ooc Cult of Cinders OOC

[Daryk]

Well, if Samrod and Cirmaran every get in a situation where they might get drunk... ;)

[Lycar]

Maybe they booze over the headache that was herding Pendergrast to civilisation before the oaf can ruin everything... 😉

[Daryk]

Cirmaran would not turn down an excuse to go to Port Peril...

[ifreedman]

10 hours ago, Lycar said:

@ifreedman Heh, nice speech to Pendergrast! 😄 As for mocking Pendergrast...

@Daryk Certainly Cirmaran knows a few shanties and songs from his sailor life? Because, just perhaps, there is a jaunty tune mocking a Chelaxian Grand Admiral or something, which could be slightly rewritten to fit good ol' Gerhard? I have an idea about that. Too bad that none of us are trained in Performance, but oh well, the song ought to be memorable enough (even if Cirmaran and Samrod possibly drunkenly singing it may only be memorable for just how bad the two sing...). 😉

Wilder isn't trained in performance, but he has the untrained improv feat, so he still has a +11 to performance FYI.

[Daryk]

Sounds like a winner to me! :)

[Lycar]

Seem like Samrod needs to enlist Wilder's aid in mocking Pendergrast then. Or maybe... both Wilder and Cirmaran.

The more of a team effort this becomes, so much the better! 😃

[Daryk]

Cirmaran pretty much already gave his back-handed contribution to that effort. Even if Pendergrast is unaware of the Ekujae, he should understand common courtesy regarding inviting "friends of friends" (or rather "acquaintances of acquaintances") to someone's home.

[Lycar]

The Rules Lawyer talking about ABP, benefits and caveats. Also modifications.

[Abberdaggus]

Sorry about the delay - crazy few days at work...

51 minutes ago, Lycar said:

The Rules Lawyer talking about ABP, benefits and caveats. Also modifications.

Funny you should mention this: I was just about to bring it up again. I believe the opinions diverged quite a bit, so I propose a simple vote. I suggest we consider whether to adopt the more simplified Automatic Rune Progression, which only replaces fundamental runes to weapon and armor and doesn't mess with bonusses to skills, and abilities. It can be seen as something of a compromise.

My personal preference would lean slightly towards adopting the ARP. There are various pros and cons, but the most important thing for me is flavor. I find that the fundamental runes commoditizes magic. To make sure characters are up to date with what bonuses they need to have to survive, the campaign have to flood the world with magical runes, or alternatively make sure that even the smallest little hamlet would have to have a shop filled with magical runes for sale. It just has wrong flavor to me. Magical items should be interesting, wondrous and relatively rare (in the world, not necessarily in the campaign) so that when you find a magical item, it is seen as a great stroke of luck instead of something you feel you are entitled to. I would probably have adopted either ABP or ARB (if I had been aware of that) in the original game ad, if I had had a bit more experience of higher level play. But it is in no way a dealbreaker for me - I can live with vanilla rules and be happy.

I think you should decide, so I will not cast a vote. And to be on the conservative side, a tie means sticking to vanilla. You can decide to not cast a vote, if you are indifferent.

This is probably as good a time as any to decide. It will take effect at next level up (which I have a feeling is very close now...)

Also - if you haven't noticed: I just edited the IC post to include a hero point award!

Edited February 27 by Abberdaggus (see edit history)

[Lycar]

@Abberdaggus I am happy with just doing away with the fundamental runes, which are just math enhancers, especially since it screws people over who do not have / lose them. Let the power come from the character.

However, I am not adverse to retaining skill boost items. I am perfectly fine with going full ABP progression, but since the skill items usually also have a magical effect associated with them, they are still worth-while in their own right. Unlike the fundamental runes, the skill bonus is usually more of a want-to-have rather then a must have.

On the other hand, with full ABP in play, people just apply the potency bonus to whatever skill they want their toon to specialise in, and still buy interesting magic items because of the extra effect they give, instead of the +x to the skill.

So I am happy with going full ABP or just abolishing fundamental runes. Those are the mandatory ones that are not fun because of this.

But yes, if the martials no longer have to spend so much gold on their weapons and armour, make sure the caster types get the scrolls, wands and staffs they need to be full-fledged casters.

Or maybe the dabblers just use the saved gold to buy some utility scrolls.

[Daryk]

Ok, having watched the video, my reflexive reaction is "not on your life". That said, I could probably live with ARP if (and only if) we get refunded for the runes we have (Cirmaran has debts to pay...).

More seriously, Paizo put a LOT of effort into building this system and ABP just seems to toss a good portion of it for no reason. If I were to implement ARP myself, I would require the purchase/crafting of the lowest runes but let them progress with character level. That seems too fiddly to introduce mid-game though, so my overall vote is "no" stick with what we're using.

I'll admit that ABP killing ALL Item Bonuses is the deal breaker for me. Having maxed out my Circumstance and Status bonuses to speed, Item bonuses are all that's left to me, and I really don't want to give them up.

[ifreedman]

Wow, such different opinions already. Hmm...

 

If I'm being honest, if we use ARP -- which I like and vote in favor of using -- I'd actually prefer to do it with the skill bonuses also. That's partly because I don't see the ARP actually affecting Wilder all that much since weapon and armor bonuses aren't likely to come up much for him. But also, I don't love managing equipment, always searching for the right items for the right bonuses. If I need to acquire magic items for skill bonuses that are built into the game's design, I'll probably never actually get them.

 

In general, I like fun and fantastical magic items, but I've never loved the glut of common magic items in PF. Magic items should feel interesting and special, and not something that is needed to collect just to keep pace with the rising difficulty of the monsters.

 

That's my vote at least.

[leons1701]

I guess I just feel like ABP in PF2 is addressing a problem that doesn't really exist. Sure, you need a potency rune and a striking rune for your weapon and a potency and resiliency rune for your armor, but that's basically it. ABP in Pathfinder grew out of the "Christmas Tree" effect where you 'needed' not only enhancement bonuses to armor and weapons, but stat bonuses for 3-5 different stats, resistance bonus to saves, deflection bonus, natural armor bonus and probably three other things I'm forgetting and critically, each and every one of those needed a specific body slot. There were a ton of cool belts in Pathfinder. Did you ever use any of them? Of course not, none of them were better than a bonus to your physical stats. Capes? Gotta have that resistance bonus. Head? Mental stats. ABP in Pathfinder was the only way hundreds of items would ever get used. Not only did PF2 reduce the Christmas tree effect, it basically did away with body slots. Show me an item in PF2 you'll never use because it competes with a needed item (other than shields which is a whole discussion in and of itself and one ARP does nothing to fix).

 

All that said, I guess I don't really care one way or the other. I don't particularly like having to remember "oh yeah, I leveled up and get a random skill bonus for reasons" but I'll live with it if that's what the group wants.

 

Edit: Yeesh, I'd never even considered the effect on alchemists or kineticists of ABP as written and apparently neither did anyone at Paizo. While we don't actually have anyone playing either class in this game, I would still strongly prefer ARP if we're going that way, simply so that we don't just remove alchemy from the game entirely.

[Lycar]

So it would seem we could agree on just doing without the fundamental runes then. That would be good enough for me.

However, as for magic items with a stat bonus, there is the alternative to use the Rules Lawyer's hybrid system: The items exist, but every PC still gets the potency bonus to skills according to ABP. The two boni just do not stack. You put a potency bonus into Athletics and also buy a belt fot the extra bulk? Awesome, you get the item bonus or the potency bonus, whichever is higher. So people still can fiddle with the Magic-Mart(TM), but they don't miss out if they dont.

As for weapons and armour... How about this: Everybody gets the to-hit and damage bonus as per ABP, but if you wish to add any property runes, the weapon or armour must have the potency rune of the required grade to support the number of property runes you wish to add. Again, everybody gets what is required to have, but you can add more if you wish.

Instead of using potency runes, maybe the weapon/armour instead needs to be made of sufficient quality to bear the runes.

Edited February 28 by Lycar (see edit history)

[Abberdaggus]

So to sum up as I understand it:

• Two votes in favor of ARP or even ABP
• One vote in favor of vanilla (no change)
• One abstain (but preference for ARP over ABP)

I read that as a majority in favor of ARP. As I see it, this would make the following changes:

• Remove weapon potency runes and add +1 potency bonus to attacks
• Remove striking runes and give everyone two damage dice to weapon attacks
• Remove armor potency runes and add +1 potency bonus to AC
• Remove resistance runes and add +1 potency bonus to saves (since the change takes place at level-up to 8th)

I plan to do a full refund on the runes removed (as well as things like the doubling rings, which no longer have any real effect). This is probably somewhat of an overcompensation (since the runes are replaced by "free" bonuses 1:1) - but I suspect that you have passed over hidden loot during your explorations anyway, so I do not expect it to have any unbalancing effects.

Since we are running an AP, the world has already been populated with loot. For the most part, I will simply remove the fundamental runes from the loot, but some of it I will exchange with other random (and more interesting) items. Occasionally, the AP rewards players with fundamental runes ahead of time (e.g. Wilder already has a resilient rune even though you are not supposed to have it until lvl 8). I actually intend to leave them in, allowing you to get ahead for a short while. Those runes will give potency bonuses rather than item bonuses and they will not stack with the innate potency bonuses, so it will only have effect until your lvl catches up. But it will allow you feel a bit more powerful for a short while. These runes will be much rarer under this system, so the markets will not be flooded with runes. (Also, these runes cannot be bought in shops or crafted - but they can be transferred - consider them rare relics from a time long gone).

I will prefer to keep the rules on property runes simple and not require potency runes to be on the weapon. Instead, I will think of it as the property runes working on a tiny sliver of the wielders life force. This means that the wielder needs to have the corresponding level of potency bonus for the property rune to work. You can in principle etch the rune onto any weapon, but it will not work unless you have the potency bonus (this includes the potency bonus provided by a rare relic potency rune, if you are lucky enough to find one of those ahead of time). The property bonus also determines how many property runes will work (if you are weilding a weapon with too many runes on the weapon compared to your potency bonus, none of them work).

There may be more tweaks we need to do along the way to address issues that we haven't thought about. It may make things a bit more complicated, but hopefully we can find a simple solution. To take an example I briefly considered Alchemist's fire. Should the extra innate damage die be automatically added to the lesser version? I would say no, since you can't put a striking rune on a flask of alchemists fire. But what about the item bonus of higher level versions? Do those stack with the potency bonus? In principle they shouldn't because the item bonus is meant to replace a striking rune, so it is the same bonus. On the other hand, perhaps it is not unreasonable to give such consumables a bit extra love? In my experience they are rarely used since players would rather sell them for gold to save up for more permanent items. The extra bonus might give a bit extra incentive to actually use them? Granted stacking 2x +3 at lvl 17 is a massive bonus - but the damage is still relatively modest at that level (and the price tag of a single use item fairly steep), so why not? But I haven't given very deep thoughts about it, so we can consider it when it comes up.