| 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
It feels like an error that Qi Spells (also Advanced, Master, and Grandmaster) lack language that "you can take this feat more than once". Since currently you can't get both Inner Upheaval and Qi Rush or Qi Blast and Shrink the Span, etc.
Back when these were all separate feats, this didn't need to be said but I doubt the intention was to make the qi spell feats an either/or choice. A character who wants to spend more than 5 feats on qi spells should be free to.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
AFAIK, Champion Dedication doesn't give you Champion's Aura, which means things like Champion's Reaction don't have a range. That obviously isn't the intention since it makes no sense to give a feat to get the reaction and then not have it work. Feels like an obvious oversight.
Doesn't Oracle also say 2/3 spell slots per rank in one place and 3/4 in another?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Interrogator Pointed Questions will be Errata'd day 1.
Everyone thinks Live Wire will but it won't.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alchemist Bomb splash
-- rule book contradictions on if splash hits AoE on miss or better, or on hit or better.
================
Chirugeon Alchemist Feat Soothing Vials
--- adds an effect to FV healing that triggers when something "regains Hit Points from your..."
--- but the FV healing trait gives a 10 min cooldown on restoring Hit Point, while also saying "not immune to any other effects of those items."
--- Meaning the FV- enhancing Feat is still stuck on the same 10-min cooldown.
There's the thing about the number of Oracle spell slots, too.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Interrogator Pointed Questions will be Errata'd day 1.
And thank god for that.
Errata on if Alchemical Sciences recharge will hopefully be there too
Why would Blood Rising would need a nerf/errata? The fact you can buff yourself and trigger Blood Magic with a magic of the same Tradition is very cool and a reaction, I don't really see it myself. Does anyone else?
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Devise a Stratagem still specifically calls out the sap on its weapons list even though a sap is an agile melee weapon and so is already included in that category.
Somehow this unnecessary text has survived two printings of the APG and the remaster. It's weird.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh and I hope to hear something about the Battle Oracle, that's too bad to be true.
|
Why would Blood Rising would need a nerf/errata? The fact you can buff yourself and trigger Blood Magic with a magic of the same Tradition is very cool and a reaction, I don't really see it myself. Does anyone else?
I don't think its a power question, it just feels like it wasn't intended as it overly trivialises the cost of Blood Magic.
The Dual-Weapon Reload feat from the Dual-Weapon Warrior has the wording of the new errata'd Dual-Weapon Reload from the Gunslinger, however it still has the one-action chevron.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not nearly as pressing as some other things that are and will be brought up, but I'd really like to see the wording on Flash of Grandeur be a bit more clear. Saying "for one round, the attacker is affected by Revealing Light" on an effect that doesn't prompt a save and doesn't have the same duration as any possible outcome of revealing light is bizarre.
I assume it means "for one round, the attacker is dazzled. Further, if the attacker was invisible, they are concealed instead; and if they were concealed, they are no longer concealed, unless that concealment was the result of Flash of Grandeur, Revealing Light, or a similar effect." Yeah, that's a comparative mouthful. But referencing a spell that requires a save in this way as strange. Even if it's not fully written out, there's got to be a better way.
It's also somewhat odd that an effect with a duration that's normally tied to the caster's turn is on a reaction; I've already seen some confusion about when the effect ends because of that. Presumably, the champion can never take advantage of the off-guard proc from the L1 feat tied to this ability, because the duration of the effect ends at the start of their next turn. But a lot of people find that extremely unintuitive. It also encourages some very strange choices with initiative delays; it's desirable to have your initiative right before whoever you're reacting to, in order to maximize effect duration.
Why would Blood Rising would need a nerf/errata? The fact you can buff yourself and trigger Blood Magic with a magic of the same Tradition is very cool and a reaction, I don't really see it myself. Does anyone else?
I think it's just supposed to be limited to enemies targeting you. It reads that way to me at least. Getting blood magic from cantrips also seems unintentional, but we'll see.
On pg. 139, one of the results of Meddling Futures is inconsistent with the rest. Result 2 Adept states you get the bonus only if you're cursebound 3. The other results provide their bonus "if you are at least cursebound 3." Pretty minor.
Oh and I hope to hear something about the Battle Oracle, that's too bad to be true.
The removal of Martial Proficiency?
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh and I hope to hear something about the Battle Oracle, that's too bad to be true.The removal of Martial Proficiency?
Having your weapon proficiency come and go is a problem rather than a boon. What happens if you miss your Strikes? You have to recast the spell (hard to do at lower levels, when your focus pool is likely just 1 point) or switch to a simple weapon, because your martial one has become deadweight.
I'd rather have the Battle Oracle stick to simple weapons (you can always take feats or dedications to change that) and Battle Trance grant a different effect, than the mess it is now.| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Plus, if you take the Weapons Training general feat (or otherwise get martial weapon proficiency through an archetype), this focus spell is now useless, and if you haven't gotten a second focus spell yet, you'll have nothing to spend focus points on.Oh and I hope to hear something about the Battle Oracle, that's too bad to be true.The removal of Martial Proficiency?Having your weapon proficiency come and go is a problem rather than a boon. What happens if you miss your Strikes? You have to recast the spell (hard to do at lower levels, when your focus pool is likely just 1 point) or switch to a simple weapon, because your martial one has become deadweight.
I'd rather have the Battle Oracle stick to simple weapons (you can always take feats or dedications to change that) and Battle Trance grant a different effect, than the mess it is now.
I agree with all of that, but I don't think its a day 0 errata candidate since fixing it really requires changing the fundamental idea of the spell. The best they're likely to do in a day 0 errata is remove the sustained parts of it so it at least stays up the full minute, which would at least not feel so janky.
The only way to make it better than the weapon proficiency feat is if it gives some kind of bonus when you hit (or even when you attack) so that using it and striking feels like you're getting something positive instead of "this is a spell tax I'm required to pay in order for this to work at all."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Bad/incompetent but not technically broken design" is a reason to hope Paizo feels shame, but not generally a reason to hope for errata.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Bad/incompetent but not technically broken design" is a reason to hope Paizo feels shame, but not generally a reason to hope for errata.
Normally I agree, but weapon trance is so unqualifiedly bad and makes so little sense within PF2 as a system that I think there might be a chance.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why would Blood Rising would need a nerf/errata? The fact you can buff yourself and trigger Blood Magic with a magic of the same Tradition is very cool and a reaction, I don't really see it myself. Does anyone else?
The description says 'foe' but the rules line just says 'targeted', not 'targeted by an enemy'
This means it triggers when you or an ally casts guidance or message, or tremor signs or take root on you (single action cantrips available to many traditions), but not when an enemy fireballs you (as most areas don't target).Is that really what was intended? Please make the intention of the feat clear.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Tempest Oracle has very severe design flaws: Both new domains granted to the Tempest mystery, Cold & Lightning, seem useless: The first Cold domain spell (Winter Bolt) and both lightning domain spells (Charged Javelin, Bottle the Storm) are spells with ranged attacks, yet ranged attacks get a severe -2 penalty from the Tempest cursebound 2 effect. Spells with attack rolls are already weak (and casters have no way to improve these), but this makes the 2 new domains virtually useless.
Furthermore, it's 100% impossible to actually use the Bottle the Storm lightning domain spell:
"You gain electricity resistance 10 against the triggering effect. If you successfully prevent damage in this way, at any time during the spell’s duration, you can spend a single action, which has the attack trait, to..."
because the Tempest curse suppresses electricity resistance & immunity.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sorcerer 1st focus spells for Angelic & Undead bloodlines both provide a status bonus to hitpoints healed, which doesn't stack with the status bonus from Sorcerous Potency. Rework or clarification that it does stack?
Also Angelic bloodline's 3rd focus spell can target only unholy creatures, and grants damage bonus only to holy allies. Maybe not an Errata, but this feels incredibly useless without the exact right party in the exact right campaign. And Angelic doesn't even offer the option of sanctification.
Aberrant Sorcerer 1st focus spell hasn't changed (gives extended reach on touch spells), while virtually all touch spells were removed by the Remaster.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A self correction.
"Bad/incompetent but not technically broken design" is a reason to hope Paizo feels shame, but not generally a reason to hope for errata.
I just remembered the Lightning Rod errata, and while that was mocked and hated 10x as hard as anything in this book it does provide some precedent for hope.
The Tempest Oracle has very severe design flaws: Both new domains granted to the Tempest mystery, Cold & Lightning, seem useless: The first Cold domain spell (Winter Bolt) and both lightning domain spells (Charged Javelin, Bottle the Storm) are spells with ranged attacks, yet ranged attacks get a severe -2 penalty from the Tempest cursebound 2 effect. Spells with attack rolls are already weak (and casters have no way to improve these), but this makes the 2 new domains virtually useless.
Furthermore, it's 100% impossible to actually use the Bottle the Storm lightning domain spell:
"You gain electricity resistance 10 against the triggering effect. If you successfully prevent damage in this way, at any time during the spell’s duration, you can spend a single action, which has the attack trait, to..."
because the Tempest curse suppresses electricity resistance & immunity.
None of these are problems because you can freely use these domain spells when your curse isn't active, and using them doesn't activate your curse.
Cursebound activities are entirely separate from domain spells and need not interact at all. Don't use them at all, don't invest in domain spells, or use up your focus spells before you start using cursebound actions. All of these will prevent the conflict you think you see.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Tempest Oracle has very severe design flaws: Both new domains granted to the Tempest mystery, Cold & Lightning, seem useless: The first Cold domain spell (Winter Bolt) and both lightning domain spells (Charged Javelin, Bottle the Storm) are spells with ranged attacks, yet ranged attacks get a severe -2 penalty from the Tempest cursebound 2 effect. Spells with attack rolls are already weak (and casters have no way to improve these), but this makes the 2 new domains virtually useless.
Furthermore, it's 100% impossible to actually use the Bottle the Storm lightning domain spell:
"You gain electricity resistance 10 against the triggering effect. If you successfully prevent damage in this way, at any time during the spell’s duration, you can spend a single action, which has the attack trait, to..."
because the Tempest curse suppresses electricity resistance & immunity.None of these are problems because you can freely use these domain spells when your curse isn't active, and using them doesn't activate your curse.
Cursebound activities are entirely separate from domain spells and need not interact at all. Don't use them at all, don't invest in domain spells, or use up your focus spells before you start using cursebound actions. All of these will prevent the conflict you think you see.
This sort of anti-synergy is still counter to the general design philosophy we've seen elsewhere and feels like an oversight, though. Probably not a Day 1 fix, but definately to be addressed.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would describe the general design philosophy of the Oracle as "meh, good enough, ship it!" This isn't a top 10 things wrong with the Oracle item. If being unable to cast spells at Lore cursebound 4 is ok, and they think enfeebled 1-4 and clumsy 1-4 curses are equivalent with no obvious balancing points between the mystery packages, then having some anti-synergy between some of your optional domains and some of your cursebound levels isn't really an issue.
And don't get 5,000 people started again on that first Battle mystery focus spell that is the worse one in the game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I just remembered the Lightning Rod errata, and while that was mocked and hated 10x as hard as anything in this book it does provide some precedent for hope.
Remember also that we had to wait like 6 months for Roiling Mudslide to get an area. Before the actual errata it was just "have your GM pick something" and they left it like that, since it's not an unworkable solution.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I for one am shocked, SHOCKED, that paizo would release a product that needs exstensive errating from the very jump. Paizo does so many things well - formatting and proof reading just aren't among them.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder if giving Oracle mysteries 9 bonus spells instead of 3 would help it any the way bloodlines have 9.
Divine Access being baked in does some of that, and Mysterious Repitoire giving a non-Divine spell also helps. I don't think it really needs the extra spells on the mysteries.
I just remembered the Lightning Rod errata, and while that was mocked and hated 10x as hard as anything in this book it does provide some precedent for hope.Remember also that we had to wait like 6 months for Roiling Mudslide to get an area. Before the actual errata it was just "have your GM pick something" and they left it like that, since it's not an unworkable solution.
We're going on what, 3 years now waiting for the promised Inner Radiance Torrent update? That one is relatively minor in the grand scheme of things, but they acknowledged it was wrong and it's been held up since in the "we really don't want to errata Secrets of Magic" backlog. (Arcane Cascade was far more egregious and even that took until the Remaster release basically forcing it.)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Tempest Oracle has very severe design flaws: Both new domains granted to the Tempest mystery, Cold & Lightning, seem useless: The first Cold domain spell (Winter Bolt) and both lightning domain spells (Charged Javelin, Bottle the Storm) are spells with ranged attacks, yet ranged attacks get a severe -2 penalty from the Tempest cursebound 2 effect. Spells with attack rolls are already weak (and casters have no way to improve these), but this makes the 2 new domains virtually useless.
Furthermore, it's 100% impossible to actually use the Bottle the Storm lightning domain spell:
"You gain electricity resistance 10 against the triggering effect. If you successfully prevent damage in this way, at any time during the spell’s duration, you can spend a single action, which has the attack trait, to..."
because the Tempest curse suppresses electricity resistance & immunity.None of these are problems because you can freely use these domain spells when your curse isn't active, and using them doesn't activate your curse.
Cursebound activities are entirely separate from domain spells and need not interact at all. Don't use them at all, don't invest in domain spells, or use up your focus spells before you start using cursebound actions. All of these will prevent the conflict you think you see.
No, these are definitely bad. Your class abilities shouldn't actively work against each other like this. That's a thing the class updates and PF2 itself were trying to move away from.
"We're giving you class abilities as focus spells, but choose between using them or your class cursebound abilities" is really not a good thing to be pitching, especially when some other mysteries can freely spam both with little to no downside. (The curses being wildly imbalanced with each other is another issue, but I doubt errata is going to touch that.)
They may be bad, but they aren't problems requiring errata. Paizo publishes badly designed options nearly every month. They don't change more than a tiny fraction usually after years have passed.
Extravagent Parry grants panache on a miss.
Elegant Buckler grants panache on a critical miss.
What gives? These two fighting styles were treated the same before.
Extravagent Parry grants panache on a miss.
Elegant Buckler grants panache on a critical miss.What gives? These two fighting styles were treated the same before.
I’ve seen plenty of discussion on this that assumes the intent is that the buckler style favor defense (because shield block?) and the other offense (easier off turn panache).
That is 9 levels to do without.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would describe the general design philosophy of the Oracle as "meh, good enough, ship it!" This isn't a top 10 things wrong with the Oracle item. If being unable to cast spells at Lore cursebound 4 is ok, and they think enfeebled 1-4 and clumsy 1-4 curses are equivalent with no obvious balancing points between the mystery packages, then having some anti-synergy between some of your optional domains and some of your cursebound levels isn't really an issue.
And don't get 5,000 people started again on that first Battle mystery focus spell that is the worse one in the game.
To be fair, 1E Oracles also had curses which were much worse (or better) than others, so it isn't without precedent.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That is 9 levels to do without.That’s true, but it wouldn’t be the first time a strong combination at higher levels caused them not to give something at lower levels.
And have it broadly rejected by the player base.
There is a problem in the much lauded Sorcerous Potency class feature, but it can easily be fixed by removing a single word:
Because of the magical power inherent in your blood, your spells that hurt or cure are stronger than those of other spellcasters. When you Cast a Spell from your spell slots thateitherdeals damage or restores Hit Points, you gain a status bonus to that spell’s damage or healing equal to the spell’s rank. This applies only to the initial damage or healing the spell deals when cast. An individual creature takes this damage or benefits from this healing only once per spell, even if the spell would damage or heal that creature multiple times.
Just remove the word "either" from the text. Otherwise Sorcerous Potency would not apply to spells when they both damage AND restore hit points, like a 3-action Heal/Harm.
That is because "either X or Y" is a mutually exclusive or-statement, meaning only ever one can be true (e.g. "X is true, Y is false" or "X is false, Y is true"), but not both simultaneously (e.g. "X is true, Y is true"). It's different from a normal "X or Y" statement, which allows both things to be true simultaneously.
I'm sure you don't want to exclude the primary bloodline spells of the Angelic, Psychopomp, and Undead bloodlines just because of this single, superfluous word!
p.s.: I do recommend to change the "or" to an "and" in this sentence as well. It doesn't change anything, because "or" already applies to both, but as you have just witnessed the intricacies of "and" and "or" can lead to unnecessary misunderstandings:
...you gain a status bonus to that spell’s damageorhealing equal to the spell’s rank.
That is 9 levels to do without.
Sure, but you can always pick extravagant parry then retrain at level 10. But part of the tradeoff is that you can use shield block with a buckler (and make it out of precious materials and put reinforcing runes on it) or use a buckler that's a specific magic item but there's no comparable benefit to the free hand/parry weapon option. Since a free hand has nothing in it and a swashbuckler has no real two-weapon fighting support so you're just going to hold your main-gauche or whatever for the AC bonus.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
That is because "either X or Y" is a mutually exclusive or-statement, meaning only ever one can be true
Not in natural everyday English
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes this happens in other languages too. The natural "or" many times works like an or+and in boolean.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Animal Instinct Frog Barbarian’s Tongue attack is only 1d4 when every other attack like it is 1d6.
1d4 made sense when it had reach, but it doesn’t anymore.
I noticed that the weapon tables have "tripkee" instead of "trip" listed for weapons with the trip trait.