Welcome to the War of Immortals Playtest!

Sneaking the reveal of upcoming mythic rules into the playtest document... FFS Paizo my heart can't take this! XD

Anyway, I certainly hope mythic characters are straight up more powerful than non-mythic characters of the same level. What's the point of being mythic otherwise? Just attaching signs to enemies that say "you must be this mythic to fight" is boring.

The 1e mythic rules were TOO broken, but the basic concept wasn't the problem. Mythic heroes should be stronger than non-mythic heroes, and should face little (or at least less) threat from non-mythic enemies.

That should be the baseline expectation of choosing to run a mythic game, imo. It's what 1e mythic promised - it just overdelivered a fair bit!

Sneaking the reveal of upcoming mythic rules into the playtest document... FFS Paizo my heart can't take this! XD

Anyway, I certainly hope mythic characters are straight up more powerful than non-mythic characters of the same level. What's the point of being mythic otherwise? Just attaching signs to enemies that say "you must be this mythic to fight" is boring.

The 1e mythic rules were TOO broken, but the basic concept wasn't the problem. Mythic heroes should be stronger than non-mythic heroes, and should face little (or at least less) threat from non-mythic enemies.

That should be the baseline expectation of choosing to run a mythic game, imo. It's what 1e mythic promised - it just overdelivered a fair bit!

Just giving free levels to PCs already does this. I sincerely hope PF2 Mythic goes beyond.

Personally, I really feel like if they're bringing back Mythic Power to 2E, that really deserves its own playtest so that the community can help make sure it isn't overtuned like it was in 1E.

I agree with the idea that Mythic characters SHOULD feel more powerful than non-Mythic characters and foes, but not to the point of it being Trivial or Extreme encounters and Nuke Tag, with no in-between. 2E is already WAY better at eliminating Nuke Tag, so I imagine that won't be as big a problem. It's a very delicate balance to play, to make them feel more powerful as they should, without completely breaking everything else down.

If 2E's "Mythic" rules are more tongue-in-cheek and not at all what 1E presented (ie, bringing Epic power into the game), then I'd really appreciate if the designers could be very explicit about that right now so we can temper expectations.

I know JB came in to state that there will be no over-leveling, but 1E Mythic Power didn't operate like that either, so that still doesn't tell us much about what they mean.

EDIT: I should note, I have a vested interest in this clarity and outcome as I do intend to run a 2E home-conversion of Wrath of the Righteous at some point, so knowing whether or not this will actually be useful or relevant to that pursuit would be very nice (and save a great deal of time and energy personally converting Mythic rules from 1E to 2E and doing all of the balancing myself)

MaxAstro wrote:

Sneaking the reveal of upcoming mythic rules into the playtest document... FFS Paizo my heart can't take this! XD

Anyway, I certainly hope mythic characters are straight up more powerful than non-mythic characters of the same level. What's the point of being mythic otherwise? Just attaching signs to enemies that say "you must be this mythic to fight" is boring.

The 1e mythic rules were TOO broken, but the basic concept wasn't the problem. Mythic heroes should be stronger than non-mythic heroes, and should face little (or at least less) threat from non-mythic enemies.

That should be the baseline expectation of choosing to run a mythic game, imo. It's what 1e mythic promised - it just overdelivered a fair bit!

Just giving free levels to PCs already does this. I sincerely hope PF2 Mythic goes beyond.

Yes, making characters more powerful makes characters more powerful.

I'm not entirely sure what point you are trying to make.

I have full faith that Mythic is in good hands after seeing JB dip his toe into this pond again when this topic came up.

The only fear I have for the system is that they decide to do something silly like adding a new Bonus type Silo named Mythic or something like that which provides another number-increase function for more accuracy/damage/defenses/skills to become more powerful rather than empowering characters to do larger-than-life things through "enabler" functions that make it possible to do things that are simply just out of reach for non Mythic PCs.

Things like staving off effects, conditions, and environments that are just too dangerous for NON-Specialized PCs would be a good step in the right direction I think. For example, most characters would have some REAL problems adventuring inside an active volcano or underwater without either being naturally or supernaturally accliminated to that environment or taking measures to get magical protection but for a Mythic character I could see a general blanket protective feature to enable them to endure and/or improvise without having to personally specialize in a permanent way or spend limited resources on the location/encounter.

I think my immediate problem with the Exemplar is the limitation on their weapon Ikons. It's slashing or piercing, sword or knife, hammer or club or axe, spear or polearm or stick, and ranged weapons. It'd been cool to see things like shield boss (though technically barrow's edge does let you use shield spikes) or brawling weapons.

I gave this same feedback. Brawling weapons seem like a big miss (even in playtest).

I'd like the idea that keeping it in one's "soul" should also provide empower options to a Saving Throw, Perception, Vision/Sense, Temp HP, or Key Ability Mod

I have full faith that Mythic is in good hands after seeing JB dip his toe into this pond again when this topic came up.

The only fear I have for the system is that they decide to do something silly like adding a new Bonus type Silo named Mythic or something like that which provides another number-increase function for more accuracy/damage/defenses/skills to become more powerful rather than empowering characters to do larger-than-life things through "enabler" functions that make it possible to do things that are simply just out of reach for non Mythic PCs.

Things like staving off effects, conditions, and environments that are just too dangerous for NON-Specialized PCs would be a good step in the right direction I think. For example, most characters would have some REAL problems adventuring inside an active volcano or underwater without either being naturally or supernaturally accliminated to that environment or taking measures to get magical protection but for a Mythic character I could see a general blanket protective feature to enable them to endure and/or improvise without having to personally specialize in a permanent way or spend limited resources on the location/encounter.

That wouldn't be bad start, but there would need to be some impact on combat as well beyond allowing characters to operate in more dangerous environs. I'm totally fine with them not introducing more or new modifiers and instead just offering greater scope. Like, say, an ability to more easily bypass damage resistance, or treat immunity as a high resistance instead, available to more characters than very specific class builds. Having an adaptive resistance to damage types would also be neat, and I REALLY like the idea someone else mentioned about giving Mythic characters and foes the equivalant type of Resistance that limit Archaic weapons in Starfinder 2E, though in this case it'd be "mortal" and "mythic".

I'd REALLY like to see them play more with Fortune and Misfortune, which could be a good way to add a little "oomph" to important rolls or checks without actually adding to the math (beyond playing with odds, naturally). That could be a nice replacement for Mythic Surge, which let you add to die rolls after making them. In this case it could be a limited but replenishable resource ala Focus Spells. Maybe a Mythic Pool that fuels Mythic Surge, Mythic Abilities, and Mythic Spells so you have important choices to make on what to spend on and when.

I just want to say that I've been a big fan of Pathfinder second edition since the CRB dropped, but the older the system gets, the cooler the new classes seem to get. Like I don't know how well these two classes work mechanically yet, but I just read the doc and I'm pretty sure they're the coolest Pathfinder classes I've ever read.

Why is the word "ikons" spelled that way?

It's a valid alternate spelling, and actually closer to the original Greek. Besides: "icon" is already a Starfinder background.

You know, for a bizarre minute I had convinced myself the Animist was an Uncommon class and was preparing to challenge the idea why this could possibly be. Went to see if the class description offered any insight and realized that it never said anything was Uncommon in the first place, except maybe the Focus spells (as always).

I suppose while I'm here I may as well add that both of these classes delight me in various ways. I've been interested to see what kind of character the revitalised shaman-esque class comes out to be since Sayre first mentioned it so I'm thrilled that it's finally here and filled with cool spirit interactions, but the Exemplar has completely taking my imagination by storm with its folk hero charm and the way your deeds enhance your power as your divine spark grows with your legacy.

I understand that, tonally, it might not be suited to every game, but I almost don't even want the Exemplar to be Rare. If it has to be restricted for Society play, sure keep it Uncommon, but I want to see what kinds of concepts my players can come up with and don't much care for the idea that only one in a million people can become a folk hero. Sorcerers are already supposed to be rare enough in-setting that many people couldn't tell the difference between them and another spellcaster, I don't feel like there's any reason why no person has ever caught a divine spark before the modern cataclysm (but then of course the Exemplar's whole bit is probably going to be tied up with this whole cataclysm plotline anyway).

One example is actually a player's old character--she was a Paladin in 1e, but more the type of, "naive farm girl with a good heart who was called by the gods to protect the innocent and who beats down 'weeds' with her trusty shovel". Having a spark of divinity be what powers her shovelling skills and holy deeds actually works much better than the Champion's much more trained-knight flavour, and Humble Strikes actually works for her preference for simple weapons like shovels and sickles.

As a final note, I find the name of the class perfectly serviceable, but when talking about the class I find myself consistently flubbing and calling it the "Ikon" even when talking about its actual ikon class feature.

Will this rulebook be compatible with Pathfinder Remaster?

As for the mythic rules, does that mean there will be no epic level rules in Pathfinder Second Edition? That's too sad. :(

Quote:

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.

To clarify, the exemplar's key ability is strength or dexterity. It can optionally gain the ability to cast domain spells and the spellcasting attribute is charisma.

To manage expectations, we don't plan to go into mythic rule details anytime soon. Remaster, Tian Xia, and Howl of the Wild will all come first. Gen Con 2024 will be the time to lean in, perhaps a bit at PaizoCon Online 2024. Enjoy the sneak peak!

Will this rulebook be compatible with Pathfinder Remaster?

As for the mythic rules, does that mean there will be no epic level rules in Pathfinder Second Edition? That's too sad. :(

Paizo's rulebooks will be compatible with Pathfinder Remaster Project and ORC license for the foreseeable future.

I love the Animist class a lot. The spirits are done really well and I like the spellcasting too. I can see this being my go-to caster from now on.

Sadly I don't think I will be able to playtest it, as it doesn't really fit with the only game I'm playing in.

There is definitly something funny with the saves though, I feel like a class feature got accidently left out. Cause they start with expert will but never improve it, and the Channeler gets expert Fortitude but then gets the 'success to crit' for Will not Fort? Very odd.

I feel like everyone is enamored with the exemplar and I'm the only person who like the Animist more.

I love the Animist class a lot. The spirits are done really well and I like the spellcasting too. I can see this being my go-to caster from now on.

Sadly I don't think I will be able to playtest it, as it doesn't really fit with the only game I'm playing in.

There is definitly something funny with the saves though, I feel like a class feature got accidently left out. Cause they start with expert will but never improve it, and the Channeler gets expert Fortitude but then gets the 'success to crit' for Will not Fort? Very odd.

I feel like everyone is enamored with the exemplar and I'm the only person who like the Animist more.

Yup animist is cool. Still wish it could be sanctified because I like sanctification too much, but hey there might be an archetype for that. It being divine (as opposed to primal) is a little bizarre given no sanctification, but it's supposed to be spirits of the natural world so I get why...mostly.

Exemplar isn't really my thing. It's the martial version of kineticist (which I love to death), but I've never really liked martials, ergo, it doesn't excite me as much as animist. Cool setting implications, mechanical execution is "large man hitting things with large club while yelling his attack names like a shonen anime character". I did like the Bifrost reference and Eternity-Ending Blaze, though.

I hope that there will be some options for unarmed and unarmored Exemplars down the line.

2e Monks just can't capture the almost Buddha-like Unchained Monk I made in 1e with my Serpent-Fire Adept.

The Exemplar has some great options I love, but the lack of a fist/unarmed strike ikon option really holds it back for what I want to do with it.

Yup animist is cool. Still wish it could be sanctified because I like sanctification too much, but hey there might be an archetype for that. It being divine (as opposed to primal) is a little bizarre given no sanctification, but it's supposed to be spirits of the natural world so I get why...mostly.

It does feel odd not bring a primal caster. I think it's partly because the default lore to research spirits is Religon, and partly cause the primal spell list is way more blasty.

But you can get some primal spells from the spirits at least.

Calliope5431 wrote:

Yup animist is cool. Still wish it could be sanctified because I like sanctification too much, but hey there might be an archetype for that. It being divine (as opposed to primal) is a little bizarre given no sanctification, but it's supposed to be spirits of the natural world so I get why...mostly.

It does feel odd not bring a primal caster. I think it's partly because the default lore to research spirits is Religon, and partly cause the primal spell list is way more blasty.

But you can get some primal spells from the spirits at least.

The Animist is the Cleric without deity. Divine is the fitting list for such a spiritual class.

theWasp wrote:

Calliope5431 wrote:

Yup animist is cool. Still wish it could be sanctified because I like sanctification too much, but hey there might be an archetype for that. It being divine (as opposed to primal) is a little bizarre given no sanctification, but it's supposed to be spirits of the natural world so I get why...mostly.

It does feel odd not bring a primal caster. I think it's partly because the default lore to research spirits is Religon, and partly cause the primal spell list is way more blasty.

But you can get some primal spells from the spirits at least.

The Animist is the Cleric without deity. Divine is the fitting list for such a spiritual class.

Also, on a game level, giving them the primal list would have devalued the spirits. They'd mostly be giving spells they already had so it wouldn't be a notable benefit but having them provide out of class spells makes them a biger part of the play experience/niche of the class

To manage expectations, we don't plan to go into mythic rule details anytime soon. Remaster, Tian Xia, and Howl of the Wild will all come first. Gen Con 2024 will be the time to lean in, perhaps a bit at PaizoCon Online 2024. Enjoy the sneak peak!

The presumed lack of a playtest for these is... mildly concerning, not gonna lie.

The Raven Black wrote:

theWasp wrote:

Calliope5431 wrote:

Yup animist is cool. Still wish it could be sanctified because I like sanctification too much, but hey there might be an archetype for that. It being divine (as opposed to primal) is a little bizarre given no sanctification, but it's supposed to be spirits of the natural world so I get why...mostly.

It does feel odd not bring a primal caster. I think it's partly because the default lore to research spirits is Religon, and partly cause the primal spell list is way more blasty.

But you can get some primal spells from the spirits at least.

The Animist is the Cleric without deity. Divine is the fitting list for such a spiritual class.

Also, on a game level, giving them the primal list would have devalued the spirits. They'd mostly be giving spells they already had so it wouldn't be a notable benefit but having them provide out of class spells makes them a biger part of the play experience/niche of the class

It could also be that its a primal class and the spirits grant divine spells if spirits really are "divine" in nature.

Paul Watson wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

theWasp wrote:

Calliope5431 wrote:

Yup animist is cool. Still wish it could be sanctified because I like sanctification too much, but hey there might be an archetype for that. It being divine (as opposed to primal) is a little bizarre given no sanctification, but it's supposed to be spirits of the natural world so I get why...mostly.

It does feel odd not bring a primal caster. I think it's partly because the default lore to research spirits is Religon, and partly cause the primal spell list is way more blasty.

But you can get some primal spells from the spirits at least.

The Animist is the Cleric without deity. Divine is the fitting list for such a spiritual class.

Also, on a game level, giving them the primal list would have devalued the spirits. They'd mostly be giving spells they already had so it wouldn't be a notable benefit but having them provide out of class spells makes them a biger part of the play experience/niche of the class

It could also be that its a primal class and the spirits grant divine spells if spirits really are "divine" in nature.

And then we'd get complaitns about "nature spirits" giving out divine spells not being appropriate. So, pays money, takes choice.

You all make good points about it being divine.

Gut reactions:

I like that the animist gets two apparitions at a time right out of the gate. This fulfills the class fantasy and sets it apart without adding excess complexity.

I like that the apparitions sound like they were pulled from Spirit Island rather than copy/pasted cleric domains or sorcerer bloodlines.

I like the idea of exemplars limiting their divine spark to one ikon at a time and want that gameplay loop to stick.

I love both new classes.

For the Animist, I have a Druid I was already struggling against the chassis / concept with, who will simply be served by taking this class.

For the Exemplar, I have a Fighter I was already struggling against the chassis / concept with, who will simply be served by taking this class.

Golden times in PF2 here!

Aaron Shanks wrote:

To manage expectations, we don't plan to go into mythic rule details anytime soon. Remaster, Tian Xia, and Howl of the Wild will all come first. Gen Con 2024 will be the time to lean in, perhaps a bit at PaizoCon Online 2024. Enjoy the sneak peak!

The presumed lack of a playtest for these is... mildly concerning, not gonna lie.

I'm 80 percent sure they're just going to be archetypes (which have never been play tested) and I'm 95 percent sure beyond being more appetizing than current archetype offerings they aren't going to break the math the CR system runs on

Ilorin Lorati wrote:

Aaron Shanks wrote:

To manage expectations, we don't plan to go into mythic rule details anytime soon. Remaster, Tian Xia, and Howl of the Wild will all come first. Gen Con 2024 will be the time to lean in, perhaps a bit at PaizoCon Online 2024. Enjoy the sneak peak!

The presumed lack of a playtest for these is... mildly concerning, not gonna lie.

I'm 80 percent sure they're just going to be archetypes (which have never been play tested) and I'm 95 percent sure beyond being more appetizing than current archetype offerings they aren't going to break the math the CR system runs on

I am worried they will end up underpowered and people who eagerly await them will be disappointed.

I sincerely hope they will be amazing though.

Removed some off topic/potentially baiting posts and their quotes

Exemplar seems really awesome and I've been running some test builds and combat at various levels and with various abilities. Love the rotating spark mechanic, love having cool at-will abilities of all different kinds from offensive to utility to support all based on anticipation and resource management. Really makes you think about what your best move is and what's going to have happened in combat by your next turn when deciding where to move your spark.

First off, I echo needing more options especially for weapon ikons as many weapons have no options, but I think that being fixed in full release was already covered. Another niche might be more body/worn ikons that can offer a bit better offensive utility/set-up with their transcendence ability, as the difference between when I took two weapon ikons and could alternate offensive abilities every turn vs when I only had one and was basically forced into either wasted actions or utility transcendence abilities that felt a bit underwhelming in turns of setting up an offensive turn, felt pretty significant.

The second thing is I feel like the additional ikon feat is a little unclear or awkward. My assumption based on my reading is that any feat or epithet granting an imminence or transcendence ability applies only to a single chosen ikon (not to all ikons of that type or when the feat prereqs are being met), so if you gain an additional ikon you need to chose to give it abilities from feats before it has something other than its default ones. But if you say want to pick up a second weapon ikon of a different style and dual wield weapon ikons and swap your spark between them to alternate using their different chosen abilities (the build I found the most fun and dynamic to play), that leaves one of them without an epithet and thus no crit spec ability (unless you go out of your way to pick one up via ancestry or something). When one weapon drops up to ~35 average extra damage on a crit and one weapon does nothing, it's hard not to feel like you have a strong main weapon and an inferior offhand weapon instead of two diverse but equal ikons to use in different ways. I'd suggest epithets apply to all ikons of that type you have, or even better that the additional ikon feat lets you select an epithet for that type of ikon to apply to your additional ikon (at the appropriate level if need be).

Also, Twin Stars feels like it would be the perfect prerequisite set-up for taking and using Mated Birds In Paired Flight with a single weapon ikon, but my RAW reading of the prereq for the latter seems to exclude this possibility and require two entire seperate ikons. Being able to combo those two feats (and possible Hurl at the Horizon) feels like a missed opportunity.

The second thing is I feel like the additional ikon feat is a little unclear or awkward. My assumption based on my reading is that any feat or epithet granting an imminence or transcendence ability applies only to a single chosen ikon (not to all ikons of that type or when the feat prereqs are being met), so if you gain an additional ikon you need to chose to give it abilities from feats before it has something other than its default ones.

Yes, I am not sure I understand this feat. The only purpose I can think of is to be able to Spark Transcendence and keep the current Immanence. E.g., my worn ikon is active because I want to provide an aura to allies. If I Spark Transcendence the divine spark has to move to another ikon. If I had an additional worn ikon I could Spark Transcendence and have the spark move to the other worn ikon, maintaining the aura.

Yes, I am not sure I understand this feat. The only purpose I can think of is to be able to Spark Transcendence and keep the current Immanence. E.g., my worn ikon is active because I want to provide an aura to allies. If I Spark Transcendence the divine spark has to move to another ikon. If I had an additional worn ikon I could Spark Transcendence and have the spark move to the other worn ikon, maintaining the aura.

I think its best use case is two weapon ikons, so you can swap the spark back and forth between them and use a powerful offensive transcendence ability every turn rather than every other turn.

Maybe I misunderstand because I thought you could do that already, as long as you don't need to use your third action for anything else. Can't you do Weapon Transcend for 2 actions, and then Shift Immanence to put the spark back in the weapon? Or Shift Immanence as your first action, then do the Transcend? Or is it just that you want to attack with the second weapon as well?

You can, at the considerable cost of one action. With two weapon ikons you can use that action from something productive instead.

You can, at the considerable cost of one action. With two weapon ikons you can use that action from something productive instead.

Exactly. An action every turn to shift transcendence is a huge burden and only something to be done in emergencies imo. Even putting aside having your 3rd action to move, demoralize, heal, buff, feint, whatever, there are several 3 action transcendence abilities you cannot ever use if you are wasting an action to shift transcendence every turn. Not to mention many ways to get a save based transcendence ability that doesn't care about MAP so when you have all three actions you can do something like strike->two action save based transcendence ability.

You can, at the considerable cost of one action. With two weapon ikons you can use that action from something productive instead.

Which is why I said "as long as you don't need to use your third action for anything else."

The War of Immortals Playtest ends today. Remember to log your survey data before 5 PM Pacific!

My duty is done.

A great many thanks to the designers and the whole Paizo staff and associates for getting this playtest to us.

And also many many thanks to all those who posted about the playtest on the boards, especially those who wrote down the results of their testing the classes in actual play.

And big thanks too to everyone who will answer the survey.

See you on the other side :-)

The playtest is closed!

The War of Immortals Playtest ends today. Remember to log your survey data before 5 PM Pacific!

Huh. Since I can't submit class feedback, I guess I'll submit playtest feedback that if the end time is not 11:59 pm Paizo time, that needs to be communicated clearly everywhere from the get-go. The Playtest announcement itself says "open through Oct 2nd" rather than "specifying the workday. This comment is the only place I personally saw 5 pm mentioned.

Answered playtest survey yesterday, though I feel bit bad I couldn't comment on overall class strength or give star ratings because I didn't really have enough time to experience classes much x'D So dunno how useful the feedback is on stuff I did answer because of how many things I left blank

Answered playtest survey yesterday, though I feel bit bad I couldn't comment on overall class strength or give star ratings because I didn't really have enough time to experience classes much x'D So dunno how useful the feedback is on stuff I did answer because of how many things I left blank

TBH while the questions were worded for people having played the class (something to be improved in future playtest surveys), the survey started by asking whether you had GMed and/or played the classes or none of those but sill wanted to give your opinion. So I answered the questions and rated the classes even though I did not have the opportunity to play them. Paizo has all the info they need to correctly weigh my feedback.

Answered playtest survey yesterday, though I feel bit bad I couldn't comment on overall class strength or give star ratings because I didn't really have enough time to experience classes much x'D So dunno how useful the feedback is on stuff I did answer because of how many things I left blank

The ideal is that you have played the maximum as possible before sent the form but you can answer even if you just read the document.

The first thing that a classe needs to do is to convince a player to play with it. So even your impressions are important because this is the stronger and more important barrier that a class need to break to pass them impression that its mechanics and flavor will be fun to play because in a game with a dozen of classes most players probably will never play with all them and will decide only based in about what he/she is reading.

I was a fan of the Playest Feedback Feedback they did for Kineticist - I await something similar to that here in due time!