# Pathfinder 2 Character Sheet #1: Fumbus, Goblin Alchemist



## imagineGod (Jul 12, 2018)

Honestly, I was a bit reluctant to make the switch to "Pathfinder 2" (will that be the official name), but seeing this character sheet, is encouraging. 

To be honest, it is the little things often overlooked, like the gear list showing items that are ready versus those that are stowed, which I can surely see helping minimize arguments between GM and Players, especially when PCs enter a friendly town, and their weapons and stowed first. 

I also like the rules reference, will it come as standard with pregens?


----------



## Kaodi (Jul 12, 2018)

I like the fact that alchemist's fire and acid are not hideously overpriced now. Interesting that they have changed the alchemist to actual use alchemical items for bombs rather than a proprietary mechanic.


----------



## lightblade (Jul 12, 2018)

Kaodi said:


> I like the fact that alchemist's fire and acid are not hideously overpriced now. Interesting that they have changed the alchemist to actual use alchemical items for bombs rather than a proprietary mechanic.



The playtest has gone over to a Silver-based economy, so 3gp is equivalent to 30gp in old Pathfinder. That said, it's my understanding that the Alchemist has a daily crafting allotment for these academical items and typically won't need to worry about purchasing them.


----------



## lightblade (Jul 12, 2018)

The DC 20 flat check to remove persistent damage seems like a typo; It's my understanding that a flat check is just a D20 roll, and only curing it on a nat 20 seems rather poor. Perhaps it should be DC 10?


----------



## Datalore (Jul 12, 2018)

Touch AC. Boo.


----------



## vpuigdoller (Jul 12, 2018)

I don't know what to think.  Going to need to see more.


----------



## Just Jacque (Jul 12, 2018)

lightblade said:


> The DC 20 flat check to remove persistent damage seems like a typo; It's my understanding that a flat check is just a D20 roll, and only curing it on a nat 20 seems rather poor. Perhaps it should be DC 10?





The flat check is just for it going out naturally, i.e without any player intervention. In the actual description for the Alchemist's Fire you can see you (or an ally) can end the damage with a single action.


----------



## lightblade (Jul 12, 2018)

Just Jacque said:


> The flat check is just for it going out naturally, i.e without any player intervention. In the actual description for the Alchemist's Fire you can see you (or an ally) can end the damage with a single action.



Sure, but that's not the one I'm concerned about. I'm worried about the persistent damage from the acid flask.


----------



## Ghal Maraz (Jul 12, 2018)

As much as PF remains the crunchy D&D, I must say the functional and clean tag terminology goes a long way to address the mechanical weight of the system. 

Much, much better than the "natural language" approach of D&D 5 (which is a lighter ruleset, so it can certainly go with a less "gamist" language, but I'm one of those people to whom rules must be rules and background is a separate thing. Not that you can't have rules filled with background faithfulness, but rules, to me, must be clear, above anything else).


----------



## Wrathamon (Jul 12, 2018)

it reminds me of 4e layout


----------



## timbannock (Jul 12, 2018)

imagineGod said:
			
		

> Honestly, I was a bit reluctant to make the switch to "Pathfinder 2" (will that be the official name), but seeing this character sheet, is encouraging.
> 
> To be honest, it is the little things often overlooked, like the gear list showing items that are ready versus those that are stowed, which I can surely see helping minimize arguments between GM and Players, especially when PCs enter a friendly town, and their weapons and stowed first.




Agreed; that's a clean sheet, and is the first of the previews that I've found favorable. That gear setup looks so simple, clean, and functional. I'm hoping it's fairly easy to port and most of all complete so any conversion to other OSR/D&D games doesn't require coming up with my own lists of gear and encumbrance/bulk values.



			
				AMGhal Maraz said:
			
		

> As much as PF remains the crunchy D&D, I must say the functional and clean tag terminology goes a long way to address the mechanical weight of the system.
> 
> Much, much better than the "natural language" approach of D&D 5 (which is a lighter ruleset, so it can certainly go with a less "gamist" language, but I'm one of those people to whom rules must be rules and background is a separate thing. Not that you can't have rules filled with background faithfulness, but rules, to me, must be clear, above anything else).




I'm a 5E stalwart through and through but I gotta agree here, too. I think one of the strengths of the Pathfinder team is that they've been dealing with such a heavy level of crunch that when they focus on paring it down, they do so with a critical, technical eye that makes the end result much better than some "natural language" dictum. Games are games, and especially in era of more and more convention gaming, gaming leagues, organized play, and streaming games, having a strong, clear ruleset to work from makes it easier for all of that to exist and share the same basis. (One of my pet peeves is turning on an actual play video to get an understanding of a game and being immediately greeted with all of their house rules and rules changes.)


----------



## Superchunk77 (Jul 12, 2018)

I like it!


----------



## Pil Ambrosio (Jul 12, 2018)

I can't stand Wayne Reynolds, and, quite frankly, I can't understand why Paizo didn't choose to change its illustrator. It just doesn't make sense to me. If you want new players to your game, you gotta change not only the rules, but the whole visual ID.


----------



## Morrus (Jul 12, 2018)

Pil Ambrosio said:


> I can't stand Wayne Reynolds,




Aww. And he speaks so highly of you.


----------



## Adso (Jul 12, 2018)

Pil Ambrosio said:


> I can't stand Wayne Reynolds, and, quite frankly, I can't understand why Paizo didn't choose to change its illustrator. It just doesn't make sense to me. If you want new players to your game, you gotta change not only the rules, but the whole visual ID.




Turns out we (and myself personally) really like Wayne as a person and love his art. And we are not alone. I've met many a new player who fell in love with Wayne's artwork due to Pathfinder. But, you know, opinions vary.

Stephen
Pathfinder RPG Senior Designer and map guy.


----------



## Superchunk77 (Jul 12, 2018)

Pil Ambrosio said:


> I can't stand Wayne Reynolds, and, quite frankly, I can't understand why Paizo didn't choose to change its illustrator. It just doesn't make sense to me. If you want new players to your game, you gotta change not only the rules, but the whole visual ID.




I disagree, Wayne Reynolds makes fantastic art and I'm glad he's still their main artist.


----------



## Henry (Jul 12, 2018)

Just Jacque said:


> The flat check is just for it going out naturally, i.e without any player intervention. In the actual description for the Alchemist's Fire you can see you (or an ally) can end the damage with a single action.




Actually, what ISN'T listed there is that the "interact" to end the effect requires a roll also (I believe it was a DC15?):

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v8ks?Pregen-previews-over-at-ENWorld#49

Also, see the Glass Cannon Podcast's Playtest actual play games to get an example of someone failing for two turns in a row to get the fire out by spending all their actions each round through TERRIBLE rolls.


----------



## Vexies (Jul 12, 2018)

loving this, really like that Goblins are a core race and alchemist a core class. This looks really fun to play. its a clean easy to understand sheet. Still need to see how skills work but overall im pretty sold. Looking forward to the playtest.


----------



## Arilyn (Jul 12, 2018)

Superchunk77 said:


> I disagree, Wayne Reynolds makes fantastic art and I'm glad he's still their main artist.




I like Wayne Reynolds' work too. In my mind he's linked solidly to PF, and the game would seem odd without him.


----------



## Sunseeker (Jul 12, 2018)

Adso said:


> Turns out we (and myself personally) really like Wayne as a person and love his art. And we are not alone. I've met many a new player who fell in love with Wayne's artwork due to Pathfinder. But, you know, opinions vary.
> 
> Stephen
> Pathfinder RPG Senior Designer and map guy.




Well, since folks from Paizo are listening in, and we're talking about Wayne Reynolds....

Wayne Reynolds *art* (since I have no idea how he is as a person) is one of the primary reasons I held off buying Pathfinder books until you announced you weren't going to make hardbacks of PF1 anymore.  

Now, I've seen Wayne's art outside of Pathfinder (in non-fantasy or other material where his usual style is unbecoming) and he's clearly a skilled artist.  HOWEVER, from an _art_ perspective, beyond the obvious stylization of his work, his work is almost universally busy to the point that in some work is is difficult to tell what I'm even looking at.  There are gobs of unnecessary details that while indeed, an adventurer may actually be covered in all these little details, districts from the works themselves.  And yes, there is clearly some stylization going on, there are also some obvious anatomy issues with many of his images.

Even though I LOVED 4E, and likewise loved the artist who did the vast majority of its art, the overwhelming _singularity_ of the art was a turn-off.  As it often is in PF1.  One of the strengths of other games, not just D&D, is a diversity of art styles.  It helps enable the reader to visualize the game _on their terms_, while utilizing a singular artist forces the reader to visualize the game on _your terms_.  Both of these are perfectly valid marketing strategies, but at least in my case, I _still_ have difficulty visualizing even my own characters when playing Pathfinder in a non-Wayne-Reynolds-style.  Because of that, I find my desire to play PF1 much lower.

So sure, different strokes for different folks, but that's kinda my point.  And quite literally, different strokes would attract different folks.


----------



## Adso (Jul 12, 2018)

Sunseeker said:


> One of the strengths of other games, not just D&D, is a diversity of art styles.  It helps enable the reader to visualize the game _on their terms_, while utilizing a singular artist forces the reader to visualize the game on _your terms_.  Both of these are perfectly valid marketing strategies, but at least in my case, I _still_ have difficulty visualizing even my own characters when playing Pathfinder in a non-Wayne-Reynolds-style.  Because of that, I find my desire to play PF1 much lower.
> 
> So sure, different strokes for different folks, but that's kinda my point.  And quite literally, different strokes would attract different folks.




While we do you Wayne for the covers of all our hardback core books, he is not the only artist that we use. In fact, if you take all of the gaming product we produce for Pathfinder (adventures, adventure path volumes, Pathfinder Setting books, Player Companions, novels, comics, and so on), Wayne doesn't even do the vast majority of our covers. He certainly doesn't do anywhere near the majority of our interior art. 

And Wayne is a delightful person: smart, fun and kind.


----------



## Jeff Carpenter (Jul 12, 2018)

I have never been a fan of Reynolds’s art either.  Not sure I would make a buying decision based on just that. I can see both side of the argument for change to bring in new buyers vs Reynolds is our brand. Honestly the fact that goblins are a player races is more a turn off. Especially if they are played for laughs. Come on Fumbles.... I mean Fumbus.


----------



## nightspaladin (Jul 12, 2018)

Alignment missing from the sheet that I can see. Maybe not needed for demo characters?


----------



## Adso (Jul 12, 2018)

nightspaladin said:


> Alignment missing from the sheet that I can see. Maybe not needed for demo characters?




Not needed for the demo. Alignment is still in the game (even though I think it is somewhere between dumb or not entirely doing its job right...yet again, opinions vary).


----------



## EthanSental (Jul 12, 2018)

Much like my desire for PF1 that waned as the company put out to much stuff to keep up with or even want to use, Wayne's art was well liked to begin with but my fondness for it has waned as well.  The feet/boots are jacked in most but it's an aesthetic thing to me.  I didn't play much 4e but seeing 15 hp at first level seems high to my 1e/2e/3e/5e mindset.  Function of game design for the edition but just odd to my initial eye balling  

still ill looking forward to reading the final PDF rules book to mine for my home D&D game!


----------



## Adso (Jul 12, 2018)

EthanSental said:


> I didn't play much 4e but seeing 15 hp at first level seems high to my 1e/2e/3e/5e mindset.  Function of game design for the edition but just odd to my initial eye balling
> 
> still ill looking forward to reading the final PDF rules book to mine for my home D&D game!




This is an effect of our take on ancestries and 0-level characters. Unlike older editions, you gain Hit Points for you ancestry not just for your class and when you level. So, for instance, the gnome baker living in town might have 8 Hit Points, while the 1st-level gnome rogue you just met at the tavern might have 16 Hit Points.


----------



## Yaarel (Jul 12, 2018)

Alignment needs to be in the personality, story section, not in the mechanics section. Put it in the same category as things like goals, relationships, philosophical views, religious customs, ideals, and so on. Alignment is a shorthand descriptor for ethics.


----------



## Bob Klassen (Jul 12, 2018)

I don’t know. That skill list is very small and there is no way I’d be able to put all my gear in that list. What about the tents and bed roll and rope etc.


----------



## EthanSental (Jul 12, 2018)

Thanks, that's a nice explanation of the design behind it as I haven't been able to read all the releases.


----------



## Adso (Jul 12, 2018)

Bob Klassen said:


> I don’t know. That skill list is very small and there is no way I’d be able to put all my gear in that list. What about the tents and bed roll and rope etc.




This is not the final character sheet. It's just something that we are using for demos and tailored to each character.


----------



## jmucchiello (Jul 13, 2018)

So, Background "Pathfinder hopeful" has no bearing on the character sheet at first level? Other than being at the top of the sheet, no ability comes from it. (I'm guessing it affects ability scores but we can't see how they were generated here.)


----------



## Adso (Jul 13, 2018)

jmucchiello said:


> So, Background "Pathfinder hopeful" has no bearing on the character sheet at first level? Other than being at the top of the sheet, no ability comes from it. (I'm guessing it affects ability scores but we can't see how they were generated here.)




It has bearing on the stats and it's where Fumbus's two lore skills come from.


----------



## Ghal Maraz (Jul 13, 2018)

Here's the description, taken directly from Paizo's website:

"Pathfinder Hopeful (Background)
You've long wanted to join the adventurous Pathfinder Society, a world-spanning organization of relic hunters. This aspiration has led you to take up the dangerous life of an adventurer eager to make a name for yourself and gain the attention of the Pathfinder Society.

Choose two ability boosts. One must be to Strength or Intelligence, and one is a free ability boost.

You gain the Additional Lore feat, and you're trained in the Pathfinder Society Lore skill".

An ability boost is a +2.


----------



## TheCosmicKid (Jul 13, 2018)

Adso said:


> And Wayne is a delightful person: smart, fun and kind.



I'm delighted to hear that, but nobody has claimed otherwise. Expressing a dislike for an artist's style does not constitute an attack - or comment of any sort - on his character. And the good character of an artist is not going to make his style any more appealing to those who dislike it. I'm sure there have been plenty of other artists who are also smart, fun, and kind whom you have decided not to commission based on their work's style and/or quality.


----------



## mellored (Jul 13, 2018)

Kaodi said:


> I like the fact that alchemist's fire and acid are not hideously overpriced now. Interesting that they have changed the alchemist to actual use alchemical items for bombs rather than a proprietary mechanic.



while the gold cost is less, there is a resonance cost instead.  So you can buy 1000 acid flasks, but you still can't use them all in a single day.


----------



## Shasarak (Jul 13, 2018)

I like the main Character sheet and on the other hand the Reference document is way too jargon heavy for my tastes.  Like for example instead of Cheetahs Elixir increasing your speed by 5 it instead gives you acceleration 5 which, in a separate section of the rules, tells you that it increases your speed by 5 ft.

And I am not sure why you specifically need an "interaction" action when you could just say action.


----------



## mellored (Jul 13, 2018)

lightblade said:


> The DC 20 flat check to remove persistent damage seems like a typo; It's my understanding that a flat check is just a D20 roll, and only curing it on a nat 20 seems rather poor. Perhaps it should be DC 10?



Seems fine to me.

10d4 damage may sound like alot, but over 11 turns (since it's at the end of their turn) it's not going to be great in most battles.  

And don't forget it cost RP.   So it's along the lines of a spell, not a weapon attack.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jul 13, 2018)

Re: Wayne Reynolds: I love his style. The business is part of its charm in my opinion. I can see why others might not like it, but I love how every piece of his is packed to the brim with little details. It's also very distinctive. I'll occasionally see MtG cards he did the art for and I can immediately recognize it as his. It's also a very smart move on Paizo's part to associate their brand with such a distinctive style, as when I see such Magic cards, my immediate reaction is that the subject looks like a Pathfinder character. It gives the world a degree of cohesion that you don't see in, say, 5e D&D. Of course, there's always a tradeoff. Having such a distinct visual identity comes with the risk of putting off people who don't like that visual identity, whereas a game with more eclectic art probably doesn't have to worry too much about that.


----------



## Jester David (Jul 13, 2018)

mellored said:


> while the gold cost is less, there is a resonance cost instead.  So you can buy 1000 acid flasks, but you still can't use them all in a single day.



Which is weird. 

"Oh no, I used to many healing potions and now the acid in my flasks is no longer reactive!"


----------



## Charlaquin (Jul 13, 2018)

mellored said:


> while the gold cost is less, there is a resonance cost instead.  So you can buy 1000 acid flasks, but you still can't use them all in a single day.



I don't think that's true. None of the bombs on this sheet say they cost Resonance to use, in contrast to Quick Alchemy, which does.



Jester David said:


> Which is weird.
> 
> "Oh no, I used to many healing potions and now the acid in my flasks is no longer reactive!"



I'm pretty sure that's not how it works either.



			
				Paizo Blog said:
			
		

> Alchemy might feature dramatic effects, but these are powered by the reactions of powerful chemicals—and sometimes catalyzed by resonance—creating a type of fantastic mad science. Where magical power comes from the energies of a spellcasting tradition, alchemical power comes from the fusion of latent potential trapped within matter, released as energy through a reaction with a different potent material.




So notably, alchemy is only _sometimes_ catalyzed by resonance, and when it is, it's simply the means of releasing the latent chemical energy stored within the elixer's, bomb's, or mutagen's constituent components. If acid flasks _did_ cost resonance (which again, I'm pretty sure they don't), it wouldn't be potent acid in the flask. It would be some combination of inert liquids that require a jolt of magical energy to interact with one another, and when they do, they become corrosive. If you drank too many healing potions (which likewise aren't magically potent on their own, but react to the magical resonance of the drinker), it stands to reason that you might not have enough magical juice left to catalyze the acid.

EDIT:
Went back and reviewed the Resonance blog, and it looks like both of the elixers do in fact cost Resonance to use, but neither of the bombs do. Note that the elixers have a bolded *Activation:* (whatever) line, which the bombs lack. Activation costs Resonance. As the bombs do not require activation to use, they do not cost Resonance to use.


----------



## Jester David (Jul 13, 2018)

Charlaquin said:


> I'm pretty sure that's not how it works either.
> 
> So notably, alchemy is only _sometimes_ catalyzed by resonance, and when it is, it's simply the means of releasing the latent chemical energy stored within the elixer's, bomb's, or mutagen's constituent components. If acid flasks _did_ cost resonance (which again, I'm pretty sure they don't), it wouldn't be potent acid in the flask. It would be some combination of inert liquids that require a jolt of magical energy to interact with one another, and when they do, they become corrosive. If you drank too many healing potions (which likewise aren't magically potent on their own, but react to the magical resonance of the drinker), it stands to reason that you might not have enough magical juice left to catalyze the acid.



Yeah, looking at the character sheet, those item’s don’t require resonance.

I just find resonance a clunky way of managing magic items. Like the magic item Daily power limit in 4e items. It’s a weird artificial limit that exists more for mechanics reasons. Literally there to cut down on _cure light wound wands_ being overused.
The “flavour” is just a justification.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jul 13, 2018)

Jester David said:


> Yeah, looking at the character sheet, those item’s don’t require resonance.
> 
> I just find resonance a clunky way of managing magic items. Like the magic item Daily power limit in 4e items. It’s a weird artificial limit that exists more for mechanics reasons. Literally there to cut down on _cure light wound wands_ being overused.
> The “flavour” is just a justification.




All limitations are artificial and exist for mechanical reasons, all flavor is "just" justification for those game mechanics. This mechanic seems less clunky to me than having to track the charges on every individual item separately (though I do wish they would remove magic item charges entirely if they're going this route instead of keeping them on a few items). The flavor change is a wash for me, though I can certainly see why some don't care for it.


----------



## Staffan (Jul 13, 2018)

Charlaquin said:


> So notably, alchemy is only _sometimes_ catalyzed by resonance, and when it is, it's simply the means of releasing the latent chemical energy stored within the elixer's, bomb's, or mutagen's constituent components. If acid flasks _did_ cost resonance (which again, I'm pretty sure they don't), it wouldn't be potent acid in the flask. It would be some combination of inert liquids that require a jolt of magical energy to interact with one another, and when they do, they become corrosive. If you drank too many healing potions (which likewise aren't magically potent on their own, but react to the magical resonance of the drinker), it stands to reason that you might not have enough magical juice left to catalyze the acid.




My impression is that "regular" alchemy does not use resonance, at least not for bombs and utility items. That's the old-fashioned way of doing it via the crafting rules, or buying bombs from the alchemy store. But the alchemist has an ability that lets them "cheat" and make items quickly and for negligible cost, but requires them to spend resonance - this would usually be done at the same time as the party casters prepare their spells.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jul 13, 2018)

Staffan said:


> My impression is that "regular" alchemy does not use resonance, at least not for bombs and utility items. That's the old-fashioned way of doing it via the crafting rules, or buying bombs from the alchemy store. But the alchemist has an ability that lets them "cheat" and make items quickly and for negligible cost, but requires them to spend resonance - this would usually be done at the same time as the party casters prepare their spells.



Well, we can see from this Fumbus sheet that his Elixirs require Activation, and we can see from the Resonance blog that Activation Actions cost Resonance Points. So it’s pretty clear that some alchemical items always require Resonance to catalyze. It’s just that Alchemists also have the ability to spend Resonance to make alchemical items on the fly. We can also see from the Fumbus sheet that alchemical items made this way have the Infused trait, which means they can be Activated without spending Resonance, but lose potency if not used within the round.


----------



## mellored (Jul 13, 2018)

Jester David said:


> Which is weird.
> 
> "Oh no, I used to many healing potions and now the acid in my flasks is no longer reactive!"



No weirder than any of the other magic.  "Oh, I cast too many magic missiles, so I can't cast cure wounds".

But yea, looks like I was wrong about both the cost and the resonance.

Which means I could play an acid assassin (monk?).  Sneak up, throw a flask, and run away.  Come back a minute later to loot and buy another flask.


----------



## Jester David (Jul 13, 2018)

Charlaquin said:


> All limitations are artificial and exist for mechanical reasons, all flavor is "just" justification for those game mechanics. This mechanic seems less clunky to me than having to track the charges on every individual item separately (though I do wish they would remove magic item charges entirely if they're going this route instead of keeping them on a few items). The flavor change is a wash for me, though I can certainly see why some don't care for it.



One of my biggest problems with 3e/ PF1 was the magic item Christmas tree and how magic item's weren't wondrous things with a story and history, or the spoils of battle and rewards from quests. But were instead mechanical build choices with 90% of the magic items you found being reduced to gold. I spent a lot of time trying to find hacks and ways around that for my PF1 games. 
You can see that design in the RPG All Star advice, where they literally tell designers not to include history or backstory with magic items because anyone can make them. 

So I'm sad that PF2 isn't trying to get away from that, but instead offering resonance as a "rules patch" to cap the number of items you can have. So you can only have a couple at low levels and a high level, you can either have a couple high level items that use a lot of resonance or lots of small consumables.

But it feels awkward that the magic item you paid money for (one cost) and the action to use (second cost) doesn't work because of a third cost. It'd be annoying if you can't use a potion when dying because you used another potion earlier that adventure.
But that also makes it harder to give out fun, cool items or award artifacts to low level parties for fun. I gave a PF party a _wand of wonder_ once, and that was glorious and more memorable than half of the rest of the adventure, but it wouldn't have work at all in a by-the-books Pathfinder 1 game as it would have been reduced to gold for a +4 belt, and likely wouldn't be worth the resonance cost in PF2...


----------



## houser2112 (Jul 13, 2018)

Pil Ambrosio said:


> I can't stand Wayne Reynolds, and, quite frankly, I can't understand why Paizo didn't choose to change its illustrator. It just doesn't make sense to me. If you want new players to your game, you gotta change not only the rules, but the whole visual ID.




I disagree with you specifically regarding PF/WAR, and in general. I still miss the art of Jeff Easley, Clyde Caldwell, and Larry Elmore gracing the pages of my D&D books.


----------



## mellored (Jul 13, 2018)

Jester David said:


> So I'm sad that PF2 isn't trying to get away from that, but instead offering resonance as a "rules patch" to cap the number of items you can have. So you can only have a couple at low levels and a high level, you can either have a couple high level items that use a lot of resonance or lots of small consumables.



I haven't noticed them saying that high level items took more resonance.

At the very least all potion only cost 1 RP, no matter what their level.   Thus high level potions are more effective, at the cost of higher gold.


Though really, I feel a universal system would be better.   Everyone gets X points and can spend it on items, spells, prayers, rages, potions, etc...  With a mix of cost scaling and class features to parent spamming and to specialize.

I.e.
Cure wounds:
Cost: 1 mana + 1 mana each time you cast this +1 mana to increase the spell level.

Life Cleric:  reduce the final cost of healing spells by 1/4 (round down).   Increase the final cost of damage spells by 1.


----------



## Jester David (Jul 13, 2018)

mellored said:


> I haven't noticed them saying that high level items took more resonance.



I'm making an educated guess. 

IIRC resonance is Charisma + level. So it goes up pretty fast. Once you hit all the major slots at level 5 or 6, every extra point is just another consumable used. Once you pass level 9 or 10, the resonance limit might cease to have any impact. You longer have to worry about hitting your cap and is not a meaningful limit unless better items cost more resonance. 

Yeah, it still prevents you from getting a low level magic item and using it a dozen times. But if the sole purpose was fixing _wands of cure light wounds_, there had to be a better way...


----------



## Jer (Jul 13, 2018)

mellored said:


> I haven't noticed them saying that high level items took more resonance.







Jester David said:


> I'm making an educated guess.




Actually, I don't think higher level items do cost more resonance.  In fact, that would kind of defeat the whole proposed purpose of fixing the problem with cure wands.

Right now it's cheaper to buy a cord of cure light wounds wands than to buy a higher level wand.  To fix that they propose Resonance - you can still use the low-level wands, and yes in gp it's cheaper to do so, but the cost in Resonance is so high to get you healed up that it's better to take the gold hit and buy the more expensive wand.  If the more expensive wand also cost more Resonance, you'd be right back to where you started where it's better to just buy the cord of cheap healing wands.

Also their examples using healing potions don't scale with Resonance - each one only takes 1 RP to use.  That suggests to me that the same will be true for wands.



Jester David said:


> I'm making an educated guess.
> 
> IIRC resonance is Charisma + level. So it goes up pretty fast. Once you hit all the major slots at level 5 or 6, every extra point is just another consumable used. Once you pass level 9 or 10, the resonance limit might cease to have any impact. You longer have to worry about hitting your cap and is not a meaningful limit unless better items cost more resonance.
> 
> Yeah, it still prevents you from getting a low level magic item and using it a dozen times. But if the sole purpose was fixing _wands of cure light wounds_, there had to be a better way...




It's not just another consumable used - it's another "use" of an item you have.  Using the examples they've shown so far, suppose you have a cloak of Elvenkind.  You have to spend 1 RP to use its invisibility power, so each level you gain another use of its power.  If you have a weapon that requires an activation to use its power you get more uses of that power.  And so on.  I don't think that this mechanic is designed to put a stop to the Christmas Tree of Magic Items playstyle - especially at high levels it seems like its impact would be negligible.

Of course this is where I think the system is going to fall down and I want to see it in playtest.  Because, as with clerical spells, you have incentive to NOT spend your Resonance to activate your magic items to do cool things and instead hoard it to be used for healing magic.  Typically that's a cleric choice - do I want to cast this cool spell that I have on my spell list, or do I need to hold onto this slot because I may need to save the fighter's bacon in a few rounds.  Now EVERYONE has to make that choice - do I want to spend some RP to have this cool effect come off my sword, or do I need to hang onto it in case I need to drink a healing potion.  (And of course it's worse for clerics because they're the ones who are also going to be holding the staff of healing or the wand of cure light wounds or whatever and will need to use their Resonance not just to heal themselves, but ALSO to heal their fellow party members).

That's the part of the proposed mechanic that I really want to see in wide playtest.  As a long-time player of clerics (when I get to play), tying together your "do cool stuff" resource with your "healing" resource is probably the worst part of cleric mechanics.  The more you can separate those two pools of resources, the more fun the cleric is to play IMO.


----------



## qstor (Jul 13, 2018)

I love Wayne Reynolds art too. In fact he did some Greyhawk stuff for TSR/Wotc too


----------



## Melkor (Jul 14, 2018)

The Wayne Reynolds art is one of the huge draws of Pathfinder 2E to me.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jul 15, 2018)

Jester David said:


> IIRC resonance is Charisma + level. So it goes up pretty fast. Once you hit all the major slots at level 5 or 6, every extra point is just another consumable used. Once you pass level 9 or 10, the resonance limit might cease to have any impact. You longer have to worry about hitting your cap and is not a meaningful limit unless better items cost more resonance.
> 
> Yeah, it still prevents you from getting a low level magic item and using it a dozen times. But if the sole purpose was fixing _wands of cure light wounds_, there had to be a better way...




They have explicitly stated that this is exactly how it's intend it to work. You're not supposed to have to worry about running out of resonance, except at low levels and when trying to abuse low-level magic items to save on gold. And it doesn't _just_ fix CLW wands. It also removes the need to limit the number of times per day activated items can be used, and the number of worn items you can slot, thereby significantly reducing bookkeeping.


----------



## Dr. Bull (Jul 15, 2018)

Howdy Folks!

Here's my two cents of opinion...

Wayne Reynold is on par with Erol Otis, as far as I am concerned.  His art is evocative and well crafted.  His art instills a sense of adventure within me.  I want to thank him for his amazing contribution to my favorite hobby.  

- Dr. Bull


----------



## thompur (Jul 15, 2018)

Dr. Bull said:


> Howdy Folks!
> 
> Here's my two cents of opinion...
> 
> ...




You were playing DND in 1962? What did "DND" stand for back then?


----------



## Morrus (Jul 15, 2018)

Dr. Bull said:


> - BTW:  I was playing DND before you were born.  Please respect your elders.




This seems improbable. Also, please respect your fellow posters.


----------



## Ancalagon (Jul 16, 2018)

1: I like Renold's art. 

2: the new alchemy system is the part of pathfinder I am most hopeful about.


----------



## jaycrockett (Jul 17, 2018)

WAR for life.


----------



## alegur (Jul 18, 2018)

That goblin is a psychotic looking type.  I like it.   I also like what I see here.


----------



## Henry (Jul 18, 2018)

Charlaquin said:


> This mechanic seems less clunky to me than having to track the charges on every individual item separately (though I do wish they would remove magic item charges entirely if they're going this route instead of keeping them on a few items). The flavor change is a wash for me, though I can certainly see why some don't care for it.




My thoughts, also; because they're keeping the concept of item charges and X/day on some things, it still doesn't solve what it set out to solve, which I think is going to be the biggest grievance. Out of any of the playtest rules, resonance is the one which, if I were a betting man, I would say will not survive unscathed.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jul 18, 2018)

Henry said:


> My thoughts, also; because they're keeping the concept of item charges and X/day on some things, it still doesn't solve what it set out to solve, which I think is going to be the biggest grievance. Out of any of the playtest rules, resonance is the one which, if I were a betting man, I would say will not survive unscathed.




I agree. I'm _hoping_ that item charges is the thing to give, but I'm expecting the opposite will be the case.


----------



## Henry (Jul 19, 2018)

Charlaquin said:


> I agree. I'm _hoping_ that item charges is the thing to give, but I'm expecting the opposite will be the case.




Me, too - I like the core idea of resonance, but barring seeing it in play, I think it needs some tweaking, just not for
The reasons that most of its detractors use about consumables and healing. I played back in the days of 1st Edition when the on,y healing was what the Cleric brought with him, so I’m fine with sucking it up and managing my resonance like a good little adventurer.  
I’d rather see something else - maybe a 1 in 10 roll that the wand’s magic is consumed, checked after each successful wand use? Something to keep from having to track charges, and having (roughly) 10 charges in a wand sounds like that’s kind of where they wanted to go with this thing?


----------



## Noodlekeeper (Sep 25, 2018)

Just really curious, what is the point of him carrying a lantern when he can see in the dark?


----------

