nothinglord's page

How much casting in blood rager?

Multiclass Archetype Psychic, but swap the Psi Cantrip/Focus points for a pittance of damage and two feats that add extremely action and/or health intensive ways to get some extra spells.

We do now!

Let it be known that anytime something like this happens again, that people saying "you can just use the original content" should be disregarded because clearly some people won't be able to do this. This exact situation happened when the new ability score option was added and the original Voluntary Flaws option was completely removed.

I'm tempted to use absolutely none of it, considering the number of things I was hoping to get a second look that instead got overlooked while other things got buffed. RIP Mastermind Racket, and I'll always remember the 90% of Domain spells that are just hot garbage, because clearly nobody at Paizo did.

This isn't even counting the Dying rules, Wizard School spell selection, Talismans are apparently still not great (haven't gotten to GM Core yet), Outwit Ranger, and Warpriest sort of (the Dying rules kind of make going into melee as a Expert armor, 8hp class a stupid move, so Master Weapons is pointless unless you're Cleric of Erastil or something).

I guess use the Cleric font change though.

This is pretty precipitated and look like ignores things like the new alignment damage, focus spell rules, metal armored druids, the kineticist...

I still don't see reason to condem the entire revision just because one aspect don't becomes good.

The Alignment damage change dropped Law and Chaos, the Focus Point change is fairly minor in the function of the game (as in it already worked before. Plus we don't know what the classes that previously had it baked in are getting in return), metal armored druids can be trivially house ruled, and I haven't even seen Kineticist yet.

Meanwhile the changes to Wizard/Spell Schools/Spells in general, are so far pretty big. I'd gladly sacrifice the entire Kineticist class to have Remastered Wizard be hit with the un-nerf bat. This is again assuming that there's nothing to compensate for the nerfs.

I'm not writing off the Remaster because "one aspect don't becomes good", I'm writing it off because they've made something actively worse. This would be like them revealing that they dropped Barbarian to 10hp per level and increased the AC penalty when Raging to -2.

The onus is now on Paizo to convince me that these changes are good, because if the remaster contains more changes like this then why would I buy it let alone play it?

As much as people say "wait for Player Core 1", that just spells out how s@@+ty of a preview this is. I was planning to try preorder the special cover versions of the Remaster books, but with how this preview is, I won't be getting the new books (even new non-Remastered books) at all unless they show off more that makes this not as bad as it looks.

When someone would ask "should I get books now, or wait for the remaster?", I previously would've said to wait, but now I'd tell people to buy the originals and avoid the Remaster books.

This isn't a good preview. If there is things that account for these very blatantl nerfs, then they better preview that too.

Squiggit wrote:

"Nerfing Produce Flame" was not on my PF2R bingo card.

I want to say there's a mechanic we're missing here, because nerfing blasters is about the oddest thing Paizo could choose to do, but if there was something missing it'd probably be in the document so...

Ignition isn't really a down grade though, it now does D6s (as in 2d6s at first level in melee, and a D6 for persistent damage. There are a lot of questions about how these new spells are going to interact with class features and each other. The PDF is a tease of both big changes and not very big changes somehow all at the same time. I do think I will be waiting to implement any remastery changes until all the books are out.

The melee option that only Magus will ever care about? The melee option gained an average of 6.5 damage while the ranged option lost an average of 4.5 damage. I'm sure cloth wearing spellcasters everywhere are rejoicing.

I'm hoping a 3 free boost 1 flaw option is added alongside the 2 free boost option to account for Voluntary Flaws being snapped out of existence.

Mathmuse wrote:

Hm, maybe the Remastered rulebook should change Refocus from an activity to a trait. A Prayer activity gains the Refocus trait for clerics and champions, a Meditation activity gains the Refocus trait for monks, all Nature activities gain the Refocus trait for druids, and all activities gain the Refocus trait for sorcerers. Other activities can also gain Refocus trait if it relates to their source of magic; for example, Treat Wounds would gain Refocus for a cleric of a healing god. And the trait would say, "Ten minutes spent performing Refocus activities restore one focus point to the character's focus pool. Spending a focus point interrupts the Refocus process so that the character has to start the 10 minutes anew."

Anything that clarifies which useful actions can be done while refocussing would be great.

Currently, disagreements between GM and player about this are both common and impactful IME.

The only safe activity is the one mentioned in the RAW : healing people for Sarenrae.

Technically Sorcerers have a RAW safe activity which is doing literally anything.

I understand this is not helpful to the point.

While it never made it into any official material, word of god is that Zon-Kuthon is also from the previous universe.

Thanks for all the clarity and transparency James.

While I feel somewhat for the Fall of the Drow, my home made setting already made serpentfolk the dominant underempire, so it does not affect me negatively. (And then you also publishing centaurs and Minotaurs in the same year - almost feels like you are personally catering to me …..).

However I do feel for the people who are losing “their” Drow - but hope they can adjust and understand that this is part of the further evolution of Pathfinder away from its D&D origins into its own thing.

To be honest I didn't actually think about Drow being that big of an OGL issue until this came out. I considered a name change, but the rest of the specifics never crossed my mind.

That said I not particularly attached to D&d Drow, so I'd actually like if Pathfinder has their own kind of dark elf (I'm partial to the name Hollow Elf).

While I really think Drow could've been reworked since WotC doesn't own the concept of a dark elf, I do like the idea of the underground Serpentfolk empires. They're able to fill similar roles.

That said, I do hope that a possible replacement dark elf can eventually be added, ideally in a way that enables the original Pathfinder Drow origin to be worked in, along with any other lore that isn't to tied to OGL.

If only so the Starfinder Drow don't have to get clapped out of existence.

Another thing that came up was removal of the 8 schools of magic.

I believe replacement schools mentioned were school of the battle mage and school of the protean form

Why would they need to change these? Most of them are things they shouldn't need to change (Conjuration, Divination, Enchantment, Illusion, Necromancy, and Transmutation).

Are they just renaming them?, because I can't see them completely redoing the schools, since that would be a far more incompatible change then alignment.

A 3 free boost 1 flaw option for ancestries.

My only question is what the full list of combination elements are.

Slamy Mcbiteo wrote:

. Society play will convert to the new rule set. Just wondering when that will be

When CRP (4th printing) removed Ancestry flaws from how you build characters, PFS adjusted at exactly the same time. When Player Core and GM Core remove alignment, PFS will adjust at exactly the same time.

But.... you will still be able to build and play characters with alignments, just like you can still build and play characters with Ancestry flaws.

I'm assuming you're referring to Voluntary Flaws, in which case you actually can't use them in Society play, unless they walked that back.

This is also why I'm hoping they've added an any 3 Boost 1 Flaw option in addition to the any 2 Boost alternative.

---

On a different note, I'm a little confused on how Nephilim would work. If "Nephilim" is specifically the versatile heritage, then wouldn't you be able to have weird mish mash of Aasimar an Tiefling abilities? It seems like it would be like having Half-Elf and Half-Orc as a single versatile heritage.

Speaking of ability scores/modifiers, I hope that a 3 boost 1 flaw option for ancestries is added as a fix to the previous removal of Voluntary Flaws.

Icky? Why so?

It's a sarcastic jab at their reasons for the ability score alternate rule. Dwarves being slow and elves being fast is something that is an inherent difference between them, and unlike their ability scores is still completely impossible to overcome. Under no circumstance will the fastest Dwarf be faster than the fastest elf. Additionally it's one if the things that look like balancing aspects. Dwarves had a generically good statline but -5ft speed, Elves had a Con penalty and low ancestry health but +5ft speed (with an additional ancestry feat to get more).

I have mechanical disagreements with the ability scores change (I think there was an much better and simpler way to go about fixing the same mechanical issue) but, the bioessentialist reasoning I absolutely loath. It was stupid when Wizards did it with D&d 5e and it's stupid here. Pf2e is far better mechanically designed that 5e, so it's not a deal breaker but I'd rather not ever go in that direction at all.

Since I don't think they're considering reversing it for a better option, the best I can do is try and get is a 3 free boost / 1 flaw option added. Then at least only dwarves are getting screwed.

Hopefully with increased frequency of errata we can get a 3 boost / 1 flaw option. Oh, and also remove the icky bio-essentialist belief that Dwarves are slow and that Elves are quick.

Someone already mentioned that not every material has the Precious trait, therefore it can't be relevant in triggering weaknesses even if the trait was passed to weapons.

Otherwise a Wooden club can't trigger Wood weaknesses because it isn't Precious enough.

Nimor Starseeker wrote:

GeneticDrift wrote:

Nimor Starseeker wrote:

GeneticDrift wrote:

The computer interface helps melee. It can turn on your jet pack or haste circuit.

This is a great catch - getting the full benefit of the haste circuit going on you first turn is an excellent boon!

Well the end of your first turn assuming you activate it with combat banter as a free action before your turn. Still, it helps.

You would activate it as a free action, so you can use you full-action on your first turn. I don’t see why you would get the benefit at the end of your first turn. Please explain.

"If the trigger occurs, the computer automatically activates the linked system. This occurs at the end of your next turn after the condition occurs."

The sentence right before the part you quoted has two parts, one talking about the triggers and another that lets you activate something on your turn for free.

You can set the computer to operate the upgrade at your command (allowing you to activate one such item each round without taking an action to do so)

This part never mentions "triggers" or "conditions" so it is separate from the following sentence.

Of course this means that it is almost always better to tell the computer to do something during your turn, as it gets it done quicker than it doing it automatically, but I guess the point of it reacting on its own is in case you are unable too.

If the part I quoted does still take time to activate than it seems like stupidly slow, as it effectively takes 2 turns to activate as it would happen at the end of the turn after the turn you told it to do something. The computer literally would be taking nearly 12 seconds what it takes a normal person less than 6.

It's not a guaranteed method, but there is a pattern to the class grafts.

+2 to one saving throw, at _ CR they get one of the classes' iconic _ level abilities, at certain CR's they get one of the abilities replaced by an archetype, etc.

Of note is that the saving throw bonuses are only to adjust saves to closer mimic the classes' base saves.

For example, Soldiers usually have Good Fort and Will, but the Combatant Array has Good Fort and Ref. Mechanics get Good Fort and Ref, but the Expert Array only gets good Will. Envoys get Good Ref and Will while Expert Array already has Good Will. Same with Mystic and the Spellcaster Array.

Soldiers get +2 Will and -2 Ref, Mechanics get +2 Fort, +2 Ref, and -2 Will, Envoys just get +2 Ref, and Mystics get nothing.

Based on this, Biohackers (Expert) would get +2 Fort and -2 Will, Vanguards (Combatant) would get nothing, and Witchwarpers (Spellcaster) would get +2 Ref a -2 Will.

Solar Inferno (Su) pg 86 and 87

This ability is explicitly allowed with Melee attacks through the Solar Weapon/Shield, but makes no mention of excluding the user from the ability. This means you're always nuking yourself whenever you use the ability and since you have Bad Reflex, chances are you light yourself on fire.

I understand that the Graviton equivalent, Gravity Well, also affects the user, but it's not nearly as detrimental (and is much more beneficial for Melee than Ranged).

I don't know if this is in fact unintentional, but it seems like a pretty big detriment to light yourself on fire anytime you use an ability, enough so that it could be an oversight.

It's not great, but it's a mild upgrade for spellcasters or envoys who wanted to focus on skills/spells stuff and not devote a bunch of resources to longarms or have the image of dragging around a rifle. I don't think it's really reasonable to ever ask Soldiers to be as effective with a pistol as they can be with any other option.

I don't understand why it's limited in being used with other damage boosters given that it only narrows the gap with longarms and doesn't erase it.

Well if all double tap did was give Full Weapon Specialization and the +1 bonus on attack rolls (still can't be used with Trick Attack, Triple/Quad Attack, or AOE weapons), then a Soldier with the feat would still be doing less damage than with a Longarm, let alone a Heavy Weapon. Even if the Soldier had Multiweapon Fighting it's still overall less damage, but it's close.

So it's not making them being just as effective as with any other option, it just makes the option not horrendously bad. That way someone isn't totally gimped if they want to play a gun slinging Soldier.

Same for other classes. It's still less feat investment than Longarm proficiency + Specialization, but also less damage.

Is anyone else disappointed that Double Tap is locked in as a Standard Action?

I was hoping it would instead just have a restriction that prevented it from being used with Trick Attack and Triple/Quad Attack. The Standard Action restriction means that the only class that always gets a benefit from it is Mystic since they don't have any Standard Action Shoot + bonus effect abilities. Envoys have their multitude of such abilities, Mechanics have Overcharge, and Technomancers have Spellshot and its upgrades. It can't even be because they didn't want the damage to stack, since all of those can also be used with Longarms (or even Heavy Weapons). Not to mention that the restriction means no Pistol-wielding Soldiers (or Solarians, if they didn't go Solar Flare).

These would still be doing less damage than if they were using Longarms, so it just feels like a missed opportunity.

~

On another note, the Improvise Surgery Expertise Talent grants Insight bonuses, which is useless for an Envoy.

They also need to fix some of their other types of maps.

The map of part of Verces in the Pact Worlds book is topologically impossible with how Verces is described.

On topic though, if a game company is going to make battle maps, they should always make them high enough resolution to fit the scale they use. It would be nice if they came with whatever book they're needed in, but if Paizo needed to, I'm sure people would be fine with paying maybe $3-5 dollars for the maps (depending on the number and quality obviously).

At least they have 2d maps. 5e's Curse of Strahd campaign comes with a big map of Castle Ravenloft, which is cool, but is in ISOMETRIC PERSPECTIVE.

On the product page for Ultimate Psionics, it says it combines "nearly all of the material in Psionics Unleashed and Psionics Expanded into a single hardcover book. But not only does Ultimate Psionics contain existing content, over seventy pages of brand new material has been added (separately released as Psionics Augmented for those who already have Psionics Unleashed and Psionics Expanded)".

My question is, what materials of Psionics Augmented does Ultimate Psionics contain? Since I already have Ultimate Psionics, I don't want to double up and buy the same material twice, but I'm not sure which of the products under the Psionics Augmented listing are already there. I know that are some things that Ultimate Psionics doesn't have, like Psionics Augmented: Seventh Path.

How exactly does the Strength bonus for Primal Fury's Iron Hide Stance work?

"the initiator’s Strength bonus to damage is doubled (or tripled if wielding a weapon with two hands)."

Would this mean a character with a strength bonus of +4 using a one handed weapon would add 8 using only one hand and add 12 (4*3) using two hands or 8 with one hand and 18 (4*1.5*3) with two hands? I'm asking because the interaction between this stance and things like the Landsknecht's Strength of Arms ability or the Dragon Style and Dragon Ferocity Feats aren't clear to me.

I assume it just replaces the normal bonus (as the first example), but that means that any ability that increases your strength bonus is sort of wasted. If a Landsknecht with this stance gets the same benefit as anyone else it why would the take it over something else. If it worked as the second example those kinds of abilities would still be beneficial and still wouldn't top using a 2 handed weapon (even dragon style + dragon ferocity adding 2x str on the first hit).

With the errata, can you no longer take this feat multiple times for the same class? Before it just said "You may select this feat multiple times." but now it says:

"You can take this feat multiple times. Each time you do, you may choose a different class and different maneuvers. Levels in prestige classes that progress maneuvers stack with your class levels for determining how many levels you have in a martial disciple class."

Is this just explaining that you CAN take it multiple times for different classes, since it says "you may choose", or does it mean you are restricted to taking it once per class?

I'd think it would be the former based on how it's worded, but if it is the latter it has a pretty significant impact on how you build a character, since its power literally depends on what level you take it at. I'm mainly confused because I'd swear I've seen first party material that says "you may" but doesn't really give you a choice, as if it meant "you may take this again as long as you apply it to something else."

Can you select the Standard Monk abilities that are listed as options for Qinggong powers as long as you don't already have it? For example, could you select the base monk's Diamond Soul for always on spell resistance that you have to lower manually instead of the Unchained Monk's swift action activated spell resistance that you have to manually activate?

Is there a pdf with any errata for Path of War Expanded? I thought they would just update the pdfs instead of releasing errata separately, so it's good to know that they do release it separately.

On the d20pfsrd is says "When wielding a weapon in your off-hand, Deadly Agility will add the same fraction of Dexterity as you normally would for Strength." this directly contradicts my copy of Path of War which says "This modifier to damage is not increased for two-handed weapons, but is not reduced for off-hand weapons."

Did they release Deadly Agility in another book where they changed how the feat works? Cause unless they changed it somewhere I'm going with what my actual copy says.