Old_Man_Robot's page

Mechanically, I hope there exists some options that allow for some limited template breaking.

A new "mythic" proficiency tier which gives a +10.

A generic option that allows you to advance a prof up a step, which can be taken a few times, maybe up to a cap so a non-Fighter/Gunslinger can never get mythic weapon prof, buy they could advance to legend, etc.

Same with things like armour, saves, casting, and so on.

Eternal Legend sounds like the "tough"/"resistant" mythic destiny to me. It could also potentially include self-healing and status removal.

My money would be that's abilites are a generl grab bag on handy things.

Eternal Legend could be the more secular, folk hero, factionless, path. You're still a mythic being, but you chose no side or aligned to no power in whatever that landscape looks like.

The "other" option in the mythic census.

These damn forums.

I had like 3 paragraphs after the end of the example about the use of the feat. Gone for no reason.

I really can't understand the last sentence: "You’re a treasure trove of information, but not all of it comes from reputable sources. When you fail (but don’t critically fail) a Recall Knowledge check using any skill, you learn the correct answer and an erroneous answer, but you don’t have any way to differentiate which is which. This can occur as not knowing something is significant, but not whether it’s good or bad." Scratch that. I can't even parse it at all. What do they even mean simply in English, if not in terms of rules? Even in the context of the previous sentence. Could you help?

Your party is attending a fancy gala, when, shock-horror, a guest has been found murdered in a quiet part of the manor. The body is managled, both ribbed to shreds, but curiously, drained entirely of its blood.

Thinking back, you felt that the towns mayor was acting unusual all evening.

You recall knowledge on the mayor, but fail. You have the Dubious Knowledge feat, and your GM presents you with the following:

You recall that the mayor didn't use the silverware that was at the table, instead you think he ate with his own utensils.

and

You recall that the mayor said he was too tried to walk in the gardens with the other guests. He retired to his room, only appearing again after sundown for the evening meal.

I was looking over sustained damage spells and Phantom Orchestra is the main one I use.

I can never think of this spell as anything other than that scene from the 2nd Doctor Strange movie where the two Strange's are throwing musical notes at each other.

Do the characters have access to a means of getting compound interest?

The proper combo is Water Walk, Wall Run and a Decanter of Endless Water. And now you can get everywhere you want.

Unfortunately, I don't find the Decanter in Remaster...

Sounds like a job for Base Kinesis to me!

I never thought about it before, but I love the Pawns of the actions.

Giving new players action tokens, so they can have a tactile aspect to using their actions each turn, is great!

I see the Essences as being of one of two types : what you affect : Matter (tangible) or Spirit (intangible) and how you go about affecting it : Mental (mind, logic) or Vital (faith, instinct).

IMO, there cannot be Traditions blending 2 Essences beyond the 4 Traditions we already have because they would be missing an essential component.

Matter + Spirit would be missing how you go about affecting them : not the mind/logic nor the faith/instinct.

Mental + Vital would be missing what you affect : not the tangible nor the intangible.

That is on the assumption that the essential components as we currently understand them are all there is. Perhaps they are incomplete understandings, or, something grander - like the existence of Gods - suppresses other components, but now they are starting to emerge again.

Just like real world physics, if we think we have the mechanics locked up tight, its really because we aren't seeing the whole picture.

Its like you're complaining that a barbarian is too powerful because it can rage. No, that is a defining feature. If literally any class could beat it at one of its primary class identities by taking a L2 archetype dedication I think that would be very dissatisfying and poor game design.

Recall knowledge is no single classes defining feature, as almost all classes need to have access to that knowledge.

Recall Knowledge is also not the thaumaturges primary class identity.

I do feel that Paizo making the Thaumaturge's lore features tied to Charisma was a mistake. Charisma is already a particularly powerful stat, with a number of excellent abilites keyed from it. Making it a key driver for a knowledge skill does undermine Intelligence a good deal.

That said, both the Thaumurge and Diverse lore are utterly fine. They aren't the problem.

Its that Paizo has generally dropped the ball with making Recall Knowledge an accessible and rewarding activity for some Int based classes. The Wizard, the most academic and knowledge themed of all classes, has a single interaction with Recall Knowledge - and it just came out in the remaster. And takes a critical success to work...

Secondary Nova wrote:

So it recommends the Runelord archetype, with the dissolution of the magic schools how do we play that one. Or do we just play that one as per pre-master rules.

Our first Remaster AP is going to be Wardens of Wildwood. Seven Dooms is our final Adventure Path using the OGL pre-Remaster rules.

I take it that we won’t be seeing a Remastered Runelord archetype in 7 Dooms then?

Seemed like such a natural place for it as well.

That is the why the conversation is focused on quality and parity of the options, rather than just the existence of the options.

Technically some classes have about 1460+ spells-from-spell-slots spells per day, with things like Bloodline Conduit, Leyline Conduit, etc and their normal spell slots. We don't take that into consideration because just the existence of the option doesn't impact its qualative aspects.

The goal should be overall class parity, with each class having their own meaningful "thing" that adds to a parties overall value. If one class can bring everything another can, plus more, that's a problem, and its why we have conversations like this.

foxpwnsyou wrote:

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

I think sorcerers should have 1 less spell slot per level actually.

Making them a 4 slot caster ate too much of the Wizards lunch.

Agree'd to be honest on top of this Sorceres need to KNOW less spells...they are spontaneous and can up and down cast spells ffs...they should only KNOW 2 spells of each level and have 3 spell slots end of story, its ridiculous to me how OP they are...yes Wizard can be GOOD but it takes 10x more effort to do.

I honestly don't like this type of leveling down

I'm not a fan of it either honestly, it feels bad.

But now, with Player Core 1 behind us, subtraction is what Paizo opted for with the Wizard. The school slot change really curtailed the versatility aspect of the Wizard.

It makes sense that they should apply the same hand to the Sorcerer.

Arcane Evolution, at least, should be reworked and no longer allow for spell preparation.

Leave novel/niche spell-based solutions wholly to the prepared casters.

Such as Pocket Library's +1 Status, which is not a Circumstance.

Pocket Library is an interesting one.

During the duration of this spell, you can call forth a tome from the extradimensional library when attempting a Recall Knowledge check using your chosen skill. This is part of the action to Recall Knowledge. You must have a hand free to do so

.

It is unclear if this should be taken as "Part of the recall knowledge action, as defined on page 239 of the Player Core, etc etc etc" or if it becomes part of any action which invokes a Recall Knowledge check.

I feel like the design of Pocket Library means that it is intended to work with any action that invokes an RK check, but I can see an equal argument that since such abilties don't grant the action, it doesn't allow for the ability to be used.

A good case study for this is actually Discern Secrets in its Premaster vs Remaster state.

Premaster Discern Secrets grants the RK check as a subordinate part of casting the spell. An argument can be made that since this is not a RK action, Pocket Library couldn't be used.

Remaster Discern Secrets grants the RK as a free action instead of a subordinate one, so its much clearer that Pocket Library has an actual RK action to work on.

No, they don't interact. The RK check from Organsight is a specific RK check that asks for an action, you can't use another RK check like the one from Discern Secrets instead.

You can't use the RK check that is subordinate to the casting of Discern Secrets itself, in the place of the RK check called for in Organ Sight.

You can however, on subsequent actions, after sustaining Discern Secrets, apply the bonus it grants to the RK check called for in Organ Sight.

It's better parsed in the Remastered language, so its clear that the bonus to the chosen action is applied to future versions of the same action, not just the one granted by casting Discern Secrets.

If I was a new player, coming to the game with a fresh reading of remaster-only rules, I would not come away from reading Staff Nexus with the idea that the Makeshift staff did not gain charges like a regular staff.

I would, has directed in the ability, look at page 278 of the GM Core to understand how regular staffs operate vs the Makeshift one.

The Makeshift does differ from normal staves, and the ways in which it differs are laid out in the text of Staff Nexus.

So, what are we to make of this?

The removal of the charges verbage from the ability post-remaster could easily be an oversight. With the intention being that the lack of the staff trait means it does not function as an normal staff, save for the exceptions in the ability itself.

Worth noting however, is that the staff trait does not grant any special function or ability that is not references in Remastered Staff Nexus' text.

This magic item holds spells of a particular theme and allows a spellcaster to cast additional spells by preparing the staff.

Staff Nexus talks about casting spells from the Makeshift staff and the process of preparing it. So the lack of the staff trait doesn't actual mean anything in the context of the Makeshift staff.

There is a case strong case for the negative reading however, in the below:

You can Craft your makeshift staff into any other type of magical staff for the new staff’s usual cost, adding the two spells you originally chose to the staff you Craft. This staff gains charges from preparing it along with expended spells. Magical staves are described
on page 278 of GM Core

This creates the idea that there is a divergence in how the Makeshift staff gains charges from how it works when upgraded.

So its a bit of a mess.

________

Does the remastered Staff Nexus intentionally allow for charges to be gain like any other staff?

No, Probably not.

If I was new the game, or seeing Remastered Staff Nexus for the first time, would I have any reason to think it DIDN'T gain charges like a regular staff?

No, Probably not.

Staff Nexus needed to keep it clear language regarding staff functioning for this exact reason, and it should never have been removed.

Everyone agrees that DreadStriker makes all this tumbling effort obsolete.

They're different attack vectors. Just because one is potentially more universally accessible than others doesn't mean I don't want options. I will always taken an option that me to target multiple types of saves to get my desired effect instead of just one.

I always wanted to stack the deck as much as possible.

That needs 50' movement speed when tumbling through a medium creature. (40' if you are just trying to stay at the range of regular daggers). Possible, but it needs some work.

30 is enough for medium creature.

Start 10 away,
Difficult terrain, so 10 through,
and then 10 out the otherside.

You need to start and end 20ft away, 10 works just as well in most circumstances. Sure, there is reach considersations, but you need to factor that in no matter what you do.

Lets not forget Tumble Behind!

It was the core of a friends early level Thrower Rogue build.

Tumble through their space, get some distance out the other side, Sneak attack from range. Daggers have a pretty small range increment by default anyhow.

They eventually made heavy use of Dreadstriker and You're Next/Battlecry/Dazzling Display, etc.

Yep!

It used to be called Cascade Casting in the early days of the edition, but now the word Cascade is used elsewhere in PF2, so it can be confusing to google. I have a handy table for useage in excel ( Found here - the rest of this doc is terribly out of date and its advice should never be followed)

Best advice I can give is to get a mount via either the beast master or cavalier archetype.

That way you can stay mobile while attempting to utilse.

Reminder to toss a coin to your Blake Davis.

If you are going for an Arcane Witch, you would still probably be better overall with a Wizard and poach just Witch feats via archetyping.

If you are going for anything other than Arcane, Witch is the better class now.

The Wizard's legacy of having largely dull/marginally useful feats has the "benefit" of meaning you can trade most of the away for archetypes without feeling too much pain.

When I consider the attributes, I find it best to seperate them into two groups. The active and the passive.

Passive attributes:

- Dex: Reflex Saves, naked-AC
- Con: Fort Saves, HP
- Wis: Will save, Perception

Active attributes:

- Str: Bulk limit
- Int: Additional trained starting skills, additional languages
- Cha: zip!

It important to bare in mind that until the end of the playtest, Charisma played the roll of determining how many magical items one could have invested. Which might explain its lack of other inherent qualities.

All the ones in the passive group are incredibly important to almost every character. Some aspects, like the importance of Dex can move up and down depending on things like armour and use of fineese weapons, but those are generally on top of layers.

Of the 6, it looks like Charsima is the worst intrinsically, as it has little in the way of generic benefit. It has an interesting parrell with Strength, in that all of its power comes from its active use. Its also somewhat telling that Strength acts on your physical carrying capacity, and Charisma was intended to work as your magical one.

The active attributes then come down to their actual effectiveness when literally used.

Strength is the fundamental combat stat. Dex can swap in for some builds/weapon choices, but strength is really the core.

Charisma is the fundaental social stat. Deception, Diplomacy, Intimidate. The work horses of social interactions, with hundreds of skill feats between them.

Intelligence then is something of the odd one out. It grants some passive benefits, but none anywhere near as important as the main 3 passives, and its active uses are pretty much confined to Lore rolls. Lore, unlike athletics or intimidate or the like, does bring with it or actually enable any changes to the world or enviroment. It sits as the odd one out.

Marginal passive effects, marginal active effects.

You know what seperates Intelligence from Charisma in power? Charisma has a series of strong, math influencing, feats and abilities.

Feint and Demoralise are two very strong ever-green options. Bon Mot is a 1st level feat.

Intelligence doesn't have anything like that.

Recall Knowledge is good, but does nothing inherently and just knowing a good course of action doesn't mean you have the means to implement it.

How to make Int better without making changes?

Buff the Battle Planner feat.

- Remove the Expert skill requirement
- Drop to 1st level
- Let your party share in it (maybe scale that it so that it impacts you + 1 other at trained, +3 at Expert, +6 at Master, + "any number of allies within 30ft" at Legend)
- Losen the restrictions a touch

Now, suddenly, Int can play an important role in planning ahead and more actively rewards scouting.

I feel like you answered your own question really.

You are right, in that the PF2 Kineticist is elementally focused. It draws its power from the elemental planes and as such, its power sources are tied to those planes.

There is no elemental plane of "force" or of "mind" of anything like that.

Its a lore driven decision due to the class being fundamentally and conceptually different from its 1e namesake.

The concept of telekinesis is already captured by the Psychic anyhow!

I wasn’t arguing you couldn’t build it with legacy material, just that it is not a rogue build possible with the remastered rogue. You can’t get Wis as a key attribute anymore, which makes magical trickster much less valuable as a feat. You are already dealing with accuracy issues as a rogue caster. And without Wis KAS, you are no longer better as a trap finder than any other rogue.

But you can still do that. Nothing stops that when using either premaster or remaster material. Eldritch Trickster isn't removed, inaccessible or incompatible due to the remaster. It just wasn't in PC1.

Joseph Collins wrote:

Personally, I expect to see it return, as it is generally well-liked and well-used, in addition to being a classic character type. Either as a Rogue Racket in PC2, once all the kinks are worked out, or, my preferred choice, pulled altogether and repackaged as a new Archetype that can be used by multiple classes.

Part of the pc1+2 rearrangement was to *Not* split content over multiple books, so we probably won't See a magical trickster Racket there

But I can certainly Imagine the Feed being added to an arcane trickster archetype that has more versatility

Archetypes are going to be in PC2 however. So its possible that class archetypes for PC1 classes may be printed there.

The "Chair" companions (Legchair, Oozeform chair & Rootball chair) are all pretty good for casters.

Their support benefits don't help casters with their magic directly, but they help mitigate other concerns. Such as movement, cover, Oozeform might be able to grant off-guard, etc.

Beastmaster is a somewhat slept on caster supporting archetype, as, after 4th level, you essentially gain a bonus action to Stride, meaning you can use Spellshape feeats more freely. This is indeed addition to granting additional early-level focus points, which is a real boon post-remaster.

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

are we at the stage where:

- A suitibly high level character
- Utilising some means of sleep reduction (Ring of sustenance, etc)
- Using Complex Crafting rules

Create at least 2 scrolls per "night"?

If you are creating that many scrolls, I assume that it is so that you can cast them during the day's adventures.

So why not use Scroll Trickster?

Scroll Trickster only requires trained in one of the spellcasting tradition skills, and two feats will get you 2 scrolls per day at level 8 (the level 6 feat upgrades itself to two scrolls at level 8).

There is also Wizard Scroll Savant and Thaumaturge Scroll Esoterica for characters of those two classes.

I always need more scrolls.

Always more.

Plus if I can stockpile permanent scrolls, it means I can save them up for cases of prolonged adventure.

The shipping has been utterly crazy this time around.

On the 15th, when it was clear there was a problem, I just cancelled all my orders and subs for the Remaster and bought the PDF's directly. Called a LFG to see of they had got their order in, then swung round and picked up the hard copies the next day.

Not a "good" solution for anyone really, but at least I wasn't stuck waiting until now.

My own pet question around scroll crafting is, given the reduced general crafting time in the remaster, are we at the stage where:

- A suitibly high level character
- Utilising some means of sleep reduction (Ring of sustenance, etc)
- Using Complex Crafting rules

Create at least 2 scrolls per "night"?

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

Quote:

Like other consumables, scrolls can be crafted in batches of four. All scrolls of one batch must contain the same spell at the same level, and you must provide one casting for each scroll crafted.

I guess the can should be read as an "up to" in order to make scroll crafting possible for lone spellcasters.

I would insist it be read as such because the consumable crafting rule that it is referring to does actually use that wording.

Player Core Consumable Crafting wrote:

You can Craft items with the consumable trait in batches, making up to four of the same item at once with a single check.

There we go then!

So Wizards and Sorcerers can potentially make up to 4 scrolls per day.
All other casters can potentially make up to 3 scrolls per day.

With anything less than 4 being potentially augmented up to 4 with the aid of another caster.

A Wizard would be able to provide 4 castings of a 1st rank spell at level 2 or level 3 by using Drain Bonded Item.

The craft rules don't have any requirements on when the spells need to be cast, so as long as the process isn't interrupted, this is probably an easy to handle it.

It DOES make crafting a batch of scrolls a problem for most casters however. You can't even use a heighened version

Like other consumables, scrolls can be crafted in batches of four. All scrolls of one batch must contain the same spell at the same level, and you must provide one casting for each scroll crafted.

I guess the can should be read as an "up to" in order to make scroll crafting possible for lone spellcasters.

You're sounding a bit misanthropic, friend. Perhaps take a break for a bit?

These conversations are one of several levers by which change is affected.

The impact of any given post or thread is probably going to be pretty damn low, but its not like Paizo are some faceless corporation. The designers and developers are right here as well.

If your local government put a bus stop in the middle of your drive way, you wouldn't say "it is what it is". You'd make some noise about it, even if you can't win against City Hall.

A solid summary.

Also expressing nothing that hasn't been expressed multiple times in at least one other thread.

So...

My question repeated, why continue discussing what has already been discussed?

Honestly, I am curious, what is the thought process? Is there some idea that a new point will be brought up? Truly, what is the point?

I think the answers you seek lie beyond an internet forum about a TTRPG.

I know it shouldn't, but somehow it still boggles my mind that the discussion of school curriculum spells and focus spells continues. Is there really anything new to talk about?

I mean, when they changed staves to no longer allow property runes, I was pretty disappointed. Really disappointed. But *shrug* it is what it is. I didn't make threads or take over threads just to rehash the discussion over and over again. So what is the motivation here? What am I missing that makes this iteration of the conversation valuable?

Well some people seem to think its a purely cosmetic change, while others say its a change to the class balance which hasn't been implemented well.

So there is discussion from that tension.

My personal opinion is that the chances to Schools on a whole are fine in concept, but the options given in the core are too regressive to existing character concepts and too narrowly focus future ones, and so should have had a few additional ones in the core. My other opinion is that the implementation of the Curriculum spell slot is one of the worst ways they could have approached the idea, impacting the Wizards overall power in a negative way. It also introduces a logistical problem where whole spell ranks provided by that slot become "dead" as you level.

The converse side of this is that others think that none of these concerns are a big deal or matter all that much. That the impact of the changes will be next to non-existent and that the overall improvements to casters more than makes up for any loss felt.

There is some further contention over the "narrative" qualities of the change. Where some people are happy with the greater creative freedom this gives to create more, discrete and interesting schools. Others point out that this was always an option, and the 8 fundamental schools never prevented Paizo from making a more robust school system on top of the existing.

For Paizo's part, they opted to show case with the new creative freedom of the schools by reducing the core number from 8 to 6, but have teased others. These will come at some point in the future.

The homebrew element of Wizards has increased however, with the ability to homebrew schools as a creative win for those who are able to enjoy such, and is somewhat forced on those who are unhappy with the spell selection of their chosen school at any given level. And, as anyone who spends anytime with this community knows, homebrewing gets a generally a mixed reaction at best.

I would love to make a school of Lighting wizardry. Pick spells that have the lightning tag and spells that let the player move fast or teleport to emulate lighting and spells that stun for the theme.

It's kind of odd that his couldn't be done with the Elementalist. We don't have an elemental plane of electricity, and the air schools seem to totally lack eletric/lightning options. Ligthning Elements come from the plane of Air, so you'd think there would have been a few spells on the list.

The only spells with both the Air and Lightning traits that I can think of aren't on the Arcane list, apart from Cataclysm.

That said, there isn't all that many spells with the Electricity trait to begin with. You couldn't even fill a curriculum with the ones presently on AoN.

Lets take this to PM's, this will just get the thread locked.

It is only a psychological issue to feel like having 1 rank 1 spell slot locked into a spell you don’t like is an actual problem for your character.

I am not trying to silence discussion

*Blows Whistle*

Stop! Foul!

Telling someone their concerns are imaginary is silencing discussion.

2 Minutes in the Box!

__

You don't get to decide what is and isn't an impactful part of someones character, nor how a change gets to feel to them. You certainly don't get to decide its merits in an any objective sense. You personally don't get to arbitrate validity of anyones points.

Breaking up messages like this is a bad way to argue as it doesn't deal with what someone said in a holistic way. Breaking it into fragmentary parts which lack nuance and coherency that the original message had.

Not for nothing, but I looked at your post history and can see you doing the exact same thing. No reason to throw stones from a glass house.

its an easy and natural way to address certain topics within a long post. Unicore loves to post essays and the reply function only captures so much before it cuts off, so its a practical way to address specific points in verbose replies.

On Pathbuilder, when you create a new character, and you see the Remaster pop-up, you should see one of the toggles is called

Allow outdated Feats, Heritages and other choices?

Make sure that is toggled to ON, and you should have your options. You need to pick Tiefling still, but its there with the rest of the remaster content that way.

Like others suggested, I'll just make the wizard 4 free slots at my table so the school spells will just be gravy in their spellbook that they can prepare at whatever ranks are applicable.

That is probably the most elegant solution.

I think the greatly restricted spell slot is a big enough deal if I'm honest. For a class that is supposedly all about utility and flexibility, removing a chunk of that does devalue the class.

But the thing which needs fixed, and is an actual problem in day to day play, is the dead slot problem. It honestly baffles me how it happened. If you are going to restrict a spell slot to only a small subset of spells, then there needs to be an option at each level for each school which does not draw its utility from being heightened.

Well here is an advice question!

What sources are there that give a circumstance penalty to saves? We're coming down with Status penalties, but there has to be a few circumstance ones out there as well.

All I can think of is the action from the Whispering Staff.

Slow has a 1 minute duration and on a failure it gives the Slowed 1 condition for 1 minute. As the duration of the Slowed condition is equivalent to the spell duration it's not an ongoing effect and as such expires when the spell duration ends or if it is dispelled.

You can use Ongoing Misery on the Slowed condition to increase its duration to 11 rounds but it won't increase the duration of Slow itself.

Then, at the 10 rounds mark, the Slow spell expires removing the condition despite it's longer duration.

That's a very strict RAW reading, it seems not to be RAI. As such I agree with you we should allow the duration of a condition to extend longer than the spell duration even if it's not RAW.

This is why I called this reading as nonsensical. It would mean that Ongoing Misery doesn't actually do much of anything.

Th school nerf is over stated

I actually feel the opposite. I feel is generally being understated by the community at large.

The restricted spell lists as part of the school does two important things on a character level:
1) Causes a large drop in the usefulness and versatility of the Wizard's most integral class feature.
2) Narrows the range of character options, and ties the Wizard more closely to their school than before. This is fine for some characters, but for others, it doesn't really work at all. Plus, the core didn't provide enough options to cover all general bases. I understand that peoples mileage will vary on this point, but from an RP perspective, suddenly being forced to only use certain spells in a quarter of your slots is jarring.

The Dead Slot problem is entirely a result of the school changes. Its a wholly new problem that simply didn't exist before. I was on the preview stream for the Wizard changes months ago, the chat called out the issue within seconds of seeing the spell lists. There were so many ways to avoid this issue but it happened anyhow.

Like a feat chain off Recall Knowledge

In my personal opinion, the Wizard has been in dire need of meaningful interactions with the recall knowledge system from day 1.

There is a quite solid 8th level feat now, a reworked Knowledge is power. But it still requires a critical success to do anything.

Even if you're right, that reading still wouldn't apply to sickened which has no duration. It lasts until you reach

This is why I think everything about your reading doesn't make sense. Sickened does have a duration, it gets that duration from the source or effect that applied it.

If a source of Sickened doesn't grant it a duration, then it would be ineligible for Ongoing Misery.

Attempting to divorce the condition from the thing that applied it makes no sense in this context.

Ravingdork wrote:

When Ongoing Misery says "it doesn’t prevent conditions from being removed by other means", I don't think it means things like the countdown for frightened (that's clearly a duration that can be extended) so much as it means things like cleanse affliction, clear mind, sound body, or sure footing can still end an effect that has been extended.

i think the wider audience does indeed accept the countdown to be included in the "other means",

After thinking about it, I don't feel that this can be correct.

Familiar of Ongoing Misery

Your familiar seems hostile to all creatures other than you, hissing at them if they get too near.

When you Cast or Sustain a hex, your familiar can curse a creature within 15 feet of it, prolonging the duration of any negative conditions affecting it by 1 round.

This is a curse effect.

This prolongs only conditions with a timed duration (such as “1 round” or “until the end of your next turn”) and doesn’t prevent conditions from being removed by other means

So lets break it down.

"Other Means", other, in this sentence is creating a distinction between the subject of the preceding sentence. That sentence is discussing the duration of the effect. The effect is prolonging the duration of effect by 1 round.

If it was the intention that the tick-down duration of abilites was included as a source to be included in other means, then this ability, as written makes no sense.

The phrase "any negative conditions affecting it" is pretty straight forward, its not looking at the source of the effect or way it governs duration or how the effect works. It looks for effects with a duration, then adds 1 to that duration.

Including the natural duration of the effect as a means of removing the effect which is "other" than its duration would mean that this ability just wouldn't work on its face.