Is Restoration supposed to be phased out in favor of the new remastered trio of spells or are they supposed to coexist?
Yes.
...
Meaning that it will depend on the gaming group and the campaign.
Organized Play (Pathfinder Society games) have decided that the spells will coexist.
Other tables may decide to update anyone (Player character or NPC) that has one of the replaced spells with the replacement.
We still need to get PC2 to know if some spells from CRB/APG will survive the remaster.
|
Is Restoration supposed to be phased out in favor of the new remastered trio of spells or are they supposed to coexist?
Absolutely NOT. Unless Paizo issues errata that removes the spell from Pathfinder 2E, Restoration and all of the spells not included in the Remaster continue to be a part of Pathfinder 2E.
In many cases, the old spells are not included due to copyright reasons, so you won't see them in future official Paizo published content.
If your GM wants to restrict their game to only include spells from the Remaster, that's on your GM, NOT Paizo.
Pathfinder Society has it correct. Pathfinder Society is based on Pathfinder Second Edition, which includes changes from Remaster. As Restoration and its ilk are Pathfinder Second Edition, they continue to be legal for Society play.
There are certain individuals on the board who keep pushing this idea that Remaster somehow wholesale invalidates existing, official Paizo content. Remaster does change certain rules, features and abilities, and to that extent replaces or invalidates the older versions (just as any errata would do), and Paizo issued contemporaneous errata to change or even eliminate some of the older aspects of Pathfinder Second Edition (e.g. the damage done by cantrips), but Remaster DOES NOT simply by its existence eliminate or change older Pathfinder Second Edition content.
Again, if a GM wants to limit their game to Remaster books only, that's on them, not Paizo - it would be that GM's decision to use a limited subset of Pathfinder Second Edition, no different than GM's who used to limit their game to Core only, or Core+APG only, or any other subset of the Pathfinder Second Edition rules.
Yeah, all the indicators from Paizo are that blended content will be the norm for the foreseeable future. Unless something in a remastered book shares the exact name of pre-remaster thing, it is still a valid pick by default.
Table variance is possible. I took pause when my players prepared fairie fire instead of revealing light, but the two spells are mechanically distinct enough to allow for both.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is Restoration supposed to be phased out in favor of the new remastered trio of spells or are they supposed to coexist?Absolutely NOT. Unless Paizo issues errata that removes the spell from Pathfinder 2E, Restoration and all of the spells not included in the Remaster continue to be a part of Pathfinder 2E.
Mostly I save that level of pushback for the idea that anything that wasn't reprinted at all doesn't continue to exist and be valid.
So things like Spout from Secrets of Magic, or even Synesthesia.
If a GM wants to say that Magic Missile is no longer available because Force Barrage has taken its place, I am fine with that. As was noted in a different thread, insisting that both still exist, and are distinct, slightly reduces the effectiveness of Counterspell.
Yet there's things like Divine Aura that there's no remaster equivalent nor compatibility. This makes me fell that sooner o later the designers will put a break at last in CRB/APG retrocompatibility. Specially after the PC2.
Once again this isn't official. Officially the compatibility between PC1 and older books still there and I believe that they won't brake the compatibility from non-core books (they will just errata these books). But the compatibility between the old and the new core books I don't have faith that this will continue for long.
Yet there's things like Divine Aura that there's no remaster equivalent nor compatibility. This makes me fell that sooner o later the designers will put a break at last in CRB/APG retrocompatibility. Specially after the PC2.
Once again this isn't official. Officially the compatibility between PC1 and older books still there and I believe that they won't brake the compatibility from non-core books (they will just errata these books). But the compatibility between the old and the new core books I don't have faith that this will continue for long.
The problem with that scenario is that entire books worth of content probably won't be remastered. Secrets of Magic, Guns and Gears, and Dark Archives really don't need it, and it feels like more trouble than its worth to track whether a spell came out in the APG or Secrets of Magic. If your GM bans Synesthesia, they likely just wanted an excuse to do so because they thought the spell was OP.
I also think there's a distinction between spells that no longer make sense because of alignment or school vs stuff which still works fine. Even Divine Aura is pretty simple to adjudicate. You just need to decide if the stronger works on opposed traits or all creatures.
Also, we are still six months away from Player Core 2 coming out and haven't even gotten a preview of it. The point is moot for quite awhile yet.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with YuriP, they should at some point forbid the old options from books that have been remastered. Both because there's certainly a reason why they didn't remastered it but also because these options will never have an errata and as such may continue to be problematic (I consider Synesthesia to be a spell that should have had an errata but will never unless it's reprinted).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
They both exist technically, but Restoration is kind of absolete spell now.
As for what to allow and what not, I'll wait for PC2. We need to see the bigger picture before jumping to conclussions. Right now the best course of action IMO is just allowing everything.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
As much as I dislike Restoration, there's two big ways that it isn't obsolete: it lowers a condition without a check, and it helps with Doomed at spell rank 4 rather than spell rank 6 like Clear Mind. (Specifically non-permanent Doomed because that needed to be a distinction I guess.)
And if Paizo wanted to errata Synesthesia, there was absolutely nothing stopping them from getting around to it in the five and a half years since it got put in the playtest book with exactly the same effects it's always had. Aside from player discontent, I guess, and that didn't stop them from poking at cantrip damage or whatever. ¯\_('•')_/¯ It seems silly to say 'there must be a game design reason these weren't reprinted, they should be banned!' when all official guidance on the matter so far has been contrary to that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with YuriP, they should at some point forbid the old options from books that have been remastered. Both because there's certainly a reason why they didn't remastered it but also because these options will never have an errata and as such may continue to be problematic (I consider Synesthesia to be a spell that should have had an errata but will never unless it's reprinted).
Maybe create a book called Dragon Hoard that reprints all of the options that were deliberately removed and adds the Rare tag to them. Make it .pdf only so that they don't have to worry so much about page counts and printing costs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I will be retiring all content from the crb and apg once pc2 releases. Less for a balance reason and more because it makes source tracking simpler and my life easier when it comes to remembering what does what.
I would like for there to be a spell that replaces synaesthesia rather than it just simply disappearing though... and I would rather a more balanced spell than it getting the incap trait slapped on it. It is hard to argue that it isn't one of the best spells in the game currently.
I am kinda sad the remaster didn't make affliction a type of effect with disease and poison being traits on an affliction instead of the types of affliction themselves. That way we could have shifted synaesthesia to a type of affliction instead as a means of helping level out its impact.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like a spell that removes things without a 50/50 give or take check that is low level that makes a 2nd level slot useful all the way to level 20. I thought it was a good spell to have in the game. Everything needing a counteract check given how high the DCs are makes some of the spells not worth taking. You might as well just wait.
|
The side to this that hasn't been mentioned yet is spontaneous casters.
Restoration solves some problems. So does Neutralize Poson, Remove Fear, Remove Paralysis, Remove Disease and Remove Curse.
Because many of these rely on counteracting, a say divine sorcerer would have to either devote many high level / signature slots to them, or accept that they can't be relied on to make everything better. As opposed to a cleric, who can at least prepare the right spell the next day in a high slot.
In the remaster this list is at least somewhat consolidated.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Somewhat, but the weird thing is that they consolidated the Cleanse Poison/Disease/Curse stuff while seperating restoration into the aforementioned spells.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, if players don't mind the lack of simplicity, it's nice to have multiple valid options for condition removal.
Honestly, if players don't mind the lack of simplicity, it's nice to have multiple valid options for condition removal.
Restoration is now something of a scroll or NPC spell whereas Sound body and company are the versions PCs will actually pick for their repertoire. I also like both existing at the same time, but it adds more complexity than anything else, so I'm not against removing it completely, since the spell being more fit for NPC is something that a GM can decide to handwave anyway.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Am I misunderstanding something? I thought that Sound Body / Clear Mind / Sure Footing were the remaster replacements for Restore Senses / Remove Fear / Remove Paralysis, not Restoration
They consolidate a lot more condition removal spells than just those three. Between these spells and Cleanse Affliction there's like 7 old spells together sorted by theme.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
They both exist technically, but Restoration is kind of absolete spell now.
Restoration works if you're casting from archetype slots/staff/wand. None of the new spells realistically will in any case where it actually matters because the effect rank will be too high to have any reasonable chance of success.
I guess that was deliberate, but given how badly it hinders a party where the only caster is Arcane (none of this stuff is available to them), I don't really like it... though TBH even as a Divine caster it still feels bad to have to put things into highest level slots and then still have them not work.
That's especially true since the things Restoration fixes tend to be things that stop an adventuring day. Spending the spell slots to fix Drained 3 is a thing always worth doing if you have Restoration. Without it, you spend a higher level spell slot, roll a 2, waste the slot, and now you're basically done adventuring for the day because you can't try again and most PCs are pretty justifiably reluctant to go jump into more adventuring while Drained 3.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, Restoration has 1 min casting time, it's never something that you can do in-combat. While All 3 of those are usable in combat.
They are not really comparable.
Course, given that it's 3 spells, the odds are really low you have the right one in your party at a high enough rank to actually cast it in combat for the given situation unless you knew in advance it would come up, or you're a spontaneous caster and got lucky that its the one you happened to pick. Which is why the staff/wand/archetype versions being so bad is really frustrating.
I get the idea, but people just don't have enough spell slots or actions to have all 3 of these available to make combat casting viable, especially since the most likely outcome is "suppress it for 1 round".
You're right: they're not comparable. I don't think I've seen any of them used except Cleanse Affliction since the Remaster came out, whereas Restoration is still pretty popular. If the GM bans it, Medicine's feats just do it better than the 3 spells do.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They both exist technically, but Restoration is kind of absolete spell now.Restoration works if you're casting from archetype slots/staff/wand. None of the new spells realistically will in any case where it actually matters because the effect rank will be too high to have any reasonable chance of success.
I guess that was deliberate, but given how badly it hinders a party where the only caster is Arcane (none of this stuff is available to them), I don't really like it... though TBH even as a Divine caster it still feels bad to have to put things into highest level slots and then still have them not work.
That's especially true since the things Restoration fixes tend to be things that stop an adventuring day. Spending the spell slots to fix Drained 3 is a thing always worth doing if you have Restoration. Without it, you spend a higher level spell slot, roll a 2, waste the slot, and now you're basically done adventuring for the day because you can't try again and most PCs are pretty justifiably reluctant to go jump into more adventuring while Drained 3.
I don't like this either. Slotting something in a high level slot for a fairly high failure rate is not fun. I wouldn't even do it 99 percent of the time. Not sure why they changed the function of restoration along with the name.