Pathfinder Is Still Bad

[FatR]

They say they're monsters "easier to run", but from the examples this sure doesn't seem to be the case. Sure, the ogre, being a simple beatstick, is easy. But the redcap is very complicated for a level 5 monster.

Also, holy HP inflation! The last time I posted into my own hearbreaker thread, I complained about my inability to prevent HP snowballing with levels. But my own version of ogre, and, IIRC, the 3.0 version as well, have less than half HPs at the same CR. If a fucking ogre boasts 60 HPs, a tarrasque is likely to have a four-digit number.

[Wiseman]

Seems like bad wording on Seifter's part. It's pretty clear that what he meant is that "Bolstered" is a keyword that replaces the couple sentences of boilerplate text they used on a bunch of monster and class abilities you only have to save against once before getting conditional immunity for a period of time. It's still kinda stupid, but circlejerking about "24 hours for the next 10 minutes" is lame too.

The annoying thing is that "Bolstered" is already a condition (at least in D&D, I think PF changed it), where an evil cleric can use their rebuking ability (from a holy symbol) to make undead resistant to turning (from another holy symbol). So more unnecessary confusion.

[rasmuswagner]

I wonder if they at least take the time to consider how stuff like "Yeth Hound Baying" or "Troglodyte Axe Body Spray" should stack.

Haha, no, obviously I don't wonder if they are going to fix that. This is a company whose average quality of rules writing declined when Sean K. Reynolds left.

[Username17]

Also, holy HP inflation! The last time I posted into my own hearbreaker thread, I complained about my inability to prevent HP snowballing with levels. But my own version of ogre, and, IIRC, the 3.0 version as well, have less than half HPs at the same CR. If a fucking ogre boasts 60 HPs, a tarrasque is likely to have a four-digit number.

I don't see how anyone could have lived through the fiasco that was 4th edition and come out of that thinking it was remotely OK to have monsters that have 60 hit points and do a d6+7 damage with their attacks that don't even always hit.

-Username17

[infected slut princess]

Correct me if I am wrong but it looks like if this Pathfinder 2 Ogre is in a mirror match with itself they're going to be wailing on each other for six or seven rounds before one of them drops. That is so goddamn stupid and at least 2x or 3x too long.

Hacking away at huge piles of hit points is only fun when you have a whole party chopping away at a big bruiser monster at the same time. Then you are inflicting huge amounts of damage but at the same time you get to kill the monster in a round or two.

[Axebird]

Correct me if I am wrong but it looks like if this Pathfinder 2 Ogre is in a mirror match with itself they're going to be wailing on each other for six or seven rounds before one of them drops. That is so goddamn stupid and at least 2x or 3x too long.

Hacking away at huge piles of hit points is only fun when you have a whole party chopping away at a big bruiser monster at the same time. Then you are inflicting huge amounts of damage but at the same time you get to kill the monster in a round or two.

Ogres hit each other with a 6 and crit on a 16 on their first attack. They deal 1d10+7 (12.5) damage on a hit and 3d10+14 (30.5) damage on a crit. If they're already engaged in melee they can attack 3 times with cumulative -5 penalties to hit.

The first attack averages 13.875 damage (sort of- 50% chance of a hit and 25% chance of a crit), the second averages 6.25, and the third averages 3.125, for a total of 23.25 damage per round when full attacking. You're off by a really wide margin.

Edit: Javelins are obviously way worse. They hit on an 8 and crit on an 18 for 1d6+7 (10.5) and 2d6+14 (21) respectively. That works out to 7.35, then 1.575, then .525, dealing 9.45 damage per round against another ogre. They're way better off just closing the gap and getting the first attack with their hook.

[infected slut princess]

Wut. What's up with this "1st attack critical on 16" and the "attack 3 times." I don't see anything about that. I mean, if you are correct, this is even worse. Why do ogres get three attacks on full attack, at -5 and -10 on the second and third. That seems dumb for a big retarded level 3 monster.

[virgil]

Wut. What's up with this "1st attack critical on 16" and the "attack 3 times." I don't see anything about that. I mean, if you are correct, this is even worse. Why do ogres get three attacks on full attack, at -5 and -10 on the second and third. That seems dumb for a big retarded level 3 monster.

Earlier in the thread, with links, it's mentioned that PF2 changes the rules for iterative attacks and critical hits.

[infected slut princess]

Earlier in the thread, with links, it's mentioned that PF2 changes the rules for iterative attacks and critical hits.

Oh. Interesting. I am coming into this late and trying to catch up. I cant find these links.

[Axebird]

PF2 is replacing the usual d20 action economy. Everyone gets 3 action points on their turn and 1 "reaction" between them. "Move your speed" and "Make a standard attack, cumulative -5 for each attack after the first" are 1 AP actions all creatures can take, even at level 1.

Critical ranges are gone, instead you score a critical if you hit the target's AC+10. The "deadly 1d10" property on the ogre's hook adds an additional 1d10 damage on critical hits.

[Wiseman]

PF2 is replacing the usual d20 action economy. Everyone gets 3 action points on their turn and 1 "reaction" between them. "Move your speed" and "Make a standard attack, cumulative -5 for each attack after the first" are 1 AP actions all creatures can take, even at level 1.

Critical ranges are gone, instead you score a critical if you hit the target's AC+10. The "deadly 1d10" property on the ogre's hook adds an additional 1d10 damage on critical hits.

[INB4 they start adding things that give you more action points.]

[Axebird]

[INB4 they start adding things that give you more action points.]

They're way ahead of you. Haste and Slow give you extra AP or subtract it. The only rub is that you can only use AP from Haste to move or make a basic attack.

It's also slightly worse than I've presented it as. They're calling each action point an "action". As in, you have "3 actions" each turn. But certain actions might use more than one of your actions. This won't be confusing at all.

[Koumei]

Yeah, actions that cost multiple actions and I'm sure there will be have abilities that use one action but basically allow multiple... actions. Reminds me of WoD and asking if three successes is a success.

[Slade]

So they discussed an alternate MM (I call Macro Missile) that starts at 2 actions, but the cool thing is it heightens every level (Normal Magic Missile is Heighten +2 so you can't double the missiles as a 2nd level spell):

So as a 2nd level spell it can shoot 2 missile per action (thus 6 at most at level 2 spell).

I'm wondering now, how about a touch AC version that can thus crit?
Sure, it can now miss, but those sweet crits make very nice damage.

If I do playtest, I'm totally creating this spell.
As a 2nd level spell you deal up to 6d4+6, crit every time means 12d6+12, though I doubt you'll hit that much.

[GâtFromKI]

The last blog post is about downtime and crafting.

In the Playtest, items have levels. You can craft items of your level or lower, and you must be skilled enough at crafting, reflected in your proficiency rank, to craft an item of that quality (trained for standard items, and expert, master, or legendary for higher-quality ones). Crafting an item requires you to spend half its Price in crafting materials. You might find or acquire these sorts of materials, and most of them you can buy directly with currency, if you need to.

You have to spend at least 4 days crafting an item of your level, and you can reduce this if your level is higher than the item's. Once that time is up, you have two options if you succeed at your check: complete the item right away by supplying the rest of its Price in materials (a great option if you have the money for the item but can't find one on the market), or spend more time on your crafting to reduce the Price through your superior skill. You can stop crafting at any time and complete the item by providing the remaining amount of its Price. If you got a critical success on your skill check, the discount is better!

... OK, I can't understand how this works. You pay and you sepnd time and then you may pay as much as the initial price or spend the time you've already spent...

Maybe i'm not skilled enough in English language. Can someone translate this into French?

[Username17]

Making an item costs 4 time units and X gold units plus an additional X that can be paid in gold or time units. The time unit is 1 day for items of your level and progressively less for items below your crafting level. The exchange rate of time to gold for the second X specifically varies on your level and your check result, but is probably influenced by all kinds of crap.

Not conceptually difficult, but extremely stupid. I can kind of see how you get there starting from 3.5 and Pathfailure as a base, but someone should have put the breaks on this train.

So the deal here is that for 4 days you can buy a level appropriate item for its market price. That's... pretty bad actually. For some other amount of time, you can make a magic item of your level or less for one half the gold value. The amount of time is specifically less when you are making items of lower level, and less still if you can get super success on the craft check, which I suspect will also be easier to do when making lower level items, but maybe not. I have honestly no idea whether the time investments amount to working a job for a decent wage or not, but I rather suspect that it's going to end up with some weird shit where you can make ass tonnes of money making items that are a certain number of levels lower than your own, and making level appropriate items is basically a sucker's game.

-Username17

[Axebird]

There's also this:

What does this mean for characters who are looking to make money by crafting? Well, crafting progress is based on a similar scale to Practicing a Trade or Staging a Performance, so it's about as lucrative.

So if you want to get an item of your level, you're probably going to be better off using those extra 4 days busking on a street corner or some fucking thing instead of crafting it.

[djelai]

The last blog post is about downtime and crafting.

You have to spend at least 4 days crafting an item of your level, [...]

Wait a minute... does it mean that the wizard should now spend at least 4 days to write a fucking scroll ??! Or that scrolls are not level-appropriate items?

Also, some BS:

[...] in the first edition, where it was simply too easy to end up with far more powerful characters that had twice as much wealth, [...]

Could you really double your WBL with the "craft for ½price / sell for ½price" mechanism?
Was it really "too easy" considering the cost in feats and time?
Was a character with twice the intended WBL really "far more powerful" than expected, considering the quadratic price progression?

[Orca]

[...] in the first edition, where it was simply too easy to end up with far more powerful characters that had twice as much wealth, [...]

Could you really double your WBL with the "craft for ½price / sell for ½price" mechanism?
Was it really "too easy" considering the cost in feats and time?
Was a character with twice the intended WBL really "far more powerful" than expected, considering the quadratic price progression?

A wizard with craft wondrous item could get pretty close to twice as much value of gear. The power difference was notable, and arguably too high for one feat and time spent which might not actually be a cost other than in fighter irritation - and the fighter might be bought off with a little more time spent making them a bauble or two.

[Username17]

The issue with crafting in Pathfinder that they are talking about is that Wondrous Items do enough good things that you can have all your wealth in Wondrous Items of your level and feel pretty good about your life. That in turn means that with some downtime, you could just cash in all your character wealth and make your own Wondrous Items and have equipment that was valued at double your WBL amount.

Now the big answer to that is "So what?" The Wealth By Level numbers in 3e follow an elegant mathematical progression, but they aren't actually balanced to anything. Characters don't get enough wealth by level to have level appropriate equipment in 3e, which is where the "Secret Class Feature: Artifact Sword" memes come in. Pathfinder wasn't allowed to use the exact WBL chart because it wasn't OGL, so they came up with their own and not one of those people is as mathematically inclined as Skip Williams. So the Pathfinder Wealth By Level numbers are not only insufficient for character needs, they are also not mathematically elegant. Whining that actual players were disregarding the WBL numbers is just sour grapes - yes obviously people are going to pretty much ignore numbers you pulled out of your ass that don't meet design objectives. Because fucking obviously.

-Username17

[djelai]

you could just cash in all your character wealth and make your own Wondrous Items and have equipment that was valued at double your WBL amount.

You can cash in all your PC wealth at half the market price only, barring gold and gems. Therefore, you can't really double the value of gear by crafting your own stuff, unless extreme situations like:
1. you only find gold and gems in the loot and no actual equipment
2. none of the looted equipment is useful to the wizard, who must sell it anyway to buy useful stuff.
So no, I don't think you could double your wealth by crafting your own stuff in an actual game.

But OK, let say CWI doubles your WBL. Let say that, instead of having a +2 cloak of resistance (4,000gp), you now have a +3 cloak of resistance (9,000gp... which is already more than double price).
So what? Yes, your wizard gets a +1 here and there. Yes, it is more powerful than feats like Dodge or Skill Focus. But is it really enough to consider the CWI wizard "far more powerful" than random wizard?

Don't get me wrong, I agree that craft feats are powerful feats. But to me, they are powerful because they let you tailor your equipment and grant access to effects above your level (thanks to BS rule to bypass prerequisites), not because they potentially double your WBL in a few corner cases...

[Slade]

you could just cash in all your character wealth and make your own Wondrous Items and have equipment that was valued at double your WBL amount.

You can cash in all your PC wealth at half the market price only, barring gold and gems. Therefore, you can't really double the value of gear by crafting your own stuff, unless extreme situations like:
1. you only find gold and gems in the loot and no actual equipment
2. none of the looted equipment is useful to the wizard, who must sell it anyway to buy useful stuff.
So no, I don't think you could double your wealth by crafting your own stuff in an actual game.

But OK, let say CWI doubles your WBL. Let say that, instead of having a +2 cloak of resistance (4,000gp), you now have a +3 cloak of resistance (9,000gp... which is already more than double price).
So what? Yes, your wizard gets a +1 here and there. Yes, it is more powerful than feats like Dodge or Skill Focus. But is it really enough to consider the CWI wizard "far more powerful" than random wizard?

Don't get me wrong, I agree that craft feats are powerful feats. But to me, they are powerful because they let you tailor your equipment and grant access to effects above your level (thanks to BS rule to bypass prerequisites), not because they potentially double your WBL in a few corner cases...

He means your effective WBL, but Pathfinder designers say they like CWI making it double as long as it is your own wealth by level (not your allies).

[Aharon]

He means your effective WBL, but Pathfinder designers say they like CWI making it double as long as it is your own wealth by level (not your allies).

Actually, they recommend that characters with item creation feats get 25 to 50% more wealth:

Adjusting Character Wealth by Level
You can take advantage of the item creation rules to hand-craft most or all of your magic items. Because you've spent gp equal to only half the price of these items, you could end up with more gear than what the Character Wealth by Level table suggests for you. This is especially the case if you're a new character starting above 1st level or one with the versatile Craft Wondrous Item feat. With these advantages, you can carefully craft optimized gear rather than acquiring GM-selected gear over the course of a campaign. For example, a newly created 4th-level character should have about 6,000 gp worth of gear, but you can craft up to 12,000 gp worth of gear with that much gold, all of it taking place before the character enters the campaign, making the time-cost of crafting irrelevant.

Some GMs might be tempted to reduce the amount or value of the treasure you acquire to offset this and keep your overall wealth in line with the Character Wealth by Level table. Unfortunately, that has the net result of negating the main benefit of crafting magic items—in effect negating your choice of a feat. However, game balance for the default campaign experience expects you and all other PCs to be close to the listed wealth values, so the GM shouldn't just let you craft double the normal amount of gear. As a guideline, allowing a crafting PC to exceed the Character Wealth by Level guidelines by about 25% is fair, or even up to 50% if the PC has multiple crafting feats.

If you are creating items for other characters in the party, the increased wealth for the other characters should come out of your increased allotment. Not only does this prevent you from skewing the wealth by level for everyone in the party, but it encourages other characters to learn item creation feats.

Example: The Character Wealth By Level table states that an 8th-level character should have about 33,000 gp worth of items. Using the above 25% rule, Patrick's 8th-level wizard with Craft Wondrous Item is allowed an additional 8,250 gp worth of crafted wondrous items. If he uses his feat to craft items for the rest of the party, any excess value the other PCs have because of those items should count toward Patrick's additional 8,250 gp worth of crafted items.

[RobbyPants]

I love how they admit that their crafting rules will break a core assumption of their game, and that the GM will have to pick whether to ditch that assumption or to make crafting largely pointless.

[deaddmwalking]

I am baffled why an item that Patrick gives his companions counts against his 'wealth by level'.

I mean, on top of why they're still trying to use a very broken metric. Magic Item costs are variable (for example, calculating an always on 1st level spell versus calculating a +20 attack bonus for true strike) so undervaluing a magic item OR overvaluing a magic item would undermine the value of a wealth-by-level system. Despite their efforts to develop formulas that capture this, that's still the case (ie, see +1 flaming/frosting versus +3 weapon). So, obviously having an overvalued item means you need more equipment to contribute and having undervalued items mean you would need less equipment to contribute. Further, since so many items simply duplicate magic spells, casters can have 'virtual equipment' that puts them well over the listed values, which is completely ignored. But after you accept that the things it is measuring is wrong, the TYPE of things it is measuring is wrong and you make your peace with it, now they want you to measure it against the WRONG PERSON? That is truly bizarre.