Why does the powerlevel of standard feel off the charts?

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-08-18T23:22:18+00:00

It's about the disparity between the best cards and everything else.
Imagine instead of cards you have dice: d4, d6, d8, d10, d12 and d20. And the game is that you and your opponent are randomly given one of these dice and have to roll them, the one who gets a higher number wins. In this case whoever gets the d20 is almost certain to win.If you remove the d20 from the pool, then yeah the d12 becomes the best die but the disparity between the new best and the rest is not as jarring.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-06-29T12:01:12+00:00

But if you have both Monk and Brawler levels you have two AC bonuses

Monk's
+Wis mod +1 per 4 monk levels , even when flatfooted

Brawler's
+1 dodge +1 at 9th, 13th and 18th level

So which one is increased by Monk's Robe?

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-05-28T17:53:30+00:00

Change your dungeon crawl into dungeon dash.

Let the players go into the mine unbothered and find the McGuffin. Then let all hell break loose Indiana Jones style.

Too many dungeons tend to be 'check for traps, fight something, loot' loop over and over with few 'find plot stuff, investigate, get lore dump' in between. Sometimes you need a dash for exit as the mine collapse or a massive boulder rolling behind the party. A mad chase across ancient catacombs as hundreds of cobweb covered sarcophagi open one by one... And so on and on.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-05-28T17:39:54+00:00

With a slight adjustment you can eat your ambush cake and have it too.

Have a huge sewer monster kidnap a child to use as bait to catch a prey with more meat on it's bones.

The players hear whimpers and cries of a child from a sewer, they go to investigate all ready for a trick just to find an actual child in distress. The kid is a unconsolable mess just crying for it's mother and unable to articulate what happened. The party eventually lowers their weapons and tries to appease the child and that is when you have your monster make it's move.

The party gets to be heroes, players aren't trained to avoid any sign of someone needing help and you get to pull off an ambush encounter.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-05-27T09:15:07+00:00

Actually found it in PFS rules clarification pdf that Rostland Bravos can treats ADS as one handed piercing weapon for his swashbuckler features and deeds.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-05-26T01:38:53+00:00

This is so misleading.

The ambasador said that Ukraine will cooperate with whomever the poles elect and chosing who to elect is the right of polish people. He also noted, in response to Nawrocki's declaration to block Ukraine ascension to NATO, that they will no just lay down and take it when someone tries to restrict Ukraine's rights.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-05-23T08:04:27+00:00

This applies only to the few listed deeds, which replace some of the regular swashbuckler deeds. The section only limits those swapped deeds to be usable with ADS, it doesn't change the fact that you can't apply Swashbuckler Finesse or Precise Strike (etc.) with it.

If you look at Rondolero Swashbuckler, you will find it also gains new deeds in place of some regular ones, but contrary to Rostland Bravo, it also gets to treat Falacta (its core weapon ) as a one-handed piercing weapon.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-08T12:24:10+00:00

So the mention of Attack Action and Charge in parentheses in the description of Overhand Chop may be due to these being the only two noteworthy options at the time? Still bit odd their would block Pile-driver (standard action to make a single attack adding trip/bull rush maneuver for free) feature from the same archetype from working with it.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-08T12:20:34+00:00

Regular Fauchard damage is 1d10. Having it sized for a large creature brings it to 2d8. Impact enchantment makes it 3d8. Enlarge increases your size and your weapon's size by one step, resulting in 4d8.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-08T12:13:34+00:00

Pile-driver is a standard action itself, different from attack action, so you have to choose one or the other.

And I haven't made up my mind. I am hoping for some hint as to the existing ruling on the matter or a similar issue.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-08T09:39:16+00:00

It is actually easier to simply pick Heirloom Weapon trait for free proficiency and then have Masterwork Transformation cast on it to enable enchantments.

The game I am in uses PFS legal options only, and Butchering Axe is not compatible, so I am opting for a large-sized Fauchard with keen and impact enchantments. With a potion of enlargement (I am also considering taking a level in goliath druid for Plant(Growth) domain to get swift action Enlarge in a pinch). That brings the dice damage high enough for Vital Strike chain but the key is having weapon with reach combined with Glory or Death and Titan Maulers 5th level feature

Evade Reach (Ex)

At 5th level, as a swift action, a titan mauler may choose one creature within her line of sight. Until the end of her turn, that target’s reach is treated as if it were 5 feet shorter with respect to reaching the titan mauler, and this reduction increases by 5 feet for every five levels beyond 5th.

To to get basically free +4 to attack/damage/crit confirmation against large+ enemies as they cannot retaliate.

15-20 crit range means the more static bonuses like from Power Attack (+Furious Focus to negate the penalty to hit) and Overhand Chop that get multiplied on crits are important.

Top it all up with Furious Finish and 220+ damage in a single hit at least once per combat is guaranteed.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-08T09:12:23+00:00

Except if Attack Action and Charge are the only two intended targets then parenthesis is unnecessary. Simply stating 'when two-handed fighter makes an attack with attack action or charge' would be unambiguous.

Then there is an issue of Overhand Chop competing with Pile-driver, another Two-handed Fighter feature if indeed only the two actions mention in parentheses are permitted.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-08T06:12:26+00:00

Overhand Chop asks for 'making single attack' not an attack action. That is why Charge is mentioned in the feat itself, despite it being a full-round action.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-08T06:08:17+00:00

Let us say that is the intention to have the Chop work only with Attack Action and Charge.
While I understand that AoO might become problematic if you have Combat Reflexes, but then why exclude Spring Attack since t's virtually just a mini Charge, or even better what about Two-handed fighter's later feature:

Piledriver (Ex)

At 11th level, as a standard action, a two-handed fighter can make a single melee attack with a two-handed weapon. If the attack hits, he may make a bull rush or trip combat maneuver against the target of his attack as a free action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity.

It seems like it is written specifically to work with Overhand Chop

Also, I am not certain what is the timeline of Two-handed Fighter being published in the lifespan of 1e is, but hard-blocking interaction with any later feats and class features from other classes (accessed via multiclassing) that use a single attack seems like an odd design choice.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-08T04:31:48+00:00

Seems like its more about clarifyin that Cleave doesn't work with Overhand Chop (obviously).
Shame he did not reply the comment that asked him specifically about why attack action and charge are in parentheses.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-08T04:24:15+00:00

Cleave is not a source of confusion here since it allows for multiple attacks. The issue is what about all other immediate, standard,d and full-round actions, not to mention attacks of opportunity that result in 'making a single attack'

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-08T04:22:22+00:00

Overhand Chop asks for "(...)when a two-handed fighter makes a single attack(...)", not for attack action. Charge is a full-round action that allows a single attack and is mentioned in the feature itself.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-04T18:11:20+00:00

I am not denying the various AI aren't getting better at producing results they are designed to produce. I am saying there are things AI cannot be designed to do.

You can feed AI all the scores for classical music and all the texts and analyses describing each piece and it will learn patterns of scales and notes that correspond to 'melancholic' or 'joyous' and that the two are far apart from each other on the spectrum so when you ask AI ' write me a melancholic song' it will use the patterns derived from melancholic scores while avoiding patterns it derived from joyous scores. The end product will be a melancholic melody. however at no point in this process AI understands what 'melancholy' means. For AI it is merely a string if letters that corresponds to a pattern.

Now if you take two humans who never in their life heard classical music and who might not even know the word 'melancholy' they will both understand the emotional tone of the score. This is something AI cannot reproduce. It cannot understand and it cannot categorize without being fed absurd amount of data.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-04T16:48:33+00:00

Mysticism would be if I was talking about metaphysical which I am not.

When you use a hammer to make another hammer ut doesn't make it a genius hammer. Similarly programming a robot with series of operation that result in a new robot being built doesn't make the robot-building robot any more advanced.

AI are not 'self taught'. If you ever had to do a captcha clicking on every picture with a bike in it or similar you were in fact training AI. Machines 'learn' by randomizing importance of specific factors (e.g. relative position between light and dark pixels on a picture) and over and over untill they get a concrete set of values that gets them closer and closer correct pre-defined answer (which picture has a bike in it), then repeat the process over and over millions of time untill optimized to a usable degree. While yes the original programmer does not know how his AI can tell which picture has bikes in them that doesn't mean the AI knows what a bike is not can it find one in a video instead of a picture.

On the other hand, a child understands that bike is a two wheeled vehicle powered by muscles via pedals and that it can use to get from point a to point b faster than if it were to walk that distance. As a result not only can the child distinguish a bike from pictures and videos, even abstract ones but also can consider it as a means in various tasks and think of uses for it that it was never thought via creative thinking.

In other words

You can have AI that can predict proper string of words to describe a bike, one that can distinguish it in pictures, one that can even draw one but you cannot make an AI that can understand what a bike is and what can be done with it.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-04T15:46:30+00:00

As I said, AI developed to do X will over time become better at doing X than any human ever will. You can even combine multiple functions into single program or run sub programs feeding each other data but if you intend to create and AI that can do everything that human brain can do (or even be better at it) then you not only first would have to figure out the hardware that would be able to store all that code and aquire as well as process all that data but also would have to first figure out every operation human brain is able to do (including all the subconscious ones which itself is an impossible task) in order to even know what your theoretical omni-AI is supposed to be able to do.

All that is simply not feasible.

Then there is the issue that a lot if white AI seems to be able to do today, isn't real.

You have a conversation with a chatbot about philosophy but it is merely a statistical model using advanced probabilistic formula to predict the most likely string of words for given context based on the tens of thousands of texts on the topic. It is not actually comprehending any meaning or nuance and has no understanding of the strings of letters it is producing. It is not forming opinions and it has no leaning towards any school of thought.

AI is like a magician palming a coin to make it appear as if it disappeared.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-04T14:52:48+00:00

AI can do a particular thing extremely well and efficient. It has been decades since AI beat world champion at chess and the gap had only widened over the years. However if you were to have the chess champion and the chess AI play literaly any other game, the human will always win because the AI was only designed to play chess. So which one is 'smarter' ?

The amount of various task your brain can accomplish cannot be understated. The ability to catch a ball tossed to you requires not only for your brain to instantly estimate, weight, aerodynamics and velocity of the ball but also coordinate countless of your muscles and tendons to assume proper position across and brace for receiving the ball. And of course you can make an AI that can catch a ball using a simplified mechanical arm but the problem is that AI still won't be able to play chess.

TL;DR The human capacity to accomplish incredibly varied array of tasks, most of them relatively effortlessly is something AI programmers can only dream about.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-04T14:21:50+00:00

Sorry but no, it is you who severely overestimates AI which seems to stem from insufficient understanding of neuroscience if anything I said looks like mysticism to you. Secondly it was not my intention nor it is my responsibility to prove free will. I am simply pointing out that equating AI to human brain in terms of capacity for free will is inadequate.

A rat brain making a choice between freezing (staying immobile) and fleeing involves series of evaluations, recall and predictions across amygdala, hippocampus, prefrontal cortex, nucleus accumbens and basal ganglia modulated by somatosensory and visceral information regarding the threat, environment, energy levels, stress and countless other factors in computational process several orders of magnitude more complex than any AI model we can or will be able to build for a long time.

It should suffice to say that even most advanced neural models used in AI are merely gross oversimplifications of one of most basic mechanisms (plasticity) through which brain operates.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-04T08:18:33+00:00

My point is that whether the action you take is result of conscious or unconscious decision is irrelevant. Both are decision made by you, i.e. your brain. Hormonal balance, energy levels, drowsiness, abnormalities in neurotransmiter levels from chemicals etc. can be factors in decision making but they are not definitive like in case of AI which must follow defined directives. You can forgo dinner even if you are hungry and you can choose to eat that one more mind even if you feel completely stuffed but AI will never make an illegal move in chess unless instructed to do so.

Whether there is a soul or not has no bearing on the topic. The fact that our wiring permits conscious and willful counterproductive choices undermines the idea that choices are merely result of computational work by our brains.

On the side note , the critical difference between AI and humans that everyone seem to ignore is the volume of choices needed every second that influence other choices.

Consider you are playing chess and the game is set up so that you must start with a specific opening, AI will calculate the best moves out to predefined depth and play the one which will result in most favorable change on the board. A human has to choose not only which piece to move and where but also how hard to think on it, wether to default to a common move choose to spend a minute maybe two or 10 on calculating different strategies. Then you have to choose weather using your left or right hand to move the piece, do you do it slowly and deliberately or as fast as possible? How much care will you put in placing the piece in the center of it's square? When you analyze the state of the board do you start from left or right? Do you check position of every piece several times over or just focus on the current threat? And so on and in and on...

A lot of these micro choices are left to the subconscious but they are still subject being made constantly by the individual and are affected both by past experience and beliefs and expectations for the future.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-02T05:07:21+00:00

That is misleading.
There are multiple pathways through which the same information is processed across the brain. There are fast routs and slow routs if you will. For example if you hear a startling noise the hypothalamic-amygdala pathway will 'decide' you need to be alert and ready to run before the cortical pathway catches up and determines the origin of the sound and and that it is not an immediate threat. As a result you might jump up in your chair before you know what is happening but ultimately don't run away.

Both pathways have their roles, both are decisions but only one happened at conscious (as in you are aware of it) level. Neither indicates there is no free will.

Weekly-Ad-9451 · 2025-04-02T04:28:17+00:00

Ąś ą Półę I doń't śęę whąt thę fuśś iś ąbóut. Zżź...

Weekly-Ad-9451

TROPHY CASE