rooneg's page

Just a quick question that came up while trying to build a character from Cheliax. The regional languages on page 232 don't include Infernal, despite the Lost Omens World Guide saying citizens of Cheliax speak it. The Guide to Organized Play also fails to list it as a cultural language that's available to anyone. Is this another oversight like Erutaki and Varki, or is it not intended to be available to PFS characters from Cheliax?

also from what i read, the bloodlines spells granted to you are in fact your signature spells at each of those levels. so you cannot make chain lighting your signature spell because its not in elementals bloodline spells.

That is incorrect. Your signature spells are entirely independent of your bloodline spells. You can select a bloodline spell as a signature spell, but you don't have to (and often it would be a terrible choice since not all bloodline spells scale when heightened).

rooneg wrote:

Michael Sayre wrote:

We aimed to have these costs land in a place where we could be reasonably confident that anyone going all in to GM at a major convention would walk away with enough points to buy a new ancestry, regular GMs who travel to a major convention and do a 4 slot commitment will likely gain enough bonus points that they'll probably walk away with enough points for a new ancestry, and a player who plays twice a month will still unlock an uncommon ancestry once a year.

GMing 4 slots at GenCon (a Premier Plus convention) gets you 48 points. That's 32 point short of the cheapest ancestry on this list. Even if you assume they also played in another 4 slots that's still short of the 80 points needed. Are you assuming those 4 slots worth of points are combining with other points they've earned from GMing at home? [...]

Yes. They've just gained points equivalent to 3 months of weekly play for a player when running 4 slots and the rewards given to them just for GMing in general are greater than they were in the previous campaign. Being a regular GM at any game store is still enough to buy you all three ancestry boons listed above with points to spare. If you add in 4 slots at a convention like GenCon you can clear 4 uncommon ancestries with points to spare and if you go all-in at a con you're guaranteed an ancestry. The overall rewards for everyone have increased.

Except that not all of us GM PFS outside of the occasional con. In effect you’ve raised the price of those boons, they now require us to GM regularly outside of cons in addition to volunteering our time to make conventions possible.

We aimed to have these costs land in a place where we could be reasonably confident that anyone going all in to GM at a major convention would walk away with enough points to buy a new ancestry, regular GMs who travel to a major convention and do a 4 slot commitment will likely gain enough bonus points that they'll probably walk away with enough points for a new ancestry, and a player who plays twice a month will still unlock an uncommon ancestry once a year.

GMing 4 slots at GenCon (a Premier Plus convention) gets you 48 points. That's 32 point short of the cheapest ancestry on this list. Even if you assume they also played in another 4 slots that's still short of the 80 points needed. Are you assuming those 4 slots worth of points are combining with other points they've earned from GMing at home? Because that's a pretty significant change from the way things worked with PF1 or SFS, where convention GMing was itself enough to qualify for these sort of awards.

The boons look great, but I do have to say that I think the prices on the ancestries look about twice as expensive as I'd expect them to be. If running 4 slots of PF2 at GenCon (and playing in 4 more!) isn't enough to qualify for an ancestry boon then either the boons are too expensive or you're not giving out enough AcP. And that's at a premier plus convention, the absolute best case scenario for earning points.

Also, I'm kind of curious on the increasing prices. What's the reasoning behind making things like resurrections or rebuilds more expensive each time you do it? Does the base price reset each "season", or does that carry over?

rooneg wrote:

Excellent guide! I'm looking forward to using it while planning out my next character.

One question: Can a Champion even take Godless Healing? I don't think you can build a Champion who doesn't have a patron deity.

Not yet, but there's a potential for a "Champion of Mortality" later on for a Rahadoumi Champion. Not sure how they're going to excise the "deity" language from the class for that cause, but they'll find a way.

Sure, you could maybe do that at some point, but right now it's kind of hard to justify a three star rating for a feat that no Champion can actually qualify for.

This is very well done. Thanks, yall!

Now I just need to get my hands on this Secondary Initiation boon for Knights of Lastwall for a character. If anyone knows how I can get that please let me know.

It costs two fame.

Hey Charon, just wanted to say that I'm a huge fan of this sheet. I've switched all my characters on to it over the past few weeks and it's a big improvement over paper.

One question I had was if you'd considered including a tab for stuff like your character's commonly used wild shape forms. It'd be awesome to be able to fill in a few of the base numbers and have it give you the final modifiers.

That would leave you with a feat benefit that was INCREDIBLY strong to take at level 2, but then became useless when your main class proficiency caught up. It seems like a great way to get people to learn about retraining.

It would also make it possible to totally steal the Fighter's thunder from levels 2 through 4 (1 through 4 if you're an Ancient Elf). Multiclass Dedications aren't supposed to make you as good as another class at their core thing, that's why you don't start getting 1st level spells until you pick up the second feat in the dedication and why stuff like inspire courage doesn't come online until incredibly late in the game for multiclass Bards. This would let you have a Champion who's as good at hitting people with a sword as a Fighter at level 2, which is pretty uncool to the Fighter.

Also you can use create undead in legal play so long as your infamy does not reach (3), and these books can be found but it would be in specific locations (Evil Churches)(Evil locations) & (Tombs) at GM's Discretion

You seem to be under the impression that these rituals are the sort of thing the GM can just drop in to a module. That's not how PFS works. As I understand it until there's some PFS legal adventure where the rituals you want are made explicitly available there isn't a legal way for your character to get it.

Honestly, I think it's difficult to say much about how the PFS2 system works because the AcPs we've been accumulating literally cannot be spent on anything and exactly when that will be possible and what the price for any particular thing remains unclear. I do think the bonuses to GMing at conventions is weirdly small (25% bonus at "Premier" conventions, 50% at "Premier Plus", no reward at all for GMing at a non-Premier con, the AcPs you get are identical to what you'd get for running it at home).

Is this update also going to correct the Achievement Points issue where GM sessions show up as 1 point instead of whatever they're actually supposed to be? Or is it limited to Playtest Points?

Sandra Wilkinson wrote:

GMs receive a race boon, but PFS2 GMs receive the same award as GMs of a home game

You have to consider that GMs at conventions are likely earning many more AcP than a local gameday because they are running multiple sessions in a short period of time. The points earned roughly replicate the value of receiving a race boon under the PFS(1) system.

I don't really buy this argument. "You get more points because you spent more time running games" isn't something special about a con, it's just a reflection of the time invested. Most GMs could run more games at home if they wanted and not have to pay for travel and lodging.

I'm really saddened to learn Red Mantis Assassin still requires evil. They have such cool abilities.

That said, as an eternal GM I rarely get to play a character, so I guess it wont impact me much. Still a little sad.

One of the boons auctioned off for charity at GenCon this year gives you a background that allows you to be a renegade Red Mantis Assassin, which opens the archetype up to a Lawful Neutral character. So when the book drops presumably there will be at least one non-evil character with the archetype wandering around in Pathfinder Society games. Sadly, it went for a stupidly large amount of money, so I won't be the one using it.

rooneg wrote:

I don't know about something on the scale of a pseudodragon or a faerie dragon, but the enhanced familiar feats can give you 4 traits for your familiar, which lets you build a pretty convincing version of some of the cooler familiars. My gnome is going to have a cotton topped tamarin with darkvision, speech, a climb speed, and usable hands, which seems like it should be enough to get in a lot of amusing trouble ;-)

I love Tamarins! My favorite type is the Golden Lion Tamarin. My local zoo is part of the breeding program to keep them from becoming extinct. They are just wonderful animals.

They're pretty spectacular animals, our local science museum has a bunch and my daughter used to spend a lot of time watching their antics. I went with a Cotton Topped Tamarin because clearly my gnome is going to have to dye its hair different colors ;-)

I don't know about something on the scale of a pseudodragon or a faerie dragon, but the enhanced familiar feats can give you 4 traits for your familiar, which lets you build a pretty convincing version of some of the cooler familiars. My gnome is going to have a cotton topped tamarin with darkvision, speech, a climb speed, and usable hands, which seems like it should be enough to get in a lot of amusing trouble ;-)

If you need additional evidence, note that the Valeros pregen has Double Slice for precisely this reason.

(FWIW, I don't think this is a particularly edge case case, as you say, shields are literally listed in the weapons table. This clearly works.)

Also... I keep reading and re-reading the rules, and... I can cast Ray of Frost 3 times for 3 attacks, each dealing 5d4 points of cold damage... or Produce Flame 3 tmes for 3 attacks, each dealing 5d4 points of fire damage..., both at 10th level.

All the offensive cantrips take two actions to cast, you're not going to be casting them more than once in a round.

Blake's Tiger wrote:

Yeah, it was specific to kukris and gnomes. Also elves without Weapon Familiarity and the elven curveblade.

Now I'm sad for all those kukri-less gnomes. I was so excited that they had finally fixed gnome weapon proficiency into something useful by offering glaives and kukris in addition to standard gnome weapons. It meant that people had a reason to pick up gnome weapon proficiencies. Oh well, let's hope that there will be some access provided later.

Don't worry, they also gave them access to the only 1 handed d8 weapon with reach in the game, so they sure get something! ;-)

Again, I can understand why a buffer is nice at lower levels. I cannot understand why they are different across ancestries, though, in a front-loaded way. Anything that is front-loaded like this and only really relevant at the lower levels come across as weird design to me; I do not see a point to something that is only really relevant at the lowest of levels.

Dramatically more games are played at low level than at high level. That will continue to be true even if high level play works better in 2e because inevitably some games that start at low level will end before reaching high level. Additionally, people are typically introduced to the game via low level play, and if it sucks they will not continue to play, so making an extra effort to ensure that low level play is fun has a disproportionate impact. That’s the point.

What does it accomplish for some options to have an expiration date?

Is there some hidden nugget of game design that makes the system function better by having Armor Proficiency investments mostly be valid from 1st to 12th, only to become sidelined by 13th?

If nothing else it opens up design space for other things that do scale up. The Fighter and Champion dedications include high level feats that scale arbitrary weapon or armor proficiency up to expert. The fact that it's actually super awkward to find that sort of scaling is in fact part of what makes those dedications valuable. Now does that mean I think nobody other than a Champion multiclass should ever be able to scale up to expert armor proficiency? No, but I also don't think it should literally just come along with the Armor Proficiency feat, or just be a General Feat that anyone can take at 13th level because the existence of such a feat means that Champion Dedication gets worse.

Why is it okay for characters to benefit in full from Armor Proficiency investments at lower levels, only for such investments to become null and void by 13th level?

Because sometimes choices are good at one level but not so good later. Not all choices are required to be equally awesome for all levels in the game. I get that you seem to feel like this game should be played such that only the most optimal choices are ever made, but the game isn't only made for you.

I'm a wizard. I'm trained in Arcana.

I'm a scholar. I'm trained in Arcana, Nature, Occultism, or Religion -and- get the Assurance feat with that skill. So now I'm in the anomalous position of being Assured in, say, Occultism, while only being ordinarily trained in the thing I'm supposed to be best at.

Wouldn't it have made more sense to let me apply the Assurance feat to Arcana, Nature, Occultism, or Religion, independently of the skill chosen through Scholar?

Page 26 of the CRB says "If your class would make you trained in a skill you’re already trained in (typically due to your background), you can select another skill to become trained in." That means you can just take Arcana and Assurance (Arcana) from Scholar, then pick something else to replace the Arcana from being a Wizard.

I never said the cleric was terribly built. Please enlighten me. How could I have suggested to my player a better way to build the cleric? Give me a spell that would have changed the way all of the encounters to date in the fall of plaguestone would have gone better if he had just chosen to prepare them. Or how could he adjust his attributes for better effect? Maybe his skill choices were wrong. I'm dying to know what he did wrong and I will dutifully report to my player that you have a solution to his (and my) observation that the cleric just didn't have any options that made him escape from under the shadow of the fighter and the barbarian.

I feel like you're basing your appraisal of the class on a few introductory encounters where the cleric found that they weren't as good as the Fighter at hitting wolves with weapons, which seems like a poor way to do it. Of course they're not as good as the Fighter at hitting wolves with weapons, the fighter is literally the best at hitting wolves with weapons, it's their whole reason for existing. What clerics get is a whole bunch of additional flexibility that the Fighter can't even come close to having. Expecting them to have that additional flexibility and still be as effective in combat as classes who basically devote all of their abilities to being awesome in combat is rather unreasonable.

rooneg wrote:

Note that the weapon proficiency feat currently gives you no way the bump that martial prof up to expert. The ability to do that is part of what fighter dedication gives you.

Actually, that's a Completely different Fighter Archetype Feat you need to take at lvl 12 at the earliest... SOOO... No, the Fighter Dedication Feat itself is Still lackluster...

Yes, but fighter dedication unlocks the option to take that later feat, and there is no similar option for the weapon proficiency general feat. You may not think that benefit is significant, but it is a benefit.

On the fighter dedication topic.

It feels a tad odd all you get (off hand remember) is the martial weapon profiency. When that is just 1 general feat for a lot of characters. Most? (Idk about sorc/wiz/cleric off hand) have simple weapons.
I'm pretty sure the weapon profiency feat grants you all of martial if you know simple weapons.

I was debating whether to take Fighter + general feat. or just two general feats in order to get an advance weapon on an Alch. two general feats just feel a bit easier and less opprotunity cost.

Note that the weapon proficiency feat currently gives you no way the bump that martial prof up to expert. The ability to do that is part of what fighter dedication gives you.

One thing to keep in mind: if you’re complaining about multiclass dedications being weaker than the class they’re from, well, that’s sort of the point. A fighter who dips into wizard dedication should not be doing the same stuff the actual wizard just got access to, that’s stealing the wizard’s toys. Dipping into another class should get you some of the stuff the real person who took that class was doing a few levels ago, not the stuff they’re doing now and not their class’s core cool thing they can do. That’s why you don’t get expert weapon prof when you take fighter dedication or why you don’t get the awesome combat stuff for hunt target when you take ranger dedication or why you don’t get DEX to damage when you take rogue dedication. This is all by design.

I would very much like the region boon to unlock suck things, I’d love to give my dwarf a clan dagger, but the ancestry feat is a bit much for something that is essentially flavor text on the character.

Well, I looked at the add character function in Organized play.. They have added 2nd edition, but still doesn't let you add a character, since the option for Faction is blank, and won't let you add/save until you choose a faction.

Actually, it gives you an error if you don't pick a faction, but the character does actually get created. You can't modify it without picking a faction though. Presumably this will get cleared up shortly.

rooneg wrote:

Baby Samurai wrote:

Midnightoker wrote:

Third, the fact that Armor choice is now a flavor decision is amazing. To me, equipment has always been one of the stronger essences of flavor, so knowing that the Armor Specialization and balance Paizo has put in has created this feel is exciting!

Yeah, this seems another page they took from 5th Ed D&D; I also dig spellcasting modifier added to spell attacks (dropping TAC in the process), amongst other bits.

Umm, armor in 5e isn't just flavor, there's basically one optimal type of armor in 5e for any given character.

Which I believe is the same as PF 2E. Have high Dex, go light armor. Moderate dex, medium armor, no dex = heavy armour. All 3 styles add up to the ~ same AC (+6 for PF 2e I think, AC 17/18 for 5ed). Basically, whichever way you go, you have the same AC. Proficiency will be the difference.

In 3rd edition, you could get AC 18 with full plate but the best unarmored could get was 15 with DX 20. So there is a big difference.

The same is true regarding TAC. Just like 5 edition.

Yes, but in 5e you don't get into this position where you have multiple possible armor types for a given character that end up with the same AC/Stealth Disadvantage result. If you're a character with DEX 14 who wants to wear medium armor you either pick a Breastplate if you care about Stealth or Half Plate if you don't. There's no reason (other than money) to ever wear Scale or a Chain Shirt. If you're a heavy armor character you never have a reason to prefer Splint to Plate. If you have a flavor preference for Splint you will always end up with a lower AC.

Midnightoker wrote:

Third, the fact that Armor choice is now a flavor decision is amazing. To me, equipment has always been one of the stronger essences of flavor, so knowing that the Armor Specialization and balance Paizo has put in has created this feel is exciting!

Yeah, this seems another page they took from 5th Ed D&D; I also dig spellcasting modifier added to spell attacks (dropping TAC in the process), amongst other bits.

Umm, armor in 5e isn't just flavor, there's basically one optimal type of armor in 5e for any given character.

I am registered to participate in 3 scenarios for Pathfinder 2 at Gencon this year, and I cannot seem to find enough information about them. Primarily, do I need to bring a developed character with me, or will pre-generated characters be provided? If I need to develop characters, does anyone know where I can find the rules and how to register them, if needed

If you're playing in 1-00 Origin of the Open Road it can only be played with pregens, so don't worry about it. For any other PF2 scenario you can either bring your own or use a pregen, which will be provided. If you want to build your own characters the rules will not be available until the first day of GenCon when PF2 releases, so you'll be making them at the convention.

We're sorry for the inconvenience! The tech team is working on getting this fixed, but we can assist you if you'd like to place your order in the meantime. We aren't able to start subscriptions for folks, so you would have to submit the order on your end of the system. Then, if the incorrect products are generated, you would just notify Customer Service either via this forum, by email, or by phone. Once we receive your request, we'd just remove the incorrect items and replace them with the ones you'd prefer to start with.

So, I emailed customer service last Wednesday and then again today asking for precisely this change to my recent Adventure Path and Campaign Setting subscriptions, but haven't gotten any response at all. Is there somewhere other than customer.service@paizo.com I should be reaching out to about this problem?

Cydeth wrote:

Ed Reppert wrote:

Paksennarion was a soldier before she became a paladin. She almost certainly learned first aid.

I just want to point out that she also was incredibly unusual for a paladin in her setting. There was a whole school dedicated to finding and grooming paladin candidates, and she was considered unusual there.

The point being, she's not the best example for the argument, though I consider Paksennarion to be one of the best examples of paladins in general.

That's fair enough, I suppose. Though I wonder if that school found candidates among the general population who had no prior combat experience. I don't remember if that was mentioned in the books.

The candidates (for Paladins of Gird, anyway) typically came up through the grange system (i.e. local church branches), and thus were all well trained in combat by the time they got there.

That said, they were also quite clear about the fact that you couldn't really use their equivalent of lay-on-hands without some amount of medical knowledge to direct it, so presumably they taught their Paladins some first-aid ;-)

So if I were to choose to pickup my subscriptions at gen con, and purchase the second edition material, and choose to have them ship with my subscription, would they be available for pickup at gen con? I might be a bit confused now...

I believe that's the case. I have several subscriptions and have chosen pickup at gen con and the non-subscription pf2 items I've ordered (the GM screen and the Plaguestone Flip-Mat) are listed in the stuff I'm able to pick up there.

I'm looking forward to a game with more choice in character building than 5e but less weird complexity and cognitive overhead than PF1.

I don't know if Jason Buhlman is joking or not but it looks like he's giving him heck on twitter for posting it.

He actually said he was joking: https://twitter.com/jasonbulmahn/status/1139678230896508928?s=21

Mewzard wrote:

To me, from what I've seen, Pathfinder 2E's going to find a nice home as a healthy middle ground between Pathfinder 1E and D&D 5E. For Pathfinder 1E players who want something simpler without hitting 5E, and for 5E players who want something more complex, but not at Pathfinder 1E's level, this could be the perfect home to many players.

I highly doubt many people will jump from 5e to PF2. The math behind the systems, and it’s effects on the fantasy world, are way too different. If paizo wanted that market they would’ve kept bounded accuracy but added complexity to class choices and combat.

I'm literally a 5e player who's planning to play a lot of PF2, and I doubt I'm unique. There is a huge appeal to having something that is less complicated and weird than PF1 while allowing way more choice in character building than 5e does. PF2 seems likely to hit the sweet spot there.

This is awesome! Way easier than referring to the images.

One slight issue, you've got the text for Ranger Resiliency listed under Basic Hunter's Trick. The actual text of Basic Hunter's Trick is "You gain a 1st or 2nd level ranger feat of your choice."

Potential volunteers: Don't be scared off. People are people, but most of my tables have been good, and I've had more than a couple that were pure delight. I had a family of six sit at my 1-99; they were the best fun!

Also keep in mind that GMing on release weekend for a new system is somewhat different than normal convention GMing. Yes, you're running a system that you don't know terribly well, but the players don't know it either and they're almost certainly not going to hold any mistakes against you. I ran SFS 1-00 on release day at a FLGS two years ago and it was a great experience despite the various things I screwed up. You do your best, be an ambassador for the new game you're running and most importantly try to make sure everyone has fun. I had such a good time doing it for Starfinder that I'm going to my first GenCon so I can do it for PF2.

Wow, I must be in the minority of people who pretty much loved everything about the playtest.

Honestly, I liked a lot of stuff about the playtest, or at least what the playtest was trying to do. If I didn't I probably wouldn't be here now ;-)

I really liked resonance since it made magic item cooldowns super low or non existent. I dont think my group has even come close to our resonance cap.

This here though, this is actually the problem with resonance. Most characters don't ever come close to hitting the cap, which means you do all this bookkeeping for something that hardly ever matters. It's extra work for very little benefit.

Someone dropped a summon water elemental last night that was able to trigger weakness damage against 3 greater fire elementals. It drew all of their agro accordingly and tanked over 100 damage before going down. It didn't last long, but it soaked up all of their actions that round. And it did manage to do some respectable damage before it was dropped too.

Summons seem good for what they always were good for. A versatile tool kit that act as flanking buddies or damage sponges. I've seen PF1 summons occasionally handle combats better than parties. My first pathfinder character was an Oracle with augment summons who did this quite frequently. But that was because I read,optimization guides before showing up and the other players didn't. That is not, nor should it be, what PF2 looks like.

My only complaint about summoned elementals in the playtest was that all of them had super cool thematically appropriate reactions that they couldn't use because summoned creatures don't get reactions. That was pretty disappointing. I'm hoping that if that remains there will be class feats that give you a way to fix it for a wizard or sorcerer who specializes in summoning.

NielsenE wrote:

In the playtest, you could take the extra action granted by haste at any point during your turn.

Not that I don't belive you but just because I know at some point I'll be asked "Where does it say you can". Is that a listed rule somewhere or is it that fact that it never says you can't use it at any point on your turn that makes you believe you can.

The Quick condition starts as follows:

You gain 1 additional action at the start of your turn each round.

As I read that, the "at the start of your turn each round" bit is telling you when you GAIN the action, it says nothing about when you can USE it.

That said, all this is Playtest rules, so who knows how it'll work in the final version of PF2.

On the other hand, Classes that don't gain Martial Weapons benefit disproportionately from Fighter, which is actually kind of neat. A Fighter/Wizard has a bit more of an existing thematic niche than a Ranger/Wizard, so it's nice that there are incentives to do it that way.

I don't disagree about the thematic weight, but I do think it's a little unfortunate that it's pretty impractical for many types of characters to dip into fighter from Sorcerer or Wizard due to the lack of armor proficiency.

Unless the Armor Proficiency feat has changed from the playtest you're only getting 1 level of armor proficiency in return for a level 1 general feat. That's fine if you're trying to build a DEX based character, but it doesn't work at all for a STR based one. For that you're REALLY incentivized to go Sorcerer with a dip into Champion (and either a Weapon Proficiency general feat or one of the Weapon Familiarity ancestry feats).

Now you can still build plenty of characters via Wizard (or Sorcerer) with a Fighter multiclass feat, like nimble arcane duelists or especially archers (who may not care about armor proficiency at all), but we're probably pretty far from doing a heavy armor STR based Gish as a Wizard with a Fighter dip.

I think I like the direction the martial dedications are going. It reduces some of the overlap between the archetypes while making them more attractive to other martial characters. In the playtest casters got way more for dipping into fighter than a barbarian did, for example.

Yeah, the fact that it's now reasonable for the various martial classes to dip into another martial class is pretty cool (although dipping into fighter is of limited value for anyone who already has martial weapon proficiency until you pick up a second Fighter feat).

rooneg wrote:

The martial multiclass archetypes definitely got nerfed relative to the playtest. None of them seem to give you proficiency in both Armor and Weapons anymore (not even a deity's favored weapon for Champion), so if you were planning on doing a single feat dip to turn your Sorcerer or Wizard into a Gish think again.

Ancestry feats can fill that gap though.

Oh yeah, there are plenty of ways to work around the problem, it's just a bit harder than it was for the playtest. Honestly, I think it's probably for the best, as easy access to both a martial weapon and heavy armor proficiency for a single 2nd level feat is pretty busted.

Curious on your thoughts about whether a human could take the Natural Ambition Ancestry Feat more than once. This feat grants you an additional 1st level class feat.

My assumption is yes, but I've seen other instance of selectable ...things which specifically call out the ability to take them more than once, and Natural Ambition doesn'y have that; so now I'm leaning toward no.

Thanks!

Assuming you're talking about the playtest I believe the answer is no. Feats that can be taken multiple times explicitly say so (see the Assurance feat for an example of this), so if it doesn't say you can take it more than once you can't. (I assume there is also a rule that states this explicitly somewhere, but I can't find it off the top of my head.)

Another possibility would be tying the number of attuned items to Charisma...maybe 7 or 8 + Charisma Mod. That reclaims some of the Resonance use of Charisma without the annoyance, though it's admittedly a niche use.

The problem is less that it's niche and more that it's completely unimportant until you get a large number of wearable magic items, something that might never happen to many characters. Most games are relatively low level, I can't imagine running into that limit any time before level 10 at the earliest.

Was Create Undead a ritual in the playtest? If not I'm really happy about that change. Fully martial Graveknights are coming!

Create Undead was not in the playtest, but the existence of a ritual that lets you create undead was mentioned by the developers as something that would be in the core rules. So this is a nice confirmation, but isn’t terribly surprising (other than perhaps the fact that it’s a level 2 ritual).