Let’s Get Compatible!

[Amaya/Polaris]

Sy Kerraduess wrote:

And at the other end of the spectrum, a spell like Holy Light will always deal extra damage to undead and fiends, and then deal EVEN MORE extra damage to devils who have a weakness to holy.

So it turns out Pharasma isn't as cringe as we assumed. :P

In case y'all haven't actually gotten a chance to read it yet, Holy Light doesn't actually have that targeting anymore. It's innately Holy and deals its extra spirit damage to Unholy targets.

Runnetib wrote:

So, if I'm reading it correctly, Paladins are perfectly okay with lying now?

If it serves their goals, yep! They don't wanna be murdering though. (Save debates on what counts as 'murdering' for the table.)

[YuriP]

Yes the Remastered Paladins can now lie (no more loose your powers because you have to use your Deception to hide some important info). But you still have to take care once that cheat still an anathema.

Someone that's already have the Players Core book can say if the clerics needs to follow the edicts to keep their powers up or only anathemas that still risks to loose your powers? This will guide the importance of champions edicts too.

[Amaya/Polaris]

Only anathema is listed as something that could potentially break your connection.

[YuriP]

So the things become more easier to champions because the compatibility errata also puts only "You lose your focus pool and divine ally only when you violate any champion-related anathema" too. So things like the bellow are no more anathemas:
Good Champions

You must never knowingly harm an innocent, or allow immediate harm to one through inaction when you know you could reasonably prevent it. This tenet doesn't force you to take action against possible harm to innocents at an indefinite time in the future, or to sacrifice your life to protect them.

Paladins

You must respect the lawful authority of legitimate leadership wherever you go, and follow its laws.

Act with honor and lying
Redeemers

You must show compassion for others, regardless of their authority or station
Liberators

You must respect the choices others make over their own lives

You must demand and fight for others’ freedom to make their own decisions

This is specially interesting for evil champions that not need to be completely evil anymore just be selfish is enough. Curiously this is specially true for Desecrators.
Evil Champions

You must never put another person's needs before your own, and you must never put your own needs before those of your deity

Tyrants

Mercilessly enforce established hierarchies of masters and servants. Topple or seize control of illegitimate hierarchies, such as democratic governments or the arrogant echelons of the celestial planes, and fill power vacuums by taking that power for yourself.

Bind the weak to serve you. This tenet doesn't require you to spare foes' lives if you think they would be disloyal if pressed into servitude, nor does it require you to keep more servants than you find practical or useful.
Desecrators

Subvert or corrupt everything in your path that is pure and good, and sow doubt among those upholding such ideals. (this was the only anathema of desecrators. Technically without this the desecrators became the most free to act champions only needing to stay selfish, you cannot act for the simple good of anyone but you can do good actions of you receive some benefit from it, and depending from what deity you follow like Arazni you can easily have no deity restrictions).
Antipaladin

Act dishonorably, take advantage of others, lie, cheat, and steal to get what you want.

You must destroy that which offends you and that which stands in your way, including—and perhaps especially—the forces of good and law that oppose you. This tenet doesn't force you to take action immediately if it could mean your destruction, nor does it require you to destroy something that might be useful if corrupted toward your ends.

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

hope champion will turn to entirely oath based system

[Captain Zoom]

Maggard wrote:

Dark_Mistress wrote:

Any chance in the short time while we wait on the main PDF's to be updated. That we can have all the errata made into a single pdf or even txt file that we can download? That would be a lot more handy that having to check the web page.

I second the motion for @Paizo to provide a comprehensive errata released as a single PDF.

As mentioned before, all you have to do is go to the FAQ/Errata page, open all the sub-headers, then print to PDF.

That's what I did and I have all the errata, clarifications, etc., in a 61 page searchable PDF.

[YuriP]

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

hope champion will turn to entirely oath based system

I don't expect this in Remaster (the changes in PC1 changed how many things works but kept all the classes concepts like for example the Wizards still having schools) but I agree that would be a good opportunity to rewrite the champions to live based on their "honor" codes, instead of nescessarily to be linked to good/evil/law/chaos/holy/unholy.

[The Raven Black]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

The situation of "Pharasman clerics and champions should be extra good at fighting undead, but not better at fighting fiends compared to anything else" seems like a place for bespoke rules for Pharasma. She is, after all, a foundational figure in the setting and there is, IIRC, an ORC God book coming out.

Or maybe Pharasma dies.

[Picaboo32]

With te changes to the Focus pool being always equal to the number of focus spells you have, does the psychic now begins with 3 Focus Points since it knows 3 Amps at 1st level?

[Riddlyn]

Picaboo32 wrote:

With te changes to the Focus pool being always equal to the number of focus spells you have, does the psychic now begins with 3 Focus Points since it knows 3 Amps at 1st level?

No you still start with 2 unless you take a feat that gives you one

[GameDesignerDM]

The Raven Black wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

The situation of "Pharasman clerics and champions should be extra good at fighting undead, but not better at fighting fiends compared to anything else" seems like a place for bespoke rules for Pharasma. She is, after all, a foundational figure in the setting and there is, IIRC, an ORC God book coming out.

Or maybe Pharasma dies.

Pretty sure if she died, the current universe ends.

[The Raven Black]

GameDesignerDM wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

The situation of "Pharasman clerics and champions should be extra good at fighting undead, but not better at fighting fiends compared to anything else" seems like a place for bespoke rules for Pharasma. She is, after all, a foundational figure in the setting and there is, IIRC, an ORC God book coming out.

Or maybe Pharasma dies.

Pretty sure if she died, the current universe ends.

Lost Omens : nothing is sure anymore.

[Calliope5431]

Prophecy is broken! Nobody knows what will happen then!

It's all in the old "Three Fears of Pharasma" windsong testaments article.

[PossibleCabbage]

I put low odds on Pharasma being the one who bites it in the War for the Immortals. It's possible, but about as likely as like Desna or Iomedae. Like one of the things about Pharasma is that she's easily the most powerful god, but is not particularly active because of her responsibility to be a neutral arbiter in cosmic matters. I'm genuinely unsure about what stories "Pharasma stops doing what she does" opens up, in part because her bureaucratic apparatus will just continue to function in her absence.

I don't really even think "mods are asleep, let's have the Holy and Unholy go to war" is a thing you set up with Pharasma being out of the picture, since I'm not sure she'd mind if they did that anyway. Her role in that relationship is mostly that she's someone both sides trust implicitly which is useful insofar as the factions prefer to avoid direct confrontation.

[Sibelius Eos Owm]

I hope killing Pharamsa wouldn't be seen as a way to scramble the afterlife to introduce a higher commonality of reincarnation for other cultures... I would much rather see reincarnation added with a move more like, "it looked like it basically didn't happen bit when we zoomed in on a part of the setting where it was a bigger deal, we learned that there was a whole apparatus for it that hadn't been touched on before" rather than "we heard you asked to add chocolate chips so we threw out all these delicious peanut butter cookies you liked first to make only chocolate chip instead of combining them".

...

For an unrelated matter, I kind of hope we get some of our champion codes back to the way they were when the final version comes out. Maybe the new way of champions will be so that it doesn't make sense any more to make their anathema and their code the same thing, but one of the things that appeals to me about champions is having that list of "shall not allow innocents harm; shall not violate personal freedoms; shall not countenance tyranny - in that order".

Could be the new champion will be restructured in such a way that such a list is baked into a different part of the text (for example, might not need "no innocents come to harm" clause for holy champions if holy sanctification implies it by default), but I'd like to keep some kind of code mechanic in champions where there's a clear "this line I don't cross" even when it's a line that was probably never going to be crossed in a normal adventure anyway (like harming innocents)

[PossibleCabbage]

Pharasma's already entirely compatible with reincarnationist and ancestor worshiping cultures. The means by which mortals forestall judgement are just left mysterious. It does, after all, make no difference to her whether your essence becomes part of the outer planes immediately after you pass or after a million karmic cycles after which you have finally gained enlightenment or after no living being knows your name. She's largely hands off because she might be the most patient thing in the universe.

I fully expect the Player Core 2 Champion class to be very different than the currently existing champion. It's just that the errata issues a patch to allow the current rules to serve in the meantime. The Kludge to "if your deity allowed champions before, they still do" is not exactly elegant and ideally in the final rules you will be able to have Champions of every deity, even the more neutral ones. Probably "Holy", "Unholy", and "Your God's Thing" could be the basic three flavors. After all, even if Pharasma is out of the picture we're still going to have to wonder about Champions of Gozreh.

[Sibelius Eos Owm]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

Pharasma's already entirely compatible with reincarnationist and ancestor worshiping cultures. The means by which mortals forestall judgement are just left mysterious. It does, after all, make no difference to her whether your essence becomes part of the outer planes immediately after you pass or after a million karmic cycles after which you have finally gained enlightenment or after no living being knows your name. She's largely hands off because she might be the most patient thing in the universe.

Oh for sure I know reincarnation is a Thing in the Pathfinder universe, what with sangpotshi and manasupatras; it's just that so far the only explicit canon I know on it is that souls sometimes are sent to the Lake to be offered another go-round, which seems a lot more of an exception than an explanation for what happens in reincarnation-centric cultures...

Them again, on a closer reading I note that it says "souls free of deeds that might remove agency", not "souls who didn't have an alignment", which kind of seems like a weird way of saying don't worry evil souls still get punished in a reincarnation scheme, but I'll grant that this exception is slightly less exceptional than I remembered it being. I would love to see the Lake of Mortal Reflections being developed to have more of a role in the sangpotshi conception of the afterlife rather than seeming like a weird niche exception to the normal state of affairs with judgement and final destinations.

[Gorgo Primus]

I just noticed the Edicts and Anathema for some gods in PC1 and GMC are different than each other in some cases. I’m assuming PC1’s are the correct ones and they just missed it for this errata pass.

The big example I’ve found being Lamashtu’s now demanding you indoctrinate others and not changing what makes you different (pc1) vs indoctrinating children and refusing to cure mental illnesses (gmc and crb).

[Nezuyo]

Runnetib wrote:

So, if I'm reading it correctly, Paladins are perfectly okay with lying now?

Well except for Paladins tied to gods that still have lying as their own Anathema, such as Erastil and Sarenrae, yes.

Like that change, makes it more based on the god then the type of Champion you are.

[Josh Klingerman]

I'm not sure where else to post this, but I've noticed a few things that seem to have been missed in being retired.
I checked the Pathfinder FAQ and Character Options and couldn't find them in either place, but it's possible I missed something..

From LO Character Guide, the Arcane & Ornate Tattoo Human Feats both depend on spell schools. Arcane Tattoo seems like it would be functional but is borderline.

From LO Pathfinder Society Guide, the Dweomercat Cub familiar has a similar dependency on being targeted by spells of specific schools.

[Calliope5431]

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

Pharasma's already entirely compatible with reincarnationist and ancestor worshiping cultures. The means by which mortals forestall judgement are just left mysterious. It does, after all, make no difference to her whether your essence becomes part of the outer planes immediately after you pass or after a million karmic cycles after which you have finally gained enlightenment or after no living being knows your name. She's largely hands off because she might be the most patient thing in the universe.

Oh for sure I know reincarnation is a Thing in the Pathfinder universe, what with sangpotshi and manasupatras; it's just that so far the only explicit canon I know on it is that souls sometimes are sent to the Lake to be offered another go-round, which seems a lot more of an exception than an explanation for what happens in reincarnation-centric cultures...

Them again, on a closer reading I note that it says "souls free of deeds that might remove agency", not "souls who didn't have an alignment", which kind of seems like a weird way of saying don't worry evil souls still get punished in a reincarnation scheme, but I'll grant that this exception is slightly less exceptional than I remembered it being. I would love to see the Lake of Mortal Reflections being developed to have more of a role in the sangpotshi conception of the afterlife rather than seeming like a weird niche exception to the normal state of affairs with judgement and final destinations.

Yeah honestly no idea. Personally, I feel like the Cycle of Souls already IS a sort of reincarnation. In that it's not exactly unheard-of for souls to spend time in perdition or paradise for a while (and by "a while" I mean "eons") in Hindu or Buddhist teachings before eventually re-entering the cycle. But I'm not sure if the devs based the Cycle of Souls off of those reincarnation-centric faiths or if it's just a sort of happy coincidence.

And mileage may vary based on religious tradition as well, of course!

[Fuzzy-Wuzzy]

Josh Klingerman wrote:

I'm not sure where else to post this, but I've noticed a few things that seem to have been missed in being retired.

I checked the Pathfinder FAQ and Character Options and couldn't find them in either place, but it's possible I missed something..

From LO Character Guide, the Arcane & Ornate Tattoo Human Feats both depend on spell schools. Arcane Tattoo seems like it would be functional but is borderline.

From LO Pathfinder Society Guide, the Dweomercat Cub familiar has a similar dependency on being targeted by spells of specific schools.

Good catches! I suggest posting the Character Guide errata in the Pathfinder Remaster Errata Submission thread. It's not "official," but we know the devs look over the boards for things like this and it's highly visible. The PFS erratum is probably better off in the PFS-specific forum.

[Squark]

Can we get guidance on which pre-remaster spells should have the [Manipulate] and/or [Concentrate] trait added? It feels important since the former is not universal to all remastered spells, and Reactive strike only triggers if the action has the [Manipulate] tag, so spells like Sure Strike no longer trigger Reactive Strike or most similar reactions.

[Cyouni]

Squark wrote:

Can we get guidance on which pre-remaster spells should have the [Manipulate] and/or [Concentrate] trait added? It feels important since the former is not universal to all remastered spells, and Reactive strike only triggers if the action has the [Manipulate] tag, so spells like Sure Strike no longer trigger Reactive Strike or most similar reactions.

I suspect that Manipulate is generally on things that had Somatic, and Concentrate on things with Verbal. I'd have to trace through all of them to find exceptions, though, and see if there's a pattern there.

[Squark]

Cyouni wrote:

Squark wrote:

Can we get guidance on which pre-remaster spells should have the [Manipulate] and/or [Concentrate] trait added? It feels important since the former is not universal to all remastered spells, and Reactive strike only triggers if the action has the [Manipulate] tag, so spells like Sure Strike no longer trigger Reactive Strike or most similar reactions.

I suspect that Manipulate is generally on things that had Somatic, and Concentrate on things with Verbal. I'd have to trace through all of them to find exceptions, though, and see if there's a pattern there.

If I'd looked through the old rules for components, I'd have seen that the traits are effectively nested in the components. So I guess we do have the guidelines.

[Perpdepog]

Squark wrote:

Cyouni wrote:

Squark wrote:

Can we get guidance on which pre-remaster spells should have the [Manipulate] and/or [Concentrate] trait added? It feels important since the former is not universal to all remastered spells, and Reactive strike only triggers if the action has the [Manipulate] tag, so spells like Sure Strike no longer trigger Reactive Strike or most similar reactions.

I suspect that Manipulate is generally on things that had Somatic, and Concentrate on things with Verbal. I'd have to trace through all of them to find exceptions, though, and see if there's a pattern there.

If I'd looked through the old rules for components, I'd have seen that the traits are effectively nested in the components. So I guess we do have the guidelines.

That's correct, and was a reason why Somatic and Verbal were removed. They were effectively an unnecessary layer that promoted confusion.

[YuriP]

Squark wrote:

Cyouni wrote:

Squark wrote:

Can we get guidance on which pre-remaster spells should have the [Manipulate] and/or [Concentrate] trait added? It feels important since the former is not universal to all remastered spells, and Reactive strike only triggers if the action has the [Manipulate] tag, so spells like Sure Strike no longer trigger Reactive Strike or most similar reactions.

I suspect that Manipulate is generally on things that had Somatic, and Concentrate on things with Verbal. I'd have to trace through all of them to find exceptions, though, and see if there's a pattern there.

If I'd looked through the old rules for components, I'd have seen that the traits are effectively nested in the components. So I guess we do have the guidelines.

Source Core Rulebook pg. 303 4.0 - Somatic wrote:

A somatic component is a specific hand movement or gesture that generates a magical nexus. The spell gains the manipulate trait and requires you to make gestures. You can use this component while holding something in your hand, but not if you are restrained or otherwise unable to gesture freely.

Spells that require you to touch the target require a somatic component. You can do so while holding something as long as part of your hand is able to touch the target (even if it’s through a glove or gauntlet).

Source Core Rulebook pg. 303 4.0 - Verbal wrote:

A verbal component is a vocalization of words of power. You must speak them in a strong voice, so it’s hard to conceal that you’re Casting a Spell. The spell gains the concentrate trait. You must be able to speak to provide this component.

If this spell Sure Strike was the True Strike it never triggered reaction like Attack of Opportunity Reactive Strike because it didn't have the manipulate trait.

[Captain Morgan]

Josh Klingerman wrote:

I'm not sure where else to post this, but I've noticed a few things that seem to have been missed in being retired.

I checked the Pathfinder FAQ and Character Options and couldn't find them in either place, but it's possible I missed something..

From LO Character Guide, the Arcane & Ornate Tattoo Human Feats both depend on spell schools. Arcane Tattoo seems like it would be functional but is borderline.

From LO Pathfinder Society Guide, the Dweomercat Cub familiar has a similar dependency on being targeted by spells of specific schools.

For the dweomercat, I'd use spell traditions instead. Assign two school effects to each tradition and then flip a coin to determine which triggers, or look at the traits and make a case by case call.

I don't think subbing in traditions makes sense for the Thassilionian tattoo feats but we will just generally have to wait to see what happens to Runelord stuff.

[gesalt]

Ooh wait a minute. The errata for SoM didn't include Seifter's old forum errata for IRT. That sounds like an all clear on it to me.

[rainzax]

Irt...

[Calliope5431]

rainzax wrote:

Irt...

Inner Radiance Torrent.

The scaling was nerfed by forum post to be 2d4 per level rather than 4d4.

[Xenocrat]

gesalt wrote:

Ooh wait a minute. The errata for SoM didn't include Seifter's old forum errata for IRT. That sounds like an all clear on it to me.

I doubt it. Although the Secrets of Magic (Remaster Compatiblity) errata claims "this errata also includes some corrections from the first printing of the book that are unrelated to the Remaster" the only thing in there that isn't clearly Remaster required/related is finally fixing the Requirement language on Arcane Cascade stance, which was a violation of the basic stance rules. Everything else I can see is an update to comply with specific Remaster stuff.

A real Secrets of Magic errata has never been tried.

[YuriP]

Well with Thunderstrike doing 1d12+1d4 per rank, Inner Radiance Torrent 4d4 doesn't looks like so absurd now.

[Captain Morgan]

YuriP wrote:

Well with Thunderstrike doing 1d12+1d4 per rank, Inner Radiance Torrent 4d4 doesn't looks like so absurd now.

Well Inner Radiance has a host of other things going for it over Thunderstrike, particularly that it is AoE and on spell lists which are otherwise bad at reflex saves.

[MagnusPrime]

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

Quote:

Check out the Errata Updates On The Pathdinder FAQ

Whoops

A lot of classes that get a spell list or list of bonus spells that are no longer in Core do you use the old spell if there's not a Core counterpart?

[Laclale♪]

MagnusPrime wrote:

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

Quote:

Check out the Errata Updates On The Pathdinder FAQ

Whoops

A lot of classes that get a spell list or list of bonus spells that are no longer in Core do you use the old spell if there's not a Core counterpart?

PFS would say yes, except for ones that add part of the spellcasting mod to damage

[Zoken44]

I still want to see them remaster the three rare Patron themes because at least one of them IS available in PFS. My Witch switched his patron from curse to Baba Yaga after completing a specific adventure and purchasing a rebuild.

[Squark]

Zoken44 wrote:

I still want to see them remaster the three rare Patron themes because at least one of them IS available in PFS. My Witch switched his patron from curse to Baba Yaga after completing a specific adventure and purchasing a rebuild.

Are you asking specifically for a bespoke patron ability, or just any patron familliar ability? Because Mosquito witch and Baba Yaga payrons do have guidance on use with the remaster in PFS if you're unaware. Mosquito witch familliars share the Resentment Patron's unique familiar ability, while Baba Yaga witches share the winter patron's unique familliar ability because... Russian winters, I guess?

"If a witch’s patron is Baba Yaga, their familiar gains the Familiar of Freezing Rime ability (page 185). If a witch’s patron is the Mosquito Witch, their familiar gains the Familiar of Ongoing Misery ability (page 184). Should these patrons be reprinted in future products, their familiar abilities will be updated."

Source

Freezing rime is a bit less useful since you don't have the winter patron's speed reduction hex cantrip, but I guess you have your first lesson spell?

[YuriP]

Captain Morgan wrote:

YuriP wrote:

Well with Thunderstrike doing 1d12+1d4 per rank, Inner Radiance Torrent 4d4 doesn't looks like so absurd now.

Well Inner Radiance has a host of other things going for it over Thunderstrike, particularly that it is AoE and on spell lists which are otherwise bad at reflex saves.

I know and agree. My point here is that the reference is now higher.

[Riddlyn]

Are innate spells still tied to Cha for casters?

[Elfteiroh]

Riddlyn wrote:

Are innate spells still tied to Cha for casters?

Yes. You only need one proficiency, but the actual stat modifier used for a specific roll is decided by its source. And the default for innate spells is still CHA.

[Baelor the Bard]

Quick question, and I'm sorry if this has been asked. Are the archetypes in Secrets of Magic and any of the other books getting errata? I think some work without it, like Flexible Caster, but I know Runelord for sure needs it to function since it uses spell schools.

[Errenor]

Baelor the Bard wrote:

Quick question, and I'm sorry if this has been asked. Are the archetypes in Secrets of Magic and any of the other books getting errata? I think some work without it, like Flexible Caster, but I know Runelord for sure needs it to function since it uses spell schools.

Sometime they will. Runelords probably later then others as it needs to be remade almost completely. For now it either doesn't work (as in PFS for new chars) or needs GM's input.

For now I wouldn't expect any errata for other books until next spring.