16 points

Off-guard will take some getting used to, but it kinda makes more sense - being flat-footed to a particular creature was always a bit of a weird concept.

permalink
report
reply
10 points

“Ability scores have been removed” YES! FINALLY!

permalink
report
reply
0 points

Except now we’ve lost the ability to slowly invest in attributes over 18. Not good imo, and having ability scores didn’t raise problems

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Paizo originally wanted to get rid of ability scores and just use modifiers with 2nd Edition, but they were afraid of a D&D 4th Edition schism happening and didn’t make the change when they were releasing it. Now they have the perfect opportunity to make the shift without angering the playerbase.

What I have heard is that they haven’t quite finished working out how the change from attributes to modifiers will be implemented, but it is something being handled with the official changes of the remaster. What they have said so far is that we will still have the ability to raise ability modifiers above 18, we just don’t know how it will work yet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

If anything I think it’d be an improvement if the text just said “you can’t raise an ability modifier over +4 until lv10, and over +5 until lv20.” It’d free up an ability boost at levels 5 and 15 too, which would be nice for more MAD builds.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

That is just taking choice away from the players. How is that a good thing?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

There will still be the ability to do this, I don’t know the exact mechanic, but it was asked and answered when Paizo was doing their Livestreams regarding the remaster

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Instead of gaining +1 ability point, could just gain +0.5 modifier, with fractions rounding down on rolls. That would require that people spend two of them in the same ability to see a mechanical benefit though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Oooh, wish is a ritual now? Interesting…

permalink
report
reply
7 points

Honestly, I think that makes more sense now that Paizo has proposed the adjustment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Not sure I’m familiar. What’s the adjustment?

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

Mostly flavor, but some mechanical. You won’t be casting wish in combat any more.

From the Ritual entry on AON (emphasis mine to highlight the changes from Wish as a spell):

A ritual is an esoteric and complex spell that anyone can cast. It takes much longer to cast a ritual than a normal spell, but rituals can have more powerful effects.

When you take charge of a ritual, you are its primary caster, and others assisting you are secondary casters. You can be a primary caster for a ritual even if you can’t cast spells. You must know the ritual, and the ritual’s spell level can be no higher than half your level rounded up. You must also have the required proficiency rank in the skill used for the ritual’s primary check (see Checks below), and as the primary caster, you must attempt this skill check to determine the ritual’s effects. The primary skill check determines the tradition. Rituals do not require spell slots to cast. You can heighten a ritual up to half your level rounded up, decided when the ritual is initiated. A ritual always takes at least 1 hour to perform, and often longer. While a ritual is a downtime activity, it’s possible—albeit risky—to perform a ritual during exploration with enough uninterrupted time. A ritual’s casting time is usually listed in days. Each day of casting requires 8 hours of participation in the ritual from all casters, with breaks during multiday rituals to allow rest. One caster can continue a multiday ritual, usually with some light chanting or meditation, while the other casters rest. All rituals require material, somatic, and verbal components throughout their casting time.

Considering that Wish is supposed to be the end-all-be-all of spells, it makes sense that it would be a ritual rather than just a quick “wave my hands and say mumbo jumbo” cast as an afterthought. It now takes at least an hour, requires gathering other spell casters, multiple checks, and it fits the description of a ritual in that it can have more powerful effects than a normal spell.

Edit to add: I may have misunderstood your question. The adjustment I was referring too was the change from a spell to a ritual, not that rituals had been adjusted.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Vitality and void, huh? I approve of the alliteration.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

I’m not sure about vitality for positive though, “vitality damage” doesn’t sound to me like something that only affects undead

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I agree. While I do like some changes I disklike some others. Though I am very much not angry at Paizo, I don’t want to know how difficult it was to find everything potentially copyrighted and then come up with sensible alternatives.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Most of this is good, but I think renaming the geniekin heritages is a bit much. The old names are older than D&D and common enough in culture that there’s no way there’s a copyright issue

permalink
report
reply
4 points
*

It’s more an issue of if there is a risk of litigation, or potential avenues of it. Having less things potentially be targets helps differentiate a products identity more and have less ‘weight’ if it is used in court as evidence thereof.

Another benefit is this allows them to deviate from past/common tropes that people would expect from a “Shaitan” or any other renamed creatures based on knowledge from other systems or analogous creatures of myth in future writing - even if they still borrow from the latter in most creatures cases.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

As far as I can tell the only geniekin with a name change is ifrit. All other changes are to the actual genies. And at least in principle I think the changes are good: ifrit and efreeti are just different ways to transliterate the same Arabic word, as are (and this is much worse) djinn and genie. AFAIK there is nothing relating to earth in the word Shaytan or to water in the word Marid. I don’t know much about the new names, but at least the duplication was surely only there for continuity reasons (which are now a detriment rather than a boon).

permalink
report
parent
reply

Pathfinder 2e General Discussion

!pf2general@pathfinder.social

Create post

Community stats

  • 1

    Monthly active users

  • 82

    Posts

  • 625

    Comments

Community moderators