New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 7 of 51 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415161732 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 210 of 1501
  1. - Top - End - #181
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2011

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    New blog has some info on alchemy.

  2. - Top - End - #182
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    upho's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    I'm not seeing how that contradicts anything I said though.
    It wasn't intended to. Sorry, I should've been more clear. It was just intended to provide a little insight into how the devs think about this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    "Big guns combat stuff" are the encounters where you're most likely to, you know, die - so the dearth of higher-level slots is still an important balancing factor, because you'll need to devote a relatively greater percentage of your most powerful spells to not dying, with fewer left over for miscellaneous purposes. Using our more numerous lower level slots primarily for utility is exactly what I want.
    And what I'm saying is that if the number of slots remain about the same as in P1, how does what you're saying meaningfully differ from how it works in P1?

    Again, if a low level spell saves your butt in higher level combat, it's rarely going to be a combat spell and often a utility spell. And again, if such utility spells are also meaningfully gated, I think what you're saying here should work just fine and have the effect we're wishing for. Otherwise, not so much.

    Guess that puts us squarely back into the same old pit of "don't have enough details" yet again...

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    In addition to that, P2 gives us the new paradigm where lower level spells can't trump higher-level ones - i.e. detect magic can't spot major image or detect greater invisibility, say, or protection from evil can't beat dominate monster anymore etc. So even if you're packing your lower level slots with utility, you'll still want to devote some higher level ones to that role too, increasing the paucity of those slots further and making the casters choose very carefully which encounters they try to end with a single spell (if they even still can) and which ones they'll have to let the mundanes shine in.
    This I agree will indeed most likely actually have some impact on the C/MD issue. It may not be great, but at least it's something. And of course, how big of an impact it will have is also largely dependent on how magic items are treated in this regard. If not handled correctly, these mechanics may end up nerfing martials more than casters.

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    Well for starters let's be clear - my own goal/hope isn't to make C/MD go away, not entirely. Even 5e didn't do that, and by all observable evidence it's doing fine.
    I agree. Or rather, I think I would be the happiest if the category of tools primarily used by a class didn't make for a clear divider in terms of mechanical power, whatever that category of tools may be (spells, combat maneuvers, skills, etc). It makes for a less dynamic game overall. Otherwise I'm not just fine with classes having some varying levels of power potential, I endorse it. Perhaps most notably because it makes it easier for a group of players to balance PCs despite varying levels of system mastery, experience and different game expectations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    So with that, I'm not saying reducing consumables will solve balance by any means - but I do think it has the potential to improve it. Because when you can't carry a library's worth of scrolls around, or leave half your slots empty at the beginning of the day just in case something comes up, mundane solutions to problems (be they a trio of bugbears or a locked door leading to the mansion cellar) become a lot more appealing, I'd say.
    Well, if what you believe will turn out to be true, then yes, Resonance has the potential to be a balancing factor. Unfortunately, I also suspect you would make this particular sub-system significantly more balanced than the Paizo devs have, as I don't believe this balance is particularly high on their priority list (which isn't strange, considering the average level of play and the average level of system mastery most players seemingly have).

  3. - Top - End - #183
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Zanos's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    In addition to that, P2 gives us the new paradigm where lower level spells can't trump higher-level ones - i.e. detect magic can't spot major image or detect greater invisibility, say, or protection from evil can't beat dominate monster anymore etc. So even if you're packing your lower level slots with utility, you'll still want to devote some higher level ones to that role too, increasing the paucity of those slots further and making the casters choose very carefully which encounters they try to end with a single spell (if they even still can) and which ones they'll have to let the mundanes shine in.
    This sounds awful. Lower level spells transitioning from offensive power to good utility over the levels is an example of good game design, not bad.
    If any idiot ever tells you that life would be meaningless without death, Hyperion recommends killing them!

  4. - Top - End - #184
    Banned
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    This sounds awful. Lower level spells transitioning from offensive power to good utility over the levels is an example of good game design, not bad.
    This is true. Also, the implied paradigm of an ever-escalating battle between defensive and offensive spells without any functional difference other than level sounds terrible. The fact that the biggest differences between high and low level martial characters are quantitative rather than qualitative is something to be fixed, not emulated.

    Overall, this solution is simply worse than scaling by caster level and giving some people totally arbitrary bonuses to certain kinds of spells. Like the Illusionist gets +6 to their CL for the purposes of winning out against true seeing or whatever.

  5. - Top - End - #185
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    This sounds awful. Lower level spells transitioning from offensive power to good utility over the levels is an example of good game design, not bad.
    They're still utility mate. Just not unimpeachable anymore. So that detect magic can still be used to spot somebody who is polymorphed for instance, or to identify a magic item or an active spell - but auto-spotting illusions and magic traps are out now, you'll probably want a rogue for that if you want to save your higher level spells. (Oh those poor dirty mundanes, expecting to be valuable and all, how dare they.)

    Quote Originally Posted by upho View Post
    And what I'm saying is that if the number of slots remain about the same as in P1, how does what you're saying meaningfully differ from how it works in P1?
    That's my point though, I don't think they will. Starfinder has fewer bonus spells than P1, and 5e doesn't have any at all. That's the paradigm now. Casters need to conserve their nukes, which means mundanes doing more stuff. And the sky has yet to fall.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  6. - Top - End - #186
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Zanos's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    They're still utility mate. Just not unimpeachable anymore. So that detect magic can still be used to spot somebody who is polymorphed for instance, or to identify a magic item or an active spell - but auto-spotting illusions and magic traps are out now, you'll probably want a rogue for that if you want to save your higher level spells. (Oh those poor dirty mundanes, expecting to be valuable and all, how dare they.)
    Expect Detect Magic was never unimpeachable, since it takes three rounds of focus, can't penetrate all that much material that traps are usually behind, and can't actually do anything about the trap other than tell you that there is magic there.

    Yay for solving problems that don't exist? But if it did, the wizard could just heighten the spell and invalidate the rogue anyway.
    Last edited by Zanos; 2018-04-20 at 08:27 PM.
    If any idiot ever tells you that life would be meaningless without death, Hyperion recommends killing them!

  7. - Top - End - #187
    Banned
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    (Oh those poor dirty mundanes, expecting to be valuable and all, how dare they.)
    You mean expect that no one will ever get abilities that negate their first level ability to have skills?

    That's not "expecting to be valuable", that's "holding everyone else's character progression hostage because you refuse to advance farther than John McClane".

    Mundanes should be valuable at high levels because they get, new, interesting, valuable abilities. Like how the Cleric gets raise dead or the Wizard gets teleport. Not because no one gets to have abilities that negate 1st level challenges.

  8. - Top - End - #188
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    Expect Detect Magic was never unimpeachable, since it takes three rounds of focus
    You can usually spare 18 seconds if there are traps around.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    can't penetrate all that much material that traps are usually behind
    Most magic traps have to be uncovered, so that would be pretty dumb.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    and can't actually do anything about the trap other than tell you that there is magic there.
    And that's when your summoned celestial monkey triggers it for you.

    Anything else?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    But if it did, the wizard could just heighten the spell and invalidate the rogue anyway.
    And use up their valuable higher level slots in the process. Thanks for restating my point?
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  9. - Top - End - #189
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    Expect Detect Magic was never unimpeachable
    As written, 3E/PF's Detect Magic will immediately reveal any and all illusions (including invisibility) and polymorphed creatures, in the round it is cast, because all of those have an aura that the spell can pick up. That is problematic.

    To be fair, many DMs will in fact rule that the second-level Invisibility spell trumps the zeroth-level Detect Magic, but the rules don't actually say so. That is precisely what P2 is changing here.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  10. - Top - End - #190
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Zanos's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    It will only reveal that there's magic(yes/no) in the area of concentration on the first round.
    If any idiot ever tells you that life would be meaningless without death, Hyperion recommends killing them!

  11. - Top - End - #191
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    It will only reveal that there's magic(yes/no) in the area of concentration on the first round.
    Yes, and that information is already enough in the hands of a clever player. Aim your cone at a wall; if there's magic there, you probably need to search that. Aim your cone at a single creature; if it's magical, then it's probably suspicious. Aim your cone at empty space, and you know roughly where the invisible creature is. It's clearly not 100% foolproof, but it's still way too easy to foil a second- or third-level spell with a mere cantrip.

    If your GM rules that it doesn't work that way: congrats, he's doing the same thing as P2 now. It's rather silly to suggest it's great when your GM does it but not great when the new rulebook says so
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  12. - Top - End - #192
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Zanos's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    You can't aim the cone at a specific space only, so all that tells you is that there's something in a 45 degree 60 foot long cone, which is a lot of tactical squares. It won't even tell you it's illusion until round 3 either.

    "Detect Magic doesn't work on invisibility at all because it's higher level" and "detect magic takes three rounds to pinpoint an invisible creature that's constantly moving so it's of limited use in that scenario" are pretty different.
    Last edited by Zanos; 2018-04-21 at 08:39 AM.
    If any idiot ever tells you that life would be meaningless without death, Hyperion recommends killing them!

  13. - Top - End - #193
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    "Detect Magic doesn't work on invisibility at all because it's higher level" and "detect magic takes three rounds to pinpoint an invisible creature that's constantly moving so it's of limited use in that scenario" are pretty different.
    You seem to be assuming combat here, when I clearly said utility. You know the problem with "constantly moving?" It increases your chances of making noise, not the best strategy for a sneak or a spy. The best advantage to Invisibility is that they don't even realize something is there to look more closely in the first place, and footsteps are kind of antithetical to that. Sure you can try to move silently, but if you were that good at it you probably wouldn't need glamers as a crutch in the first place.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  14. - Top - End - #194
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    upho's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    That's my point though, I don't think they will. Starfinder has fewer bonus spells than P1, and 5e doesn't have any at all. That's the paradigm now. Casters need to conserve their nukes, which means mundanes doing more stuff. And the sky has yet to fall.
    I hope you're right. Especially since what Mark said on the topic didn't exactly sound reassuring to me, to put it mildly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cosi View Post
    You mean expect that no one will ever get abilities that negate their first level ability to have skills?

    That's not "expecting to be valuable", that's "holding everyone else's character progression hostage because you refuse to advance farther than John McClane".

    Mundanes should be valuable at high levels because they get, new, interesting, valuable abilities. Like how the Cleric gets raise dead or the Wizard gets teleport. Not because no one gets to have abilities that negate 1st level challenges.
    While I fully agree with you, I think you may have misunderstood what Psyren said. I don't really see how you managed to read that as "no one will ever get abilities that negate their first level ability to have skills", and neither do I see how the few P2 reveals indicate that this will be the case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    Expect Detect Magic was never unimpeachable, since it takes three rounds of focus, can't penetrate all that much material that traps are usually behind, and can't actually do anything about the trap other than tell you that there is magic there.

    Yay for solving problems that don't exist?
    It rarely exists from a PC caster's perspective perhaps, but I can assure you that it's a very real problem from the perspective of the sneaky martial PC scouting the evil wizards' tower. The resident casters certainly have enough reason to raise the alarm if they detect the existence of magic in an area where there shouldn't be any. And then the intruding PC is likely to get tagged by more powerful and focused detection magic within seconds. Or to put it in other words, the Lurker In Darkness feat solves a very real issue in a game where these things are played according to RAW.

    That said, I absolutely agree that using CL as the sole deciding factor for determining which spell trumps which would be very bad design. But we don't know nearly enough to say whether that is actually the case in P2. And speaking of, I think there's a much bigger issue with the general rule in P1 basically being:

    "Magic can affect both the mundane and the magic, while the mundane can only affect the mundane."

    If I had to choose, I'd definitely vastly prefer if P2 radically changed this rather than fiddling about with the finer points of P1's spell interaction mechanics.

  15. - Top - End - #195
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Zanos's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by upho View Post
    That said, I absolutely agree that using CL as the sole deciding factor for determining which spell trumps which would be very bad design. But we don't know nearly enough to say whether that is actually the case in P2. And speaking of, I think there's a much bigger issue with the general rule in P1 basically being:

    "Magic can affect both the mundane and the magic, while the mundane can only affect the mundane."

    If I had to choose, I'd definitely vastly prefer if P2 radically changed this rather than fiddling about with the finer points of P1's spell interaction mechanics.
    Yeah, I'd prefer martials had more options to interact with magic than "take this feat and spell don't work at all no more". Lurker in the Darkness is a necessary feat, but is also itself bad design.

    I will point out that the detect magic problem specifically is one PF introduced by giving casters unlimited cantrips.
    If any idiot ever tells you that life would be meaningless without death, Hyperion recommends killing them!

  16. - Top - End - #196
    Banned
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by upho View Post
    While I fully agree with you, I think you may have misunderstood what Psyren said. I don't really see how you managed to read that as "no one will ever get abilities that negate their first level ability to have skills", and neither do I see how the few P2 reveals indicate that this will be the case.
    I read it that way because Psyren seems to be suggesting that the solution to the disparity between casters and mundanes should be solved not by giving mundanes new abilities, but by making caster's abilities (specifically, the ones that allow them to obsolete mundane skill checks) no longer work. That is the exact opposite of the correct solution.

  17. - Top - End - #197
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Morty's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Poland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    The alchemy looks pretty good, their odd insistence that it's not in magic notwithstanding. That said, there's still some awkwardness at the point where alchemy is a Craft specialty that alchemists just happen to do better.

    I also do hope that an alchemist's round by round combat contribution isn't just bomb-throwing. Like, can I play someone who prepares poisons and then applies them with ranged weapons?

    Finally, they really have to show us some of the abilities afforded by weapon and skill proficiencies now. In some detail, not just vague promises.
    My FFRP characters. Avatar by Ashen Lilies. Sigatars by Ashen Lilies, Gullara and Purple Eagle.
    Interested in the Nexus FFRP setting? See our Discord server.

  18. - Top - End - #198
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    I will point out that the detect magic problem specifically is one PF introduced by giving casters unlimited cantrips.
    Nah, at-will Detect Magic (and arbitrarily high numbers of same) is easy to get in 3.5 too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morty View Post
    I also do hope that an alchemist's round by round combat contribution isn't just bomb-throwing. Like, can I play someone who prepares poisons and then applies them with ranged weapons?
    There will likely be archetypes focused on this even if the base version isn't quite as good at it.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  19. - Top - End - #199
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by upho View Post
    using CL as the sole deciding factor for determining which spell trumps which
    Spell level, not caster level.

    the general rule in P1 basically being:

    "Magic can affect both the mundane and the magic, while the mundane can only affect the mundane."
    P1 does allow fighters to deflect spells with their swords, and barbarians to negate magic by hitting it really hard. No really, those abilities both exist in P1 and are pretty straightforward to obtain. I would expect them to include similar options in P2.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  20. - Top - End - #200
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Zanos's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    Nah, at-will Detect Magic (and arbitrarily high numbers of same) is easy to get in 3.5 too.
    It doesn't get much easier than getting it at level 1 on every casting class in the game for free.

    I know you can permanency detect magic/arcane sight in 3.5, but I don't think it's possible to get it at the levels where this is frequently a concern.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    P1 does allow fighters to deflect spells with their swords, and barbarians to negate magic by hitting it really hard. No really, those abilities both exist in P1 and are pretty straightforward to obtain. I would expect them to include similar options in P2.
    I'd like more maneuverish stuff. I know it''s spells by just another name, but still.
    If any idiot ever tells you that life would be meaningless without death, Hyperion recommends killing them!

  21. - Top - End - #201
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    Spell level, not caster level.
    Indeed, and this is important, because SL does not automatically scale.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    It doesn't get much easier than getting it at le
    2vel 1 on every casting class in the game for free.

    I know you can permanency detect magic/arcane sight in 3.5, but I don't think it's possible to get it at the levels where this is frequently a concern.
    The fact is that at-will cantrips aren't actually the problem. Whether detect is limited or not, the real issue is that a type of magic that is designed to conceal things (illusions) or to be concealed itself (traps) being that easy to notice is utter nonsense in-universe. Designing illusions and traps to not work that way is logically the first thing they would do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    I'd like more maneuverish stuff. I know it''s spells by just another name, but still.
    I'm not against that, but you're vastly underestimating how controversial ToB was (and is, outside of these boards.) Even 5e has left it alone and they invented it.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  22. - Top - End - #202
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    so presumably 4d6+int is supposed to be "a lot" right?


    Quote Originally Posted by Cosi View Post
    The Epic Destinies are mostly all right, though there are some I think should probably be shifted down (but nothing as stupid as having "fights in a pit" as a Paragon Path).
    "It sounds cools so it must be good" is shaky at best, especially in light of PRCs or Grandmaster of Flowers compared to plain old Wizard.

    Gladiator would perhaps be more known for bloodsport, but it's just as generic and there's more connotation of showmanship. I guess I thought after 10 years "what it do" would have become as important as "'Horseman? I am ze Chevalier!"

  23. - Top - End - #203
    Banned
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by darkdragoon View Post
    "It sounds cools so it must be good" is shaky at best, especially in light of PRCs or Grandmaster of Flowers compared to plain old Wizard.
    It needs to sound cool because its entire job is to justify you getting powers that are sufficiently anime to compete when the enemies include mountain-sized giants made of ice. The reason we are requiring Fighters to become Thunder Champions or Dread Lancers at 11th level is because "Fighter" is no longer a viable concept. That is why concepts like "Fighter in a pit" or "Fighter who fights to entertain people" don't work.

  24. - Top - End - #204
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Wizards r dum, only Chad Spellslingers can beat Rock Lee?


    Thor, slayer of all manner of trolls and giants was a god with a super special hammer, special gloves to use that hammer, a belt of strength, and of course most important a chariot with goats.

    Aragorn is a Ranger with Dunedain Heritage (long lifespan, run for days without tiring etc.) and True King/Heir ("hands of a healer", persuade Oathbreakers etc.) Maybe even Raised by Pointy-Ears. those certain factor into his kit but I don't know that they demand a class path.

    Heracles was a demigod, while his more famous counterpart Hercules got promoted to god of strength because the Romans copied Dragon Ball Super.

    Beowulf is as unnatural as Grendel, yet is on God's good side.

    Guts on the other hand, gets a gunarm replacement and a seemingly cursed dwarven armor to go with his big sword.

    Kenshiro is the rightful heir to Your Head Asplode Fu, but otherwise is just that darn good.
    Last edited by darkdragoon; 2018-04-21 at 08:41 PM.

  25. - Top - End - #205
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    upho's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    Spell level, not caster level.
    But that was precisely what I... Ooops!

    My bad. Seems even when I'm thinking SL, I'm writing CL out of habit or something...

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    Indeed, and this is important, because SL does not automatically scale.
    Hmm... Actually, considering a hypothetical CL version, I think my main grievance would remain largely the same. Sure, a CL version would no doubt be worse, but the SL one is bad enough IMO, and largely for the same basic reason.

    But regardless, I'm not really worried this particular issue will be an annoyance in P2 as I'm fairly confident there'll be quite a few other determining factors besides SL, including for example effect types, magic schools/sub-schools and even specific spells.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    P1 does allow fighters to deflect spells with their swords, and barbarians to negate magic by hitting it really hard. No really, those abilities both exist in P1 and are pretty straightforward to obtain. I would expect them to include similar options in P2.
    Oh, I absolutely agree the benefits of spell sunder and Smash From the Air are great examples of what the game desperately needs. Not so much their prerequisites and relative inaccessibility though. And actually, I believe what you're saying here simply confirms how true "the M/M rule" I posted is in P1; despite there being more than a thousand options available to martial PCs, it's very hard to think of even just a handful which actually goes against said rule in any noticeable way, while I'd estimate easily 99.9% of options don't.

    Also, I'd say "Barbarian 6, witch hunter rage power" (plus the superstition rage power, I might add) and "Str 13, Cut from the Air, Power Attack, base attack bonus +9, weapon training class feature with a melee weapon" are both far from being "pretty straightforward to obtain". And the IMO quite contrived nature of these options also confirms how difficult it appears to be to break away from the M/M rule and realize it simply makes for bad design. To me, it's as if the devs were really nervous the very concept of options like these would be too controversial, regardless of the actual mechanical power of their benefits. And as if they felt they had to justify the existence of these options by adding numerous more or less arbitrary limitations to ensure they remain niche exceptions to the sacred M/M rule.

    If spell sunder had been released as a feat with, say, Greater Sunder and Power Attack as prereqs, had it been OP? And if Smash From the Air had it's overly long list of prereqs cut to maybe simply "Str 13 or Dex 13, Cut from the Air, base attack bonus +7, Weapon Focus with a melee weapon", would that have ruined the balance in P1, making more melee inclined classes all-powerful and full casters weak?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    I'd like more maneuverish stuff. I know it''s spells by just another name, but still.
    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    I'm not against that, but you're vastly underestimating how controversial ToB was (and is, outside of these boards.) Even 5e has left it alone and they invented it.
    I have the same wish as you, Zanos, but judging by what I've read on for example the Paizo forums, I'm afraid I believe Psyren is right about anything resembling ToB stuff still being highly controversial for some reason, even though PoW seems to have made quite a bit of progress in shifting people's attitudes. We're most likely simply gonna have to wait for DSP to pick up the slack also this time around.

  26. - Top - End - #206
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Knaight's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2008

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    This sounds awful. Lower level spells transitioning from offensive power to good utility over the levels is an example of good game design, not bad.
    So is having a solid way to handle immovable object vs. unstoppable force quandries, which is where these sorts of things are likely to crop up (notice the examples being explicit illusion magic against Dispel Magic). It's similar to the Numenera rules for cypher interactions, where if they explicitly contradict each other in effect the more powerful one dictates the effect.
    I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums.

    I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that.
    -- ChubbyRain

    Current Design Project: Legacy, a game of masters and apprentices for two players and a GM.

  27. - Top - End - #207
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by upho View Post
    I have the same wish as you, Zanos, but judging by what I've read on for example the Paizo forums, I'm afraid I believe Psyren is right about anything resembling ToB stuff still being highly controversial for some reason, even though PoW seems to have made quite a bit of progress in shifting people's attitudes. We're most likely simply gonna have to wait for DSP to pick up the slack also this time around.
    I mean, has it? Made progress, I mean. Even being freely available this time via the PFSRD, I would wager the percentage of the playerbase that actually read it (much less used it) is fairly small compared to the whole.

    Quote Originally Posted by upho View Post
    Hmm... Actually, considering a hypothetical CL version, I think my main grievance would remain largely the same. Sure, a CL version would no doubt be worse, but the SL one is bad enough IMO, and largely for the same basic reason.
    I'm genuinely confused about what grievance that is. Casters having to manage scarcity and thus rely on mundanes more? A world that is more logically consistent, where magic designed to be hidden has a chance to stay that way?
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  28. - Top - End - #208
    Banned
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Knaight View Post
    So is having a solid way to handle immovable object vs. unstoppable force quandries, which is where these sorts of things are likely to crop up (notice the examples being explicit illusion magic against Dispel Magic). It's similar to the Numenera rules for cypher interactions, where if they explicitly contradict each other in effect the more powerful one dictates the effect.
    Why is caster level insufficient for this? It also gives you an elegant way of representing a character with really strong illusion/detection/fire magic -- give them a CL bonus for the purpose of determining whether their magic wins out or not.

  29. - Top - End - #209
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Zanos's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Didn't really think ToB/PoW was controversial. When I was running a PF persistent world most of the homebrew requests were people begging for Path of War.

    Quote Originally Posted by Knaight View Post
    So is having a solid way to handle immovable object vs. unstoppable force quandries, which is where these sorts of things are likely to crop up (notice the examples being explicit illusion magic against Dispel Magic). It's similar to the Numenera rules for cypher interactions, where if they explicitly contradict each other in effect the more powerful one dictates the effect.
    It's not really a qunadry. Dispel magic is for getting rid of spells, that is it's only purpose. I've never had an issue with dispel magic being able to dispel spells above 3 without heightening.
    If any idiot ever tells you that life would be meaningless without death, Hyperion recommends killing them!

  30. - Top - End - #210
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Pathfinder 2 Blog: Critical Success and Failure

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    Didn't really think ToB/PoW was controversial. When I was running a PF persistent world most of the homebrew requests were people begging for Path of War.
    Personal Incredulity Fallacy aside, WotC themselves attempted to address concerns that ToB was seen by some as "too anime." That's a pretty odd epithet for them to write about their own book out of the blue, unless they'd actually been on the receiving end of such comments, and in numbers sufficient enough to provoke an official response no less.

    Now, with that said I'm not trying to impugn ToB and PoW's mission at all, and if P2 ended up with a laundry list of maneuvers-as-martial-spells" (in core or later on) I wouldn't have a problem with it. But I do have major doubts that will be the case all the same.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zanos View Post
    It's not really a qunadry. Dispel magic is for getting rid of spells, that is it's only purpose. I've never had an issue with dispel magic being able to dispel spells above 3 without heightening.
    Consider though that if a 3rd-level Dispel has a chance of suppressing (or even eliminating) any magic spell effect, item or trap regardless of how late in the game you encounter them - is it any wonder that strategies like Disable and Sunder get relegated to the backseat? In P1, there is precious little else that is worth putting in those slots as a result, since almost nothing will scale as well/remain useful as long. If however you were forced to use a 7+ slot at those levels to dispel instead, you'd be much more conscientious about when you'd do so, and much more likely to resort to that only when mundane solutions are impractical or fail.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •