Shining Lights and Dark Stars

RIP Paladin. You had a good run.

I know Jason mentioned in on the stream before, but seriously all casters should be like the arcanist. it's just a better system.

My Reactions:

Finished reading the document.

Alchemist: These were exactly the changes the class needed. I like how the research field doesn't penalize you for using other alchemical items. At-will low-level alchemical items at high level is great, but the alchemist needs a good at-will ability at 1st level. An alchemist that runs out of reagents is useless while a spellcaster that runs out of spells still has cantrips.

Barbarian: Extremely unwelcome changes to rage. The new rage is clunky and annoying. I'd rather a change or a feat where you can extend the rage with successful Athletics tests rather than necessitating a flat check every round.

Bard: Welcome changes. Bard is a solid class as is.

Cleric: No comment. Cleric is a solid class as is.

Druid: As much as I'm overjoyed that the wild druid is getting much deserved love, the changes do little to fix the plethora of problems with polymorph effects.

Fighter: Sad to not see any changes. The fighter needs more narrative power. Martials still get the shaft in this edition.

Monk: The changes to ki were exactly what I wanted!

Paladin: While the new reactions are very welcome and interesting, the loss of Smite Evil as a core feature is still a dealbreaker for me when it's such a big narrative moment for the class. It also feels strange to limit the reactions based on alignment.

Ranger: I'm loving hunter's edge. This was the oomph I felt the Hunt Target ability needed.

Rogue: Welcome changes.

Sorcerer: Bloodlines should be the main focus of the class, but they still feel like a minor decoration. The changes do nothing to fix how weak the class feels compared to other spellcasters.

Wizard: The wizard feels weak and boring because they lack cool and flavorful abilities to make up for the fact that other spellcasters get more interesting feats and better proficiencies. I'm not sure if quick preparation was the right direction, especially when it negates the only advantage spontaneous casting has over prepared casting.

Liberator paladins are problematic, and also, Channel Life is one of the strongest feats ever for paladins and paladin-multiclassers.

Let us start with liberator paladins. Their code of conduct is fairly problematic:
• You must respect the choices others make for their own lives and can’t force someone to act in a particular way or threaten them if they don’t act that way.
• You must demand and fight for the freedom of others to make their own decisions. You must never engage in or countenance slavery or tyranny.

Even by the standards of maliciously-read paladin codes, this one is a little heavy-handed. It imposes heavy restrictions on simply giving orders to others, and a liberator is not even in their rights to demand that an evil fellow stop killing innocents. The liberator has to stay quiet much of the time and simply murder people who are acting out-of-line.

Yes, there is a hierarchy that applies when two tenets are in conflict, with the liberator tenets low on the list. The issue is that there is, strictly speaking, no conflict as long as the liberator just straight-up kills an evil lad without negotiating first, so that is what a liberator must do. While redeemers are reasonable folk who try to talk things through first, liberators are violent vigilantes whose code pushes them towards murdering wrongdoers with no attempt at negotiation, because a liberator should not try to talk someone out of their life choices.

Besides that, the liberator's Liberating Step is not that good. Grab is a separate action, and Improved Grab is a separate free action, and thus it is impossible to use Liberating Step to reduce damage while simultaneously responding to an established Grab or Grapple. Either the liberator responds to the attack and reduces the damage, or the liberator responds to the Grab or Improved Grab and helps the ally escape, but not both. On top of all this, the line, "Finally, if the ally can move, they can Step as a free action, even if the ally didn’t have any hindrance to escape from" is unclear on whether or not it applies in response to an attack, or only in response to a Grab or Grapple.

Defenders and redeemers are good and reasonably balanced. Retributive Strike packs a strong punishment, but it generally calls for a reach weapon. Glimpse of Redemption is less situational and does not call for a reach weapon, but it is a bit weaker, especially against enemies who can bypass enfeebelement by tossing out spells and special abilities instead.

But I worry that paladins are a little too good on a certain point: Channel Life, a 4th-level feat.

Previously, when the multiclass archetype document landed, we had bards and sorcerers taking Paladin Dedication, Healing Touch, Basic Benediction (Deity's Domain), and Advanced Benediction (Channel Life) by 8th level, because 3 + Charisma modifier uses of max-level heal per day is seriously strong.

As of update 1.6, bards and sorcerers can still do exactly that, except that the four-feat investment is even better now, because Channel Life's heal no longer calls for somatic components, and the final version of the game will presumably allow Glimpse of Redemption in place of Retributive Strike for Paladin Redemption. Furthermore, since clerics have had their channel energy pools lowered, even clerics want to make this four-feat investment and earn that sweet, sweet Advanced Benediction (Channel Life).

Also in update 1.6, paladins themselves become the premier combatants by 4th level. They can take Deity's Domain at 1st and Channel Life at 4th, and just like that, they have 3 + Charisma modifier uses of max-level heal per day. I would go so far as to say that defender and liberator paladins are the strongest combat class in the game by 4th level, simply because they can whack enemies all day with hard-hitting attacks, but also use the game's most powerful and reliable combat spell, heal. That is some strong stuff.

Channel Life could use a change. Yes, I know that Paizo is fixing powers for the final release (which we will never get to playtest), and I am pointing this out precisely so that Paizo knows to watch out for the power that is Channel Life.

Kind of mixed here. And I have to agree, this doesn't feel like it's anywhere close to what the final playtest update should be. We're just getting starting with significant changes, not at the end. So either the final version of the rules are going to be this unfinished version, or they'll have a bunch of untested changes. Neither are good options.

I do like taking alchemists off of Resonance (which never should have even made it to the playtest, and most certainly never should have been linked to class abilities) and giving higher level versions of bombs. One side effect of having multiple versions of bombs is that a bomb-focused alchemist is going to have to use a lot of their Formulas as they level just to get the bombs to keep them current. Splash damage is still useless, it needs to be dramatically boosted so it's even worth keeping track of. The Research Fields are nice, in particular I like how you can finally improve your proficiency in bombs. But the fields are all mutually exclusive. It should be possible to take aspects of other fields as options. Now, if you want to be effective with any given field, you have to specialize in just that one, there is no option to be a generalist. This is something I'd say all classes need. If you have a multiple path thing, they must be able to take features from the other paths. Lack of bonus types still hurt the alchemist, because of their Item Bonuses not stacking with magic items. A step in the right direction, but way more needs to be done.

Barbarian. Improved weapon proficiency, Very good. Rage changes: Why? It just adds complexity and uncertainty for their own sake, with no actual benefit to the game.

Cleric. Nerfing channel energy? It seems a bit much. I can see possibly 2 + CHA or 1 + CHA, but this seems a bit too extreme. The casting and hands changes are good.

Paladin. Some aspects have been improved, like the changes to Lay on Hands removing the Feat Tax of Hospice Knight. But it still completely misses the point. They still aren't paladins. They're still forced to be reactive instead of proactive. Ties arbitrary combat styles to alignment. Retributive strike is better, but shouldn't be the core ability, just an option that can be taken if you want to be a bodyguard. Buffing Retributive Strike will never make it a suitable core ability of the paladin, simply because it is reactive by nature. Smite Evil is 12th level, and tied only to the Lawful Good version? Terrible. It should be the core ability of the paladin, not reactions. And it's perfectly applicable to all good, because it's about stopping evil. Being a holy crusader that barges in and tells the monsters "Knock off all that evil!" is fun, waiting for them to smack people around before you can do you signature thing, is not. This is a complete disappointment. Just delete the paladin, go back and reread the PF1 paladin, then rewrite it from scratch to actually be something even remotely similar. Do not focus on reactions. Do not tie to heavy armor. Don't make all paladins of a given alignment have identical and arbitrary points of view.

The mention of other alignment paladins coming later is also problematic. Not that I think paladins need to be highly restricted, but because non-good versions should probably have their own framework. Opening to any alignment requires it to be too generic. Just replacing one or two abilities doesn't make it really fit other alignments. And the Good options also don't give me confidence for the scope of the other versions. They're too arbitrarily linked to particular styles. Why should a neutral paladin always be about redemption and a lawful one all about defense? It's just a pointless restriction that doesn't match all characters.

The rest I either don't know the classes well enough to comment, or don't really need to be commented on.

It still feels like this should have been the starting point of the playtest, not the end. I'm very much concerned how the final version is going to turn out with no more testing of anything and such a short amount of time and so much that still needs work. I'd feel much better if the 2019 release was Playtest Round 2 instead of the final release.

RIP Paladin. You had a good run.

Lived way too long, actually.

LuniasM, Quick Preparation is not for combat. It is for rapidly swapping spells around outside of combat, thereby allowing wizards to help out in noncombat situations to an unparalleled degree, and also allowing them to quickly prepare for combat.

I'm back with the math. Counting the round you activate rage in, the expected length of a rage is 321/95 rounds, or approximately 3.38 rounds, and the variance standard deviation is sqrt(8374)/95 rounds, or approximately 0.93 rounds.

EDIT: There's a chance I made an off-by-one error, though, that the actual expected length is 2.38 rounds.

Why key ability score of Wild Order's Druid can't be Strength?

Heightened effect of Monstrosity Form is right? Because the AC and TAC is lower what the base version.

As a druid, I'm glad that druids got some boosts. But none of the changes address the key problems of a wild shaping druid in any significant fashion. Except at level 3 :-)

Why key ability score of Wild Order's Druid can't be Strength?

Heightened effect of Monstrosity Form is right? Because the AC and TAC is lower what the base version.

Mark confirmed its a typo in another thread, he didnt specify the correct ac but i imagine it was supposed to be 39/36

I like that the liberator code is so restrictive, it should be as much of a pain in the butt as the paladin code is.

But I would point out that you should be able to tell the evil person to stop doing evil while they are actively doing it since "You must not use actions that you know will harm an innocent, or through inaction cause an innocent immediate harm when you knew your action could reasonably prevent it" should take precedence, for the same reason that in PF2 the Paladin can lie to the Chellish guard about the escaped halfling fugitives hiding in the attic.

LuniasM, Quick Preparation is not for combat. It is for rapidly swapping spells around outside of combat, thereby allowing wizards to help out in noncombat situations to an unparalleled degree, and also allowing them to quickly prepare for combat.

I know, I was trying to say that it would only start to be an issue that encroaches on the Sorcerers flexibility mid-combat if it was something that could be used during a fight. Since it can't, it's strictly more of a versatility feature than a power boost. That may not have been clear in my review though.

Colette Brunel wrote:

LuniasM, Quick Preparation is not for combat. It is for rapidly swapping spells around outside of combat, thereby allowing wizards to help out in noncombat situations to an unparalleled degree, and also allowing them to quickly prepare for combat.

I know, I was trying to say that it would only start to be an issue that takes away from the Sorcerers flexibility mid-combat if it was something that could be used during a fight. Since it can't, it's strictly more of a versatility feature than a power boost. That may not have been clear in my review though.

So let me preface with saying that I greatly begrudge complaining about this because overall I have felt casters are on the weak end outside of cleric and Gish build.

I especially am not fond of complaining about this when I have been complaining a lot about the fact that +1 to DC should not be stealing away class feats, and this is something that at least made it so that it felt like a legitimate feature.

The problem with quick preparation is that general what it allow the wizard to do is spend all his slots on combat focused tools and nothing else and then whenever a problem appears out of combat they can just switch out a slot. thus giving them very similar flexibility levels to sorcerer.

The problem with versatile casting is that one it is a bonus feature for the wizard while every other casting class has been left with the stupid +1 dc and nothing else at those levels, and two its an ability that was supposed to be a spontaneous casting trick so it feels wrong that its been dumped into wizard even though I would very much like to see something interesting and wizard class based be put in its place.

I worry that sorcerer is going to be left with out any sort of interesting niche because spontaneous casting is so incredibly highly valued by Paizo that it feels like paizo doesn't want to give them interesting things beyond it or even let you really make use of how you would imagine spontaneous casting would work as far as heightening goes. At the moment there feat list is incredibly similar to wizards with the some middling blasting boosts because extra damage is being carefully safeguarded, and the rather mediocre evolution series of feats at 4th level.

I just really hope paizo can bring some focus in for the sorcerer as im kinda left feeling really meh which is the opposite of how I've felt about both pathfinder and 5es sorc that have interesting niches. I hopeful for some sort of boost to the spell point abilities as right most of them just seem rather mediocre when i really think they deserve to have a solid focus in the sorcerer class.

I like that the liberator code is so restrictive, it should be as much of a pain in the butt as the paladin code is.

But I would point out that you should be able to tell the evil person to stop doing evil while they are actively doing it since "You must not use actions that you know will harm an innocent, or through inaction cause an innocent immediate harm when you knew your action could reasonably prevent it" should take precedence, for the same reason that in PF2 the Paladin can lie to the Chellish guard about the escaped halfling fugitives hiding in the attic.

I responded to this in Colette's other thread in some detail, but the short version is that nothing stops gentle persuasion, and it's no more restrictive than falling for jaywalking (which can happen to the LG version).

Retributive Strike, and the forced, distasteful "tank" paradigm being forced down the Paladin's throat, is frankly one of the worst remaining transgressions of the playtest.

Buff Retributive strike to the sky and it's still a core, reactive, bodyguard ability on a class that's supposed to be all about diving headfirst into the gnashing maw of evil to kick its butt from the inside.

There is no good reason for it to be a backbone of the class chassis, and there's no reason Paladins should be relegated to a bodyguard.

Give proficiency bonuses for all armor types, not just heavy. Make Retributive Strike a feat. Bring back a Smite ability baseline.

The only way Retributive Strike could possibly still be salvaged is if you can use it when an enemy attacks you. There's no way that'll happen though.

I like most of these changes. In fact, I REALLY like most of these changes. There's only a couple of exceptions. Namely, I too have concerns about all wizards getting quick preparation for free, I'm not sure if I'll like the rage duration in play, and I'm not positive how much channel energy needed the nerf.

The issue that I really have is that the changes gave me a taste of what I really wanted, class paths, and didn't go as far as I'd like, which is to say give them to every class. Research Field in particular is an awesome example of what I wanted, and the Alchemist may have been the class most in need of it. They got a ton of scaling benefits, many of which take the place of various feats. And feats being condensed into single more powerful feats, or classes getting certain feats for free, is dope.

But I feel like everyone would like more class feats, and I still think class paths (or sub classes, whatever you want to call them) might be the best solution to keep the cognitive load of character creation at a reasonable level. And honestly, I think the tools to implement them are within the current feats rather than needing new features.

Just have a 1st level choice that grants you a bunch of feats along a tree for free as you level up, while still leaving you the same number of class feats to do other stuff with. Pathfinder has always been a game that rewards specialization, and that's still true this edition. And that means that to be optimal, you need a pretty specific set of feats along a track. Like, the fighter can mix and match feats for different kinds of weapons, but how often do you think an archer fighter is actually going to put a feat into a new combat style rather than double down on bows?

And then there are other class paths where taking every feat in their chain may or may not be optimal, but they are good if you want to stay thematic. Rage Totems, for example. I didn't take the Superstitous Totem so I could NOT sunder spells out of existence, so why is that competing with Great Cleave or Come and Get Me?

I think just giving classes all the tools they need to be good at their THING leaves people open to exploring various other things and create more well rounded characters.

All that being said, really good changes! I just hope they work well enough to be used as a proof of concept for the other classes to get similar packages.

Mark, you may have seen me saying this in another thread (and I'm not the person you asked in the first place, but...):

As someone who loves wizards (my first D&D character ever was a wizard; I play martials a bit more these days but when I really want to break a campaign wizard is it): Quick Preparation is exactly what wizards needed. It felt like too much at first, but upon thinking on it, I think you guys picked exactly the right thing. It would be cool if arcane bond was unique to each wizard, but I think Quick Preparation does a lot more to make wizards more approachable in play.

That said, I think a lot of the complaints you are seeing about quick preparation don't actually have anything to do with wizards being too strong. I think it really comes down to sorcerers being too... I don't know if weak is the right word, I want to say "undirected" instead.

Sorcerers need more support for non-arcane spell lists, but I think they also need something to really make them "pop" as a class compared to wizards. You've opened up sorcerers with this cool idea of having different spell lists, and that's awesome, but any given sorcerer will only have one spell list, which means that sorcerer has to compete with the class that normally has that spell list. OR sorcerer has to have something unique enough to compete with everything else another class does outside of their spell list.

This is probably all stuff you are fully aware of, but it's basically in summation a way for me to say that I'd like to see some way for sorcerer's to cherry pick spells from other spell lists; I think that would really help their niche.

On a quick glance liking a good portion of what I'm seeing. Kinda was hoping a fix for Versatile Performance {the real big sore point for me for the bard class, both in term of Performance as a skill and how the Class Feats interacts with Skill Feats}, but really liking the new Level 10 Sorcerer feat and I'm kinda interested in the new Monk Ki powers.

Mark, you may have seen me saying this in another thread (and I'm not the person you asked in the first place, but...):

As someone who loves wizards (my first D&D character ever was a wizard; I play martials a bit more these days but when I really want to break a campaign wizard is it): Quick Preparation is exactly what wizards needed. It felt like too much at first, but upon thinking on it, I think you guys picked exactly the right thing. It would be cool if arcane bond was unique to each wizard, but I think Quick Preparation does a lot more to make wizards more approachable in play.

That said, I think a lot of the complaints you are seeing about quick preparation don't actually have anything to do with wizards being too strong. I think it really comes down to sorcerers being too... I don't know if weak is the right word, I want to say "undirected" instead.

Sorcerers need more support for non-arcane spell lists, but I think they also need something to really make them "pop" as a class compared to wizards. You've opened up sorcerers with this cool idea of having different spell lists, and that's awesome, but any given sorcerer will only have one spell list, which means that sorcerer has to compete with the class that normally has that spell list. OR sorcerer has to have something unique enough to compete with everything else another class does outside of their spell list.

This is probably all stuff you are fully aware of, but it's basically in summation a way for me to say that I'd like to see some way for sorcerer's to cherry pick spells from other spell lists; I think that would really help their niche.

Yeah, we were hoping Quick Prep would make the wizard a little more approachable for less experienced players while giving something else fun but not too intimidating to do during a break while treat wounds and repair are going on (there isn't always a new item to identify or the like). Given it was an extremely popular feat choice already,the difference is that the ability is something from the start (and easier for the new player to learn the wizard that way rather than pick it up later on) and it frees up a level 4 feat for something else. Now if people wanted us to abolish or limit Quick Preparation altogether, we hadn't realized that before. Jason has mentioned a potential survey just about updates, so that's something we can ask a broader group to see how many agree.

Mark, you may have seen me saying this in another thread (and I'm not the person you asked in the first place, but...):

As someone who loves wizards (my first D&D character ever was a wizard; I play martials a bit more these days but when I really want to break a campaign wizard is it): Quick Preparation is exactly what wizards needed. It felt like too much at first, but upon thinking on it, I think you guys picked exactly the right thing. It would be cool if arcane bond was unique to each wizard, but I think Quick Preparation does a lot more to make wizards more approachable in play.

That said, I think a lot of the complaints you are seeing about quick preparation don't actually have anything to do with wizards being too strong. I think it really comes down to sorcerers being too... I don't know if weak is the right word, I want to say "undirected" instead.

Sorcerers need more support for non-arcane spell lists, but I think they also need something to really make them "pop" as a class compared to wizards. You've opened up sorcerers with this cool idea of having different spell lists, and that's awesome, but any given sorcerer will only have one spell list, which means that sorcerer has to compete with the class that normally has that spell list. OR sorcerer has to have something unique enough to compete with everything else another class does outside of their spell list.

This is probably all stuff you are fully aware of, but it's basically in summation a way for me to say that I'd like to see some way for sorcerer's to cherry pick spells from other spell lists; I think that would really help their niche.

For radical ideas, how about sorcerers get two spell lists? That would give them versatility that others can't match. I'd probably see Arcane/Occult as the default. Although Arcane/Divine would probably be more popular and might be a bit much. Occult/Primal would be weird. This is just a random idea off the top of my head. It's likely unworkable, but might be worth some thought, at least for inspiration for other things.

I think part of the problem is, the main reason for the Sorcerer originally is just to get around Vancian Casting. So anything that makes other casters a bit less Vancian, kind of steals their thunder. But many of us want to get away from Vancian casting, seeing it as a bad relic of the past. Bloodlines were a start for something that's their own thing. And the variable lists are also neat, but don't really add any options to individual characters after the decision is made.

EDIT: Another thought along the same lines is maybe sorcerers can cast spells from other lists, but they count as a higher level. Or some option to 'copy' spells they see cast without having them known or on their list. Hit a Divine sorcerer with a fireball, and maybe she'll throw one right back at you. Just brainstorming here. Trying to find something that makes them versatile and feel like they're natural magical prodigies.

Yeah, we were hoping Quick Prep would make the wizard a little more approachable for less experienced players while giving something else fun but not too intimidating to do during a break while treat wounds and repair are going on (there isn't always a new item to identify or the like). Given it was an extremely popular feat choice already,the difference is that the ability is something from the start (and easier for the new player to learn the wizard that way rather than pick it up later on) and it frees up a level 4 feat for something else. Now if people wanted us to abolish or limit Quick Preparation altogether, we hadn't realized that before. Jason has mentioned a potential survey just about updates, so that's something we can ask a broader group to see how many agree.

The problem isn't Quick Preparation per se. So many of us prefer Arcanist style casting over pure Vancian that anything which brings prepared casters like the Wizard back closer to that is a good thing. Frankly, if you won't use Arcanist casting for some reason, I'd prefer Quick Prep on the cleric and druid as well.

The problem is this happening in the absence of a meaningful fix to the sorcerer, and Paizo seemingly still way over-valuing spontaneous casting. Without improving the sorcerer, what Quick Prep does is let the wizard etc eat the sorcerer's lunch, by also being able to use any of their spells known at almost any time in any slot - and they have access to way, way more spells known than the sorcerer.

If you give the sorcerer a stronger core and identity, build in more and stronger powers, and unshackle spontaneous heightening, that solves the problem. Quick Prep doesn't have to be nerfed or removed at all.

Yeah, we were hoping Quick Prep would make the wizard a little more approachable for less experienced players while giving something else fun but not too intimidating to do during a break while treat wounds and repair are going on (there isn't always a new item to identify or the like).

I am also a huge, huge fan of the "standardized post-combat 10 minute rest", so anything that supports that paradigm is a win in my book. :)

Mark Seifter wrote:

Yeah, we were hoping Quick Prep would make the wizard a little more approachable for less experienced players while giving something else fun but not too intimidating to do during a break while treat wounds and repair are going on (there isn't always a new item to identify or the like). Given it was an extremely popular feat choice already,the difference is that the ability is something from the start (and easier for the new player to learn the wizard that way rather than pick it up later on) and it frees up a level 4 feat for something else. Now if people wanted us to abolish or limit Quick Preparation altogether, we hadn't realized that before. Jason has mentioned a potential survey just about updates, so that's something we can ask a broader group to see how many agree.

The problem isn't Quick Preparation per se. So many of us prefer Arcanist style casting over pure Vancian that anything which brings prepared casters like the Wizard back closer to that is a good thing. Frankly, if you won't use Arcanist casting for some reason, I'd prefer Quick Prep on the cleric and druid as well.

The problem is this happening in the absence of a meaningful fix to the sorcerer, and Paizo seemingly still way over-valuing spontaneous casting. Without improving the sorcerer, what Quick Prep does is let the wizard etc eat the sorcerer's lunch, by also being able to use any of their spells known at almost any time in any slot - and they have access to way, way more spells known than the sorcerer.

If you give the sorcerer a stronger core and identity, build in more and stronger powers, and unshackle spontaneous heightening, that solves the problem. Quick Prep doesn't have to be nerfed or removed at all.

This wholeheartedly, Sorcerer needs a bigger niche then just a different casting paradigm, and being able to be any of the spell schools isnt it. I think its great that thats a thing that is in 2E but it has no effect in beyond character creation. Their basically subclasses and the class itself need a niche in gameplay that extends into the subclass. Personally I'd really be down to see them as spell point masters with their various bloodline powers and maybe other class feats that let them bolster spells in some way with spell points as well. This is especially concerning if the intention is for oracle to appear eventually. There needs to be a reason I would play divine sorc over oracle, and atm there still needs to be a reason I would play divine sorc over any of the casters, especially bard, and right now I'm really just not seeing it.

That said, I think a lot of the complaints you are seeing about quick preparation don't actually have anything to do with wizards being too strong. I think it really comes down to sorcerers being too... I don't know if weak is the right word, I want to say "undirected" instead.

I'd agree with this. If it wasn't for the Wizard stepping into one of the Sorcerer's only remaining niches, I'd be all for quick preparation as a default of Wizards. Plus the 10-min class activity is probably something that nearly every class could benefit from with Treat Wounds, etc. being in the game.

I think the issue is that the Sorcerer doesn't really have much exciting going for it. Spell lists being based on bloodline is cool and a great change, but now they need something to distinguish themselves from other casters in each spellcasting tradition. Bloodline abilities currently can't really compete & spontaneous casting is all that's really left. So when the Wizard steps into that niche, the Sorcerer doesn't have much left to encourage being an arcane sorcerer rather than a Wizard. Neither Bloodlines nor Specialty Schools are currently impactful/thematic enough to make the difference, which is where I personally think these classes could benefit greatly from improvement.

Make sorcerers Rad 2k18!

Looking at the Paladin changes I want to clarify how Mighty Aura for Redeemer Paladins works.The Glimpse of Redemption reaction's trigger states: An enemy attacks one of your allies or a creature that’s friendly to you. Both the enemy and ally or friendly creature must be within 15 feet of you.

In addition, the Mighty Aura feature states: You can use Glimpse of Redemption to protect multiple allies from an effect that damages several of them. Reduce the resistance granted from Glimpse of Redemption by 2 and apply it to yourself and all allies within 15 feet of you, in addition to the triggering ally.

The intention of this combination seems to be intended for providing allies within 15ft some resistance against area attacks like spells. This seems further reinforced by the Weight of Guilt feat for Glimpse of Redemption that imposes the stupefied condition instead of enfeebled. However because of the way this is worded Glimpse of Redemption should only trigger when the Attack trait is invoked, but most spells aren't attacks, instead relying on spell saves. This feature appears rather limited as a result of his wording. The only times I can see this being useful are for the Barbarian feat Swipe or a splash weapon like Alchemist's Fire. Additionally multi-attacks like the Fighter's Double Shot feat wouldn't benefit from Mighty Aura either since it is composed of two separate strikes.

We were hoping the ability to be especially good at preparing would be seen as more of an interesting/versatility increase, as opposed to a raw power boost, based on the feedback you guys gave us. Of our other ideas, I think the best one we didn't use was customizing your arcane bond from wizard to wizard (something like: amulets give you defensive benefits, staff for the extra spell, etc, with the possibility of adding more in later books) but then that would leave the wizard making two subclass choices as opposed to one for most other characters. Does that strike you as a wizard fan as adding more to the "interesting" factor than the "power" factor?

I for one, as a wizard fan, would see the arcane bond options as definitely adding more to the 'interesting' factor. Both for crunch and fluff (would bonded items have cosmetic/mechanical flexibilites like familiars?)

To be sure, I had wanted Wizards to use the Sorcerer (Spontanious) casting mechanics (With a spell book) and the Sorcerer use powers that feed off of a central bloodline theme with powers and a limited amount of spells like the 3.5 Warlock had going for it.

The overall keeping of Vancian type casting has the same problem as it did in 3.0, the need to balance the Sorcerer with the Old man Wizard to hold it back as the ol' dude catches up.

so wait, the wizard is supposed to be the flexible one, and the sorcerer the rigid?

i could have sworn it was supposed to be the other way around, between the wizard needing to choose strict school limits, pre-prepare their spells for the day, and requiring a lengthy process to change that, while the sorcerer can cast what they need as they need it (previously balanced by narrower list and more per day).

i still need to look over the sorcerer changes, but boy, having the other arcane class have equal spells/day, free heightening as they please, a much wider spell base and a fast swapping process, i'm not particularly seeing much incentive to actually choose a sorcerer over a wizard (to say nothing of however it compares to druids/clerics/bards now). it doesn't even seem like a competition.

EDIT: having read the changes now, i stick by my initial statement RE: sorcerers: still pretty much entirely worse than it's peers in almost every field. great job.

that said: digging the alchemist changes pending further investigation, and VERY hopeful about the paladin changes--i can definitely see the flavor you want for the three paths, and LG/defender paladins are the most iconic/"real" paladins of the bunch with smite evil and whatnot, the others also look pretty solid in their approaches.

i also appreciate that you took steps to mitigate the reaction bottleneck on paladins as well (though not till 1/3-1/2 through their career... but thats a systemic problem of the edition, not just for that class specifically)

Are Paladins (or Champions) going to get offensive options? The Paladins reactions just are not fun or thematic to what paladins are supposed to be, they are proactive wrath not passive defence, and having no purge the wicked abilities really feels bad (except LG gets smite... But only LG, everyone else is still an MMO tank, not a champion of the faith smashing the heretic) Actually the Reactions would have been a great fit for the team work based Inquisitor, not the offense and attack based Paladin. So, yea any chance we cab swap those out for something fun?

This might sound like a really entitled thing to complain about, but did we really need a Diabolic bloodline? It looks pretty good, and it is cool to have, but adding a 3rd divine bloodline before adding a second occult or primal bloodline seems odd.

But even before that, I feel like the existing bloodlines need to be examined. Many powers aren't strong enough to warrant the small number of spell points we get-- fey's aren't exciting, and the 1st level aberrant power feels like a dud. Even the more exciting ones like Dragon's Breath don't feel like they do the damage they should compared to spells or the Barbarian breath weapon, for example.

Then there's the spell lists. Putting Fly on the spell list of a bloodline that grants wings seems like a questionable decision. And the angelic spell list only grants divine spells (which are already a little lacking) while the Infernal and Diabolic grant tons of arcane spells, which greatly improves the bloodline's power and flexibility. Angelic really lost out there.

We were hoping the ability to be especially good at preparing would be seen as more of an interesting/versatility increase, as opposed to a raw power boost, based on the feedback you guys gave us. Of our other ideas, I think the best one we didn't use was customizing your arcane bond from wizard to wizard (something like: amulets give you defensive benefits, staff for the extra spell, etc, with the possibility of adding more in later books) but then that would leave the wizard making two subclass choices as opposed to one for most other characters. Does that strike you as a wizard fan as adding more to the "interesting" factor than the "power" factor?

I would much prefer this option! I think it's more flavorful then Quick Preparation, and it doesn't step on the toes of the Sorcerer.

so wait, the wizard is supposed to be the flexible one, and the sorcerer the rigid?

i could have sworn it was supposed to be the other way around, between the wizard needing to choose strict school limits, pre-prepare their spells for the day, and requiring a lengthy process to change that, while the sorcerer can cast what they need as they need it (previously balanced by narrower list and more per day).

i still need to look over the sorcerer changes, but boy, having the other arcane class have equal spells/day, free heightening as they please, a much wider spell base and a fast swapping process, i'm not particularly seeing much incentive to actually choose a sorcerer over a wizard (to say nothing of however it compares to druids/clerics/bards now). it doesn't even seem like a competition.

This has more or less always been the case with the sorcerer regardless of edition. The Sorcerer has always been a test bed for new ideas handicapped from overcaution. Honestly at this point they may as well wrap the arcane sorcerer back into the Wizard and bring back the Mage class. Just have bloodlines be alternatives to Schools. Everything can go Arcanist style casting because unless Paizo sits down and does major work on the Sorcerer its just not worth having. Right now the Sorcerer has to compare against 4 primary spellcasters and its doesn't stack up well against any them.

I actually really like the quick prep on the Wizard being baked in. I feel it actually fits well into the 'preparedness' category and planning ahead for Wizard. Specifically it makes the idea of interacting with your spell book a bit more... interactive?

A 'prepared' wizard has added lots of odd spells to their book as they level to solve problems they encounter during their day. I think it will make those moments where a Wizard, particularly a low level one has that eureka moment of, "I have just the right tool for this job, give me a moment." without having to wait a whole day to be ready to use that.

I never thought of a 1e Sorcerer as 'flexible' because of their narrow spells known list. They just had more 'raw' power from more spell slots and the ability to focus on a particular type of magic that fit their character. In an absence of magic scrolls/staffs/wands, the Sorcerer was always going to be 'rigid' by comparison to the Wizard with regards to what he can cast(and even less likely to have some of those 'less used' spells on his known spell list).

In the playtest I feel like Sorcerers need a defining mechanic outside of bloodline powers or just simply up the number of spell slots to make them different from a wizard in that way.

I liked the other changes. Though the Cleric channel energy change might have been too far? I agree with a lot of the others who have said 1+ charisma mod would be probably a better middle ground just to have the primary class feature of cleric give some benefits.

AndIMustMask wrote:

so wait, the wizard is supposed to be the flexible one, and the sorcerer the rigid?

i could have sworn it was supposed to be the other way around, between the wizard needing to choose strict school limits, pre-prepare their spells for the day, and requiring a lengthy process to change that, while the sorcerer can cast what they need as they need it (previously balanced by narrower list and more per day).

i still need to look over the sorcerer changes, but boy, having the other arcane class have equal spells/day, free heightening as they please, a much wider spell base and a fast swapping process, i'm not particularly seeing much incentive to actually choose a sorcerer over a wizard (to say nothing of however it compares to druids/clerics/bards now). it doesn't even seem like a competition.

This has more or less always been the case with the sorcerer regardless of edition. The Sorcerer has always been a test bed for new ideas handicapped from overcaution. Honestly at this point they may as well wrap the arcane sorcerer back into the Wizard and bring back the Mage class. Just have bloodlines be alternatives to Schools. Everything can go Arcanist style casting because unless Paizo sits down and does major work on the Sorcerer. Right now the Sorcerer has to compare against 4 primary spellcasters and its doesn't stack up well against any them.

i really dig the idea of a personal "build-a-caster" class like they're setting the sorcerer up to be this edition--it's just so lackluster in comparison (probably to avoid the possibility of it outshining the base class).

the simplest way would be like with the paladin change: sorc casting types compare to their other spell list peers by simply taking on a different approach/niche with a similar toolkit (though with druid and bard being spontaneous casters as well, there's a bit more difficulty there since theres more direct points of comparison). things like more heightening, more metamagic-ing, things to show their deeper connection with that type of magic in lieu of their peer's tertiary abilities like performances or channelling energy, etc. etc.

The reason the Sorcerer is better (Mechanically, anyways) in PF1 is because you know what spells she has and can choose to cast whichever spell you choose at the time of casting. With the scaling in PF2 changing, knowing spells at a lower level may have lesser effects than how the wizard prepares the spell at the beginning of the day. This is the basics, not taking the classes extras into account. It is those extras that make up for the shortcomings of spell level not scaling with character level.

The first way to make the game easier to learn is to have the spells work the same way for all casters, though this is not something that has been learned by a lot of systems, Pathfinder is not the only one.

But with all the above being said, I think PF2 is a remarkable improvement on what has come before it and I realize that the magic system is likely not going to be radically changed to look more like 5th edition spontaneous caster for all, nor will it progress back to PF1 cut and paste from the 3.5 books.

I am just lamenting the disappointment I have that the Vancian sacred cow needed to be saved somehow, when the Arcanist has clearly shown it should have been put down a long time ago.

Regarding Monk: Ki Rush is a great change, but strength based monks still have some serious AC issues. They have to pump up dex to raise AC since they can't wear armor and that still leaves them with much lower AC than any other class. And on top of that they need CON since they're a melee class. Which leave very little for WIS; meaning they will not be able to use defensive abilities like Ki Rush very often.

So str based monks still seem like they're just going to get crit out and die.

But as ability scores start out so high, and increases are so outrageous, it's okay to be MAD.

I would prefer more MADness, overall.

I am just lamenting the disappointment I have that the Vancian sacred cow needed to be saved somehow, when the Arcanist has clearly shown it should have been put down a long time ago.

I call it pseudo-Vancian, or Vancianesque, 5th Ed has gone that way, the system debuted with the Spirit Shaman (very groovy class) in 3rd Ed's Complete Divine. Very easy to port back in, more classic Vancian (prepared slots), some house-rule the Wizard that way, I might for a Greyhawk campaign.

I like the idea of making Clerical Channeling a Spell Point function; one less thing to track and less dependent on a secondary stat.

Sorcerers still lag, especially non-Arcane ones (though proficiencies have a lot to do with that). Full Spontaneous Heightening as soon as meaningful would help, along with either giving them more worthwhile things to do with Spell Points and/or more casts per day.

I have no idea how the Wizard can be (one of) the most powerful class(es). Outside of a 15-minute adventuring day, that is.

I'm playing a Halfling Wizard (Evoker) in a party with a Wild Druid and a Paladin in a homebrew campaign. I already felt way weaker than the other two characters. We're only level 3, but still. Now they get nearly a complete class overhault while I get ... one additional cantrip?

Don't get me wrong, Quick Preparation at level 1 is great but it doesn't really change much since all wizards were going to pick it up anyway. So at best I have one more feat to play with, which is the same as the rest of the party, who get Animal Shape and Hospice Knight for free instead.

The more flexible slot management doesn't exactly excite me, either. It's nice to have slightly more high-level spells, I guess? It does come rather late at lvel 12 and the biggest problem is the limitation to "one additional spell slot per level".

I get up to 6 of those spell slots. So at level 17, I'm trading two 7th level slots to get one more 9th level slot, while trading two 5th level slots to get one more 7th level slot, while trading two 3rd level slots to get one more 5th level slot. That's kind of ridiculous, not to mention a total pain in the neck to keep track of.

And used to its fullest, it reduces the number of spells per day by up to six. Not sure that's a good idea. Like ever.

Also good luck finding use for those extra spell slots on some wizard specializations (looking at Diviners). I'm lucky I chose Evoker specifically to make sure I'll always have something useful-ish to put into my school slots.

I'd much rather have useful school powers than this whole new level of spell slot management. And/or just give casters their level 1, 12 and 16 feats back.

Rest of the caster-updates feel just as underwhelming (not counting the wild druid as a caster here). And so far, most of my spells have been resisted more often than not so I hope the final spell overhaul will significantly increase their quality.

Also, no more Warded Touch so a Paladin can Lay on Hands without provoking? Why?

I don't mind Channeling being a secondary stat thing. Clerics aren't necessarily brimming with Spell points and channeling is useful enough to warrant having its own pool, with players investing in it or choosing not to.

Sorcerers do still need some love. Maybe have bloodline heightening be a core part of the chassis and add a feat for sorcerers to be able to "undercast surge" a la 1st edition psychics via spell points. I would also give sorcerers more spell points than other classes in general, they are the inherently magical ones, let them feel like it. Also, give more focus and "umph" to the bloodline powers--more damage, more utility, larger area of effect. Also, diabolic edict really should be able to debuff enemies. It could also give some insights to how the witch may play.

The Wizard stuff is fine and thematically fits. They are the casters who can pull out a book to solve most if not all problems (if they can't it's because they don't have the book yet).

I don't mind the idea of paladins being "bodyguards" or punishing those who attack their allies as much, but some offensive options--smite evil/tyranny, some sort of challenge ability that encourages opponents to go after them, or something wouldn't hurt. Also, give ranged paladins more support.

Yeah, these happened.

Reactions:

-Alchemist. Eh. But oh, low level mutagens! Looks at low level mutagens. Nevermind then. That's awful.

----------
- Barbarian. All totem issues still present and unaddressed. Great.
And lol!random rage for more dice rolling, which actually makes the associated feat problems worse. (especially anything that grants flying/movement. Oops botched the check on turn 2, so sorry. Fall).

I guess the cryptic rather than explicit wording in the grey box means they get expert in simple/martial weapons? Weird way to handle it rather than just say so.

----------
- Bard. I guess this is more clear. Or would be if we got the full text altered to the new version.

----------
-Cleric. So... down to bad domains and a badly limping spell list. I guess they still get more HP and better saves and armor/weapons.

----------
-Druid. The big problems (like the pools being a mess), still remain. I guess overall this is good.

----------
-Fighter. Ok then

----------
-Monk. for clarity- you have to take rush or strike to get a ki pool? And rush can be used for prereqs for later ki powers?
Also, no idea what lawful is doing as a damage type in ki strike.

----------
-Paladin.
Still wasting space with the code and associated gibberish, despite taking the chains off the alignment restriction, and how horribly detrimental and rules lawyer-y they are. The chaos paladin looks dead in more than half the nations of Golarion, based on the 'never countenance slavery' alone.

Alignment powers. Ugh, no. These are weird, fiddly and terrible, as well as far too samey.
I have no idea what's going on with this mess, the general gist is paladins make annoying bubbles every round to make damage tracking more complicated, but still can't fight their way out of a paper bag. But hey, the bubbles are different colors, so... whee?

Why would you do this?

---------
- Ranger. The math on these two options looks bad- there is going to be a clear winner, and the lack of progression until 17th level is laughable. Stalker just looks awful because the presence of a second creature makes it fairly pointless. They can call your bluff or spot you just fine.

----------
-Rogue. Key ability score flexibility? Ok then. That solves a lot.

---------
-Sorcerer
Diabolic bloodline. Divine list is a bad sign. Bloodline spells aren't completely terrible. Powers (to no surprise) are.

Bloodline heightening. Uh. Great if the spells are great (and if they can be heightened at all). Comes way too late, however, and seems cruel and mocking to make it cost a feat given what's coming next.

------
-Wizard
Utterly, utterly, baffled by how 'this was an automatic pick because it was so strong' became 'everyone gets it free forever.'
Why even bother with the sorcerer class?

---
Short summary:
Rogue: good

Barbarian, wizard: what, why?

Ranger, Sorcerer: find a role, and stop making a mess.

Paladin: set it on fire, ditch codes and restrictions, and find a point and purpose. Start with 'Butt kicking for goodness' and not 'Yay, bubbles!'

Ki Rush has verbal casting, so you have to make noise as you move to gain concealment?

Retributive Strike seems more like a reactionary aura, than a strike. I would prefer some sort of permanent aura deal, and a separate gnarly strike reaction, as options.

Smite Evil comes online too late.

I mean if there's a PC class that must kill slavers/free slaves on sight, and that does significantly reduce the amount of slavery on Golarion I count that as a positive.

I mean I always saw "X takes/keeps slaves" as a clear signpost for "X is evil and it's okay to kill X." Sure, this includes most Chellish nobles but Cheliax is an evil nation in thrall to the second most evil deity, so this should not be a surprise.

I mean if there's a PC class that must kill slavers/free slaves on sight, and that does significantly reduce the amount of slavery on Golarion I count that as a positive.

There might be some reciprocity there, with the difficulties in dealing with slavery making Liberators uncommon (and explaining the lack of them in the fiction and world as compared to LG Paladins).

I mean I always saw "X takes/keeps slaves" as a clear signpost for "X is evil and it's okay to kill X."

That's pretty much fair. Individual slave owners aren't always Evil, but societies really into slavery, and anyone who actually deals in slaves, tend to be.

shroudb wrote:

perpetual infusions is a joke atm

considering it replaces actual free Quick alchemy procs (1/2 level is gone now)

Perpetual Infusions basically does NOTHING when you get it and when it scales:

+2 item bonus to a single very specific save when you already have +2 item bonus to all saves.
DC 14 poisons that eat a full round to make a +1d4 attack that a monster only fails with a 2
level 7 bombs that do 1dx+1 with 2 actions at level 7
and etc

Perpetual Infusions is an Alchemist At-Will ability... basically the Alchemical equivalent to a Cantrip, something the class rather lacked before. And while the others are a bit harder to compare, comparing the Bomber options to a caster's Cantrips... well, it turns on disappointingly late, there's a feat tax of Calculated Splash (assuming you use the Resonance Test where the target now takes Splash damage too, I noticed that doesn't seem to have made it into this document) and you'll be two levels behind, but otherwise it compares pretty well equally.

That out of the way, I'm mostly going to talk about the Paladin (because of course). And I'm going to start by saying that the Liberator is every bit as situational as I was afraid any CG Paladin-esque with that title was going to be. LG gets a general purpose free attack, awesome. NG gets to either no-sell or debuff the target, great. CG... gets a save or check against a very limited list of conditions, and a Step if they're not restrained. Really? Not even a bonus on the save/check unless you add to your code and happen to be fighting very specific enemies? How often does entangling, grabbing, immobilizing, or restraining even come up in the middle of a fight? Not very often in my experience. And then the step. So the Defender could potentially take an enemy out of the fight, or at least get them closer to it, the Redeemer can either completely negate the attack or inflict a debuff for the entire turn, and the Liberator might deny the attacker a single action if...

Compares to cantrips?

Hahahaha... No. It really doesn't.

Let's see what you actually get:

Chirurgeon : nothing.

Everyone already have better and always on item bonuses on saves.

You need level 15 to actually get the only benefit which is reroll vs a poison.

Poisoner : DC 14 at level 7.

That means that every monster is unaffected on a 2+.

That's literally CR 0 DC.

Mutagenist : + 1 to some skills - 1 to others, - hp, - saves, IF you're not using your mutagens as a Mutagenist.

bomber: weaker cantrips.

At least those can provide some debuffs. The only passable out of the 4 paths

Ki Rush has verbal casting, so you have to make noise as you move to gain concealment?

I mean I think I'm fine with annoying everybody else with "whoosh", "nyoom", or "hyperdrive, engage"

I'm wondering why none of the class changes appear in the PDF? Am I missing something? Are these summaries not officially a change or is there somewhere else I download the full details?