Clockwork Librarian

LoreMonger13's page

Organized Play Member. 45 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.


RSS

Dark Archive

Ravien999 wrote:
LoreMonger13 wrote:
Michael Sayre wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:


Well, that confirms that just one dies, and that it is of the Core 20,

It is for sure more than one deity that dies during the course of War of Immortals, but only one of the core 20.

*Jaunty clockwork jazz music stops*

*Starts sweating in Brigh fanboy* Well that's just MEAN to drop on our heads! D'=

(Yeh, I know Brigh is part of Triune in Starfinder, but yadda yadda different systems different lore ETC ETC)

To be fair... Brigh dying could be part of how Casandalee fuses with another diety.

Perhaps, but the staff have stressed that Starfinder lore is NOT an indication of what's to come. Further, if it were, Brigh (along with Epoch and Casandaleee) is part of the active collective consciousness of Triune, so in such a case wouldn't be "dead" even if her vessel were destroyed.

BUT, I'm hoping they keep the two as intact individuals for Pathfinder xP

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Michael Sayre wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:


Well, that confirms that just one dies, and that it is of the Core 20,

It is for sure more than one deity that dies during the course of War of Immortals, but only one of the core 20.

*Jaunty clockwork jazz music stops*

*Starts sweating in Brigh fanboy* Well that's just MEAN to drop on our heads! D'=

(Yeh, I know Brigh is part of Triune in Starfinder, but yadda yadda different systems different lore ETC ETC)

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The-Magic-Sword wrote:
LoreMonger13 wrote:
Discojaddi wrote:

How is all of this going to affect psychic?

Are the "special" cantrips they get going to remain as normal? Since amps are technically not focus spells, are they being affected at all by these changes?

While they're not "technically" Focus Spells, Amps still use Focus Points to function, and the overhaul is inclusive of how Focus Points can be used/recovered across the board.

Mainly it just means that Psychics lose that "edge" they had where they start level 1 being able to recover two at a time. I imagine there will be some errata down the line.

Technically, they still have that part of the edge because they can do in 10 what everyone else is doing with 20 pre-feat.

True, as they exist presently, unless they get errata. It does make it awkward though, now that there's going to be the one feat that grants full recovery of all Focus Points in a single 10 minute rest as opposed to needing to take two feats (or the one additional for Psychic)

That, and Psychic will need further errata to get that feat earlier, because they'll be locked out until 18th level otherwise >.> Unless Paizo decides to go wild and just give the Psychic the ability to recover all points in 10 minutes from level 1 o.O

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Discojaddi wrote:

How is all of this going to affect psychic?

Are the "special" cantrips they get going to remain as normal? Since amps are technically not focus spells, are they being affected at all by these changes?

While they're not "technically" Focus Spells, Amps still use Focus Points to function, and the overhaul is inclusive of how Focus Points can be used/recovered across the board.

Mainly it just means that Psychics lose that "edge" they had where they start level 1 being able to recover two at a time. I imagine there will be some errata down the line.

Dark Archive

8 people marked this as a favorite.

Caustic Blast as a 5ft burst makes SO much more sense with it's +2 Heightening, rather than it's previous version of single target with minimal splash. That feels way more balanced!

I'm very interested to see how something like Daze (or whatever it's analogue will be) will be readjusted. Will it have that same +2 scaling, but with a better damage die? Or will it have d4 damage with +1 scaling, since the Non-Lethal trait already means that there are large swathes of creatures already immune to it (not to mention others who are also immune to Mental effects) and it's single-target? Very curious for that!

(Tangential, but personal gripe: on seeing the Player Core page for the Wizard's feats, I saw that Non-Lethal Spell is STILL a 2nd level feat. WHY?? This really should be a 1st level option, IMO, as it provides less mechanical benefit than even Reach or Widen, which are both 1st)

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.
AestheticDialectic wrote:
Sanityfaerie wrote:
Secondary Detonation Array starts looking pretty interesting with Telekinetic Rend, just as a way to swing that mojo in a resourceless way..
New spell proficiencies makes wizard+psychic MDC very appealing and functional

That's actually my plan for my forthcoming Wizard, since my group is postponing further PF games until the Remaster (we just finished a 2E conversion of Skull'n'Shackles)

But not so much for the min-maxing, I'm going with Unbound Step and picking up specific spells that feed into the whole chronomancy vibe, like Hypercognition, Tortoise and the Hare, Suspended Retribution, etc plus the Warp Step and Phase Bolt Psicantrips ^_^

So STRONGLY agreed, the single proficiency to apply to all spellcasting makes MCD's MUCH more appealing, and the Psychic in particular is really great since it can be Intelligence or Charisma =]

Dark Archive

lordcirth wrote:
LoreMonger13 wrote:

Honestly, the thing that I'm most curious about regarding Wizards is if the "School of Unified Theory" mentioned in other previews will function the same as the prior "Universalist" school, IE that you don't gain the bonus spell slot per rank to prepare certain spells into, but instead you get to use Arcane Bond to recast a spell at each spell rank, instead of just 1/day.

My forthcoming Wizard was planned as a Universalist, so it'd be nice to know if that's going to be radically different in the Remaster, especially since my group's GM is going to enforce the Remastered versions of ALL affected classes once we start playing PF again next summer.

I think and hope so! Universalist is by far my favorite.

Me too, it always seemed the most useful option to me, and as I'll be playing my Wizard as a "Chronomancer" and plan to have a pocket watch as a bonded item, I really liked the idea of him "recasting" those spells and having the hands of the watch rewind back to the exact moment that specific spell was first cast that day =3

So if they changed that, it'd be a loss of both mechanics and flavor for me T_T

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, the thing that I'm most curious about regarding Wizards is if the "School of Unified Theory" mentioned in other previews will function the same as the prior "Universalist" school, IE that you don't gain the bonus spell slot per rank to prepare certain spells into, but instead you get to use Arcane Bond to recast a spell at each spell rank, instead of just 1/day.

My forthcoming Wizard was planned as a Universalist, so it'd be nice to know if that's going to be radically different in the Remaster, especially since my group's GM is going to enforce the Remastered versions of ALL affected classes once we start playing PF again next summer.

Dark Archive

Themetricsystem wrote:

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.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

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)

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Michael Sayre wrote:
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 =]

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
exequiel759 wrote:

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.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

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?

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Only one pic left on IG to make a complete look at both!
I definitely think Animist is in the bag =3
Less than 30 minutes for the stream, HYYYPPEE!! =D

Dark Archive

Hoping today's shift at work is decently active, that way it won't drag and make the wait for the class reveals even longer >.>

But I AM happy that I'll be home a little before the stream starts, so I can chill and take it all in as it happens ^_^

Dark Archive

The Raven Black wrote:
LoreMonger13 wrote:

Hyped for the class reveals tomorrow! Really curious as to who all was closest to the mark, or if we're all going to be thrown for a loop entirely!

Moreover, since these are "entirely new" concepts for Pathfinder, I'm VERY interested to get into the nitty gritty of mechanics and see what really sets them apart from current and older ideas, and the wild departure from normal design that the Kineticist took has me eager to see if these too will present really fresh, new, and interesting ways to engage with the game =3

It has been revealed that both classes' names have been found.

Neat! Good going, Forumite Clerics xD

Dark Archive

Hyped for the class reveals tomorrow! Really curious as to who all was closest to the mark, or if we're all going to be thrown for a loop entirely!

Moreover, since these are "entirely new" concepts for Pathfinder, I'm VERY interested to get into the nitty gritty of mechanics and see what really sets them apart from current and older ideas, and the wild departure from normal design that the Kineticist took has me eager to see if these too will present really fresh, new, and interesting ways to engage with the game =3

Dark Archive

Shisumo wrote:
It occurs to me that "precog" as a concept, rather than as a bunch of class mechanics, is definitely in the same general ballpark as "psychic," which makes me wonder if the witchwarper subclasses will determine casting list and possibly casting stat in ways reminiscent of the sorcerer and psychic subclasses.

That wouldn't be a bad approach at all! Or, if not their spell tradition, their Key attribute and special abilities and feats exclusive to them, ala the Subconscious Mind. Precog as a well-supplied "subclass" would the best route, if they're not going to make it an Archetype instead. (Failing, of course, a Kineticist-type design where Time could be its own "Element", but considering WW needs to share space with other classes, that's VERY unlikely. Kin ate up a LOT of bookspace xP)

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
kaid wrote:
Calpal wrote:
Calpal wrote:
Looking forward to the Nipplemancer being released soon.
Sorry, "Nipple Lord". Forgot the naming convention.
I believe the correct term is the Milkman!

Perhaps the Mammarist...?

Dark Archive

Romão98 wrote:
The second one is an explorer, a cartographer or something like that.

OOOH, you know, that fits with the "Year of Exploration" vibe from Society, so maybe we'll see more of that for the game as a whole!

Eeeenteresting!

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hmmm, looking very closely and carefully at these two pictures, I think I have a solid, educated answer to both!

The first on the left is clearly going to be a Strength-based spellcaster called a Swolomancer, that casts all of their spells with unarmed strikes and Athletics maneuvers like "Pacifist Fist" and "Falcon Punch"

The second is a Ysoki-only class called a "Trove Rodent" that gets more powerful the more Bulk they carry. (Early designs had called it "Packrat", but that was deemed to be a coarse slur)

Jokes aside, I'm very interested to see what these are, and happy that we'll learn more on Thursday before the playtest! I REALLY like the idea of an Animist as one of these, and as much as I jibed with the Swolomancer, I think it would actually be REALLY cool to see a super-buff 2E spellcaster iconic for a change to shake up the silhouettes some xD

I'm skeptical about Demigod as a class, though, especially because Demigods weren't just big beefsters like Hercules, but some were also cunning tricksters or powerful magicians. How could that all be captured in one class?? I think, if that wasn't a Versatile Heritage, it would fit better as a first-level Archetype like the Wellspring Mage that could be applied to any class and has enough that's appealing to both martials and casters and maybe a smattering of things specific to either role.

Looking forward to finding out what they are in less than a week! =D

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sanityfaerie wrote:
LoreMonger13 wrote:
nonbinarysunset wrote:


If the class does end up taking Precog into itself, and if we think about space/time/alternate dimensions and timelines with the flavour from the description of the Witchwarper in SF1e...

Something involving "Wyrd" could be neat, as the old definition of the word denoted someone or something that could manipulate fate. But in general, leaning into the "Weave" theme and making sure that the Precog is well-represented would be cool.

Considering they're taking a big step of "deleting" another class, the onus is on Paizo now to show us that was a good idea and that those who enjoyed the Precog can still play that kind of character in the Witchwarper (or, hopefully, whatever name it falls under in future)

Wyrdweaver?

That could be fun! Though maybe even something as simple as "Warpcaster" would fit the bill, keeping some of its prior nomenclature and identity while also being more distinct from Pathfinder's Witch, especially not that they are being made to operate under the system core chassis of 2E.

Xenocrat wrote:
LoreMonger13 wrote:


Further, as someone that manipulates time in a proactive way, the Precog presented a MASSIVE opportunity and incredible design space to really play deeply with the Action system, Fortune/Misfortune, and the underutilized Circumstance modifier.

For the latter two, the Witchwarper already had big inroads into these categories. They have all the reroll spells that precog does, including those that grant them to allies - they just flavored how this was accomplished differently. It's also hard to see how a circumstance modifier granted by manipulating a timeline can't be done by manipulating reality/probability.

As far as action manipulation, you mentioned forcing enemies to stride instead of step. The WW always had access to 95% of the spells that created difficult terrain, as well as that being one of the earliest things that Infinite Worlds could do. Same thing, different flavor as to how they're doing it.

WW also has Reality Bend spell (later shared with Precog) that let you trade your standard action to move an ally 10'. Or in PF2 terms, two actions for two steps by an ally. And of course slow/haste is a universal for action manipulation, this has never been anything special to the precog.

Comparing almost entirely by spell lists seems overly narrow and trivializing of the differences in class features, especially in the context of coming into 2E where there are only four "spell lists" for all spellcaster classes to use in Arcane, Divine, Occult, and Primal. So not a great basis of comparison to make unless you're going to say that we should only have one caster class per Tradition, because what else could actually be different between them? Both the Witchwarper and Precog were more than just their spell lists, and those differences set them apart from one another in not only how they could be played, but also how they could be designed.

That all said, here's what I will lay out as my hope for the Witchwarper absorbing the Precog (and also the hope for a name change, like the "Warpcaster", to make it clear that no, they don't just Warp Witches specifically now that we'll have class-compatibility between systems xP)

*Flexible Primary Attribute: Rather than ONLY being yet another Charisma-focused character, I'd like the option to choose between Charisma or Intelligence, at minimum.

*Kineticist-esque Design: I think this could be a FANTASTIC route to take, considering the Kineticist operates in a wonderful way with the Action system and has very interesting, compelling choices to make. In this case, the WW's "Elements" could be different physical and cosmic forces, such as Entropy, Spacetime, Matter, etc, and like Kineticist you could choose to go all in on one focus or spread yourself out across multiple.

*Unique and Dynamic Actions and Activities: I really stand by my point that the Precog, as someone that manipulates time, had ENORMOUS opportunity to play with the Action system of allies and enemies in really unique ways =outside of their spells like all other spellcasters can=, so if the WW is taking on Time as a core part of their build, then I'd like them to be able to do that as well (earlier examples: trading one of your Reactions to give an ally an extra Reaction, non-spell actions to limit enemy actions or control said actions, etc)

*Making use of Fortune/Misfortune and Circumstance Modifiers: Most time-related features, such as from the Chronoskimmer Archetype, apply Circumstance modifiers to checks because you're effectively using foreknowledge to give yourself or ally an advantage. It's also a REALLY underutilized modifier, and it'd be cool to see a class lean into that. Further, outside of a rare few feats and some spells, Fortune/Misfortune feels really poorly represented and utilized as well. Let the class that bends reality get in on that, which would also make them feel more like they truly adopted the Precog's niche!

By the sound of it, the Witchwarper is a ways off from any public Field Tests, but I really hope they do the Precog justice in a strong representation through the class rather than just "sure, you can flavor abilities this way if you want". I'd like to see mechanics that are recognizable as the Precog, like their Paradox and Anomalies.

Dark Archive

nonbinarysunset wrote:


If the class does end up taking Precog into itself, and if we think about space/time/alternate dimensions and timelines with the flavour from the description of the Witchwarper in SF1e...

Something involving "Wyrd" could be neat, as the old definition of the word denoted someone or something that could manipulate fate. But in general, leaning into the "Weave" theme and making sure that the Precog is well-represented would be cool.

Considering they're taking a big step of "deleting" another class, the onus is on Paizo now to show us that was a good idea and that those who enjoyed the Precog can still play that kind of character in the Witchwarper (or, hopefully, whatever name it falls under in future)

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Sanityfaerie wrote:
LoreMonger13 wrote:
And it's not invalid if the team just needed to trim down content to make it work and be ready for '25, that's totally fine. I'm just REALLY bummed out because, of all the things I was looking forward to in Starfinder 2E, a redesigned Precog was near, if not at, the top of the list for me...

Well... on the bright side, there is still time, and the idea of a precog that's a variety of witchwarper doesn't necessarily need to be the death of your dreams. I mean, the witchwarper bends reality. Time is part of reality, right? From the lore standpoint, this could be more a case of broadening the witchwarper's scope, rather than cramming the precog into the existing space.

So... let's suppose that Precog is a Witchwarper class path, but that the lore of "witchwarper" is still pretty malleable, and the class path is pretty significant. What would you want to see in this version of the precog? What would make you say "You know what? This is actually pretty cool after all."

After all, if you want to make something awesome, one of the best places to start looking is the people who love that thing, and you've just outed yourself as loving the precog. So... what would make it awesome?

"Outing" myself is kind of a weird turn of phrase, but to your questions: I had mentioned earlier in my post the things I would have hoped they could delve into with someone who manipulates time, ie being able to do interesting things with their Actions, as well as that of allies and enemies (ex: burn their reaction to give an ally an extra reaction, or force an enemy trying to Step away to Stride instead, spending their actions to give allies additional actions, etc), and leaning into the Fortune/Misfortune mechanic and Circumstance modifiers to bring some of what Paradox was used for in SF1E.

But a lot of these design choices would be core to the class design itself, so unless Witchwarper is going to be able to do a lot of the aforementioned (trading Actions, utilizing Fortune/Misfortune, etc), it feels like adding Precog to them is purely for flavor and expediency, rather than taking full advantage of a design space that someone capable of manipulating the flow of time presents.

Obviously, this is an initial impression based on VERY limited information provided, and maybe when the Witchwarper drops in possibly a future Field Test or the Playtest next summer we'll see more and then it could be a totally viable route to take with them and maybe they DO manage to pull off both the themes and mechanics that the Precog could.

To be clear, this is not a "deal-breaker" for me, I'm still looking forward to SF2E. I'm just really disappointed that it looks like it was decided that the Precog did not present a strong enough theme or design space when I would personally feel it really could've stood out on its own next to the Witchwarper as it already has been doing plenty well in SF1E.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Alright, first leading with the positive: this is definitely the kind of post I like! I LOVE being able to get a look at the behind-the-scenes nuts and bolts of design and testing, and certainly look forward to more Field Tests and the eventual Playtest next year =]

But, on to the core reason for this response: I am -extremely- disappointed to have it confirmed that Precog is just being rolled into another class. While I can understand some of the reasoning, it feels much more like a logistics choice than a design or flavor choice. Personally, I always felt the Witchwarper and Precog were very distinct from one another: the WW bends reality and reaches into other dimensions, where the Precog actively edits the timeline on the fly. Sure, you *can* flavor a WW's powers as conjuring or shunting different timelines, but that's very different from the feel I personally got from the Precog.

Further, as someone that manipulates time in a proactive way, the Precog presented a MASSIVE opportunity and incredible design space to really play deeply with the Action system, Fortune/Misfortune, and the underutilized Circumstance modifier. Imagine a Precog spending their reaction to give another character an extra reaction, or (ala the Kineticist's Four Winds) spending actions to allow other characters to move, or attack, or take cover, etc.

And aside from allies, imagine them being able to manipulate the actions of enemies. An enemy is using a Step to get away? The Precog spends a reaction to make those spaces Difficult Terrain, so now they can't step and instead have to stride, which could trigger a Reactive Strike from an ally also adjacent to the enemy. Or that could just be a passive aura the Precog can lay down as a stance!

And it's not invalid if the team just needed to trim down content to make it work and be ready for '25, that's totally fine. I'm just REALLY bummed out because, of all the things I was looking forward to in Starfinder 2E, a redesigned Precog was near, if not at, the top of the list for me </3

Dark Archive

I would imagine (or at least hope) that the way ability boosts *work* hasn't changed, though clarification on the language would be helpful. That's the awkward part of releasing the PDF's of Rage of Elements before the PDF for the initial Remaster changes drop.

If it did change, however, and thus prevent a character from starting with an 18 in any modifier because the free boosts are part of the same boost you get from your Class, that would have some pretty MAJOR rippling effects.

It would mean that, if you invested in your primary ability at every level up to 20th, you'd end with a fractional modifier (they have already stated that you'll still need to spend two ability boosts once you hit 4+ to increase the modifier), whereas with the current system you would end with a whole +6 modifier

Existing where you can get an ability to +4 at level 1: 1st: +4, 5th: +4(.5), 10th: +5, 15th: +5(.5), 20th: +6

Hypothetical limit of +3 at Level 1: (1st: +3, 5th: +4, 10th: +4(.5), 15th: +5, 20th: +5.(5))

That seems so awkward and inelegant compared to the previous math that I'd be pretty shocked if that's the direction Paizo is heading in the Remaster. Especially because "just don't invest in that score, then" would be a very poor justification for allowing such awkward fractions. Maybe if they had a hard cap of +5, so you couldn't get +5.5?

But then would all DCs be and enemy modifiers be lowered by 1 to compensate for the new lower maximum PC modifiers?

Again, I think this is a case of really inelegant and imprecise writing rather than the designers breaking a system that already worked, which would seem antithetical to the point of the Remaster (outside of the OGL stuff)

Dark Archive

Verzen wrote:

NM Jessica. I just got the pdf. I just noticed it.

I am taking AMAs about the book.

Heyo! Two questions, if I may ^_^

1) Did the Kinetic/Elemental Weapon universal feat survive in some form?
and
2) What are the prerequisites for the Kineticist dedication and what all does it give you?

Thanks muchly in advance! <3

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
LoreMonger13 wrote:

LOVE everything about this so far, from the concept to the new additions! Been hankering to have first-party support for Harrowers, so REALLY pleased to see three different routes for that ala the Archetype, Bloodline, and Ritual!

ONE thing that I noticed, and if anyone could help me:
On page 14, the "Vengeful Spirit Deck" feat mentions it requires a basic save against the Harrower's Class DC to resist the damage, but it doesn't actually mention if this is a Fortitude, Reflex, or Will save. My guess would be Reflex, since you're lobbing an enchanted card at the target, but since Poison may instead go against Fortitude and Mental may go against Will, clarification would help. As it is, only three of the six cards have a given saving throw associated with them so we can't really use that for the other three.

I did look under the "Benevolent Spirit Deck" feat on the same page to see if it makes any mention of saves (since Vengeful Spirit Deck references this feat for damage types), but there was no mention there either.

Is my brain just not processing a line somewhere in these writeups? >.>

The Vengeful Spirit Deck should be a Reflex save. Sorry about that omission.

Gotcha, that makes sense! Thanks much for the clarification ^_^

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

LOVE everything about this so far, from the concept to the new additions! Been hankering to have first-party support for Harrowers, so REALLY pleased to see three different routes for that ala the Archetype, Bloodline, and Ritual!

ONE thing that I noticed, and if anyone could help me:
On page 14, the "Vengeful Spirit Deck" feat mentions it requires a basic save against the Harrower's Class DC to resist the damage, but it doesn't actually mention if this is a Fortitude, Reflex, or Will save. My guess would be Reflex, since you're lobbing an enchanted card at the target, but since Poison may instead go against Fortitude and Mental may go against Will, clarification would help. As it is, only three of the six cards have a given saving throw associated with them so we can't really use that for the other three.

I did look under the "Benevolent Spirit Deck" feat on the same page to see if it makes any mention of saves (since Vengeful Spirit Deck references this feat for damage types), but there was no mention there either.

Is my brain just not processing a line somewhere in these writeups? >.>

Dark Archive

Elfteiroh wrote:
LoreMonger13 wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:
LoreMonger13 wrote:
Aaron Shanks wrote:

Don't miss this exclusive preview by How It's Played of Temporal Anomalies from the Pathfinder #DarkArchive rulebook!

Preorder or subscribe to this paranormal tome at the Paizo Store or your local game store today!

YEEESS!! This is the part I'm most excited about for Dark Archive, though honestly everything I've been hearing about it sounds SO COOL =D

Quick mechanics question, if I could plead your indulgence:
The preview shows the initial Splash Page for the Time Mage archetype, and in the text it includes an Additional Feats entry. One of those additional feats available to the Time Mage is Quickened Casting at 12th level.

So my question is: If a character took Time Mage through a class that itself has access to Quickened Casting (Wizard, Bard, Sorcerer, etc), would that mean that they could take the feat both through their Core Class AND the Time Mage and thusly be able to use it twice per day, rather than only once??

(Many would probably see this as an ineffective use of two class feats, but I'm curious as to whether it's possible rather than optimal)

IIRC if it's the same name, then it's considered the same feat and you cannot take it twice unless explicitly allowed.

I suppose, and that's a likely possibility. The reason I asked is that it's not -technically- from the same class, though perhaps since it would effect the same spell list that would lean more towards the former than latter.

Would be interesting to get an official word on that to clarify ^_^ And if ANYONE could double-dip like that, it would make sense if it were the archetype that quite literally manipulates time itself in their spellcasting ;P

Here, in the CRB 3rd printing errata explanations in the FAQ page:

CRB 3rd printing errata wrote:
Page 113: The champion's Quick Block feat accidentally had a different name than fighter Quick
...

Fair, that seemed the most likely outcome, even if it would've been a neat benefit for the Time Mage =]

Thanks for delving deep into a third-generation errata to find that, by the by! Likely would not have discovered that on my own xP

Hoping they have other interesting options. So far the Chronoskimmer seems more appealing and useful, but I was REALLY holding out for Time Mage >.> (When I get to play my planned "Chronomancer", we won't reach higher than level 17 so I wouldn't be able to get that snazzy Timeline Splitting Spell option T_T)

Dark Archive

The Raven Black wrote:
LoreMonger13 wrote:
Aaron Shanks wrote:

Don't miss this exclusive preview by How It's Played of Temporal Anomalies from the Pathfinder #DarkArchive rulebook!

Preorder or subscribe to this paranormal tome at the Paizo Store or your local game store today!

YEEESS!! This is the part I'm most excited about for Dark Archive, though honestly everything I've been hearing about it sounds SO COOL =D

Quick mechanics question, if I could plead your indulgence:
The preview shows the initial Splash Page for the Time Mage archetype, and in the text it includes an Additional Feats entry. One of those additional feats available to the Time Mage is Quickened Casting at 12th level.

So my question is: If a character took Time Mage through a class that itself has access to Quickened Casting (Wizard, Bard, Sorcerer, etc), would that mean that they could take the feat both through their Core Class AND the Time Mage and thusly be able to use it twice per day, rather than only once??

(Many would probably see this as an ineffective use of two class feats, but I'm curious as to whether it's possible rather than optimal)

IIRC if it's the same name, then it's considered the same feat and you cannot take it twice unless explicitly allowed.

I suppose, and that's a likely possibility. The reason I asked is that it's not -technically- from the same class, though perhaps since it would effect the same spell list that would lean more towards the former than latter.

Would be interesting to get an official word on that to clarify ^_^ And if ANYONE could double-dip like that, it would make sense if it were the archetype that quite literally manipulates time itself in their spellcasting ;P

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aaron Shanks wrote:

Don't miss this exclusive preview by How It's Played of Temporal Anomalies from the Pathfinder #DarkArchive rulebook!

Preorder or subscribe to this paranormal tome at the Paizo Store or your local game store today!

YEEESS!! This is the part I'm most excited about for Dark Archive, though honestly everything I've been hearing about it sounds SO COOL =D

Quick mechanics question, if I could plead your indulgence:
The preview shows the initial Splash Page for the Time Mage archetype, and in the text it includes an Additional Feats entry. One of those additional feats available to the Time Mage is Quickened Casting at 12th level.

So my question is: If a character took Time Mage through a class that itself has access to Quickened Casting (Wizard, Bard, Sorcerer, etc), would that mean that they could take the feat both through their Core Class AND the Time Mage and thusly be able to use it twice per day, rather than only once??

(Many would probably see this as an ineffective use of two class feats, but I'm curious as to whether it's possible rather than optimal)

Dark Archive

keftiu wrote:
LoreMonger13 wrote:

VERY happy that this will be coming out well in advance of my planned "Chronomancer" Wizard! LOVED all of the fun time-themed spells from Secrets of Magic, but was disappointed that there weren't any similarly flavored Archetypes or class feats to really go with them.

Naturally, I'm quite excited that it sounds like temporal shenaniganating will have it's very own chapter, and hope these new "time-skimming" Archetypes really helps to dial things in for my character =3 Failing that, I'd probably still have fun multiclassing him with Inventor, which is the present blueprint ;P

If you're fiending for time stuff, check out the store page for the second book of Outlaws of Alkenstar.

Thanks! I'll take a look at that =] Granted, the GM is a bit of a stickler for keeping area-specific or AP-specific stuff strictly in line to said qualifiers, and this character I'm planning will be for our run of Shattered Star converted to 2E.

...Yes, yes we ARE very far behind XP

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

VERY happy that this will be coming out well in advance of my planned "Chronomancer" Wizard! LOVED all of the fun time-themed spells from Secrets of Magic, but was disappointed that there weren't any similarly flavored Archetypes or class feats to really go with them.

Naturally, I'm quite excited that it sounds like temporal shenaniganating will have it's very own chapter, and hope these new "time-skimming" Archetypes really helps to dial things in for my character =3 Failing that, I'd probably still have fun multiclassing him with Inventor, which is the present blueprint ;P

Dark Archive

Blave wrote:
LoreMonger13 wrote:
hoping to get the gang back together for a multiplayer playthrough =D
I'm like 99,9% sure there is no multi-player in this game.

Aw heck, for some reason I thought there was T_T

Well, one more not-as-small disappointment then =[

Dark Archive

I've been MEGA-HYPED ever since backing this =3

Ran the tabletop AP online some years ago, and hoping to get the gang back together for a multiplayer playthrough =D [EDIT: Oh, young and naïve past-self, so full of hope and excitement...]

I think the most intriguing bit thus far has been the complete change-up of the Mythic Paths, in now being very distinct and transformative as opposed to the more traditional but generic versions from tabletop. If we ever get something akin to a Mythic system in 2E (Wink-Wink, Nudge-Nudge), I think it'd be super cool to do something more akin to the CRPG take!

Only one minor disappointment thus far: I was REALLY hoping that the Kineticist would get the Elysiokineticist archetype, given that in its writeup they're -specifically- mentioned as frequenting areas such as the Worldwound to fight off evil =[

BUT, I recognize that would involve adding in an entire new Element (Wood) to the core class itself and so would be a lot of extra work for one archetype. Maybe in a DLC, with perhaps a new Mythic Path like Green Man? ;)

Any road... REALLY looking forward to going through it as a player this time, thinking of rolling up an Exploiter Wizard and going the Aeon path!

Dark Archive

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm really excited that the Mwangi is being further fleshed out in 2E, I've loved the setting and mythos and have played three characters from the region thus far (Ekujae Elf, Zenj Half-Elf, and Bonuwat Human). My local group is wrapping up Serpent's Skull (in 1E) in probably three more sessions, and while it's a bummer I won't get to utilize anything on Magaambya in the game for my Magaambyan Initiate Arcanist, I'm absolutely going to pull in the new details and background to set up his post-campaign epilogue =3

Dark Archive

Arachnofiend wrote:
graystone wrote:
GrimmDichotomy wrote:
Gotta say, I'm really not crazy about the formerly pure-breeding half-races being relegated to Human Ancestry Feats.
1/2 elves and 1/2 orcs have gotten me thinking... Does that mean I can retrain and overnight become a new race?
I... assume you probably can't retrain out of heritage feats? Right? Right???

I suppose that's a classic RAW and RAI debate in the making XD

As it stands, unless they add that specific stipulation, there's no mechanical basis to say "no, you can't retrain an Ancestry/Heritage feat", only good sense.

Which, as we all know, can often be lacking XP

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Gotta say, I'm really not crazy about the formerly pure-breeding half-races being relegated to Human Ancestry Feats. Personally, I feel that turning what used to be two distinct races with their own identities into a 1st level feat tax completely cheapens them, and moreover it makes me wonder why anyone would play a straight Human if they can just upgrade into another race.

Now, that being said, I -do- like the concept when applied to more exotic ancestries, like the various planes-touched, Dhampyr, Shifter, maybe even Changeling, so long as it's something open to -all- races and not just Humans. A Dwarven Oread? A Gnomish Sylph? An Elven Aasimar? It not only makes for more flavorful and memorable player characters, but can really make for some unique NPC's!

We'll see when the material drops next week and we can all get a much closer look at how it all works. Overall I like many of the changes for 2E, but certain things have really stuck in my craw and I hope they get addressed through the feedback.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
MerlinCross wrote:
Cyouni wrote:
GrimmDichotomy wrote:


And having ANY ability score tied to Resonance is a TERRIBLE idea, I don't care if it reads like UMD or "inherent magic" or whatever tripe excuse can be provided. It gives Charisma-based characters an edge over others in what should be a UNIVERSAL system, and it's going to completely turn away people who may have considered playing a race with a Charisma hit (Dwarves, anyone?) and instead they'll just pick one that gives them the best mechanical edge.

If the dumpster-fire that is Resonance is going to be kept, at least get rid of anything that would give certain races/classes an arbitrary edge while others incur an equally pointless penalty.

Why should Charisma be the earmarked 'dump stat'?

You can't pick a race that drops Str because then it'll make it harder to hit things or carry stuff.
You can't pick a race that drops Dex because then you'll get hit more.
You can't pick a race that drops Con because then you'll die easier.
You can't pick a race that drops Int because you'll have less trained skills.
You can't pick a race that drops Wis because then you'll be mind-controlled easier.

These are all somewhat valid arguments for all the other stats. Why should Cha be different?

Lower STR - It's harder to hit and carry stuff..., but you can go DEX or spells for combat, and find ways of carrying stuff from mules to magic bags.

Lower DEX - You get hit more and deal with Reflex..., but you can go for better armor to help with defense and possibly work around Reflex with feats/Traits/items.
Lower CON - Less HP. Again, Feat(Hello Toughness) and if you build for not getting hit, it doesn't matter AS much.
Lower Int - Less skills and spellcasting..., but you have others that can do some skills you don't, find items to help, and if you don't scale of INT for abilites well...
Lower WIS - Once again, built/worked with items/feats/spells. At worst you can figure out something proactive like giving them a mind control before they get mind...

I personally don't think a system which should be as universally useful and sought after as Magic Items should be come with advantages/disadvantages built right in for certain races/classes. Not specific Magic Items, mind you, but ALL Magic Items.

And I think anyone who tanks their Charisma is a complete tool, honestly, and UMD is by far and away one of THE BEST skills in the game, and should continue to be (another thing Resonance would devalue, I might add). BUT, I don't think, AGAIN, that a UNIVERSAL SYSTEM should be affected so drastically and in such bias to certain race/class builds.

Just make it 3 + Level and call it good, and get consumables off of the Resonance list.

Dark Archive

10 people marked this as a favorite.

Gotta say, thus far the idea of Resonance has been a MAJOR turn-off for myself and multiple of my Pathfinder buddies. It's a needless system that just reads like it requires more, not less, book-keeping in the long run, especially when items with Charges STILL require Investment/Activation costs, etc.

Consumables should be removed from Resonance entirely, it's asinine to force players to burn an additional resource just to use what is already a finite option itself.

And having ANY ability score tied to Resonance is a TERRIBLE idea, I don't care if it reads like UMD or "inherent magic" or whatever tripe excuse can be provided. It gives Charisma-based characters an edge over others in what should be a UNIVERSAL system, and it's going to completely turn away people who may have considered playing a race with a Charisma hit (Dwarves, anyone?) and instead they'll just pick one that gives them the best mechanical edge.

If the dumpster-fire that is Resonance is going to be kept, at least get rid of anything that would give certain races/classes an arbitrary edge while others incur an equally pointless penalty.

Dark Archive

Matthew Morris wrote:
GrimmDichotomy wrote:


So we get a placeholder ability until they can get the actual official write up handled, and that still doesn't answer as to why Wood doesn't get it's own Composite Blast for focusing on it for Expanded element, which ALL OTHER Elements (including the new Void Element!) do, ie Metal Blast, Blue Flame Blast, Force Blast, etc.

GRimmDichotomy,

This was addressed here. Might I suggest you read the thread, as was previously suggested?

Thank you for the correct link to the Composite Blast quandary. All in all, it's still a mess. I appreciate that they're working on it, but it would've been very nice if this wasn't a problem to begin with. This, at least to me, comes across not as a small oversight.

That being said, I do wish them all luck and speed with patching that up. I'm very fond of Pathfinder, which is part of why I'm keen to see their content handled well. Thanks for the help, everyone.

Dark Archive

Garrett Guillotte wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:


(I tried using search to link you directly, but I couldn't find a good link that way.)

Basic Phytokinesis is in Mark Seifter's post on page 5 of the thread, and Mark points out the location of the blasts on page 7 of the thread.

As for "what's going to be done for this", Owen K.C. Stephens says a revision is under discussion on page 6 of the thread.

So we get a placeholder ability until they can get the actual official write up handled, and that still doesn't answer as to why Wood doesn't get it's own Composite Blast for focusing on it for Expanded element, which ALL OTHER Elements (including the new Void Element!) do, ie Metal Blast, Blue Flame Blast, Force Blast, etc.

Dark Archive

Kalindlara wrote:
GrimmDichotomy wrote:

Alright, I noticed a -major- discrepancy in this book, and I hope I'm not repeating anything already said by someone else.

For the Phytokineticist/Wood Element entry to the Kineticist class, there is no listing for what the Basic Phytokinesis ability actually does among the Wild Talents, nor does there appear to be a Composite Blast that exists for further specializing in Wood via Expanded Element. The latter could've just been deliberate I suppose (though really, why would you not have that?), but the former is not just a small error, since any character starting with Wood as their Element -automatically gains Basic Phytokinesis, just like any other Element with their respective basic kinesis ability.

What's going to be done for this?

Please read the last two to three pages - the answers are there, along with the rules text of basic phytokinesis.

(I tried using search to link you directly, but I couldn't find a good link that way.)

I'm looking at the PDF, can you list the page number? I've actually used the 'Find' tool multiple times, and the only time it pops up are the two names drops, but with no ability writeup.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Alright, I noticed a -major- discrepancy in this book, and I hope I'm not repeating anything already said by someone else.

For the Phytokineticist/Wood Element entry to the Kineticist class, there is no listing for what the Basic Phytokinesis ability actually does among the Wild Talents, nor does there appear to be a Composite Blast that exists for further specializing in Wood via Expanded Element. The latter could've just been deliberate I suppose (though really, why would you not have that?), but the former is not just a small error, since any character starting with Wood as their Element -automatically gains Basic Phytokinesis, just like any other Element with their respective basic kinesis ability.

What's going to be done for this?