OldManAlexi's page

I feel I should note that the witch spell list does not have any 3rd level cold spells. Thus, to qualify, you have to either have the winter patron or convince your DM to let you summon ice elementals (thus, allowing you to summon 1d3 ice elementals as a level 3 cold spell).

Edit: Wait, found one. Please disregard my previous statement.

I really want to know what the backstory will be. Did the Worm that Walks become a lich in order to make sure it didn't die again or did the lich get seal away with worms that slowly ate its undead body until it mutated into something even more horrible than it already was?

I don't see why you couldn't reduce the DC but it would have to be uniform. For example, if you cast a Fireball and one of your party members got caught in it, then you could reduce the DC to make it easier for him to save but that would also reduce the DC for your opponents. You would probably be better off just letting your party member take the hit.

The Magic Circle spells have powdered silver as a material component. Since there is no cost listed, the cost is small enough to ignore it. Does anyone else get a headache thinking about this?

I'm rather surprised that a discussion on broken melee builds got this far without AM Barbarian being mentioned.

I'm not sure you would want an intelligent golem anyway. As an intelligent item, it has a chance of going rogue. Plus, unlike normal intelligent items, an intelligent golem would be able to run off and never be heard from again. If it's a shield guardian, it could probably mind control you like a normal intelligent item.

Don't forget that, unlike normal imps, the imps summoned to be familiars have telepathy. So, your little imp can turn into a rat, turn invisible, cast suggestion using his telepathy instead of normal speech, and suddenly, a member of the palace guard has killed the king because the voices in his head told him to. Sure, the imp will become visible when he casts suggestion but he's a rat so no one will notice.

If I ever do play one, I'm definitely insisting on a rename for what he refers to himself as and what I put on my character sheet.

People do that all the time. I once heard about a gaming group with 2 clerics that each referred to themselves by different titles.

Good to see that the wizard won't be the party crafter much longer

Until they get Fabricate and gain the ability to craft mad science inventions in a few rounds.

BAB is completely unrelated to number of natural attacks. A super wolf with +20 BAB would only have 1 bite attack. A creature with six arms ending in claws but only +1 BAB would have 6 claw attacks.

If your character is chaotic evil, he could worship the demon lord Jezelda and take the Demoniac prestige class to become a natural lycanthrope. Other than that... it seems like Paizo wants lycanthropy to be a debilitating curse, not a way to become more powerful. It's unlikely that they'll make a way to easily control it.

Here's how I interpret it: The Paladin tries to get the goblins to surrender. They don't understand him so they attack him in self defense. Thus, the Paladin is forced to defend himself and kills them. Since he doesn't speak the language, it would be impossible to get them to surrender so he really had no choice. I suppose he technically could have used nonlethal damage but most people don't think of that in combat. Plus, beating them down with the flat side of his sword isn't particularly heroic anyway. Grappling is out because he could only grapple one while the other stabbed him in the back. If they had tried to surrender, that would be another story. Even with the language barrier, they could have thrown down their weapons and made nonthreatening gestures. Basically, I would rule that the Paladin didn't have much choice so he didn't do anything wrong.

I would think since a ghost's spells come from an incorporeal source (like a ghost with a ghostly +1 weapon), it would probably do 50% damage. Otherwise, ghost wizards would be able to affect everyone at 100% while living wizards can only do so with corporeal creatures.

As for Vampiric Touch, I suppose it would still work off a normal touch attack... Though, a ghost's touch deals damage... Yeah, I'm not touching that issue with a ten foot pole.

Belts of physical stats have the same price as headbands of mental stats. I don't see why you wouldn't be able to make a mental belt or a physical headband for the same price.

Nobody expects the halflings until they attack... Tricksy little hobbitses.

Seriously though, humanoid and traditionally evil only really leaves drow, orcs, and goblinoids. If you want to limit it to a working society and not excessively cliche, I would probably go with bugbears. Have them live in the mountains. They raid the civilized lands occasionally but aren't considered a big threat. Then, a ambitious chieftain starts uniting the tribes.

Actually, now that I think of it, giants might be closer to what you're looking for. Did you consider giants?

You could also go with an ethnicity of humans that are considered evil by the rest of the humanoids. That has showed up often enough that its probably a trope by now. Might want to give them distinctive physical features. White hair is traditional enough.

What happens if an aquatic creature casts rope trick? Obviously, if it fills with air, an aquatic wizard would have to hold his breathe. This doesn't seem logical to me.

Archers will not necessarily be a problem. I remember one fantasy world that contained a kingdom that believed archery was dishonorable. The army makeup will largely depend on the culture of the society that it comes from. You really shouldn't be expecting it to be entirely efficient especially since this army is made up of cultists that are angry that you killed their god. Not exactly the most rational lot.

Given that the god was a dragon, I would expect their number of spell casters would be off. On one hand, they could try to mimic their god's magical prowess, leading to a disproportionate number of spell casters. On the other hand, they may view magic as the realm of the gods, leading to a complete lack of spell casters. Of course, they might also go for magus or eldritch knight to get the dragon's mix of physical might and arcane power. Obviously, low level characters that want to be eldritch knights will not be as much of a threat as single class characters.

I was under the impression that the alternative summoning options were only for those adventure paths, not for general use. They aren't really balanced well.

Creating your own summoning lists wouldn't be that hard. The summoning lists were created based on CR. Just look up the CR of the creatures on the list for Summon Monster 3, for example. Then, look up the other monsters of the appropriate type that have that CR. That being said, if you don't have the time, someone else has probably done it by now. Anyone willing to share?

When polymorphed into a giant, your armor resizes to fit you. Thus, if a horse were to be polymorphed into a giant, its barding would transform into something that fits a giant. It's kind of ridiculous but it would technically work by RAW.

Can anyone else think of a situation where RAW would create a situation like this?

Of course if you're a standard caster then pick your partner of choice and polymorph away.

I'm not sure I would fear anything with a wizard's base attack bonus.

So, the consensus seems to be that the likelihood of your patron turning on you is a feature, not a bug... I can respect that. Now I just need to figure out what Miracle has to do with endurance.

When I think of a familiar, I don't think of something that is going into combat. However, I have hear that an imp with the familiar bonuses is effective. I really don't see how. It does 1d4 damage per turn. Sure, there's the poison but DC 13 isn't going to remain effective for long. Am I missing something? Can someone tell me how an imp (or any other familiar) can become a combat threat?

They can be used to pay for the price of creating magic items. This works off the same value as what you would get if you sold them. However, if it looks like you won't be able to sell them for their full value, using them for item creation would be a better deal.

For the values, there should be an entry in the same book that the Soul Drinker appears in.

If a familiar can learn a language this way, then a Raven would learn more languages.

Still, I don't think it ever explicitly mentions whether or not this is possible so it will be up to your DM to decide. However, there are magical beasts that can speak so it isn't really out of the realm of possibilities.

Any GM out there who will say whether or not they would allow it?

Good point. Still, the relationship between cleric and god is based on a shared belief system. It will not always be exactly the same but there will be common ground. Take a LG god and his NG cleric. The cleric will be more flexible on legal matters than the god would prefer but they will find common ground in performing goodly act. Obviously, this is an oversimplification. Plus, it's more complicated when the god is N. Still, a cleric that thinks before he casts Miracle should be able to save it for situations that his god approves of.

My point is that the patron could be CE while the witch is LG. They could potentially have absolutely nothing in common. There is even the possibility that they could become enemies. It's a much different relationship dynamic especially when the witch doesn't know who the patron is and, thus, has to guess whether or not his patron will allow the Miracle to occur.

Of course, there's also the possibility that the witch and the patron will have some form of common goal. In this case, Miracle would work exactly the same way as for the cleric. My point is that this will not always be the case.

EDIT: Gah, people posted in between.
@TriOmegaZero

Let's start with the obvious: Dropping your weapon.

Oh, and I have to ask. Do you also want a chart for when the wizard rolls a 1 on his touch attacks?

Replace every instance of "patron" in your post with "deity" and "witch" with "cleric". There is no difference.

They're not really equivalent. It's possible to have a witch and patron who have radically different beliefs or opposing alignment. A cleric worships a deity BECAUSE they have the same beliefs and goals.

Edit: If the cleric changes enough that this is no longer the case, he will end up worshiping a different deity. As far as I know, there is no way to switch witch patrons.

When a character gets a rank in Linguistics, he learns a new language. Since a familiar gets its master's skill ranks, would the familiar learn a new language and, thus, learn how to speak? I figure that a DM would only allow languages the master knows and it would not come into effect until after it has Speak with Master. Still, I don't think it would be a big enough mechanical advantage that it would cause problems but some people would think it would be neat for their familiar to be able to speak to other people.

On the other hand, knowing a language would let it spy on conversations. That would be a pretty big advantage.

Your god might decide it doesn't want you to cast that spell you prepared.

There might be a fluctuation in the magical field that causes your fireball spell to explode as soon as you cast it instead of where you direct it.

Same difference.

That would generally either occur in a plane with strange magic traits or because the GM was being a jerk (Edit: or because a cleric violated his alignment). Problems with a witch casting Miracle could come from the GM's concept of the patron not approving of what you're trying to accomplish. If the GM is planning on your patron playing a role in the campaign, he would have to make the goals and personality of the patron consistent. If a witch ends up being on bad terms with his patron, he would never be able to cast Miracle.

Except your patron might decide that it doesn't want you to be able to cast that lower level cleric spell right now.

Witches with the Endurance Patron get Miracle as their 9th level patron spell. The very idea of casting this spell fills me with child-like terror.

When a wizard casts Wish, it is interpreted by a dispassionate force without an agenda (assuming a GM that is not fixated on twisting wishes). When a cleric casts Miracle, it is interpreted and allowed by the cleric's deity, who generally has the same agenda as the cleric. In both of these cases, you can usually trust that the spell will work out how you wanted. In fact, with the cleric, you can expect the deity to interpret the spell in the best possible way for your character.

However, witches are no where near that lucky. When a witch casts Miracle, it is interpreted and allowed by the source of the witch's power, its patron. Unlike with clerics, witches do not necessarily have the same goals as their patrons. In many cases, they do not even know who their patron is. Thus, they are putting the power of a reality warping spell into the hands of a creature that they may very well know nothing about. This creature may decide to twist its interpretation of the request or simply make the spell fail on a whim.

Any one else terrified by this idea?

Okay, looking back, the Miracle spell does not explicitly mention the spell being twisted but I would interpret that as being due to the fact that your deity is not likely going to want to mess with you like that.

Those are good points. However, I would still say Demoniac isn't worth it based solely on the demonic obediences. Maybe if they messed with the frequencies. Say, an obedience that is easy to do must be done every day but the more difficult ones, like Lamashtu's, have to be preformed less often. As it is, Demoniacs of certain demon lords would have to spend so much time securing the sacrifices that they have no time for anything else.

Right, tiny and flying. +8 Stealth would work... Now, if only imps had actual ranks in it too. Still, getting total concealment wouldn't be that hard for something the size of a cat.

Edit: Oh, plus, change shape into something that would be ignored.

In hindsight, I'm not sure why I was worried about this.

The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature. For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe. Exactly who is a foe depends on the invisible character's perceptions. Actions directed at unattended objects do not break the spell. Causing harm indirectly is not an attack.

I am interpreting this to mean that if you sneak up on a random person and cast suggestion to convince him that attacking someone is a good idea, you stay invisible. However, if you do the exact same thing to someone you consider an enemy, you will become visible.

Is this correct? If so, how would you decide who is a "foe"? Would it be someone you're actively fighting? Someone you've fought before? Someone whose goals oppose your own?

I'm asking because turning invisible and casting suggestion seems like something an imp would do all the time. However, corrupting the righteous through repeated suggestions would be quite difficult if they become visible each time they try it.

The airship was in the Eberron Campaign Setting page 267. Again, it's entirely based on the elemental binding so it can't be converted without it. Rules for the binding are on page 51.

On the topic of the alchemical simulcrum dragons, why don't you just build a normal ship and have the dragons carry it through the air. Instant airship.

I wasn't expecting them to be equal but I figure they should all be at least good enough that someone might consider taking any of them. As far as I see it, taking a level in demoniac would never be a good idea for a follower of Lamashtu. Of course, this is ignoring the fact that it's already better not to multiclass.

I was looking over the Prestige Classes available to characters that worship demons, daemons, or devils. There seems to be a pretty big difference in power.

Devil worshipers get a super imp and a bunch of class features dealing with conjuring up devils and making deals with them. Basically, they get improvements in the things that devil worshipers should be the best at.

Daemon worshipers get an Improved Familiar, 2 summoning SLAs usable once per day, and a bunch of SLAs that are powered by a touch attack ability. I guess this wouldn't be bad for a cleric but arcane casters are squishy. Why would they want a touch attack? Plus, they don't get full casting.

Demon worshipers get one extra spell per day, a buff that causes confusion afterwards, the demonic boons at an earlier level, a bit of summoning, and one more buff. Again, not full casting. Plus, to be able to use the abilities of this class, including the spell casting advancement, the character has to perform a daily ritual based on their demon lord. For some demon lords, this can be hand waved as being done as part of the morning routine. For others... Lamashtu requires her followers to try to either get pregnant, get someone else pregnant, or sacrifice a baby. A pregnant follower of Lamashtu would be stuck sacrificing babies. Thus, at level 10, she must sacrifice 30 babies a month or lose 9 levels of casting. How is she supposed to find 30 babies a month? Obviously, this wasn't meant to be a PC class but still, it's kind of ridiculous.

Right, done ranting. Anyone else got any comments on this?

I was actually thinking of doing something similar. Making incantations for spells in Draconic. Of course, the language creator program I got my hands on doesn't give a big variety of words so it would take more time than I have available.

If you're willing to use 3.5 material, Eberron had rules for creating an airship. Though, the process involved enslaving an elemental so it's more difficult and morally questionable than normal item creation. Plus, it requires a totally different item creation feat.

I would hesitate to allow skeletal champions and their zombie equivalents to have variant templates. Can you imagine a bloody skeletal champion? It has class levels and it comes back from the dead after its been destroyed.

The Sun Orchid Elixir temporarily stops the aging process and, thus, extends the taker's life. However, I can't find any reference to how long it extends someone's life by. It seems to suggest that it's only one year but that seems kind of short to me. Does anyone have any idea?

Sacred Summons works when you summon creatures with the alignment SUBTYPES that match your deity's alignment. In this case, archons. Unfortunately, there are only 3 of them on the summoning list. Since celestial animals do not have subtypes, they would not be affected no matter what your deity's alignment is.

On the bright side, Sacred Summons working off of the deity's alignment works in your favor because there aren't any LN outsiders on the summon monster list... Though, that's still only 3 creatures. What's the point?

One of the functions of the Atonement spell is to change the alignment of a willing creature. In a society that is big on redemption, it would make sense for criminals to be allowed to go free if they willingly submit to an Atonement spell by a good cleric. Obviously, this is more difficult than it sounds since it doesn't work on people that are displeased with the fact that they're being forced to switch alignments. Plus, the cleric would have to cast Detect Good to make sure it worked. However, I think it would make enough of a difference to justify it. Actually, if there is a long jail sentence, they could end up saving money... assuming your fantasy world punishes through jail instead of public flogging.

Generally speaking, do your games have any signs of magic other than the verbal and somatic components? Obviously, something like Lightning Bolt or Shocking Grasp would be rather noticeable. However, I think something like Bestow Curse could be cast without anyone noticing. Of course, the verbal and somatic components would be an obvious sign so you would have to do them before you even see your target and then hold the charge. Am I wrong? Would anyone say that the caster's hand glows, or something along those line, when the spell is delivered?

Make sure you take hardy bodies. If the body you're inhabiting dies when you're not in range of the magic jar, you die... Though, in this case, you might be able to jump into any magic jar if it's in range.

You can't inhabit a corpse but undead work. Actually, when choosing which body to jump into, whether or not it's undead is one of the very few things you can tell about the potential host.

On that note, you should probably try to be alone with the person whose body you want to steal. Trying to take over the enemy barbarian and accidentally taking over your own cohort would be quite embarrassing.

I would agree with the others.

Even if you don't go with the interpretation that Summon Monster doesn't summon real creatures, it doesn't last that long and the summoned creatures can't be permanently harmed. The creatures you summon probably won't bother to remember you.

Planar Binding can be tricky though. If you give the called creature a good deal, it will probably be happy about being summoned. If you're stupid enough to force it into doing your bidding without payment, it will probably want to kill you or worse. If you're somewhere in the middle (or you give a good deal to a particularly surly outsider), the creature's response will, likewise, be somewhere between the two.

Level 1 of the Souldrinker PrC grants a Cacodaemon familiar. However, it makes no mention of what your effective level for the familiar is. My guess would be either you only get a level 1 familiar or it's based on the Souldrinker class level (plus any previous familiar-granting class). I suppose if a GM was feeling especially generous, having the familiar be based on caster level would be possible too (please don't ask your GM for this). Any opinions on what it's supposed to be?

I've heard people talking about using the spell Fabricate on sand in order to create glass. By RAW, do you think this is possible?

To take this to it's ridiculous conclusion, would a lich that spent 100 years developing the science of molecular chemistry be able to turn coal into diamonds?

So, you should cast the spell while you're on your personal demiplane. That way, there's very little chance of the familiar being on the same plane as you are.

Changing forms is a Constitution check. DC 15 for hybrid and animal forms. DC 20 to return to human form. Good luck making those checks on the first try. Even a character with Constitution 18 will only make the check half of the time, less if he's trying to become human.

Given my previous thoughts on this line seem to have panned out with regards to Dark Archive and Blood Lords AP, I'm gonna stick to my guns and keep hoping for a martial warfare themed book. Maybe they'll go all in and outright call it "The Art of War".

Could have warfare themed casting and spells as well, meaning some of these gishes could fit. A class archetype that allows casters to give up full casting for the Magus bounded style plus some ribbon abilities might satisfy a lot of these wishes personally.

D'aw, silly foxtato. You didn't have to thank me publicly like this. Being friends with you is more than enough.

I want to thank you as well! That Hao Jin article explicitly speaking about an asexual experience really hit home. I started identifying as aroace in the beginning of 2020 after years of calling myself bi cause I never knew it was "an option", and seeing something in print - a legendary sorceress no less - was huge for me.

Most surreal of all was having aced the Paizo design test last fall.

Ha! Love that you snuck that in not but 50 words after coming out. Congratulations on your success and getting to know yourself better!

Recently had a strange encounter in which a succubus lied to the party, saying that she was a simple human researcher that had been held captive by the other monsters in the dungeon for her knowledge.

She crit succeeded her Deception check against the party, and so I told the players that she seemed absolutely sincere when they asked if she were lying.

Even so, the players were extremely skeptical because she was found tied up in an opulent chamber, whereas even the monster's apparent leaders slept on straw beds elsewhere in the dungeon. It just didn't add up. So, despite her lie that the monsters had attempted to bribe her initially with the gifts, the player characters kept asking over and over again who she really was even though--as far as their characters should have been concerned--that had already been established.

Bolding mine, to show the "clues and in game information" they were using to conclude that while the NPC didn't seem to be lying, something didn't add up.

Just because someone is a great liar and you can't catch them in the act, doesn't mean you trust them.

Ravingdork wrote:

What could I have done to make this go more smoothly? What would be some good advice for similar situations in the future, in which an NPC lies to the party?

This may or may not work depending on if you're running a module or how important a plot point it is, but this is what I would have done:

She is telling the truth - I change the situation so that she isn't a succubus and the PCs are, in fact, wrong. I let their suspicions get them into trouble.

Now [i]that's[/s] metagaming!

I kid, but if the players figure out your plan don't just change it so that they didn't figure it out. That's just like a TV show finding out their audience correctly theorized the ending and then changing it the next season just so that it's surprising.

At least, don't do it all the time. Being "right all along" is a great feeling to let them have. They're wrong so many times already, no need to force it so that they don't "win"

On the topic of Lie (and any other social skill check) against PCs, there is precedent in the rules with regards to the Diplomacy and Intimidation actions in the "Changing Attitudes" side-bar, and I do not see it as a stretch to also include Deception in the advice even though it's talking about the loose attitude mechanic. https://2e.aonprd.com/Skills.aspx?ID=7

"No one can ever change the attitude of a player character with these skills. You can roleplay interactions with player characters, and even use Diplomacy results if the player wants a mechanical sense of how convincing or charming a character is, but players make the ultimate decisions about how their characters respond."

So 'allowing' players to decide themselves whether their characters believe the lie or not is not just age old GM advice, but almost outright recommended by the book.

Almost without fail, rolling social checks against PCs will lead to a bad time at some point down the road. I agree that the Lie action is wrongly worded, it should not be "the target believes your lie" but "the target does not notice any signs of your deception" or something like that. In the opposite direction: "You don't see any tells, they seem to be truthful" should be the result of a successful deception check against you.

My 'issue' with Golarion (and most published settings) is that the lauded pros are in turn cons for me. It's all already written, so I don't get the fun of creating it myself and to top it all off I'd have to force myself to read lore (as opposed to stories, which I love). Players can explore it without you through wikis and such, and they can even surprise you... but I hate that. I should be the one they go to with questions about the campaign so we can discuss and build together. You can play any story in Golarion because it has everything... but I don't want half those things in my game, so that does nothing but hinder me!

I'm gonna be running an AP for the first time soon, to see if I'm right about my feelings. Though I'm already planning a bunch of changes because if I didn't do that I wouldn't feel like I was playing the game, so is it even gonna be a fair test? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It's about control, ownership, and fun, I suppose. We all get fun from different parts of the hobby.

Deleted an earlier post I made, but I’m curious if there’s a pattern in releases. Beast books seem one obvious type. Genre books like Guns and Gears seems like another. To me, that leaves “playstyle” as a good third. Stuff like Ultimate Magic/Secrets of Magic, Ultimate Campaign, and Ultimate Wilderness.

I know there’s not a lot of daylight between “genre” and “playstyle”, but that’s kind of what I’d seen them aiming for with their July releases. A book that can bend a campaign’s play into one direction or another, but could be used at almost every table, where the steampunk vibe of G&G cannot.

I'd be a big fan of this! I think you're talking about something like the Galaxy Exploration Manual which they just did? I'm a sucker for anything sandbox, and I'd definitely be in for some deep wilderness rules.

I'm imagining another one of the themed rulebooks will be announced at this year's gencon for the next year, and I bet it will have classes again as I don't think they're gonna stop completely on putting those out yet! I got a lucky guess on calling Undead cause it's probably the most open theme for a bestiary, but for a rulebook, I totally expect to be surprised and be totally off base on my occult (which would fit blood magic) or martial warfare book guesses.

I think we can all safely guess that the AP after Frozen Flame will be a Nex/Geb one though! After that, an Arcadia or Tian Xia Lost Omens book would make sense to me considering where we're at right now, but it could also be tied to a rulebook like G&G is tied with Alkenstar.

Really hoping for some lich PC options, myself. I've always had a silly character duo idea rattling around of someone adventuring with their cantankerous lich grampa.

I said "I wonder if there is a ritual to become a lich in The Book of the Dead?" in the discord Q&A and Erik Mona did say "That would make a lot of sense to include!" So I think we can safely hope!

The Pathfinder Society Grand Lodge from Pathfinder Society Guide + Wynsal Starborn from Pathfinder Legends + the Agents of Edgewatch AP + the A of E Pawns + The Grand Bazaar (which is in Absalom) + all the NPCs in the GMG + NPC Battle Cards + all the ancestry and class options from the Advanced Players Guide, Secrets of Magic, Guns & Gears & Ancestry Guide + 440 pages of Absalom, City of Lost Omens = one HUGE urban campaign. Wow. Did I miss anything?

Dead God's Hand also ties in! Shove in a bunch of Kobolds from Little Trouble in Big Absalom too why not.

Romão98 wrote:

Fumarole wrote:

Is it just me or is the cover new? I dig it.

Wow i just saw and I like it! Maybe this symbols represent the megical schools. I count just 7 instead of the regular 8 schools.

The would-be 8th one was probably omitted to make room for the "Second Edition" in the upper right corner pocket.

From the 7 I see, 2 I can confidently guessing is in which school. Upper left corner pocket is adjuration, and right side pocket is necromancy. The rest are a toss-up (I thought bottom left corner pocket was divination, but the eye in the top side pocket could also be it, too. Or maybe that one is enchantment. Who knows???).

I bet the hidden one is the illusion school.

I imagine these are the last hours where we can get our thoughts in before an announcement at PaizoCon (I imagine it'd be at the keynote, I believe that's how it was last year).

My biggest thoughts are on a Warfare themed book. A lot of people have wanted a Warlord class or something along those lines. It could fit various subsystems, weapons, archetypes and even spells. Though, Kingdom Building is something Kingmaker is handling, so I don't know what would happen between these two.

That said, I don't think that one would be early next year. I'm imagining an occult one first cause y'all coming from 1e seem to love that stuff! This would probably have one or two Occult classes merging ideas from all the ones from before, or splitting them into Archetypes. What I'm not sure of is what else would go in the book, though I'm sure there's a lot!

Hmm... Could be we get a merged themed Bestiary + player options book. First blind guess there would be Undead, but I'm not familiar enough with the bestiaries to see anything missing. A planar book would be perfect, but not this soon into the game I'd imagine, since they seem to be focusing heavily on Golarion.

Answering rules questions on Twitter should not be the default at all. I mean, look at his Shield Master rulings. Anyway, much better to not answer directly and go through official channels like errata if necessary.

And these two quotes are great for those looking for expanded options:

"Change how you cast spells entirely, with options like channeling powerful emotions as a source of magic, casting exclusively elemental spells, tying your gear directly to your soul, harnessing the magical potential of true names, and more."

"Ley lines make certain locations more magical, and pervasive magic can put magical power into every creature and place in your game world if the normal amount of magic isn’t enough!"

Yooo I wonder if "tying your gear directly to your soul" means getting scaling DCs on items as you level.

Very excited for the "ley-lines". Well, very excited in general.

One is that maybe people have a complexity cap. If they spend their creativity creating an interesting backstory, there isn't much left for piecing together interesting stuff for the character mechanics itself. Alternatively, if the person spends their time and energy on the mechanics and story of the current and future character, they might not have much left for backstory.

I do think it's something along these lines. Rather than a complexity cap, I'd call it being enough stuff to seem "sufficiently interesting". Unique ancestries and combinations come pre-packaged with stuff that stands out, and also with a lot more specificity by nature of being more niche.

Meanwhile, people who play humans or other common ancestries, are 'forced' to come up with the interesting part themselves, to reach the same level of sufficient uniqueness. I do think that people that tend to play these kinds of characters just prefer that sort of control over what makes the character tick, a complete blank slate, rather than having to conform to the image evoked by the stranger ancestries. Could be a confirmation bias though, since I am firmly in this group.

Basically, as AnimatedPaper mentioned the "10 things" method. Most of those 10 things are taken up by "I'm a fleshwarp" and the addons to that. While for a human character, you have more space that you can/have to fill.

I'm curious about what spellhearts actually do. Like a fire spellheart gives a fire spell, adds one dice of damage to fire spells, and gives 5 fire resist? Idk I'm spitballing here. Really interested to see what the heck they are

This is what I'm expecting. Not outright +1 item bonuses to spells, but something that improves a small subset that you want to focus on. Sort of like property runes maybe, but for your magic.

I'll admit something too, that sounds like a hell of a lot of work for something that should be pre-made, damn.

The idea of wizards approaching magic with a scientific progress mindset only works in game if every wizard is very self serving and not interested in raising a general understanding of magic and its applications forward.

What? Why do you say so? Scientific progress is *predicated* on being "interested in raising a general understanding of" the world. Research is incremental on that which came before. That's the very opposite of self serving.

"I figured this out on my own," is a good way to put it, I think!

Personally, the wizard has always been the most compelling for me *because* it is not beholden to a higher power, or the natural world, or connected to powers they do not understand. The arcanist learns their abilities through hard work and study. I've always liked maths, and the imagery of applying pure mathematics to the world and obtaining magic, is very satisfying for me. This is in general though, not specifically for PF2e. I like how the Magicians by Lev Grossman makes it a PhD level course, for example.

It probably stems from the same spot that makes me drawn to almost always play humans. Wizards (and most martials) are the normal folk who worked for their abilities.

I agree with WWHsmackdown in that the Sorcerer in PF2e kinda steps on those toes for me, getting access to the same spell list and a spellbook as well.

I want more archetypes that are specifically for casters! Maybe themed to the schools of magic, so that specialists wizards can specialise further, but keeping the option open for other classes too. I'm thinking Evoker, giving stuff like metamagic to shape the AoEs and your Evocation spells, a Conjurer to boost summoning, etc.

Rules are not clear about the Corgi/Witch familiar (as you cannot have two familiars), so you'd have to ask your GM if you do the sprite thing. In my case, just going to treat the Corgi as my witch familiar (and spellbook!) and give it enhanced familiar (similar to how the Familiar Master archetype handles the matter).

You could also just take a different Ancestry feat and flavour the Witch familiar as a Corgi.

I'm astonished that these conflicts exist in a system that's so stripped down compared to its previous edition, especially so early in this editions life with so little released as of yet.

If it is the case that you simply don't get any benefit from the rogue racket because of your preference of ancestry, that's poor design and just feels bad! Looks like I may have to rely on my GM ignoring the RAW again for this one (assuming the RAw is that you do gain no benefit from the racket's dedication feat).

All the Ancient Elf does is give you a dedication. Your "preference of ancestry" is wanting to start with two multiclass dedications, which is clearly stronger, and almost certainly not intended. Just choose another heritage and say you're old.

Would you feel the same if Ancient Elf said this:

"Gain a multiclass dedication. If you can't for any reason, you gain the benefits of any other Elf heritage."

Heh. In English, the form -mancy refers to divination. So "geomancy" is a form of divination (and so is necromancy). In Pathfinder, not so much.

"Words mean what I want them to mean, neither more nor less." -- Humpty Dumpty

To be fair, I don't think any fantasy fan would think of "fire divination" when they see pyromancy, same with necromancy. These words just mean different things in the fantasy genre.

... because not a lot of people ever get to double digits levels organically, and those people won't want to jump to high levels...

I'm not disagreeing with you, I agree that the level 1 to 10 adventures would probably be a lot more popular. But this part of what you said seems to be the major draw for high level adventures. Since not many get to that point normally, they might find it appealing to start halfway there and thus actually get to experience that part of the game. The real thing that pushes people away in my opinion is that then the game starts out extremely complex, without the background of having grown with the character from level 1 slowly adding complexity along the way.

To broach a different topic, what other class feats abilities do people think we might see for non-gunslinger classes? I'm trying to imagine a barbarian with a gun, and beyond throwing the musket at someone I'm not sure how they might best utilize one.

I imagine we'll get a gun themed racket for Rogue, not sure what it might be called though. Bandit? Would let you sneak attack with guns, but I don't know what else.

Maybe an Edge for Rangers for reload weapons? Marksman's Edge. Gadget stuff could fit the ranger too, then it'd really be good for Batman.

I imagine Gunmage would be an archetype to allow access to more characters. Something along the lines of Eldritch Archer. Perhaps you would prepare spells as bullets during your daily preparations, and then casting them is shooting them. Edit: This could just be a magus subclass!

Maybe a gunslinging swashbuckler? That might step on the Gunslinger's toes though.

Now I'm thinking of a sheriff as an Investigator... What's a sheriff's methodology?

A whole lot more variable action spells! I don't even know what they could be, but more stuff like Heal and Harm would be amazing.

And not exactly spells, but feat lines for the wizards who are specializing in schools. I can't believe there aren't any yet. Say, an equivalent to Selective Energy for Evokers, or more support for Conjurors who are summoning creatures beyond just their focus spell.