| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Apart from the Runelords, where they can be styled as the magic of a given Sin/Virtue instead of explicitly referencing the DnD schools, I do not remember a canon element of the setting that would be incompatible with the Remastered PF2 system.
It's mostly that the text of the classes said "arcane" and "divine" before. For instance witches were always arcane or whatever. The division between arcane and divine did not matter in PF1 anyways. Class lists make such an idea unimportant and nothing mechanically interacted with that line of text on your class. It was a ribbon feature
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm kinda boring myself and go very science driven. tldr: Magic at the most basic is all the same the distinctions are arbitrary for me.
Magic is like any other force like gravity or EM. Like real world forces there are carrier particles e.g. Gluons, Photons, W bosons, Z bosons, Higgs bosons, Gravitons?(tbd) that real world forces have. These "other" magic carrier particles allow for individuals to exploit this field.
The magic field itself is an interaction with the other dimensions of the Outer and Inner planes with the Universe. Places in the Universe proper that don't have or lack much "overlap" have little to no magic, and this shifts on timescales in the 100's of millions of years.
To go with what someone else said Arcane, Occult, Divine, and Primal are just classifications made on ignorance of the more fundamental nature of this magic field. It's just different ways to interact and how you interact matters hence the perceived difference.
The odd and exciting part of this magic field is it is easily manipulatable in many and myriad ways by beings within it without advanced technology, all you need is thought and emotion (and sometimes not even that it's very reactive). Some real animals exploit the EM field in different ways like using it as an internal compass or use chemical battery organs to create an electric shock. But with this crazy magic "field" with the right proding you cant shoot bolts of lighting!
I find the Universe we live in a fascinating place as is and I like adding some more fun "on top" of that and it makes me happy. So matter of tastes in the end and completely subjective.
The way PF2 works, there really is no character that existed in PF1 that can’t already be made, or simulated well enough with the addition of a specific archetype that there is a need to fundamentally change the lore to make it fit. Like “but I used to be able to cast 8magic missiles a day” isn’t really a narrative thing that matters.
It is pretty clear that the 4 traditions are not going anywhere. It is possible some spells got moved around though and their appearance on a wizard school list is a way for wizards to get spells that aren’t arcane anymore, but I suspect a change of that magnitude would have been announced. Maybe not though.
More than anything, I think my realistic hope is that we get an arcane focused Lost Omens book that makes arcane magic feel unique and separate from occult magic, especially because so much lore rests on the existence of world changing wizards.
What ends up happening with sorcerer magic is pretty up in the air too. Draconic will not be list defining anymore, and might result in specific kind of dragon sorcerers or some other major shift. Imperial sorcerers are just “a family member was a great wizard” though, and genie sorcerers might very well be primal post Rage of Elements. Magi are pretty much part time wizards, and so there very well could be nothing attached to the arcane tradition except, it is the magic that wizards have discovered.
The four traditions, especially with arcane schools being removed, are fundamentally incompatible with how magic used to work on Golarion. Any attempt to define them without there being some in universe reason for them having changed in the first place is doomed to failure because all the pieces that must fit to explain things cannot currently fit. I hope Paizo is willing to write the changes they've been forced to make into lore without destroying the already tenuous connection some classes have to their past versions.I honestly do not see how this can be when the 4 traditions are a basic foundation of PF2.
Is PF1 not in the same setting? What about that system's lore and characters?
The way PF2 works, there really is no character that existed in PF1 that can’t already be made, or simulated well enough with the addition of a specific archetype that there is a need to fundamentally change the lore to make it fit. Like “but I used to be able to cast 8magic missiles a day” isn’t really a narrative thing that matters.
Okay so show me how a Wizard who wants to create their own demi-plane with a stored clone who currently inhabits the body of a dragon and mainly starts battles by summoning powerful outsiders with top level spell-slots can be made in PF2. I'll wait.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The four traditions, especially with arcane schools being removed, are fundamentally incompatible with how magic used to work on Golarion. Any attempt to define them without there being some in universe reason for them having changed in the first place is doomed to failure because all the pieces that must fit to explain things cannot currently fit. I hope Paizo is willing to write the changes they've been forced to make into lore without destroying the already tenuous connection some classes have to their past versions.
Eh, it matches up just fine. We had three traditions of magic before, with Bard and Witch being weird outliers on arcane and Druid/Hunter/Ranger being a weird outlier on divine. In PF2, Bard got moved over to the occult list, and Druid's list got spun off into Primal. That actually fits PF1's lore better than PF1's mechanics did.
As mentioned, the only big thing keying off of schools of magic in terms of lore is sin magic, which was the inspiration for Wizard's schools of magic. Now, instead of clumsily fitting gluttony and all of necromancy together, they can eventually make a gluttony school that has suitable necromancy spells like Vampiric Siphon, but can also actually conjure food or transmute it to remove poisons and improve the quality.
I guess there are a few odd results of the shift, like arcane magic not being a great fit for calling devils anymore, but I think we've all been expecting an arcane devil-binder archetype at some point, whenever they get back around to Cheliax again.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The way PF2 works, there really is no character that existed in PF1 that can’t already be made, or simulated well enough with the addition of a specific archetype that there is a need to fundamentally change the lore to make it fit. Like “but I used to be able to cast 8magic missiles a day” isn’t really a narrative thing that matters.Okay so show me how a Wizard who wants to create their own demi-plane with a stored clone who currently inhabits the body of a dragon and mainly starts battles by summoning powerful outsiders with top level spell-slots can be made in PF2. I'll wait.
Her last sentence addresses what you said, basically. She basically said: "You can thematically and narratively create the same characters, but not necessarily at the same power level." To which you replied "okay but what about this broken and absurd combination of things with no narrative or thematic backing?" Also PF1 raw, polymorphing into a dragon polymorphs your spell component pouch making any spells with material components off limits for the duration of the spell
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The way PF2 works, there really is no character that existed in PF1 that can’t already be made, or simulated well enough with the addition of a specific archetype that there is a need to fundamentally change the lore to make it fit. Like “but I used to be able to cast 8magic missiles a day” isn’t really a narrative thing that matters.Okay so show me how a Wizard who wants to create their own demi-plane with a stored clone who currently inhabits the body of a dragon and mainly starts battles by summoning powerful outsiders with top level spell-slots can be made in PF2. I'll wait.
PF1E isn't coming back
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The way PF2 works, there really is no character that existed in PF1 that can’t already be made, or simulated well enough with the addition of a specific archetype that there is a need to fundamentally change the lore to make it fit. Like “but I used to be able to cast 8magic missiles a day” isn’t really a narrative thing that matters.Okay so show me how a Wizard who wants to create their own demi-plane with a stored clone who currently inhabits the body of a dragon and mainly starts battles by summoning powerful outsiders with top level spell-slots can be made in PF2. I'll wait.
Wizard who wants to create their own demiplane with a stored clone who mainly starts battles by summoning powerful outsiders with top level spell slots. The ability to have the full spellcasting of a wizard and the powerful body of a dragon turned out to be kind of broken, but you can still do it with a popular third-party piece.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The way PF2 works, there really is no character that existed in PF1 that can’t already be made, or simulated well enough with the addition of a specific archetype that there is a need to fundamentally change the lore to make it fit. Like “but I used to be able to cast 8magic missiles a day” isn’t really a narrative thing that matters.Okay so show me how a Wizard who wants to create their own demi-plane with a stored clone who currently inhabits the body of a dragon and mainly starts battles by summoning powerful outsiders with top level spell-slots can be made in PF2. I'll wait.
Which character in Lore is this?
|
Is PF1 not in the same setting? What about that system's lore and characters?The four traditions, especially with arcane schools being removed, are fundamentally incompatible with how magic used to work on Golarion. Any attempt to define them without there being some in universe reason for them having changed in the first place is doomed to failure because all the pieces that must fit to explain things cannot currently fit. I hope Paizo is willing to write the changes they've been forced to make into lore without destroying the already tenuous connection some classes have to their past versions.I honestly do not see how this can be when the 4 traditions are a basic foundation of PF2.
They are still there AFAICT. What was lost / changed (except for the Drows) ?
|
|
The way PF2 works, there really is no character that existed in PF1 that can’t already be made, or simulated well enough with the addition of a specific archetype that there is a need to fundamentally change the lore to make it fit. Like “but I used to be able to cast 8magic missiles a day” isn’t really a narrative thing that matters.Okay so show me how a Wizard who wants to create their own demi-plane with a stored clone who currently inhabits the body of a dragon and mainly starts battles by summoning powerful outsiders with top level spell-slots can be made in PF2. I'll wait.
Which in-setting / lore canon character is this ?
That said, since NPCs are built differently than PCs, I am pretty sure PF2 can accomodate such a NPC.
Her last sentence addresses what you said, basically. She basically said: "You can thematically and narratively create the same characters, but not necessarily at the same power level." To which you replied "okay but what about this broken and absurd combination of things with no narrative or thematic backing?" Also PF1 raw, polymorphing into a dragon polymorphs your spell component pouch making any spells with material components off limits for the duration of the spellThe way PF2 works, there really is no character that existed in PF1 that can’t already be made, or simulated well enough with the addition of a specific archetype that there is a need to fundamentally change the lore to make it fit. Like “but I used to be able to cast 8magic missiles a day” isn’t really a narrative thing that matters.Okay so show me how a Wizard who wants to create their own demi-plane with a stored clone who currently inhabits the body of a dragon and mainly starts battles by summoning powerful outsiders with top level spell-slots can be made in PF2. I'll wait.
Magic Jar says hello. You didn't need to polymorph to ditch your scrawny Wizard body in PF1.
Wizard who wants to create their own demiplane with a stored clone who mainly starts battles by summoning powerful outsiders with top level spell slots. The ability to have the full spellcasting of a wizard and the powerful body of a dragon turned out to be kind of broken, but you can still do it with a popular third-party piece.The way PF2 works, there really is no character that existed in PF1 that can’t already be made, or simulated well enough with the addition of a specific archetype that there is a need to fundamentally change the lore to make it fit. Like “but I used to be able to cast 8magic missiles a day” isn’t really a narrative thing that matters.Okay so show me how a Wizard who wants to create their own demi-plane with a stored clone who currently inhabits the body of a dragon and mainly starts battles by summoning powerful outsiders with top level spell-slots can be made in PF2. I'll wait.
Rare spells that can be easily disallowed, summoned elementals that are significantly worse than outsiders, and 3rd party material... Wow! I'm convinced now!
Hasn't all the old wizard OP stuff been put into rituals that are all uncommon or rare thus very hard to get?
Isn't there a whole section of rituals that are basically the OP blackbox, thus unpublished, that's all life long quest for supreme magic type of story stuff?
Which character in Lore is this?The way PF2 works, there really is no character that existed in PF1 that can’t already be made, or simulated well enough with the addition of a specific archetype that there is a need to fundamentally change the lore to make it fit. Like “but I used to be able to cast 8magic missiles a day” isn’t really a narrative thing that matters.Okay so show me how a Wizard who wants to create their own demi-plane with a stored clone who currently inhabits the body of a dragon and mainly starts battles by summoning powerful outsiders with top level spell-slots can be made in PF2. I'll wait.
Any character that participated in a lore-changing event at a convention that used spells or combinations of abilities that no longer exist is a part of the setting's lore. You can't just say that a PC that participated in a canon event doesn't exist.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Any character that participated in a lore-changing event at a convention that used spells or combinations of abilities that no longer exist is a part of the setting's lore. You can't just say that a PC that participated in a canon event doesn't exist.Which character in Lore is this?The way PF2 works, there really is no character that existed in PF1 that can’t already be made, or simulated well enough with the addition of a specific archetype that there is a need to fundamentally change the lore to make it fit. Like “but I used to be able to cast 8magic missiles a day” isn’t really a narrative thing that matters.Okay so show me how a Wizard who wants to create their own demi-plane with a stored clone who currently inhabits the body of a dragon and mainly starts battles by summoning powerful outsiders with top level spell-slots can be made in PF2. I'll wait.
*roll eyes*
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Any character that participated in a lore-changing event at a convention that used spells or combinations of abilities that no longer exist is a part of the setting's lore. You can't just say that a PC that participated in a canon event doesn't exist.Which character in Lore is this?The way PF2 works, there really is no character that existed in PF1 that can’t already be made, or simulated well enough with the addition of a specific archetype that there is a need to fundamentally change the lore to make it fit. Like “but I used to be able to cast 8magic missiles a day” isn’t really a narrative thing that matters.Okay so show me how a Wizard who wants to create their own demi-plane with a stored clone who currently inhabits the body of a dragon and mainly starts battles by summoning powerful outsiders with top level spell-slots can be made in PF2. I'll wait.
Idk about everyone else but I very much can do exactly that. Some folks I don't know about and will never meet made characters for an event played presumably by hundreds of different people that I wasn't at? That's as close to not existing you get.
Idk about everyone else but I very much can do exactly that. Some folks I don't know about and will never meet made characters for an event played presumably by hundreds of different people that I wasn't at? That's as close to not existing you get.
I very much disagree. The history of the game as played is as important as the official lore. You cannot abandon one and claim the other remains complete and internally consistent.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Rare spells that can be easily disallowed, summoned elementals that are significantly worse than outsiders, and 3rd party material... Wow! I'm convinced now!
You said the character "wants to create a demiplane with a stored clone", and PF2 supports that being a research project instead of trivially guaranteed.
Elementals are outsiders, at least in the PF1 categorization. They're a lot more varied in PF2, so I wouldn't just dismiss them out of hand just because they were generic in PF1. But, if you just want powerful flashy summons, there's elemental herald and some incarnate options like throwing a bunch of dragons at your enemies.
The third-party material is replacing something that most GMs wouldn't have let fly in PF1, repeatedly magic-jarring a dragon to ignore your weak stats. Just because PF1 didn't have rarity didn't mean that GMs had to let you get away with everything, and some of the most broken things didn't carry over, or got easier ways for GMs to opt out of them. Yeah, getting some third-party content approved is often more work than getting your GM to not kill your wizard's body after three days of re-possessing a dragon... but not much more.
My point isn't so much to convince you that, oh, PF2 is just as strong as PF1. It's that the character itself, a wizard grasping for the safety that a private dimension with a backup body, calling upon otherworldy forces to fight their enemies, and (with some leniency by the GM) looking very imposing in the process, is still something that the system is set up to do, even for an intentionally difficult suggestion.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Idk about everyone else but I very much can do exactly that. Some folks I don't know about and will never meet made characters for an event played presumably by hundreds of different people that I wasn't at? That's as close to not existing you get.I very much disagree. The history of the game as played is as important as the official lore. You cannot abandon one and claim the other remains complete and internally consistent.
Some perspective may be beneficial here. I will never know what Dwarf Wizard #27 did in an official event and her name will never come up in my setting, nevermind which of a thousand combinations of abilities she could have used. I can never possibly care to include her as important to the canon lore of the game even if my home Golarion always 100% used official Golarion canon
Rare spells that can be easily disallowed, summoned elementals that are significantly worse than outsiders, and 3rd party material... Wow! I'm convinced now!You said the character "wants to create a demiplane with a stored clone", and PF2 supports that being a research project instead of trivially guaranteed.
Elementals are outsiders, at least in the PF1 categorization. They're a lot more varied in PF2, so I wouldn't just dismiss them out of hand just because they were generic in PF1. But, if you just want powerful flashy summons, there's elemental herald and some incarnate options like throwing a bunch of dragons at your enemies.
The third-party material is replacing something that most GMs wouldn't have let fly in PF1, repeatedly magic-jarring a dragon to ignore your weak stats. Just because PF1 didn't have rarity didn't mean that GMs had to let you get away with everything, and some of the most broken things didn't carry over, or got easier ways for GMs to opt out of them. Yeah, getting some third-party content approved is often more work than getting your GM to not kill your wizard's body after three days of re-possessing a dragon... but not much more.
My point isn't so much to convince you that, oh, PF2 is just as strong as PF1. It's that the character itself, a wizard grasping for the safety that a private dimension with a backup body, calling upon otherworldy forces to fight their enemies, and (with some leniency by the GM) looking very imposing in the process, is still something that the system is set up to do, even for an intentionally difficult suggestion.
That character still does not exist within official PF2 products as created by Paizo. So what, in universe, has changed to prevent such from existing with the same ease and frequency as they could have in PF1?
Well, the fact that they don't actually exist in PF 1e for starters.
Hell's Vengeance is a canon line of APs and it has its final book start at 15th level. I could easily create said cheese Wizard play that module, and have a character that participated in a canon event using those rules. That would satisfy my conditions for that character existing in canon as I don't think a TTRPG should get to pick and choose between what happens at the table and what happens in lore. If we did that half of D&D's settings and thus Golarion which is built from the bones of D&D wouldn't exist.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
That character still does not exist within official PF2 products as created by Paizo. So what, in universe, has changed to prevent such from existing with the same ease and frequency as they could have in PF1?Rare spells that can be easily disallowed, summoned elementals that are significantly worse than outsiders, and 3rd party material... Wow! I'm convinced now!You said the character "wants to create a demiplane with a stored clone", and PF2 supports that being a research project instead of trivially guaranteed.
Elementals are outsiders, at least in the PF1 categorization. They're a lot more varied in PF2, so I wouldn't just dismiss them out of hand just because they were generic in PF1. But, if you just want powerful flashy summons, there's elemental herald and some incarnate options like throwing a bunch of dragons at your enemies.
The third-party material is replacing something that most GMs wouldn't have let fly in PF1, repeatedly magic-jarring a dragon to ignore your weak stats. Just because PF1 didn't have rarity didn't mean that GMs had to let you get away with everything, and some of the most broken things didn't carry over, or got easier ways for GMs to opt out of them. Yeah, getting some third-party content approved is often more work than getting your GM to not kill your wizard's body after three days of re-possessing a dragon... but not much more.
My point isn't so much to convince you that, oh, PF2 is just as strong as PF1. It's that the character itself, a wizard grasping for the safety that a private dimension with a backup body, calling upon otherworldy forces to fight their enemies, and (with some leniency by the GM) looking very imposing in the process, is still something that the system is set up to do, even for an intentionally difficult suggestion.
Nothing changed in-universe. The rules are the lens through which we interact with the setting, but they aren't a one-to-one mapping of that fictional universe. The rules allowed body-hopping wizards, but the setting didn't feature many, if any, body-hopping wizards. The only classes with possession features in something like an archetype were Witch, Spiritualist, Psychic, and Mesmerist. When PF2 rolled around, the focus adjusted. The lack of systemic longer term body-hopping was better reflected by the Possession spell being shorter duration and very difficult to use reliably, especially against someone more powerful. The distinction between arcane magic and magic that interacts with souls was drawn a little more clearly, so the Possession spell ended up on the occult list instead of being very broadly available- lining up with what classes actually got options related to it. It became uncommon, better reflecting the setting's general lack of people suspecting a criminal was possessed, dragons taking precautions against being possessed by scrawny casters, etc.
The changes were on the rules side, not in-universe.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t know that an edition war digression about wizard power levels is on topic for the arcane tradition’s transition through the remastery.
At first, I think I was resistant to defining a tradition by one class, but as I have read others posts and thought about it more, I think the clearest sense of identity the tradition can now have (especially with Dragons not being innately tied to arcane magic) is for arcane magic to be the magic that Wizards have essentially invented, or discovered as a force outside of the planes or deities or mortals’ connections to entities with power. Others now have learned how to use it (and have been for a long time) but it is the tradition that requires the application of thought to not only what is, but also what could be. (Ie the material and mind essences).
Then it doesn’t really need a power source or static in world explanation for how arcane casters have learned to tap into it, some just have, and they have their own schools that can teach others how to do it as well, even if some of the explanations for how, will contradict each other from school to school.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, the fact that they don't actually exist in PF 1e for starters.Hell's Vengeance is a canon line of APs and it has its final book start at 15th level. I could easily create said cheese Wizard play that module, and have a character that participated in a canon event using those rules. That would satisfy my conditions for that character existing in canon as I don't think a TTRPG should get to pick and choose between what happens at the table and what happens in lore. If we did that half of D&D's settings and thus Golarion which is built from the bones of D&D wouldn't exist.
So because my table had endings that do not mesh with the official 2E Lore for Golarion, all the Lore is broken, right? That what I'm hearing here?
|
|
That character still does not exist within official PF2 products as created by Paizo. So what, in universe, has changed to prevent such from existing with the same ease and frequency as they could have in PF1?Rare spells that can be easily disallowed, summoned elementals that are significantly worse than outsiders, and 3rd party material... Wow! I'm convinced now!You said the character "wants to create a demiplane with a stored clone", and PF2 supports that being a research project instead of trivially guaranteed.
Elementals are outsiders, at least in the PF1 categorization. They're a lot more varied in PF2, so I wouldn't just dismiss them out of hand just because they were generic in PF1. But, if you just want powerful flashy summons, there's elemental herald and some incarnate options like throwing a bunch of dragons at your enemies.
The third-party material is replacing something that most GMs wouldn't have let fly in PF1, repeatedly magic-jarring a dragon to ignore your weak stats. Just because PF1 didn't have rarity didn't mean that GMs had to let you get away with everything, and some of the most broken things didn't carry over, or got easier ways for GMs to opt out of them. Yeah, getting some third-party content approved is often more work than getting your GM to not kill your wizard's body after three days of re-possessing a dragon... but not much more.
My point isn't so much to convince you that, oh, PF2 is just as strong as PF1. It's that the character itself, a wizard grasping for the safety that a private dimension with a backup body, calling upon otherworldy forces to fight their enemies, and (with some leniency by the GM) looking very imposing in the process, is still something that the system is set up to do, even for an intentionally difficult suggestion.
PF1 Uberwizard PCs do not exist in PF2. And never will.
You did not need to go that far to find PCs you could build in PF1 that you cannot in PF2. The easiest example to me was CG Cleric of Gorum.
But then there never was a CG Cleric of Gorum in canon.
Best to accept it and enjoy what we have.
My concern ms about defining arcane magic as something more scientific and studied though are that losing schools of magic gives players no framework for talking about the classification of spells and how they can be used that doesn’t feel like charlatan hocus pocus. Which I can be ok with, (arcane magic not really conforming to the rules and classifications any school of wizardry tries to place on it), but it is a narrative lore space that needs a whole book’s worth of material to start filling examples and in world implications of things like “necromancers” now just kinda of being creeps obsessed with the dead, and probably leaning heavily out side of the arcane tradition to be particularly good at controlling or using undeath powers.
Well D&D is right out. Apocalypse from the sky isn't a spell in 5th edition, nor are fast-time demiplanes or infinite damage loops. Nor is permanently disjoining artifacts with disjunction. Plus, Pun-Pun isn't the overgod of every setting in existence.
Exalted ditto - the stuff you could do with Sidereal martial arts (such as "I just win, no really, that's literally what the rules say happens") cannot be replicated in anything besides Exalted 2e.
D&D has justified changes to how magic works with in-universe events. Paizo can do the same and I would be satisfied but they seem rather more inclined to just keep the edge of the rug pulled up while they work the broom.
|
|
Whatever its definition, the Arcane tradition should be something that can be lost because of a Golarion-shattering, civilisations-destroying cataclysm and that can be rediscovered thousands of years later. Whereas the other traditions did not suffer thusly.
Or was it only the art of the Wizard that suffered this fate ?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My concern ms about defining arcane magic as something more scientific and studied though are that losing schools of magic gives players no framework for talking about the classification of spells and how they can be used that doesn’t feel like charlatan hocus pocus. Which I can be ok with, (arcane magic not really conforming to the rules and classifications any school of wizardry tries to place on it), but it is a narrative lore space that needs a whole book’s worth of material to start filling examples and in world implications of things like “necromancers” now just kinda of being creeps obsessed with the dead, and probably leaning heavily out side of the arcane tradition to be particularly good at controlling or using undeath powers.
Ehhh... The old classifications work about as well now as they did then. Paizo just isn't going to put the label on there for you. We don't exactly have Discern Taxonomy in real life, so this makes the Thassilonian classification one popular option instead of the one true classification with spells and feats confirming it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
D&D has justified changes to how magic works with in-universe events. Paizo can do the same and I would be satisfied but they seem rather more inclined to just keep the edge of the rug pulled up while they work the broom.Well D&D is right out. Apocalypse from the sky isn't a spell in 5th edition, nor are fast-time demiplanes or infinite damage loops. Nor is permanently disjoining artifacts with disjunction. Plus, Pun-Pun isn't the overgod of every setting in existence.
Exalted ditto - the stuff you could do with Sidereal martial arts (such as "I just win, no really, that's literally what the rules say happens") cannot be replicated in anything besides Exalted 2e.
I vastly prefer that Paizo keeps on improving their setting while trying extremely hard to preserve its harmony with the new rules rather than reinventing everything each time the rules evolve.
Not in Eberron and Greyhawk it hasn't. That piece of silliness is unique to the Forgotten Realms.
Nothing changed between 3rd edition Eberron and Greyhawk and 5th edition Eberron and Greyhawk (Greyhawk didn't exist in 4e).
For that matter, nothing changed from 2nd edition Dark Sun to 4th edition Dark Sun either. But the mechanics changed dramatically.
I knew there was a reason I hadn't been running games in those settings.
And that's because blowing up the setting every time there's a new edition is SILLY. Forgotten Realms kills Mystra every few years and after several decades of that the setting resembles a comic book in terms of kitchen sink of apocalypses and barrage of continuity resets. Every major character in the setting has died at least twice if not more often than that.
Golarion is better than that nonsense.
A lot of people don't even run their PF2 games in Golarion because they want a non-kitchen sink setting. Golarion is fine as a theme park to hang APs from but poor at almost anything else.
I tend to view Jatembe's rediscovery and reinvention of arcane magic as somewhat particular to wizardry, namely under the idea that he and his ten magic warriors brought back mortal-centric magic that could be taught and learned by study. Arcane Sorcerers and Witches probably existed still in their rare pockets of the world, but they were dependant on factors external to themselves, where anybody could learn to be a wizard without any special bloodline or approval of otherworldly forces.
... Of course interestingly enough this tugs at this whole thread's context of defining the difference between occult and arcane, since bardcraft so far as we know also has mortal-powered magic that anyone with a bit of creative talent (which is no more restrictive than the cunning to learn wizardry) could pick it up. Maybe bards are just a newer branch of magic so nobody was all that excited about the historic moment it returned to the world
Cheesewizard.
Er.
So why do you care?
Because I strongly believe that rule changes should be explained with in-universe lore. It weakens PF2 as a system for me that it is unable to provide a setting where this happens.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because I strongly believe that rule changes should be explained with in-universe lore. It weakens PF2 as a system for me that it is unable to provide a setting where this happens.Er.
So why do you care?
In that case, nothing about the remastery changes really matter to you because your complaint was about changes from PF1 to PF2. There was no big explanation for the 4 traditions in the first place.