What are some small changes you'd like to see in the Remaster?


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 398 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:

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.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Helmic wrote:
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.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I don't know if someone already said it, but an athletics action to Throw or Toss objects.


I'd like the Druid feat list to include Cantrip Expansion. I'd love to be able to play a monster hunter druid who has enough cantrips to trigger any weakness he identifies.

Part of me wishes Clerics had access to Effortless Concentration. I think I would have enjoyed the divine list far more if my 1-20 Cleric eventually got the power to sustain Spiritual Weapon, Girzanje's March or Forbidding Ward without giving up his third action. However, the fact that Clerics lack the feat does give me a reason to try the divine list with a Sorcerer or Summoner.


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).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Regarding the various Lore posts. I would really like for PCs to get a separate Lore boost each time they got a Skill boost. Its great flavor for a PC to be able to have varying levels of Lore expertise as they advance based on their actual adventures. Spend forever in a Jungle, drop your next Lore boost in for training. Spend a lot of downtime carousing at the local tavern, increase Alcohol lore or Inn keeping Lore. Find yourself constantly fighting Will'O'Wisps, get trained in Will'o'Wisp lore.
It says a lot about your Smuggler Rogue if they are Trained in Absalom Lore, an Expert in Sewer Lore, and a Master in both Norgorber and Dock District Lore vs Trained in Absalom Lore, Expert in Plains Lore, and Master in Centaur Lore and Underworld Lore.

Another area I would love to see remastered is rituals. Specifically I would love to see anything that takes 10 minutes or longer to cast moved over to rituals (probably some of the 1 minute casts as well). A greater number of rituals only requiring a primary caster and ways to reduce secondary casters requirements. Also better integration of them into play by making them inherent parts of caster builds, with options to gains rituals with level progression and actual purchase/learn costs.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Scarablob wrote:
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.

Radiant Oath

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

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.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Innate Casting stat should be at a minimum your spell DC, not just charisma based. Class DC ok too.

Hybrid cases need full DC scaling.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
breithauptclan wrote:
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.
Xethik wrote:
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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

If Warpriest is going to get a feat to upgrade to heavy without going into Sentinel, then every medium armor class should.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
dmerceless wrote:
Scarablob wrote:
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.

This is honestly a result of Vancian casting w/ class lists making generalists have no opportunity cost, and specialization that results in a loss of versatility is always going to feel pretty rough.

Maybe in a 3rd Edition if they switched to "mix and match" traditions like Fantasy AGE, SotDL, etc where you have to choose from various themed "sublists" for your spell list.

This could actually play pretty well with Cleric domains, Witch patrons, Sorc bloodlines, etc, which would give access to specific sublists on top of a basic "choose X amount"


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
CaffeinatedNinja wrote:
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.
Helmic wrote:
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.


Eldritch Yodel wrote:
Scarablob wrote:
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.


Kobold Catgirl wrote:

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.


Extinction of clerical doctrines. Too restricted. Nothing new since the release of the edition.


Sorry, I misspoke. Taking Cover is an action, leaving that Take Cover is a free action.


Kobold Catgirl wrote:

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.


The Gleeful Grognard wrote:
Xethik wrote:
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.

Liberty's Edge

From a recent Rules thread : can you fight freely while climbing if you have a Climb speed ?


Kobold Catgirl wrote:

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.


bugleyman wrote:
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.

Facts. Similarly swords with longer blades are easier to teach effective techniques for than ones with shorter blades. Knives and daggers in particular require the most training to be fully effective. I sometimes wonder if simple=primitive and/or simple=doubles as a tool...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Scarablob wrote:
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.

Abundant Step has somehow survived every CRB errata as a level 4 focus spell.

The feat for it is level 6. You aren't allowed to cast level 4 focus spells at level 6 (and the rule even suggests there shouldn't be a way to get into that situation...)

Verdant Wheel

8 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)


5 people marked this as a favorite.
rainzax wrote:

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.

Verdant Wheel

QuidEst wrote:
rainzax wrote:

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.

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.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
rainzax wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
rainzax wrote:

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.
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.

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.

Verdant Wheel

In line with the title of this thread, I am unsure that invalidating those skill feats / class feats is within the scope of the remaster. Too big.

A +1 here or there or other modest but thematic bump seems more reasonable to me.

Verdant Wheel

The Gleeful Grognard wrote:
A minor trait I want is for shields to state that they are strapped on and to use a different trait than "strapped" for items like the current buckler.

+1


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
The Raven Black wrote:
Mathmuse wrote:
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.

Liberty's Edge

nothinglord wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:
Mathmuse wrote:
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.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Probably not going to get it, but I'd like to get my LAW beam and CHAOS damages that damage more than small group of creatures and have unique effects to distinct them from "holy and unholy" damages x'D

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Yeah that's already confirmed as not happening.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cori Marie wrote:
Yeah that's already confirmed as not happening.

Yeaah I know :'D Aphorites and ganzi is getting rolled into the aasimar/tiefling package, no law/chaos damage equivalence, its gonna be sad for law/chaos fans


It should be able to houserule some tags that do the same thing as the holy/unholy tags are going to do with spiritual damage.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm hoping a 3 free boost 1 flaw option is added alongside the 2 free boost option to account for Voluntary Flaws being snapped out of existence.


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.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Crouza wrote:


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.

51 to 100 of 398 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / What are some small changes you'd like to see in the Remaster? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.