| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I guess that Henro is speaking of the same point already put forward by others : you can currently have 3 Focus Points but regenerate only 1 of them every 10 minutes.
So, 1 Focus point can be used basically once every encounter.
The other 2 Focus Points can only be used once a day.
This has been the sticking point for me, yes. The solution currently is currently quite indirect and I don't think "when your focus pool increases, that doesn't actually give you more focus spells per combat, just one extra per day" is especially intuitive to begin with.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tiny little things that maybe don't have a big overall impact but fix some annoyance you have. For me, I want leaning from cover to be codified as an actual action. As it currently exists, you *can* lean around cover for one action to attack (or for free if you're shooting through a slit or similar), but it's buried in the cover rules where it's hard to find and reference. Myself and players alike just assume that it would be an action if it existed and start thinking we misremembered it or something, only to find where it is in the rules after the session. I wanna be able to add that action to a character sheet in Foundry and just click it so everyone can see the rules and see the action being spent.
Hard agree there. It could also use a little clarification around how it persists. Can one action to lean cover you for an entire combat? Does it reset if you use the Take Cover action?
Something minor but cool would be the fighter and champion dedication would be actually continually useful. Also to someone who already has those proficiencies.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know if someone already said it, but an athletics action to Throw or Toss objects.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It'd be nice if they added something to the nephilim and other versatile heritages that give low light/darkvision to do something for ancestries that already have darkvision.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Speaking of druids, I'd like some feat that allow you to make better use of the "terrain spells", that create some persistent zone of effect that doesn't necessarily cause damage, like entangle, shifting sands and the like. Or just, more of these spells in general. To me, they're the quintessential druid spells along with the polymorph effects, but while they're here, you can't really "specialize" in them in any measure.
Even something as simple as an alternate version of "widen spell" that specifically work with burst AOE spell that have a duration (while the current widen spell don't work if the spell have a duration) would be pretty cool. Or something that make it so you (or maybe even your allies) treat these zones as normal terrain and automatically critically succed any save the spell ask of you. Or some high level feat that make the duration of these spells permanent (or at least, last multiple hours instead of a minute at most).
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Speaking of druids, I'd like some feat that allow you to make better use of the "terrain spells", that create some persistent zone of effect that doesn't necessarily cause damage, like entangle, shifting sands and the like. Or just, more of these spells in general. To me, they're the quintessential druid spells along with the polymorph effects, but while they're here, you can't really "specialize" in them in any measure.
Being able to specialize in certain kinds of magic, in general, is something that the game really needs right now. Every caster being a variation of uber-generalist gets stale fast, and in my experience doesn't even align with how most people actually want to play them.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A Simple axe of some sort, whether a new one, or maybe shifting the hatchet to that category. I've had a dream of playing a hatchet-wielding dwarf Ruffian for a while.
From what it sounds like that may have been an oversight, at least if what Luis Loza suggested in some sort of Q&A recently is accurate.
Knowing whether each spell on a scroll is a separate crafting formula, each spell level of scroll is a separate crafting formula, or if scrolls as a whole share a common crafting formula. Same with potions, and wands.
Spell scrolls are pretty explicit in the rules that you only need a single first level formula to craft any Spell scroll. Same with magic wands (which I believe excludes specialty wands).
Oh, also, I would like a rework/rewording of shape wood. It was too versatile in PF1, but in PF2, it have been restricted to the point of being near useless. The "unworked piece of wood" only especially hurt the spell, and also make it very GM dependent. Some will allow you to use it on "crude enought piece of wood", like basic wooden doors, and woods plank on the floor, some only on tree and branches, some even restrict it on only dead tree and branches (arguing that a living tree isn't a "piece of woods").
So I'd like if the restriction were loosenned a bit (and clarified, so that what you can do with this spell isn't as GM dependant). Conversly, if paizo is warry of buffing that spell and risking it becoming as versatile as it was in 1e, I'd like it to be demoted to a cantrip (and still, for the restrictions to be made clearer so that it isn't as GM dependant), because the "strict" interpretation of it's effect don't allow the player to make much with it anyway, which sucks when it eat a spell slot, but is fine if it's useable at will and allow more trial and error and creativity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Spell scrolls are pretty explicit in the rules that you only need a single first level formula to craft any Spell scroll. Same with magic wands (which I believe excludes specialty wands).
They are explicit, however this was an errata change so I don't blame people for missing it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If Warpriest is going to get a feat to upgrade to heavy without going into Sentinel, then every medium armor class should.
I disagree. War Priest is a MAD'er than any other class in the game. They need that heavy armor more than barbarians or rangers do.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tiny little things that maybe don't have a big overall impact but fix some annoyance you have. For me, I want leaning from cover to be codified as an actual action. As it currently exists, you *can* lean around cover for one action to attack (or for free if you're shooting through a slit or similar), but it's buried in the cover rules where it's hard to find and reference. Myself and players alike just assume that it would be an action if it existed and start thinking we misremembered it or something, only to find where it is in the rules after the session. I wanna be able to add that action to a character sheet in Foundry and just click it so everyone can see the rules and see the action being spent.
Personally, I wish they'd just revert to 1E cover rules entirely; not only did they work better, they weren't any more complicated (to my mind, at least). I've often wondered the impetus for changing them.
Honestly, it feels way simpler to me. Connecting the centers of your squares and seeing if they pass through any walls feels incredibly intuitive, compared to "connect the corners of your squares".
Leaning out from cover feels very much like a "the GM is meant to adjudicate this" rule, though encoding it in doesn't sound awful or anything. Interesting, if you're not wholly in cover, you can always attack, then Take Cover as a free action, then end the effect next turn as a free action and attack, then Take Cover again, etc.
Sling stuff. There aren't enought. Crossbows and firearms get whole feat trees to compensate for the reload 1, sling have one ancestry specific feat. Slings are cool, I'd like more insentive to use them.+1 for this. Slings are a very iconic weapon in fiction as well as being incredibly potent historically, so it's a shame it got pushed to the side as much as it did (Even the 'slinger class just has boltslingers & gunslingers, no "sling-slingers").
For a different one: I'd want whichever book (PC1 or PC2) has Contingency in it to also include a small handful of other contingency spells in it. I want this purely as it gives an excuse for Contingency to get the contingency trait (without it being a trait for literally 1 spell in the book) and thus let it's wording be simplified ("You can have only one spell with the contingency trait active at a time" vs "You can have only one spell with the contingency trait, or one contingency spell, active at a time" which we have right now)
Slings are weird; they don't really seem to fit at all in the niche the game has defined for them. For instance, I have no idea how they're a "simple" weapon. I promise you I could reasonably operate a crossbow with half an hour of practice, but a sling? No way. At the very least a sling should be martial, if not advanced, and it should effective enough to at least somewhat justify the investment. I can only speculate that slings are "bad" because they don't seem to enjoy a favorable place in popular fiction.
I think it's mainly that, plus their culturalconnotations, plus how extremely cheap a sling is. It's a "commoner's weapon", so it got grandfathered into being Simple. I'd love to see the sling get a meaningful buff, but I also kind of think it's good to give access to a Simple weapon with the Propulsive trait, and it's cool as an underdog weapon.
Honestly, it feels way simpler to me. Connecting the centers of your squares and seeing if they pass through any walls feels incredibly intuitive, compared to "connect the corners of your squares".
Leaning out from cover feels very much like a "the GM is meant to adjudicate this" rule, though encoding it in doesn't sound awful or anything. Interesting, if you're not wholly in cover, you can always attack, then Take Cover as a free action, then end the effect next turn as a free action and attack, then Take Cover again, etc.
So for me, center to center strains credulity.
Image a guy in an empty corridor, and a guy at the end of said corridor, but around a corner (a pretty common situation). RAW, the guy behind the corner enjoys no advantage in a firefight, which is very counter-intuitive and unrealistic to me (and I say this as a guy who isn't usually big on "realism" in an RPG). To me, it is as jarring as counting every diagonal as one square would be.
As for your proposed solution, I have two objections. First, taking cover is not a free action. But secondly, per RAW both parties in the above scenario have equal access to the take cover action, and so we're right back to being around a corner offering no advantage.
In order to remedy this, they had to resort to a (buried and poorly defined, which is very weird for a game as codified as Pathfinder 2E) action allowing one to "set up" shooting around a corner, which then reverts to the corner-based cover rules anyway.
In short, you wind up with either (1) super unrealistic outcomes, or (2) the same complexity as 1E, just much less clearly expressed.
As much as I would prefer it, I don't really expect the remaster to revert to the 1E rules, but at the very least I hope that Helmic gets their wish and the "lean out from cover" action is clearly codified.
Sorry, I misspoke. Taking Cover is an action, leaving that Take Cover is a free action.
Sorry, I misspoke. Taking Cover is an action, leaving that Take Cover is not.
No worries! I hadn't assumed that you were acting in bad faith. ;-)
Haha, yeah!
Almost got away with it. Damn that bugleyman. Paizo will never send me the check now.
Spell scrolls are pretty explicit in the rules that you only need a single first level formula to craft any Spell scroll. Same with magic wands (which I believe excludes specialty wands).They are explicit, however this was an errata change so I don't blame people for missing it.
Ah. It was changed. 3rd printing errata. Nice.
Haha, yeah!
Almost got away with it. Damn that bugleyman. Paizo will never send me the check now.
*twirls mustache*
I would like to see the captivator archetype in one of the new core books, but only so that it can be finally errata'd. Too many weird stuff about it, between the weird level at which you get feats, to the fact that it doesn't even specify how many spell it give you (and you just havee to assume it's one per spell rank like the other archetype), it need to be cleaned up.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would like to see the captivator archetype in one of the new core books, but only so that it can be finally errata'd.
Captivator (and red mantis and a few other things) are going to need errata anyways since they're tied to spell schools.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another cook of Exploration Mode with specific “free” boons for each Tactic (not just Avoid Notice, Defend, Search, and Scout).
Like, if I am Investigating as we transition to Encounter Mode, can I get a bonus to Recall Knowledge? (etc)
Rather than a bonus, I'd appreciate something like a free Recall Knowledge check against an enemy you can see during initiative. Something that makes it easier for the knowledge characters to do their thing.
|
Rather than a bonus, I'd appreciate something like a free Recall Knowledge check against an enemy you can see during initiative. Something that makes it easier for the knowledge characters to do their thing.Another cook of Exploration Mode with specific “free” boons for each Tactic (not just Avoid Notice, Defend, Search, and Scout).
Like, if I am Investigating as we transition to Encounter Mode, can I get a bonus to Recall Knowledge? (etc)
There are already a host of skill feats that do that - so something that benefits characters who have taken those feats would be a better solution.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are already a host of skill feats that do that - so something that benefits characters who have taken those feats would be a better solution.Rather than a bonus, I'd appreciate something like a free Recall Knowledge check against an enemy you can see during initiative. Something that makes it easier for the knowledge characters to do their thing.Another cook of Exploration Mode with specific “free” boons for each Tactic (not just Avoid Notice, Defend, Search, and Scout).
Like, if I am Investigating as we transition to Encounter Mode, can I get a bonus to Recall Knowledge? (etc)
Are there? I can mostly think of class feats (which mostly should have been class tagged skill feats.) The only skill feat I can think of is automatic knowledge which is largely a trap feat run as written.
|
Hm, maybe the Remastered rulebook should change Refocus from an activity to a trait. A Prayer activity gains the Refocus trait for clerics and champions, a Meditation activity gains the Refocus trait for monks, all Nature activities gain the Refocus trait for druids, and all activities gain the Refocus trait for sorcerers. Other activities can also gain Refocus trait if it relates to their source of magic; for example, Treat Wounds would gain Refocus for a cleric of a healing god. And the trait would say, "Ten minutes spent performing Refocus activities restore one focus point to the character's focus pool. Spending a focus point interrupts the Refocus process so that the character has to start the 10 minutes anew."Anything that clarifies which useful actions can be done while refocussing would be great.
Currently, disagreements between GM and player about this are both common and impactful IME.
The only safe activity is the one mentioned in the RAW : healing people for Sarenrae.
Technically Sorcerers have a RAW safe activity which is doing literally anything.
I understand this is not helpful to the point.
It is a very good point actually. I admit my post was focused on deities.
There's a big change and a small change I'd like to see. The small change is shifting around what the alchemist gets and at what level. Giving them master proficiency at 13 and maybe allowing the quick alchemy upgrades to fall into later levels would be a nice of improving what is a barrier to entry for alchemy players, who don't quite know how to get the most out of the alchemists lagging proficiency to hit.
The big change is giving prepared casters the ability to switch a small amount of prepared spells per day. A downtime action with a limit to once a day, that allows them to change a number of spells levels/ranks equal to their highest level spellslot/rank. So if you had 4th level/rank spells, you would be able to unprepare and re-prepare Four 1st level/rank spells, or Two 2nd level/rank spells, or One 3rd level/rank spell and One 1st level/rank spell. That might be a way to make prepared casters like the wizard feel a little less hard to play and be a general quality of life boost to vacian casters in general.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The big change is giving prepared casters the ability to switch a small amount of prepared spells per day. A downtime action with a limit to once a day, that allows them to change a number of spells levels/ranks equal to their highest level spellslot/rank. So if you had 4th level/rank spells, you would be able to unprepare and re-prepare Four 1st level/rank spells, or Two 2nd level/rank spells, or One 3rd level/rank spell and One 1st level/rank spell. That might be a way to make prepared casters like the wizard feel a little less hard to play and be a general quality of life boost to vacian casters in general.
I could see this for casters who use a spellbook. For those who have unlimited access to all their list, like Clerics do, just no way.