Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Turku
|
Aren't they the exact same weapon? Both are 1d6 bludgeoning martial clubs with L bulk, 1 hand, shove, thrown 30ft, and the grippli/tripkee trait? Why change it anyway?
By default, there's no rules for "just changing one weapon to another".
However, if you're still level 1, you can sell back equipment at the original price, and then buy the new weapon, effectively losing nothing.
If your first chronicle sheet was received before... November 15th last year I think, you have one use of the remaster rebuild for the character. As part of that rebuild, you may sell back equipment at full price, and then purchase a new weapon, effectively switching it out for free.
Both of those options do require that you have some sort of character rebuild available, though - either lvl 1 or remaster rebuild. Outside of those, there's no special rule allowing switching weapons (other than transfering runes at that 10% gp price), although in this case as the weapons are literally identical, I doubt anyone will mind if you just call your rungu a Cruuk instead. Technically speaking though, they are two different weapons because they have different names.
Aren't they the exact same weapon? Both are 1d6 bludgeoning martial clubs with L bulk, 1 hand, shove, thrown 30ft, and the grippli/tripkee trait? Why change it anyway?
I think that the cruuk is intended to replace the rungu in order to avoid the issues of cultural insensitivity/appropriation raised in this thread.
The Ancestry Guide wasn't likely to get a reprint, but it seems obvious to me that the remaster, with the conversion of Grippli to Tripkee, provided Paizo with an ideal opportunity to remove the problematic real-world reference.
Since the two items are mechanically identical, I suspect that Outl wants to switch to the cruuk so as not to engage in such cultural insensitivity/appropriation.
It seems to me that that's a choice that PFS might want to encourage by making the switch from a rungu to a cruuk be a free option for all players.
|
If a character uses the remaster rebuild and undergoes some radical changes, can they request their faction reputation be adjusted?You can already freely change what faction you are gaining reputation with on an adventure by adventure basis.
I think that Squark meant change what you've already earned because your new character would be a better fit with a different Faction.
|
Venture-Captain, New Zealand—Christchurch
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Aren't they the exact same weapon? Both are 1d6 bludgeoning martial clubs with L bulk, 1 hand, shove, thrown 30ft, and the grippli/tripkee trait? Why change it anyway?I think that the cruuk is intended to replace the rungu in order to avoid the issues of cultural insensitivity/appropriation raised in this thread.
...
Since the two items are mechanically identical, I suspect that Outl wants to switch to the cruuk so as not to engage in such cultural insensitivity/appropriation.
It seems to me that that's a choice that PFS might want to encourage by making the switch from a rungu to a cruuk be a free option for all players.
Even for me, this degree of hand-holding is a bit much. You don't need an official PFS ruling for this, IMHO. Just switch it, nobody will notice or care.
|
|
1) With the Guns and Gears remaster released, we are expected to use the remastered version of feats and features with the same name. This is problematic for some multiclass inventors who may no longer meet the prerequisites for inventor dedication, as it now requires an Intelligence attribute of +3 or greater (unless that was an accident in need of errata). What should agfected players do?
2) Do existing Gunslingers need to use a rebuild to replace Singular Expertise with Slinger's Precision? Because that... kind of sucks.
3) Will Nahlmika and Droven receive pregens? Can Fumbus finally go on adventures with his hero?
Organized Play Coordinator
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) With the Guns and Gears remaster released, we are expected to use the remastered version of feats and features with the same name. This is problematic for some multiclass inventors who may no longer meet the prerequisites for inventor dedication, as it now requires an Intelligence attribute of +3 or greater (unless that was an accident in need of errata). What should agfected players do?
2) Do existing Gunslingers need to use a rebuild to replace Singular Expertise with Slinger's Precision? Because that... kind of sucks.
1) This is covered in the Errata Rebuilds section of the Guide to Organized Play. Specifically I will quote the following:
Class Features and Archetype Abilities: If an errata or FAQ changes an attribute modifier-dependent feature of a class or archetype, you can rebuild your character to its current XP. You can keep the same equipment or choose to resell any equipment that augments the altered ability score at full price.
2) No. Gunslingers explicitly replace Singular Expertise with Slinger's Precision, which is called out explicitly on the updated Character Options page.
I wish I knew sooner that there was an official thread to post such questions in. Anyway...
Players and GMs are supposed to use the remaster rules where possible. Does this include remastered monster stat blocks?
There's a great thread here on this topic with a bunch of very experienced GMs and VOs weighing in on the issue that you might want to look at.I wish I knew sooner that there was an official thread to post such questions in. Anyway...
Players and GMs are supposed to use the remaster rules where possible. Does this include remastered monster stat blocks?
Those were Venture Officers? Is that what "Venture-Agent" and "Venture-Lieutenant" refer to under their usernames?
|
Organized Play Coordinator
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Players and GMs are supposed to use the remaster rules where possible. Does this include remastered monster stat blocks?
Thanks for bringing up this question! When we wrote the Remaster guidelines, we were focused on the player-facing updates to character options, and not so much on the eventual updates to characters that would come.
After discussions with the team, our official guidance is this: GMs are strongly encouraged to use the statblocks as printed in the scenarios rather than swapping for Remastered versions. I want to specifically note that the Remaster guidance *does* provide GMs with tools for specific abilities or features (such as strikes with alignment-related traits) that no longer function as intended, and this does not override that.
In most cases, changing out a statblock for a remastered version is not going to make a significant difference, and we're not going to scold any GM who does so if we overhear them at a convention. However, in some cases it will significantly affect encounter tactics. As we have written the adventures assuming the monsters we include will work the way we wrote them, we'd prefer GMs stick to that where possible.
Thank you for the clarification.
What should we do for monsters that rely on spell schools but also haven't been remastered yet?
The Roiling Incant comes to mind. It is immune to and absorbs evocation magic.
|
Venture-Captain, New Zealand—Christchurch
|
Quick little question...
Would it be within the realm of possibility to update non-remastered ancestries' ancestral lore feats to be in line with the remastered versions (granting the Lore skill as a feat rather than the skill itself)?
Sprites, fetchlings, androids, etc are all running around with Lore skills instead of feats and it's slightly sad.
|
|
Could we get some guidelines for the Remastered Runelord's Anathema? Some of them are rather vague.
E.G. Runelords of wrath are forbiddwn from using magic to create or protect. What constitutes creation? A lot of ex-Evocation spells technically create things very briefly. Does creating a short lived area of destructive magic (E.G. Freezing Rain, Rust Cloud) count? Using the sin spells as guidance doesn't help because those explicitly can do something technically forbidden wothout violating the anathema.
I know a lot of this comes down to asking GMs and players to both operate in good faith, but there's still enough ambiguity in the language for two people to have different opinions on a spell. Some basic guidance would be appreciated.
Venture-Agent, California—Silicon Valley
|
Could we get some guidelines for the Remastered Runelord's Anathema? Some of them are rather vague.
E.G. Runelords of wrath are forbiddwn from using magic to create or protect. What constitutes creation? A lot of ex-Evocation spells technically create things very briefly. Does creating a short lived area of destructive magic (E.G. Freezing Rain, Rust Cloud) count? Using the sin spells as guidance doesn't help because those explicitly can do something technically forbidden wothout violating the anathema.
I know a lot of this comes down to asking GMs and players to both operate in good faith, but there's still enough ambiguity in the language for two people to have different opinions on a spell. Some basic guidance would be appreciated.
I agree that the anathema is very vague, and we could use some guidance here. On top of that, there's no guidance on warning players that they are about to break their anathema, so a player could cast a spell they believe to be well within their limits, and end up breaking their anathema due to the GM seeing it otherwise, leading to a very expensive Atone ritual to regain their class features.
Speaking of atoning, I also believe being forced to pay for an Atone just because you cast one spell wrong is a huge penalty, and well outside the norm for similar features, like overwhelming your curse for oracles. For example, a level 2 PC would have to pay 90g to Atone, and sacrifice 30 days of downtime since the PFS rule doesn't specify that those 30 days are only needed for regaining cleric/champion class features.
|
So, now that the Remastered Runelord is out, how should Legacy Runelords be treated going forward?
It uses the Core Rulebook Wizard chassis, which doesn't get a remaster rebuild since we are now outside of that window. But it also utilitizes "a character option other than the entire class" which should therefore be treated as errata and auto updated.
I have not yet tried to figure out if the new Class Archetype mechanically functions on the Legacy chassis, but I suspect it will be odd.
Can I just continue to play it using the Legacy version? Or must I update it to the Remaster version, and if I do so, must I also update to Remaster Wizard? (Or *can* I update it to Remaster Runelord & Remaster Wizard if I decided I wanted to?)
None of these options would upset me (although, like I said, I expect weirdness if the answer is Remaster Runelord on Legacy Wizard) -- just want to make sure I'm doing it right.
(This character was built from a Charity boon I won in a raffle, which also gave it a unique background allowing Runelord access, so it might be a real corner case in a lot of ways.)
|
|
So, now that the Remastered Runelord is out, how should Legacy Runelords be treated going forward?
It uses the Core Rulebook Wizard chassis, which doesn't get a remaster rebuild since we are now outside of that window. But it also utilitizes "a character option other than the entire class" which should therefore be treated as errata and auto updated.
I have not yet tried to figure out if the new Class Archetype mechanically functions on the Legacy chassis, but I suspect it will be odd.
Can I just continue to play it using the Legacy version? Or must I update it to the Remaster version, and if I do so, must I also update to Remaster Wizard? (Or *can* I update it to Remaster Runelord & Remaster Wizard if I decided I wanted to?)
None of these options would upset me (although, like I said, I expect weirdness if the answer is Remaster Runelord on Legacy Wizard) -- just want to make sure I'm doing it right.
(This character was built from a Charity boon I won in a raffle, which also gave it a unique background allowing Runelord access, so it might be a real corner case in a lot of ways.)
Repeating this question now that the Remastered Runelord is live.
In the absence of other guidance, my VC is going with "Existing Wizards were grandfathered in, so you can continue to use Premaster Runelord," so if the intent is something different, please let me know.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Turku
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, now that the Remastered Runelord is out, how should Legacy Runelords be treated going forward?
It uses the Core Rulebook Wizard chassis, which doesn't get a remaster rebuild since we are now outside of that window. But it also utilitizes "a character option other than the entire class" which should therefore be treated as errata and auto updated.
I have not yet tried to figure out if the new Class Archetype mechanically functions on the Legacy chassis, but I suspect it will be odd.
Can I just continue to play it using the Legacy version? Or must I update it to the Remaster version, and if I do so, must I also update to Remaster Wizard? (Or *can* I update it to Remaster Runelord & Remaster Wizard if I decided I wanted to?)
None of these options would upset me (although, like I said, I expect weirdness if the answer is Remaster Runelord on Legacy Wizard) -- just want to make sure I'm doing it right.
(This character was built from a Charity boon I won in a raffle, which also gave it a unique background allowing Runelord access, so it might be a real corner case in a lot of ways.)
Repeating this question now that the Remastered Runelord is live.
In the absence of other guidance, my VC is going with "Existing Wizards were grandfathered in, so you can continue to use Premaster Runelord," so if the intent is something different, please let me know.
March update / character options page
Previously existing characters with the Runelord class archetype as printed in Secrets of Magic may continue using it alongside the legacy wizard class as printed in the Core Rulebook. New boons for this version may not be purchased.
New characters or characters which have rebuilt to use the remastered wizard class in the Player Core must use the Runelord class archtype as printed in Lost Omens: Rival Academies.
As a general rule, the OP team does not provide guidance on edicts or anathema, as they are inherently subjective. Runelord anathema should evaluated in the context of their former spell schools and common sense for the game. A temporary fireball is not considered creating something and attacking an enemy would not violate an anathema against protecting others or changing a physical thing.
|
So, about new firearms access. As of remaster GnG says:
All Pathfinder Society agents have access to all uncommon clockwork items and gadgets from Chapters 1 and 2 of this book and all uncommon weapons, ammunition, and related items from Chapter 4 of this book, with the exception of Beast Guns and any limited or restricted items below, unless the item indicates otherwise.
Does that include firearms with racial tag? Most GMs I met say "no, access does not include racial firearms", and even some VC said they will ban me if I bring character that owns one to their games. But if no, why text that forbid it was removed?
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Turku
|
I highly doubt a VO would ban you for having a different interpretation of the rules than they do. A GM could ask you to bring a different character or play a pregen or fix the character, if they believed it wasn't legal, though.
The character options state that all agents have access to all firearms "with the exception of Beast Guns and any limited or restricted items below, unless the item indicates otherwise." The book indicates that simply having the Dwarven Weapon familiarity is not enough to gain access to dwarf firearms. If dwarf firearms need both dwarven weapon familiarity AND access to firearms according to the book, then simply having access to firearms is not enough to give access to dwarf firearms.
It's pretty clear what the intent here is, and while your interpretation is also plausible, "Everybody gets access to all ancestry-limited firearms" is clearly too good to be true when compared to how nobody has access, by default, to clan daggers or elven curved blades. It's clearly not intended that clan pistol is something any random adventurer can find on the market, but clan dagger is not.
|
|
Text from PFS Character options page said that before remaster:
Feats that grant access to weapons with ancestry traits (such as Dwarven Weapon Familiarity), do not grant access to firearms with the listed trait unless the character separately has access to firearms. The reverse is also true, that general access to firearms does not grant access to ancestry-specific weapons. If you have access to firearms, you can gain access to firearms with an ancestry trait (dwarf, elf, goblin, etc.) by selecting an ancestry feat or other option that specifically grants it (for example, to gain access to a clan pistol, take the Clan Pistol feat or Dwarven Weapon Familiarity feat).
Book says just that(both remaster and pre-remaster):
The clan pistol and dwarven scattergun have the
dwarf trait, the dawnsilver tree has the elf trait, and
the flingflenser has the goblin trait. However, feats
such as Dwarven Weapon Familiarity, which normally
grants access to all uncommon weapons with the dwarf
trait, don’t grant access to firearms with the listed traits
unless the character separately has access to firearms.
For instance, dwarves who’ve never seen a firearm and
then train in traditional dwarven weapons don’t have
access to clan pistols and dwarven scatterguns. You
can find more information on firearm access details on
page 148.
If rules didn't change, why bolded section of PFS Character Options no longer there? Book remaster didn't change that aspect, and no where in the book it is stated that you need access to Firearms and Racial weapons to gain access to race tagged firearms. Only that later doesn't give access to former. It doesn't state that reverse is true in the book.
Archives of Nethys currently have "PFS Note All Pathfinder Society agents have access to all uncommon weapons, ammunition, and related items from Chapter 4" on all fireams, racial or not.
If this is not cleared soon, it will confuse a lot of players, especially those that use AoN as main method for checking legality.
I don't know if this is the correct place for this question, but I'm wondering whether there are any plans to update the Esoteric Spellcaster - Core Rulebook boon, to bring it in line with the Remaster. I purchased this boon pre-remaster and selected a spell (Ethereal Jaunt) which doesn't have a remaster version. Does the world even still have an ethereal plane post-remaster?
I'm aware that the old spells are still legal, but it would be nice to have the option of converting my boon spell choice to a remastered spell. Thanks!
|
Organized Play Coordinator
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know if this is the correct place for this question, but I'm wondering whether there are any plans to update the Esoteric Spellcaster - Core Rulebook boon, to bring it in line with the Remaster. I purchased this boon pre-remaster and selected a spell (Ethereal Jaunt) which doesn't have a remaster version. Does the world even still have an ethereal plane post-remaster?
I'm aware that the old spells are still legal, but it would be nice to have the option of converting my boon spell choice to a remastered spell. Thanks!
We don't intend to update old boons, no. If you have a boon you would like refunded to purchase a remastered version, email orgplayreportingerrors[at]paizo[dot]com and I'll be happy to process that for you!
Is Kobold Breath no longer legal for new kobolds, even using the new exemplars table?
|
|
Is Kobold Breath no longer legal for new kobolds, even using the new exemplars table?
You can use legacy options as long as they do not have a newer vesion with the same name printed or are specifically called out as retired.
|
|
With Aphorite, Ganzi and the other planar scions being rolled into Nephilim with War of the immortals, will we get a refund for achievement points that we spent to purchase Aphorite for Society play?
Also something that I've seen other content creators talk about is that it feels like we are losing a first level feat slot for our ancestries now with the remaster Nephilim change. Before I just chose Aphorite for my heritage, but now I need to choose the Nephilim heritage and the Aphorite lineage feat for level 1.
Possibility of getting to choose a lineage at level 1 but still get a choice of a level 1 feat?
Sorry to resurrect this old post but I've been away from Society games for a while and recently came back. So I have an issue now with this character in that the aphorite feats were reprinted in war of the immortals under the Aeonbound tree.
Previously I bought the boon for aphorite, selected dwarven weapon familiarity at level 1 as my ancestry feat -> level 13 impose order -> level 17 channel the godmind.
Now with the age of immortals printing, impose order and channel the Godmind have the level 1 Aeonbound ancestry feat requirement. This means I would have to choose that and lose out on dwarven weapon. So now not only have I bought the boon and get nothing for the points. (I don't see any changes to the aphorite boon after downloading it again), it hurts my character idea as him using dwarven weapons from level 1 in society was a big part of it for me.
|
|
With Aphorite, Ganzi and the other planar scions being rolled into Nephilim with War of the immortals, will we get a refund for achievement points that we spent to purchase Aphorite for Society play?
Also something that I've seen other content creators talk about is that it feels like we are losing a first level feat slot for our ancestries now with the remaster Nephilim change. Before I just chose Aphorite for my heritage, but now I need to choose the Nephilim heritage and the Aphorite lineage feat for level 1.
Possibility of getting to choose a lineage at level 1 but still get a choice of a level 1 feat?
Sorry to resurrect this old post but I've been away from Society games for a while and recently came back. So I have an issue now with this character in that the aphorite feats were reprinted in war of the immortals under the Aeonbound tree.
Previously I bought the boon for aphorite, selected dwarven weapon familiarity at level 1 as my ancestry feat -> level 13 impose order -> level 17 channel the godmind.
Now with the age of immortals printing, impose order and channel the Godmind have the level 1 Aeonbound ancestry feat requirement. This means I would have to choose that and lose out on dwarven weapon. So now not only have I bought the boon and get nothing for the points. (I don't see any changes to the aphorite boon after downloading it again), it hurts my character idea as him using dwarven weapons from level 1 in society was a big part of it for me.
The state of Aphorites and Ganzi after the release of War of Immortals hasn't been addressed, and rhis raises an issue I hadn't considered. I'd been previously assuming people who purchased the old boons at any time including the present (they are still available on the ACP store) could make a character using the rules for Aphorites and Ganzis available in the Ancestry Guide, since no language exists in the PFS sanctioing that combines these heritages with Nephilim the way legacy Aasimar and Tiefling feats were made available to Nephilim. So people who wanted to use the Legacy versions of Aphorite and Ganzi could continue to do so, and that also meant some feats from the ancestry guide like Offensive Analysis were unavailable to Nephilim with the Aeonbound feat.
As Absion points out, the policy that newly printed options with the same name as the old rules option take precedence throws a wrench in that. Have most of the old Aphorite and Ganzi feats dissapered for Legacy characters?
|
|
The state of Aphorites and Ganzi after the release of War of Immortals hasn't been addressed, and rhis raises an issue I hadn't considered. I'd been previously assuming people who purchased the old boons at any time including the present (they are still available on the ACP store) could make a character using the rules for Aphorites and Ganzis available in the Ancestry Guide, since no language exists in the PFS sanctioing that combines these heritages with Nephilim the way legacy Aasimar and Tiefling feats were made available to Nephilim. So people who wanted to use the Legacy versions of Aphorite and Ganzi could continue to do so, and that also meant some feats from the ancestry guide like Offensive Analysis were unavailable to Nephilim with the Aeonbound feat.
As Absion points out, the policy that newly printed options with the same name as the old rules option take precedence throws a wrench in that. Have most of the old Aphorite and Ganzi feats dissapered for Legacy characters?
Looking at the Aeonbound feat tree:
Channel the Godmind, Impose Order, Intuitive Crafting, and Resilient Physiology have all been reprinted in WoI with the Aeonbound requirement going forward, and have been removed from the Aphorite trait list.https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?Traits=335
(Interestingly enough Ancillary Motes wasn't converted along with Crystalline dust becoming Extraplanar Haze so not sure on that option and how it would be chosen)
As for Ganzi, Proteankin is now a requirement for Alter Resistance, Amorphous Aspect, Anarchic Arcana, Creative Prodigy. So those have lost the Ganzi trait.
https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?Traits=339