Someone Living Near Paizo Has the PF2 Books and Is Answering Questions and Posting Photos


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

451 to 500 of 554 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>

Mellok wrote:

Did the lance gain any mounted combat special rules in the full text block, or any other changes to the lance? Is spear crit still weaken 1?

I am interested in a mobility based spear fighter and it looks like using the lance as a 2 handed spear with the option to drop back to a regular spear and shield if defense is needed.

To that end is there a fighter spring attack type feat that would help support the builds mobility and chance to hit?

The playtest's Sudden Charge seems like enough of a mobility booster to me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Voss wrote:

Any overhauls to the ranger? The playtest version (even the final one), seemed be competing for worst possible class iteration.

Apologies if the ranger has come up before, i missed it if it did.

Surely not as bad as the 5th edition Beastmaster Ranger...? ;-p


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mellok wrote:

Did the lance gain any mounted combat special rules in the full text block, or any other changes to the lance? Is spear crit still weaken 1?

I am interested in a mobility based spear fighter and it looks like using the lance as a 2 handed spear with the option to drop back to a regular spear and shield if defense is needed.

To that end is there a fighter spring attack type feat that would help support the builds mobility and chance to hit?

Spring attack? You mean Stride -> Strike -> Stride? Or Sudden Charge -> Stride?

As for a Mobility type feat, Fighter has one that lets you avoid AoOs while you have your shield up. Rogue has one that lets you avoid AoOs when you move up to half your speed in a single Stride.

Spear crit inflicts clumsy 1. Lance is in the spear group and does have special mounted combat rules; a new weapon trait called jousting that, among other things, makes it wieldable in one hand while mounted.

You won't find "to-hit" boons on any of the classes, except the Ranger's reduction of multi attack penalties and the Bard's inspire courage cantrip. Fighter does get Expert proficiency at first level, so they are the best at hitting things.

With that said, if you want to move around a lot I would probably go with Ranger. Ranger and Monk are the two classes that can make two attacks as a single action, giving them the best mobility. Ranger has to do twf for it, but you could do spear + spiked shield for that.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Zapp wrote:
Voss wrote:

Any overhauls to the ranger? The playtest version (even the final one), seemed be competing for worst possible class iteration.

Apologies if the ranger has come up before, i missed it if it did.

Surely not as bad as the 5th edition Beastmaster Ranger...? ;-p

Ranger looks awesome IMO. There are several numbers changes and little tweaks compared to the playtest that end up making a big difference.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
caps wrote:
You won't find "to-hit" boons on any of the classes, except the Ranger's reduction of multi attack penalties and the Bard's inspire courage cantrip. Fighter does get Expert proficiency at first level, so they are the best at hitting things.

The 8th Level Ranger feat that grans their Hunter's Edge to ally(ies) is BONKERS. Because it's 1 action, and there's (as I understand it) no limitation to the number of times you can do it, i.e. grant it to 3 allies.

I haven't actually run the numbers, but I'd argue that's got to be one of the highest DPR buffs in the game. Giving your Giant Instinct Barbarian Friend a Ranger MAP, hue.


Is there anything to support dex melee for classes other than the rogue? It seemed odd to me that there was little reason to make a fighter or ranger that favors dex over strength.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
FaerieLore wrote:
Is there anything to support dex melee for classes other than the rogue? It seemed odd to me that there was little reason to make a fighter or ranger that favors dex over strength.

I assume you mean “melee” fighter or ranger who favours Dex

Strength bonuses to damage seem to have less impact than before because there is no more two handed weapon power attack

So 18 strength and 14 Dex does only 2 more damage than the reverse

Or am I basing this on the assumption that all finesse weapons use Dex to hit (is that a rogue thing)

Dex to damage is held up as the holy grail but it simply did not exist in PF1 for more than half of its life . And then if you look at vigilante they started to take it away again

So I really wouldn’t expect it’s return

*caveat : as mentioned I assume finesse weapons are Dex to hit for everyone as I thought that was the case in the playtest . If not then pretty much all of the above can be discounted ...


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Dex to damage is just, fundamentally, poor design if it becomes widely available. It becomes the optimal choice for most anyone who gets access to it, which is almost certainly why it is Rogue-only at the moment.

Hopefully it stays that way.

Especially with free-hand Fighter being a build with lots of support, I would hope that free-hand Fighter never gets Dex to damage, because that would make any Strength-based free-hand Fighter strictly inferior to Dex-based ones.

Basically I like it being something special that only Rogues can do and I hope it stays that way.


Unicore wrote:
TheGoofyGE3K wrote:
What's the XP equation? That's what I'm dying to know
The XP equation is that it takes 1000 do to level up every level. Or are you asking about how to determine how much XP a creature is worth?

The latter, sorry. How do you figure out how much xp an encounter gives based on the CR of the encounter?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't think we need to give other classes dex to damage. I think they should have something that encourages them to use dex as their melee stat even if they end up dealing a little less damage.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
TheGoofyGE3K wrote:
Unicore wrote:
TheGoofyGE3K wrote:
What's the XP equation? That's what I'm dying to know
The XP equation is that it takes 1000 do to level up every level. Or are you asking about how to determine how much XP a creature is worth?
The latter, sorry. How do you figure out how much xp an encounter gives based on the CR of the encounter?

There's a table in the GMing chapter of the CRB that tells you how much XP each adversary is worth, based on the difference between party level and adversary level. You add that up for each adversary faced, and give that amount to all PCs involved in the encounter (no dividing by number of players). There's an explanation of alterations for party sizes other than 4 (you add/remove adversaries to the combat but don't award additional/less XP), and there's a similar table to work out appropriate XP for hazards.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
FaerieLore wrote:
I don't think we need to give other classes dex to damage. I think they should have something that encourages them to use dex as their melee stat even if they end up dealing a little less damage.

They get more AC and the versatility of being better with ranged weapons

Those are potentially reasonable trade offs especially now precise shot isn’t a requirement to pick up a bow and shoot it ...

Especially if we are taking about 2 or 3 points of damage

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

IIRC Finesse weapons do less damage than equivalent non-Finesse ones. This damage disparity is in addition to the reduced damage coming from not being a STR build. And IIRC it is multiplied on crits and damage-multiplying magic.

Rogues get DEX to damage AND sneak attack to stay competitive.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
FaerieLore wrote:
I don't think we need to give other classes dex to damage. I think they should have something that encourages them to use dex as their melee stat even if they end up dealing a little less damage.

It needs to strike a precarious balance so that it is less good than STR builds but not so bad that no one will take it


3 people marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:
FaerieLore wrote:
I don't think we need to give other classes dex to damage. I think they should have something that encourages them to use dex as their melee stat even if they end up dealing a little less damage.
It needs to strike a precarious balance so that it is less good than STR builds but not so bad that no one will take it

Keep in mind that a 16 or 14 starting stat is really not far behind one that starts at 18 if you boost it every time you get your boosts.

A 16 is behind by +1 for 10 levels and equal for 10 levels. A 14 is behind +2 from 1-4 and behind +1 thereafter.

So a Dexterity build that adds Str to damage isn't struggling as it would in PF1. You just don't need it as much in this system. Dex melee will be fine.

The Exchange

The Raven Black wrote:

IIRC Finesse weapons do less damage than equivalent non-Finesse ones. This damage disparity is in addition to the reduced damage coming from not being a STR build. And IIRC it is multiplied on crits and damage-multiplying magic.

Rogues get DEX to damage AND sneak attack to stay competitive.

I'd wager a guess that a more dex focused fighter would be aiming for multiple hits/ more crits with a finesse weapon thanks to agile


With DEX being the god stat that governs Reflex saves and AC I doubt that we will not see DEX Figthers and Rangers, specially because these two classes can make amazing use of agile weapons.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Why give DEX to damage to Rogues then ?

TBH I would have preferred it not available to anyone rather than Class-gated.


I feel like dex-to-damage is both less necessary and less unbalancing than in the previous edition. After all, you're not likely to add more than 4 damage from a stat for the front half of your career with strength or dex. But this is pretty small compared to what you get from weapon specialization and from damage adding runes like striking or flaming, which are going to be more common now since they don't compete with +1s like they used to.

The Exchange

Also it's probably another factor of balancing since that dex Fighter will always have a higher attack bonus than that Rogue due to their higher proficiencies, enabling more crits.


And perhaps the thought is due to access to medium armour even Dex based fighters might want more strength than a rogue to carry it and offset penalties (perhaps I am wrong here due to Dex caps but I don’t know all the details )

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

My STR-dumping melee combatant will need to be DEX-Rogue then. I wonder how he will compare to more traditional meleists.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Maybe it's ok if only one class gets a nice thing? like just cause Rogues get a nice thing (dex to damage) doesn't mean everyone else should also get access to it, or make them worse at what they do.


The Raven Black wrote:
My STR-dumping melee combatant will need to be DEX-Rogue then. I wonder how he will compare to more traditional meleists.

Assuming Level 1, The rogue uses a D8 weapon for first strike, and an agile (d6) weapon for subsequent strikes, and the Fighter is using a D12 AND flanking (for both) the Rogue is somewhere around 4% to 10% (depending on AC) behind the Fighter in DPR.

Edit: This is all based on the assumption there's a D8 finnese weapon. Also, the Rogue will scale better. Finally once the rogue gets Gang up at 6 they will be able to flank easier than the Fighter, and comparing a flanking Rogue to a non-flanking Fighter, the Rogue is doing more DPR.


The Raven Black wrote:
My STR-dumping melee combatant will need to be DEX-Rogue then. I wonder how he will compare to more traditional meleists.

I played a low-str monk in the playtest and frankly my damage was fine. Difference between starting at 10 str and 18 str without dex to damage is literally 4 points of damage per hit for the first 10 levels- this is not an insurmountable deficit.


The Raven Black wrote:
My STR-dumping melee combatant will need to be DEX-Rogue then. I wonder how he will compare to more traditional meleists.

Ah this is where the hiccup is. Your premier of strength dumping

Dumping shouldn’t really be a thing with the way stats work in this system. Unless you mean strength 10 - which is not dumping because you haven’t reduced it from the base

Dumping was a thing in point buy encouraged you to trade for what you want. My personal peeve was how you got 2 points back for an 8 but this jumped to 4 for a 7. I hate seeing 7s in a guide . I don’t think it was ever made clear enough what a 7 in each stat translated to. But that is kind of separate

Negative strength on a melee character would realistically have to be gnome or halfling and even then you have to really go some to not put at least one boost in strength (in my opinion at least). And at that point you have made a conscious and specific and determined effort to have low strength despite many chances not to

It is a little like the complaint on another thread about alchemist carrying limit that seems based on the 1E idea that you need to dump stats to have good stats elsewhere (which really doesn’t seem true anymore) and, in the case of that discussion, some questionable goals

Dex to damage was never really a thing in pathfinder 1E and in 2E a Dex based character can use agile weapons and have better AC and reflex as a trade

Rogues get sneak attack because they don’t get double slice and higher proficiency (Fighter) or the ranger hunter thing that reduces MAP. Seriously have you seen how low the MAP can get on a ranger with agile gameplay weapons? That seems worth losing a few points of damage for - more chances to hit overall ...

So no, even if you insist on “dumping” strength it doesn’t seem like you need to be a rogue at all


1 person marked this as a favorite.

One thing I'm curious how to make work are the d4 finesse weapons with piles of traits (like the whip, sai, and starknife). Each of these is martial so they don't qualify for the cleric and champion's die boost for simple weapons.

It sees odd to me that a plain old rogue can be a better whip user than a devout Callistrian who gets magic from their goddess.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

They're just bad choices. At best they make the equpment table look like there are more options.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Voss wrote:
They're just bad choices. At best they make the equpment table look like there are more options.

Not necessarily. Depends on the abilities and how you want to use them. Given how damage works now, the difference between a d4 and d6 weapon can easily be as little as a single point even at high levels, and is 4 points of damage as compared to a d6 weapon at absolute most.

The properties may be worth that. Depends on the build and the weapon.


PossibleCabbage wrote:

One thing I'm curious how to make work are the d4 finesse weapons with piles of traits (like the whip, sai, and starknife). Each of these is martial so they don't qualify for the cleric and champion's die boost for simple weapons.

It sees odd to me that a plain old rogue can be a better whip user than a devout Callistrian who gets magic from their goddess.

What is the cleric and champion damage boost?

I heard it mentioned on a twitch but it wasn’t quantified . Example was pharamsa daggers become d6. Is it just one dice up? Or at least 1d6?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

My definition of dumping is basically the opposite of investing. So STR 8.

It is an experiment I did in early PF1 and wish to try in PF2.

Can someone who does not rely on muscles nor offensive casting still be somewhat relevant or even competitive in melee ?

That is my quest.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lanathar wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:

One thing I'm curious how to make work are the d4 finesse weapons with piles of traits (like the whip, sai, and starknife). Each of these is martial so they don't qualify for the cleric and champion's die boost for simple weapons.

It sees odd to me that a plain old rogue can be a better whip user than a devout Callistrian who gets magic from their goddess.

What is the cleric and champion damage boost?

I heard it mentioned on a twitch but it wasn’t quantified . Example was pharamsa daggers become d6. Is it just one dice up? Or at least 1d6?

If they stuck with the playtest, it's a die up, but only for Simple Weapons (which makes them equivalent to martial weapons). Martial Weapons receive no boost at all.


The Raven Black wrote:

My definition of dumping is basically the opposite of investing. So STR 8.

It is an experiment I did in early PF1 and wish to try in PF2.

Can someone who does not rely on muscles nor offensive casting still be somewhat relevant or even competitive in melee ?

That is my quest.

Do you count rogues using dex to damage? Because then definitely.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:

My definition of dumping is basically the opposite of investing. So STR 8.

It is an experiment I did in early PF1 and wish to try in PF2.

Can someone who does not rely on muscles nor offensive casting still be somewhat relevant or even competitive in melee ?

That is my quest.

Well, you need to really 'invest' in not having Str 10 unless you're a Gnome or Halfling. But yeah, Str 8 should work fine on a Rogue from everything we've heard.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Lanathar wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:

One thing I'm curious how to make work are the d4 finesse weapons with piles of traits (like the whip, sai, and starknife). Each of these is martial so they don't qualify for the cleric and champion's die boost for simple weapons.

It sees odd to me that a plain old rogue can be a better whip user than a devout Callistrian who gets magic from their goddess.

What is the cleric and champion damage boost?

I heard it mentioned on a twitch but it wasn’t quantified . Example was pharamsa daggers become d6. Is it just one dice up? Or at least 1d6?

Somewhat both : most are one dice up.

Unarmed strikes improve to d6 if below.

And yes it only works for Simple favored weapons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It depends, even Rogues with Finesse Striker don't want to dump STR because of bulk, the weapons and armor alone would take a considerable amount.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kyrone wrote:
It depends, even Rogues with Finesse Striker don't want to dump STR because of bulk, the weapons and armor alone would take a considerable amount.

Eh. Studded Leather is 1, a Rapier is 1, and an Adventurer's Pack is (according to Mark Seifter) 1. That's 3 Bulk, total. Now, you do want more stuff than that...but how much more, really? Thieve's Tools are L as are a dagger as a backup weapon, and most of the other stuff you'll want (and you can have a lot of L stuff before it equals one Bulk). I mean, maybe a shortbow for a total of 4 Bulk?

That's going fairly minimalist, but it seems doable.


Lanathar wrote:


Or am I basing this on the assumption that all finesse weapons use Dex to hit (is that a rogue thing)

All finesse weapons are dex *or* strength to hit. Only rogues may get dex to damage, and only one of the rogue rackets, at that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Kyrone wrote:
It depends, even Rogues with Finesse Striker don't want to dump STR because of bulk, the weapons and armor alone would take a considerable amount.

Eh. Studded Leather is 1, a Rapier is 1, and an Adventurer's Pack is (according to Mark Seifter) 1. That's 3 Bulk, total. Now, you do want more stuff than that...but how much more, really? Thieve's Tools are L as are a dagger as a backup weapon, and most of the other stuff you'll want (and you can have a lot of L stuff before it equals one Bulk). I mean, maybe a shortbow for a total of 4 Bulk?

That's going fairly minimalist, but it seems doable.

It does seem weird that the iconic rogue weapon these days is a rapier. It's only a good weapon if you need reach, have space, and want to keep one hand open. A throat-slitting rogue would be better off with a dagger, and a 'weapon in both hands' rogue would benefit from a longsword (the two handed variety, similar to a pathfinder bastard sword). Really only a swashbuckling character specifically benefits from a rapier.


Gonna give asking these questions one last try...

How does the Sorcerer compare to the playtest?

What direction did they go with the fey bloodline granted spells and focus spells? I'd like to convert my 1e fey bloodline character to 2e, but in the playtest they lost a lot of their enchantment ability.

Lastly, does anyone know if harrow cards made it into the CRB?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
sherlock1701 wrote:
It does seem weird that the iconic rogue weapon these days is a rapier.

I figure the shortsword (which in Golarion really is just a really big knife) is a better choice in a lot of cases. Difference is you're giving up Deadly d8, and disarm for agile and versatile S. I have found agile is pretty important, and the rapier is really the canonical example of a finesse weapon which is not agile.

I'd probably use a rapier on a rogue if I could manage a main-gauche or other agile, parry weapon in the other hand though.

Liberty's Edge

Bardic Dave wrote:
ikarinokami wrote:
Lanathar wrote:
On elemental bloodline / primal spells - is there any way to play a water power focused caster? Or would their powers be based off of ice like the old elemental bloodline ?
Water is specially the damage type not ice now.
Am I understanding you correctly that water is its own damage type now? Interesting!

So if you are a sorcerer with the elemental bloodline can you use spells from all four elements?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Joe Hex wrote:

Gonna give asking these questions one last try...

How does the Sorcerer compare to the playtest?

What direction did they go with the fey bloodline granted spells and focus spells? I'd like to convert my 1e fey bloodline character to 2e, but in the playtest they lost a lot of their enchantment ability.

Lastly, does anyone know if harrow cards made it into the CRB?

Fey bloodline is still primal tradition. Two of their bloodline spells have the Enchantment tag and the third has the illusion tag.

I don't play many spellcasters, and I only skimmed over the spell lists, so take this with a grain of salt:
At higher levels Primal tradition doesnn't have a lot of enchantment spells.
However, the Fey bloodline grants quite a few enchantment spells over 9 levels.
Occult seems the most enchantment-focused tradition. Divine has enchantment spells that seem more like buffs and debuffs (along the lines of bless and bane) and command type spells.

I do not see harrow cards in the appendix; that doesn't mean they're not in the book.


Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Grimmzorch wrote:
Bardic Dave wrote:
ikarinokami wrote:
Lanathar wrote:
On elemental bloodline / primal spells - is there any way to play a water power focused caster? Or would their powers be based off of ice like the old elemental bloodline ?
Water is specially the damage type not ice now.
Am I understanding you correctly that water is its own damage type now? Interesting!
So if you are a sorcerer with the elemental bloodline can you use spells from all four elements?

I believe so. However, some of the granted spells (like produce flame or burning hands) are modified to do damage of your element type instead of the type specified in the spell.

But I don't think water is its own damage type. For this effect, water, earth, and air all do bludgeoning damage.


Another sorc question - are some of the focus spells, the ones with durations, 10 minutes or longer? With sorc not having to do anything specific to get focus back they would pretty much be constant at the cost of having one less focus.


caps wrote:
Joe Hex wrote:

Gonna give asking these questions one last try...

How does the Sorcerer compare to the playtest?

What direction did they go with the fey bloodline granted spells and focus spells? I'd like to convert my 1e fey bloodline character to 2e, but in the playtest they lost a lot of their enchantment ability.

Lastly, does anyone know if harrow cards made it into the CRB?

Fey bloodline is still primal tradition. Two of their bloodline spells have the Enchantment tag and the third has the illusion tag.

I don't play many spellcasters, and I only skimmed over the spell lists, so take this with a grain of salt:
At higher levels Primal tradition doesnn't have a lot of enchantment spells.
However, the Fey bloodline grants quite a few enchantment spells over 9 levels.
Occult seems the most enchantment-focused tradition. Divine has enchantment spells that seem more like buffs and debuffs (along the lines of bless and bane) and command type spells.

I do not see harrow cards in the appendix; that doesn't mean they're not in the book.

Thanks caps! I appreciate the info!


Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Gaulin wrote:
Another sorc question - are some of the focus spells, the ones with durations, 10 minutes or longer? With sorc not having to do anything specific to get focus back they would pretty much be constant at the cost of having one less focus.

The third Fey bloodline power has a duration of 10 minutes. I see at least one bloodline power that can be heightened to 10 minutes. Most of them last for 1 minute or less, or are instantaneous.


caps wrote:
Gaulin wrote:
Another sorc question - are some of the focus spells, the ones with durations, 10 minutes or longer? With sorc not having to do anything specific to get focus back they would pretty much be constant at the cost of having one less focus.
The third Fey bloodline power has a duration of 10 minutes. I see at least one bloodline power that can be heightened to 10 minutes. Most of them last for 1 minute or less, or are instantaneous.

Thanks for answering our questions! Here's another one for you: did the spell flame blade make it into the CRB? It wasn't in the Playtest.


Joe Hex wrote:
caps wrote:
Joe Hex wrote:

Gonna give asking these questions one last try...

How does the Sorcerer compare to the playtest?

What direction did they go with the fey bloodline granted spells and focus spells? I'd like to convert my 1e fey bloodline character to 2e, but in the playtest they lost a lot of their enchantment ability.

Lastly, does anyone know if harrow cards made it into the CRB?

Fey bloodline is still primal tradition. Two of their bloodline spells have the Enchantment tag and the third has the illusion tag.

I don't play many spellcasters, and I only skimmed over the spell lists, so take this with a grain of salt:
At higher levels Primal tradition doesnn't have a lot of enchantment spells.
However, the Fey bloodline grants quite a few enchantment spells over 9 levels.
Occult seems the most enchantment-focused tradition. Divine has enchantment spells that seem more like buffs and debuffs (along the lines of bless and bane) and command type spells.

I do not see harrow cards in the appendix; that doesn't mean they're not in the book.

Thanks caps! I appreciate the info!

We also saw this from the #MyPathfinderSpoilers:

51. Fey Caller Druid Feat 8
You have learned some of the tricks the fey use to bend primal magic toward illusion and trickery. Add illusory disguise, illusory object, illusory scene, and veil to your spell list as primal spells.

I dunno if sorcerers got that in class too, but it seems like something they should get down the road, and they can always multiclass into druid. This feat would come online late, but getting a bunch of prepared spell slots for buff and utility is awesome on the sorcerer so they can cover those bases while keeping their spell known primed for combat. Of course, with their charisma focus, they can also easily multiclass into bard, who get the most mental spell list in the game.

I also don't know that I agree they were lacking for enchantment. 6 of their 10 bloodline spells were enchantment or illusion. That's especially relevant when you consider a single spell like Charm heightened is basically the equivalent of knowing 3-4 spells in PF1. (Side note: Primal casters really should be able to Charm animals before 4th level spells, I hope that got fixed.) In fact, one of my players abandoned a concept for a fey sorcerer because her bloodline spells were too heavy on enchantment and she wasn't comfortable with violating the minds and autonomy of others.


Captain Morgan wrote:
Joe Hex wrote:
caps wrote:
Joe Hex wrote:

Gonna give asking these questions one last try...

How does the Sorcerer compare to the playtest?

What direction did they go with the fey bloodline granted spells and focus spells? I'd like to convert my 1e fey bloodline character to 2e, but in the playtest they lost a lot of their enchantment ability.

Lastly, does anyone know if harrow cards made it into the CRB?

Fey bloodline is still primal tradition. Two of their bloodline spells have the Enchantment tag and the third has the illusion tag.

I don't play many spellcasters, and I only skimmed over the spell lists, so take this with a grain of salt:
At higher levels Primal tradition doesnn't have a lot of enchantment spells.
However, the Fey bloodline grants quite a few enchantment spells over 9 levels.
Occult seems the most enchantment-focused tradition. Divine has enchantment spells that seem more like buffs and debuffs (along the lines of bless and bane) and command type spells.

I do not see harrow cards in the appendix; that doesn't mean they're not in the book.

Thanks caps! I appreciate the info!

We also saw this from the #MyPathfinderSpoilers:

51. Fey Caller Druid Feat 8
You have learned some of the tricks the fey use to bend primal magic toward illusion and trickery. Add illusory disguise, illusory object, illusory scene, and veil to your spell list as primal spells.

I dunno if sorcerers got that in class too, but it seems like something they should get down the road, and they can always multiclass into druid. This feat would come online late, but getting a bunch of prepared spell slots for buff and utility is awesome on the sorcerer so they can cover those bases while keeping their spell known primed for combat. Of course, with their charisma focus, they can also easily multiclass into bard, who get the most mental spell list in the game.

I also don't know that I agree they were lacking for enchantment. 6 of their 10...

I guess the big difference between 1e and 2e for the fey bloodline, is the save DCs in 1e vs their enchantment spells were very high. They were on par with enchantment school wizards and mesmerists. I am however very glad the bloodline getting the primal spell list. As long as the bloodline feels suitability "fey", I'm happy.

451 to 500 of 554 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Someone Living Near Paizo Has the PF2 Books and Is Answering Questions and Posting Photos All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.