TRPG General Chat

Medix2

3:00 PM

Now I'm just imagining Great Weapon Fighting's first bullet working with unarmed strikes

goodguy5

so, could dual wield and get the cha bonus to damage, while already using cha for damage?

KorvinStarmast

@Carcer stands 59' from Carcer

David Coffron

@goodguy5 I stand corrected. A hexblade can have two weapons that benefit from Hex Warrior, but still only one pact weapon

NautArch

10

Q: How many Pact Weapons can a Blade Pact Warlock create?

The question is relatively simple and I have searched far and wide for an official ruling or good answer: How many Pact Weapons can a Warlock create (have out) at the same time? The RAW says: You can use your action to create a pact weapon in your empty hand. So the sentence uses singula...

David Coffron

@goodguy5 Huh? Where are you getting charisma to damage from?

I know Paladin has a feature like that, but not barbarian afaik

goodguy5

3:02 PM

@DavidCoffron hex warrior and life drinker

David Coffron

@goodguy5 Ah. Lifedrinker. Yep. You can double-dip on your charisma

goodguy5

Then add in the static bonus from barb

David Coffron

@goodguy5 I don't think it works unless you are using Strength

goodguy5

oh right, it is strength attacks

I was thinking it was strength weapons

David Coffron

> When you make a melee weapon attack using Strength, you gain a bonus to the damage roll that increases as you gain levels as a barbarian, as shown in the Rage Damage column of the Barbarian table.

goodguy5

3:04 PM

tbh, I'd allow it, but yea. it's not allowed raw

David Coffron

Sacred Weapon from Devotion Paladin + Lifedrinker + Hex Warrior lets you triple-dip on Charisma though

goodguy5

spiffy

JohnP

@Medix2 The weapon must have the two-handed or versatile property for you to gain this benefit.

goodguy5

@DavidCoffron that's only to hit

David Coffron

@goodguy5 I definitely wouldn't allow it. The concept is that your charisma dictates the magnitude that your pact improves your combat prowess. Whereas Rage is a magnification of your Strength. I'd say you have to use one or the other

Medix2

3:06 PM

@JohnP Oh I said Great Weapon Fighting... My mistake. Great Weapon Master Feat***

David Coffron

@goodguy5 Oh right. It's Oathbreaker that has the +Cha to damage

goodguy5

@DavidCoffron See, the reason I'd allow it is because it's a weird janky build anyway. 12 levels of warlock and some number of barb levels. which is already a MAD character.

I'd allow it with the stipulation that I might take it back later

David Coffron

@goodguy5 Huh. I never allow anti-RAW/RAI rulings unless it is sponsored by RACS.

Medix2

"I'll allow it... for now"

JohnP

@Medix2 That would work. Unarmed strikes are considered to be melee weapon attacks, although your hands don't qualify as melee weapons (for other spell purposes)

goodguy5

3:08 PM

@DavidCoffron I almost always allow anti raw/rai rulings if they seem underpowered and are RAF

Medix2

@JohnP "when you score a critical hit with a melee weapon..."

Delioth

RAF > RAI > RAW

JohnP

@Medix2 Yes...and?

Medix2

Normally that would not work with unarmed strikes, but if Paladin's can divinely smite that would also apply. I'm just thinking it's funny imaging a character's "Great Weapon" is their foot

goodguy5

@Delioth eh.... there's a line for me.

JohnP

3:11 PM

@Medix2 Wouldn't work. Smite needs a weapon, and hands/feet are not considered weapons.

Delioth

Oh yeah, there's definitely a line. I usually prefer RAW for most cases, but if it's heavily implied that it should work a different way, or the RAW or implied way is just unfun...

Medix2

@JohnP That was the entire point, if you let them work as weapons for the paladin smites, it would also apply there, a scenario I found funny

goodguy5

I lean much closer to the "fists are weapons" than not

JohnP

@goodguy5 They are considered to be melee weapon attacks, but the fist is not considered a weapon for purposes of smite, etc. At least as I'm understanding the interpretations.

Medix2

@JohnP That is correct, but a distinction I find affects seemingly random features and so I ignore the RAW of it

goodguy5

3:13 PM

yes, John, raw.

But I'm saying at home

JohnP

@goodguy5 ah. gr0k.

Sir Cinnamon

Is sage advice still a valid rules source?

I know we dont consider JC tweets valid anymore

Medix2

The Compendium or the tweet compilation site?

Sir Cinnamon

In this case the compendium

JohnP

yes

Sir Cinnamon

3:17 PM

Im assuming the tweets are out

JohnP

> Official rulings on how to interpret rules are made here in the Sage Advice Compendium by the game’s lead rules designer, Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford on Twitter). The public statements of the D&D team, or anyone else at Wizards of the Coast, are not official rulings; they are advice. Jeremy Crawford’s tweets are often a preview of rulings that will appear here.

Carcer

sage advice is official rulings

JohnP

So compendium yes, tweets no

Carcer

it is not errata, but it should be taken at least as official statement on how some rules are meant to be interpreted

Medix2

I think the only thing in the Compendium that really surprises me is that the Ranger's Whirlwind/Volley count as a single attack

Delioth

3:25 PM

Aw sweet, pf2e katana aren't just bastard swords or longswords with extra steps

David Coffron

33

Q: With the 2019 Sage Advice Compendium release, are Jeremy Crawford's tweets considered to be "official rulings"?

The 2019 Sage Advice Compendium has been released. Previously, the SAC has indicated that Jeremy Crawford's tweets were considered to be official rulings. Is this still true?

dnd-5e wizards-of-the-coast sage-advice

This Q&A also talks about how the Compendium is still considered official

Delioth

smaller die than bastard sword (for both onehand and twohand), but versatile for slashing or piercing, and an extra d8 on crit

Medix2

Does the score of Q/A's pasted here live-update?

Carcer

no

your client fetches the scores at the time it loads the message

you have to hard refresh the chat page if you want it to poll again, I think

[screams internally about the magic of ki again]

Sir Cinnamon

NOT MAGIC

David Coffron

3:31 PM

@Carcer Yeah; that one is confusing. The text says that ki is magic, but most of the features that use ki are not

Sir Cinnamon

just... superhuman :p

David Coffron

(or are you talking about the differences with D&Ds ki and real world ideas of ki; rather than the mechanical confusion)

Sir Cinnamon

> In D&D, the first type of magic is part of nature. It is no more dispellable than the wind. A monster like a dragon exists because of that magic-enhanced nature. The second type of magic is what the rules are concerned about. When a rule refers to something being magical, it’s referring to that second type.

David Coffron

@SirCinnamon Well it is magic, but you can access that magic without using magic yourself. Kind of like how some effects that access the Weave in the Realms don't actually count as magic for the purposes of things like Antimagic field

Sir Cinnamon

From a lore perspective I like this explanation (rules-wise it gets confusing). Dispel magic/Antimagic Field shouldn't be able to stop a dragon from flying or a golem/skeleton from animating

David Coffron

3:34 PM

@SirCinnamon And they can't unless the skeleton is animated with something like danse macabre (which is an ongoing effect)

Glazius

@MikeQ check the fellowship backroom? You weren't in there recently enough to ping.

Carcer

@DavidCoffron I'm talking about the mechanical confusion. The text states ki is magical and that monks use ki to produce magical effects, but the official interpretation we're meant to follow is that actually those effects aren't magical

and also that the magic that suffuses the multiverse that anti-magic field explicitly cuts off isn't cut off by anti-magic field

I wouldn't mind if they were capable of going "oh yeah we kind of messed this up" but JC's approach is almost always "no the rules make sense you're just reading them wrong"

KorvinStarmast

@DavidCoffron I treat ki as magic because it is a limite resource, like spell slots or the variant spell points. The book calls it magic, and a form of access to the weave that creates magical effects. While I get JC's point, I do not find it consistent with what ki represents. You have to harness that magical thing to let loose with, for example, step of the wind. It's not an always on ability. I can also live with JC's ruling.

@Carcer Yeah, nicely put.

Pierre Cathé

3:51 PM

@Carcer No ones's stopping you from playing the game in a way that *gasp* JC would disapprove of

Sir Cinnamon

Reminds me of Marvel's "Captain America isn't superhuman he's just PEAK human, with the serum"

Then he throws a motorbike 40 feet and throws down with Thanos

Delioth

PEAK == Brand-name Human variety

Like Elf vs High Elf

He's also a 20th level Barbarian though, so that's got to factor in

Sir Cinnamon

Wouldnt hulk be the barbarian?

Surely Cap is a battle master

Yuuki

Nah, Cap is a Way of the Drunken Master Monk.

Sir Cinnamon

Iron man = Artificer?

Yuuki

3:57 PM

Everything special about him came out of a bottle.

Sir Cinnamon

BOOOOOOO

Yuuki

@SirCinnamon I think that's more of a comics thing. In the movies, it's far more nebulous.

They just say he becomes "something more".

@SirCinnamon Hulk is a Monk with Barbarian levels, I think.

Or a Barbarian with Monk levels.

Sir Cinnamon

@Yuuki A wizard who only knows True Polymorph

Yuuki

Either way, needs something to improve his unarmed strikes.

What if Iron Man is an Eldritch Blasting Warlock?

Artificer with a Warlock dip?

Sir Cinnamon

4:20 PM

Ironically I think Dr. Strange is a wizard

Wizard Supreme doesnt have the same ring to it

Rubiksmoose

4:57 PM

@SirCinnamon Gotta have that sweet sweet alliteration.

NautArch

5:19 PM

WOuld it overstep if I removed the questions at the end from this question?

David Coffron

5:50 PM

@NautArch Maybe. I'd be fine with it on my questions, but some users are a bit more sensitive to substantive edits like that. Probably best to wait

NautArch

@DavidCoffron Yeah, I almost always wait and I do get frustrated when other users make big changes to questions that aren't theirs. I just want to at least give them the general answer and let them figure out how to make it work for them.

David Coffron

@NautArch Could always do the "ask and self-answer a stackable version of the question, and then request to change the close condition to duplicate". I did that once, but I did it on a much older question. Idk how good a solve that is here

NautArch

@DavidCoffron That I'm not comfortable with :) It's not my question and I don't want to make it my question. I'll just wait.

I don't get the downvotes, either (as someone who liberally downvotes.)

@JohnP I'm on the final book of the Serpentwar saga :) Think i'll backtrack to the kelewan series before moving forward.

David Coffron

@NautArch Could be people thinking "why would you want to do that?" or "that is a pointless burden on the gameplay". Or it could be that they don't think the question is important.

Idk. Guessing downvote reasons is a bit fruitless most of the time

NautArch

@DavidCoffron True. Very true.

Or they think it's too "i wanna be different!"

Do you think my last bit on suspension of disbelief isn't nice?

David Coffron

5:59 PM

@NautArch I think it's okay. I probably would have offered my own in-universe explanation, but honestly I think I'd think less of someone else's answer if someone else did, so I might need to stop doing that

Hot RPG Questions

6

Q: Is the Survivor feat (half) useless?

The Survivor feat reads as follows: Prerequisite: Con 13, Diehard, Endurance. Benefit: You gain a +5 bonus on all Constitution checks made to stabilize while dying. Once per day, if you are struck by a critical hit or sneak attack, you can spend an immediate action to negate the critical...

pathfinder feats

David Coffron

@NautArch Although John's elaboration (minus the specific explanation) reads a bit kinder. Something like "The rules don't really concern themselves with realism to that degree; it's largely up to the DM and players to figure out how a given interpretation actually looks in-universe" or something

Takes the blame off of the person falling into the "trap" and onto the rules being lacking (not in a bad way, but just in a way that forces us to create our own explanations)

NautArch

6:33 PM

@DavidCoffron hehe :) I can try and think of a narrative for it, but ultimately that's my narrative, and part of the fun of monk is coming up with the crazy narratives for their moves.

@DavidCoffron yeah, that's a good point. THe trap bit is bordering on not nice. fixing.

DuckTapeAl

6:51 PM

Real sad that I'm on mobile rn and couldn't make the [pathfinder-2e] tag myself. :P

Delioth

Mmmm.... do we have a precedent for that sort of question? There's a lot of differences, and some aren't evident or relevant to some points of view (Monster stats and abilities aren't super visible to a player, but make GM lives vastly easier and more interesting)

It feels like it might be wandering near too-broad; it might actually be easier to ask what the similarities are, really

NautArch

@Delioth we do

David Coffron

@Delioth We have precedent for it

Here are a few

Carcer

there's precedent, though I suspect given the scope of changes a complete answer is either going to be very long or very shallow

Delioth

Ah, I see - I had just looked for the tag and saw a bunch that were chopped a bit ("From a DM's perspective", etc), and also this one

1

Q: What are the differences between Pathfinder, and Pathfinder 2e playtest v1.6?

Of course, by "Pathfinder 2e" I mean the new version of Pathfinder that has currently been released by Paizo for playtesting; Version 1.6. The type of answer I would prefer is an unordered list which lists the primary differences between the two RPG systems from a systemic level. Such as differen...

pathfinder edition-comparison pathfinder-2e-playtest

Which was closed as "Too Broad"

David Coffron

6:58 PM

To be fair, question standards have changed since many of those other difference-detectors were asked, so it might be closed again. Probably worth bringing up in meta

NautArch

13

Q: What are the differences between 5e compared to 4e and 3.5e in terms of power level?

Looking for a short, sweet, and authoritative answer as to the tone/theme power level of characters in 5e in comparison to 4e and 3.5e. I'm looking specifically for theme of the power level presented - 3.5e in my view was zeroes to demigods, characters that literally reshaped the setting and the...

dnd-5e

Delioth

I also know that I've seen a couple discussions on Reddit on the differences, and even the high-level summaries of some differences... end up very large

NautArch

7

Q: What are the major differences between AD&D and D&D 3.5e?

What are the major differences between Advanced Dungeons & Dragons and D&D 3.5e? My DM is used to old school D&D and wants to know the differences.

dnd-3.5e adnd edition-comparison

kviiri

What's a good word to describe a position where a person is in charge of a civilian fleet of ships? I assume "admiral" etc have too much military connotation

DuckTapeAl

So, I just read a list of differences between PF2e and 5e on Reddit, and it def seemed like a SE answer length.

NautArch

7:02 PM

@kviiri You mean like a merchant marine?

DuckTapeAl

So I'd assume one for PF to PF2e would be similar.

Delioth

Kinda, other than the big thing of 5e having a roughly-unified Proficiency system already, where Pathfinder 1e really didn't

kviiri

@NautArch Yea. I'm trying to think of a fancy corporate title to my character who'll be in charge of acquiring and maintaining our business fleet.

Hmm, except not state run like I think merchant marines are? This is purely our company's.

NautArch

@kviiri Fleet manager?

David Coffron

@kviiri Could go with the generic "navarch" if you want something cool sounding

kviiri

7:10 PM

@NautArch Seems correct, thanks! I might want to upgrade that into something a bit cooler but David seems to have me covered there :D

Ok now I feel dumb. I originally thought of a Finnish term I wanted to replace because it had the right sound otherwise but is a military rank

...except it isn't, so it's good

pursimestari, roughly "master of vessels"

Delioth

"Captain Central" or variations thereupon (I mean, if you didn't already have your solution)

JohnP

@NautArch Cool.

kviiri

Navarch is a cool term to remember though

NautArch

@JohnP For some reason, I am totally hooked into this world.

just kills me that the library doesn't have the books and I have to <gasp> buy them

David Coffron

@kviiri Something that's happening a lot in the States recently is corporations giving mundane occupations more impressive sounding names, like Sales Associate for clerks, and Media Distribution Officer for a paperby; you could just use some flowery language

kviiri

7:18 PM

@NautArch Actually isn't your username etymologically the same as navarch

JohnP

@NautArch It's a fascinating world, for sure. The layers that he has built into it are astounding.

NautArch

@kviiri nautical/naval

kviiri

@DavidCoffron As an associate data analyst I know what you mean

JohnP

@DavidCoffron That's been happening for quite some time by my perception. I'm essentially a sysadmin right now, but my title is Senior Systems Integration Analyst.

Delioth

@DavidCoffron You're assuming that the corporations are giving those titles, rather than employees taking those titles on and the company not caring enough to change them (if HR asks a tester what their title is so they can hire another one, and they tell HR it's "Quality Assurance Engineer, Supreme", that'll be roughly what HR puts on the ad)

Over time, those seem more professional or great, so people put that on resumes too

JohnP

7:21 PM

@Delioth Only in smaller corporations.

Most large corporations (in my experience) have very strict, defined naming conventions, which also often indicate heirarchy.

Delioth

Happens in smaller corps > person from a smaller corp job hunts with that title on their resume > bunch of recruiters or corps see that > naming conventions drift towards those more "impressive-sounding" names

It's evolution of language and vernacular; it starts smaller in more flexible environments, and less flexible environments (large corps) eventually either accept the convention over time or the upcoming convention doesn't get uptake and dies off

We just don't notice the ones that never got taken up

kviiri

Yeah, it's not a new thing. There's a guy in GTA:SA who is insistent about their official job title of "hygiene technician" (meaning toilet cleaner)

Carcer

@JohnP I'm a sysadmin but my organisation decided that sysadmin isn't actually a job anyone in it does so I'm officially a Systems Engineer

there's a big ol' list of "job families" and job titles within those families and everyone must be one of those, no exceptions

JohnP

@Carcer I'm an "analyst" because I don't have an engineering degree. Engineers always have engineer in their title, even if they essentially do the same job.

Carcer

that sucks

Delioth

7:29 PM

Exceptions to a rule are the worst thing on this planet, Change My View [Software engineer here]

NautArch

@Delioth are you asking us to find an exception? :D

Carcer

@Delioth well see the thing is that nobody gets to be a sysadmin because the larger org outsources its IT to a third party so literally does not directly employ sysadmins

except I work for a bit of the org which does our own IT in-house

kviiri

In my mental model, engineer is not a degree but a person who has that special je ne sais quoi that makes them really good at problems they've never encountered before

Eg. I consider my SO an engineer, she has the gift of practical smarts

Delioth

@kviiri Psh, an engineer must be "one who engines", following the correct pattern.

Wait hold up

NautArch

@Delioth I thought they drove trains?

Delioth

7:33 PM

One of the obsolete definitions of "engine" is "Ingenuity, Wile"

JohnP

So...question. Since PF 2.0 was released today, do we need a pathfinder generic tag, a 1e and a 2e tag? There are already pathfinder and pathfinder 2e playtest tags.

GcL

Call it pathfinder next /S

Delioth

There's also a Pathfinder-2e tag for the one question

JohnP

Ah., I just saw that.

David Coffron

@Delioth No that's enginer (one "e"). Engineer is one who enginees

Delioth

7:37 PM

Isn't the one for "any-D&D version" mostly in existence for historical reasons since there's a somewhat cohesive history of how D&D evolved concepts? I'm not confident that we need one for Pathfinder-general unless we start getting world-lore things (which should be under [golarion]

It'd also force us to take another look at the [dungeons-and-dragons] tag, since that one includes [pathfinder] since it's a fork

Granted, we probably have to do that anyways

kviiri

@Delioth well there are stackable questions concerning the franchise as a whole

Delioth

@kviiri To be fair, though, almost all of those are lore-questions (which we already have a tag for, [golarion] since that's the setting for lore in pathfinder, both versions), or they're ones about the whole overarching system and history, which [dungeons-and-dragons] still covers in general

Or they're ones that are secretly system-agnostic, but with a tag to help guide answers to the goal-context

Mark Wells

@Delioth Are you asking us to describe arbitrary terrible things that exist on this planet?

David Coffron

@Delioth There are some pleasant exceptions to certain rules. The understood rule is that humans in NY are jerks, but there are some very nice people there too

V2Blast

@JohnP Great minds think alike ;)

David Coffron

7:50 PM

0

Q: Should the [pathfinder] tag be renamed to [pathfinder-1e] (with the former as a synonym)?

Pretty straightforward question. Pathfinder's 2nd edition has just been released, and correspondingly there is a pathfinder-2e tag (as well as the pathfinder-2e-playtest tag for the playtest version(s) of the 2nd edition). The tag pathfinder has traditionally been used for the 1st edition, namel...

discussion tags rename-request

Delioth

@DavidCoffron On the other hand, humans in NY could be considered an exception to the rule that people are generally not jerks

David Coffron

@Delioth Grr...

JohnP

@V2Blast I already did a quick edit on the pathfinder-2e

And a very minor edit on the pathfinder tag to add the release date of 2e instead of "expected in"

V2Blast

@JohnP Approved :)

also, no real need for generic tag. There's only 2 editions; if a single question asks about both editions, it can probably just have both tags

(I don't expect questions to be relevant to both final editions and the playtest version of one of them)

KorvinStarmast

@JohnP Did you overwrite my edit? When I first moused over it the tag was blank.

JohnP

7:54 PM

@V2Blast [whine] "Why was this changed from the playtest? I liked it!"

KorvinStarmast

@JohnP Also, glad to see the improvement. :)

JohnP

@KorvinStarmast uh...maybe? I had it open working on links since I said something in chat.

KorvinStarmast

@JohnP I like your edit better than my original, thanks. :)

The Oracle

0

Q: Should the [pathfinder] tag be renamed to [pathfinder-1e] (with the former as a synonym)?

Pretty straightforward question. Pathfinder's 2nd edition has just been released, and correspondingly there is a pathfinder-2e tag (as well as the pathfinder-2e-playtest tag for the playtest version(s) of the 2nd edition). The tag pathfinder has traditionally been used for the 1st edition, namel...

discussion tags rename-request

JohnP

@KorvinStarmast Thanks. Somehow I ended up with 8 rep over two edits, not sure how that happened. All rep gratefully accepted, though.

Hrm. $30 US for the bestiary PDF and core rulebook PDF together. That's not bad.

Delioth

8:08 PM

@JohnP Yeah, plus all the rules are available online already (well, not quite all the bestiary monsters, but they're working on it)

JohnP

@Delioth I don't think that differences question is really viable, despite the upvotes. For the same reason teh playtest one was closed, it will be an ever expanding list question.

Delioth

With a more-smooth release than I expected. Said it'd be out at 7AM PDT; dummy site with the notice of that went down at ~6:55AM, site with all the info came up ~7:06AM

JohnP

@Delioth And no server crash at 7:08AM.

Delioth

@JohnP Yeah, this was roughly my thought as well; it feels like it just needs some more clarification. There's a lot of differences from many points of view

Like the differences to a GM are completely different from the differences a PC gets to deal with, which are completely different from the differences on the game-design side of things

JohnP

@Delioth Especially in character creation, class tweaks, addition of playable races or whatever they are calling them now, ancestries?

Delioth

8:12 PM

Some of them touch (monsters getting cool abilities), some of them don't (Monster stat blocks being easy to read)

@JohnP Yeah, old races > Ancestries

But when you pick an ancestry you also get a Heritage

JohnP

@Delioth Yeah, from the briefest of glances that I spared it, looked like character creation was wildly different.

Delioth

And archetypes and multiclassing are on the same framework now, which is like neither multiclassing nor archetypes from 1e

To be honest, it'd probably be simpler to enumerate the similarities from 1e to 2e; there's too many big changes to really even give a decent broad-strokes transition

JohnP

This is probably the best summary of Alchemist from PF1e that I've seen:

> At best a wizard with a love of props or at worst a sorcerer with a drinking problem

Ooh, they got rid of favored enemies for Rangers? Interesting.

Delioth

Yeah, Rangers Hunt a target, which I think is better than "yeah, we're not playing against undead for this campaign so that feature's worthless", or "oh yeah, you get +2/4/6 against everything you fight"

And Rangers also don't get magic

JohnP

@Delioth That's ok, I've always thought ranger magic (in just about every system) was kind of a kludge.

Delioth

8:20 PM

Might be the first actually good version of Ranger to grace a D&Derivative

Which actually makes thematic sense without sort-of arbitrary decisions

Like the weird "all rangers either dual wield or use bows"

JohnP

@Delioth One word - Aragorn II (Ok, so that's technically two or three depending on how you look at it, but still...)

Carcer

imho it's fine for the answer to that question to be that the system is so wildly different that making a concise comparison is impossible and there will be no easy translation between the two editions

"these bits are the same and basically everything else has changed" effectively answers the question

JohnP

@Carcer Get to typin' :p

Delioth

I might take a stab at giving a full answer later when I get home, but my gut tells me it's going to end up either useless or too detailed

NautArch

@Delioth why not both?

Carcer

8:30 PM

@JohnP would if I actually had PF2 to hand!

Delioth

I know I have a few notes about the biggest major differences from a GM point of view, maybe reviewing that will put me in the right mindset to give similar broad strokes from a more general POV

@Carcer You do though: 2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx

Carcer

@Delioth would if I actually had time to read and understand it!

sadly I must play videogames

2

JohnP

Well, my three applications are now "in review", hopefully I'll get an interview for at least one of them.

Delioth

On the plus side, it's way easier to parse than PF1E

JohnP

@Delioth For now :p

Delioth

8:32 PM

And the whole first chapter, I'm told, is a gold mine

JohnP

Hrm...firefly, or Pf2e...what to do, hey @KorvinStarmast ?

G. Moylan

@Delioth for what? Game tips: Sure, thanks! boogers: keep 'em.

Delioth

Eh, at Core it's easier to understand... and it's also built in a much more evolvable way; so many of the parts are definitely built to handle expansion gracefully

Chapter 1 is the "I've never played RPGs, wat do?"

And Chapter 1, at least, is laid out in a really intuitive manner to actually just... read. Which feels weird with a rulebook

JohnP

Hokay, PF - Pf2e similarities. Well, lets see...dice. and people. sorta.

Delioth

Bonuses to rolls have been standardized from "Cowabunga it is" to a singular proficiency system of Untrained/Trained/Expert/Master/Legendary

That thing a ton of the newer classes got where they got new features every couple levels, but got to choose them off a list... is now standard and called "Class Feats"

JohnP

8:38 PM

@Delioth Awww, I liked "Well, I have Ability X and Feat Y which stacks with Feat Q and this racial ability gives me effect Z so... +23, I rolled an 18, so 41?"

"Miss"

Delioth

Yeah, stacking bonuses is not the way to go anymore

Since you get your full level plus a flat modifier from your proficiency if you're at least trained

Untrained gets +0 and no level

MikeQ

@Delioth Ah so it's bonus-based and not penalty-based?

Delioth

Yeah, one of the big complaints was that it wasn't impactful and felt weird that Untrained was Level-2

Where it was otherwise TEML: +0/+1/+2/+3

So that moved to Untrained: +0, TEML= Level + 2/4/6/8

And on top of that you get like, 4 extra bonuses, total

MikeQ

That's good to hear. One of my hangups with 1e is trying to remember all the conditional penalties, which are defined in various places across the rules

Delioth

Abilities, Item bonus, Status Bonus, and Circumstance Bonus

And then Status/Circumstance Penalties, and untyped penalties

So theoretically you could have a ton of different penalties if they're all untyped, but they look like they're not super-common

JohnP

8:44 PM

@MikeQ That's because of the organic growth way it went for 10 years.

Delioth

Also I'm an idiot for not noting the action economy as a major change as I was iterating some of them, since that's probably one of the top 2 most important changes

MikeQ

@JohnP True, although even the CRB was poorly organized, and full of "hidden rules"

JohnP

@MikeQ True. That tome took a lot of perusing to get it all.

The new core book is 640 pages though...that's a lot of reading.

KorvinStarmast

@JohnP Either is fine by me, I have zero PF 1e so I'd not be making version errors

Delioth

@JohnP Admittedly, a lot of that is pure options so doesn't need to be read or parsed immediately. Like you don't need to know what all the 15th level items are on starting out

JohnP

8:49 PM

@KorvinStarmast Oh? PF was my main system after AD&D, I played the most in that. My main problem is finding the time to read and gr0k.

KorvinStarmast

@JohnP Should that question be split into a "GM" and a "Player" question. I've no idea, just throwing that out there.

Delioth

I think it'd be a lot more tractable if the Q was split up that way, since there are a bunch of improvements on both sides of the screen... but there's also a fair number of cross-cutting things that would be repeated in both (TEML making math & setting DC's easy, 3 actions making combat smoother, etc)

And GM book has been said to be mostly optional rules and guidance; everything you need to run the game is in either CRB or Bestiary

JohnP

@Delioth Oh, so the PF2E GM book is essentially the pirates code.

KorvinStarmast

@Delioth Hmm, that looks a lot like the D&D 5e template ...

G. Moylan

@KorvinStarmast and the rest of the game looks a lot like D&D 4.5

Delioth

9:00 PM

@KorvinStarmast On the other hand, they released a ton of stuff today, dropping a GMG would have been too much probably

KorvinStarmast

9:15 PM

@Delioth Well, the DMG was the last of the three core books to come out for 5e, I think. back in 2014.

Hot RPG Questions

10:00 PM

5

Q: How does the barbarian bonus damage interact with two weapon fighting?

Some days ago, I created for someone a barbarian dwarf character sheet. Everything gone well, and the sheet is complete. As I'm very new to D&D, I decided to read through the barbarian class to get what could be nice this future player to have, as I know pretty much know what she's looking for ...

dnd-5e barbarian two-weapon-fighting rage

Someone_Evil

Does anyone have a good word for 'success' beginning with E?

Wrigglenite

Success as in accomplishing something?

What's the context?

Someone_Evil

As in making rolling a pool of dice and based on a set of criteria scoring a number of successes from it

Wrigglenite

10:15 PM

Excellence? :v

Someone_Evil

"Each 5 you roll equals one Excellence", doesn't quite jam with me, but it's not bad

BESW

Effort or Exploit.

"You need three Exploits to execute the expected effect."

Someone_Evil

Ok, I think I can roll with Exploits

Thanks!

BESW

10:30 PM

Handy tip: you never have to use the mechanical term to describe a mechanic. You can call a success a badger and so long as it meshes with the narrative aesthetic people will roll with it.

[writes game where every roll 4-6 in the dice pool is a badger and you spend mushrooms to modify the dice pool in order to get more badgers than the GM has snakes opposing you]

Someone_Evil

But the closer it describes the mechanic the easier it is to understand and/or roll with, yes?

BESW

Only for people who are already familiar with the vocabulary and the game design assumptions you're associating with that vocabulary.

For example, Golden Sky Stories could've used the term "XP" to describe the points you get during play which are accumulated and spent to advance your character's numerical effectiveness.

But GSS called those points "Dreams" instead because they're not anything like traditional XP: you get them when each person at the table decides to give them to you based on how cute or helpful you're being, and you spend them between scenes to improve relationships with PCs and NPCs. Dreams push a totally different narrative than XP usually does, so calling them XP would just add unnecessary confusion--there's no actual "experience" that awards points anyway.

On the other hand, Roll For Shoes DOES use the term "XP" to describe the points you get during play which are accumulated and spent to advance your character's numerical effectiveness, despite XP not being associated with experience in that system either.

It's a game that assumes people are already comfortable enough with RPGs that a bare-bones set of rules can rely on players being able to draw on existing knowledge structures even when those structures aren't actually good fits for the game being described.

...and that's created problems in people being able to understand the system, because those assumptions lead to inaccurate readings of the text.

So, it's a matter of who you're designing for and what context you want to bring to your game by using terms that have pre-existing meanings.

trogdor

11:34 PM

@BESW preach it brother! XD

BESW

trogdor

🐉

Hot RPG Questions

11:59 PM

1

Q: Why is Searing Smite not listed in the Roll20 Spell books?

i.e. here: https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Spells%20List#content According to this: https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/searing-smite it's listed in the PHB on page 274.

dnd-5e spells roll20

Transcript for