dispute the decision.

>Diamond claims that 128 companies, including major names like Marvel, DC, and several toy companies, lost their rights to their inventory because they did not file a U.C.C.-1 financing statement before the bankruptcy. According to Diamond’s filing, “None of the vendors that provided consigned inventory to any of the Debtors filed a U.C.C.-1 financing statement against any of the Debtors prior to the Petition Date.” A U.C.C.-1 is a legal form that gives notice that a creditor has an interest in a debtor’s property.
https://bleedingfool.com/comics/consignment-or-confiscation-diamonds-bankruptcy-leaves-publishers-guessing/

>>96002182
>yeah we failed as a business but you didn't BET on us failing as a business so we get all your shit
I really don't care that this is hitting Major Brands and that they don't need to be defended (including paizo), I fucking hate the legal system we've agreed upon

>>96001965
>You'll also find archetypes that allow you to raise a small battalion of undead soldiers
I really hope it's good, but even a few decent feats would be nice. I've been playing a "necromancer" with the Reanimator archetype and Summon Undead for a while and don't really want to change to Necromancer since I'm already playing a high level occult caster in another campaign.

>>95978319 (OP)
Is harm cleric good? I plan to take the reanimator archetype as a free dedication

>>96003971
yes cast down is very good

2e. What are the best ancestries non-human for a Thief Rogue?

>>95992314
I don't get it.

I love the d20pfsrd, but where can I find art for the creatures in their bestiary?

like the ashmaw ooze for example.

>>96005303
Goblin. They have a feat that lets you end Sneaks in open view.

>>96005303
Tanuki for unlimited espionage options.
Also SOVL

I'm playing a Tripkee. You think its worth grabbing Bon Mot if I already have Terrifying Croak?

Besides Saloc for guisarme, what's the best god for Avenger? Actually, is Avenger worth it? 2e

>>96008341
Depends on your campaign and party comp. If you are mostly going to be fighting monsters that can't speak, skip it. If you don't have an ally that also wants to target will saves, skip it unless you are a caster.

>>96005303
Lots of small races have feats to help with stealth. Elf is always good, Tengu gives easy access to the dueling sword. Catfolk and kitsune has some nice stuff.
>>96008341
One is for diplo and the other intimidate, and both give a status penalty. Bon mot potentially gives a larger but narrower penalty. If you're already investing in diplo then it isn't too big a cost to grab it, otherwise skip.
>>96008503
Uvuko gets you a maul.

>>96008503
I think urgathoa or some harvest empyreal lord for haft striker+twin takedown scythe is an interesting play but if you don't want to be fucking around with hunt prey and its action cost then you can just pick a god with a shortsword/rapier/starknife or something that's good for any rogue and not have to worry about hunting. Or there's just going d12 weapons and trying to wreck shit with gang up+opportune backstab, shoutout to ragathiel there as I think the bastard sword is one of the best weapons in the game, you can slip into any athletics maneuver you want for a free action to take a hand off and you're still wielding a d8 weapon.

I don't think avenger is great, all the feats around the doomed mechanic are awkward and competing with rogue feats that are actually good and it doesn't get some of the good feats all the other rackets like ways to alter your debilitations but it's good at hitting hard when you have all your ducks in a row, prey hunted and off guard.

>>96008503
Avenger is probably the worst Class Archetype released in War of Immortals. It just doesn't really do much compared to normal (Ruffian) Rogue or Ranger and its own gimmicks are so slow and unsupportive.

>>96008859
that's a bold claim given the other class archetypes printed in WoI are also pretty shit (Vindicator especially), but I'll give it to you entirely because I forgot Battle Harbinger and Palatine Detective were a different book until I double checked.

>>96009291
I have a soft spot for Vindicator, I think it a fine subclass with bad-to-decent options. You can at least see the objective with it and the stuff does mesh together eventually. Bloodrager is kinda iffy and not really what I want out of it, but it is also fine, especially once Hematocritical kicks in. Seneschal is just good, if a little empty. And Warrior of Legend is pretty ehhhh, arguably as bad as Vindicator were it not being stuck on Fighter.

Avenger, I really got nothing. Being able to Sneak Attack with d12 weapons does sound cool, but it really isn't that big an improvement, especially with having to Hunt Prey anyway. It is just really confused and doesn't do much better than Ruffian does.

But hey, at least it isn't actually dysfunctional as Battle Harbinger is... That shit is the only class archetype that actually makes your class WORSE. Even Elementalist isn't that fucked up...

>>96009354
I fundamentally disagree on Vindicator ever hitting a coherent or acceptable state, but not strongly enough to argue about it.

Build advice question for Pf2e: I'm making a level 1 elf Witch. He'll be a ancient elf for lore reasons, and I'm stuck on the free dedication that it gets. Which is the best class dedication to pair with witch? My other partymembers are a bard, a fighter and a cleric. The campaign may go on until level 9 or so.

>>96009792
Can't go wrong with inventor for int classes

>>96009816
Thanks for the advice. Which innovation would you suggest? Is there anything worth grabbing at high levels for a witch?

>>96009885
Go for the armor, it's the least intrusive; other options are asking for actions towards things you won't be good at

>>96009792
Ignore the other anon. Inventor is atrocious and you're being trolled.
Good archetypes for spellcasters are either another spellcaster that uses the same stat (to get more slots) or rogue (for mobility and master reflex).

>>96008503
Avenger doesn't do a lot. Sneak attacking with a d10 reach or d12 weapon is about it, and every other part of the archetype tries to disincentivise that, so it's a bit schizophrenic. If you really want to bring down ragathiel's divine justice on a bitch with a bastard sword sneak attack then it's pretty cool, but otherwise it doesn't really do anything that a normal rogue can't do better. Even in terms of overall damage it's not any better than a normal rogue since they'll want to be hitting as often as possible with agile weapons - A rapier and shortsword double slice will instantly clear any advantage that your higher die size is giving you.
It's still good in a vacuum, because it's a rogue, and rogues are insane. But compared to the basic chassis it's pretty much just a massive flavour tax for no real gain.

>>96009792
>3 spellcaster party
First time playing pf2?

>>96010059
NTA but he really isn't. Armor Inventor is an easy way to get +6 Medium Armor easily. It can be pretty helpful for a variety of classes (and the only reasonable justification that the +3 INT requirement isn't a misprint). The main problem is the MEDIUM ARMOR bit, Witch's don't even get Light Armor. So it isn't that good a grab for them...

For my picks, I say go Blessed One, Pistol Phenom, Spell Trickster, Beastmaster/Cavalier, Fan Dancer, or Scout, all depending on your stat and skill distribution.

>>96010098
Normally I'd also be pretty critical and suggest SOMEONE pick another frontliner like Champion, but given that Warpriest can be a frontliner and Bard can do whatever the fuck they want as long as Courageous Anthem is up, I don't think this team comp is that bad, if bad at all.

>>96010059
oh, thank. given that logic, rogue seems appealing.
>>96010098
2nd time, but the gm is a pushover. Is our comp that bad?
>>96010111
I wish, but ancient elf heritage only lets you take class dedications with its benefit.

>>96010151
>I wish, but ancient elf heritage only lets you take class dedications with its benefit.
Riiight, forgot that. Thought you were figuring out Free Archetypes.
Yeah, go with Rogue, Psychic, Animist, or Alchemist MC.

>2nd time, but the gm is a pushover. Is our comp that bad?
Like I said >>96010133, normally 3 spellcasters is way too difficult for a newbie party to accomplish much with. Damage just becomes too inconsistent, no one can hold the line, and someone will be redundant between supporting the anchor, debuffing the enemies, and crowd control. But Bard and Cleric are just ridiculous classes that can carry parties a lot, so you really shouldn't have too much issue, as long as someone understands the game.

>>96010151
>the gm is a pushover
Ah, you'll be fine then, no worries. Spellcasters get bodied if they have to fight higher level opponents and turn into pathetic cheerleaders, but if the gm cares more about the group actually having fun than following encounter guidelines then you might even actually enjoy playing a spellcaster.

>>96010174
I appreciate the guidance, anon. Sounds like our cleric is going Warpriest, but the others haven't decided yet. Thanks for your help
>>96010179
damn, I hope I get to enjoy it then! thanks for your advice

Pathfinder 2e.

I remember seeing a playtest feat called “switch places”, what happened to that, did they kill it? I don't see it anymore

Pathfinder 1e question for spheres of might:
>Anyone standing in the square of impact or adjacent squares must attempt Will saves.
which is a 3x3 square
>You can increase the Craft DC for this weapon in increments of 10; each time you do so, the radius increases by 5 feet.


Which is the correct size increase?
1 or 2?

>>96011069
the radius is not increasing by 5' in figure 1 because a radius is from an edge to the center
it's 2 because it's a square of impact and not an intersection on the grid

>>96011233
Thank you.

most of spheres is pretty straight forward but I wasn't sure about this one.

>>96009354
>I have a soft spot for Vindicator
As do consider the inquisitor is one my go to classes in PF1e

Anyone got some Pathfinder Infinite recommendations?

>>96011695
https://www.pathfinderinfinite.com/product/398373/Callybon-Tenpennys-Fantastical-Flatularium

>my Int and Wis have been recently swapped due to fuckery
>tfw my Will save is now +1 because I was a moron before
oops

Why would I use a Buckler over just a normal shield?

>>96012742
You can't use the buckler hand to hold a dagger but somehow you can use it to hold a whole dragon

>>96012755
I'm not sure which is sillier, this or the fact that using a proper sized shield is so overwhelmingly encumbering that you can't sweep the leg anymore and NEED to buy a 4 silver shield augment in order to bowl somebody over and that doing so completely foregoes your ability to punch with your shield
or that using a two-handed weapon also prevents you from just having an entire body you could use to knock someone over with
in a far better version of pf2e there is no handedness requirement for any maneuvers

>>96012985
The worst part is that because the game stopped even remotely claiming to be simulationist, any kind of argument that appeals to logic can just be waved away with "yeah but that's not balanced so it's not allowed".

>>96012985
>so completely foregoes your ability to punch with your shield

Shield augment damage is 1d4, the boss and spikes increases the damage

>>96009885
Armor and companion are both top shelf choices, you can also get Brilliant Crafter, learn gadget schematics and Reverse Engineer.

I guess it depends how much you value crafting

>>96010059
Someone plays in a Monty haul or lampoon campaign

>>96010111
> Because of the unique features of your innovation, everyone except you is untrained in it, even if they would normally be trained (or better) in medium armor.

Pathbuilder and most GMs have ruled that you gain proficiency with that one armor because of that one line. It's just the dedication itself doesn't give armor.

>>96011455
I actually don't appreciate 1e Inquisitor, it always was a rather confused design and flavor. I like Vindicator trying to compress everything into something sane and readable, I just wish the parts connected better and Vindicator's Mark wasn't so ass.

>>96012755
You can hold and use a dagger with a buckler in the same hand, you just can't use the buckler. If you really need AC and weapon prowess, just grab a Parry dagger. Bucklers are good if you don't want to juggle between a shield and an item in your off-hand.

>>96012985
>or that using a two-handed weapon also prevents you from just having an entire body you could use to knock someone over with
I was gonna make a bit asking why did they removed Bull Rush...but ontop of no one using Bull Rush, it really was just Shove.
Berate me for falling on the sword of balance, but I don't really need freer combat maneuvers, especially given the options for using them with 2 handers already exist.

>>96013023
If you don't like a rule you can just house rule it, balance and what is allowed is ultimately up to the GM
Special Considerations is the most important section in the GM Core and cures RAW autism

>>96013545
When it comes to free-hand bucklers, I typically allow using of a small weapon like dagger or hatchet Agile weapons since balance wise they could simply augment the buckler to do the same thing. I think the fear is 2h+buckler balance

My players don't use shields nearly enough, so I'm fairly generous with shield rulings

>>96013545
Making Shove without bothering to also make it decent was the sin.

>>95981027
Excellent summation.
>/thread

>>96013551
Hiding behind bad rules because there's another rule that says "hey guys don't forget you can ignore everything we tell you if you feel like it!" doesn't change the fact that the devs designed the game a certain way in the first place.

for me it's
>shove pushes a target 5' plus 5' for every 5 you beat the DC by and per size larger you are than the target (and vice versa)
>crit also prones
>if a shoved creature must stop due to contacting a surface, it takes 1d4 damage per 5' it didn't move because of the contact. damage increases by 1d4 for every rank of athletics training you have. appropriate surfaces add appropriate damage (e.g. spikes add 3 damage per die)
and
>standardized 2-action double MAP metastrikes for the following maneuvers: shove, trip, disarm, hook. a critical strike with the initial strike adds a degree of success to the followup maneuver (but there are no Improved Knockdown auto-successes)
and since I'm here
>the axe sweep trait is replaced because it's shit, instead axes double the damage dealt to shields (but not shield wielders) during Shield Block reactions, and have the Hook maneuver trait
>Hook maneuver (attack trait) allows you to make an Athletics check vs their Fortitude or Reflex (defender's choice) DC to negate the benefits of Raise a Shield or Parry. On a great success the target is flatfooted until the start of their next turn

>>96013679
>"hey guys don't forget you can ignore everything we tell you if you feel like it!"

You're so new it hurts. That's every TTRPG my little man, most run on RAI and RAR. It's impressive that you can even run PF2E RAW and only need to make tweaks for table playstyles

>>96013545
>I like Vindicator trying to compress everything into something sane and readable
I won't fight that 1e Inquisitor is confused even if I like the way it shakes out, especially since after playing it a bunch it feels like it suffers some of the worst "gimme time to set up, I promise I'm good just lemme spin up I scale so good later in the fight-" problems a 1e class can face.

But I'm always baffled by defenses of Vindicator because I cannot give it any kind of props, basically everything you reasonably want out of a 2e Inquisitor was already doable by just being a ranger or rogue with cleric archetype anyway.

The spell focus of the Vindicator Edge feels less like a coherent identity and more like a begrudging attempt to make a dedicated support for caster players via Warden's Boon/Shared Prey. Its dedication sucks, its unique focus spells range from "bad" to "good (if it actually lands)", its reaction was insane but got (rightfully) nerfed.

>>96013836
Don't be disingenuous anon, I've been playing TTRPGs for over a decade with plenty of houserules for the games I play in and run, but none of that matters regarding my actual point that if the devs have made the game X way that sucks as a baseline, that's an inexorable mark against the game no matter how true it is that infinite players could just ignore it.

That's like saying that if you invented Rock, Paper, Scissors, but then included a secret Dynamite option that automatically wins if you show it first, but the rest of the game is totally functional so long as you just both agree to not use it is a retarded argument because the person who invented the game shouldn't have included something like that to begin with!

>>96013866
>I've been playing TTRPGs for over a decade

That makes what you said much worse then. Now If you want to remove the handiness needed for certain actions you can.

>Improvised Weapons
>The GM determines the amount and type of damage the attack deals, if any, as well as any weapon traits that the improvised weapon should have.

Just give a –2 item penalty if you try to without the right weapon trait or free hand since it would qualify as an improvised attack with whatever maneuver trait. This is not even a houserule.

>>96013836
>That's every TTRPG
So why are you spouting the same faulty argument that's been refuted for every TTRPG ever?

>>96013850
Vindicator is more cleric+investigator

The ranged interrupt, favored weapon, and focus spells are good for combat. Lots of good exploring and RP tools, but Vindicator really strong in certain campaigns/deities.
Silver Flame Vindicator+Eldritch Archer in Eberron goes hard

>>96013974
Your GM has buck broken you, thank god you'll never be a GM lol

>>96014057
>can't answer the question
You have the kind of dumbass stance that's plain to see to everyone above kindergarten level. Thinking about it for more than 5 seconds makes it completely fall apart so I don't know why you cling to it

>>96013773
ok borat

At this point I just keep a running list of stuff that bugs me about different rules elements and what I would want to change, and just discuss that shit with my play group and see what they or the GM would want to implement. Shit like "Monastic Weapon is built into Monk and allows d8 non-monk weapons", "Magus can enter cascade as a free action", "Mutagens can always be dismissed as an interact action", "Dirty Trick Loses the attack and manipulate traits", etc.

I wish I didn't need to keep a list that's so fucking long, but it's the same shit as what I did with 1e so whatever. Not everything gets group agreement, but it's easier to have the list than not, and the reddit tier rule purists can get bent about it.

>>96014088
It's obvious you don't even know what RAI, RAR and RAW even means. My stance is to read the GM Core instead of being a confused tryhard winging it

>>96014296
>GM Core
actually that's a big downgrade from the GMG

>>96013850
>But I'm always baffled by defenses of Vindicator because I cannot give it any kind of props, basically everything you reasonably want out of a 2e Inquisitor was already doable by just being a ranger or rogue with cleric archetype anyway.
I can actually agree with this. I think it does just sort of coasts on it being mostly Ranger, but can somewhat leverage spells better. However, I don't think this is necessarily bad, or even goes against the core idea of Class Archetypes. I always felt the 1e archetype system was mainly about making these rather complex build plots simpler and more focused to do. That's why despite it not doing much standout beyond cribbing some Thaumaturge and Investigator feats for itself, I respect Vindicator and think it comes together in its own right. Combine with how it doesn't lose much and having access to the wide array of Domain spells to patch up specific problems (though not every one, and there's much to be said about Domain Spells in their own right), it is a reasonable subclass pick for Ranger, if it doesn't really stand out as a "class option" as people would expect Class Archetypes to be. I compare it unfavorably to Avenger because of how the additional stipulation of needing to Hunt Prey actively goes against Rogue's schtick. You doubled the action tax compared to other non-Thief subclasses, what the fuck? And unlike Vindicator's Mark, you can't just ignore it and focus on the good parts because they don't much for being a Rogue or an Avenger.

All the WoI archetypes really could be much better. And there really is quite a lot of weirdness that Paizo keeps indulging in with the CA system as a whole, compared to how it was in 1e. Hell, I'm actually very confused why only Bloodrager out of the gish options gets real spell slots. But I don't think Vindicator deserves as much ire. I think it is just fine as is.

>>96015022
At the end of it I just think it's kind of bad and not worth playing unless you're specifically building a level 8+ team comp specifically around buffing your spellcaster friend's attempt to do single target spells, which comes online too fucking late for me to think that's a good playstyle. If your class's only standout shit isn't real until level 8+, I just don't think it's well designed. The fact you can even say Vindicator's Mark is ignorable just feels like a harsh indictment of the thing, that spell shouldn't be two actions and a focus point-it should do no up-front damage, be a single action, and be a focus CANTRIP if anything.

I'm not going to bat for Avenger, fuck that thing. The slayer iconic deserved better.

>>96015022
(cont.)
If I were to sit down and think about all the ways it could be better as a CA, I actually wouldn't scratch that much. Like...
>Give it Cleric MC spellcasting
>Vindicator's Mark can be used without Hunt Prey and does so when casted, regardless of success.
>You don't need to be in a city or church to statswap Religion for the CHA skills
>Print more than 2 Vindicator spells
>Reduce the Level requirements for most feats by like 2
>Some kind of Heavy Armor feat like Warpriest's Armor?

I struggle to really improve on it that wouldn't just be redoing the entire class or overstuffing it again.

>>96015076
>unless you're specifically building a level 8+ team comp specifically around buffing your spellcaster friend's attempt to do single target spells
Note that the hit rate buffs are only for (You), your allies don't benefit from such. You don't get a direct buffing feature until 12 with Call the Hunt. Most of your supportive prowess comes from Recall Knowledge and torturing non-believers, just like normal Rangers (replacing heretics with litterers). Much like Precision Ranger, it is more about damage ramp up, just in a bit more esoteric as a function.

>The fact you can even say Vindicator's Mark is ignorable just feels like a harsh indictment of the thing, that spell shouldn't be two actions and a focus point-it should do no up-front damage, be a single action, and be a focus CANTRIP if anything.
Yeah, kind of. I have no idea why they thought this thing is worth the ink its printed on. I just also know that not every feature has to be good and not every Level 1 option is meant to be indicative of the entire class. I don't think anyone was bemoaning Tyrant/Obedience Champs back when they were stuck with just Touch of Corruption as their focus spell, or find it to the cherry on top of the shit sundae of the other Evil Champ options.

>>96015149
>Note that the hit rate buffs are only for (You)
The feat to share it is level 8, hence citing level 8. Warden's Boon and Share Prey aren't banned from Vindicator, you're a ranger, just share that shit with the spellcaster. Call the Hunt is just a bad version of Rogue's Gang Up.

>Recall Knowledge
You're not going to be much better at that then a standard Ranger taking the Monster Hunter line, unless Instructive Strike and Thorough Research are magically such vast improvements to recalling at your tables they make a big difference

>Not every feature has to be good
I don't like them wasting page space on shit that sucks and that I'm not actually supposed to pay attention to. Call me crazy for not liking useless filler I guess.

>>96015220
>The feat to share it is level 8, hence citing level 8. Warden's Boon and Share Prey aren't banned from Vindicator, you're a ranger, just share that shit with the spellcaster.
You know what, I genuinely didn't know those feats existed. Think it because Precision and Flurry Edges aren't really that good to share and Outwit is...Outwit. Vindication has some neat if niche appliances with that, which I think is fun.
Your other points are more than valid. Like I said, I'm a softie when it comes to Vindicator and I think being a fine option bogged down by questionable design is pretty average when it comes to Paizo's production standards. Maybe that's just low expectations speaking more than optimism, but I also acknowledge that this couldn't have been an easy project to make with how schizo Inquisitor was, so I give it more leeway than it really should.

All said, WoI is a really messy book when it comes to down to it. The CAs all needed an extra page and proper playtesting. I don't know why they think CAs don't need it when they all suffer from just awful production. The original Spellshot, OG Runelord, Flexible Spellcasting, Elementalist, Palatine Detective, FUCKING BATTLE HARBINGER. If these are supposed to be analogous to class options, then they should have the same stress testing they give real classes.

>>96015149
>>96015383
Most of your listed changes to it would pretty heavily tone down my spite towards it, though I still feel Vindicator's Mark needs more alterations. I'd even accept "you only spend a focus point if you actually mark a target", because that would let it stay as a class-specific ranged spell attack to make use of its damn primary edge benefit.

I'm also just not willing to be anything but critical of the way character options are designed, partly because I'm spiteful about how little any of my problems from 1e actually felt fixed. There's still arbitrary feat taxes and obtuse bullshit all over, it's just different now, and now I have to deal with classes that feel like I'm only allowed 1/3rd what they should be capable of, because everything had to be chopped up between more class feats than they deserve, just to pad out space.

>>96014120
Any chance you could share your list? I'm fixing up a document myself and not having to make the same mistakes you had or read through the rulesbooks for the nth time would be a help.

Thoughts for a class to take into Seven Dooms? I've played Fighter and Swash before. Considering Rogue. Other players are Cleric, Champion and not sure on the other one.

DM's, have you ever had your monsters beat on a PC after they were downed? I know it might feel like a dick move to go for the kill even while the other players are still active threats, but I feel like it's an opportunity that a wretched monster would absolutely take. Perhaps a boss might even take a downed PC hostage to demand surrender.

>>96019582
Depends, has the party shown the ability for utilizing restorative measures like healing magic? If so, what's to stop a player from going over and healing the downed PC so they can rejoin the fight? If your creature has seen this capability and has a sense of self preservation, ensuring the PC stays down is just the smart thing to do.

Now, on the other hand, if using those actions would compromise their own safety (so like, for instance, the creature downed an easy to down PC who wasn't that big of a threat while the Fighter with 3 different buffs is able to crit them on a 15 is approaching them menacingly), then it would probably be a more efficient use of their time to ensure the actual threat is being handled.

>>96019582
depends on the monster
mindless hunger? zombies and oozes just tear whoever they knock down apart, no question
average monster or human? they'll probably just go to neutralize another target
bosses or masterminds? yeah they'll absolutely start a hostage situation
it's not "mean" or a "dick move," it's playing the world as it would be, which is what your job is as a DM
if the monster is intelligent and a dick, it's merely acting in its nature. you aren't the one killing PCs, it's the monsters

>>96019688
>what's to stop a player from going over and healing the downed PC so they can rejoin the fight?
The enemy can just attack that healer instead