Joachim_L

Hi Joachim
It is, as there's no 'Join' setting, as there is with a non FX stroke, we use the default Round Join option. There is already an improvement logged to add the Join option to the FX dialog which would allow you to control this.
This is by design - as any FX added to an object does not affect its bounding box, and the bounding box is used to calculate text wrapping. This is also the behaviour in InDesign, so you will need to rasterise the object (and not retain the FX) for the FX size to be accounted for when text wrapping.
Again, this is by design - however in PS there is an option to Overprint the outline FX to counteract this. There is already an improvement logged for this overprint function here, so I'll bump this log with your thread now
I hope this helps!

Could you provide the .adesign file and the PDF? May I ask why you print to PDF instead of exporting the PDF from ADesigner?

Or just use the Polygon type of the Freehand Selection Tool?

I'm afraid we don't have an ETA on this. Sorry. 

Come on @RandyZ be more specific! To which font issue are you referring to? There are several.
A: Continue to pay? Seems to be that you have to pay for 2.x which comes in a far distant future.
B: Others may not use your workflow and have not your problems?
 

You can even use the arrowheads to create bullets that are not an ellipse.
But there is a bug: When you have selected the width of the stroke and the arrowhead and change the width of the stroke afterwards, the arrowhead vanishes. Same in beta 1.8.0.535.

Good call on using arrowheads Joachim_L.
Shame the pop-ups still need work (it’s also difficult to select an arrowhead sometimes, often can’t select it properly).
I’ve attached two examples of arrowhead usage (that are probably more like hacks than expected behaviour).

You can even use the arrowheads to create bullets that are not an ellipse.
But there is a bug: When you have selected the width of the stroke and the arrowhead and change the width of the stroke afterwards, the arrowhead vanishes. Same in beta 1.8.0.535.

Thank you for your assistance.
Hard to learn after 54 years, that I am not the centre of the universe.
Honestly, I never used the Alignment Handle option before, but now it becomes useful.
As said, big thanks!

-

Thank you for your assistance.
Hard to learn after 54 years, that I am not the centre of the universe.
Honestly, I never used the Alignment Handle option before, but now it becomes useful.
As said, big thanks!

You can get what you want by using Paragraph Decorations.
They need a bit of up-front work – and a bit of tweaking – but they are usable, see attached afpub file and GIF.
It’s not ideal, it’s but better than nothing.
decorations-as-bullets.afpub

Maybe you find something here:
 

-

Thank you for the screenshots. It works perfectly fine.

Like this?
 

Welcome to the forums.
Depending on what you want, you might be able to get away with using the Contrast Negate Blend Mode on the text layer (see attached GIF).

It depends on what's happened to the file. There's a couple of different issues, but yes if an object has been corrupted due to an issue in 1.7.3 then 1.8 won't remove this corruption, although we should hopefully avoid some crashes, we will still need to fix the file ourselves (and we do this and get them back to customers when we can)
The fix in 1.8 should prevent files getting into this state, so any new files created in 1.8 shouldn't encounter this issue and I would like to know if a file created from scratch does, because it means there's another way to get a file into this state that we aren't aware of.
If it crashes on save like the OP,  or copying and pasting certain objects (which will be the offending objects if they crash on copy/paste) just removing the page with the corrupt object in can rectify it, but it could have multiple objects with the issue, and so forth.
Using the beta is the best way, as it depends on your workflow as to what happened - but linked text frames and pinned objects on master pages was one of the areas that could cause corruptions to happen to some objects which then lead to the crash on save
This should be fine and as far as i'm aware it shouldn't be possible to encounter it, however we do have StudioLink to try tighten up the workflow and prevent you from constantly switching between the applications. Personally I think it's better to have local versions of resources in your file if possible.
Edit: I've just glanced at the crash report and it is a corrupt pinned object that's causing it, which is what we have seen before and fixed in 1.8.

-

Many of us in the other side are actual professionals earning money with Affinity. CURRENTLY and since long, and with the current, and past versions of AD and AP. I definitely am one. Is not like one of the sides in the debate is formed by professionals and the other isn't (that's even funny). I've recently been able to exchange work and samples with two persons (in a different community!) that had been years claiming to be super pros, and when I have been able to check stuff (and them mine), man has it been revealing. It is a very bad claim to make around here, specially as an argument in the fashion of: I am more professional than you, so I "know". Back it up with reasons , technical ones, as in any debate about tech stuff. And then we will argue with that, often the final truth staying in the middle. 
Workarounds ARE the everyday of so, so, sooo many professionals that it's not even funny. 10 companies and not only me, so many colleagues have always used workarounds, with the industry standard tools as I was even detailing in a recent post. Of course, minimizing the need of those is a must. I have never been against the implementation of these two features. Indeed, I'd say there are a few that are also pending, very important, in the Affinity apps (I'd love some added and other fixed in the Adobe and Autodesk ones too, BTW. Since many years).
About the focus on digital painters... don't get me started. They have worked great there, but what they have addressed are some features and bugs in the very basic brush system in Photo, but photo retouch field does need to have a flawless brush for so many operations (ask any high end pro working editing magazine covers of studio photos of very high end level. And all use tablets). And the tablet precision issues was affecting even making a lasso for any operation (freaking dented contours!), so commonly used in image editing / photo retouch. Selections and masks are the soul of photo retouch, had to make a lot of  that at many jobs. That's heavily more in the land of photography than in digital painting. Digital painters are also professionals, when they do it professionally, BTW.
Designer now needs some love. YEP!!! Absolutely. In my hands at least, is proven to be EXTREMELY efficient. Maybe I am a more experience professional, then. Still, by no means this is to say that adding these features (and fixing some problems) is not of critical importance. Should surely be on the top of the list. So... we are agreeing in everything? NOPE. The harsh criticism without knowing what is happening there internally, neither considering the tools' price, the tone, is with what I can never agree. Also, as just mentioned, what is the point ? Generating animosity in a certain matter/feature is only going to make them have a less positive attitude in adding it. And they'll act as professionals, but we are all human, and motivation plays a big role.
Another thing I don't get to understand is :  If for many, the difference on behavior, quality, industry standards, logo, and whatever, is so much better with Adobe, what is their point in being YEARS waiting around here for a feature ? I mean, they clearly DO NOT love these apps, or adore Adobe's in comparison, why then don't just use Adobe suite? Isn't it then a huge waste of their professional time ? And time is money. To me it is. Is it because the company they work at pays the subscription but they are not willing to pay from own pockets one for home? If so, they should admit that honestly and how if being so, they depend on Serif. Or... just be fully coherent, and simply pay with your own money 60 bucks per month (and whatever it increases to be in the future) for the Adobe suite subscription.
I would TOTALLY agree with criticism here, in that the features must be added. Heck, while doing projects, I've seen me wishing to have to make less "jumps", even if I do that at the speed of light. But the tone, borderline with insults at times, is IMO what removes relevance to the conversation. Because they haven't added this or that, then they ARE this or that (insert here whatever insult or disqualification), is the wrong point of the whole thing, even if the technical points were pretty valid and solid till that moment. Same with insulting users calling  them unprofessional (while a real comparison of skills and experience might end up being super funny, with some...)
I HOPE distort (even if perspective is added later, as you can deal with distort) and warp are implemented the earlier possible. But we don't want it done like a faulty outline stroke. They make the right call if don't add a feature in a poor way (seems the reason why they don't add a vectorizer), but only if they are sure they can implement something  solid. I'm not in the other band in these, but absolutely against the tone, manners (of some, not all), and disqualifications/insults directed to the company. 

If it is just a few words, then convert the text to curves. 

If it is just a few words, then convert the text to curves. 

Maybe for producing static clings that go on the inside of car windows?

-

Okay,
the reset did the trick:
I found several reset-options in the applications settings. (I dont know the shortcut for starting up / reset in MacOS)
Now, I am getting the correct PDF-output from my documents as well. I understand, that this is something Affinity is still working on. I hope, the workflow for the colour settings gets improved with later releases. Although, it might just be me learning pretty slowly...

@Joachim_L Thanks for your help! And as you were pointing out: There seems to be some improvement in 1.8. I cant wait to get the next version released.
Cheers