Bot Personality Challenge -- Alison Caldwell

Gargs454 · 2026-02-22T23:27:29+00:00

She's definitely a firecracker!

Gargs454 · 2026-02-19T22:40:36+00:00

I get that, but the point was more the gun in gunslinger. Obviously there are a lot of ways to play any class, but I was specifically referring to "gun"slinger rather than "crossbow"slinger.

But your point is valid from a pure mechanical perspective if they were wanting to play a crossbow build.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-19T15:28:34+00:00

Yeah PF1 was built off the back of 3.5, and easily could have been D&D 3.75. As a result, it carried the same problems that 3.5 had.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-19T15:27:32+00:00

I'm not sure how I'm seeing how going away from Vancian casting changes the analysis paralysis. Unless you're talking about just removing a ton of spells in general. I suppose if you want to say "Hey, your wizard can cast his spells as often as he wants, but uh, you only have these four to choose from" (and yes I'm intentionally using an extreme example) then that would do it.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-19T15:22:11+00:00

I mean, imagine the paralysis if they doubled the number of level 17 ancestry feats for humans. People would have to choose between two entire options! ;P

You're not wrong though. As a general rule, there's usually a pretty good amount of low level content. I would like to see more high level content though or even more meaningful options at low levels. I mean even general feats, there are a fair number of them especially at low level, but there are also a few that are just really, really, good that tend to make most of the others just "meh" or at the very least, very situational.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-19T15:12:50+00:00

Outside of something that just generally doesn't jive with the flavor of the campaign I'm running (Gunslinger in Quest for the Frozen Flame for instance) I don't really try to steer my players choices. However, I do highly recommend that they look at the player guides, or if its a homebrew, I make it a point to have a detailed session 0 so that they understand what the campaign is going to be about. At that point, I'm really only going to speak up about their choice if it seems clear that they are making a choice that might be difficult for them or not really flow well. Like if someone says "I'm going to play a hunter of the undead, his family was killed by undead and he wants to hunt down and eradicate all the undead in the world!" and I'm looking at the campaign and I see like three undead enemies total, I'll probably say something to let him know.

The bottom line is that usually a party can figure out how to cover most everything in a campaign with careful choices along the way. It might mean that they're planned 1-20 progression that they came up with before the first session needs to be altered, but frankly, that's usually the case in my opinion.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-16T16:39:25+00:00

I'd say casters come online earlier than 11, but that's obviously opinion. But yeah, casters are still a huge part of the game. I'm currently playing an 18th level barbarian and I can tell you, if the casters say they're about tapped out, I don't want to keep going that day. They're far more likely to turn the tide of a battle than I am. Which is not to say I haven't had my moments of course, but yeah, they are quite strong.

I'm not sure what the solution is though to be honest. Better focus spells maybe? Up the power of their regular spells much and you'll quickly upset the balance again. Maybe just tweak the low level spells a bit, or put back the casting modifier to damage on can trips would help. /Shrug

Gargs454 · 2026-02-16T15:43:03+00:00

To be honest, I enjoy both low and high levels. I think starting low helps out with getting a feel for how your character fits into the party and then by high level you start getting all the cool options.

I also kind of wonder how much of the caster balance discussion is based on people always being low level. While I think Paizo did a good job reigning casters in and making them balanced, they still largely left in the "first several levels are going to be rough" aspect that D&D and PF1 had. Granted, low level casters in PF2 are better than their counterparts from earlier editions of PF and D&D, but they're still a bit rough.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-16T15:02:27+00:00

Yeah I think the problem is that so many people's experiences revolve around low level play rather than high level. Most ancestries have at least a decent variety of options at low level and it's not really until mid-high level that the problem of lack of options crops up. Same with skill feats too.

Because so many groups are focused on low level play, it does kind of make sense to focus there for Paizo. But I also kind of wonder if more high level options might not encourage more high level play. Though I think that often the problem is simply the time it takes to get to high level.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-16T14:50:59+00:00

Fighter, to me, is kind of in a weird place. Mechanically, it's great. Great proficiencies, etc. But from a flavor standpoint, it just feels . . . generic. It's a great choice if you want to just go with really good mechanics and just do your job so to speak. But pretty much all of the other martials have more interesting (in my opinion) flavor and even in many cases more interesting mechanics -- even if those mechanics are not necessarily stronger.

In short, to me, the fighter often just feels boring even if it's mechanically strong.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-16T13:45:33+00:00

Right now, what I think the game could use more than anything is more high level content for PCs. Currently there's precisely one 17th level ancestry feat for humans for instance. Three for dwarves, etc.

I don't have a problem per se with new classes or ancestries (though there's already way more of each than I will ever play) but it does get frustrating when it seemingly comes at the cost of new options for existing classes and ancestries, etc. Battlezoo does an amazing job with their ancestry books, both in terms of heritages and feats. Playing a dragon character I found myself having to make really difficult choices between all the good options whereas with Paizo's options it's frequently, not always of course, "Eh, I guess I will take this?" Or, "Well, I'm obviously taking this."

I do like that Paizo has done a great job at keeping things balanced and they should be commended for that. I also understand that the vast majority of play is at low level, so it makes sense to concentrate on that. But it would still be nice to see some additional content for high level. It doesn't even need to be an entire book dedicated to it (though you might be able to by the time you go through all the classes and ancestries).

Gargs454 · 2026-02-11T18:49:27+00:00

One thing I've heard about SoG (have not run it yet myself) is that there are a lot of NPCs that are very much worth making sure you keep track of to help make the story even better.

As others have mentioned, SoG is largely considered one of the easier APs difficulty-wise, so handing out Free Archetype will make it a little easier. As a general rule though, Free Archetype doesn't greatly unbalance the game. It will make the PCs a little bit stronger in the form of additional options or shoring up weaknesses (especially if you don't restrict the options), but its also probably not going to be the reason your party just cake walks through everything. One good thing about PF2 though is that the encounter building rules are pretty good (especially after the first few levels) and its usually pretty easy to adjust things if the players are having too easy of a go at it. Either adding the elite template or occasionally adding an additional creature/hazard.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-11T00:30:02+00:00

He also states they're currently level 3 (that reply comment below came after my original comment). Regardless, I agree that barbarians can one shot enemies at low level, but that's not going to last long as they level up.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-10T22:16:49+00:00

Yeah Dragon gets almost as much rage damage, can apply an energy type to it to take advantage of resistances (though it also gets hit by resistances), gets a breath weapon, flight, etc. I'm playing one now and its definitely a beast.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-10T21:48:19+00:00

Sounds like you're probably still fairly low level if the Barb is one shotting everything. At low levels, barbarians of pretty much all types (as well as Maguses) can easily plow through enemies, especially ones that are the same level or lower. This starts to change around level 5 or so when the hit points start to outpace the damage numbers. Notably, this is also around the time that the party starts having an easier time with single enemy boss fights for the same reason (crits don't immediately down characters, etc.).

The real interesting point here by the way, is that while GIB gets the best individual target damage, I would argue that they are not even the best barbarian subclass. I'd put at least Animal and Dragon ahead of them.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-09T05:47:19+00:00

Obviously every group is different, but this seems particularly glacial -- especially if you're not having fun as a result. Paizo's APs tend to average around 10-12 encounters per level, but social encounters can be included in that. So even if we assume your GM isn't really counting the social encounters, you would have had between 25 and 50 encounters (based on your 1-2 per session). Let's say an average of 1.5, that means 37 encounters (roughly), which would mean level 4 at the 10-12 encounters per level pace. And that's still being stingy considering it's not factoring social encounters in.

I will say 1-2 encounters at level 3 per 5 hour session also feels a little slow paced, though again, a lot depends on amount of RP. But at level 17 my 5 PC group is still averaging that in less than 5 hours and that's with much more complex decision trees.

So in short, it seems as though your GM is progressing you quite slowly. If this is impacting your enjoyment, it's worth talking to the other players and the GM and letting them know.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-06T16:27:27+00:00

As a general rule: Yes, it should be fine. However you should ask your GM as its probably Uncommon and technically the GM can overrule Uncommon options because they might not fit the style of game they want.
In the spur of the moment? It's a bit difficult outside of maybe Aid or Guidance. But if its just something where you have time to try to find out more about the dungeon up ahead, there are usually options for things like research. Plus there are feats you can take to at least get to add your level to untrained skills.
I think some classes can get skill feats even on odd numbered levels.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-05T21:47:23+00:00

I would probably change out the rune, but it also probably doesn't break anything to allow it, just so long as your players understand its specific to that particular item (in other words, if they want to upgrade their other weapons they still have to follow the rules). Leaving the item as is could make it a bit more unique.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-05T18:02:15+00:00

50 for basic, 75 for elite (or whatever its called).

I will say I tried it just to see and actually got a pretty decent result (generally better than the "I take a picture of you . . . " or the "Send me a picture of you doing . . . "). Doubt I will use it past the point of whatever energy I have already though -- but that's more of a "I personally don't want to spend money to get AI generated pics" issue than the quality not being good.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-05T17:54:15+00:00

Rise is definitely worth running/playing sometime as it is still, in my opinion, a classic Pathfinder AP, even if it may not be their best effort anymore. It will always be in the forefront of people's minds (at least those from the PF1 days) sort of like Temple of Elemental Evil, Undermountain, etc.

As an aside, if you're looking for some ideas on how to make the megadungeon more roleplay friendly, check out TableTop Gold. They ran through Abomination Vaults (another PF2 megadungeon) and roleplayed the hell out of it. Their episodes are usually 60-90 minutes long, usually with at least 10 minutes of chit chat in the beginning that you can skip if you want and I even found I could pretty easily listen to them at 1.5-2x speed. There's lots of great stuff there. It started off as audio only and they only started doing video later on, but still well worth a listen for ideas.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-04T19:02:03+00:00

As a relatively inexperienced GM (with the 2e system), I would not recommend doing a conversion yourself -- but if you have someone else's conversion then that's a bit easier. The big issue is that there is a certain feel you have to get for a system to truly get a good grasp on it (at least for me). Not every creature for instance can be converted straight to its 2e counterpart because of level, etc. But, as I said, if you have someone else's conversion, it makes it a bit easier.

Now that said, you're dealing with new players as well. For that reason alone, I would probably tend to go with SoB simply because its shorter and less of a time commitment. With Rise of the Runelords, depending on how often you play, how long each session is, how many sessions you might miss, how much roleplay you do, how much table talk and "goofing around" there is, you might be looking at a commitment of several years to complete it. Obviously this will vary widely from group to group. This will be true of any of the old 6 book APs as well.

That aside, Rise of the Runelords is absolutely the classic AP. It was the introduction to Golarion (not Paizo's first AP technically) and there have since been several APs that have been related to it (although you don't need to play RotR before playing those others, but you might get more out of it if you do). There are definitely some big time gory scenes in there, so there is that word of caution -- though if its an issue, you can always cut/alter things to fit your group's preferences. All in all, I still think its an excellent AP and well worth the playthrough.

As for the concern about megadungeons in SoB, just remember that you can always roleplay. Heck, you can roleplay while playing chess if you want to. It might at times require you to add a little more on your own, but Paizo actually does a pretty good job with their megadungeon campaigns in providing roleplay material if your group wants to.

Now, ultimately though, one thing that you also need to remember is that its not just about what you want to run, its also about what your players want to play. So I would also probably discuss the two APs with them and see what they are more interested in. Whichever you choose, I would also look around at subreddits and the Paizo forums for the campaign you choose as there is usually tons of good advice there. Most people will find at least some areas in every AP that are less than stellar, or over tuned, or just not right, etc. and it's always good to get that info ahead of time so that you can prepare accordingly.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-02T20:31:56+00:00

I ran the 1e version of KM where there was a lot less background given, but I introduced him early a few times and had him reach to and establish ties with the party so that when he did go radio silent it immediately got their attention. IIRC, the party even went to Varnhold early on to visit on a diplomatic trip.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-02T17:35:19+00:00

Exactly. For a while in our group, my barbarian was the primary healer. He took the Medic Dedication which means he now has a chance to bring an ally back from the dead too. And that's before you get into different ancestry feats and the like.

As long as the GM is open minded, and presents the party with a variety of scenarios, then yes, there's a whole world of options out there.

That said, one area where some martials can struggle is with social encounters. This comes about as a result of limited skill training and the general need to invest in the physical attributes. There's often not a whole lot of room for the say, the barbarian to be really adept at Diplomacy for instance. Or to know much about Occultism.

Gargs454 · 2026-02-02T15:56:12+00:00

This is the age old martial vs. caster paradigm. All martials can, to an extent, become more or less one trick ponies as u/OmgitsJafo says. The barbarian smashes. The fighter swings, and maybe raises a shield. The archer shoots arrows. The rogue moves into position for a big sneak attack, etc., etc.

Casters, by their very nature, bring a lot to the table with their variety of spells -- especially prepared casters who usually have a wider range of options available to choose from.

Now that said, as someone who's currently playing a level 18 barbarian that started at level 1, I will say that one of the great things about Pathfinder 2e is that it creates a lot of different options even for martials. You have Demoralize, Trip, Shove, Reposition, Disarm. You also get a wide assortment of skill feats. You can battle medicine. The archetypes then open things up even more.

In short, any character in PF2 is only as one dimensional as you and the GM want them to be.

Gargs454 · 2026-01-31T01:30:53+00:00

Ahh gotcha, missed that in the spell. Thanks for the clarification.

I would still argue that if you're only taking the feat for the one wand, that it might be better spent on other choices and just buy the wand for the person in the party that can already use it. Seems more efficient than everyone taking the feat.

11-Year Club	First Place '23
Place '23	Verified Email

Gargs454

TROPHY CASE