| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What are some of the things that shocked you in the Remastered Core 1 so far? Mine would have to be the fact Elves lost their Initiative Ancestry Feat or how there are no specific Familiars anymore.
| 15 people marked this as a favorite. |
*points at all of the other books that have specific familiars*
To avoid being snippy for a moment, this isn't intended as a system reset or whatever, that elf feat still exists and so do specific familiars and so does all of the other content from all of the other books released since 2019. If you thought this was a hard reset or expected these remaster books to include everything made thus far, I'm afraid there was some communication or logistics you missed.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
What didn't I like? The fact that I have to wait 6 months for some sorcerer love.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What didn't I like? The fact that I have to wait 6 months for some sorcerer love.
*9 months
:P
What didn't I like? The fact that I have to wait 6 months for some sorcerer love.*9 months
:P
November, December, January, February, March
March is the date listed on the pages for Player Core 2 and Monster Core, that is five months away assuming it's end of March
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What didn't I like? The fact that I have to wait 6 months for some sorcerer love.*9 months
:P
November, December, January, February, March
March is the date listed on the pages for Player Core 2 and Monster Core, that is five months away assuming it's end of March
March is Monster Core. Player Core 2 is July. I think it's next year's GenCon release.
March is Monster Core. Player Core 2 is July. I think it's next year's GenCon release.What didn't I like? The fact that I have to wait 6 months for some sorcerer love.*9 months
:P
November, December, January, February, March
March is the date listed on the pages for Player Core 2 and Monster Core, that is five months away assuming it's end of March
So it is, I thought I looked yesterday and saw March for both, but I guess not. July is an awfully long ways away
|
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
It didn't shock me, as we knew about it a long time ago, but the change to the Wizard Curriculum spell slot is just bad.
Several schools now create basically dead slots as you reach higher levels. School of battle magics 1st level option are particularly bad for this.
If means you and your GM HAVE to change the curriculum spells if you want your full spell slots to remain useful as you level.
So far, my biggest dislike is the logic (or lack thereof) behind the balance shift of Rogue rackets. The by far strongest racket, namely Thief, got the biggest buff. Scoundrel and Ruffian got slight buffs and the weakest racket, so Mastermind (ignoring Eldritch Trickster), is completely unchanged. I don't consider fixing Recall Knowledge to finally work at all any buff to it whatsoever.
I understand that they had to hurry with Player Core 1 release and couldn't fix every single tiny issue the game had. But how do mess up something as obvious as Rogue rackets this bad? There is not a single person in existence that would consider Mastermind stronger than Thief or Ruffian, yet for whatever reason it was considered to be "fine" as is, not needing a single change. How?
What did Thief get?
Several schools now create basically dead slots as you reach higher levels.
Won't wizards be able to put these curriculum spells that call for heightening to stay competitive into higher-ranking curriculum slots eventually?
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Several schools now create basically dead slots as you reach higher levels.Won't wizards be able to put these curriculum spells that call for heightening to stay competitive into higher-ranking curriculum slots eventually?
Sure, but that doesn't make the lower rank spell slots any more useful.
And it's not only completely dead slots. There's plenty of spells in the curriculums that just don't work very well for daily preparation. Some use counteracting or have the incapacitation trait, making them questionable unlesss you cast them from your highest slot. Others are actually decent spells, just way too situational for something you'd want to fill a slot with every single day. And some are spells you use so rarely that they are much better reserved for Scrolls or maybe a Wand.
And as usual for any bespoken spell list, there's also borderline useless stuff in there which I have never ever seen anyone cast or felt the need to cast, like nightmare.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
So the crazy huge buff to thieves is... if they sink 2 feats into being a monk they gain the ability to enter a stance that does +2 damage on average over a rapier, factoring backstabber as a gimme? That's really cool but you might have oversold it a bit. Still the unarmed theif-monk seems like an excellent concept I want to try now.
[...] Sure, but that doesn't make the lower rank spell slots any more useful.
ah, ok so the worries is that certain curriculum slots won't find enough attractive spells to fill them out in higher levels. Thx, did not get this at first.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It didn't shock me, as we knew about it a long time ago, but the change to the Wizard Curriculum spell slot is just bad.
I really hoped that wasn’t what would happen. I don’t want to get into what they could have done instead (out of scope for this thread), but im sure there’s about to be a million threads to hopefully influence the next round of errata.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I am pretrty sure some things will be as upon such as, why did this spell get a buff but not this spell? Or perhaps why Mastermidn still has it's base effect, if you recall knowledge once it becomes harder to recall later, it wouldn't be so bad if there was a feat in either Lore or Rogue that lowered or mad the DC not increase.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
They get DEX to damage to finesse unarmed attacks now, so for example Wolf Jaw from Wolf Stance, which are d8 agile, backstabber, finesse attacks, which are much stronger than any other attack a Thief had prior access to. Especially since Ruffians new martial/advanced weapon access is limited to d6 attacks, those weapons are a joke compared to Thief's access to those unarmed attacks.What did Thief get?So far, my biggest dislike is the logic (or lack thereof) behind the balance shift of Rogue rackets. The by far strongest racket, namely Thief, got the biggest buff. Scoundrel and Ruffian got slight buffs and the weakest racket, so Mastermind (ignoring Eldritch Trickster), is completely unchanged. I don't consider fixing Recall Knowledge to finally work at all any buff to it whatsoever.
I understand that they had to hurry with Player Core 1 release and couldn't fix every single tiny issue the game had. But how do mess up something as obvious as Rogue rackets this bad? There is not a single person in existence that would consider Mastermind stronger than Thief or Ruffian, yet for whatever reason it was considered to be "fine" as is, not needing a single change. How?
What were the designer's thinking!
Before I was FORCED to go Ruffian Racket, STR 18 and Spend 2 class feats so I could take Stumbling Stance at 4th level to do 1d8+4+Sneak Attack damage...
It is inconceivable that the designers now allow you to go Thief Racket, DEX 18 and Spend 2 class feas so you can take Stumbling Stance at 4th level to do 1d8+4+Sneak Attack damage!
And you can even choose NOT to wear armor (so take a 1 point AC hit - AC19 instead of Rogue Max of AC20 at level 4 if wearing armor) to take a martial arts stance (like Wolf Stance) that requires you to be unarmored so that you can do (drum roll...) 1d8+4+Sneak Attack damage.
Seriously - Keeping in mind that many GM's interpreted the Thief Racket's "finesse melee weapon" as including finesse unarmed attacks, and among those in the other campt that felt that RAW meant ONLY actual physical weapons (not unarmed attacks), many in the second "RAW" camp nevertheless still allowed Thief Racket with finesse unarmed attacks as either RAI or because it was cool. I don't have actual numbers, but I suspect a majority (or at least a very signigicant minority) of GMs allowed Thief Racket to get DEX to damage with finesse unarmed attacks.
Personally, I'm not convinced this is an actual change, but might simply be the designers clarifying that they always meant it to be usable with unarmed attacks, and that they saw all the backbiting that was going on since PF2E hit the shelves and decided to be clearer this time around.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Meanwhile, I'm over here having always considered ruffian the best rogue after the athletics maneuvers/finesse weapon maneuvers clarification. Now I still have all those benefits AND my weapon pool increased. Flail and shield ruffian looks like a lot of fun; I'll make a retired back alley bouncer taking adventuring jobs to help put his granddaughter through prep school
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd just like to add that if the elven feat you're worried about is Elven Instincts, that is not gone, but won't get reprinted, since it came from the Lost Omens Character Guide book, which is still valid, but not core.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nevertheless, it seems strange to me that a rogue pretending to be a monk will likely outdamage a true monk at the monk's niche: unarmed strikes.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't like that Gouging Claw is even more a mandatory cantrip for Magi.
If I'm playing a Magus, I want to do magic with my SWORD, not a shapeshifted unarmed strike! And casting it through a weapon just seems SILLY! What, your sword shapeshifts into a claw that you swing like a backscratcher with a bad attitude?!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They get DEX to damage to finesse unarmed attacks now, so for example Wolf Jaw from Wolf Stance, which are d8 agile, backstabber, finesse attacks, which are much stronger than any other attack a Thief had prior access to. Especially since Ruffians new martial/advanced weapon access is limited to d6 attacks, those weapons are a joke compared to Thief's access to those unarmed attacks.What did Thief get?So far, my biggest dislike is the logic (or lack thereof) behind the balance shift of Rogue rackets. The by far strongest racket, namely Thief, got the biggest buff. Scoundrel and Ruffian got slight buffs and the weakest racket, so Mastermind (ignoring Eldritch Trickster), is completely unchanged. I don't consider fixing Recall Knowledge to finally work at all any buff to it whatsoever.
I understand that they had to hurry with Player Core 1 release and couldn't fix every single tiny issue the game had. But how do mess up something as obvious as Rogue rackets this bad? There is not a single person in existence that would consider Mastermind stronger than Thief or Ruffian, yet for whatever reason it was considered to be "fine" as is, not needing a single change. How?
Dancer Spear is way better than any of the stances unless you get Flurry, that requires 14 STR and locks you out of Preparation.
Thief got some nice feats from what I've seen, but the only actual buff was the proficiency increase all rogues got. The other chassis changes will just increase build variety.
So far, my biggest dislike is the logic (or lack thereof) behind the balance shift of Rogue rackets. The by far strongest racket, namely Thief, got the biggest buff. Scoundrel and Ruffian got slight buffs and the weakest racket, so Mastermind (ignoring Eldritch Trickster), is completely unchanged. I don't consider fixing Recall Knowledge to finally work at all any buff to it whatsoever.
I understand that they had to hurry with Player Core 1 release and couldn't fix every single tiny issue the game had. But how do mess up something as obvious as Rogue rackets this bad? There is not a single person in existence that would consider Mastermind stronger than Thief or Ruffian, yet for whatever reason it was considered to be "fine" as is, not needing a single change. How?
Buffing/tweaking the strongest classes and ignoring the weakest classes was the theme of this book. The Rogue just got to experience that internally with its subclasses.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Buffing/tweaking the strongest classes and ignoring the weakest classes was the theme of this book.
So... Witch wasn't the weakest class previously?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't like that Gouging Claw is even more a mandatory cantrip for Magi.
If I'm playing a Magus, I want to do magic with my SWORD, not a shapeshifted unarmed strike! And casting it through a weapon just seems SILLY! What, your sword shapeshifts into a claw that you swing like a backscratcher with a bad attitude?!
I personally rather use ignition over gouging claw
| 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
Now the weakest class is the wizardBuffing/tweaking the strongest classes and ignoring the weakest classes was the theme of this book.So... Witch wasn't the weakest class previously?
Extremely and absurdly wrong lmfao
If you played a universalist wizard, I'm pretty sure all the remaster has been is a big buff? You get a free focus spell at level 1 (hand of the apprentice is incredibly fun) in addition to your free wizard feat. Your advanced school spell is now unique and while I wouldn't say its good I will say its cool and memorable. Yoinking an enemy's spell then casting it back at them is hilarious.
My least favorite change about the remaster is enemies rolling to grapple with grab. We played with this rule for 1 or two sessions before a caster got perma-restrained with nearly no chance of escape before going back to the old ones. I can appreciate what they were going for but enemies who were designed to grapple (and thus have grab) are probably still going to grapple a frontliner and are likely now to restrain backliners.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
The class wasn't in a good state even before the remaster, but now with all the buffs that the other classes received, while the wizard actually received a nerf with the removal of the schools, is objectively the weakest casterNow the weakest class is the wizardExtremely and absurdly wrong lmfao
"Objectively" in this case when the discussion comes up again and again has always proven to be subjectively. People who complain about the wizard have playstyle issues with it. People who really like the flavor and feel of wizards, like myself, get a lot of mileage from the class. The nerfs from schools is minor, and they got some extra toys too. Knowledge is Power for instance lowers enemy saves. Wizard is as good as any other caster and if you value high level spell slots they're one of the best. If you value focus spells, they're not. It has always been playstyle preference that determines whether people think the wizard is really good or really bad, aka subjective
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Objectively" in this case when the discussion comes up again and again has always proven to be subjectively. People who complain about the wizard have playstyle issues with it. People who really like the flavor and feel of wizards, like myself, get a lot of mileage from the class. The nerfs from schools is minor, and they got some extra toys too. Knowledge is Power for instance lowers enemy saves. Wizard is as good as any other caster and if you value high level spell slots they're one of the best. If you value focus spells, they're not. It has always been playstyle preference that determines whether people think the wizard is really good or really bad, aka subjectiveThe class wasn't in a good state even before the remaster, but now with all the buffs that the other classes received, while the wizard actually received a nerf with the removal of the schools, is objectively the weakest casterNow the weakest class is the wizardExtremely and absurdly wrong lmfao
So then why are subjective takes being used as objective facts for the class' positives, but not the class' negatives? It works both ways IMO; the subjective negativity is just as valid as the subjective positivity.
Also, saying one new feat is good for the class when it already has a bunch of bad feats to begin with is basically throwing feat taxes on the class instead of providing actual parity between options to promote differing playstyles, compared to the de facto "just take dedication feats" gameplay it has now.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
So then why are subjective takes being used as objective facts for the class' positives, but not the class' negatives? It works both ways IMO; the subjective negativity is just as valid as the subjective positivity.
Also, saying one new feat is good for the class when it already has a bunch of bad feats to begin with is basically throwing feat taxes on the class instead of providing actual parity between options to promote differing playstyles, compared to the de facto "just take dedication feats" gameplay it has now.
Correct I did infact mention that there are aspects and features of the class that make people like it the most of all the casters. I did not say it was objective, I did say it was playstyle preference. Mathematically speaking casters are about as good as each other and each spell list is about as good as the others
Everything people use to demonstrate a class being good is with their feats. Chassis alone all casters are nearly identical with wizard and sorcerer having more slots. Everyone gets one focus spell with no feat investment. If we don't talk about feats these classes are near identical. The only stand out is divine font and it's only heal spells. You have to talk about feats to talk about a class being good. Wizards get some good feats, people just don't like that they're straight forward and not as flashy. Which is fine, the sorcerer exists because it's something more people will like
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally rather use ignition over gouging clawI don't like that Gouging Claw is even more a mandatory cantrip for Magi.
If I'm playing a Magus, I want to do magic with my SWORD, not a shapeshifted unarmed strike! And casting it through a weapon just seems SILLY! What, your sword shapeshifts into a claw that you swing like a backscratcher with a bad attitude?!
Really? According to this analysis here ignition is one of the worst damaging cantrip options...
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't like that Gouging Claw is even more a mandatory cantrip for Magi.
If I'm playing a Magus, I want to do magic with my SWORD, not a shapeshifted unarmed strike! And casting it through a weapon just seems SILLY! What, your sword shapeshifts into a claw that you swing like a backscratcher with a bad attitude?!
Gouging Claw was already a staple for the Magus. It's not new.
Have fun imagining how it applies to my Spellstriking arrow.
My least favorite change about the remaster is enemies rolling to grapple with grab. We played with this rule for 1 or two sessions before a caster got perma-restrained with nearly no chance of escape before going back to the old ones. I can appreciate what they were going for but enemies who were designed to grapple (and thus have grab) are probably still going to grapple a frontliner and are likely now to restrain backliners.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this.
Previously, Grab and Improved Grab are no-roll automatic success. The difference between the two being that Grab costs an action and Improved Grab is a free action.
What I have heard of the Remaster versions of Grab and Improved Grab is that their action costs haven't changed, but the monster has to make an athletics roll in order to succeed.
Really? According to this analysis here ignition is one of the worst damaging cantrip options...I personally rather use ignition over gouging clawI don't like that Gouging Claw is even more a mandatory cantrip for Magi.
If I'm playing a Magus, I want to do magic with my SWORD, not a shapeshifted unarmed strike! And casting it through a weapon just seems SILLY! What, your sword shapeshifts into a claw that you swing like a backscratcher with a bad attitude?!
Ignition and gouging claw do the same damage in melee unless you crit, and I haven't been able to see the new gouging claw but it just looks like the persistent damage is higher?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gouging deals 2d6 damage plus2 persistent bleed on a regular hit. Heighten +1 for +1d6 and +1 bleed.
Double all on crit, to my understanding.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gouging deals 2d6 damage plus2 persistent bleed on a regular hit. Heighten +1 for +1d6 and +1 bleed.
Double all on crit, to my understanding.
Kinda jacked asf, the hell? Idk, I really didn't want to play a magus to not do elemental damage with my sword
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Kinda jacked asf, the hell? Idk, I really didn't want to play a magus to not do elemental damage with my swordGouging deals 2d6 damage plus2 persistent bleed on a regular hit. Heighten +1 for +1d6 and +1 bleed.
Double all on crit, to my understanding.
So use Ignition or Ray of Frost.
Is there anyone other than yourself insisting that you use Gouging Claw?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ignition in melee range is 2d6 fire
On crit double damage and 1d6 persistent fire
Heighten (+1)1d6 fire and on crit 1d6 persistent fire
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gouging Claw was already a staple for the Magus. It's not new.
Have fun imagining how it applies to my Spellstriking arrow.
I know, but at least produce flame could keep up with it, so it was more a choice between Honeycrisp apples and Pink Lady apples. Now it's more like comparing Honeycrisp apples to Red Delicious apples.
Only way I could think it applies would be...like, one of Green Arrow's boxing-glove trick arrows, but with a bagh nahk on it?
Kinda jacked asf, the hell? Idk, I really didn't want to play a magus to not do elemental damage with my swordGouging deals 2d6 damage plus2 persistent bleed on a regular hit. Heighten +1 for +1d6 and +1 bleed.
Double all on crit, to my understanding.
Exactly!
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Neither of those are Fuji apples
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Neither of those are Fuji applesWhich is what in this extended metaphor?
Lol not sure but it would be better than the honey crisp because its as crisp but less sweet.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
My least favorite change about the remaster is enemies rolling to grapple with grab. We played with this rule for 1 or two sessions before a caster got perma-restrained with nearly no chance of escape before going back to the old ones. I can appreciate what they were going for but enemies who were designed to grapple (and thus have grab) are probably still going to grapple a frontliner and are likely now to restrain backliners.I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this.
Previously, Grab and Improved Grab are no-roll automatic success. The difference between the two being that Grab costs an action and Improved Grab is a free action.
What I have heard of the Remaster versions of Grab and Improved Grab is that their action costs haven't changed, but the monster has to make an athletics roll in order to succeed.
"no-roll success" also means "can't crit". If the monster's athletics bonus is high enough....