Remaster fix anything?


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I haven't been following the remaster closely but will dig in now that it is on Archives.

Now that it is out and digested, did the remaster fix anything or really just tweaks on the edges and copyright fixes?

The kind of things I'm thinking about that I wish were changed:

1) boosting power of low level spellcasters

2) fixing Wizard -- better focus spells, better feats

3) making the spell list have a greater percentage of more useful spells in general vs. a handful of must pick ones that are clearly better than others (cough synesthesia)

4) more good skill feats -- chain for recall knowledge, etc.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Things we can definately observe so far

1) Witch received some better feat support and flavor
2) Many "Boss" Monsters received small, targeted nerfs to make them feel more fair to fight.
3) A number of spells did have changes to improve usability, although probably not in the way you're hoping (Several Spell slot spells lost attack rolls, the 5th rank cold spell now has a burst and cone function). Synesthesia is noticeably absent.

Your specific complaints haven't been largely addressed, and I think the new wizard schools were probably the biggest miss of the Player Core. School spells feel haphazardly picked and have a number of feel-bad moments during progression that the old system was at least slightly better at avoiding/mitigating


The Remaster Compatibility errata for Secrets of Magic at least fixed Arcane Cascade so that it doesn't end as soon as you use the action to start it.

That wasn't really part of the Remaster though. Just an errata fix that came out at the same time.

Edit: The strapped nature of shields and Swap action meaning that you don't end up leaving your equipment laying around the battlefield when you need to change up your weapons mid-battle is nice too. But that probably falls into the 'tweaks around the edges' idea.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

"Swap" action is a thing now, making action economy much less frustrating to run by the rules.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
hsnsy56 wrote:


I haven't been following the remaster closely but will dig in now that it is on Archives.

Now that it is out and digested, did the remaster fix anything or really just tweaks on the edges and copyright fixes?

The kind of things I'm thinking about that I wish were changed:

1) boosting power of low level spellcasters

2) fixing Wizard -- better focus spells, better feats

3) making the spell list have a greater percentage of more useful spells in general vs. a handful of must pick ones that are clearly better than others (cough synesthesia)

4) more good skill feats -- chain for recall knowledge, etc.

Yeah people have gone through these in detail in different threads.

1) cantrips are basically the same as before. No ability mods, add an extra die of damage, works out to similar damage (except for electric arc, which was nerfed)

2) wizard has pretty much the same feats and focus spells as before, they're literally the same spells but renamed. I think on the whole the new schools do a decent job picking the better focus spells and leaving behind the less useful ones.

3) synesthesia no longer exists (except as a legacy spell). Spells are mostly just clones from pre-remaster, so nope, no real difference there.

4) there are a few more Recall Knowledge class feats but no changes to skill feats.

The remaster did do quite a lot to buff casters, though. Formerly alignment damage spells now deal spirit damage and thus hit everything except constructs. That makes evil damage (from diabolic bloodline sorcerers' hellfire plume, for instance) vastly more usable, and makes evil/chaotic/lawful clerics not cry in a corner.

Golems no longer have flat immunity to magic and just have resistance 5-15 to spell damage, which makes casters much happier since they can now slow or web golems and blast through their spell resistances.

Liberty's Edge

It is my understanding that the Witch, the Warpriest and the Rogue got boosted. Not the Wizard though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Cleric received some very nice boosts too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

1. All cantrips lost ability mod to damage, but most wound up buffed overall. Electric arc was nerfed. Being able to refocus your entire pool is a huge boon for casters, though only some classes can take advantage of it without multiclassing into psychic. (But come on, just multiclass into psychic.)

2. Wizard focus spells had a few minor buffs but I didn't see anything significant. They got some pretty good new feats, but as mentioned their new spell schools lowered their ceiling a bit.

3. If you just look at player core in a vacuum, there definitely is a "greater percentage of more useful spells in general vs. a handful of must pick ones that are clearly better than others." Lots of spells got nice buffs alongside a more legally distinct flavor, and Synesthesia isn't in the book. That said, no one needs to consider player core in a vacuum unless their table is setting that limit, because everything that wasn't reprinted with the same name is still a legal pick, including all of the bad spells.

4. I don't recall a single new skill feat. A few got upgrades, but I don't think any were tied to Recall Knowledge. Automatic Knowledge remains a trap.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the new focus spells for Wizard are all around way better than the original ones, and most of the returning ones have been changed to just be better (illusory terrain becoming Earthworks, beguiling words becoming Charming Push)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Could be, I didn't do an exhaustive comparison. I will say spell slots are better and wizards get the most from those.

Dark Archive

For an overview, some people on reddit compiled this list of changes
which i use often.


Captain Morgan wrote:
Could be, I didn't do an exhaustive comparison. I will say spell slots are better and wizards get the most from those.

Why would the wizard get the most from spell slots? I don't get this line of thought.

It has already been clearly shown the wizard's spell slot advantage is an illusion due to preparation causing them to have plenty of spell slots that don't end up being used. With scrolls being so cheap as Super Bidi has pointed out, any class can load up on scrolls.

On top of that, if a wizard takes Spell Substitution which allows them to change out less used spell slots for more used ones they give up Spell Blending which doesn't allow them to trade lower slots for higher slots.

Only in theorycrafting does a wizard get more out of their spell slots than any other casting class. Spell slots are good for every single caster.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It probably isn't the overt changes that some folks were hoping for, but remastered wizard feats are better than pre-remaster.

Spellbook prodigy removes the critical fail chance of learning spells, which makes trying to learn higher level spells a lot easier and lower risk.

Conceal spell is much better. A lot has already been said about it.

Energy ablation is pretty interesting if you are a wizard in a party that is throwing down a lot of AoE energy effects/splash damage and you are up in the mix. A lot of people write off the wizard as being able to fight up in the mix though so this feat won't look useful to many players. It pairs really effectively with Forcible energy later.

Spell protection Array is a no cost (except for actions) buff against magic that the wizard can do any time without wasting resources, even out of combat. It is better than using the shield cantrip to raise a shield as an exploration activity, because it can affect up to 4 people.

Explosive Arrival is really good as an offensive option when fighting creatures with weaknesses.

Knowledge is power is a double bonus on a critical success recall knowledge, it debuffs the enemies defenses and offense.

Secondary Detonation array is a useful offensive option if an enemy already has a weakness. so if you have it and Forcible energy, you have pretty good tactical options for exploiting different energy type spells. It makes the wizard a good damage dealer, although it takes system mastery to use to maximum efficacy.

The wizard has always had strong high level feats, so not much changed there though.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
hsnsy56 wrote:


I haven't been following the remaster closely but will dig in now that it is on Archives.

Now that it is out and digested, did the remaster fix anything or really just tweaks on the edges and copyright fixes?

The kind of things I'm thinking about that I wish were changed:

1) boosting power of low level spellcasters

2) fixing Wizard -- better focus spells, better feats

3) making the spell list have a greater percentage of more useful spells in general vs. a handful of must pick ones that are clearly better than others (cough synesthesia)

4) more good skill feats -- chain for recall knowledge, etc.

You are being unreasonable. The point of the remaster was not what you asked.

1) Low level spellcasters are as powerful as they need to be. There is no problem there.

2) Wizard was changed. They have different focus spells and some better feats so I guess that that was met. But really the classes that were changed in PC1 were the Witch and the Cleric. They have been done really well.

3) No way that whole lists can be fixed short of an edition change. There are a good number of really great spells at every level and still lots of trash. Yes Synesthesia was left out sort of. Aside from that instance - I think that spells are the best balanced that they have every been in any large spell system ever. Yes they could do with some work still.

4) There were some good skill feats, not much though.

If you think something is a problem, and someone always will, then use the GM card that the game tells you to. Play the game and try to have fun.


Gortle wrote:

The point of the remaster was not what you asked.

That is a good point. Tweaks around the edges and copyright fixes was all that was advertised. What we got is exactly what was on the tin.


Gortle wrote:


You are being unreasonable. The point of the remaster was not what you asked.

Finoan wrote:


That is a good point. Tweaks around the edges and copyright fixes was all that was advertised. What we got is exactly what was on the tin.

I don't really have any expectations that they fixed anything or that people share my assessment of what needed changing, and know this wasn't meant to be a complete overhaul. But I also know they did end up tweaking some stuff beyond name changes so was just curious.

Did these tweaks end up fixing anything someone thought needed fixing? Did these tweaks add anything positive to the game?

Gortle wrote:

If you think something is a problem, and someone always will, then use the GM card that the game tells you to. Play the game and try to have fun.

How is this ever a productive comment? Of course I can GM and house rule to my satisfaction. Of course I have fun playing PF2e with the people I play with, otherwise I wouldn't play. I think Pf2e is a pretty good game, but any system can be improved.

My OP was simply meant to be-- given that the remaster DID change some things beyond just copyright name changes, in your opinion did these tweaks add anything positive to the game (improve classes that you thought needed improving, make rules clearer, make more of the spell list likely to be used, etc.) and how?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
hsnsy56 wrote:
Gortle wrote:


You are being unreasonable. The point of the remaster was not what you asked.

Finoan wrote:


That is a good point. Tweaks around the edges and copyright fixes was all that was advertised. What we got is exactly what was on the tin.

I don't really have any expectations that they fixed anything or that people share my assessment of what needed changing, and know this wasn't meant to be a complete overhaul. But I also know they did end up tweaking some stuff beyond name changes so was just curious.

Did these tweaks end up fixing anything someone thought needed fixing? Did these tweaks add anything positive to the game?

Gortle wrote:

If you think something is a problem, and someone always will, then use the GM card that the game tells you to. Play the game and try to have fun.

How is this ever a productive comment? Of course I can GM and house rule to my satisfaction. Of course I have fun playing PF2e with the people I play with, otherwise I wouldn't play. I think Pf2e is a pretty good game, but any system can be improved.

My OP was simply meant to be-- given that the remaster DID change some things beyond just copyright name changes, in your opinion did these tweaks add anything positive to the game (improve classes that you thought needed improving, make rules clearer, make more of the spell list likely to be used, etc.) and how?

Golem anti magic was vile and horrible. I'm extremely happy it got fixed to something more sane.

And spirit damage makes evil characters so much more playable it's not even funny. Sanctification in general is just a much clearer and cleaner approach.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

My comment above was directed at point 2. They are subtle changes, but wizards do have good feats now. Maybe they are not as flashy as some have hoped, but tou can build multiple, very different wizards based upon the feats you have available now. The schools are relatively minor in terms of how much they shape the build of your wizard, but that was largely true before the remaster and the focus spell distribution from the schools is better.


Grankless wrote:
I think the new focus spells for Wizard are all around way better than the original ones, and most of the returning ones have been changed to just be better (illusory terrain becoming Earthworks, beguiling words becoming Charming Push)

Earthworks is definitely not 'just better' Warped Terrain. It's as weak as it was (I see extremely little value in just difficult terrain, especially this small. Most of the time it's just useless), but completely lost its 'big (even if restricted) illusion on demand, lots times per day' utility.

And Charming Push is (almost) the same. Effects are definitely the same.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
hsnsy56 wrote:
How is this ever a productive comment?

I don't know, I am on some heavy medication at the moment so excuse me if I am wierd or rude. I have metal parts now.

Look it is just an acknowledgement by Paizo that there are limits to what they can codify and I think you have found the edge.

I am GMing a group of 5. 3 of whom are power gamers and 1 is super lucky and the other is really wierd but efficienct in random ways. They are pushing my encounter building skills. This week one showed up and changed to a WinterSleet Kineticist and he is a Poppet riding a Trex. so they are working the system great. I thought the world would break but it held together and I was able to challenge them just by doubling one encounter.
PF2 is great. If we were playing D&D the world would have cracked by now.

Sorry rambling.

Envoy's Alliance

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I like the changes to classes (Specifically the Wizard the Witch and the Cleric)

The Witch gets a bit more of an idenity with the new unique patron familiar abilities

The Cleric gets to be a little less Mad, allowing them to build more into multi-class, crafters, warriors, etc.

And I think the change in the Wizard subclasses is really cool allowing for a more thematic subclass, and giving a cler rubric for how to create a custom one.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
hsnsy56 wrote:
Gortle wrote:
If you think something is a problem, and someone always will, then use the GM card that the game tells you to. Play the game and try to have fun.
How is this ever a productive comment? Of course I can GM and house rule to my satisfaction. Of course I have fun playing PF2e with the people I play with, otherwise I wouldn't play. I think Pf2e is a pretty good game, but any system can be improved.

There are plenty of people who don't seem to know that. I've met several. We're just covering all the bases.


Gortle wrote:
hsnsy56 wrote:
How is this ever a productive comment?

I don't know, I am on some heavy medication at the moment so excuse me if I am wierd or rude. I have metal parts now.

No worries. Hope you feel better.

I agree PF2e is a very solid system overall.


Errenor wrote:
Grankless wrote:
I think the new focus spells for Wizard are all around way better than the original ones, and most of the returning ones have been changed to just be better (illusory terrain becoming Earthworks, beguiling words becoming Charming Push)

Earthworks is definitely not 'just better' Warped Terrain. It's as weak as it was (I see extremely little value in just difficult terrain, especially this small. Most of the time it's just useless), but completely lost its 'big (even if restricted) illusion on demand, lots times per day' utility.

And Charming Push is (almost) the same. Effects are definitely the same.

It's funny that Scramble Body is just strictly worse than Evil Eye now. Twice the action cost, takes a focus point, no option to sustain to prevent retching.

Charming Push is the most egregious to me though because it COULD be good if they had just made it a reaction. As it stands other than Force Bolt and Hand I'd be hard pressed to even justify casting the initial wizard focus spells.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

My Ars Gramatica wizard has gotten a ton of usage out of her focus spell and it regularly prevents crits and hits for the whole party. Like she casts it nearly once an encounter and it has prevented damage in almost every one of them. I can’t wait to get the advanced spell too


Some of the minor improvements for the wizard such as gaining simple weapon proficiency and making spellcasting proficiency not attached to a spell list make the class better in my opinion.

Simple weapons allows a wizard to use feats to obtain a better weapon and access combat archetypes that were problematic before.

The standardized spellcasting proficiency allows a wizard to access archetypes more easily and use the spells more effectively.

Given the weak wizard feats, it makes it easy for the wizard to obtain more spellcasting power with archetypes without feeling like they are giving up quality feats. In that regard, they are a bit like the fighter where you use a lot of fighter feats to pick up archetypes because fighter feats are kind of boring and once you pick up one fighting style you don't need many other fighter feats.

I think the wizard was improved quite a bit with these two small changes allowing more versatile and effective wizard builds. So the wizard has become the generic "fighter" of caster classes insofar as they have a chassis that is easy to build a lot of effective casting on.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I've enjoyed most the remaster changes thus far: better warpriests, better ruffians, better witches, better caster multiclassing. There's a lot to like, all the way down to interact now letting you swap a held item with something in your pack. I'm excited to see the PC2 changes

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Remaster fix anything? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.