Welcome to the War of Immortals Playtest!

If JB is speaking up on the forums after taking his leave of it for so long in the last few years I think that people should take him seriously, very seriously.

Mythic was incredibly disruptive to PF1 balance to the point of absurdity even in the adventures that assumed that Mythic was the norm, heck, the whole thing and the base of the PF1 rules had to be cannibalized and recreated basically from scratch for WotR CRPG because of it, the fact that he is coming out to say in no uncertain terms that Mythic isn't an expansion of the Player Character levels means that the power curve of the proposed PF2 Mythic options won't drop the ball and simply amp up the PCs to simply make them more powerful than is befitting for their level, or in the least, not in a way that will throw out the baby with the bathwater.

so does this mean that we'll get cr 26-30 creatures now & rules for building them

I really really really hope so. I maintain it's bizarre that some of the cooler critters of the Pathfinderverse like Sorshen, Tar-Baphon, and the Horsemen of the Apocalypse have known levels, but those levels literally have no mechanical significance.

belgrath9344 wrote:

so does this mean that we'll get cr 26-30 creatures now & rules for building them

I really really really hope so. I maintain it's bizarre that some of the cooler critters of the Pathfinderverse like Sorshen, Tar-Baphon, and the Horsemen of the Apocalypse have known levels, but those levels literally have no mechanical significance.

ill be severely upset if not those creatures & fighting them is a big part of why I've wanted mythic especially the 4 horsemen

belgrath9344 wrote:

so does this mean that we'll get cr 26-30 creatures now & rules for building them

I really really really hope so. I maintain it's bizarre that some of the cooler critters of the Pathfinderverse like Sorshen, Tar-Baphon, and the Horsemen of the Apocalypse have known levels, but those levels literally have no mechanical significance.

That is certainly my hope as well.

I'm not concerned about Mythic potentially being very strong, as it'll most likely be an optional rule as it was in 1e, specifically for when you want to tell higher power level stories. With that in mind I desperately hope that after Mythic is out we receive stats for some creatures like Infernal Dukes, Demon Lords, Horsemen, Archmages, Empyreal Lords etc...

I'm not concerned about Mythic potentially being very strong, as it'll most likely be an optional rule as it was in 1e, specifically for when you want to tell higher power level stories. With that in mind I desperately hope that after Mythic is out we receive stats for some creatures like Infernal Dukes, Demon Lords, Horsemen, Archmages, Empyreal Lords etc...

same & how to build them

reading animist playtest and immediately see overpowered focus spell problem

or will this the new power standard for focus spell after reprint

despite their ridiculous low range misfortune aura with no save as focus spell are ridiculously overpowered for melee martial if they can get it through archetype

Okay, just on first impressions alone I am really liking both the Animist and the Exemplar. I'm excited that my crew and I will have 5 Fridays to sink our collective teeth and really try these classes. (I've always wanted to participate in a Pathfinder playtest).

And absolutely excited for War of Immortals!

reading animist playtest and immediately see overpowered focus spell problem

or will this the new power standard for focus spell after reprint

despite their ridiculous low range misfortune aura with no save as focus spell are ridiculously overpowered for melee martial if they can get it through archetype

An action per turn on sustain is pretty rough for a martial. That's at least something.

Also, this kind of feedback is probably better in the appropriate playtest forum.

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

reading animist playtest and immediately see overpowered focus spell problem

or will this the new power standard for focus spell after reprint

despite their ridiculous low range misfortune aura with no save as focus spell are ridiculously overpowered for melee martial if they can get it through archetype

An action per turn on sustain is pretty rough for a martial. That's at least something.

Also, this kind of feedback is probably better in the appropriate playtest forum.

making a list for playtest forum

not sure what worth start a thread yet

Am I reading the Animist right?

After 10th level, they become a 5 slot caster (for ranks 1st-8th), with 2 prepared and 3 spontaneous?

How will Flexible Spellcasting interact with Animist spell slots?

Am I reading the Animist right?

After 10th level, they become a 5 slot caster (for ranks 1st-8th), with 2 prepared and 3 spontaneous?

The table includes the bonus spells from Advanced Interlocution, so you get exactly what's in the table.

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

Am I reading the Animist right?

After 10th level, they become a 5 slot caster (for ranks 1st-8th), with 2 prepared and 3 spontaneous?

The table includes the bonus spells from Advanced Interlocution, so you get exactly what's in the table.

Oh okay, cool! I wasn’t sure if that was factored in or not!

I'm a bit confused over Animist saves.

The Channeler gets Master Fort, with crit success on Will - but Will is never above expert? And they don't get any Legendary saves?

And Sage never gets a crit success save and never gets any save above Expert? What's the design intent behind this?

Another thing that feels like a missing detail:
On the Initial Proficiency table, Spells simply lists "Trained in spell attack modifier" and "Trained in spell DC"

All other spellcasting classes specify the Tradition in this section, such as "Trained in divine spell attack modifier" or "Trained in arcane spell DC", or even for classes like Sorcerer / Summoner / Witch, "Trained in spell modifier in the tradition from your Bloodline/Eidolon/Patron" etc.

And since under the Apparition Spellcasting feature it specifies that any Apparition Spells are also Divine spells, my assumption would be that the Animist should specify its proficiency in Divine spells, especially since they prepare their spells from the Divine list as described under Animist Spellcasting.

Otherwise, this opens up the possible interpretation that they can use their unspecified "spell modifier" for scrolls/staves/wands etc from ANY Tradition, which seems WILDLY off-base.

Is this something to do with the Remaster, where Spell Proficiency isn't going to be so specific and thus there will be more language needed to make these distinctions between what magic they can utilize through items and such?

I was looking at the Embodiment of Battle focus spell and I thought that... since it gives you a status bonus to attack (and damage) to keep up with martials that nearly follows how a martial would get it's weapon scaling increases ("expert" at 7th level instead of 5th though), why don't make it that you instead use your spell attack roll proficiency with weapons while under the effects of Embodiment of Battle?

At the only point where it would make a difference mechanically would be at 13th level (since currently you would have expert proficiency with a +3 bonus on top of that, while under this proposal you'll stay behind martials till 15th level) and at 19th level (because at that point you will be above msot martials due to legendary proficiency). I also think this is a way more flavorful way to convey mechanically what you are doing at the table, as you will be channeling the apparition's martial prowess through your spellcasting. You would still get the -2 to spell attack modifier and your spell DCs when you actually use them for spells though.

I was looking at the Embodiment of Battle focus spell and I thought that... since it gives you a status bonus to attack (and damage) to keep up with martials that nearly follows how a martial would get it's weapon scaling increases ("expert" at 7th level instead of 5th though), why don't make it that you instead use your spell attack roll proficiency with weapons while under the effects of Embodiment of Battle?

At the only point where it would make a difference mechanically would be at 13th level (since currently you would have expert proficiency with a +3 bonus on top of that, while under this proposal you'll stay behind martials till 15th level) and at 19th level (because at that point you will be above msot martials due to legendary proficiency). I also think this is a way more flavorful way to convey mechanically what you are doing at the table, as you will be channeling the apparition's martial prowess through your spellcasting. You would still get the -2 to spell attack modifier and your spell DCs when you actually use them for spells though.

THIS. Or, if they want a bigger buy in, have it swap Spell and Weapon Proficiency entirely, so you can suddenly be a Martial badass, but your spells become WAY weaker.

Another thing that feels like a missing detail:

On the Initial Proficiency table, Spells simply lists "Trained in spell attack modifier" and "Trained in spell DC"

This is consistent with all spellcasters post-Remaster.

Any reason the Exemplar has one trained skill less than any other class? Every other class has at least 5 trained skills and a lore skill at level 1.

The bonus granted from embodiment of battle is fine actually. The rest of the spell maybe not so much but it puts you on par with martials starting at 7th level minus any status bonuses they happen to have. The biggest issue is needing to sustain it and the penalties to casting

The idea of Nephellim Fleshwarp Exemplar sounds pretty inticing. With the idea being your body not being able to quite handle the divine spark now within you

That or your godbits are Lamashtan in origin.

If JB is speaking up on the forums after taking his leave of it for so long in the last few years I think that people should take him seriously, very seriously.

Mythic was incredibly disruptive to PF1 balance to the point of absurdity even in the adventures that assumed that Mythic was the norm, heck, the whole thing and the base of the PF1 rules had to be cannibalized and recreated basically from scratch for WotR CRPG because of it, the fact that he is coming out to say in no uncertain terms that Mythic isn't an expansion of the Player Character levels means that the power curve of the proposed PF2 Mythic options won't drop the ball and simply amp up the PCs to simply make them more powerful than is befitting for their level, or in the least, not in a way that will throw out the baby with the bathwater.

That's actually kind of the opposite of what's being said, I think-- if it doesn't raise your level beyond 20 (which is what was said in literal terms), there are two options.

1. It raises your power level without raising your character level, which is what you're suggesting it wouldn't be here-- you'd be able to fight things stronger than Treerazor with a level 20 character, because your level 20 character is stronger than a level 20 character normally would be.

2. It doesn't raise your power level at all, which means we can't use it to fight demigod-tier entities, which would be... very odd, because then what is it even for, in the long run?

Edit: Option 3, I guess unless there's a 'mythic check' built into creatures meant to be stronger than Treerazor and co, where instead of them being higher level, they just have special traits that negate or limit incoming damage unless it's from a mythic source, almost like the archaic trait in the recent starfinder field test.

Any reason the Exemplar has one trained skill less than any other class? Every other class has at least 5 trained skills and a lore skill at level 1.

wizard get 2 skill plus int at level 1 too

seem to be lowest number a class get

LoreMonger13 wrote:

Another thing that feels like a missing detail:

On the Initial Proficiency table, Spells simply lists "Trained in spell attack modifier" and "Trained in spell DC"

This is consistent with all spellcasters post-Remaster.

Gotcha, thanks! I guess we'll find out come November as to what that entails =]

The bonus granted from embodiment of battle is fine actually. The rest of the spell maybe not so much but it puts you on par with martials starting at 7th level minus any status bonuses they happen to have. The biggest issue is needing to sustain it and the penalties to casting

What I said doesn't make it stronger till 19th level though (and it technically makes it weaker at 13th level) and as someone else already said if you wanted to compensate for the legendary proficiencies at 19th level you could compensate it with swapping your weapon and spell proficiencies around so you will effectively have a -4 to your spells since you would be an expert with them. There's also Animist feats like Grudge Strike which also give you a bonus to attack which IMO could get tweaked to not have that bonus if the Animist could eventually reach legendary with weapons.

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

Am I reading the Animist right?

After 10th level, they become a 5 slot caster (for ranks 1st-8th), with 2 prepared and 3 spontaneous?

The table includes the bonus spells from Advanced Interlocution, so you get exactly what's in the table.

Then what's the point of making it an ability instead of just using the table? It's already a unique spell slot table, this just seems like a weird extra step that serves no purpose other than to cause confusion.

I mean technically speaking all features of all classes including the animist mention the spell slots as a listed feature.

That's actually kind of the opposite of what's being said, I think-- if it doesn't raise your level beyond 20 (which is what was said in literal terms), there are two options.

1. It raises your power level without raising your character level, which is what you're suggesting it wouldn't be here-- you'd be able to fight things stronger than Treerazor with a level 20 character, because your level 20 character is stronger than a level 20 character normally would be.

2. It doesn't raise your power level at all, which means we can't use it to fight demigod-tier entities, which would be... very odd, because then what is it even for, in the long run?

Edit: Option 3, I guess unless there's a 'mythic check' built into creatures meant to be stronger than Treerazor and co, where instead of them being higher level, they just have special traits that negate or limit incoming damage unless it's from a mythic source, almost like the archaic trait in the recent starfinder field test.

I think the safe money is surely on option 3 for sure. Doing anything else and allowing Mythic features and gameplay right out of the gate would otherwise just simply throw out the encounter, XP, and game balance straight away unless the Mythic rules essentially just state that if you're playing a Mythic PC then you will and can only EVER fight Mythic creatures and have Mythic encounters which, in some ways sort of is self-defeating. I can't say I know for sure but I can safely say that if JB spoke up about Mythic then we should absolutely 110% be assured that those systems and rules ARE coming and based on his comments that it shouldn't be interpreted as a way to increase your overall power or level over what is attained "naturally" by being level 20. The best way I think I can describe an analogy for this is that I think Mythic will more often than not help "open doors" that would otherwise be impossible to access ala Super Mario 64, you need so many Power Stars to enter a new area of the Castle because, well, you do, those Stars don't functionally make you more powerful in that you can jump higher, punch harder, or run faster but they do make you more powerful in that you can access and do more things.

Only time will tell, and I could have the wrong impression for sure and Mythic will be a "here is some bonus math, go crazy" system but I don't suspect that's the case, just personally. I hope his resurfacing is a sign he will be back around again or more often after that whole thing a couple of years ago, he never deserved to be treated or spoken about the way he had back then.

The rest of the spell maybe not so much but it puts you on par with martials starting at 7th level minus any status bonuses they happen to have.

The bold part is kind of my problem with it though. It means your self buff designed to make you a relevant martial gets worse the more party buffing you have (and better the less your party has). That feels kind of janky.

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Mythic rules are categorically NOT an extension of the game past 20th level.

That has me all a little concerned, given how the last set of mythic ruled crushed the already not very big on balance 1E. Me changing to 2E was in large part motivated by the much better game balance. I hope these new rules do not throw that completely out of whack.

I also am concerned I don't think you can do justice to mythic heroes and have them equivalent to equal levelled none mythic heroes.

Having two different level tracks (like mythic in 1e) is in my mind less intuitive than just inflated levels

Mythic Heroes aren't supposed to be equivalent or equal to non mythic heroes. Mythic rules, at least as in PF1e, is not a thing that one or two characters have, but rather something all the player characters have and also at least some of the enemies you face, but not all enemies so that you can feel like a mythic hero mowing down the chaff.

Not giving Mythic to all your players is like only giving one or two Free Archetype

aobst128 wrote:

The rest of the spell maybe not so much but it puts you on par with martials starting at 7th level minus any status bonuses they happen to have.

The bold part is kind of my problem with it though. It means your self buff designed to make you a relevant martial gets worse the more party buffing you have (and better the less your party has). That feels kind of janky.

It's not designed to make you a "relevant martial" though, it's designed to let you step in for a martial if you have to, in specific situations. You shouldn't be able to be a full caster with powerful focus spells and be able to be equivalent to a martial as well, that's one of the biggest contributors to the martial/caster disparity that PF2 has done such a good job of overcoming so far.

Oh wow, love the Exemplar. Well, now to continue the trend of my Lantern King worshippers with the Cunning type :D

The exemplar is our first rare class, a Charisma-based divine warrior possessing their own spark of divinity.

Is this outdated/incorrect info? The playtest version only lists Charisma as the attribute used for the Exemplar’s domain spells.

Squiggit wrote:

aobst128 wrote:

The rest of the spell maybe not so much but it puts you on par with martials starting at 7th level minus any status bonuses they happen to have.

The bold part is kind of my problem with it though. It means your self buff designed to make you a relevant martial gets worse the more party buffing you have (and better the less your party has). That feels kind of janky.

It's not designed to make you a "relevant martial" though, it's designed to let you step in for a martial if you have to, in specific situations. You shouldn't be able to be a full caster with powerful focus spells and be able to be equivalent to a martial as well, that's one of the biggest contributors to the martial/caster disparity that PF2 has done such a good job of overcoming so far.

I mean that's nice and all, but you're missing the point. Whatever it's 'supposed' to do it should do it consistently.

As is, it effectively does give you martial tier accuracy... if there isn't another source of status bonuses floating around, while getting significantly worse (potentially worthless) if you do.

That's a bad way to design class features.

magnuskn wrote:

Any reason the Exemplar has one trained skill less than any other class? Every other class has at least 5 trained skills and a lore skill at level 1.

wizard get 2 skill plus int at level 1 too

seem to be lowest number a class get

Wizards have INT as their main stat hence they will always have way more skills at trained than 5 after character creation. Same goes for the other classes which use INT as an important stat for them, i.e. Magus and so on. Sorcerers, which also nominally start with 2 + INT skills at level 1, get two extra trained skills from their bloodline (at least I haven't found one which does not give them two skills), bringing them up with their background to 5 + Lore trained skills at first level, like everyone else who is counted among the "low number of skills" classes.

So, all other classes which don't use INT as an important stat for their class abilities have at least 5 + Lore trained skills at level 1. The Exemplar does not use INT for anything of note, hence many of them will start with INT +0 and therefore it will be the only class in the game with 4 + Lore as their starting trained skills. Which is why I am wondering if that is an oversight or intentional. And if it is intentional, what makes the Exemplar worse at skills than everyone else? It seems like a curious design decision to me.

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

magnuskn wrote:

Any reason the Exemplar has one trained skill less than any other class? Every other class has at least 5 trained skills and a lore skill at level 1.

wizard get 2 skill plus int at level 1 too

seem to be lowest number a class get

Wizards have INT as their main stat hence they will always have way more skills at trained than 5 after character creation. Same goes for the other classes which use INT as an important stat for them, i.e. Magus and so on. Sorcerers, which also nominally start with 2 + INT skills at level 1, get two extra trained skills from their bloodline (at least I haven't found one which does not give them two skills), bringing them up with their background to 5 + Lore trained skills at first level, like everyone else who is counted among the "low number of skills" classes.

So, all other classes which don't use INT as an important stat for their class abilities have at least 5 + Lore trained skills at level 1. The Exemplar does not use INT for anything of note, hence many of them will start with INT +0 and therefore it will be the only class in the game with 4 + Lore as their starting trained skills. Which is why I am wondering if that is an oversight or intentional. And if it is intentional, what makes the Exemplar worse at skills than everyone else? It seems like a curious design decision to me.

Are you perhaps overlooking the free skill at level 3 that comes with their first Epithet? It's not at level 1 like all the others, but it's still pretty early on.

magnuskn wrote:

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

magnuskn wrote:

Any reason the Exemplar has one trained skill less than any other class? Every other class has at least 5 trained skills and a lore skill at level 1.

wizard get 2 skill plus int at level 1 too

seem to be lowest number a class get

Wizards have INT as their main stat hence they will always have way more skills at trained than 5 after character creation. Same goes for the other classes which use INT as an important stat for them, i.e. Magus and so on. Sorcerers, which also nominally start with 2 + INT skills at level 1, get two extra trained skills from their bloodline (at least I haven't found one which does not give them two skills), bringing them up with their background to 5 + Lore trained skills at first level, like everyone else who is counted among the "low number of skills" classes.

So, all other classes which don't use INT as an important stat for their class abilities have at least 5 + Lore trained skills at level 1. The Exemplar does not use INT for anything of note, hence many of them will start with INT +0 and therefore it will be the only class in the game with 4 + Lore as their starting trained skills. Which is why I am wondering if that is an oversight or intentional. And if it is intentional, what makes the Exemplar worse at skills than everyone else? It seems like a curious design decision to me.

Are you perhaps overlooking the free skill at level 3 that comes with their first Epithet? It's not at level 1 like all the others, but it's still pretty early on.

I did at that. Alright, that explains the one skill less, if they get another trained one automatically early on in their careers.

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

magnuskn wrote:

Any reason the Exemplar has one trained skill less than any other class? Every other class has at least 5 trained skills and a lore skill at level 1.

wizard get 2 skill plus int at level 1 too

seem to be lowest number a class get

Wizards have INT as their main stat hence they will always have way more skills at trained than 5 after character creation. Same goes for the other classes which use INT as an important stat for them, i.e. Magus and so on.

No, it’s literally just Wizard and Magus.

Every other Int based class starts with more. Even the Witch, who is an Int based prepared caster, starts with more.

It’s a dumb legacy artifact that I hope has been removed in the remaster.

Even though I’m the GM for my group, I can’t help but think about potential animists and exemplars I’d want to create/play. I think an iruxi animist would be cool and a matajjn (sp?) orc exemplar sounds epic! (I might have to play around with this). Oh! A catfolk exemplar whose divine spark comes from Chohar! Ooooh! Yes!

All right, gonna play around now.

Dean; The_Minstrel_Wyrm

If you hate Asian influences/writers/material in your fantasy rpg… I don’t think that that is the fantasy rpg for you.

I definitely don’t see what you think you’re accomplishing outing yourself like this.

If you hate Asian influences/writers/material in your fantasy rpg… I don’t think that that is the fantasy rpg for you.

I definitely don’t see what you think you’re accomplishing outing yourself like this.

hated what 1e had

was great and surprising to actually see so many east asia reference used so well in 2e

maybe expression of different part of internet culture didn't translate well