| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yup. I think people often forget that most of the stuff in PF2 was done on purpose.
Yes there are some requests in this thread for things that were clearly a design decision and aren't going to change.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yup. I think people often forget that most of the stuff in PF2 was done on purpose.Yes there are some requests in this thread for things that were clearly a design decision and aren't going to change.
While some of the requests are unlikely, there are plenty of things that people knew would never happen that... did end up happening, and ultimately the only way to affect change is to try. Even if the odds are long, trying to see the game improved is a reasonable endeavor.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On side note for those who think that fighter is overpowered in your opinion what nerf he should receive to be in line with other Martials?
I think fighters should get a different weapon proficiency boost. Start trained. Level 3 goes to expert. Level 9 master. Level 15 legendary. But what will the fighter have to stand out? AOO at level 1 is huge. An extra stack with no MAP. No one else gets that. It gets triggered all the time. That alone ticks fighter above martial with no additional boost.
One question: the classes that weren't mentioned in any book, of this new remastered version, (which I still haven't swallowed, but anyway...), can we consider that they are "perfect" as they are? I don't want to start with a Thaum for example and in a few months have to remake the character because a "remastered Thaum" came out...
One question: the classes that weren't mentioned in any book, of this new remastered version, (which I still haven't swallowed, but anyway...), can we consider that they are "perfect" as they are? I don't want to start with a Thaum for example and in a few months have to remake the character because a "remastered Thaum" came out...
There maybe eventual Erratas to those classes down the line, but those would be like minor changes or clarifications. TBH most of the changes in the remaster will be pretty minor, except for the four mentioned I think. And from my understanding you can still use the old versions just fine.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Changes to the classes from "Guns and Gears", "Secrets of Magic", and "Dark Archive" are pretty much going to be on the order of "normal errata" whenever those books get that.
But the thing is that the Remastered rules don't invalidate any of the previous rules. There will assuredly be characters that can't be made exactly the same under the remastered rules, but you can continue to play those characters without changing them.
Ok,thanks.This reassures me more, especially in relation to our GM...
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are lots of little things I hope they tune up for core and there is of course the issue with caster accuracy being abysmal which I'd like to see changed but my "one big thing" is to open advanced weapons up to the other classes in a usable way. It is very weird that an entire section of the armaments in this game are effectively restricted to a single class (fighter) or ancestry (tengu). Being -2 to hit is never going to be worth it and other than a certain recently released sword from taldor, none of the advanced weapons would even be spectacular because you need to give up a feat to get them.
I think Athletics is so good cause its the only strength skill is a poor design decision. Designers, even Paizo ones make mistakes.
Dividing Athletics into 2 skills to give a second strength skill is a better outcome. Athletics lumps a lot of different abilities into 1 skill, grappling, tripping, climbing, swimming, jumping is a lot of base skill uses and ones that can come up often. Not sure any other skill has quite as many as Athletics has. Its the whole reason dex to damage is a bad design choice - too many eggs in 1 basket makes that basket too good and all or nothing. Imagine if Arcana, Religion, Occult and Nature were combined into 1 skill called 'Academics.' Those skills outside of classes that need it to learn spells are really just used for Recall Knowledge (without skill feat support for extra options anyway).
But then again I am not a huge fan of skills being 100% tied to attributes but I understand the choice for simplistic game reasons.
Strength right now is a god stat in a very combat centric game. Yes I know not everything is combat but over half the rules are about it so that makes it a combat focused system by default.
I really hate the logic presented earlier that Thief getting dex to damage frees up their secondary stats for other things... except the thief skills Thievery and Stealth are already Dex based. Also having your identity determined by secondary options rather than your primary one being how your identity is defined is bad. Like saying the fighter's +2 proficiency advantage on weapons isn't their defining feature, its that they can pick up archetypes without affecting their raw potential. Try doing that with an alchemist... its bad logic.
Wizards... are boring in their current incarnation. Spell preparation and a wide selection of spells is available to a lot of classes and to be honest anyone who is willing to invest in scrolls can have the same advantage for trivial gold costs for most utility spells at later levels. Arcane sorcerers are objectively better.
Thesis are kind of uninteresting. I was super excited for the concept but... well... meh. Arcane schools are... uninteresting. Wizard if it is going to be so vanilla needs an mathematical edge over other spell casters similar to fighter to make it a compelling choice. I would rather they had focus spells that worked like meta magic - heighten a spell from a low level spell slot on the fly would be great, or energy damage substitution for the cost of an action and focus spells. I would love if School or Thesis based focus spells that brought back old school meta magic concepts became a thing. That would truly make wizards feel like the master of spell casting.
Witches... controversial opinion but I would like witches to get more interplay with talismans as well as potions - they could be easily buffed with some limited talisman or spell heart kind of things free per day. Also they need some real compelling patron mechanics, its cool that you can role play patrons and whatever but when it barely has any mechanical support it will be skipped at a lot of tables.
Witches could also use focus spells to buff their familiar - that would also be cool a familiar suddenly changing form. A focus spell to allow familiars to change abilities on the fly would be great. A class ability 1/day that allows the familiar to be like an eidolon for a minute would be mint and really make me love my familiar.
What does "like an eidolon" mean in this context?
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's a small thing, but opening up Rogue weapons is such a massive relief. Genuinely one of the changes I'm most excited about.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe that, apart from the significant changes Paizo already mentioned, all other changes will be minor errata at best. They will not change the overall balance of the system and the classes at all.
These threads have turned into an interesting wish list of things to maybe consider for a new edition.
But it is not what Remastered will be and Paizo has been very clear about this from the start.
So, I expect a lot of posters clamoring for big changes they really want to be extremely disappointed when Remastered will be here.
I think if any of the other "non-core" classes needed to be significantly revised due to the remaster, they would have just put them in Core 2. That seems in part some of the logic of what classes are going in what book.
Have they said what Ruffian Rogues will get with these proficiency changes?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have they said what Ruffian Rogues will get with these proficiency changes?
Not yet, but I can't imagine it'll change that much. The main benefit still is getting Sneak Attack on all simple weapons, and getting crit specialization on simple up-to-d8 weapons at Level 1. You also still get trained in Medium armor and get full armor progression with it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ruffian rogues might get Sneak Attack on martial weapons, too. We'll have to wait and see, but we could be looking at rogues with katanas pretty soon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It would be neat but right now I expect zero changes to ruffians.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Balance-wise, there's not a ton of reason to keep them stuck with just simple weapons. They're already limited by damage die, after all. It'd feel a little weird, too, to give all rogues a martial proficiency boost without giving ruffians a boost alongside it.
I wouldn't be surprised if they leave it the same, but I also wouldn't be surprised if they change it. It would be really cool to finally get to play a rogue with a bastard sword, though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A rogue with a katana that works with sneak attack is my dream.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What does "like an eidolon" mean in this context?
I just mean it goes big can participate in combat as something more than a normal summon as their is higher risk - shared life pool, consequences if familiar dies. They wouldn't get act together or the other cool summoner stuff.
Right now Witch is a confused mess.
It has Hex cantrips which compare poorly with composition cantrips - maybe if they gave no save like composition cantrips they would be better or the buff provided was to allies in 30ft.
They get decent and somewhat powerful hex focus spells probably the best part of the class right now.
They get great familiars but familiars are kind of a bag of weak tricks so it makes it hard to care about them all that much and can be a huge liability.
And they get a patron.
Of these 3 things only familiars get class feat support and mostly just I can get more weak abilities on an already situational chassis. I don't count gaining additional 'lessons' as it is just pick a focus spell that has no real mechanical link back to the patron.
I would like stronger mechanical support for their patron and a link to their familiar. Patron choice also granting some unique buff or power to the familiar would be cool, it needs to be something tied to the familiar and hopefully not a familiar ability any other class can get. I would like to see feats that grant the familiar cool abilities not just pick more from this generic list or you can get an imp familiar faster (which is really just having more familiar abilities earlier).
I would be happy for witches to get only 2 spells per level if we buffed the other aspects of the class. I actually think the psychic proved that two spells per level with cool focus spell stuff is a viable option. Witches getting cool powerful focus hexes useable more often, cool familiar abilities that can make them temporarily good in combat would be good.
Talisman options similar or maybe slightly better than thaumaturge or maybe rather than talisman things similar to spellhearts to buff their spells each day in cool ways would be good.
Right now witch feats are weird and kind of all over the shop. Cool witch nails and hair are ok but they are martial abilities on a caster chassis which never works well. Lessons which feel mandatory to take and the usual feats to increase focus point regeneration which are mandatory on a class so heavily dependent on focus hexes.
The witch is a mess of cool ideas but with little ability to realise any of them well.
Bard and Druid seem to probably be subject to the least amount of work, but what minor stuff do y'all think they'll get? Bards are probably also getting nominal weapon proficiencies, muses made to be more iconic from each other; Druids might get some more interesting focus spells in their core Orders like Leaf and Animal.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd love more options for non-pet druids. It's a little frustrating that you get stuck with a companion if you want to be animal- or plant-themed. Besides that, fey-themed and vermin-themed druid orders would be nice!
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bard and Druid seem to probably be subject to the least amount of work, but what minor stuff do y'all think they'll get? Bards are probably also getting nominal weapon proficiencies, muses made to be more iconic from each other; Druids might get some more interesting focus spells in their core Orders like Leaf and Animal.
I'd actually be surprised if Bards got expanded weapon proficiencies, since there's a subclass focused around that. Why would Bard be the only full caster with martial weapon proficiency baked in when they're already so good? Rogue being brought up to the level of other martials makes sense, as does Wizard being brought up to the level of other casters.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bard and Druid seem to probably be subject to the least amount of work, but what minor stuff do y'all think they'll get? Bards are probably also getting nominal weapon proficiencies, muses made to be more iconic from each other; Druids might get some more interesting focus spells in their core Orders like Leaf and Animal.
Bards could honestly stand to be tuned down a little.
Drop their starting perception to trained, drop their starting number of trained skills to 2+int to match other full casters.
Every other full casters has a total of 4+int (except Wizards who are 3+Int for some dumb reason, and Oracles who mystery gives them an additional one), where as the bard is 6+int.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bard and Druid seem to probably be subject to the least amount of work, but what minor stuff do y'all think they'll get? Bards are probably also getting nominal weapon proficiencies, muses made to be more iconic from each other; Druids might get some more interesting focus spells in their core Orders like Leaf and Animal.I'd actually be surprised if Bards got expanded weapon proficiencies, since there's a subclass focused around that. Why would Bard be the only full caster with martial weapon proficiency baked in when they're already so good? Rogue being brought up to the level of other martials makes sense, as does Wizard being brought up to the level of other casters.
I should have specified, when I said "nominal" I was intending to mean "Simple only" instead of "Simple + Martial" but I guess that was not clear.
Drop their starting perception to trained, drop their starting number of trained skills to 2+int to match other full casters.
Every other full casters has a total of 4+int (except Wizards who are 3+Int for some dumb reason, and Oracles who mystery gives them an additional one), where as the bard is 6+int.
I mean, they were more skilly in PF1e compared to other casters, so I can see them maintaining that in PF2e; but I 100% agree on perception getting tanked, expert perception on a caster is a liiiiiiitle much. I could see 5+Int skills with Trained in perc/light armor/saves that aren't Will as starter proficiencies and that'd be pretty reasonable from my standpoint, although them keeping 8+Con HP is also a little outlier I think could use looking at
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also don't expect any classes to get significant nerfs, like taking away Bard's weapons and skills. Is it more balanced? Sure. Is it a worthwhile change? No. Very few people will get more enjoyment from it, but it would make everyone playing a Bard decide on what skills to ditch and maybe change weapons. It'd seriously sour the mood of the updates, and is a lot more impactful than nerfing a spell or feat.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO, they could just shove shortsword, longsword, shortbow, and whip into the simple weapons category. These are not exactly overpowered weapons (or weapons with overly may traits).
I honestly can't tell if you're joking. Shortsword and shortbow are solidly competitive martial weapons for appropriate builds, and longsword is 1d8, which simply is not available at simple without two hands.
I'd love more options for non-pet druids. It's a little frustrating that you get stuck with a companion if you want to be animal- or plant-themed. Besides that, fey-themed and vermin-themed druid orders would be nice!
I have a character waiting for whenever my group picks up Blood Lords that has a swamp motif. If we're doing themed stuff, that'd be pretty neat.
Bard and Druid seem to probably be subject to the least amount of work, but what minor stuff do y'all think they'll get? Bards are probably also getting nominal weapon proficiencies, muses made to be more iconic from each other; Druids might get some more interesting focus spells in their core Orders like Leaf and Animal.I'd actually be surprised if Bards got expanded weapon proficiencies, since there's a subclass focused around that. Why would Bard be the only full caster with martial weapon proficiency baked in when they're already so good? Rogue being brought up to the level of other martials makes sense, as does Wizard being brought up to the level of other casters.
Its obviously too late now but I would have like to see the bard as a bounded caster with investigator level weapon, armour, skill and skill feat proficiencies and increases. That would give it a lot more of the jack of all trades feel while still giving magic.
Be easy to make a skald class archetype then just changing the composition cantrip to be rage based and a few feats based off it similar to the martial muse ones but more rage flavoured.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean it's not something to 'not agree' on.. it's just how the game is designed.
... Shortbows and shortswords are also pretty firmly best in class options for their respective categories, if they aren't good enough to be martial weapons I'm not sure what would be.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, simple weapons are very carefully balanced to be weaker than martial weapons. It's part of the game's core math: Martial weapons aren't just a lateral upgrade, they're flat-out better weapons, because getting access to martial weapons is supposed to be a big deal.
If you want to house rule it, I recommend reducing those weapons' damage dice/traits accordingly (or, as others have suggested, simply allowing martial weapons to be wielded as simple weapons with according penalties). Honestly, it'd be nice to have a classic sword in play for simple weapon wielders. But yeah, house ruling without paying attention to core balance decisions is likely to cause unforeseen complications.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If they spend their time nerfing class rather than fixing unclear rules I would be pretty fried.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If they spend their time nerfing class rather than fixing unclear rules I would be pretty fried.
Agreed it is clarifying rules, then fixing things that don't work, then looking again at the unpopular sub classes and working out why they are unpopular.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
No class should be nerfed. Some classes should be improved.
The Bard is going to stay a full caster.
It seems like a lot of Paizo errata are focused on nerfing. I would prefer buffing weak than nerfing strong.
To be fair it's not just Pathfinder, most systems I've seen are much quicker to serve up nerfs rather than buffs when issuing errata.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As far as I remember the biggest nerf we've seen in an errata pass has been rule clarifications like for familiar valet+independant or independant + mounted sprite. (Or the poor poor necromancer summoning zombies with only 1 action)
Maybe if we are talking about non-class specific nerfs that damage die drop for the Flickmace to a d6.
Its funny to see comments at the top of this page noting some of the changes people are suggesting are more for an entire edition change (or atleast a whole new rulebook) rather then an errata pass then right after that calls for the bard to get completely reworked, changed, and nerfed.
We spent 4 years arguing certain classes should be buffed with a portion arguing "nah those things are just how things are meant to be and you can't buff them. But when its asking to nerf the options that are clearly too much its bad?
Make up your mind. Is the game supposed to be balanced and those clearly weak options need to be buffed, or are you going to nerf the clearly too good parts that strong arming the system?
Speaking of other things to nerf. If shield are meant to not block damage, then nerf sturdy shields. Also nerf bows, those are also clearly way too strong when other ranged weapons deal vastly less damage for more work.
What are you even talking about? No one asked for nerfs to bards or any other class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What are you even talking about? No one asked for nerfs to bards or any other class.We spent 4 years arguing certain classes should be buffed with a portion arguing "nah those things are just how things are meant to be and you can't buff them. But when its asking to nerf the options that are clearly too much its bad?
Make up your mind. Is the game supposed to be balanced and those clearly weak options need to be buffed, or are you going to nerf the clearly too good parts that strong arming the system?
Speaking of other things to nerf. If shield are meant to not block damage, then nerf sturdy shields. Also nerf bows, those are also clearly way too strong when other ranged weapons deal vastly less damage for more work.
People were asking for bard buffs. I countered with bard nerfs.
Of course no one is asking for nerfs, they got what they wanted: A strong at will support with full caster power and knowledge.
Just like no one asks for fighter nerfs because they are getting what they want: a strong damage class that can steal whatever they want from other classes and likely do it better.
I've played nearly every class. Most of them are fine. Fighter is strong, but super boring.
Bard is good at what a bard does, but also super boring.
Sometimes you're too good at doing the same thing over and over again, so you don't do much else.
Druid is the most fun for me. Extremely versatile in nearly every area of the game with great class builds.
Rogue isn't bad either for versatility.
Every class is balanced for the most part. Some are boring and could use some work to better fulfill the class fantasy.
Wizard casting is fine. Their feats are super boring and their focus spells are not in line with how you play the particular school.
Witch was made with too many NPC feats that provide no useful combat power. Thematically the witch is cool, but you can't use much of the thematic feats in play. Their focus spells are pretty weak, even the higher level ones. Their hex cantrips are very uneven and too limited.