Animist Feat (16) - Monstrous Inclinations has a One Action icon, but it just gives you a spell for your repertoire. Surely this is a typo and you don’t have to spend an action to do this every day, right?
Search Posts
Sarangay have a speed of 0ft because Paizo forgot to give them one. Also the new Poppet Heritage should probably replace the Flammable feature with a Conductive feature with the chosen weakness or something rather than just changing the weakness type on Flammable - because now you technically have ‘Flammable’ Ceramic Poppets that are weak to Cold.
No, but it really should in my opinion. I was hoping this would be one of the things they’d have handled with the Remaster Errata, but they didn’t touch it.
So very glad this happened before things became a full blown crisis. Thank you Paizo! <3
It’s been about a month since this was announced and it feels like the only things keeping this from becoming a full blown OGL Crisis level loss of community faith and reputation off forum is people here hoping that somehow your explanatory FAQ comes with massive revisions to the core of what you’ve done and said you’re doing, and that most people have no idea this happened because nobody on YouTube with a large following has made a video detailing this yet. What are you guys doing Paizo? Cause I really doubt a FAQ explaining what you’ve done and that you’re not going to back down on any of this is going to help you at this point given everything we’ve read and had explained to us by you. You do indeed need to protect your IP and company, but this certainly isn’t the only way to do it and clearly isn’t the best way given how badly this has gone over.
I’m not saying to just delete the level 1 feat and leave it at that. I’d suggest that it should just be part of the heritage. It’s not even a strong ability - it’s a very short jump because to even go up 5ft you’ve already used 10 of the 15. Though I’m not opposed to your suggestion either.
Remember that unlike all those other ancestries you start with basically nothing that defines your ancestry outside of speed and size. A Crane would have low-light vision, but not yours because you don't get any ancestry feats for the first 2/3rds of the game outside of flight. Your bat? It also has no echolocation. Your moth? No Darkvision or Scent. These are just the senses alone, and what it'd take to match its animal counterpart in the bestiary. Aside from those there are lots of interesting animal feats that every other Awakened Animal would have a shot at and likely take besides a sense or two, but yours can't take any until you'd be at a high level in a 1-20/11-20 game. Saying 'you must really want flight if you pick a flying animal!' is missing the point of the OP. Yes, I do in fact miss not having more than [effectively] 3 ancestry feats by the time I'm level 20 - 1(!) for most players who end at level 10 - when they are what mechanically defines my animal on top of giving it the goodies ancestry feats typically get. All I'm asking for is Flying Animals to actually get a choice of feat at level 1 instead of being obligated to always get a feat tax on top of the feat tax others like them have to pay for Flight - two feats.
But is very much the case for Flying Animals.
It’s not ‘functionally identical to automatic’ because you still need to actively do it - which is the opposite of automatic. If you somehow spent 10min in an encounter because you hate yourself, I don’t think any gm would go “oh, right, I guess you have all your focus points back now!” because you still need to use Refocus and that is its own (contextually exploration) activity you have to explicitly say you’re doing on top of whatever else. So claiming you literally don’t have to say or do anything to refocus, which is what it being ‘automatic’ would entail, is wrong.
That'd be disappointing given that HOTW managed to get day 0 errata and some things are so broken in PC2 that GMs are having to rely on PFS rulings as holdovers to make them work.
So what are the odds we get errata for this next week or so now that Gencon is over?
I can’t find a single Creature that has “Land: 0” written for a speed. Which to me is confirmation that not listing a speed is absolutely to be taken as if it said 0, which means Sharks’ unwritten 0 speeds should overwrite your normal land speed - if the contention is that if it’s written it overwrites and otherwise lets you keep it. Someone else I spoke to also mentioned you have the same issues with senses. It never explicitly says you lose Darkvision and Lifesense or what have you, it just says you gain Low-Light and Sense. The whole spell really just starts to leak holes everywhere if you insist this is how RAW works in my opinion.
PF2E on Foundry runs it like this, else I wouldn't have even thought of this as a potential reading either. I was hoping someone would either be able to point me to something that disproves it, explain why this is fine actually, or else call for an errata or something. Sorry, I should have made that more clear in the OP.
Right but as was pointed out to me when I reported it as a bug on Foundry, nothing in any of the rules seems to state that you lose your speeds if they aren't superseded. They only explicitly call out losing strikes. If I'm wrong please let me know so I can cite it to them.
So, my understanding of these types of spells is that you fully turn into said creature. Shark Form? You're still you in there but you're a full on shark. T-Rex Form? You're a T-Rex. The rules also make clear that when you transform you can't speak (cause your animal physically can't), and you lose any of your strikes that animal lacks - you as a crocodile physically have no way to make and throw your Leshy seedpods. So far makes absolutely perfect sense both thematically and mechanically. You also can't modify your statistics for various balance reasons. Also makes sense. Now when you decide what creature to polymorph into you have a fair bit to base your decision on according to what creature would be best suited for a given encounter or task. Things that can fly for aerial battles, things that do slashing if the enemy is weak to that, etc. But now we get to my rules issue. If you're in a shoreside encounter as a level 1 Nimble Elf Wildshape Druid you've got a great land speed of 35. Let's say your Elf wants to charge across a beach and strike someone at the shore, then go deeper into the water to fight something there. If you're just looking at speeds you might think your best Animal Form option would be Crocodile or Snake since those are animals that can traverse on land and also manage in the water since they've got land and swim speeds. You'd be wrong. No, if you turn into a Crocodile your land speed will drop to 25ft which is 10 lower than you could be getting... if you turn into a Shark. Yes since Sharks don't have a listed land speed - and they're a shark(!) - you might be confused, but since nothing says you lose your speeds that aren't in the stat blocks like they say you do for your strikes, by RAW if you turn into a Shark (something with no legs!) you can run across the beach at 35ft while holding your breath, stab someone, and then hop in the water with your new 35ft swim speed. And Foundry's PF2E System, because it's RAW, implements it this way. But the heck do these spells work this way? Surely this can't be RAI right? Cause it makes no sense thematically and also arguably hurts Form diversity mechanically.
Yeah the -1 to AC for the archetype is perfectly fine in my opinion. If anything I wish Oracle’s multiclass had followed suit and had more done to it to prevent Sorcerers who dabble in it from being able to poach all the best parts of Oracle with no downsides, and thus become better at Oracle things than actual Oracles.
I do think there is a problem when Wizard isn’t the best Arcanist. That and more slots than most is what it had going for it, and it has neither now. And that’s not due to nerfs to it, but buffs to others - so power creep seems like the appropriate term for it.
The -1 is the only ‘nerf’ to the Barbarian multiclass and it already effectively worked that way for them premaster. The rest are incidental causalities of Barbarians getting buffed so they can fill their niche better, and since Paizo seems to think class niches were generally being encroached upon far too often by multiclasses premaster I’d say this is a pretty mild and fair change to those ends.
Worth noting, in case it hasn't already, that the game has rules for slower or faster leveling (requiring 800-1200xp per level), and if your players are all okay with it nothing would stop you from saying in session 0 "at level 10 we're going to slow advancement because it's better for the pacing of what I have planned". https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=574 So if you really want to have xp requirements be different at different stages of a campaign, you can do that RAW to some extent already. Generally though, 1000xp is just a nice easy to track and remember number and changing it drastically or often is just gonna confuse people for zero benefit.
Well, then this pack (and future ones) should also come with normal sized normal tokens as well and let us choose between them. Because I would not have bought this had I known it’d be effectively incompatible with all other tokens currently in use - and make it harder to see new small/tiny token art in general unless you zoom in a ton. Are they willing to do that?
I really strongly dislike how tiny these tokens are on the map compared to the standard all the other tokens use. If this is WAD, I wish I had known about this design decision before I bought them…
It doesn't say you can't retrain out of the level 1 feat because the retraining rules do. If you get rid of a prerequisite feat then every feat that required it turns off and becomes useless. As for more arms, it's just a general thing in PF2 that you can have as many arms and limbs as you want - but only two of them count as arms for doing anything mechanical. SF2 is gonna let you rotate out your pairs of arms if you have multiple, but even there it's only one in use for taking actions at a time.
Are we really not getting any errata today? Kinda surprised.
Hopefully the Champion multiclass also has a smaller aura with a locked size to follow the pattern of changing to better protect class niches.I don't see where either the remastered Champion dedication or the pre-remaster version grant an aura. Correct, they don’t and are thus broken and need errata anyways. Hence my hoping for them to use a smaller aura when they fix it.
Animal Instinct Frog Barbarian’s Tongue attack is only 1d4 when every other attack like it is 1d6. 1d4 made sense when it had reach, but it doesn’t anymore.
Hopefully the Champion multiclass also has a smaller aura with a locked size to follow the pattern of changing to better protect class niches.
I'm also extremely confused as to how this affects FoundryVTT modules. Is a free module for the PF2E System on FoundryVTT that automates aspects of some Feats or Conditions (that are in System already, to be clear) now unable to do so if the Feats/Conditions themselves come from a mix of OGL and ORC sources? Cause if so that's going to be doing some significant damage to a number of ubiquitous modules in the community and potentially kill a bunch outright.
Oh no, at no point was I saying you should have a fly speed from just the heritage. I'm saying the level 5 feat should be the start of the flying chain, not that it should start at character creation. As for flavouring, you could flavour your eagle having just enough flight to get things to eat but not to partake in combat or do much in exploration without any feats at all. The feats are primarily for combat and flight having a role in combat is for well well past level 1. Even if you take the level 1 feat as it is now and try to use it in combat I think you'll find it pretty pointless given movement upwards is difficult terrain and so 15ft of temp-fly speed isn't even enough to really do anything you couldn't do with Leap. In fact Leap when you're an Elf or Centaur or have Fleet will take you just as far iirc. The chief reasons there is a level 1 feat for Awakened Animals are (1) because if there wasn't some form of flight at level 1 for awakened birds, then Awakened Animal fans would have rioted, and (2) so that we can have non-flying animal concepts like chickens, flying squirrels, or leap frogs. I was super looking forwards to the ancestry and I wouldn't have rioted anymore than I did before when I saw Sprites didn't have a level 1 flying feat [until recently when they had a useful feat for interactions turn into a filler level 1 tax on pseudo-flying before the actual tax on flying at 5]. And while I can't really speak to the counterfactual 'what if they didn't' for anyone else, I do know I'm far from the first person to complain online about how shafted Flying Animals are in terms of freedom for feats compared to all their other heritages. And if you wanted to be a chicken you could just... wait for the level 5 feat that makes you sorta fly, just like you have to do already, and stop there. As it is most of the 'this is what kind of animal you are' feats are all level 1 anyways so you could get their Senses (for example) all in order for your chicken in the meantime and still be making progress on 'I'm a chicken'. I don't know, those don't seem like super compelling arguments to me.
I don’t think 5ft is worth losing a level 1 feat in Awakened Animal’s context though. If that’s really the explanation I’d gladly take the 20ft and be able to actually flesh out what kind of animal they were beyond “has wings”.
So that flying tengu & dragonbloods are more common than flying awakened animals? I have no idea what you mean by that. Awakened Animals are Rare and the Heritage in question that enables this long feat chain is literally called Flying Animal and has the same rarity as the other Heritages next to it. Tengu of all kinds are already more common since they’re just Uncommon, and why would you/they want there to be less flying Flying Awakened Animals at level 9? If your GM doesn’t want you to play an awakened owl or bat they can just veto the selection in the first place with full raw support on their side. Plus, in practice how things work now doesn’t make them any less common than if they errataed them as I’ve suggested - my change would just allow the people who want to play them have the ability to make their animal [have aspects of] their animal apart from “I don’t know, but it can fly!”. The only thing the status quo on the other hand makes less common is a Flying Awakened Animal who can do anything else (have a sense like low-light vision, act cute, have a second basic unarmed attack, scurry along if Tiny, etc) besides fly via Ancestry feats.
I’m really glad the multiclass Flurry of Blows has a cooldown penalty now so not everyone will/can poach a major Monk selling point and feature, but why doesn’t the multiclass Champion’s Reaction have one for the same reason? At least that’s what the previews have lead me to believe is how things stand in PC2.
From what I’ve seen and heard from people who got their Player Core 2 PDFs early, the Tengu and Dragonblood ancestries can now gain a permanent fly speed upon taking a level 5 feat for a pseudo-flight and then a 9th level feat for a the real thing. Which is perfectly fair and reasonable to me given how powerful flight is in the system along with the fact that, for Tengu anyways, they’re straight up crow people with giant wings and so it’s already a bit weird that they can’t fly out of the gate. I’m also aware that for the Tengu these used to be at 9 and 13, and so this is a buff to them from how things worked premaster. Awakened animals also have those feats, but their level 5 one requires a level 1 feat tax on top of that. This means that for Awakened Animals, for whom their feat choices are their primary way of mechanically demonstrating/matching what kind of animal they are, of the Flying Heritage need to use 3 of their 5 feats(!) on a simple fly speed that others can now do with 2 if they want to be an awakened eagle or bat or something that quintessentially flies as much as a crow (or dragon I guess) would. Does anyone know why Awakened Animal works this way, and is there any hope of future errata to make it so that Strong of Wing (5) doesn’t require Take Flight (1) as a prerequisite so it’s but more flexible and closer to how the PC2 winged ancestries work? Usually I wouldn’t care much but given that reliant Awakened Animals are on their feats for their animal fantasy it’s now even sadder that you can’t really play as (for example) an awakened owl ‘properly’ until you’re level 9, and to do so you’ve given up getting the low-light vision they should have until even later because that’s a feat too. And then they have one last feat left for anything else on top of now being an owl. But then again maybe this kind of concern/disappointment about how Flying Heritage pans out in retrospect after seeing Tengu is just me or maybe I’m missing something big in terms of balance considerations, so I’d be interested to see what the rest of you ah e to say on the topic.
I’m seeing people say that Deer and Frog Barbarians lost reach, which is great… but from AMAs it looks like the Frog’s Tongue is still 1d4 instead of 1d6 like every other agile secondary attack. Am I missing something here, or are they still being charged for reach (unlike Deer which never was) while getting nothing? I’m hoping I’m mistaken or it’s on the list of future pc2 errata.
We have Catfolk, so I’d like to see Shoony remastered and made broader to cover all dog-people in a PC3. But yeah, I think if they did PC3 they should just put every ancestry premaster who isn’t in PC1+2 and remaster those. Could even throw in Bugbear as a new thing!
Yeah I also think Commander is the name that's potentially much more problematic. 'Commander' sounds like the class is all about taking total control of the group and giving orders to underlings, when the actual class functions more like a 'Strategist' or 'Tactician' who is part of a team and offers advice and options.
I do think, based on my experience with debates on battle medicine in groups post remaster, that even if it’s redundant information for many it’d be worth it to put in the actual text of battle medicine that using it results in swapping out whatever is in a hand for your tools. That way you don’t have to worry about breaking requirements, but all the info you need for how it works in practice is in the same place (and where newer players will see first and foremost).
Thanks for these! If something isn't changed here, like Winter Sleet, should we take that as "we've looked everything over for a few months and think the rest works fine as is" or as "we won't get to everything we know is wrong in one errata pass, so it's very likely to show up next time"?
Hobgoblin General’s ‘General’s Cry’ ability still refers to the Goblin trait, which for whatever reason none of the Hobgoblins have anymore. (Pg.199)
Animated Broom (pg.18) has its AC listed as “15 (13 when broken)”, but under its Construct Armor section it says it has AC 14 when broken.
Foundry maps by ID and not name, and Monster Core creatures have different IDs than their counterparts of the same name in the Bestiaries. So if they decided to add Monster Core creatures to this pack they not only wouldn’t have to remove anything, but it’d make no sense to. That being said we have no idea if they’re gonna add them here or make and sell a second product for MC yet.
If you parse the clause as “As such, it has no effect on [nonliving creatures or living creatures] that don’t need blood to live.“ then it makes perfect sense for Vampires to take bleed damage. They’re a non-living creature that needs (to drink) blood to live. Is that RAI?
Extremely mirror error, but it annoys me. On page 79 of PC1 there is an image of a character labeled as Nephilim, which is true but seems like the wrong label was placed in error given that the entire section is on Nephilim and every other character there is labelled as the specific kind they are like Angelkin or the like.
The Edicts and Anathema for some gods in PC1 and GMC are different than each other in some cases. I’m assuming PC1’s are the correct ones and they just missed it for this errata pass. The big example I’ve found being Lamashtu’s now demanding you indoctrinate others and not changing what makes you different (pc1) vs indoctrinating children and refusing to cure mental illnesses (gmc and crb). Also it was like that is CRB too but shouldn’t Prone state “If you would be knocked prone while you're Climbing or Flying, you fall instead (see Falling for the rules on falling). You can't be knocked prone when Swimming.”? Right now it’s missed the bolded word and a fair number of people are arguing you can make someone prone while in the air despite the first sentence of Prone stating you’re flat on the ground. An errata like this, or a statement that they’re right to read it the other way at least, would clear that up one way or the other.
I just noticed the Edicts and Anathema for some gods in PC1 and GMC are different than each other in some cases. I’m assuming PC1’s are the correct ones and they just missed it for this errata pass. The big example I’ve found being Lamashtu’s now demanding you indoctrinate others and not changing what makes you different (pc1) vs indoctrinating children and refusing to cure mental illnesses (gmc and crb).
Very minor typo error, but the First Level Impulse Feat sections are all named ‘[Element] Impulses’ except for fire’s which is just titled ‘Fire’. |