| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We don't dare to dream here.
Being realistic, most classes besides Witch, Alchemist, Oracle and Champion aren't getting any mayor changes, if they even get changed at all.
Obviously, all aligment-related feats will be changed for all classes (Champion, Cleric, Sorcerer and Oracle have a few of those, I believe), and all divine spellcasters will most likely be buffed due to aligment being changed to a Holy/Unholy kind of deal.
The focus spell change will probably be that all sources that give you a focus spell also give you a focus point and that you can always do another activity while refocusing as long as you are not in an encounter.
I also expect a lot of clean up work regarding confusing writing, ambiguous rules and misleading flavor text.
As for classes with "very minor changes" I expect (besides the proficiency changes we already know about):
- Investigator gets to forgo the INT to hit and the precision damage for a normal attack roll against the target of DaS.
- Either Swashbuckler gets a feature similar to Singular Expertise that slighly boosts damage dealt with finesse weapons or gets the flat damage boost from panache increased. The class gets the current bonus to skill that Panache gives at all times only for checks that would give Panache on a success, doubled when you have Panache.
- Since Staves are getting changed, I can see Staff Wizard getting some changes as well. Impossible to know since they could do a million things with them.
As for the classes we know are getting mayor changes:
- I'd like to say that I believe Alchemist will get martial proficiency, but seeing how reluctant Paizo has been to that in previous errata, I'm not sure. If that ends up being the case, I expect the subclasses to have way more impact in making the current alchemical items stronger via class features rather than feats. I also expect the class to have less room to make items outside their field of expertise. Finally, I also expect some sort of "alchemical cantrips" of sorts at level 1 that are worse than current lvl 1 consumables (like a damaging ranged attack for bombers, d6 fists for mutagenists, a weak poison for Toxicologist and the ability to do medicine stuff at a very short range for Chirurgeon)
- Champion causes will change a lot, but the reactions will be more or less the same. My guess is that they will add to each god what causes are compatible with them instead of the compatible alignments. Tenets of good and evil will disappear with alignment, leaving specific, additional edicts and anathemas based on the champion's cause on top of the deities ones. This may pave the way for more causes, but I wouldn't count on it.
- Oracles will probably get Divine Access as a starting class feature (with the option of making the choice again with what the current feat is) and have all curses slighly balanced between them.
- Witches will most likely get 8 HP per level. Niche cantrips will be slighly changed for the better, the ones that are usable now will stay the same. Familiars will get a comprehensive list of things they are supposedly able to do and witch familiars will get special abilities on top of that. Most feats that are not focus spells will be revamped since most of them are hot garbage.
So what's your take on this?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, almost all this seems plausible to me, although I don't really see them restricting cross-specialty alchemy. Everything else, yeah.
I had my own thought for a plausible possibility while reading through, although actually guessing what specific changes Paizo will make is hard.
I could see Witch replacing their default focus spell with one that allows them to swap one of their familiar's abilities during the day. Need Mittens to have thumbs to deal with the doors, but speech after to report back? Covered. Seems like an easy way to make them stand out from other classes with a familiar, and easy to lock as class-exclusive. Too specific for me to actually think that's what Paizo is doing, though.
Proficiency changes?
Wizards get Simple and rogues get martial.
- Since Staves are getting changed, I can see Staff Wizard getting some changes as well. Impossible to know since they could do a million things with them.Staves are being changed? I hadn't heard about this before.
Yeah, I don't recall any staff news.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Proficiency changes?Wizards get Simple and rogues get martial.
Yeah, I don't recall any staff news.- Since Staves are getting changed, I can see Staff Wizard getting some changes as well. Impossible to know since they could do a million things with them.Staves are being changed? I hadn't heard about this before.
From the GM Core's product description:
"Fully integrated errata from the first 4 years of Pathfinder Second Edition, including improvements to staves and talismans and all-new apex magic items!"
Proficiency changes?Wizards get Simple and rogues get martial.
Yeah, I don't recall any staff news.- Since Staves are getting changed, I can see Staff Wizard getting some changes as well. Impossible to know since they could do a million things with them.Staves are being changed? I hadn't heard about this before.From the GM Core's product description:
"Fully integrated errata from the first 4 years of Pathfinder Second Edition, including improvements to staves and talismans and all-new apex magic items!"
Hmmm... *look at page* Well, it sure does. I recalled talismans and apex items but totally forgot the staves. Maybe I didn't look at the page myself.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I’d love to see class kits like battle oracle/warrior muse change proficiency tracks for martial combat, but doubt it will happen. User-friendly staves would be awesome; I missed that too.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alchemists losing access in some capacity to non-research field options would be really strange and really bad, basically a complete 180 on how the class is designed right now.
I'm wondering what that'll mean though. Was there some problem with staves? The closest I knew to any kind of issue was concerning how a staff's charges and spells were handled with multiclass spellcasters.
Maybe it's about Creating a Personal Staff? That's got some jank to it. Or maybe making it clear how they work with wave casters?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's some fiddly rules bits with staves that are a little wonky.
A strict reading says if somebody has prepared it. only they can cast from it, but there's not actually a restriction if nobody has prepared it.
Meaning its extra cantrip(s) are available to anybody, unless its prepared.
---
As graystone mentioned I think there may still be issues with wavecasters (Even if we all generally agree they work, otherwise half the staff magus feats don't make sense, the rules could use a little polishing there.)
Also staves being so static is also sad when new spells come out that would fit well.
In my dream they become a little more flexible. What if all staves got a keyword, kinda like the personal staff rules, and you could retrain what spell was in a staff? (Within the keyword)
I’d love to see class kits like battle oracle/warrior muse change proficiency tracks for martial combat, but doubt it will happen. User-friendly staves would be awesome; I missed that too.Pretty sure that if martial Bard is going to happen, it will come as a class archetype later down the line. Not so sure for Warpriest and Battle Oracle, but I believe that if the Warpriest was about to be changed they would have said so already.
Alchemists losing access in some capacity to non-research field options would be really strange and really bad, basically a complete 180 on how the class is designed right now.
Paizo has been taken baby steps with the alchemist buffs since forever, so I don't expect martial proficiency to come with no tradeoffs.
I was thinking of something like some key features being locked behind subclass and losing the ability to use quick alchemy outside the research field as a possible outcome.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hope they clarify Hardness and how it compares to resistance. Comes up quite a bit for a variety of items like shields, magic walls, animated objects, and corrosive runes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hope they clarify Hardness and how it compares to resistance. Comes up quite a bit for a variety of items like shields, magic walls, animated objects, and corrosive runes.
On the GM side of things, the 2 things I'm looking forward the most are a better explained section for resistances, weaknesses and specially hardness and a clear and consistent way of dealing with persistent illusions (some things ask for perception, others for will). This is a little bit off-topic, though.
Oh, also RK stuff.
With alignment gone, I hope that leads to champion causes that are about the cause and concept and it about what fits an alignment slot
Maybe a cause about seeking knowledge and preserving it. Could be really fitting for Nethys + a warrior who protects knowledge could be fun
Or a cause about being glorious and a shining beacon of hope, and always striving to be a famous and legendary hero, something that, if we are using old alignment terms, would fit any good alignment or arguably even neutral ones since someone might make an oath to become a legendary hero but might not be an actual good person and is just in it for the fame, or something like that lol
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Being realistic is almost as being pessimistic based in what we get in last 4 erratas.
The focus spell change will probably be that all sources that give you a focus spell also give you a focus point and that you can always do another activity while refocusing as long as you are not in an encounter.
They probably just make the refocus mechanic clearer. Based on previous changes, Paizo's designers leaned much more towards nerfs than improvements. What I hope here realistically is just that they make refocus a full 10 minute activity in the same way that Treat Wounds is. Preventing you from doing anything else while refocusing.
I also expect a lot of clean up work regarding confusing writing, ambiguous rules and misleading flavor text.
I agree except from flavor text. I don't think they will make a clear division between flavor and mechanics with so little time (less than a year).
- Investigator gets to forgo the INT to hit and the precision damage for a normal attack roll against the target of DaS.
Not even that. If too much will allow you to give up DaS against the same target (make the roll completely optional).
- Either Swashbuckler gets a feature similar to Singular Expertise that slighly boosts damage dealt with finesse weapons or gets the flat damage boost from panache increased. The class gets the current bonus to skill that Panache gives at all times only for checks that would give Panache on a success, doubled when you have Panache.
I doubt. If a lot will increase 1 damage per die of precision damage. Perhaps they increase the precision die to d8 just like they did with the investigator when placing the Insight Coffee.
I really wish they would also remove the cap on not being able to use more attack actions after Finisher. But the most I can hope for in this regard, if they're going to do it at all, is to swap the attack for Strike, as they did with the battle forms, to at least free up the maneuvers.- Since Staves are getting changed, I can see Staff Wizard getting some changes as well. Impossible to know since they could do a million things with them.
I just expect nerfs here.
The rules for defining staff in SoM are different from the staves found in CRB. Define that the staves "must share the trait you chose for the staff", many staves in the CRB do not respect this and can end up being nerfed to respect. Except maybe the Staff of the Magi. If there are improvements here it will be the addition of new staves.Now about the classes.
First I will stick to commenting only on the classes that will come in PC1 that are probably already well defined:
Bard: Nothing.
Cleric: Removal of alighment damage feats.
Druid: Not directly to it but maybe removal of must size grow rules from companions and battle forms.
Fighter: Nothing
Ranger: Nothing
Rogue: Nothing
Witch: Little improvement into hexes power to become more like surface Unique Psi Cantrips.
Wizard: Nothing
Maybe it's too much hope on my part. But I really have some hope that they make flexible casting the default. The reason is what I've already said in other topics, it's not something difficult to implement because it already exists, it's just optional. And since in PC1 there is only the spontaneous caster are bards, leaving all the other casters trapped in the Vancian conjuration can scare and even scare off new players who already find it strange and complain about the PF2 casters and who, by chance, start with PC1 and practically only see prepared spellcasters with such a restricted spellcasting mechanic (even if we say that in previous books this is not the case, and that PC2 will have the remaining spontaneous spellcasters, the first impression is the one that lasts, new players will be more scared with the spellcasting than those who it already comes nowadays, many won't even buy PC2 after reading PC1 and not liking it).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Being realistic is almost as being pessimistic based in what we get in last 4 erratas.
I don't particularly agree. From memory alone I think I've only truly disliked 2 of the errata changes thus far, the Finesse + maneuver trait change and spells with 24h duration going to "until next daily preps" duration.
Like sure, the game would benefit from deeper changes than what we got in the existing errata, but they have been mostly positive changes thus far.