| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I found the sanctification choice especially interesting on Gorum, who previously did not allow good aligned clerics IIRC. I guess he's cool with people that want to fight on the side of the angels against demons, or demons against angels, as long as they are fighting.
Based on the changes to Ghost Touch, I've got a question for anyone who's got the remaster: Is the Disrupting weapon rune (and the later upgrade) still in, and if so, does it still have a limitation on melee weapons?It is renamed Vitalizing, but looks to function the same. There's also now a level 8 Void damage version called Decaying, which also hurts constructs and objects.
The new version of disrupting weapons is also much better. It applies to 3 three creatures and adds vitality damage to all of their weapons AND unarmed strikes. Bespell Strikes also now works for unarmed strikes, too.
"OUR LORD IN IRON, WITNESS ME!!!"
Time to make a chaotic good orc who's always down for a good scrap (when properly funneled to deserving targets)| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I found the sanctification choice especially interesting on Gorum, who previously did not allow good aligned clerics IIRC. I guess he's cool with people that want to fight on the side of the angels against demons, or demons against angels, as long as they are fighting.
This seems consistent with Gorum's deal. Like it's hard to be a good person who "believes diplomacy is never preferable to fighting" (a basic tenet of Gorumites) but "I will devote my life to my quest to personally decapitate every single devil" is both Gorumesque and Holy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, man, I can finally play my Orc Warpriest of Gorum again.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I found the sanctification choice especially interesting on Gorum, who previously did not allow good aligned clerics IIRC. I guess he's cool with people that want to fight on the side of the angels against demons, or demons against angels, as long as they are fighting.This seems consistent with Gorum's deal. Like it's hard to be a good person who "believes diplomacy is never preferable to fighting" (a basic tenet of Gorumites) but "I will devote my life to my quest to personally decapitate every single devil" is both Gorumesque and Holy.
It really reinforces the idea that Sanctification is about joining a large Cosmic battle between Holy & Unholy.
Of course Gorum's gonna let you join that Cosmic battle but Pharasma on the other hand isn't interested in the Cosmic battle.
Sanctification can have completely different meanings to different people. Some people could be joining to fight for or against Holy/Unholy for personal beliefs while people like Gorum's are mercenaries joining a war.
You can now roleplay a character who's divinely blessed to kill Unholy while also being a person who'd be considered Evil.
Is there much in the magic section of the player core talking about the traditions of magic? Does each tradition get like a page? Or a paragraph talking about its theme? Also, did they tighten up the traditions at all? Are all the wizard school spells arcane spells? Or does any school grant crossover options?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is there much in the magic section of the player core talking about the traditions of magic? Does each tradition get like a page? Or a paragraph talking about its theme? Also, did they tighten up the traditions at all? Are all the wizard school spells arcane spells? Or does any school grant crossover options?
Each tradition has a paragraph in a sidebar. Not sure what you mean by "tighten up". As far as spells, offhand they all look like arcane ones but not 100% sure with the name changes.
Thanks!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Tree of seasons (previewed here ) is plausibly usable with familiars. Or the pet feat. Just like fire seeds plausibly was.
Or as one of my friends said, when I was discussing it with them:
"I would take issue with claims that monkeys can't pick and throw fruit."
I mean, I could say the same thing about a monkey and its ability to bite something but that doesn't allow a familiar to make an unarmed attack...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Humanoids don't get those either to be fair. Nor do balors, who could probably rip your throat out trivially if they did.
Not true: even if they have no listed attack, they default to the normal 'fist' even if they aren't proficient and that means they can perform a Strike with it. The same isn't true of a familiar as they can't strike at all even though they have an unarmed attack like every creature.
Would you let a monkey throw non-explosive fruit, is the real question?
Would you allow one to throw a dagger, real question?
On a non-familiar monkey, sure. On a familiar? I err on the side of pet rock unless an ability is expressly given.
Loving the new spell casting flavor. "As a witch, when you cast
spells, your incantations might rhyme, your gestures
might be as simple as an ominous pointing finger or a
complex folk sign, and your familiar might even echo
your words or movements slightly as your patron’s
magic surges."
'your patron's magic'
Really went all in on the patron dependency for the remaster, the witch isn't even casting their own spells anymore.
Tree of seasons (previewed here ) is plausibly usable with familiars. Or the pet feat. Just like fire seeds plausibly was.
Or as one of my friends said, when I was discussing it with them:
"I would take issue with claims that monkeys can't pick and throw fruit."
Eh, seems fine I guess. Tree of Seasons is already a spell meant to spread the actions around the party.
It really reinforces the idea that Sanctification is about joining a large Cosmic battle between Holy & Unholy.
Of course Gorum's gonna let you join that Cosmic battle but Pharasma on the other hand isn't interested in the Cosmic battle.
Sanctification can have completely different meanings to different people. Some people could be joining to fight for or against Holy/Unholy for personal beliefs while people like Gorum's are mercenaries joining a war.
You can now roleplay a character who's divinely blessed to kill Unholy while also being a person who'd be considered Evil.
Yeah, and also if you're someone who tries to be a good person but is nevertheless a Gorumite, probably the best option for "never stop fighting" is to pick out fights that are in no way morally ambiguous (like "let's go hunt down some demons"), since there's no hope for diplomacy in that sort of thing.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The funny thing about living in a world with demons is that you never have to worry about running out of just wars.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nonat1s is happy that "They FINALLY FIXED DISARM in Pathfinder 2e!", found here. He also didn't put "Remaster" in his video title, which makes it difficult for me to find his Remaster preview video...
|
I found the sanctification choice especially interesting on Gorum, who previously did not allow good aligned clerics IIRC. I guess he's cool with people that want to fight on the side of the angels against demons, or demons against angels, as long as they are fighting.This seems consistent with Gorum's deal. Like it's hard to be a good person who "believes diplomacy is never preferable to fighting" (a basic tenet of Gorumites) but "I will devote my life to my quest to personally decapitate every single devil" is both Gorumesque and Holy.It really reinforces the idea that Sanctification is about joining a large Cosmic battle between Holy & Unholy.
Of course Gorum's gonna let you join that Cosmic battle but Pharasma on the other hand isn't interested in the Cosmic battle.
Sanctification can have completely different meanings to different people. Some people could be joining to fight for or against Holy/Unholy for personal beliefs while people like Gorum's are mercenaries joining a war.
You can now roleplay a character who's divinely blessed to kill Unholy while also being a person who'd be considered Evil.
On that last point, not really. We might have more leeway than before but, to be Holy, you have to follow the values of Holy/Good. Same for Unholy/Evil.
So, no serial killer of innocents sanctified to Holy.
|
|
Loving the new spell casting flavor. "As a witch, when you cast
spells, your incantations might rhyme, your gestures
might be as simple as an ominous pointing finger or a
complex folk sign, and your familiar might even echo
your words or movements slightly as your patron’s
magic surges."'your patron's magic'
Really went all in on the patron dependency for the remaster, the witch isn't even casting their own spells anymore.
I depict my Baba Yaga Witch as having obtained his powers from obsessively diving into a complete and thorough study of Baba Yaga. He is sure that his stylus whispers secrets of magic to him. So, I can totally see his magic as coming from his own mental representation of the focus of his obsession. The Baba Yaga Patron in his head.
did the ranger got anything new apart from the two rather meh crossbow feats and the fix to the DC for spells?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
did the ranger got anything new apart from the two rather meh crossbow feats and the fix to the DC for spells?
Their difficult terrain abilities now work with all difficult terrain, including magical. Beyond that, nothing I spotted. I didn't read exhaustively, and they did tell us the ranger would have a light touch... But I was still a little bummed there wasn't more. The class is still quite functional and really good within its niche, but also suffers from the class feat bottleneck if they want to be good at traditional ranger stuff beyond what you can do with skill feats and outwit.
did the ranger got anything new apart from the two rather meh crossbow feats and the fix to the DC for spells?Their difficult terrain abilities now work with all difficult terrain, including magical. Beyond that, nothing I spotted. I didn't read exhaustively, and they did tell us the ranger would have a light touch... But I was still a little bummed there wasn't more. The class is still quite functional and really good within its niche, but also suffers from the class feat bottleneck if they want to be good at traditional ranger stuff beyond what you can do with skill feats and outwit.
Thats nice to have but yeah, disappointing. Not much love for rangers it would seem compared to what rogue and cleric got
Did any ranger's feats lose 'to hunted prey' requirement? That was promised, at least for some of them.did the ranger got anything new apart from the two rather meh crossbow feats and the fix to the DC for spells?Their difficult terrain abilities now work with all difficult terrain, including magical. Beyond that, nothing I spotted. I didn't read exhaustively, and they did tell us the ranger would have a light touch... But I was still a little bummed there wasn't more. The class is still quite functional and really good within its niche, but also suffers from the class feat bottleneck if they want to be good at traditional ranger stuff beyond what you can do with skill feats and outwit.
Iirc Mature Animal Companion does not require Hunt Prey anymore to get the free action (works like the other versions of the feat, basically).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
BadLuckGamer lists "All Changes to Bard in Pathfinder 2e's Remaster", found here.
Swingrippers gives the "PF2e Remaster Class Overview - What to Play as a New Player", found here.
Nonat1s explains that "They Added a BRAND NEW ACTION to Pathfinder 2e! - PF2 Remaster", found here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Btw, I heard there is a Rogue feat that allows you to strike after dodging with Nimble Dodge. I'd appreciate it a lot if someone with the book could post how it works and how it interacts with Nimble Roll.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Btw, I heard there is a Rogue feat that allows you to strike after dodging with Nimble Dodge. I'd appreciate it a lot if someone with the book could post how it works and how it interacts with Nimble Roll.
Nimble Strike
Feat 10Prerequisite: Nimble Roll
You’re cunning enough to find an opening in an opponent’s attack. When you use your Nimble Dodge reaction, you can make a melee Strike against the triggering creature. This Strike doesn’t count toward your multiple attack penalty, and your multiple attack penalty doesn’t apply to this Strike. If you use the Nimble Roll feat, you can make this Strike at any point during your roll.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, that's nuts.
Since Swashbuckler has both Nimble Dodge and Nimble Roll, I guess they will also get this in Player Core 2.
Was Nimble Dodge itself changed? Previously you had to use the reaction before the enemy attacked. Which means wasting the reaction if their attack missed anyway.
And that makes it really hard to use in play-by-post where entire blocks of enemy turns are posted all at once.
|
|
I don't think Nimble Dodge changed. It is a reaction with the following trigger:
Trigger A creature targets you with an attack and you can see the attacker.
And that makes it really hard to use in play-by-post where entire blocks of enemy turns are posted all at once.
I'm used to players making a declaration at the beginning of combat like "I will always use Nimble Dodge against the first attack from that opponent" to avoid that kind of problem -- but having Nimble Strike might change that calculation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe we've been ruling this wrong, but isn't rolling the dice part of targeting someone with an attack roll? Rolling the dice is the first step on the attack roll process in the rules and the targetting rules make no mention of it being a process prior to any other process.
What we've been ruling is that stuff like concealment, hidden and similar effects that happen when targetting are resolved at the same time as the attack roll. So in the case of a rogue being concealed how we interpret the rules is.
1- The enemy decides to strike the Rogue. Rolls an attack and a concealment check. Passes concealment and rolls +1 over the rogue's AC.
2- Rogue sees they are being targeted by an attack with an attack roll of X. They decide then to use Nimble Dodge.
Or with the new feat case.
1- The enemy decides to strike the Rogue. Rolls an attack and a concealment check. Doesn't pass concealment and rolls +1 over the rogue's AC. Attack will not affect the rogue.
2- Rogue is still being targeted and decides to use Nimble Dodge to get an strike.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's probably more practical way to run the ability roquepo.
There's a strong argument to be made that since the trigger is being targeted it needs to happen before the roll.
But, frankly, that's not the way most people from my experience play the game and it would be nightmarish to try to change play patterns for that.
So I'm inclined to agree that your way is the correct way, even if there is that argument to be made.
I would also prefer to see the result of the attack roll before deciding to use Nimble Dodge.
But with the existince of similar reactions like Guardian's Deflection that have more complicated triggers, I don't see that ruling very often.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like I said, I just don't see that as a practical way to run the game. Stopping to declare every attack independently of a roll and then waiting to see if a player activates something is going to bog down even in person games, much less online or especially PbP games.
So I see most tables just run nimble dodge as best they can, i.e. by allowing the rogue to declare at first possible opportunity.
I would also prefer to see the result of the attack roll before deciding to use Nimble Dodge.
But with the existince of similar reactions like Guardian's Deflection that have more complicated triggers, I don't see that ruling very often.
I don't see this as Nimble Dodge needing to be declared before knowing the result, but as the other ones not being able to be used unless that specific case happens.
For example, I read Reactive Block trigger entry not as an indication that Nimble Dodge needs to go before knowing the roll, but as a reaction that gives you an ongoing effect that you cannot use unless you get hit (sometimes you will dodge the triggrting attack thanks to it, sometimes you will just get your shield raised for the following attacks).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Roll For Combat gives the "Pathfinder Remaster Druid First Look with Pathfinder 2e Co-Author Mark Seifter", found here.
Well, I'm not sure that this thread is the best place to debate it out.
I do know that it has been the long-standing semi-consensus on these forums that RAW Nimble Dodge has to be used before the result of the attack roll is known to the player. See here and here.
Don't get me wrong, I know most people run it like that, I just don't know how that consensus came to be since it is not clearly stated anywhere, that's all.
And yes, let's leave this discussion to another day and another thread.
Has anyone talked about Crafting in the remaster yet?
Setup time is reduced to 2 days. You no longer need a formula for common items. If you do have the formula, setup time is reduced to 1 day.
The Inventor skill feat is now level 2 and with GM permission allows you to invent the formulas for uncommon and rare items.
That's all I know so far.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you magnuskn for keeping the hits coming. Sadly, there is no way in all the hells I’ll even watch one of these, so can you ask TheMagicSword to compile all of these into a bullet point document. Preferably by tonight. Thanks!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you magnuskn for keeping the hits coming. Sadly, there is no way in all the hells I’ll even watch one of these, so can you ask TheMagicSword to compile all of these into a bullet point document. Preferably by tonight. Thanks!
Alas, I have no sway over that gentleperson, so it's up to them. ^^
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Team Player Gaming tells us what "The Most Important Change in the Pathfinder 2e Remaster" is, found here.
The Sly Strategist gives us a "Player Core Overview: The Remaster is Here!", found here.
Cardinal Adventures presents a "Pathfinder 2e Remaster Primer: Key Terms and Rule Format", found here.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, it's not completely terrible, at least. Might not be worth a feat, though.Glad to see that Ray of Enfeeblement is now halfway usable, that's a very nice buff for spellcasters. The fact that it inexplicably still has the Attack trait despite removing spell attack roll is hilarious but also probably unintended.
The intention here could be that using Enfeeble still incurrs your MAP, so if you Enfeeble, you are getting that -5 on a any 3rd action attack you might have.
Just in case any Witches got uppity and thought their Witch Armaments meant they could actually attack with them.
It seems that Luis Loza has stated that Enfeeble should not have the Attack trait.
Might as well start us off - enfeeble inexplicably has the Attack trait, despite having nothing to do with attacks. Likely someone forgot that it was no longer ray of enfeeblement and no longer has a spell attack roll.I actually don't think this is a mistake.
It looks like an intentional step to decouple the Attack trait from being exclusively applied to spells which target AC.
The langauge in the new Knowledge is Power feat carves out a benefit granted to attacks which don't target AC.
It also means that it would benefit from things which improve attacks in someway.
Luis confirmed on Discord that Enfeeble having the Attack trait is an error, and is marked for errata.
Sure seems like an error. We found a similar error for a different spell and I've already logged both errors for errata.
I think a Neutral deity does not care about Evil or Good, even extremes of it.
So I read it more as a "as long as you faithfully respect my edicts and anathemas, you can go play the game of Holy vs Unholy if you wish. I do not care one iota."
Or, perhaps, the sanctification rules help distinguish between different forms of neutrality.
For some deities, neutrality is about actively trying to maintain balance between good and evil. Giving their followers both sanctifications provides them with tools to actively try to restore such balance when it starts to tilt. Abadar, for example.
For other deities, neutrality is about staying out of the good/evil paradigm entirely so not granting any sanctifications would help keep their followers above that particular fray. Pharasma comes to mind.
According to a kind person on Discord, Gang Up will now make enemies flanked for allies as well instead of just for the rogue.I'm all in for this, but my lord someone at Paizo likes their rogues...
From the feat:
Looks to me like they still need to flank.