Changes to the Way We Make Changes

Fragile grace could be +Cha or -Str, the "immense talent and knowledge" line is about how others see Elves, and honestly, we're in the "all X are Y" stereotype territory which is what Paizo likely wanted to ditch.

Ouch.

That guy above with his rant about supposedly universal American traits, is a great example of why this kind of stuff belongs in the trashcan.

While I did not follow or see that discussion, I still (mechanically) believe saying "the average Elf is..." is very much not comparable to "all US Americans are...".

But that is just me.

So... a level 7 Chirurgeon can heal everyone by 1d6 every 10 minutes? Doesn't that seem a bit useless at that level?

I'd have preferred something like "You can only create one perpetually infused Elixir of Life per minute". That would give you 10d6 healing per 10 minutes, which is admittedly a bit high for free healing, but it scales much slower than say Lay on Hands. By level 7, you're already Treating Wounds for about 19 damage in 10 minutes, even guaranteed with Assurance and potentially to up to 4 targets with Ward Medic.

It would outscale other free healing options by quite a bit at level 11+, but at that point I don't think out of combat healing will be an issue for any party.

I definitely think folks are sleeping on what this really does.

Assuming a party of 4, Medicine heals the party for 19 damage every hour, requiring forty minutes of activity. Ward Medic cuts that down to a much more reasonable ten minutes of activity. Perpetual infusions heals the party for 21 damage every hour, requiring two and a half minutes of activity (or just one minute if everybody gathers around each time).

It works great during travel, exploration, and even as an add-on during ten minute breaks. When you Treat Wounds during a break, you can also give them a free elixir of life at the start and finish for an extra +2d6 of healing. Traveling for an hour? Heal everyone 6d6.

Plus, that's just half a feature. Sure, the other half is just "give the party +1 against either disease or poison" right now, but we're getting more options in Treasure Vault.

Taking a flaw for no benefit is not narratively satisfying. I argued the same in the Playtest and I certainly haven't changed my mind on it. As others have mentioned, it invites criticism from other players about reducing the team's average chance of success for essentially personal vanity. It also isn't how the game world is supposed to work, since for example "a dumb strong barbarian" is a trope but "a dumb barbarian" is just sad. Even if it isn't realistic, the tradeoff is important for the narrative and gameplay to be satisfying.

I agree that we can just have the options be [2 Boost] or [3 Boost, 1 Flaw] and be done with it.

Blave wrote:

So... a level 7 Chirurgeon can heal everyone by 1d6 every 10 minutes? Doesn't that seem a bit useless at that level?

I'd have preferred something like "You can only create one perpetually infused Elixir of Life per minute". That would give you 10d6 healing per 10 minutes, which is admittedly a bit high for free healing, but it scales much slower than say Lay on Hands. By level 7, you're already Treating Wounds for about 19 damage in 10 minutes, even guaranteed with Assurance and potentially to up to 4 targets with Ward Medic.

It would outscale other free healing options by quite a bit at level 11+, but at that point I don't think out of combat healing will be an issue for any party.

I definitely think folks are sleeping on what this really does.

Assuming a party of 4, Medicine heals the party for 19 damage every hour, requiring forty minutes of activity. Ward Medic cuts that down to a much more reasonable ten minutes of activity. Perpetual infusions heals the party for 21 damage every hour, requiring two and a half minutes of activity (or just one minute if everybody gathers around each time).

It works great during travel, exploration, and even as an add-on during ten minute breaks. When you Treat Wounds during a break, you can also give them a free elixir of life at the start and finish for an extra +2d6 of healing. Traveling for an hour? Heal everyone 6d6.

Plus, that's just half a feature. Sure, the other half is just "give the party +1 against either disease or poison" right now, but we're getting more options in Treasure Vault.

I think the way to actually make this work is to use the elixirs as a supplement for Treat Wounds. In my experience you need a little more than two medicine checks to recover from a significant fight. Three rounds of elixir shots could probably reduce that to two checks, meaning you spend 20 mins instead of 30. That, healing while being forced to stay on the move and quickly topping off after minor damage are the only situations where I think this will be useful in any shape or form. In all other situations, I have to agree with Blave - the healing is so insignificant as to be superfluous.

All in all, I don't think I would waste a pick of this feature on Elixir of Life.

Firstly, I want to apologize if this has been discussed already and I simply couldn't find it.

With the changes to the healer alchemist (I'm bad at spelling), do we think we will ever see adjustments to Natural Medicine? I don't want to see it take over the medicine skill, I just wish it would qualify me for continual recovery so I can use it more than once an hour.

If they won't do that, can someone help get me off of my soapbox and explain why not? If not for me, than for my poor DM that has to listen to me.

Firstly, I want to apologize if this has been discussed already and I simply couldn't find it.

With the changes to the healer alchemist (I'm bad at spelling), do we think we will ever see adjustments to Natural Medicine? I don't want to see it take over the medicine skill, I just wish it would qualify me for continual recovery so I can use it more than once an hour.

If they won't do that, can someone help get me off of my soapbox and explain why not? If not for me, than for my poor DM that has to listen to me.

We will definitely not. The clarifications document has a section confirming that Natural Medicine doesn't work like the change to Alchemist. (Presumably, the reason is that a major class feature is much stronger than a skill feat.)

Chirurgeon is great now, thank you. And finally we can stop hearing about Flickmace in every discussion.

Firstly, I want to apologize if this has been discussed already and I simply couldn't find it.

With the changes to the healer alchemist (I'm bad at spelling), do we think we will ever see adjustments to Natural Medicine? I don't want to see it take over the medicine skill, I just wish it would qualify me for continual recovery so I can use it more than once an hour.

If they won't do that, can someone help get me off of my soapbox and explain why not? If not for me, than for my poor DM that has to listen to me.

Natural Medicine did receive a clarification!

"Page 264 (Clarification): When I use Natural Medicine, can I attempt the higher-DC checks even though I'm not using Medicine?

You absolutely can. Essentially, you replace any mention of “Medicine” in the activity with “Nature” if you’re using Natural Medicine. You do still need healer’s tools. 

Also, note that this feat applies only to using Treat Wounds. You would still need to be an expert in Medicine, not Nature, to select the Ward Medic feat. If you did qualify for and did select Ward Medic, you would be able to use Nature to Treat Wounds for two targets. You’d still need to become a master or legendary in Medicine to treat more targets than that."

I've always found the Chirurgeon to be the best Research Field, so the changes are just icing on the cake for me.
The change to the first level ability is definitely the best one. The change to Perpetual Infusions is nice but not major (but I'm waiting for the new items to give a definite point of view).

I really like some of the changes.

I do wish they had gone slightly further with the Warpriest change.

Warpriest (Page 120): Third doctrine grants expert proficiency with your deity’s favored weapon, simple weapons, and unarmed attacks.

That sort of leaves Martial Weapon proficiency behind. The Second Doctrine for Warpriest says:

Second Doctrine (3rd): You’re trained in martial weapons.

I welcomed the second doctrine on my Warpriest of Kurgess. I am disappointed that they did not improve proficiency with those weapons when they were doing it for simple weapons.

As a middle ground between having outdated PDFs and having to completely reflow text and layouts every errata, could non-print associated errata be put into the PDFs as simple PDF annotations, rather than needing complete layout updates? That certainly adds a lot less labor and doesn't leave PDF customers with such a reliance on third-party references.

On another note, I'm having trouble grokking the change to Quick Alchemy. Specifically, "works correctly with non-consumable alchemical items." Does this mean that it correctly excludes non-consumable alchemical items? That seems weird since the phrase "works correctly with" was used, though is consistent with the rule adding "consumable" to its text. Or, is it meant that (though there are only 2 currently, and they are rare) you can create consumable versions of non-consumable alchemical items?

Flickmace still seems strong, mainly its traits + flail spec, as others have said.

I agree that we can just have the options be [2 Boost] or [3 Boost, 1 Flaw] and be done with it.

This seems the most elegant, rather than having a vestigial voluntary flaws option that is just a Rule 0 sort of thing. Uncomplicates character creation text dramatically and un-pigeonholes ancestries.

I think it's good to keep in mind that this isn't really an either/or situation. We can have some version of Voluntary Flaws with the new ability rules. Removing Voluntary Flaws was more a tangential adjustment than a critical step in the overhaul.

I think there is something to be said for it being much too much room to optimize in tandem with the new changes. The old voluntary flaw would mean every ancestry can get boosts to three completely controlled stats at the cost of two penalties, on top of their individual feat support, heritages, etc.

Tri Stat is very much the no-compromise point for a lot of the MAD builds in the game, its a big part of why humans were such a tempting consideration for EVERY character-- Dex/Con/[Caster] instead of Dex/[Caster]is the difference between having toughness and not, but stacks with toughness.

So like, one of the big beneficiaries of this change was the strength penalty ancestries like halfling and gnome, which can now just take strength/dex, dex/strength, or strength/con and lose less for their trouble, or Elves which now don't need to pay to catch up in constitution-- but for those other two, that can easily become strength/con/dex, again no compromise stat.

Now Dex/Con/[Caster], is actually something that's best accessed through Halfling and Gnome's original boosts, which I think is desirable, because it leaves an optimization niche for the initial ancestries.

If anything, I'd want them to errata the likes of Tengu, Kitsune, Orc to give them a tri boost / mono penalty option like all the core ancestries, to help provide coverage for tri stats for certain builds that really want them, and because this change clarifies that the differences can now only be cultural, there's less reason for them to not have penalties, and because this change kind of leaves them with fewer options.

Not sure if I missed it, but is there an ETA on the 4th printing?

Would it be possible to put something like "Date last Updated" on each of the collapsible menus an the FAQ page?

What was wrong with the horse? I've been playing a simple weapon wielding cleric Cavalier for over a year and I've felt fine

If you are using a Horse and its Support Benefit the way it is described, then there is no problem.

The problem was that the rules didn't enforce sane usage of the Horse.

Initially, there was no restriction on what type of attack would get the benefit - so it would be adding 2 damage per dice to a spell attack such as Disintigrate.

That was fixed to be only Strike attacks - so physical weapons only. That removed spell shenanigans, but doesn't prevent ranged attacks from getting the bonus. The 4th printing errata finally limits the bonus to melee Strike only.

And up until the 4th printing errata, you didn't have to actually be riding the horse in order to gain the bonus damage. The horse simply had to exist as your animal companion and use its support action on a turn when you move 10 feet.

Not sure if I missed it, but is there an ETA on the 4th printing?

Somewhere (in here I think) they said it's in the warehouse and just needs like an inventory check before starting to get shipped out or something.

AJCarrington wrote:

Not sure if I missed it, but is there an ETA on the 4th printing?

Somewhere (in here I think) they said it's in the warehouse and just needs like an inventory check before starting to get shipped out or something.

More specifically, the warehouse is closed this week in order for Paizo to check their inventory, and the warehouse will re-open next week (starting on the 9th). After that point, the 4th printing of the CRB should start shipping, and once it does, the .PDFs of the CRB will be updated to reflect the new printing.

On another note, I'm having trouble grokking the change to Quick Alchemy. Specifically, "works correctly with non-consumable alchemical items." Does this mean that it correctly excludes non-consumable alchemical items? That seems weird since the phrase "works correctly with" was used, though is consistent with the rule adding "consumable" to its text. Or, is it meant that (though there are only 2 currently, and they are rare) you can create consumable versions of non-consumable alchemical items?

We're confirmed to be getting Permanent Alchemical Items in the Alchemy Unleashed chapter of Treasure Vault. And technically, with the way Quick Alchemy worked before this printing, you could Quick Alchemy any kind of alchemical item. This didn't mean much before, as 99% of all alchemical items are consumable anyways, and the 3 non-consumable items were restricted by access (Alchemical Crossbow was Uncommon and was from Fall of Plaguestone, and the 2 others are Rare and from Lost Omens Legends).

But now we're likely to get many more Common Permanent Alchemical Items, so this errata was made necessary to prevent any funny business, like people Quick Alchemying a bunch of alchemical flamethrowers or something of the sort.

I wonder how big a difference the use of the perm alchemical tools will make to the class, depending on how they were done, they could help with some of the other pain points.

Will this same twice yearly approach be taken for Starfinder?

This is currently a Pathfinder process, not a Starfinder process. We'll let you know if that changes.

AJCarrington wrote:

Not sure if I missed it, but is there an ETA on the 4th printing?

Somewhere (in here I think) they said it's in the warehouse and just needs like an inventory check before starting to get shipped out or something.

Yes, it came in over the Holidays and should start shipping next week when inventory is complete.

SilvanOrion wrote:

Firstly, I want to apologize if this has been discussed already and I simply couldn't find it.

With the changes to the healer alchemist (I'm bad at spelling), do we think we will ever see adjustments to Natural Medicine? I don't want to see it take over the medicine skill, I just wish it would qualify me for continual recovery so I can use it more than once an hour.

If they won't do that, can someone help get me off of my soapbox and explain why not? If not for me, than for my poor DM that has to listen to me.

Natural Medicine did receive a clarification!

"Page 264 (Clarification): When I use Natural Medicine, can I attempt the higher-DC checks even though I'm not using Medicine?

You absolutely can. Essentially, you replace any mention of “Medicine” in the activity with “Nature” if you’re using Natural Medicine. You do still need healer’s tools. 

Also, note that this feat applies only to using Treat Wounds. You would still need to be an expert in Medicine, not Nature, to select the Ward Medic feat. If you did qualify for and did select Ward Medic, you would be able to use Nature to Treat Wounds for two targets. You’d still need to become a master or legendary in Medicine to treat more targets than that."

I do like that it has the higher DC options, which is a great help. I'm curious why getting continual recovery is so hard for an Herbalist. As it is, you'd be doing Nature for treat wounds, but then would need to get Medicine up to make it any good, at which point you may as well have not done Natural Medicine since you're now just as high on Medic but spent a feat to use a different skill that is likely at the same modifier. At least that's how it feels to me.

As it is, you'd be doing Nature for treat wounds, but then would need to get Medicine up to make it any good, at which point you may as well have not done Natural Medicine since you're now just as high on Medic but spent a feat to use a different skill that is likely at the same modifier. At least that's how it feels to me.

Suppose it is just me wanting more, but a man can dream.

I think part of the reasoning is that Nature is also one of the magical tradition skills used for identifying magic and creatures, so it is already a valuable skill on its own. It is also given trained proficiency automatically for several classes. Sometimes even up to Expert proficiency (Thaumaturge can get Nature to Expert at level 9 for free).

SilvanOrion wrote:

As it is, you'd be doing Nature for treat wounds, but then would need to get Medicine up to make it any good, at which point you may as well have not done Natural Medicine since you're now just as high on Medic but spent a feat to use a different skill that is likely at the same modifier. At least that's how it feels to me.

Suppose it is just me wanting more, but a man can dream.

I think part of the reasoning is that Nature is also one of the magical tradition skills used for identifying magic and creatures, so it is already a valuable skill on its own. It is also given trained proficiency automatically for several classes. Sometimes even up to Expert proficiency (Thaumaturge can get Nature to Expert at level 9 for free).

A fair point. I suppose what I'd want is some feat just in Herbalist that allows a continual recovery type of effect. Not Ward Medic or anything that strong, mind you, but just the flavor of being the druid hermit healer is one I like, but I always feel so starved for skills. Likely that's just left over from 1e though and I need to get over it. Lol

I do like that it has the higher DC options, which is a great help. I'm curious why getting continual recovery is so hard for an Herbalist. As it is, you'd be doing Nature for treat wounds, but then would need to get Medicine up to make it any good, at which point you may as well have not done Natural Medicine since you're now just as high on Medic but spent a feat to use a different skill that is likely at the same modifier. At least that's how it feels to me.

Suppose it is just me wanting more, but a man can dream.

SERIOUSLY. I'm building a druid for an AP and no one wants to heal except me. All of this character's skill feats and increases are taken up by Medicine to level 8. They feel less like an outdoorsey druid and more like a medical school grad student.

Allowing another path to qualify for these feats (or adding an equivalent within a path, such as a Natural medicine feat chain) would help mitigate this bad feeling.

I think it's worth noting that +2/+2 has historically been the one thing humans, well, have. Now that everyone has it, they're an extremely weak ancestry with no special abilities at all. Maybe that's a sacrifice we have to make, but it's pretty obvious that the game devs were willing to give up some balance in order to improve the overall options of players. And hey, I support that! But that's a big part of why I think the balance concerns brought up about the various Voluntary Flaw alternatives fall a little flat.

I do ask that we try to remember that we're all friends here and try to think about these arguments from the other person's point of view, rather than assuming we can read people's minds. There is really no good reason for being hyperconfrontational about this issue.

Summary:

The errata is live: paizo.com/pathfinder/faq

The 4th printing of the Pathfinder (2e) Core Rulebook should start shipping next week.

PDF update process: It will still be updated if/when print products are reprinted. (So the PDF for the Core Rulebook should update soon.)

This is currently a Pathfinder, not a Starfinder process.

Thanks for playing Pathfinder!

SilvanOrion wrote:

I do like that it has the higher DC options, which is a great help. I'm curious why getting continual recovery is so hard for an Herbalist. As it is, you'd be doing Nature for treat wounds, but then would need to get Medicine up to make it any good, at which point you may as well have not done Natural Medicine since you're now just as high on Medic but spent a feat to use a different skill that is likely at the same modifier. At least that's how it feels to me.

Suppose it is just me wanting more, but a man can dream.

SERIOUSLY. I'm building a druid for an AP and no one wants to heal except me. All of this character's skill feats and increases are taken up by Medicine to level 8. They feel less like an outdoorsey druid and more like a medical school grad student.

Allowing another path to qualify for these feats (or adding an equivalent within a path, such as a Natural medicine feat chain) would help mitigate this bad feeling.

This feels like a party problem, and not a system problem. A single skill feat unlocking a whole path doesn't make a lot of sense, and there really isn't a good way to build a druid as only a healer. The alchemist subclass of Chirurgeon is taking a class feature to build this out. Short of them adding another subclass under druid, I'm not sure how this would make sense.

While I think a follow-up feat to Natural Medicine sounds cool, it's way beyond the scope of this errata.

I think it's worth noting that +2/+2 has historically been the one thing humans, well, have. Now that everyone has it, they're an extremely weak ancestry. Maybe that's a sacrifice we have to make, but it's pretty obvious that the game devs were willing to give up some balance in order to improve the overall options of players. And hey, I support that! But that's a big part of why I think the balance concerns brought up about the various Voluntary Flaw alternatives fall a little flat.

I do ask that we try to remember that we're all friends here and try to think about these arguments from the other person's point of view, rather than assuming we can read people's minds. There is really no good reason for being hyperconfrontational about this issue.

Absolutely agree on the issue of some people being too confrontational.

On the point that humans are now a weak ancestry... not so much. They are still one of the strongest with their feat selection alone - Natural Ambition, an almost free advanced weapon with Unconventional Weaponry, General Training, Clever Improviser and the list goes on.

Ancestry feats should never be used to balance the core ancestry. Pathfinder 2 is usually really good about avoiding "context-based balance" (balancing one underpowed mechanic with an overpowered mechanic over there). It's a really dangerous habit to fall into, and one I'm pretty sure the devs have explicitly said they always avoid.

The reason it's a bad idea is that you have no way of ensuring the context will even be relevant. What happens if they take a versatile heritage, and have to focus their ancestry feats on that? Now you've just created a trap option--taking beastkin feats instead of human feats makes you objectively weaker than a human who took human feats, or a halfling who took beastkin feats.

I personally feel that it's unlikely that optional feats are meant to balance out an unavoidably weak chassis. If they do so, it's an inconsistent happy accident that won't truly solve the problem.

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

I think it's worth noting that +2/+2 has historically been the one thing humans, well, have. Now that everyone has it, they're an extremely weak ancestry. Maybe that's a sacrifice we have to make, but it's pretty obvious that the game devs were willing to give up some balance in order to improve the overall options of players. And hey, I support that! But that's a big part of why I think the balance concerns brought up about the various Voluntary Flaw alternatives fall a little flat.

I do ask that we try to remember that we're all friends here and try to think about these arguments from the other person's point of view, rather than assuming we can read people's minds. There is really no good reason for being hyperconfrontational about this issue.

Absolutely agree on the issue of some people being too confrontational.

On the point that humans are now a weak ancestry... not so much. They are still one of the strongest with their feat selection alone - Natural Ambition, an almost free advanced weapon with Unconventional Weaponry, General Training, Clever Improviser and the list goes on.

Multitalented as well, for explicitly defying the 'special' line restriction on archetypes.

Doug Hahn wrote:

SilvanOrion wrote:

I do like that it has the higher DC options, which is a great help. I'm curious why getting continual recovery is so hard for an Herbalist. As it is, you'd be doing Nature for treat wounds, but then would need to get Medicine up to make it any good, at which point you may as well have not done Natural Medicine since you're now just as high on Medic but spent a feat to use a different skill that is likely at the same modifier. At least that's how it feels to me.

Suppose it is just me wanting more, but a man can dream.

SERIOUSLY. I'm building a druid for an AP and no one wants to heal except me. All of this character's skill feats and increases are taken up by Medicine to level 8. They feel less like an outdoorsey druid and more like a medical school grad student.

Allowing another path to qualify for these feats (or adding an equivalent within a path, such as a Natural medicine feat chain) would help mitigate this bad feeling.

This feels like a party problem, and not a system problem. A single skill feat unlocking a whole path doesn't make a lot of sense, and there really isn't a good way to build a druid as only a healer. The alchemist subclass of Chirurgeon is taking a class feature to build this out. Short of them adding another subclass under druid, I'm not sure how this would make sense.

You are very right, that a single skill feat unlocking it all shouldn't happen. I think that's where the idea of having it be something specifically in Herbalist would make it maybe easier to do, but I am by no means a game designer. I also admit some of it is just player greed of "but I wanna do this too". Especially when my dedicated healer cleric isn't as good at healing as the rogue. Lol

While I think a follow-up feat to Natural Medicine sounds cool, it's way beyond the scope of this errata.

This may be the best point I didn't really think on. Even if it was changed, it would have to be more focused than this errata is.

Pathfinder 2 is usually really good about avoiding "context-based balance" (balancing one underpowed mechanic with an overpowered mechanic over there).

The +2/+2 that Humans have isn't underpowered though. It is literally the same powered as all of the other ancestries now.

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

Pathfinder 2 is usually really good about avoiding "context-based balance" (balancing one underpowed mechanic with an overpowered mechanic over there).

The +2/+2 that Humans have isn't underpowered though. It is literally the same powered as all of the other ancestries now.

Well, humans have no other benefits (like the extra language gnomes get, darkvision or low-light vision, keen senses, etc). This used to be made up for potentially by their flexible boosts, but now it's really just their feats and heritages.

Yeah, that's the thing--humans used to be one of the only ancestries that got +2/+2. In exchange, they don't get any other racial abilities. Now they still have no ancestry abilities, and their ability array isn't unique anymore. And that's on top of no longer being able to get three boosts if they need it!

My point is less that "humans have been nerfed and this is an outrage" and more that it's fairly obvious that balance wasn't the reason this change was made. It's for player options, which is, to be clear, a good reason to sacrifice a little balance now and again. But with that in mind, it certainly feels like finding a way to keep voluntary flaws could be worth making one or two tiny balance concessions if it really did need to. I don't think it would, but some people here do and I respect their opinion.

Ancestry feats should never be used to balance the core ancestry. Pathfinder 2 is usually really good about avoiding "context-based balance" (balancing one underpowed mechanic with an overpowered mechanic over there). It's a really dangerous habit to fall into, and one I'm pretty sure the devs have explicitly said they always avoid.

Nothing in regards to humans is what I would call underpowered. Solidly "ok" or "boring". Absolutely, especially the base ancestry plus heritages. But that is kind of the point and not rare among ancestries by any means.

As far as I know, that also has no impact on relative feat balance either. They just have a lot of great feats because Golarion is a rather human-centric setting and lots of people play human.

Overall love the new alternate ability boosts. Either you get the ancestry stat spread (+Phys, +Mental, +Free, -Flaw), or the flexible human stat spread (+Free, +Free). Now even easier to make a PC of any ancestry function optimally in any class! That said, it makes me want to homebrew new stat spreads for all the (+Stat, +Free) ancestries so they actually have an option instead of the +2 Free Boosts just being superior.

While part of me is sad for the changes to voluntary flaws, I can see why it is necessary. For some reason I never even considered what happens when Humans used that voluntary rule, and +3 Free Boost, -2 Free Flaws seems unbalanced compared to the other ancestry options, especially when 2 stats clearly pull less weight than the others in the system (Int, Cha).

This feels like a party problem, and not a system problem. A single skill feat unlocking a whole path doesn't make a lot of sense, and there really isn't a good way to build a druid as only a healer. The alchemist subclass of Chirurgeon is taking a class feature to build this out. Short of them adding another subclass under druid, I'm not sure how this would make sense.

My point is that Medicine feats take up a majority of a PC's feats before it's reliable/good. I also play a lot in the org play setting with multiple medicine-based PCS and it feels like a tax. A path for Natural medicine would be really nice and as it is now it's fundamentally useless.

I fail to see why using a feat to qualify for further feats in a parallel chain would be problematic. (e.g. Ward Medic: Requirements: Expert in Medicine, or Expert in Nature with Natural Medicine). Better yet maybe they will add new equivalent feats within a Natural medicine feat path.

If anything it's another feat tax to get there. I will flavor medicine feats as natural medicine on this PC anyway.

"Underpowered" is kind of excessive, but it is technically the case that the human core chassis gets less than other ancestries' do. They don't get a sense, they don't get any improvement to movement, they don't have the option of getting three bonuses, and they don't have increased hit points. Their versatility was what balanced that out, and now that's no longer something unique to them.

Honestly, though, I think that them now being a bit more boring is worse than them now being a bit "underpowered". Like, I'm not counting the beans necessarily--I mean, I am, because I'm currently working on designing some ancestries so I have literally been counting the beans of the ones that already exist and the math just doesn't add up for humans anymore--but removing the one thing that makes humans special does make them a worse ancestry overall than they were before.

It's immaterial to my point, since I was more pointing out that this update wasn't for balance's sake and the game designers are clearly okay making compromises in balance for the sake of customizability, but I do think we focus a bit too much on words like "underpowered" as if "boring" isn't kind of worse.

Well, humans have no other benefits (like the extra language gnomes get, darkvision or low-light vision, keen senses, etc). This used to be made up for potentially by their flexible boosts, but now it's really just their feats and heritages.

There are also other balancing factors for the ancestries that I am seeing.

Elves get +5 foot speed and low-light vision, but are also at -2 HP.
Gnomes get two specific languages and low-light vision, but are size small
Dwarves get darkvision, clan dagger, and +2 HP, but are at -5 foot speed.
And so on.

Wizard Level 1 wrote:

Blave wrote:

Those elixirs use counteract checks with a fixed counteract modifier and counteract level. They are basically useless as perpetual infusions because they will be at least 5 levels behind your character level and fail to counter pretty much anything you're up against at that level.

Fair point. I hadn't considered that by the time you get those particular perpetual elixirs you will have out leveled anything around the level of the elixir that would apply those conditions.

That really sours me to this fix. Chirurgeon has gone from having 2 useless perpetual elixirs to a handful of almost always useless perpetual elixirs.

More elixirs that don't do anything for my party isn't a solution.

This is conflating the issue too much.

Just because the Perpetual Infusions feature doesn't work well with Focus Cathartics or Sinew-Shock Serums does not mean it'll not work well with all future alchemical elixirs with the Healing trait. This change was done specifically with the new items in Treasure Vault in mind, so there's likely plenty of items for a Chirurgeon to choose from.

I think we should wait to see what Treasure Vault has in store for us before we write it all off.

I'm not conflating the issue, I'm recognizing it. As is, using perpetual the elixirs with the healing tag in the Core Rule book is nigh useless.

Not every group is going to have access to the Treasure Vault. The core rules should be good on their own and not require additional books and sources to make them good.

*shrugs* I have always found Human ancestry to be boring. I don't think I have ever played one in any TTRPG edition no matter how mechanically powerful they are or are not.

Those balance points do exist, but ultimately it generally rounds out to having a net +1-+2 benefits. Elves get a penalty to Con (an important stat linked to a saving throw), low light vision, improved speed, and -2 hit points. Improved speed and darkvision seem to be worth two, as every ancestry that has darkvision or improved speed also comes with an extra flaw.

Xethik wrote:

Well, humans have no other benefits (like the extra language gnomes get, darkvision or low-light vision, keen senses, etc). This used to be made up for potentially by their flexible boosts, but now it's really just their feats and heritages.

There are also other balancing factors for the ancestries that I am seeing.

Elves get +5 foot speed and low-light vision, but are also at -2 HP.
Gnomes get two specific languages and low-light vision, but are size small
Dwarves get darkvision, clan dagger, and +2 HP, but are at -5 foot speed.
And so on.

Sure - but once you look at Uncommon there are "strict upgrades" ignoring heritages and feats once more, like Orcs with extra HP and darkvision. Again, it's a false equivalence due to ancestry feats and heritage options, and humans are also more flexible with languages.

But this argument was already a bit faulty when you were already going to boost something like Strength on a human character and compare to the orc.

"Underpowered" is kind of excessive, but it is technically the case that the human core chassis gets less than other ancestries' do. They don't get a sense, they don't get any improvement to movement, they don't have the option of getting three bonuses, and they don't have increased hit points. Their versatility was what balanced that out, and now that's no longer something unique to them.

Honestly, though, I think that them now being a bit more boring is worse than them now being a bit "underpowered". Like, I'm not counting the beans necessarily--I mean, I am, because I'm currently working on designing some ancestry so I have literally been counting the beans of the other ancestries and the math just doesn't add up for humans anymore--but removing the one thing that makes humans special does make them a worse ancestry overall than they were before.

It's immaterial to my point, since I was more pointing out that this update wasn't for balance's sake and the game designers are clearly okay making compromises and balance for the sake of customizability, but I do think we focus a bit too much on words like "underpowered" as if "boring" isn't kind of worse.

Actually as far as I can tell comparing them to the other core ancestries:

- Dwarves have more HP but are 5 feet slower, have darkvision, and get one language fewer.

- Elves have 2 less HP, have low light, and are faster, and get one fewer language.

- Goblins get darkvision, and have 2 less HP.

- Halflings have 2 less HP, one fewer language, but get keen eyes.

- Gnomes have the same HP, but get one fewer language, and have low light.

It seems like there's a point system for each of these traits internally such that humans are supposed to be flush with the others via their HP and language. Its a little underwhelming because most groups practically ignore language and 2 HP is only strong at like, really low level (where it will most likely stop you from going down from a given attack or dying of massive damage from certain crits.)

But honestly, if I have to guess, feats and heritages play at least a small role, in reality, presumably just with a low weight because of the possibility someone could insist on taking no specific feats or heritage whatsoever, but in practice, ancestry feats are not symmetrically powerful for all use cases, and humans have especially splashable ones.

I don't know that I can agree, honestly, for reasons I went into above, but I also have to admit that this was a tangential point for me--I was more pointing out that this update was made not for balance, but for customizability, which it probably was, and that it objectively makes humans a bit weaker, which it probably does. How weak humans are now isn't a huge fixation of mine, since my interest in this update is a lot less in balance and a lot more in the loss of customizability with the removal of the Voluntary Flaw system.

I'm going to back out of the "are humans underpowered now" argument, because I think it's creating a really really big tangent and distracting from the stuff that I actually am a lot more interested in! I find the current argument interesting, but like, it's also the sort of argument that I think could turn into a big debate if we let it, and I don't think it's super responsible of me to derail a thread with an issue I'm not even that passionate about. :P

So here's the big question:

Are Alchemists now in a good state or are we hoping there's still puzzle pieces to their overall viability (even just in terms of specific playstyles) to be revealed in Treasure Vault?

Like, if Treasure Vault was somehow cancelled and all existing copies were burned, is Alchemist 'fixed' enough to get on with?

I don't know that I can agree, honestly, for reasons I went into above, but I also have to admit that this was a tangential point for me--I was more pointing out that this update was made not for balance, but for customizability, which it probably was, and that it objectively makes humans a bit weaker, which it probably does. How weak humans are now isn't a huge fixation of mine, since my interest in this update is a lot less in balance and a lot more in the loss of customizability with the removal of the Voluntary Flaw system.

I'm going to back out of the "are humans underpowered now" argument, because I think it's creating a really really big tangent and distracting from the stuff that I actually am a lot more interested in! I find the current argument interesting, but like, it's also the sort of argument that I think could turn into a big debate if we let it, and I don't think it's super responsible of me to derail a thread with an issue I'm not even that passionate about. :P

EDIT: i will say that i really really don't think the number of bonus languages that someone could hypothetically take remotely factors into the balance of these ancestries

Pick a lane, are we debating it or not?

This post has changed like four times to varying degrees of "I don't want to debate this but I also feel the need to win the debate at the same time."