Refocus change appreciation thread

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

Riddlyn wrote:

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

if refocus are changed there is no reason it take 30 minute for 3 point

conflux spell are mostly worthless

dimensional assault maybe the only exception for that recharge plus movement

I don't know the action compression on the sparkling targe conflux spell is pretty good. In 1 turn I can strike, raise a shield, recharge my spellstrike and cast a 2 action spell. Seems at least decent

magus get emergency targe at level 4

possibility of shield block doesn't worth a focus point that can be used on attack focus spell

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

Sanityfaerie wrote:

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

if refocus are changed there is no reason it take 30 minute for 3 point

conflux spell are mostly worthless

dimensional assault maybe the only exception for that recharge plus movement

- Thunderous Strike: attack plus a bit of extra damage plus possible knockdown plus recharge spellstrike

- Dimensional Assault: moce plus attack plus recharge spellstrike

- Shielding Strike: raise shield plus strike plus recharge spellstrike

- Shooting star: admittedly kind of situational/meh

- Spinning Staff: make two attacks, plus recharge spellstrike

Three of the five are giving you three actions for the price of one. The other two are giving you two actions, one of which is buffed, for the price of one. That's not any kind of "mostly worthless".

for the follow-ons:
- Force Fang (lvl 2): Guaranteed auto-damage that doesn't care about saves or hit rolls, plus recharge spellstrike
- Hasted Assault (lvl 14): gain quickened (strikes only) for a minute and recharge spellstrike.

Force Fang is a bit situational but potentially quite useful. Hasted Assault is just straight up good stuff. Again, "mostly worthless" would not describe.

if those attack are used at the same turn as spellstrike

they are useless crit fish at -8 or -10

if those attack are used at the turn after spellstrike than the action saved are worthless because the at same turn spellstrike will be at -4 or worse

magus doesn't have the action economy to true strike spellstrike every turn until level 20

so the focus spell that turn recharge action tax into something else are worthless

force fang does 11 damage at level 11

hardly noticeable and doesn't worth focus point that can be used on attack focus spell

[Crouza]

One thing that's been curious to see is people decrying how this makes Nova's a thing now, how Nova's are gonna be as bad as they are in 5e, and for me I just don't see it.

The only people going super hard into Nova-casting their focus spells are going to be Psychics and Psychic multiclasses. But that seems more of the case that the psychic archetype gives you really strong first level benefits vs all focus spells being a source of increased nova damage.

Even tempest surge isn't all that impressive when you break it down. It does 2d12 at level 3, pretty strong. But shocking grasp does 2d12 at level 1, and deals 1d4 persistent damage vs the 1 persistent damage. Tempest surge is a weaker shocking grasp, with a tradeoff being that you are basically benefiting from a reach spell on that shocking grasp at all times.

It's stronger than a cantrips, but weaker than a leveled spell, which is where focus point stuff should be. So I personally don't see it as a big deal if the Tempest Druid who is trying to play their blaster druid fantasy has a means of casting weakened-shocking-grasp in combat multiple times a day. It means the fantasy is able to be fulfilled, and outside of stuff like psychic amped imaginary weapon or guidance which are vast outliers, the change seems fine.

And the reason I state this is that I do not like the current trend I am seeing with some DM's, who originally came from 5e, seeing this change and getting war flashbacks. The amount of people I've seen decry that "This is sorcadin/coffeelock in PF 2e now" is absurd. Equally so is the people who are using this as some kind of justification to a balance arms race of "Oh so casters are getting a buff? Well now I'm only going to have Severe and Extreme encounters to balance this change", and they proclaim that proudly as if this is in any way warranted or balanced. Like 3 nerfed shocking grasp is suddenly going to make a group of PL+1 or a PL+2 enemy a joke and its now time to use PL+3's as common dungeon fodder.

I really am looking forward to the changes but the kneejerk reaction of "this is too strong" is something that's making me roll my eyes a bit.

[Dubious Scholar]

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

Riddlyn wrote:

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

if refocus are changed there is no reason it take 30 minute for 3 point

conflux spell are mostly worthless

dimensional assault maybe the only exception for that recharge plus movement

I don't know the action compression on the sparkling targe conflux spell is pretty good. In 1 turn I can strike, raise a shield, recharge my spellstrike and cast a 2 action spell. Seems at least decent

magus get emergency targe at level 4

possibility of shield block doesn't worth a focus point that can be used on attack focus spell

Attack of Opportunity is available to them at 6 and is a better use of your reaction.

One note about Force Fang is that it doesn't increase MAP. All the initial conflux spells involve an Attack action, so they hit issues using them in the same turn as Spellstrike. (This is also true of the later hasted assault, but as that's a buff you aren't going to do it turn after turn)

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

Dubious Scholar wrote:

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

Riddlyn wrote:

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

if refocus are changed there is no reason it take 30 minute for 3 point

conflux spell are mostly worthless

dimensional assault maybe the only exception for that recharge plus movement

I don't know the action compression on the sparkling targe conflux spell is pretty good. In 1 turn I can strike, raise a shield, recharge my spellstrike and cast a 2 action spell. Seems at least decent

magus get emergency targe at level 4

possibility of shield block doesn't worth a focus point that can be used on attack focus spell

Attack of Opportunity is available to them at 6 and is a better use of your reaction.

One note about Force Fang is that it doesn't increase MAP. All the initial conflux spells involve an Attack action, so they hit issues using them in the same turn as Spellstrike. (This is also true of the later hasted assault, but as that's a buff you aren't going to do it turn after turn)

aoo are most valuable for class that actually have decent damage per hit

dex magus normal strike have damage even lower than monk with their dex d8 stance and no 10 percent higher hit and crit of fighter

and melee magus need reach more than most other martial so dex magus will be using weapon like whip

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

Crouza wrote:

One thing that's been curious to see is people decrying how this makes Nova's a thing now, how Nova's are gonna be as bad as they are in 5e, and for me I just don't see it.

The only people going super hard into Nova-casting their focus spells are going to be Psychics and Psychic multiclasses. But that seems more of the case that the psychic archetype gives you really strong first level benefits vs all focus spells being a source of increased nova damage.

Even tempest surge isn't all that impressive when you break it down. It does 2d12 at level 3, pretty strong. But shocking grasp does 2d12 at level 1, and deals 1d4 persistent damage vs the 1 persistent damage. Tempest surge is a weaker shocking grasp, with a tradeoff being that you are basically benefiting from a reach spell on that shocking grasp at all times.

It's stronger than a cantrips, but weaker than a leveled spell, which is where focus point stuff should be. So I personally don't see it as a big deal if the Tempest Druid who is trying to play their blaster druid fantasy has a means of casting weakened-shocking-grasp in combat multiple times a day. It means the fantasy is able to be fulfilled, and outside of stuff like psychic amped imaginary weapon or guidance which are vast outliers, the change seems fine.

And the reason I state this is that I do not like the current trend I am seeing with some DM's, who originally came from 5e, seeing this change and getting war flashbacks. The amount of people I've seen decry that "This is sorcadin/coffeelock in PF 2e now" is absurd. Equally so is the people who are using this as some kind of justification to a balance arms race of "Oh so casters are getting a buff? Well now I'm only going to have Severe and Extreme encounters to balance this change", and they proclaim that proudly as if this is in any way warranted or balanced. Like 3 nerfed shocking grasp is suddenly going to make a group of PL+1 or a PL+2 enemy a joke and its now time to use PL+3's as common dungeon fodder.

I really am looking...

tempest surge are strongest because they can be cast as reaction knockback on fail and apply clumsy on fail

caster will be crit by melee enemy many time before every enemy are super oversized and have 20 reach

so it will be used a lot

[Crouza]

Where on tempest surge does it say you can cast it on a reaction? And what knock back are you talking about?

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

Crouza wrote:

Where on tempest surge does it say you can cast it on a reaction? And what knock back are you talking about?

https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=329

[Sanityfaerie]

So... I'm hearing that the thesis here is that martials being able to take a second attack in a round is worthless.

That's sufficiently divorced from reality that I don't particularly feel that engaging with it further is going to help anything.

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

second attack after spellstrike at -10 have 10 percent damage of normal first attack

for magus that is about 2 to 7 percent of spellstrike with spell slot or focus spell

that is before applying true strike on spellstrike

so the separation of reality depend on definition of worthless

[Crouza]

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

Crouza wrote:

Where on tempest surge does it say you can cast it on a reaction? And what knock back are you talking about?

https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=329

That's not Tempest Surge, that's a feat that empowers and augments tempest surge. It's good to bring up because it does increase the power of that spell, but at the same time treating it as if that were part of Tempest Surge by default is disingenuous. Someone could just not take Storm's Retribution, and thus make calculating Tempest Surge be off because they aren't using it as a reaction to being crit.

[The Raven Black]

I have not met any enemy in all of my PFS games with 20 reach IIRC.

[gesalt]

At least as far as magus goes, it's conflux spells are impressively low value compared to using cleric or psychic focus spells. However, since we will be able to spend focus points freely, there's definitely value in just blowing all three focus spells on two spellstrikes and a recharge.

I might actually need to reevaluate melee magus with that in mind. Being able to consistently achieve a smooth action economy over 3-4 turns makes them much more stable. A 4 turn rotation of [stride+spell/attack, spellstrike, focus recharge+whatever, spellstrike] isn't half bad.

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

gesalt wrote:

At least as far as magus goes, it's conflux spells are impressively low value compared to using cleric or psychic focus spells. However, since we will be able to spend focus points freely, there's definitely value in just blowing all three focus spells on two spellstrikes and a recharge.

I might actually need to reevaluate melee magus with that in mind. Being able to consistently achieve a smooth action economy over 3-4 turns makes them much more stable. A 4 turn rotation of [stride+spell/attack, spellstrike, focus recharge+whatever, spellstrike] isn't half bad.

melee magus need haste to reposition more than focus spell recharge

or feat like reactive pursuit keep pace and relentless stalker

mostly depend on cooporation caster teammate

[Riddlyn]

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

Sanityfaerie wrote:

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

if refocus are changed there is no reason it take 30 minute for 3 point

conflux spell are mostly worthless

dimensional assault maybe the only exception for that recharge plus movement

- Thunderous Strike: attack plus a bit of extra damage plus possible knockdown plus recharge spellstrike

- Dimensional Assault: move plus attack plus recharge spellstrike

- Shielding Strike: raise shield plus strike plus recharge spellstrike

- Shooting star: admittedly kind of situational/meh

- Spinning Staff: make two attacks, plus recharge spellstrike

Three of the five are giving you three actions for the price of one. The other two are giving you two actions, one of which is buffed, for the price of one. That's not any kind of "mostly worthless".

for the follow-ons:
- Force Fang (lvl 2): Guaranteed auto-damage that doesn't care about saves or hit rolls, plus recharge spellstrike
- Hasted Assault (lvl 14): gain quickened (strikes only) for a minute and recharge spellstrike.

Force Fang is a bit situational but potentially quite useful. Hasted Assault is just straight up good stuff. Again, "mostly worthless" would not describe.

if those attack are used at the same turn as spellstrike

they are useless crit fish at -8 or -10

if those attack are used at the turn after spellstrike than the action saved are worthless because the at same turn spellstrike will be at -4 or worse

magus doesn't have the action economy to true strike spellstrike every turn until level 20

so the focus spell that turn recharge action tax into something else are worthless

force fang does 11 damage at level 11

hardly noticeable and doesn't worth focus point that can be used on attack focus spell

Some of us are ok not spellstriking every turn. With a sparkling targe I like taking 5 effective actions on some turns. I'm worried more about the AC bonus than shield blocking most of the time. Which means at 4th when I can take reactive targe it smooths out a bit more. From then on I can spellstrike damn near every turn but I wouldn't want to. And I've played 3 magi and I've never gone dex primary and while AoO's are a thing I've only had to worry about it once and it's really not that hard to work around.

[Squiggit]

Sanityfaerie wrote:

Alternately, if you're not playing turret-magus, you could actually use your conflux spells.

This is an odd defense because even if you want to use conflux spells you still benefit from improved refocusing.

It's especially good in that scenario because now you don't have to choose between your conflux spell and any other focus spell, you can do both.

[Sanityfaerie]

Squiggit wrote:

Sanityfaerie wrote:

Alternately, if you're not playing turret-magus, you could actually use your conflux spells.

This is an odd defense because even if you want to use conflux spells you still benefit from improved refocusing.

It's especially good in that scenario because now you don't have to choose between your conflux spell and any other focus spell, you can do both.

It was more the suggestion that you were playing Starlit Span with Psychic archetype... which is honestly a kind of degenerate build, and one that's already built around its focus spells to a much greater degree than almost anyone else - and, in particular, cares about second and third castings more than basically everyone else. So... perhaps it is more important for the very specific build that you've put yourself in than it is for the rest of the world?

I mean, I don't know for sure. Maybe you aren't playing a Starlit Span Magus with a Psychic archetype between the levels of 4 and 11 inclusive. I could be wrong.

[Squiggit]

Right because there's no reason I'd ever want more focus points as a laughing shadow or inexorable iron magus. Don't really get that take. Like I said, being able to teleport with dimensional assault without losing my ability to cast force fang or imaginary weapon (or whatever other focus spell you have) or a second dimensional assault is significant even on its own.

There are some builds that are already focus point efficient (wild druids) or don't have a focus spell worth casting often (many wizards, clerics with certain domains, some sorcerers) that aren't going to really benefit from this change (although a lot of spells are changing so maybe they will after the fact) but... getting two or three focus spells per combat isn't really this hyper-niche mechanic that only "degenerate" characters can take advantage of that you're making it out to be. Magus was just a good example because it illustrates how significantly it can change the way you even build the character.

[Sanityfaerie]

Squiggit wrote:

There are some builds that are already focus point efficient (wild druids) or don't have a focus spell worth casting often (many wizards, clerics with certain domains, some sorcerers) that aren't going to really benefit from this change (although a lot of spells are changing so maybe they will after the fact) but... getting two or three focus spells per combat isn't really this hyper-niche mechanic that only "degenerate" characters can take advantage of that you're making it out to be. Magus was just a good example because it illustrates how significantly it can change the way you even build the character.

No. I'm not making it out to be that at all. I'm saying that it's not as big a deal as you're making it out to be, which is a different thing entirely. I'm saying that there are a number of conditionals and caveats that go on top of that "getting two or three focus spells per combat" that mean that it's not quite that simple, and that there's not but so many builds who really care. I'm not saying that it's meaningless, just that it's not....

No, wait. Let me check ground truth.

Okay. Going back through the thread history... most of what you've said has been pretty reasonable. The only thing that I strongly disagree with is this:

Squiggit wrote:

Being stuck with a terrible focus spell isn't a "meaningful choice", it's a huge hit to your playability, usually with no positive outcome for it

Asserting "huge hit to your playability" is a pretty severe statement, and I really don't think it's warranted in this case. The kind of change we're talking about here isn't "huge hit to your playability" levels even if you couldn't fix it trivially by just grabbing an archetype. I've been unconsciously using that as the benchmark for how strongly you were asserting that this mattered, and I realize now that that might not have been fair.

[WWHsmackdown]

Psychic is my favorite class in the game now. Not sure how to feel about all classes rubbing shoulders and possibly exceeding it's refocus shtick as soon as tier 1 of play. It's not the biggest part of it's identity to lose, but I think everything between the buffed/amped cantrips, the unleash psyche, and the two point refocus makes up for having 2 slots instead of three. It doesn't seem like non core are getting the remaster treatment so I hope the other unique aspects of their kit can pull enough weight when everyone can refocus like them so early.

[Sanityfaerie]

WWHsmackdown wrote:

Psychic is my favorite class in the game now. Not sure how to feel about all classes rubbing shoulders and possibly exceeding it's refocus shtick as soon as tier 1 of play. It's not the biggest part of it's identity to lose, but I think everything between the buffed/amped cantrips, the unleash psyche, and the two point refocus makes up for having 2 slots instead of three. It doesn't seem like non core are getting the remaster treatment so I hope the other unique aspects of their kit can pull enough weight when everyone can refocus like them so early.

I think we're pretty much inherently going to see some errata coming out of this one even for non-core classes. If nothing else, the refocus feats are going to need to change. I'm not going to say for sure that the Psychic is getting a compensatory bump through that channel, but I wouldn't be surprised.

[WWHsmackdown]

Sanityfaerie wrote:

WWHsmackdown wrote:

Psychic is my favorite class in the game now. Not sure how to feel about all classes rubbing shoulders and possibly exceeding it's refocus shtick as soon as tier 1 of play. It's not the biggest part of it's identity to lose, but I think everything between the buffed/amped cantrips, the unleash psyche, and the two point refocus makes up for having 2 slots instead of three. It doesn't seem like non core are getting the remaster treatment so I hope the other unique aspects of their kit can pull enough weight when everyone can refocus like them so early.

I think we're pretty much inherently going to see some errata coming out of this one even for non-core classes. If nothing else, the refocus feats are going to need to change. I'm not going to say for sure that the Psychic is getting a compensatory bump through that channel, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Good point. Honestly, psychic is fun/interesting enough to survive that slight stealth nerf unscathed but every class with refocus feats is getting some change so they might as well throw a bone while they're there. Slight tangent, but James Case making the psychic has me very excited to see the witch rework. Whether it's strong or weak I know it'll at least be INTERESTING compared to the current one

[Themetricsystem]

A general question that I don't expect lead designers/devs to answer but want to ask anyhow:

Why exactly is Focus as a system only something that ever interfaces with Magic and Spells specifically and is not used as a generic resource to fuel other cool "limited use" Abilities? To me the whole idea of Focus evokes the concept of spending your... well, focus, to concentrate on doing something with more intent and care and not "Yeah, this is a way to cast special Spells." Why couldn't there be an Ability that ISN'T a Focus Spell such as "Focused Aim" that is accessible to Ranged Weapon users/specialists to cool things to your Ranged Attack such as making Critical Hits easier or for a Loremaster to spend Focus on gaining additional bonuses to Recall Knowledge in exchange for thinking really hard about the topic?

[QuidEst]

Themetricsystem wrote:

A general question that I don't expect lead designers/devs to answer but want to ask anyhow:

Why exactly is Focus as a system only something that ever interfaces with Magic and Spells specifically and is not used as a generic resource to fuel other cool "limited use" Abilities? To me the whole idea of Focus evokes the concept of spending your... well, focus, to concentrate on doing something with more intent and care and not "Yeah, this is a way to cast special Spells." Why couldn't there be an Ability that ISN'T a Focus Spell such as "Focused Aim" that is accessible to Ranged Weapon users/specialists to cool things to your Ranged Attack such as making Critical Hits easier or for a Loremaster to spend Focus on gaining additional bonuses to Recall Knowledge in exchange for thinking really hard about the topic?

Everything with a ten minute cooldown is more or less the non-spell version of focus points. Clue In, Helpful Tinkering, Share Senses, basically any form of at-will non-spell healing, and so on.

[NECR0G1ANT]

Themetricsystem wrote:

A general question that I don't expect lead designers/devs to answer but want to ask anyhow:

Why exactly is Focus as a system only something that ever interfaces with Magic and Spells specifically and is not used as a generic resource to fuel other cool "limited use" Abilities? To me the whole idea of Focus evokes the concept of spending your... well, focus, to concentrate on doing something with more intent and care and not "Yeah, this is a way to cast special Spells." Why couldn't there be an Ability that ISN'T a Focus Spell such as "Focused Aim" that is accessible to Ranged Weapon users/specialists to cool things to your Ranged Attack such as making Critical Hits easier or for a Loremaster to spend Focus on gaining additional bonuses to Recall Knowledge in exchange for thinking really hard about the topic?

The reason that martial abilities that are 1/encounter or 1/day are few and far between is that D&D 4E had a unified system for spellcasting and martial exploits and it wasn't popular.

RPG players have a tolerance for Vancian casting for tradition's sake, but Vancian martials never took off.

[Themetricsystem]

I mean, in theory, I suppose the whole chocolate/peanut butter thing for Vancian styled mechanics makes sense on paper but it's pretty safe to say that aversion is overrepresented in discussions because there are very few things that are more popular for many chcolate PCs than spending one to three Class Feats on Spellcaster Dedications or in-Class Feats to get their OWN Focus Spells or Spellcasting equivalent options explicitly to get access to that peanut butter.

They've also broken the mold there for Martial PCs because Monks, Rogues, Barbarians, and Rangers who are decidedly Martial Classes have their own Focus Spells, Innate Spells, or Abilities that function exactly like specific Spells that allow in-class peanut butter harvests. These aren't even Reeses Classes either, they're flat-out straight Hersheys, if we are talking Resses then we would be talking about stuff like Magus or Summoner and time will only tell what kind of sweet the Kineticist will end up being.

I just don't see a reason to stay bolted to the idea that Focus Points should remain a thing that is only useful or core to Characters that are Spellcasters first or otherwise Opt-in for Martials when the system could be used for so much more and even just help wholesale eliminate nearly all of those x/encounter, x/hour, x/day abilities that are clunky and have specific self-enclosed resource tracking, esp when they COULD make at least 2-4 neat and useful general Focus Actions that actually fit the mindscape image of what one thinks of when you hear the word "focus."

IDK, just thoughts I guess, the Remaster has already been shown to be far more than just Errata for the sake of dodging lawyers and is improving on things even moreso than many of the PF1 Unchained alternative options ever did so in my mind I see this as a "room to grow" opportunity as they're already buying a whole new house, why not install in-floor heating for the kids, kinda thing.

It's just not something I've seen much real discussion of as it seems to be taken for granted that this is how it "should be."

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

that is the problem with any class doesn't get focus spell

they will feel obligated to get one through archetype

blessed one are so nice for anyone

because unstable are a separate system everyone with 14 int can just get searing restoration too

best leave the insistence that all focus spell be magical behind and give every class their focus point powered something

[Aristophanes]

Themetricsystem wrote:

I mean, in theory, I suppose the whole chocolate/peanut butter thing for Vancian styled mechanics makes sense on paper but it's pretty safe to say that aversion is overrepresented in discussions because there are very few things that are more popular for many chcolate PCs than spending one to three Class Feats on Spellcaster Dedications or in-Class Feats to get their OWN Focus Spells or Spellcasting equivalent options explicitly to get access to that peanut butter.

They've also broken the mold there for Martial PCs because Monks, Rogues, Barbarians, and Rangers who are decidedly Martial Classes have their own Focus Spells, Innate Spells, or Abilities that function exactly like specific Spells that allow in-class peanut butter harvests. These aren't even Reeses Classes either, they're flat-out straight Hersheys, if we are talking Resses then we would be talking about stuff like Magus or Summoner and time will only tell what kind of sweet the Kineticist will end up being.

I just don't see a reason to stay bolted to the idea that Focus Points should remain a thing that is only useful or core to Characters that are Spellcasters first or otherwise Opt-in for Martials when the system could be used for so much more and even just help wholesale eliminate nearly all of those x/encounter, x/hour, x/day abilities that are clunky and have specific self-enclosed resource tracking, esp when they COULD make at least 2-4 neat and useful general Focus Actions that actually fit the mindscape image of what one thinks of when you hear the word "focus."

IDK, just thoughts I guess, the Remaster has already been shown to be far more than just Errata for the sake of dodging lawyers and is improving on things even moreso than many of the PF1 Unchained alternative options ever did so in my mind I see this as a "room to grow" opportunity as they're already buying a whole new house, why not install in-floor heating for the kids, kinda thing.

It's just not something I've seen much real discussion of as it seems to be taken for...

Dammit Themetricsystem! Now I can't play a Magus or a Summoner! I'm Diabetic!!

[Jacob Jett]

I think inevitably, PF3 (when it arrives years from now) is highly likely to resemble D&D4.

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

Jacob Jett wrote:

I think inevitably, PF3 (when it arrives years from now) is highly likely to resemble D&D4.

hope it would be more like pillar of eternity 2

just with number better fit for ttrpg

[Sanityfaerie]

Jacob Jett wrote:

I think inevitably, PF3 (when it arrives years from now) is highly likely to resemble D&D4.

I find that severely unlikely.

I liked 4th ed. I dug deep in 4th ed. 4th ed was very good at what it did and outright awful at everything else. PF1 was created in response to the flaws in 4th ed, and PF2 was built on a whole lot of lessons learned from PF1. They're not going to turn around and start marching backwards now.

If anything, I'd expect that the step from PF2->PF3 would resemble the move from AD&D 1e to AD&D 2e. Rebuild some of the underlying math and make a few of those structural adjustments that you just can't make while the car is rolling down the road, and wind up with a game that runs smoother but behaves very similarly.

Maybe have a bit less focus on caster vs martial and a bit more space opened for classes that do Other Things. The PF2 launch classes were somewhat constrained by the fact that they didn't have a huge amount of experience with the tight balance and they were pumping out a bunch of classes all at once, so they had to stick pretty close to some pretty specific formula. Going into PF3, I'd expect that the significantly better developed skills and tools there would let them be a bit less rigid in that way.

[Jacob Jett]

I'm not so certain. There's definitely a perceived "balance" along with 1/encounter mechanic-set that the next edition could double down on. IMO, this would provide a three-fold benefit:

1) Make more observable the games mathematical balance points (which some perceive as "balance" in and of itself).

2) Institute a series of feel-goods through better aligning martial and spell-casting classes abilities into broad, @will, 1/encounter, 1/day abilities. (The flaw of D&D4 not being the institution of these things but in retaining the D&D brand for it. Better if they had made a new game and then slowly merged their lines...but that requires the kind of multi-year planning that the average business-person calling the shots doesn't have.)

3) Provide a distinct differentiation point between PF2/PF2.r and PF3. While lagging sales is often the primary cause of a new edition being created, the fact is that sales start to lag because people start to yearn for shiny and new things. This is actually part of GW's sales strategies (beyond the rolling balance issues that their tournament organizers face...). Newness is an important aspect for new editions. And truly, developers and authors like to try out new things too.

So, I would not expect so small an incremental advance as the differences between (A)D&D1 and (A)D&D2--the latter in some ways being more akin to a (A)D&D1.5 version of the former than a true iterative edition.

[The Raven Black]

I expect PF3 to be an improvement on PF2 that will tackle things that Remastered cannot touch because of compatibility issues AND the parts of Remastered that end up not working that well.

It might need revisiting the game's engine, like PF2 did, or not.

[PossibleCabbage]

Jacob Jett wrote:

I think inevitably, PF3 (when it arrives years from now) is highly likely to resemble D&D4.

Doesn't PF2 effectively already resemble D&D 4e? In that the 2nd edition of Pathfinder and the 4th edition of D&D both looked at some of the fundamental problems with the 3rd edition of D&D and its cousins (e.g. Caster/Martial Disparity, High level play is rocket tag, martial classes lacked diverse options, etc.)

It's not like PF2 answered them in exactly the same way, but focus points aren't that different from "encounter powers" and most classes in PF2 do have a subclass choice.

[OrochiFuror]

The reason I got into PF2 is because of all the 4e I saw in it. I think incorporating more of the good ideas from it and getting rid of more out dated things that people think are integral to D20 fantasy (like some of the things the remaster is doing) will only make it better.

We already have many things that I've seen people say they hated in 4e, it's just presented in a way they don't notice it. So hopefully more of that will be on the horizon, both in the remaster and eventually in PF3.

For refocus specifically, I think there's so much focus on how the class that has the best focus spells to achieve its mechanic that all the classes with niche and very low powered focus spells seem to be ignored.
The magus focus spells aren't real spells because they do martial strikes, typical focus spells scale up like spell slots, AKA very poorly. There's lots of these I think should be brought up before the fear of a magus that just works at max effectiveness for 3 rounds puts people off from the change.

[Squiggit]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

It's not like PF2 answered them in exactly the same way, but focus points aren't that different from "encounter powers" and most classes in PF2 do have a subclass choice.

Psionic classes in 4e had almost this exact mechanic. Instead of individual encounter powers that recharge individually you'd have a pool of psi points you'd spend and then recharge by resting.

One of the core gimmicks was at-will powers you could spend those points to upgrade on a per-encounter basis, paired with stronger daily abilities... i.e. literally the PF2 psychic.

What PF2 (and 5e too, honestly) does well is taking a lot of those gamey mechanics that worked well and repackaging them in such a way as to make them appear slightly less game-y than they are. There are lot of similarities though once you get down to the nuts and bolts.

[Gortle]

Jacob Jett wrote:

I think inevitably, PF3 (when it arrives years from now) is highly likely to resemble D&D4.

You'll have to define what you mean by D&D4.

To me I think of forcing everything to be the same structurally with at will, encounter, daily powers. A rejection of spells slots and ranks. Strong gaming elements like the afore mentioned powers plus minions and bosses meaning something mechanically. Everything is selectable feat. A lack options and real combinations. No actual balance because some of the powers were so much stronger than the others - did anyone ever play a fighter and not take Come and Get it?

Sanityfaerie wrote:

4th ed was very good at what it did and outright awful at everything else. PF1 was created in response to the flaws in 4th ed, and PF2 was built on a whole lot of lessons learned from PF1.

I think it is wrong to imply PF1 built much on D&D4. It was more of a reaction and a rejection than anything else.

Yes we do have lots of feats in PFx but beyond that what? The structure in PF2 is the level and action system and is nothing like the structure of D&D4. PF2 is dilberately diverse and non standard in the wording of many of its abilities.

I do expect that there will be a trend of increasing gamist elements in PF3.

[Sanityfaerie]

Gortle wrote:

Sanityfaerie wrote:

4th ed was very good at what it did and outright awful at everything else. PF1 was created in response to the flaws in 4th ed, and PF2 was built on a whole lot of lessons learned from PF1.

I think it is wrong to imply PF1 built much on D&D4. It was more of a reaction and a rejection than anything else.

I wasn't meaning to imply "built on" at all. Indeed, when I said "created in response to the flaws of" I meant "reaction and a rejection".

[Kyle_TheBuilder]

I absolutely love this change and we jump onto it as soon as we heard it will be new RAW in Remaster so no point waiting :).

Immidietly we saw great improvement on lower levels, mostly 1-6 where certain more focus classes/casters got well-needed boost to their core features or just flexibility in general. Mainly:

1. Monk. Being able to have 3xFP/Ki Strikes at level ~4 means they really can Ki Strike almost every round and feats like Elemental Fist and Sacred Ki became much better as they are able to trigger enemy weakness multiple times per combat and giving themselves +1 status bonus to hit. It also opens up combinations of using Ki Strike and still having FPs for WoB, Ki Rush or Student of Perfection Ki Spells etc. Also let's be honest: monk being albe to Ki Strike once/combat was lame as hell...

2. Champion and Monk. This really makes them more "tank" oriented at lower levels than Fighter, having 3x/combat LoH or WoB allows them to really stay there at front line and reduce the pressure of casters to keep them alive.

3. Casters in general, some more than others. Storm Druid being able to toss 3x/combat Tempest Surge is such an awesome blasting option now. Our druid immidietly felt much stronger when it comes to blasting with D12 reflex Focus Spell that can deliver Clumsy 2 on enemy, which encourage teamwork aspect and combos and also decreased the pressure of having Synesthesia being spammed on bosses. Elemental Toss, same, great option for just 1 action etc. Generally casters now have pretty much "resource free" options to use in combt apart from their Cantrips and it's great.

4. Utility. Anything from Heal Animal to Domain Spells like Enduring Might, Veil of Confidence, Perfected Mind, Protector's Sacrifice, Adapt Self etc. has more usage now.

All of that becasue players no longer will clinch to their single FP every combat for "best option" or "most emergency option" and instead they will feel like they can play more with their Focus Spells and have fun to them in combat, isntead of using same over and over again becasue it's best value for that single FP.

The little downsides:

1. Psychic and Champion dedications just got stronger and they were already top 2 archetypes for optimizing builds. Whole main Psychic class feature of having 2 FP recharge will need to be reworked as it's no longer unique thing.

2. We will get little more power creep from Free Archetype. Fighters/Rogues for example will be able to easy get with right Archetypes chosen 3 Focus Points and great Focus Spells by level ~8 which will already boost their powerful chasis. It won't break anything, but still, worth mentioning.

3. Bards got even stronger now being able to do 3x Inspire Heroics per combat as soon as level 8 or easy switching from Lingering to Inspire (or any other way around) since they have enough FPs for that.

[The Raven Black]

The above made me slightly worried for Monks who do not use Ki powers. It now sounds like a suboptimal built whereas it was a perfectly usable version previously.

[Kyle_TheBuilder]

The Raven Black wrote:

The above made me slightly worried for Monks who do not use Ki powers. It now sounds like a suboptimal built whereas it was a perfectly usable version previously.

Well, before taking Ki Feats was suboptimal as you had only 1 FP so it was much better to take feats that work always. It's like saying that you are worried about clerics who won't use their Deities Domain spells. I mean, part of chosing classes with Focus Spells is to use them. Monk was designed around Ki Spells and in my opinion the FP rules before remaster were countering the whole PF2e Monk design.

However, I also disagree with you. A Bo Staff Monk just going for Flurry, Stand Still, Flurry of Manouvers and only Ki Rush/Abundant Step for extra mobility is perfectly fine build for skirmisher. Combine with Tiger Stance for longer Steps or with Tangled Forest for extra control.

However, if you want to make "in-your-face" striker monk then Ki Strike, Sacred Ki/Elementa Fist or Stand Still (dependig on campaign), WoB and Ki Rush from Student (combined with Sky and Heaven Stance and Heaven's Thunder) is perfect for maximizing your striking damage with Ki Strikes (or tankiness with WoB) but you sacrefice control as you are unable to take feats like Flurry of Manouvers/Mixed Manouvers or Stand Still. Not much usage of reaction here as opposed to above so you have to find something for yourself (like Champion reaction for example etc.)

Or combine both for some mixes. A lot of options now.

So in my opinion it's better now as Ki builds are finally viable due to fact that average combat in PF2e is 3-4 rounds. Before that you were better to not take Ki Spells and focus on mundane combat feats. Now you have more options to mix and match Ki spells focus vs manouver focus. A Wolf Drag monk for example won't have much usage of Ki Strikes, but can have of Ki Rush, Abundant Step and WoB.

[The Raven Black]

Kyle_TheBuilder wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

The above made me slightly worried for Monks who do not use Ki powers. It now sounds like a suboptimal built whereas it was a perfectly usable version previously.

Well, before taking Ki Feats was suboptimal as you had only 1 FP so it was much better to take feats that work always. It's like saying that you are worried about clerics who won't use their Deities Domain spells. I mean, part of chosing classes with Focus Spells is to use them. Monk was designed around Ki Spells and in my opinion the FP rules before remaster were countering the whole PF2e Monk design.

However, I also disagree with you. A Bo Staff Monk just going for Flurry, Stand Still, Flurry of Manouvers and only Ki Rush/Abundant Step for extra mobility is perfectly fine build for skirmisher.

However, if you want to make "in-your-face" striker monk then Ki Strike, Sacred Ki, WoB and Perfect Strike from Student (combined with Sky and Heaven Stance) is perfect for maximizing your striking damage with Ki Strikes (or tankiness with WoB) but you sacrefice control as you are unable to take feats like Flurry of Manouvers/Mixed Manouvers or Stand Still.

So in my opinion it's better now as Ki builds are finally viable due to fact that average combat in PF2e is 3-4 rounds. Before that you were better to not take Ki Spells and focus on mundane combat feats.

One of the goals for the PF2 Monk in the playtest was to make non-mystical (ie, no Ki-power) Monk a perfectly fine choice.

Ki-powers were designed from the start to be an option and not a requirement.

So, completely different from Cleric, or even Champion.

[Kyle_TheBuilder]

The Raven Black wrote:

Kyle_TheBuilder wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

The above made me slightly worried for Monks who do not use Ki powers. It now sounds like a suboptimal built whereas it was a perfectly usable version previously.

Well, before taking Ki Feats was suboptimal as you had only 1 FP so it was much better to take feats that work always. It's like saying that you are worried about clerics who won't use their Deities Domain spells. I mean, part of chosing classes with Focus Spells is to use them. Monk was designed around Ki Spells and in my opinion the FP rules before remaster were countering the whole PF2e Monk design.

However, I also disagree with you. A Bo Staff Monk just going for Flurry, Stand Still, Flurry of Manouvers and only Ki Rush/Abundant Step for extra mobility is perfectly fine build for skirmisher.

However, if you want to make "in-your-face" striker monk then Ki Strike, Sacred Ki, WoB and Perfect Strike from Student (combined with Sky and Heaven Stance) is perfect for maximizing your striking damage with Ki Strikes (or tankiness with WoB) but you sacrefice control as you are unable to take feats like Flurry of Manouvers/Mixed Manouvers or Stand Still.

So in my opinion it's better now as Ki builds are finally viable due to fact that average combat in PF2e is 3-4 rounds. Before that you were better to not take Ki Spells and focus on mundane combat feats.

One of the goals for the PF2 Monk in the playtest was to make non-mystical (ie, no Ki-power) Monk a perfectly fine choice.

Ki-powers were designed from the start to be an option and not a requirement.

So, completely different from Cleric, or even Champion.

And I said above, a non-mystical Monk is pefectly fine, you have tons of great feats you have to chose between when you level up Monk. You can't have everything. Stand Still, Mixed Manouvers, Flurry of Manouvers, Stunning Fist, Wolf Drag/Tiger Slash etc. are all great non-Ki feats and you can't have them all and at the same time have Ki Rush, Ki Strike, Sacred Ki/Elemental Fist, Abundant Step and Wholness of Body with Wind Initiate as ki-range option as backup.

You have to pick your poison. Monk has so many good feats now that Ki is viable that it makes me want to play 3 monks in 3 different campaigns now, while before a Ki Strike Monk wouldn't even cross my mind.

Non-mystical Monk is as good as it was. He wasn't nerfed or anything. It's Ki-Monk that's finally good becasue before there was no point in doing Ki focused Monk with pathethic 1 FP/combat. But with 3? That's great now.

[The Raven Black]

I get that Ki-Monk did need a boost. I am merely worried that in a few months people will start saying the non-Ki Monk now needs a boost because the refocus change ended up being too big of a boost for the Ki-Monk.

(Basically the same situation we have now but in reverse)

[Karmagator]

The Raven Black wrote:

The above made me slightly worried for Monks who do not use Ki powers. It now sounds like a suboptimal built whereas it was a perfectly usable version previously.

Supposing that the only change will be what we already know, then that is exactly what would happen, yes. At least the suboptimal part. The offense from Ki Strike and the sustain from Wholeness of Body at the very least are incredible tools to pass up.

On the other hand, non-ki monks are exactly as usable as before. As far as we know their effectiveness in combat should be identical to before, which is to say pretty decent by popular perception. All that changes is our perception of them, as we are presented with something that seems (and probably is) more effective. With the changes coming this late in the game, I think this will cushion the perception shift a lot.

But at the end of the day, yes, it sounds like ki monks will be objectively more optimal. It'll be interesting to see what steps, if any, Paizo will take to limit that shift. Because we can be absolutely sure that they see those problems as well.

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

ki monk need to have their spell dc base on str or dex

cleric ki blast have 4 higher dc than monk

that just doesn't look good for monk

[Kyle_TheBuilder]

Karmagator wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

The above made me slightly worried for Monks who do not use Ki powers. It now sounds like a suboptimal built whereas it was a perfectly usable version previously.

Supposing that the only change will be what we already know, then that is exactly what would happen, yes. At least the suboptimal part. The offense from Ki Strike and the sustain from Wholeness of Body at the very least are incredible tools to pass up.

On the other hand, non-ki monks are exactly as usable as before. As far as we know their effectiveness in combat should be identical to before, which is to say pretty decent by popular perception. All that changes is our perception of them, as we are presented with something that seems (and probably is) more effective. With the changes coming this late in the game, I think this will cushion the perception shift a lot.

But at the end of the day, yes, it sounds like ki monks will be objectively more optimal. It'll be interesting to see what steps, if any, Paizo will take to limit that shift. Because we can be absolutely sure that they see those problems as well.

Besides, lets also be honest. "More optimal" in PF2e term is very little difference. Reach Fighter/Champion is definitely more optimal than greataxe Fighter/Dandy but it's not like PF1e, DnD 3.5/5e. It's like 10-20% difference at most. So such things as what is absolutely the most optimal only will matter to powergamers like me who sit with excel weeks before campaign and make tons of builds for their upcoming character and squeeze every % of advantage they can get.

For majority of players a small difference like that won't be a reason to play or not play certain build/class/style. Hell, it's even hardly for me becasue PF2e is so balanced as I sometimes choose some options becasue I like them, not becasue they are mechanically stronger (which is new to me in RPGs). All thanks to excelent math behind system.

Besides even by sheer law of statistics, even if differences are small, something must be at top and something must be at bottom with everything else in between. But if difference between top and bottom is small, then apart from extreme competetive players: it doesn't matter for most.

[Kyle_TheBuilder]

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

ki monk need to have their spell dc base on str or dex

cleric ki blast have 4 higher dc than monk

that just doesn't look good for monk

Even though Monk doesn't have much DC Ki Spells, I agree 100%. I wish I could make Monk that uses Ki Blast becasue I think it's awesome but the terrible DC makes me skip it every time.