| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What is your take on the Remastered? How do you feel about the fact Spellcasters are now just trained in Spell Attack Modifier and Spell DC? What do you hope to honestly see with this and the change from alignment to spirit damage making many builds more powerful. What is a fear you feel will happen with the Remastered?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not seeing any downsides to any of this. Especially not those concerns specifically mentioned at the top of the thread.
I like the idea of spirit damage as a replacement for alignment damage. As was mentioned before, it means that it is a reliable damage type instead of having a wide array of potential enemies that it simply doesn't work against.
I like the idea of all archetype spellcasters being on equal footing. Previously (currently?) archetype spellcasting is relegated to 'spells that don't involve checks' unless you happen to have a synergy between your primary class spellcasting and your archetype spellcasting.
A Wizard taking Cleric archetype only works at all because divine spells are often buff spells that don't need rolls. Don't try to use counteract check spells. The problem is that Wizard mismatches on both key ability and tradition proficiency.
A Divine sorcerer taking Cleric archetype works better because they have the same tradition and can use the full class's divine casting proficiency. But they are still mismatched on key ability.
A Divine sorcerer taking Oracle archetype works the best because they do happen to match on both tradition and key ability.
And I don't understand why it is good for the game and an improvement on character building to have that rather arbitrary difference in spellcasting archetype choice. Removing that imbalance sounds good to me.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've yet to see a Remaster change I dislike, other than being a little sad at no Law or Chaos option for Sanctification/Spirit Damage.
The changes to Wizard have me hopeful that the PF2R Champion will be more interesting than the PF2 original.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's been fairly positive imo. I only have two minor concerns and even then I trust paizo to handle it right.
1) I worry about power creep, not just in the remaster but the game in general. But paizo has done a good job of avoiding that over all imo.
2) lastly I am concerned about certain problematic player behaviors increasing due to some of the changes. BUT those behaviors existed before hand and Paizo should make the game in good faith with those who also play in good faith in mind. If I do see an uptick i wouldn't put that on paizo. And some of the changes may also improve things in some ways.
It's been fairly positive imo. I only have two minor concerns and even then I trust paizo to handle it right.
1) I worry about power creep, not just in the remaster but the game in general. But paizo has done a good job of avoiding that over all imo.
2) lastly I am concerned about certain problematic player behaviors increasing due to some of the changes. BUT those behaviors existed before hand and Paizo should make the game in good faith with those who also play in good faith in mind. If I do see an uptick i wouldn't put that on paizo. And some of the changes may also improve things in some ways.
What sort of problems have you seen. I may be new to the online scene or at least the forums.
What sort of problems have you seen. I may be new to the online scene or at least the forums.
Reddit rpghorrorstories should be able to fill in the specifics.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I lament the loss of Drow and the "Duergar" term (hryungar sounds kinda stupid) but I'm on board with everything else.
It's actually hryngar, to my understanding. In general I prefer using a term from mythology over a fully made up fantasy name, but unfortunately we don't have that option and I like hryngar myself. To each their own.
-
As for almost every single other change about the remaster--I've been on-board in a big way. I was already trying to do what the remaster has done with alignment in my own games so that my player's Cleric of Pharasma could have a damaging cantrip among other things. I love the changes to wizard schools thematically (mechanically, we don't talk about that here please) and except that nephilim have ganzi and aphorite options on the backburner, I love the idea of blending outer plane scions into a grab bag of everything you want.
Only thing I'm waiting on is to see if there are still law and chaos themed paths for characters like champions to choose, even if they have no alignment damage options anymore. I fully expect their should be, since a large chunk of the gods still adhere to the concept regardless of mechanics, it's just a question of how much of that narrative comes down in their codes and toys.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really like the vast majority of the changes we’ve seen (with the possible exception of the wizard, but I’m reserving judgment until we see the class in full). It’s a very nice array of QoL improvements, buffs and simplifications, particularly for casters. If I have any complaints, it’s in places where I don’t think Paizo went far enough, such as spells or feats that stayed the same that I feel should’ve been re-tuned/reworked/condensed/etc. (looking at you, murksight)
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not a fan of the removal of Alignment.
I'm also not a fan of the removal of ability scores.
I'm also not a fan of splitting the core into two books.
I understand and support that Paizo has to move away from the OGL and they absolutely should.
But I think the remaster project will be my jumping-off point with Pathfinder and probably Paizo. I've been around since the Dungeon / Dragon Magazine days. And that's fine. Maybe I'll change my mind once it's in the wild I'm not completely inflexible.
I see the positives for all of the things that I'm not a fan of. I just disagree with those changes.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not seeing any downsides to any of this.
I've only seen one downside. Namely, having to rebuy my PF2E Core Book, Bestiary, Game Mastery Guide, Advanced Player's Guide, and Beginner's Box.
And, it's not even Paizo's fault. WotC's move on the OGL doesn't given them much choice.
I'm not a fan of the removal of Alignment.
I'm also not a fan of the removal of ability scores.
Neither am I, but mostly for "grognard" reasons.
I'm also not a fan of splitting the core into two books.
I'm with you on this. I'm not sure why they are doing this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not seeing any downsides to any of this.I've only seen one downside. Namely, having to rebuy my PF2E Core Book, Bestiary, Game Mastery Guide, Advanced Player's Guide, and Beginner's Box.
Pretty sure they haven't announced a replacement for the Beginner Box yet. Likely there'd be an eventual product to replace it, but right now it's staying around.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm with you on this. I'm not sure why they are doing this.It is easier to get retailers to buy books that are not 700 pages and it is less a splitting core in two than a reshuffling of the Core Book, APG and GMs Guide.
That makes sense. (Though the GM's Guide is being folded into the GM Core.)
I lament the loss of Drow and the "Duergar" term (hryungar sounds kinda stupid) but I'm on board with everything else.And Duergar doesn't sound stupid?
No it does not. It comes from the Old Norse "dvergr."
So, it is actually a real word meaning "Ugly Dwarves"
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm with you on this. I'm not sure why they are doing this.It is easier to get retailers to buy books that are not 700 pages and it is less a splitting core in two than a reshuffling of the Core Book, APG and GMs Guide.
Yeah, there's been plenty of complaints for 1) the size of the CRB, 2) the readability and ability to search things within the CRB, and 3) having to bounce back-and-forth between the CRB and the APG for options of the CRB classes.
Shuffling the CRB, GMG, and APG into Player Core and GM Core (with the remaining half of the ancestries and classes going to Player Core 2) makes the books easier to read, easier to get in book stores, and have all of the options for each class in a single book.
I'm fine with my copy of the CRB, but I'd definitely would like something I can read through a little easier. But that's just me.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've only seen one downside. Namely, having to rebuy my PF2E Core Book, Bestiary, Game Mastery Guide, Advanced Player's Guide, and Beginner's Box.
That's mostly where I'm at. PF2.5 isn't that revolutionary a new direction, or that big of a change in the rules, to justify buying back in. I'd rather get excited about Starfinder 2 than get too invested in these differences.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Other than for completionist mentality or because you don't have reliable internet access, what is the reason for needing to 'buy back in' to PF2?
I don't plan on buying Player Core or Player Core 2. I already have the Core Rulebook and Advanced Player's Guide. And I use neither for normal gaming needs. And I definitely intend to continue playing PF2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's mostly where I'm at. PF2.5 isn't that revolutionary a new direction, or that big of a change in the rules, to justify buying back in. I'd rather get excited about Starfinder 2 than get too invested in these differences.
That's the problem. From what I'm reading, PF 2E Revised does seem like a radical change.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm with you on this. I'm not sure why they are doing this.
Not everybody loves lugging around a giant brick once a week (or more). Also, D&D before Pathfinder used to have the Player's Guide and Dungeon Masters Guide.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As for myself, the Remaster is the reason I finally bought into second edition (and now am the owner of all the hardcover rulebooks aside from the CRB and APG... get those Remaster books out there already, grrrr!).
Since I finally made the jump and started really looking into the rules, I've already come to appreciate most of the design choices made with 2E. And the Remaster seems to be ironing out many of my still remaining concerns as well, with the designers finally getting over their "caster paranoia", as can also be seen in the playtest of the new classes and the kineticist, which still maintaining the balance of the game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to have seen them go deeper and make this a proper PF2.5 instead of the halfway house of - forced - haphazard changes and QoL fixes that we're getting. I understand why they felt like they couldn't afford the time it would take to do this. I also have a feeling that because of this, the remaster just won't fix the issues I've been having with PF2 in a meaningful way. I'm not upset about this is PF2 is already only a minor staple of my TTRPG diet but it is a small disappointment as I was hoping the remaster would allow me to fall in love with the system in a way I just haven't thus far.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like pretty much everything I've seen so far. Or at least I can't think of much that's negative to me. I'm indifferent about the alignment removal, for example.
The only two (potential) downsides I can see so far:
1. The new Grab monster ability could be a bit much since many creatures have pretty high Athletics scores, especially when used as a level+2 (or higher) boss. That makes them very likely to outright restrain someone with the new Grab. Their high Athletics also makes any Escape attempts very hard and they can just keep Restraining their target with an action every turn without even rolling another check. While using one action per turn is a significant downside for a boss encounter, it also means the player is probably not really participating in the fight.
2. The Wizard. I won't go into details because everyone here who cares about it probably know them. I'm hoping that remaster Wizard-blogpost they mentioned on reddit is from the in-depth line of remaster blogposts and not from the "here are the remaster basics" line.
I'm not a fan of the removal of Alignment.
I'm also not a fan of the removal of ability scores.
At first that shocked me, but after thinking about it, doesn't sound that bad. I mean:
- Alignment can be something more related to morale, instead having so much weight in mechanics. Is more about roleplaying than maths.- They continue using ability modifiers, so ability scores can be removed. Now just increase or decrease modifiers directly, with no need of a conversion table. The scores can be bypassed as is something purely aesthetic if not used in mechanics. Notice than even when used, like armors, can replace the score by the corresponding modifier.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not a fan of the removal of Alignment.
I'm also not a fan of the removal of ability scores.
I'm also not a fan of splitting the core into two books.I understand and support that Paizo has to move away from the OGL and they absolutely should.
But I think the remaster project will be my jumping-off point with Pathfinder and probably Paizo. I've been around since the Dungeon / Dragon Magazine days. And that's fine. Maybe I'll change my mind once it's in the wild I'm not completely inflexible.
I see the positives for all of the things that I'm not a fan of. I just disagree with those changes.
I feel the same way. Totally understand why they did it. Just dislike many of the changes. As well as a cost issue in that I can’t justify buying another version.
I have a few editions of D&D and Pathfinder 1and 2 I have years if not decades with those rpgs.
I may change my mind once air hear/watch and read reviews of the Remaster as never say never.
But I think the remaster project will be my jumping-off point with Pathfinder and probably Paizo. I've been around since the Dungeon / Dragon Magazine days. And that's fine. Maybe I'll change my mind once it's in the wild I'm not completely inflexible.
I see the positives for all of the things that I'm not a fan of. I just disagree with those changes.
So you’re not a fan of the changes that were forced by another company (the same one you who was the precursor to Pathfinder). I’m kind of curious, do you have ideas on how they could have changed these things so that you would keep playing the game you’ve enjoyed for the past 10+ years?
I’m excited about many of changes I’ve seen for PF 2.1!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It sucks that it basically boils down to "renaming stuff and changing the rules 4 years in the 2nd Edition to avoid WotC's lawyers"...
When WoTc did it with 3.5 or even 3.75, it was to rectify some mishaps with the rules. However here, Paizo's doing this not to correct stuff, but to "clear their names".
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It sucks that it basically boils down to "renaming stuff and changing the rules 4 years in the 2nd Edition to avoid WotC's lawyers"...
When WoTc did it with 3.5 or even 3.75, it was to rectify some mishaps with the rules. However here, Paizo's doing this not to correct stuff, but to "clear their names".
That doesn't mean that Paizo isn't trying to use the "opportunity" to correct stuff.
| 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
Having some people complain that changes are going too far and some complain that changes are not going far enough is a solid indicator that the amount of changes is just right.
That doesn't mean that Paizo isn't trying to use the "opportunity" to correct stuff.It sucks that it basically boils down to "renaming stuff and changing the rules 4 years in the 2nd Edition to avoid WotC's lawyers"...
When WoTc did it with 3.5 or even 3.75, it was to rectify some mishaps with the rules. However here, Paizo's doing this not to correct stuff, but to "clear their names".
Oh, if they can errata stuff, they can go ahead. It is a prefect time for that.
Having some people complain that changes are going too far and some complain that changes are not going far enough is a solid indicator that the amount of changes is just right.
Don't go crying when Paizo removes your avatar, because they may fear that WotC could come after them for using a Bag of Holding, lifted straight from the OGL...
Having some people complain that changes are going too far and some complain that changes are not going far enough is a solid indicator that the amount of changes is just right.Don't go crying when Paizo removes your avatar, because they may fear that WotC could come after them for using a Bag of Holding, lifted straight from the OGL...
What are you trying to say?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Having some people complain that changes are going too far and some complain that changes are not going far enough is a solid indicator that the amount of changes is just right.Don't go crying when Paizo removes your avatar, because they may fear that WotC could come after them for using a Bag of Holding, lifted straight from the OGL...
I think that'd be his old avatar. I don't believe WotC owns the rights to bags in general, so I don't think that Gorby will have to fend off the Pinkertons any time soon. :p
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just because Wotc forced their hand does not mean one should simply shrug and accept the Remaster
I’m not against them doing it. I totally understand and respect it . It’s not going to make me want to just ignore my budget and blindly buy the Remaster. In the same way I m not getting zone D&D. Budget and an unwillingness to learn another system.
As much as I want to I can’t justify it financially. No matter that Wotc forced Paizo hand.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As much as I want to I can’t justify it financially. No matter that Wotc forced Paizo hand.
Neither can I. Such is life.
Just because Wotc forced their hand does not mean one should simply shrug and accept the Remaster
Why not. As you pointed out, Paizo doesn't have a lot of choice in the matter. Who knows what insanity Hasbro may try next?
Also much like D&D 3.5, it gives Paizo a chance to make fixes to their Pathfinder game system.
I think that'd be his old avatar. I don't believe WotC owns the rights to bags in general, so I don't think that Gorby will have to fend off the Pinkertons any time soon. :pHaving some people complain that changes are going too far and some complain that changes are not going far enough is a solid indicator that the amount of changes is just right.Don't go crying when Paizo removes your avatar, because they may fear that WotC could come after them for using a Bag of Holding, lifted straight from the OGL...
Things would end badly for the Pinkertons. ;)
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
And for those with budget concerns AND want to check out the remaster there’s Archives of Nethys.
I buy the books to support the writers and artists and every other employee that made it happen.
And to make sure more happens by keeping the company afloat. *Insert "I'm doung my part" gif*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For smaller rpgs and core books and supplements so enjoy using Online SRDs. Larger set of rules like Paizo just not my thing.
Again I am lot advocating they should not do the Remaster. One should also not expect or demand full support from the fans either. I want it to succeed I also past the stage of bring an completist when it comes to rpgs. Same thing with Tales of the Valiant. I fully support KP for doing so as well even if I won’t probably buy it.
In terms of splitting the books into player and DM it should have been done way back with 1E imo. What made Paizo stand out was that it was a continuation of 3.5. not having an all I one core book. Pocket editions came much later having PHB and DMG separate would have made it easier to read and carry from table to table. The opportunity was missed with PF 2E and finally being done in the Remaster.
What really get me interested in buying more from Paizo, KP or Wotc is them going fully generic like Savage Worlds, Gurps and Heyo System. If Sacred cows mean nothing anymore just go the fully generic route. With one core book for the rules and setting expansions.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
But I think the remaster project will be my jumping-off point with Pathfinder and probably Paizo. I've been around since the Dungeon / Dragon Magazine days. And that's fine. Maybe I'll change my mind once it's in the wild I'm not completely inflexible.
I see the positives for all of the things that I'm not a fan of. I just disagree with those changes.
So you’re not a fan of the changes that were forced by another company (the same one you who was the precursor to Pathfinder). I’m kind of curious, do you have ideas on how they could have changed these things so that you would keep playing the game you’ve enjoyed for the past 10+ years?
I’m excited about many of changes I’ve seen for PF 2.1!
Make no mistake, I'm going to KEEP playing PF/PF2e. I just won't be supporting/purchasing anything NEW.
And if we're being honest, the alignment elimination was Paizo's idea and not something forced by OGL since alignment isn't covered under OGL but Creative Commons. If I'm wrong about that point I'm sure someone will be along shortly to tell me so.
Your curiosity nonewithstanding, I do have ideas on how to handle alignment but I find that most people who are against alignment have their minds made up so I'm not interested in having a discussion or argument about it. I'll keep using it in my games and everyone else who doesn't like it can keep doing what they want.
The splitting of the books is something else I'm not a fan of but for organizational reasons I get it.
Like I said I won't be buying anything new but I have enough material to run PF/PF2E for a long, LONG time. Even converting 3.5 adventures to run in PF1 or PF2 can be done, so jumping off the Paizo / Pathfinder wagon doesn't mean that I no longer LIKE PF/PF2e.
How do you feel about the fact Spellcasters are now just trained in Spell Attack Modifier and Spell DC?
What is that supposed to mean?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I couldn't care less about them removing stuff from the OGL. Drow weren't even playable in PF2e to begin with so them removing them from the setting is IMO meaningless (even when I do play on Golarion and I used drow in PF1e). If you really want to have drow or other OGL things in PF2e you can homebrew them yourself, of hell, use the original PF2e versions of them if they exist.
I really care about the Remaster because they are changing stuff that they clearly did originally out of fear, to not risk having weird interactions. or because they wanted to be conservative with it. Rogues with martial weapons should have been a thing since 3.5 as literally all the other rogue-like classes in that system already had martial weapons, yet never did the jump to do that with the rogue itself because tradition weights more than logical sense in TTRPGs for some reason. By cutting their ties to D&D and the OGL it gives Paizo the chance to make a game that isn't shackled by years of dumb traditions that stopped making sense a long time ago.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
How do you feel about the fact Spellcasters are now just trained in Spell Attack Modifier and Spell DC?What is that supposed to mean?
Spell proficiency is no longer tradition specific. If you're a wizard with the cleric archetype, you can use your full wizard proficiency for the cleric spells, for example. They will still use wisdom, of course.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just because Wotc forced their hand does not mean one should simply shrug and accept the Remaster
I’m not against them doing it. I totally understand and respect it . It’s not going to make me want to just ignore my budget and blindly buy the Remaster. In the same way I m not getting zone D&D. Budget and an unwillingness to learn another system.
As much as I want to I can’t justify it financially. No matter that Wotc forced Paizo hand.
Again I am sitting here wondering what this claim of financial abuse is all about.
Archives of Nethys and Pathbuilder2e are both updating once the Remastered books are released. Which is what I use for 97% of my rules reference needs already anyway.
I'm feeling no pressure to buy the new books to replace the old ones. I will keep the old CRB and APG that I have in case for some reason I need to show that I did spend money on the game - which usually isn't necessary.
The only book that I have that I need to prove ownership of is Secrets of Magic for playing an Oracle in PFS. And maybe APG for the Swashbuckler. But as far as I understand things, owning SoM and APG will still be sufficient for that even after the Remaster lands.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
...
And if we're being honest, the alignment elimination was Paizo's idea and not something forced by OGL since alignment isn't covered under OGL but Creative Commons. If I'm wrong about that point I'm sure someone will be along shortly to tell me so.
...
While no one can really claim to own the terms 'good', 'evil', 'law', and 'chaos', there is probably a decent argument* that terms like 'lawful good' and 'chaotic evil' were the intellectual property of TSR and therefore now belong to WotC / Hasbro.
I'm guessing Paizo decided it was easier to remove the somewhat contentious alignment system altogether than try to come up with alternate terminology.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just because Wotc forced their hand does not mean one should simply shrug and accept the Remaster
I’m not against them doing it. I totally understand and respect it . It’s not going to make me want to just ignore my budget and blindly buy the Remaster. In the same way I m not getting zone D&D. Budget and an unwillingness to learn another system.
As much as I want to I can’t justify it financially. No matter that Wotc forced Paizo hand.
Again I am sitting here wondering what this claim of financial abuse is all about.
Archives of Nethys and Pathbuilder2e are both updating once the Remastered books are released. Which is what I use for 97% of my rules reference needs already anyway.
I'm feeling no pressure to buy the new books to replace the old ones. I will keep the old CRB and APG that I have in case for some reason I need to show that I did spend money on the game - which usually isn't necessary.
The only book that I have that I need to prove ownership of is Secrets of Magic for playing an Oracle in PFS. And maybe APG for the Swashbuckler. But as far as I understand things, owning SoM and APG will still be sufficient for that even after the Remaster lands.
Yeah. I don't get a financial abuse argument at all. Paizo gives their game away for the most part. People buy it because they want the books in their hands or around the table or want to support Paizo. Paizo gives a ton of materials to their customers from the free player's guides to the free forums with play by post and as the web sites with authorized versions of the rules.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
And if we're being honest, the alignment elimination was Paizo's idea and not something forced by OGL since alignment isn't covered under OGL but Creative Commons. If I'm wrong about that point I'm sure someone will be along shortly to tell me so.
Very wrong.
Not alignments in general, but very specific alignment names in a 3x3 grid.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And if we're being honest, the alignment elimination was Paizo's idea and not something forced by OGL since alignment isn't covered under OGL but Creative Commons. If I'm wrong about that point I'm sure someone will be along shortly to tell me so.Very wrong.
Not alignments in general, but very specific alignment names in a 3x3 grid.
Nothing is more D&D than alignment. I've played a lot of games and D&D is the only one I can recall using alignment and all the rules built off of it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For me the best alignment system has always been the Palladium Books version. What a character can do in point form. If a good aligned character insists on torturing or killing prisoners depending on their alignment it tells the player if they can.
Ironically enough I have found many D&D players dislike it because unlike the open ended end sometimes vague alignment system they can’t exploit it using their alignment for questionable to evil actions.
I never claimed it was financial abuse. I just don’t like using online SRD in general and even then only got an fest or class. I am not in any financial distress or broke. I just don’t feel buying the Remaster or any similar editions at this time.