ADDITIONS/ERRATA: -On #5 (teaching better), one thing I didn't add was that the book could use a couple sidebars giving tips to new players. The kind of thing we usually answer over and over at the Subreddit: "consider not attacking at -10, work together against bosses" -PF2 for some reason insists on almost NEVER giving examples. :( Even now, one has to go to forums to see exactly how Shield Block reducing damage works! -On #9 (scaling Leap for Size), I'm having mixed feelings because doubling Long Jump and High Jump seems OP. I'm now gravitating toward +2/-2 FEET per size category away from Small/Medium on Leap. And +5/-5 per size category, to CHECKS for Long Jump/High Jump -On #12, the Stunned condition is still unclear, BUT Violent Unleash is clear: the order of operations about the start of a turn has you gain actions at the END of "start of your turn", so you lose 1 action for the current turn. -Another one that I didn't include but I'll say now since I saw Derik of Knights of Last Call mention it... #15. There should be a Monk-specific action to "Raise Shield" without using a shield, to get a +2 circumstance bonus to AC. Monks using shields is weird! (This wouldn't give other shield abilities btw)
For #15, I think a shield-centric monk tree (in addition to a feat allows unarmed Raise a Shield, as two seperate trees ofc) Like, spitballing here, using it could require a shield and allows strikes made with shields to apply to Monk feats and features and allow Flurry of Blows to forgo one strike to Raise a Shield instead, at the cost of suffering a speed penalty while in the stance. I'll... I'll go write up a full homebrew for that.
Monks using shields is not weird! Monks are practitioners of an *artform* where they attempt to get as close to perfection with their martial art as possible! Different monasteries teach different arts! Basic bodily protection would absolutely be a part of certain monasteries' teachings. (Personally, I think monk weapons absolutely need to be scrapped in favor of letting each monk choose their own weapon group(s) to train in.)
Hell yes to #15. Monks using shields is weird and wrong. I'd be happy to just say that they cannot use their fancy martial arts unless they are unarmored AND not using a shield
@@ArceusShayminTotally valid, but I think the opposite view needs rules support in the system. Right now, you probably are nerfing yourself if you go shieldless
Monks can use parry weapons to simulate having a shield without using a real one, it's a smaller bonus sure but they already have the highest starting AC potentially on top of everything else a low level monk can do. Plus a raise shield equivalent action would interfere with Mountain Stronghold which definitely does not need a nerf. Personally I never had a problem with and even encouraged monks to wear shields, aside from there being little to no mechanical downside to using one it also makes sense to me that in a world as deadly as golarion everyone would use any tool to survive especially if it's as simple as carrying a wooden board around! I understand not everyone likes the aesthetic but to me monks finally being able to use shields makes them different from other editions and systems, and as a last addition a shield can be one more magic item to have on yourself, you never know.
The fascinated condition should basically make everyone else concealed to the person who is fascinated except for whatever it is they are fascinated by.
There is a small change they should make to the remaster character sheet. Reorder the boxes for coins to go Platinum, Gold, Silver, and Copper left to right. This would emulate how we write numbers with the largest digit to the left and decreasing values to the right.
The big change I'd like to see is to make the adopted ancestry general feat into a versatile heritage or add it to a new background. This feat is literally part of your backstory and unless you're a human, you have to wait to level 3 to take it.
Sounds good to me (as a "versatile heritage") though it's less good compared to an actual Versatile Heritage that usually gives you low-light vision or something in addition Honestly, I wouldn't mind if every ancestry had a "Versatile Heritage" that's like a Dedication Feat, but for ancestries!
I would do the same for advanced weapons, unless you're playing a fighter or human its too hard to pick a advanced weapon not counting the ancestry weapons
To go along with the idea of hyperlinking the PDF, and it's something Paizo and WOTC are both guilty of... I wish the rulebooks would capitalize words that refer to conditions, actions, rules, keywords. Like "strike". Anytime you see the word "Strike" and it's capitalized, you KNOW it's referring to the strike action. This way you aren't confused if it's being used in a flavor text or actually referencing the action. WOTC is super inconsistent about it and I noticed Paizo is the same. It would be immensely useful, especially in a system with so MANY keywords to capitalize these things.
They consistently use the lower case form when referring to who or what is affected by some effect. It is indeed making it a lot hard to decipher whether or not something is a game term or just flavor text.
Honestly... I'm not aware of a fan who does as much work, pf2e content and analysis as Ron. Other than maybe the sly strategist? I agree, I hope he gets recognition from Paizo one day.
I could easily see Disarm's success effect having something like this: "Success: You weaken your target's grasp on the item. Until the start of that creature's turn, -attempts to Disarm the target of that item gain a +2 circumstance bonus, and- the target takes a -2 circumstance penalty to attacks with the item or other checks requiring a firm grasp on the item. _The next time you or an ally successfully Disarms this creature while the target has this penalty, you critically succeed."_ One thing I'd suggest is also porting over off-target from Starfinder, since a lot of effects have "-2 circumstance penalty to attack rolls" and the language exists for it already in Paizo's vocabulary. With that in mind, Disarm's success effect could look something like this: "Success: You weaken your target's grasp on the item. Until the start of that creature's turn, _the target becomes off-target with the item and takes off-target's -2 circumstance penalty to other checks require a firm grasp of the item. The next time you or an ally successfully Disarms this creature while the target is off-target from being Disarmed, you critically succeed."_
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG Well, yea, that could be workshopped some, but I do wonder on that kind of failing-forward effect if it would help, vis a vis you or an ally wanting to spend the additional action to try and guarantee it. In trying to, in my own time, think on a way to buff Disarm without intruding on what's already in the game, I've been eyeing Disarm's MAP/degrees of success specifically, so that's sort of where my mind's at with this. That said, that kind of set-up/pay-off with my proposed success effect isn't a design paradigm that really exists in PF unfortunately, it just sucks to suck in these hallowed halls.
This is a problem. Most enemies who use weapons have only one wepon because it would kill the gold economy to give them more magic items. If you could guarantee to disarm an enemy with two actions you could grab the weapon with the third action. An character with free hands could therefore trvialize any encounter with weapon based enemies (especially bosses). Because they can't take the weapon away from you as soon as you are not wielding it anymore. Because they would need a stupid investment in thievery feats to pickpocket equipped weapons.
Teaching the game is what im most excited to see Better organization, some pages talking about mechanical assumptions of the game, maybe sample combat, showing what can be done with the 3-action system
Honestly brave and appreciated. I love PF2E and so much of the community but many really hate the practice of house rules, homebrews, and system critiques/changes. Which is a shame since that’s one of the best assets of the D&D community to the point of whole careers for homebrew and home systems. My Recall Knowledge lets you tell at least what category it is and a property on a failure, and then a feature and resistance and question on a success. For Aid, we use a DC of one step lower from what you’re trying to help with. So if someone is attempting something DC 20, your Aid DC is 15. Teamwork should feel good, Aid costs a lot of action economy, and there aren’t a lot of ways to provide Circumstance Bonuses. Yeah I don’t love the new character sheet. It’s cleaner and I like the little bubbles but wow it doesn’t feel like it was built to be USED. Not only is multiple attack not available, but why is Perception distant from your Saves? WEIRD choice. I miss those big dark labels that make visual clarity quick. I also feel like a quick guide for go-to Activities is favorable, even if it’s just like a bookmark. Most new players playing naturally don’t recall knowledge or demoralize despite those being so powerful. For low level HP, I’d kinda like for them to just give a flat bonus to HP, like 10 HP plus Class HP. If you’re Tiny, take 5. If Large, take 15. That tiny nudge at level 1 does enough, and I’d rather the Ancestries be more uniform and have those differences come from heritages and mythological powers
So about that Free Archetype at Level 1 thing, at my tables I actually give FA feats at odd levels and reduce the qualifying levels for all Archetype Feats by 1. It's been a really good experience, because it means every character makes an important decision about their build at every level.
11:00 If you look at the Fascinated condition as the opposite point of view of a charm spell the fix becomes more readily apparent. If you attack the target of the charm spell after they have been charmed the spell effect ends. In different versions of D&D most charm spells have a stipulation that the effect of the spell ends if you or your allies attack the charmed target. In a way you can consider the Fascinated condition as a form of charm spell placed on the character by the creature or source imposing the condition on the character. So, the fix is to change the last sentence to read "This condition ends if the creature or source of the Fascination uses a hostile action against you or any of your allies."
That would make more logical sense compared to it being to the end of your next turn. But I do think an Interact action should be allowed to cancel it out. Action Economy!
22:20 I would assume it's apparent that you're casting a spell but they wouldn't be able tell what spell or what kind of spell you're casting unless they are able to use recognize spell.
Addendum to Aid: Like with many rules, you learn more about them just by learning about certain feats that modify them. Both Humans and Halflings, the two base ancestries that can't have Darkvision without a headache have ancestry feats that can make Aid a powerhouse for them from level 1 onwards, making human fighters and Halfling rogues worth their salt once they're stuck for a third action in the front line. Co-operative nature followed up with Co-operative soul makes it so worth it to have a higher starting threshhold, and Halflings with Intuitive Co-operation get half that first human bonus both to aid and also to allies to aid them. Things that need fixing are things that are 100% broken, things that are just annoying without any investment are fine. Besides, what better way to narrative illuminate the troubles of a group of lvl 1 doodz trying to learn how to work together than for them to screw up each other's rolls by "helping"?
With Aid; watching the video it seems like a rewording would be sufficient. *"Typical DC"* seems to be the hang up for a lot of people. At most, they should just reword it and give some examples on how to run Aid at low level, medium and high lvl play.
Interestingly enough, the Beginner's Box has aid proposed at one point, with an inferior DC (I recall it was the one the PC "helped" was trying to beat). I absolutely agree they should provide examples. Same for standard social interaction for higher level play.
I'd rather they just make the rule good from the start instead of having needing to fix it, particularly because society is the only way I play and you basically have to play exactly by RAW in that scenario.
Also counterspell, it should either be removed, or buffed somehow because as of right now it is incredibly underpowered, and it's just going to get worse as more books with more spells come out.
pf1 did counterspelling way better to be honest. Everyone who can cast spells can counterspell automatically from the get go. You ready an action on your turn (mostly because reactions didn't work the same in pf1). If an enemy casts a spell, you roll to see if you identify it. If you do, you can expend a spell slot of the same spell or specifically opposed spell to automatically counteract the spell. No check or anything. The dispel magic spell can always be used to counterspell any spell, but it isn't a "true counterspell" and therefore requires a counteract check. The improved counterspell feat allows you to use any spell of the same school as long as it's a higher level than the opposing spell. No feat taxes, no class requirements, and most importantly, dispel magic allowing you to do it more readily. In pf2e you could easily make it a normal reaction instead of having to ready it, but maybe still require the feats to make it balanced and avoid counterspell wars every battle.
Jump physics, actually, works the other way around. The bigger you are, the smaller your jump is. Think about insects or cats who easily jump on heights bigger than humans can, while most biggest animals can't jump at all. The reason is, when your size changes X times, your mass changes X^3 times
I like how the Gumshoe system runs "recalling knowledge" for its more mystery-genre-oriented style- if the player thinks to apply one of their investigative skills, they just receive some kind of info, automatically, without rolling. Additionally, they can spend points from that skill to gain something tangible based on that info, such as a favor from someone they're smooth-talking info out of or a new avenue of pursuit from based on a conclusion they've drawn (one of the examples I read was basic investigation with Photography told the player a photo they found was a polaroid and not a digital print, while spending a Photography point told them that some distortion indicated the camera that took it was damaged, and that there's only one shop in town that repairs and sells film for old cameras). The players are also given enough skill points at character creation for the whole party to have access to every skill the GM includes in their game, with each player specializing in a different subset of skills and overlapping on more generic skills like Notice.
Re: spells, my understanding is glowing runes appear around your hands or body any time you cast a spell with somatic components (in the new system having the manipulate trait) and it has been super clear that you cannot hide spellcasting unless the text of the spell says the target ifs forced not to notice the casting (like with charm)
On point #7 about making low level play easier, a thought that just popped into my head would be to just increase the amount of HP you get from your ancestry (maybe double or even triple). That will give a larger cushion at the lower levels, but only end up being a drop in the bucket once you get to higher levels. Haven't thought too deeply on it, so I don't know if that will actually break anything, but it might be worth exploring.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG Well, let's see how the math goes. And keep in mind that the actual HP number isn't want matters. It's the number of hits required to down a character. An average level 1 character likely has close to 16 HP (8 from ancestry, and 8 from class, not counting CON modifier). A single level-3 monster, which is a moderate encounter for 4 level-1 characters, has moderate damage of 12 per strike (based on the monster creation table). That means it will only take two attacks or one crit to down a character. Giving the character triple ancestry HP will boost the HP total to 32, allowing the character to withstand a single crit, and that character would take on average three normal attacks to down. Now lets look at level 9 characters. Normally, they would have, on average, 80 HP (8 from ancestry, 72 from class). An average moderate strike from a level-11 monster does 26 damage (I chose those levels because at level 12, monsters get access to a third damage die, which is a big sudden jump). The number of hits required to down the PC is now four. And they can even withstand one crit and one normal strike. However, if the PC had 96 HP (triple the ancestry HP), the number of attacks to down the character doesn't really change. It's still just four normal strikes. So if this example is close accurate (and I acknowledge it may not be), it means that as the characters level up, even with triple ancestry HP, they'll still start to approach that "normal" balance because of the way the numbers scale. And an extra 12, or 16, or 20 HP at levels 15 and higher really isn't going to be noticeable. But I'll admit, I may still be missing something. I'm just going to basic averages here, so the devil may be in the details.
Attack clarification: "A damaging attack": an attack that deals at least 1pt of damage before resistances are applied. This differentiates it from attacks that deal no damage (i.e. Trip, Grapple, Disarm, etc.)
Related to teaching the rules better: Completely agree. I have been diving into P2E with the hope of eventually GMing a campaign and one of the things I have been doing, both for my own sake but also as a potential resource to give to my players is a document full of rules breakdown's and summaries. As you said later, Pathfinder is very self referential. What that means is often to fully understand a rule you need to read three separate parts of the book, and often the piece of information you might need to understand something on page 30 is not until page 200. Also, and I know this is more difficult but, there are a lot of false assumptions that players would have coming from other systems (mainly 5e and Pathfinder 1) but for many of them, the rule book doesn't do much to correct them. For example, everyone can use shields, but if I came from either 5E or P1E I would likely assume that my wizard couldn't use one (for multiple reasons) but, if they are just going through character creation they would probably assume they can't and would never try (until a more knowledgeable player told them). I think part of this issue is that for Paizo, if it is written it is a rule and if it isn't written it is not a rule, but players don't start the game having read all the rules. Simply omitting a rule is not enough if many of the players coming to your game would assume they just haven't read it yet (and see my first paragraph for why that is a reasonable assumption), you have to actively inform players at least in some way.
Great picks for changes and updates. What made me most happy is that all of these are good points, and yet still so much better than other systems I used before where I'd have to house rule 90% of these matters anyway.
For your Stunned portion -- the "you can't act while stunned" is flower-language. It specifically goes on to state that you reduce the number of actions you have by the stunned value. Being Stunned 1 doesn't mean you don't get any actions. So Stunned 3 means you can take no actions in the round, but Stunned 1 just means (for that 1/3 of your turn you can't spend an action) - hence Stunned 1
That is a judgement call. Flavour text is usually identifiable, but it doesnt say anywhere that it is flavour. If the lines between flavour and mechanics are blurry, it is a judgment call. This text could very well be mechanical, which would also clarify the need for the stunned condition in the game - since there is to my knowledge no "stunned 4" - thereby reducing stunned to "slowed 1/2/3 untill the end of your turn". However, as far as i know, there is no place in the rules that directly clarifies what the word "act" entails. It is not really a key word. There are however two things to consider. The name of the second phase of a turn in encountermode is called "Act". The text in the stunned condition could be referring to this, or atleast interpreted as - you can't "stage two of your turn". This interpretation does not tell you, if you can use reactions while stunned. Are you not allowed to do anything durring the "act" phase, if you become stunned during the act phase, but still somehow allowed to use reactions after the act phase - even if you are still stunned? That is wierd. In this case, play the rules how they make most sense to you. But i dont believe that the rules on this is clear. However his interpretation of unleash psyche is still wrong because actions and reactions that happen when "your turn begins", happen prior to regaining actions. So you are regaining actions right after becomming stunned.
Regarding large creatures jumping, it's actually realistic that it doesn't scale. Strength is directly proportional to muscle section, which goes with length squared, and weight is related to volume, which is length cubed. That's the reason why ants can carry many times their weight, while whales can't stand their own weight outside of water. Once you do the math on scaling a creature, it turns out that the jump height remains exactly the same, no matter if the creature becomes larger or smaller.
Not quite, or your ant would be able to jump feet into the air. His ballpark isn't far off. A huge creature is 8 times the size, but only 3 times the jump height, which is a lower percent of the creature's height.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG Hm, somehow I don't think making fleas secret level 20s with legendary prof in athletics is quite the answer either... Unfortunately, it is in handling all the edge cases that rules complexity tends to explode to unusable levels.
Elephants are one of the only mammals that can't jump, while mice have a huge jump height compared to their body which can rival humans. Rats have a larger objective jump height than mice and most humans, but things start hitting diminishing returns pretty close to there.
@@yellingintothewind The way GURPS handled it was to say "If your throwing distance with an object that weighs as much as your body would be greater than the jump distance determined by your Speed, treat your 'jump' as a throwing object that happens to be you." Hulk and Marvel's Thor both use their super strength to propel themselves at distance, for fictional examples. Thor doesn't fly so much as he throws Mjolnir and holds onto it as it flies.
I see the fascinated condition as a strong roleplay status to apply, with it not meant for combat. I think this is a good move since there are plenty of abilities and conditions that are aggressive and can only be used in conbat
20:20 Regarding Unleash Psyche and Violent Unleash, my understanding was that the free action "trigger" for Unleash Psyche (and thus Violent Unleash) occurred before any Stunned or Slowed conditions reduced a character's action count. Thus, the Stunned condition, from Violent Unleash, would only take away an action on your turn as opposed to your entire turn. I do agree with you that the Stunned condition should be revised, however. Great video, as per usual.
That's how it's played RAW, yes. CRB p.468 : On the beginning of your turn, the following events occur : - your turn begins - the trigger for Unleash Psyche is met, so you Unleash. - as you Unleash, the trigger for Violent Unleash is met, so you gain the stunned 1 condition - after all the things that could happen during this phase, as a LAST STEP : you regain your actions. Your stunned condition wears off and you regain only 2 actions.
@@benalias9118 That is so fucking confusing, but I think you're right. Not sure why they chose Violent Unleash to be worded so confusingly. Wouldn't it have just made it more sense to make Violent Unleash take 1 action, and just have its requirement be that you use it as your first action in the turn you used Unleash Psyche? Edit: Wait a minute... On page 468 it says that before you regain your actions: "You can use 1 free action or reaction with a trigger of “Your turn begins” or something similar. " This makes sense for Unleash Psyche, since it's a "your turn begins" free action, but Violent Unleash isn't... So, does that mean you can use as many free actions you want, as long as they're linked to one free action with the "your turn begins" trigger? Shouldn't this rule specify that? Because this text on page 468, to me, makes it seem like you use the Violent Unleash free action AFTER regaining your actions... Idk, this whole thing is just written so confusingly.
@@benalias9118 So you're all in agreement, then, that "you can't act" is only flavor text? And it doesn't stop reactions like Attack of Opportunity/Reactive Strike?
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG I don’t think that’s what they’re talking about. They’re talking specifically about the order of events at the start of a turn that interacts in such a way that violent unleash doesn’t actually take away your entire turn
I really like pair of Locate action and “Be Located” reaction. The enemy covers the battlefield in magical Darkness, so it’s time for a game of Marco Polo.
I definitely agree that archetype at level one should be a variant rule. My first pathfinder character I played a vampire. It was the first time any of us had played Pathfinder 2E and we were very hesitant to Homebrew right out the gate, and I almost ended up switching character concepts. Luckily, we ended up deciding that The Homebrew was relatively minor, considering that it would be fixed by level 2 if any problems did come up, so we ended up doing that.
For Aid, I always set the DC = to an easy DC. So if there is an Athletics DC of 20, the Aid DC is 18. I’ll adjust it further depending on the relevance of the skill used.
The way me and my group run the Aid DC is using the level based DC for every aid check except for Fake out which instead uses the enemy AC. While the Fake out DC ends up being higher it's arguably less costly as instead of needing to invest a "void" action to ready it all you need to do is have your gun loaded, which for a gunslinger usually coincides with a secondary action on top of the reload, and it also has a built in "boost" from hitting on your previous turn and it's affected by AC reductions like flat footed or frightened. I do hope Aid gets more accessible in the future as right now a handful of classes can really make great use of it and the others don't really have a reason to invest the action.
Re point 13.. by RAW in the PATHFINDER 2E TRAVEL GUIDE.. all spells give off a rune effect of somesort (Think Dr Strange) .. These runes or glyphs can tell you 1) What school of magic is being cast 2) roughly when the spell was cast (lament energies which give off a timeline) and a unique signature that can show WHO cast the spell. There are feats in the game which sudue this effect.. but as RAW it should be an obvious thing happening.
What I think will still be unclear after the Remaster is whether your spellcasting can be heard behind a door before kicking down a door. Can you pre-buff before an ambush?
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG That's an interesting point.. perhaps if you had to shout the verbal component.. and if there's an instance of magic lights being seen under the door for example. The Spellcaster could mitigate the light of the spell by casting next to a bright object.. like a torch.. but for verbal .. I can see Silent spell being more useful.
Re verbal: A verbal component is a vocalization of words of power. You must speak them in a strong voice, so it’s hard to conceal that you’re Casting a Spell. The spell gains the concentrate trait. You must be able to speak to provide this component.
I really don't get the point of any of the 'espionage' spells as they're written in this system, when the designers were so worried about spellcasting that they make triple sure that everyone within striking distance will immediately know you're casting a spell, whether it's from components or the oh-so-vague spell 'manifestations.' It feels especially bad as a psychic, because they don't get conceal spell on their feat list! So the very idea of playing a subtle user of mental power is shot in the face because you're still marred by manifestations, even with a lack of verbal components (and as a kicker they made sure to add in aural manifestations so if you thought you could cast a spell without making noise, think again. Really fits in the class fantasy of being a psychic.. to have a lot of flashing lights and random noise whenever you use your mental powers?). I can understand the idea behind these choices, it just isn't very satisfying.
For your falling/jumping down suggestion, I've always operated under the assumption that intentionally grabbing a ledge and lowering yourself down will bring you closer to the ground, and thus less distance to fall. If you are on a 6' tall ledge, then hang down from it lowering your feet toward the ground, you are only falling 3 feet or less in most cases.
No notes. This is great. I have run into the fascinated, disarm, and free archetype clunkiness all already and we've only been playing for 4 months-would be cool to get a little QOL polish on them.
I want them to fix item DC. Item DCs should all scale based on the Standard DC table, and all items made with infused reagents should use class/spell DC. It's the main house rule I always use and it's SO MUCH BETTER. It improves quality of life dramatically (you don't need to keep looking up items every single time you want to use them, and they remain useful for more than one level of gameplay) without affecting game balance at all (the effects don't change, so they still aren't particularly great as levels increase). Paizo could even put a small box labelled Item Save DC on the first page of the character sheet for even easier reference. This is the one change I've asked for since the 2e playtest and the one thing they've constantly ignored, even though it's objectively superior to what exists now. The only thing it affects negatively is the Toxicologist, but let's be honest here, that research field is an absolute pile of hot shyte and should be removed from the game entirely.
I think a more ideal way to handle it would be items having their own Proficiency (Trained/Expert/etc.) and "stat bonus", but then adding their user's level. This can sort of be currently done by just adding the difference between the user's level and the item's level. This change makes it so items where increased DC is part of the benefit to upgrading still have better DCs than lower versions, but neither of them become totally useless. Take a Frost rune and Greater Frost rune fir example. The DC is only for the crit effect which is otherwise identical, but with something like this the Greater Frost rune has a DC 2-3 higher.
Fascinated is a condition I really want to get a fix/buff. Only things I found interesting for Fascinated is redirecting spells and possibly prolonging an ally's Bon-mot on an enemy. In the playtest for exemplar, there was a Body Ikon, Eye-catching Spot, which fascinates a creature if they failed their Will save with the added effect of the condition ending if you use a hostile action against them but not their allies, which is great. Though my fear stems from the wording as it implies the effect as an exception. So it also implies that certain restriction on the original Fascinated condition may not change. Granted, it is a playtest and there was no explicit mention in the playtest of certain changes to the Fascinated condition. Just gotta hope I guess.
Interesting note on jumping. In the real world the bigger you are the harder it is to jump. Compare a rabbit to an elephant; elephants cannot jump, whereas rabbits can jump multiple times their own body length from a standing start. I'd rule it that smaller creatures have a lower DCs to jump, so a halfling or goblin migth get a -5 to the DC on a long jump, whereas a huge creature would get a penalty to the DC upwards of +10 but I'd probably rule that they'd get a bonus to the distance travelled simply due to the amount of power they'd have to generate. There's probably a simple way of writing and applying these rules. The end result would be that small creatures have an easier time jumping, whereas larger creatures have to generate more power but travel further by default.
Fascinating And we all know fleas can jump huge distances. Must have something to do with cubic vs square numbers. Still unsure about a specific fix tho that would be elegant
How to fix aid. Add the success/fail effects from aid to any readied action that is triggered by another's action. IE If you want to aid another player's strike, ready to do something (grab, trip, strike, demoralize) the target as that player strikes as an example. Yes I know it's worded terribly but I hope you all get the idea. Also I do 10 less than the DC to aid for things like breaking down a door.
Funny thing you looked up for a solution to falling on 4e, when they also kind of did your solution to level 1 lethality. If I remember right, on 4e you started at level 1 with something around 3 to 4 levels worth of HP, depending on your constitution.
A couple of things, as a blind person, I can promise you finding someone with an arms reach, takes actual effort. I don’t always reach out and touch someone even wanna know where they are.. they really don’t need to do anything to disarm coming in first edition. It was one of the most overpowered combat maneuvers. You could perform that and trip.
Very neat - I also am very frustrated about the Conceal and Silent spellshape things in the revision. I also hope both of the feats are available to every spellcasting class ('Silent spell' being a Wizard-only spellshape is very frustrating - I really want my Shadow Sorcerer to be able to just Suggest or Dominate NPCs without consequences from their immediate surroundings)
I will say the 'threat' of falling distance is often underestimated by people. 5' is like the height of a minivan, so it doesnt seem all that high at first glance. Yes, an average person could very easily drop from a 5' height and stick the landing if they were doing it intentionally - if they picked a spot on the ground, gauged the height, and focused on the action. But if you slipped off a ladder or got pushed off a ledge when you weren't expecting? No, your falling on your butt (as a best case scenario).
I replied to someone else but will post in its own comment so hopefully you can see it. I believe you've missed the rules on the flow of actions at the start of your turn, which is causing the confusion over violent unleash. Pathfinder 2e Core Rule Book - Page 468: "At the start of your turn do the following in any order you choose: - If you created an effect lasting a certain number of rounds, reduce the remaining rounds by 1. - *Use 1 free action or reaction with a trigger of "Your turn begins" or something similar* . - If you're dying, roll a recovery check. - Do something else that is specified to happen at the start of your turn. *The last step of starting your turn is always the same* - Regain your 3 actions and 1 reaction. *Some abilities or conditions (Such as quicked and slowed) can change how many actions you regain and whether you regain your reaction* ." Pathfinder Core Rule Book - Page 662: "Stunned: You've become senseless. You can't act while stunned. *Stunned usually includes a value, which indicates how many total actions you lose, possibly over multiple turns, from being stunned. Each time you regain actions (such as at the start of your turn), reduce the number you regain by your stunned value* ." Therefore the flow of events is: Turn begins Unleash Psyche Violent Unleash Stunned 1 Regain 2 actions due to stunned.
I think this makes the most sense out of all the possibilities on how Violent Unleash. However, I do have one issue with this, and it's the "You can use 1 free action or reaction with a trigger of “Your turn begins” or something similar." Like, this rule works completely fine with Unleash Psyche, since it has the "your turn begins" trigger, but, Violent Unleash does not have this. So, since it states you can only use ONE free action, wouldn't it mean that you can't use Violent Unleash before you regain your actions? And what does the "or something similar" mean? Does Violent Unleash count as "something similar"? If it does, then that would also mean that you can't use it before regaining your actions. I think in order for you to be completely right, there would have to be some kind of specification on this rule, like after saying that 1 free action thing, it'd say that you can also use additional free actions that are tied to a free action that has the "your turn begins" trigger. Yes, it is confusing, but it's the only way to convey the rule clearly.
@@eamk887 Violent unleash has the trigger "You unleash your Psyche" meaning you can use it as a free action when you unleash your psyche. The rule already exists right there in the action.
@@ASJames Idk, I think it's still a bit confusing. I think adding some kind of clarification on either the rule on turn starts, or Violent Unleash would be a good idea.
Regarding confusion about Stunned: I don't like it, but I think the authors did indeed intend the stunned 1 condition to be powerful enough to take an enemy's entire turn away when used off turn as described in the video. Most spells and effects have the "incapacitation" tag when they inflict even low amounts of stun in a way that doesn't really exist for slow. In RAW we still need clarification, but this interpretation is at least consistent with the power balance that seem to apply to things that inflict stunned.
Regarding the subtle spell topic i think that requiring every spell to be spelled loud is a bit of nonsense. Enchantment and illusion spells sits in a branch of magic where most of the utility is squeezed by being "stealthy" to work at the fullest (excluded the brute force commands usable in combat). Maybe they can create tags on the degree of the manifestation appearing in the casting, for example: Lesser manifestation: the casting of these spells produces only minor glyphs, arcane sigils, murmurs and similar effects. The caster can try to hide them with a Stealth Check with a hard level DC based on the observers. Medium Manifestation: same as lesser, but more loud, or with brighter sigils or voices, hiding them uses a incredibly hard DC. Extreme Manifestation: casting generates a powerful aura in a radius around the caster (think it as the kinetic aura magnitude) and cannot be hidden. Using metamagic like concealed spell or Silent spells reduce the stealth DC by 2 for concealed and by 4 with Silent. The Blood component substitution feat of sorcerer make possible to attempt a Hard Stealth DC for hiding the casting of Extreme Manifestation Magic, or cancel the check for Lesser and Medium manifestation spells. In this way it's possible to makr impossible to cast stealthy a nuke as Chain Lighting, or give inexpected low level of manifestation to high level non damaging spells that require some cunning to be used, like Illusory scene. That's a practical idea, if someone have the time to tag all the spells...
I don't let people roll to avoid falling damage (if they fail to grab a ledge), but I do let them use Acrobatics to avoid landing prone, the DC is 10+ the damage taken.
My big wish would be editing for conciseness and clarity. Reduce the amount of text by 25 - 50% and make it easier to see the relevant information at a glance (just some bold text would go a long way as many keywords are buried in paragraphs of text and are written in lowercase letters). I hope at least they make stealth rules less clunky...
I'm curious what your aid fix is that requires another video. Personally in my game, I've been using a level DC of the player's level as the standard (and even applying the easy and hard modifiers to it as needed) and it's worked like a charm
Given Golarion's gods tend to be somewhat active, I could see a compact of the gods that provides a boost to level one adventurers, to avoid the death spirals, and as they become stronger and can stand on their own feet, that blessing fades.
Also wondering if we all just never read Leap properly, and that there's a fundamental difference between *falling* 10 feet and Leaping Vertically 10 feet *except down not up*?
@@ErikLevin Plus, it puts jumping itself back into the realm of Athletics, which means your basketball types don't need the investment in Acrobatics to be that high and can still dunk and land without breaking a hip :p
I think they just need to reword stun so that it prevents you from regaining actions and reactions? That kinda feels like that's how a lot of the design team thinks it works, based on how it's been used.
The condition for being Stunned is pretty clear about what it does, and it's right after the description in the entry. I'll quote it below, directly from Archives of Nethys... "Stunned usually includes a value, which indicates how many total actions you lose, possibly over multiple turns, from being stunned. Each time you regain actions (such as at the start of your turn), reduce the number you regain by your stunned value, then reduce your stunned value by the number of actions you lost. For example, if you were stunned 4, you would lose all 3 of your actions on your turn, reducing you to stunned 1; on your next turn, you would lose 1 more action, and then be able to use your remaining 2 actions normally." Psychic ability Violent Unleash specifies "Stunned 1," so the psychic will unleash psyche, violent unleash, and then still have 2 actions remaining on that turn
Not only is the Stunned condition's description written poorly, you also wrote an extremely bad explanation as to how it works. You just copied the description, and then said what happens with Violent Unleash, without giving any kind of explanation as to how you come to the conclusion. Luckily, there are others in this comment section that explain both Stunned and Violent Unleash much better than you. But ignoring that, I have an issue with this conclusion. At first, it makes sense that when a Psychic uses Violent Unleash, they immediately lose 1 action, since they use the feat before regaining any actions, but here's the issue: the rules don't specify that you can use Violent Unleash before regaining your actions. On page 468 of CRB, it says that before regaining your actions: "You can use 1 free action or reaction with a trigger of “Your turn begins” or something similar." This makes sense for Unleash Psyche, since it has the "your turn begins" trigger, but Violent Unleash doesn't work here, since a) you have already used your ONE free action on Unleash Psyche, and b) Violent Unleash doesn't have the "your turn begins" trigger. So, by these rules, I don't think you are able to use Violent Unleash before regaining your actions, since it is not specified that you can do so. In order for what you said to work, the rule of using 1 free action should be specified. Maybe, idk, after saying that rule, it'd say "You can use additional free actions or reactions if their trigger is a free action or a reaction with a trigger of "Your turn begins."", or Violent Unleash could itself specify at the end of its description something like "This effect happens before you regain your actions and reactions." I know this sounds confusing, and there probably is a better way to communicate this, but something like this should be written there.
Would like to add a special mention for High Jump being impossible to not crit fail at low levels + the jump boots gadget an Inventor can make _starting at 4th level_ requiring a Jump (not Leap) to function and being wasted on a crit fail. Also I agree the falling rules are pretty busted, IRL it's easy to take "fall damage" (strain your legs rather a lot) without landing on your face or your back or your arm or your butt or whatever.
In point 13, how does that affect psychic’s non verbal casting? It’s also not clear about whether psychic casting makes sound it seems as I have seen it debated elsewhere.
Disarm, however, is a nice way for the party frontliner to give cover for allies to Move around an enemy with Reactive Strike options, even on just a Success.
To #10, IME GM's do enforce targeting friendlies but most waive the target self. Another thing I'd add is that little excerpt under taking damage while dying that says you add your wounded value to your dying condition when you take damage while dying. There is only that one small place where it's mentioned but games where it is enforced are EXTREMELY lethal and turn up the difficulty of any monster that inflicts persistent damage by orders of magnitude because PC's can die instantly. Wounded 2 becomes a death sentence. It also just doesn't seem intentional. No where else in the dying or wounded information is it mentioned. So I would like clarification on that and if it is intended, for it to be included in the rules on Wounded.
I don't see how anyone could have that reading re: Wounded. Wounded reads "If you GAIN the dying condition while wounded, increase your dying condition value by your wounded value." Since you're already Dying, you don't "gain" the condition when you take damage...
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG I tried to send this earlier and it didn't go for some reason. It's on pg 459 of the CRB under the heading "Taking Damage while Dying": "If you take damage while you already have the dying condition, increase your dying condition value by 1, or by 2 if the damage came from an attacker’s critical hit or your own critical failure. If you have the wounded condition, remember to add the value of your wounded condition to your dying value." It's only in that one spot but it sure seems to indicate with that last clause that if you take damage while dying you increase your dying value by 1 + your wounded value. Which if you are wounded 2, dying 1, means you die instantly on a tick from persistent damage.
I think the flat check for targeting creatures doesn't apply when you're not making an attack role, as per 2-action Heal. Would be the same as Suggestion (etc) - if you can more or less see them, you can affect them. The idea is for "miss chance" which is why it's for attack rolls only. Perhaps that's not explicit enough, for sure, but flat check misses come from 1e's percentage-chance miss rules, which were only for attack rolls.
in my current game, I started my characters at 2nd level but with a negative level. they were beefier, but still effectively 1st level, and it was easy to remove when they hit the milestone.
locating nearby allies that are otherwise hidden to you. if i remember there the 5th lvl human feat sense allies. tho it doesnt remove the flat check it does lower it to 5
The Violent Unleash issue doesn’t actually happen. By the rules for the structure of a round, abilities and effects that happen at the start of your turn, like Violent Unleash, happen before you gain your actions for the round. Gaining your actions is always the last thing that occurs in starting a turn. So, you Violent Unleash, then become Stunned 1, then gain your actions, lose 1 of those actions, and lose the Stunned condition.
I'd like to see more guidance re: Critical Fails/dubious knowledge with recall knowledge. Should incorrect information be merely wrong (I.E. a claiming a creature has a weakness it really doesn't), or should it be actively harmful (I.E. encouraging players to use electricity on flesh golems to "disrupt the arcane processes")?
I feel like the Stunned thing isn't as big of an issue as you made it out to be. Violent Unleash applies Stunned 1 (you regain 1 less action at the start of your next turn). The "You can't act while stunned." is just flavor text. Edit: I was wrong, definitely needs a bit of clarifying, but it's not a severe issue.
the "you can't act while stunned" is a pretty important distinction, especially when it come to reactions. "Stunned 1" doesn't just mean "you lose 1 action next turn", it means "you are stunned, and at the start of your turn it goes away at the cost of 1 action," which is different. And therefore that sentence has an important mechanical meaning. if an enemy is stunned 1 (like you crit them with daze), are they allowed to do attacks of opportunity if you move away from them? by RAW they cannot because they are stunned and they can't act while stunned. you start your turn and as your first act, you unleash, you become stunned 1. That stun effect doesn't go away until the start of your turn. that means you are definitely stunned for the "remainder" of your turn, the rest of the combat round, all the way until the start of your next turn. and again, that's because you can't get rid of the stun, RAW, until the start of a turn (more specifically, until you waste your first action... so something giving you stunned 1 has ramifications on something like Effortless Concentration). so suddenly your turn ends (so you have to unleash as a final action essentially). You can certainly *house rule* it that "you can't act while stunned" is just flavor text and that it's just equivalent to slow 1 that goes away at the next turn, but then you've made a house rule that it's flavor text because it's written otherwise. edit: if they wanted to clarify it that it's just flavor text or that it's otherwise text without a mechanical impact, they should phrase it differently. more like "Being stunned makes it harder to act." and then continuing with the rules of stunned. edit 2: if you interpreted "you can't act while stunned" as mere flavor text, it has the odd ramification that e.g. a stun 3 would still permit free actions in that turn where you lose all 3 actions, which doesn't make sense to me. this interpretation would also mean a stun with a duration, e.g. stunned for 2 rounds would still permit characters to do reactions, which also doesn't make sense to me.
ngl i strongly disagree on #8, PF2 doesn't give you an Acrobatics roll to "land well" and reduce fall damage because it gives you the Grab an Edge reaction when you start falling or fall past a tree branch or similar, which reduces the distance you count as having falling just like you want, having both (even if they don't stack) would be cumbersome
8:00 I m colourblind... I m not complaining) It's a cool sheet, the only thing i would need for myself =] more space for m attack penalty, yes. I hope it will be more comfortable for colour-perceiving folk!
I disagree with #7. I feel that an adventurer at lvl 1 SHOULD be more fragile. They are just starting out in thier adventuring career and things should be dangerous. If you give the players things that make things easier at lvl 1, whats the point? You basicly kill and Risk vs. Reward for the players because being able to easily best any lvl 1-2 encounter it dosent give the players any sense of accomplishment. And death spirals, in my experience, happen because of bad decisions of the players, not from anything inherent to the mechanics of the system itself. Pcs by level 3 become able to take on tougher challenges without much concern, as there should always be a sense of danger no matter what the level.
As I read it, the example you give of fascination of one of the three fascinated guards hitting another guard would not work. The guard must use a hostile action against you or *your* allies. Am I missing something?
I want the lockpick rules fixed. As it is, the only real penalties for failing to pick a lock are wasting an action and/or breaking your lockpick. In my own campaign, I use a houserule where you get two tries per lock: one that's three actions and one that's ten minutes, and if you fail them both, you have to wait until your Thievery permanently improves somehow (usually by leveling up) and then you get your two tries back. Is it perfect? Nope, I'm still not entirely happy with it, but it's better than the existing system imo.
This is part of a bigger issue which is: activities that are written with Encounter mode in mind, but are really more likely to come up in Exploration mode. In a combat, you don't Pick Locks super often but it can happen. In that case, the action works great, failing to Pick a Lock and wasting two actions without accomplishing anything is a big cost. But in exploration mode, failing to Pick a Lock and wasting four seconds of time is irrelevant. The same problem exists for Force Open and Climb (especially when climbing *up* from ground level). It would be nice if all of these would get Exploration versions of the activities, where all the outcomes are relevant in that game mode.
The way I read the stun condition, inflicting stun 1 on a creature would not immediately "end their turn" just their current action. So if inflicted at the beginning of a creature's turn where they regain actions and was hit with stun 1 than they still would have 2 more actions.
It actually depends on when you gain the Stunned condition. If you gain it before regaining your actions, like with Violent Unleash, then it just takes away that amount of actions from you that turn (with Violent Unleash it takes 1 action from you, meaning you have 2 actions left that turn). However, if you gain the Stunned condition *after* regaining your actions, your turn actually immediately ends. Yes, rules specify that you can't lose or gain actions during your turn, but the Stunned condition isn't just making you lose actions, it also prevents you from doing them. So, if you become Stunned on your turn before you have regained your actions, even if it was just 1 or 2, your turn immediately ends, since Stunned specifies that you cannot use any actions while you have the condition. Of course, I don't think there is a way for a character to become Stunned on their turn before regaining actions, so all of this is just hypothetical, at least for now.
Question: Can Flurry of Blows actually be readied? It has the Flourish trait, and "You can use only 1 action with the flourish trait per turn." But is this turn only the player's or could it also be an enemy's?
Jumping scales with size in real life... in the opposite direction. Square to cube ratio, that giant is lucky he can stand up without breaking his legs. There's a reason elephants can't jump.
I think I would like just Artisan tools. Not the dozen odd tools, just like 1 set like, 3-4 bulk, covers all of the tools you might need. Hell, make it a level 5 magical item. And the current magical workshop should not be set to one type, like you can only deploy it x number times a day, but every time you deploy it it can change which type of workshop it is. If your the only crafter in the group it feels like you are unable to craft more than a tiny handful of the items you might need. Maybe make the item for all mundane tools (leatherworking, woodworking, etc), so keep alchemical tools separate and make a special set of magical tools for magical item crafting that you use alongside the mundane tools. IDK, maybe these aren’t the right but my point is that Crafting at launch was horrible and it is only slightly better complex crafting. It needs more attention.
On jumping, smaller jump heights for larger creatures actually makes sense. There's a reason that elephants can't jump. It's a square-cube law thing. That might be too far to go* in your fantasy game, but there you go. * Mixing physics or economics with fantasy is fraught with peril. 8-)
I was nonplussed with your Leap action changes until you mentioned Tiny creatures. I agree that things should change, but in my mind I treated a PC being Large and Huge PCs as temporary, so the rules don't need to describe them. But Sprites, who are probably 8 inches tall, can still jump up 3 feet? The same as your Huge giant instinct barbarian? Something in the rules ought to address this, surely.
In real life, smaller creatures tend to have similar jump heights/distances to small and medium ones, and far better in comparison to their size. Mice can easily jump three feet, rats can jump four or so, rabbits can jump several, fleas can basically jump from ground to head height. Elephants, meanwhile, cannot jump at all.
I like to think that help at lower levels is harder because the party doesn’t know each other yet-it gets easier as they become more in-tune. That being said, I feel like the whole “action AND reaction” thing is high key confusing and too much effort for new players.
i think the falling damage is fair, but maybe something to limit the prone. If you fall 5 feet taking 2 points of damage (even for us non superheros) is fair. Even a 5 foot jump you feel it. But maybe some type of acrobatics check so you dont fall prone. You still take the damage, but dont fall prone. DC could be 5+distance.
On #2, I'm on the fence about tweaking Aid too much. On the one side I understand the need for balance between an already quite deadly early game and the easier late game, but on the other it makes more sense thematically that Rookie Rando attempting to help his fellow adventurer very well might screw them both over, especially if they're untrained, and likewise the accomplished hero does wonders in helping his mates, especially when trained. Perhaps a more reasonable DC like 15 might suffice in making it not so daunting during the lower levels.
With the Subtle spell (and similar issues the various systems have had for years with components) I feel like part of the problem is that they don't want to actually clarify it, because how a spell is cast is tied so strongly to worldbuilding that any rules about it (especially any that spill over from pure mechanics into role-play) risk ruining people's subjective ideas about how the fantasy is supposed to play out (in general, it seems that the editions have been more and more vague with how spell casting actually works in-universe, while mechanically expanding everything as much as possible; they're really tying to have their cake and eat it too with this half-vancian-half-every-other-fantasy-type-of-spellcasting-in-one-system thing that they're obsessed with).
#6 I think fascinated should make you off-guard and unable to use reactions to anything other than what you're fascinated by. However, it can be broken *after* you get attacked or spend an action with the concentrate trait. This is what a similar condition does in my TTRPG. #8 This could be fixed by changing the Arrest a Fall reaction so you can use it without a fly speed. Success reduces the fall damage, critical success negates it completely, and a fly speed lets you treat successes as critical successes. #10 Maybe fix this by having Seek automatically succeed against allies and ignore the the hidden/concealed flat check? #13 This has grinded my gears for so long and has made playing trickster or enchanter characters so annoying. I've never understood why there isn't an easily available skill feat that let's you use Deception checks to conceal your spellcasting. It would fix a lot of problems and give Charisma casters an interesting advantage. I always felt like Charisma casters get screwed on skills because all magical skills are Intelligence or Wisdom. #15 Have powerful fist also add the parry trait to your fists. This would add a fun niche for fists over stance feats, and we could get feats that interact with it. I'm always the player that gets the shield spell for most of my martials.
Is stunned supposed to stop actions? When you keep reading it says you lose a value equal to the value of stunned? The example Archives gives is you are stunned 4, you lose 3 actions on your turn, next turn you lose 1 action but have two actions left. I don’t see why you wouldn’t be able to use reactions unless all 3 of your actions were gone. So far I’ve never encountered anything that stuns more than stunned 2, I haven’t played with a monk so idk
Yep, it says directly “You can't act while stunned.” Which is clarified elsewhere to mean that you can’t take ANY actions, including reactions. Note that this is different from paralyzed where you can still take mental-only actions like Recall Knowledge.
As the other person said, Stunned does indeed stop actions, including reactions. What many people are disregarding about the description on Stunned, is this line: *"You can't act while stunned."* At first, this might seem like flavor text, but it isn't. "You can't act" is actually defined in CRB page 469; *"If you can’t act, you can’t use any actions, including reactions and free actions."* So, this means that while you have a Stunned condition that's higher than 0, you cannot use any kind of actions. You can only use actions after you have dropped your Stunned condition to 0.
@@eamk887 ok see I get what you are saying but on archives of Nethys it states in the example of how stunned works that: For example, if you were stunned 4, you would lose all 3 of your actions on your turn, reducing you to stunned 1; on your next turn, you would lose 1 more action, and then be able to use your remaining 2 actions normally. Stunned might also have a duration instead of a value, such as “stunned for 1 minute.” In this case, you lose all your actions for the listed duration. If the case is that whole you are stunned you can’t make any actions, then is this a mistake on the side of archives? Because if the intention was to not be able to use any actions for “Stunned X” turns, why say something else in the example?
@@nikolaj.andresen Core rule book page 623, under what it defines as stunned the example Paizo says very clearly states that you can still you actions while you are stunned, if you are stunned 1 then you can still use your remaining two actions. This is why I am quite confused as their example of how it’s intended to work is they clearly mention that it’s supposed to still allow you to use actions, otherwise why include the line on you gaining back actions if you can’t use them??
@mynamehere69 I actually don't see how that example goes against what I said. The example you referenced only talks about how the Stunned X part of the Stunned condition works, like how you reduce X and what happens when you do reduce it. The example doesn't touch or overlap with the other "you can't act" part of Stunned. Reading your other comment you made in response to the other person, I think you're a bit confused. When we say that while you are Stunned, you can't do any actions, we mean that you can't do any actions while your Stunned condition is more than 0. For example, if you become Stunned 1 during an enemy's turn, that means that you can't do any actions from that point on, including reactions. This doesn't change until your turn begins, and you regain your actions. And when you regain your actions at the start of your turn, you gain 3 actions, but you also lose 1 action due to the Stunned condition, which then means that your Stunned condition is reduced to 0. At that point, you are no longer Stunned, so you can now use actions, including the 2 actions you regained at the start of your turn. In the end though, I think we can both agree that the Stunned condition is very poorly written. As I mentioned, I thought the "you can't act" part was always just flavor text, but it isn't. I mean, it could be, but how fucking confusing would it be that they used this specific wording that has a clear definition? In either case, the Stunned description needs to be changed. If they did intend for Stunned to stop you from acting, they should replace the sentence with something like "You can’t use any actions, including reactions and free actions while stunned." Or if it was meant to be just flavor text, then it should be straight up removed.
I would like to point out, that the interpretation of unleash psyche is incorrect. According to rules as written reactions and free actions that are triggered off the turn begging, happens prior to you regaining actions. This means, that upon using the unleash psyche you become stunned 1, and then regain actions, which you reduce by the stunned condition. So unless i am missing some convoluted interaction, the stunned condition from violent unleash does not remove all actions on that turn. There are however other niche consequences of this being "stunned 1" and not "slowed 1 untill the end of your turn", but that hardly matters.
Not sure if I understood the problem you see in fascinated. I always played fascinated like the "enemy" is the one that has to attack you to break it. There's a feat (Snap out of it) that allows you to break it on allies with a medicine check. I guess you could allow to have fascinated removed with an ally slap, but I'd make the player roll damage at least, and they would have to be aware that their ally is under it's influence (from a roleplay perspective).
They're not changing the rules for recall knowledge, they're just making it clear that Creature Identification is for exactly that, creature identification, and then you can use Recall Knowledge to gather more information. This is currently in the rules: Pathfinder Core Rulebook pg. 239 " *You attempt a skill check to try to remember a bit of knowledge regarding a topic related to that skill.... For example, Arcana might tell you about the magical defenses of a golem, whereas Crafting could tell you about its sturdy resistance to physical attacks* " Creature Identification is meant for "What is this thing?" Recall Knowledge is meant for "Do I know what this thing is weak to?" The updates are just making that clearer for the people who seem to have conflated the two.
“I have no idea what kind of creature that is, but it seems to be kind of slow and lumbering. I bet it won’t be able do dodge my fireball very easily.”
When it comes to fall damage: The game already lets you reduce fall damage if you intentionally dove into "soft substance". I'd say not being able to apply that to all landings feels like an omission. Maybe reducing it to ignoring the first 5ft on solid terrain would be more appropriate. This way a player could jump down 10ft without consequence. Just feel like rolling acrobatics there is needless complication.
ADDITIONS/ERRATA:
-On #5 (teaching better), one thing I didn't add was that the book could use a couple sidebars giving tips to new players. The kind of thing we usually answer over and over at the Subreddit: "consider not attacking at -10, work together against bosses"
-PF2 for some reason insists on almost NEVER giving examples. :( Even now, one has to go to forums to see exactly how Shield Block reducing damage works!
-On #9 (scaling Leap for Size), I'm having mixed feelings because doubling Long Jump and High Jump seems OP. I'm now gravitating toward +2/-2 FEET per size category away from Small/Medium on Leap. And +5/-5 per size category, to CHECKS for Long Jump/High Jump
-On #12, the Stunned condition is still unclear, BUT Violent Unleash is clear: the order of operations about the start of a turn has you gain actions at the END of "start of your turn", so you lose 1 action for the current turn.
-Another one that I didn't include but I'll say now since I saw Derik of Knights of Last Call mention it...
#15. There should be a Monk-specific action to "Raise Shield" without using a shield, to get a +2 circumstance bonus to AC. Monks using shields is weird! (This wouldn't give other shield abilities btw)
For #15, I think a shield-centric monk tree (in addition to a feat allows unarmed Raise a Shield, as two seperate trees ofc)
Like, spitballing here, using it could require a shield and allows strikes made with shields to apply to Monk feats and features and allow Flurry of Blows to forgo one strike to Raise a Shield instead, at the cost of suffering a speed penalty while in the stance.
I'll... I'll go write up a full homebrew for that.
Monks using shields is not weird! Monks are practitioners of an *artform* where they attempt to get as close to perfection with their martial art as possible! Different monasteries teach different arts! Basic bodily protection would absolutely be a part of certain monasteries' teachings.
(Personally, I think monk weapons absolutely need to be scrapped in favor of letting each monk choose their own weapon group(s) to train in.)
Hell yes to #15. Monks using shields is weird and wrong. I'd be happy to just say that they cannot use their fancy martial arts unless they are unarmored AND not using a shield
@@ArceusShayminTotally valid, but I think the opposite view needs rules support in the system. Right now, you probably are nerfing yourself if you go shieldless
Monks can use parry weapons to simulate having a shield without using a real one, it's a smaller bonus sure but they already have the highest starting AC potentially on top of everything else a low level monk can do. Plus a raise shield equivalent action would interfere with Mountain Stronghold which definitely does not need a nerf.
Personally I never had a problem with and even encouraged monks to wear shields, aside from there being little to no mechanical downside to using one it also makes sense to me that in a world as deadly as golarion everyone would use any tool to survive especially if it's as simple as carrying a wooden board around! I understand not everyone likes the aesthetic but to me monks finally being able to use shields makes them different from other editions and systems, and as a last addition a shield can be one more magic item to have on yourself, you never know.
The fascinated condition should basically make everyone else concealed to the person who is fascinated except for whatever it is they are fascinated by.
Interesting idea! I might want to test that out!
Yes, that is thematically and mechanically in line with how fascinated should work. I was also planning to use a similar homebrew.
This is pretty perfect. The base condition is generally underwhelming in combat.
great idea, i will incorporate it in my game, someone is playing a swashbuckler dancer^^
As someone fascinated by your comment, what other people are you speaking of?
There is a small change they should make to the remaster character sheet. Reorder the boxes for coins to go Platinum, Gold, Silver, and Copper left to right. This would emulate how we write numbers with the largest digit to the left and decreasing values to the right.
The big change I'd like to see is to make the adopted ancestry general feat into a versatile heritage or add it to a new background. This feat is literally part of your backstory and unless you're a human, you have to wait to level 3 to take it.
great idea.
Sounds good to me (as a "versatile heritage") though it's less good compared to an actual Versatile Heritage that usually gives you low-light vision or something in addition
Honestly, I wouldn't mind if every ancestry had a "Versatile Heritage" that's like a Dedication Feat, but for ancestries!
I would do the same for advanced weapons, unless you're playing a fighter or human its too hard to pick a advanced weapon not counting the ancestry weapons
To go along with the idea of hyperlinking the PDF, and it's something Paizo and WOTC are both guilty of... I wish the rulebooks would capitalize words that refer to conditions, actions, rules, keywords. Like "strike". Anytime you see the word "Strike" and it's capitalized, you KNOW it's referring to the strike action. This way you aren't confused if it's being used in a flavor text or actually referencing the action. WOTC is super inconsistent about it and I noticed Paizo is the same. It would be immensely useful, especially in a system with so MANY keywords to capitalize these things.
What's an example of PF2 failing to do this? I'm trying to think of one
They consistently use the lower case form when referring to who or what is affected by some effect. It is indeed making it a lot hard to decipher whether or not something is a game term or just flavor text.
Also, they should add "Ronald the Rules Lawyer" to the special thanks section
Honestly... I'm not aware of a fan who does as much work, pf2e content and analysis as Ron. Other than maybe the sly strategist?
I agree, I hope he gets recognition from Paizo one day.
I could easily see Disarm's success effect having something like this:
"Success: You weaken your target's grasp on the item. Until the start of that creature's turn, -attempts to Disarm the target of that item gain a +2 circumstance bonus, and- the target takes a -2 circumstance penalty to attacks with the item or other checks requiring a firm grasp on the item. _The next time you or an ally successfully Disarms this creature while the target has this penalty, you critically succeed."_
One thing I'd suggest is also porting over off-target from Starfinder, since a lot of effects have "-2 circumstance penalty to attack rolls" and the language exists for it already in Paizo's vocabulary. With that in mind, Disarm's success effect could look something like this:
"Success: You weaken your target's grasp on the item. Until the start of that creature's turn, _the target becomes off-target with the item and takes off-target's -2 circumstance penalty to other checks require a firm grasp of the item. The next time you or an ally successfully Disarms this creature while the target is off-target from being Disarmed, you critically succeed."_
That seems stronger than intended. It's effectively a +10 to the next Disarm check.
I do like the idea of a new condition tho
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG Well, yea, that could be workshopped some, but I do wonder on that kind of failing-forward effect if it would help, vis a vis you or an ally wanting to spend the additional action to try and guarantee it. In trying to, in my own time, think on a way to buff Disarm without intruding on what's already in the game, I've been eyeing Disarm's MAP/degrees of success specifically, so that's sort of where my mind's at with this.
That said, that kind of set-up/pay-off with my proposed success effect isn't a design paradigm that really exists in PF unfortunately, it just sucks to suck in these hallowed halls.
This is a problem. Most enemies who use weapons have only one wepon because it would kill the gold economy to give them more magic items.
If you could guarantee to disarm an enemy with two actions you could grab the weapon with the third action. An character with free hands could therefore trvialize any encounter with weapon based enemies (especially bosses). Because they can't take the weapon away from you as soon as you are not wielding it anymore. Because they would need a stupid investment in thievery feats to pickpocket equipped weapons.
Teaching the game is what im most excited to see
Better organization, some pages talking about mechanical assumptions of the game, maybe sample combat, showing what can be done with the 3-action system
Honestly brave and appreciated. I love PF2E and so much of the community but many really hate the practice of house rules, homebrews, and system critiques/changes. Which is a shame since that’s one of the best assets of the D&D community to the point of whole careers for homebrew and home systems.
My Recall Knowledge lets you tell at least what category it is and a property on a failure, and then a feature and resistance and question on a success.
For Aid, we use a DC of one step lower from what you’re trying to help with. So if someone is attempting something DC 20, your Aid DC is 15. Teamwork should feel good, Aid costs a lot of action economy, and there aren’t a lot of ways to provide Circumstance Bonuses.
Yeah I don’t love the new character sheet. It’s cleaner and I like the little bubbles but wow it doesn’t feel like it was built to be USED. Not only is multiple attack not available, but why is Perception distant from your Saves? WEIRD choice. I miss those big dark labels that make visual clarity quick.
I also feel like a quick guide for go-to Activities is favorable, even if it’s just like a bookmark. Most new players playing naturally don’t recall knowledge or demoralize despite those being so powerful.
For low level HP, I’d kinda like for them to just give a flat bonus to HP, like 10 HP plus Class HP. If you’re Tiny, take 5. If Large, take 15. That tiny nudge at level 1 does enough, and I’d rather the Ancestries be more uniform and have those differences come from heritages and mythological powers
B. D you suffer you could probably choose a shield as I might only be part of armol ❤❤ ppl ppl
I legit wrote class guides for my players characters on what they could do on their turn including skills and such
So about that Free Archetype at Level 1 thing, at my tables I actually give FA feats at odd levels and reduce the qualifying levels for all Archetype Feats by 1. It's been a really good experience, because it means every character makes an important decision about their build at every level.
11:00 If you look at the Fascinated condition as the opposite point of view of a charm spell the fix becomes more readily apparent. If you attack the target of the charm spell after they have been charmed the spell effect ends. In different versions of D&D most charm spells have a stipulation that the effect of the spell ends if you or your allies attack the charmed target. In a way you can consider the Fascinated condition as a form of charm spell placed on the character by the creature or source imposing the condition on the character. So, the fix is to change the last sentence to read "This condition ends if the creature or source of the Fascination uses a hostile action against you or any of your allies."
My disarm fix suggestion would be to use the condition they are using on sf2e, succes on disarm makes a foe suppresed until the end of their next turn
7:00 Wouldn't a simpler fix be to just make the effect of Disarm last until the end of the affected creature's next turn?
That would make more logical sense compared to it being to the end of your next turn. But I do think an Interact action should be allowed to cancel it out. Action Economy!
@@slb797Allowed? How about required, then you don't need to also have text specifying an end time.
22:20 I would assume it's apparent that you're casting a spell but they wouldn't be able tell what spell or what kind of spell you're casting unless they are able to use recognize spell.
Addendum to Aid: Like with many rules, you learn more about them just by learning about certain feats that modify them. Both Humans and Halflings, the two base ancestries that can't have Darkvision without a headache have ancestry feats that can make Aid a powerhouse for them from level 1 onwards, making human fighters and Halfling rogues worth their salt once they're stuck for a third action in the front line. Co-operative nature followed up with Co-operative soul makes it so worth it to have a higher starting threshhold, and Halflings with Intuitive Co-operation get half that first human bonus both to aid and also to allies to aid them.
Things that need fixing are things that are 100% broken, things that are just annoying without any investment are fine. Besides, what better way to narrative illuminate the troubles of a group of lvl 1 doodz trying to learn how to work together than for them to screw up each other's rolls by "helping"?
With Aid; watching the video it seems like a rewording would be sufficient. *"Typical DC"* seems to be the hang up for a lot of people. At most, they should just reword it and give some examples on how to run Aid at low level, medium and high lvl play.
"Typical DC" should be the DC of the task -2.
@@davidbowles7281 The typical DC should be the DC of the Task + or - X becuase it our choice of action you Aid with might effect the DC.
Interestingly enough, the Beginner's Box has aid proposed at one point, with an inferior DC (I recall it was the one the PC "helped" was trying to beat).
I absolutely agree they should provide examples.
Same for standard social interaction for higher level play.
I'd rather they just make the rule good from the start instead of having needing to fix it, particularly because society is the only way I play and you basically have to play exactly by RAW in that scenario.
@@Lycaon1765 RAW, the GM can still set the aid difficulty. Which I do to task DC -2.
Also counterspell, it should either be removed, or buffed somehow because as of right now it is incredibly underpowered, and it's just going to get worse as more books with more spells come out.
pf1 did counterspelling way better to be honest. Everyone who can cast spells can counterspell automatically from the get go. You ready an action on your turn (mostly because reactions didn't work the same in pf1). If an enemy casts a spell, you roll to see if you identify it. If you do, you can expend a spell slot of the same spell or specifically opposed spell to automatically counteract the spell. No check or anything. The dispel magic spell can always be used to counterspell any spell, but it isn't a "true counterspell" and therefore requires a counteract check. The improved counterspell feat allows you to use any spell of the same school as long as it's a higher level than the opposing spell.
No feat taxes, no class requirements, and most importantly, dispel magic allowing you to do it more readily. In pf2e you could easily make it a normal reaction instead of having to ready it, but maybe still require the feats to make it balanced and avoid counterspell wars every battle.
Soft disagree. I like that counterspell is niche unless you explicitly focus on it in your feats to loosen its requirements.
@@zanzaklaus2496I dunno, Counterspell is in the same boat as Disarm. It's actively not useful unless feated into, where it becomes only OK.
Jump physics, actually, works the other way around. The bigger you are, the smaller your jump is. Think about insects or cats who easily jump on heights bigger than humans can, while most biggest animals can't jump at all. The reason is, when your size changes X times, your mass changes X^3 times
I like how the Gumshoe system runs "recalling knowledge" for its more mystery-genre-oriented style- if the player thinks to apply one of their investigative skills, they just receive some kind of info, automatically, without rolling.
Additionally, they can spend points from that skill to gain something tangible based on that info, such as a favor from someone they're smooth-talking info out of or a new avenue of pursuit from based on a conclusion they've drawn (one of the examples I read was basic investigation with Photography told the player a photo they found was a polaroid and not a digital print, while spending a Photography point told them that some distortion indicated the camera that took it was damaged, and that there's only one shop in town that repairs and sells film for old cameras).
The players are also given enough skill points at character creation for the whole party to have access to every skill the GM includes in their game, with each player specializing in a different subset of skills and overlapping on more generic skills like Notice.
Re: spells, my understanding is glowing runes appear around your hands or body any time you cast a spell with somatic components (in the new system having the manipulate trait) and it has been super clear that you cannot hide spellcasting unless the text of the spell says the target ifs forced not to notice the casting (like with charm)
This. I believe it's VERY clearly stated in secrets of magic.
On point #7 about making low level play easier, a thought that just popped into my head would be to just increase the amount of HP you get from your ancestry (maybe double or even triple). That will give a larger cushion at the lower levels, but only end up being a drop in the bucket once you get to higher levels. Haven't thought too deeply on it, so I don't know if that will actually break anything, but it might be worth exploring.
And it would avoid any confusion at level 2. Even double should get PCs over 20hp, which should keep the PC from being 1 crit-hit downed from max hp.
I would avoid it, as it permanently affects the balance of the game. I'd be inclined to get back to "normal" at some point.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG Well, let's see how the math goes. And keep in mind that the actual HP number isn't want matters. It's the number of hits required to down a character.
An average level 1 character likely has close to 16 HP (8 from ancestry, and 8 from class, not counting CON modifier). A single level-3 monster, which is a moderate encounter for 4 level-1 characters, has moderate damage of 12 per strike (based on the monster creation table). That means it will only take two attacks or one crit to down a character. Giving the character triple ancestry HP will boost the HP total to 32, allowing the character to withstand a single crit, and that character would take on average three normal attacks to down.
Now lets look at level 9 characters. Normally, they would have, on average, 80 HP (8 from ancestry, 72 from class). An average moderate strike from a level-11 monster does 26 damage (I chose those levels because at level 12, monsters get access to a third damage die, which is a big sudden jump). The number of hits required to down the PC is now four. And they can even withstand one crit and one normal strike. However, if the PC had 96 HP (triple the ancestry HP), the number of attacks to down the character doesn't really change. It's still just four normal strikes.
So if this example is close accurate (and I acknowledge it may not be), it means that as the characters level up, even with triple ancestry HP, they'll still start to approach that "normal" balance because of the way the numbers scale. And an extra 12, or 16, or 20 HP at levels 15 and higher really isn't going to be noticeable.
But I'll admit, I may still be missing something. I'm just going to basic averages here, so the devil may be in the details.
Attack clarification:
"A damaging attack": an attack that deals at least 1pt of damage before resistances are applied.
This differentiates it from attacks that deal no damage (i.e. Trip, Grapple, Disarm, etc.)
Related to teaching the rules better: Completely agree. I have been diving into P2E with the hope of eventually GMing a campaign and one of the things I have been doing, both for my own sake but also as a potential resource to give to my players is a document full of rules breakdown's and summaries. As you said later, Pathfinder is very self referential. What that means is often to fully understand a rule you need to read three separate parts of the book, and often the piece of information you might need to understand something on page 30 is not until page 200.
Also, and I know this is more difficult but, there are a lot of false assumptions that players would have coming from other systems (mainly 5e and Pathfinder 1) but for many of them, the rule book doesn't do much to correct them. For example, everyone can use shields, but if I came from either 5E or P1E I would likely assume that my wizard couldn't use one (for multiple reasons) but, if they are just going through character creation they would probably assume they can't and would never try (until a more knowledgeable player told them). I think part of this issue is that for Paizo, if it is written it is a rule and if it isn't written it is not a rule, but players don't start the game having read all the rules. Simply omitting a rule is not enough if many of the players coming to your game would assume they just haven't read it yet (and see my first paragraph for why that is a reasonable assumption), you have to actively inform players at least in some way.
Great picks for changes and updates. What made me most happy is that all of these are good points, and yet still so much better than other systems I used before where I'd have to house rule 90% of these matters anyway.
For your Stunned portion -- the "you can't act while stunned" is flower-language. It specifically goes on to state that you reduce the number of actions you have by the stunned value. Being Stunned 1 doesn't mean you don't get any actions. So Stunned 3 means you can take no actions in the round, but Stunned 1 just means (for that 1/3 of your turn you can't spend an action) - hence Stunned 1
That is a judgement call. Flavour text is usually identifiable, but it doesnt say anywhere that it is flavour. If the lines between flavour and mechanics are blurry, it is a judgment call.
This text could very well be mechanical, which would also clarify the need for the stunned condition in the game - since there is to my knowledge no "stunned 4" - thereby reducing stunned to "slowed 1/2/3 untill the end of your turn".
However, as far as i know, there is no place in the rules that directly clarifies what the word "act" entails. It is not really a key word. There are however two things to consider.
The name of the second phase of a turn in encountermode is called "Act". The text in the stunned condition could be referring to this, or atleast interpreted as - you can't "stage two of your turn". This interpretation does not tell you, if you can use reactions while stunned. Are you not allowed to do anything durring the "act" phase, if you become stunned during the act phase, but still somehow allowed to use reactions after the act phase - even if you are still stunned? That is wierd.
In this case, play the rules how they make most sense to you. But i dont believe that the rules on this is clear.
However his interpretation of unleash psyche is still wrong because actions and reactions that happen when "your turn begins", happen prior to regaining actions. So you are regaining actions right after becomming stunned.
Great stuff again Ronald! 👏 Can't wait for you to cover all the various Remaster changes as they hit!
Regarding large creatures jumping, it's actually realistic that it doesn't scale. Strength is directly proportional to muscle section, which goes with length squared, and weight is related to volume, which is length cubed. That's the reason why ants can carry many times their weight, while whales can't stand their own weight outside of water. Once you do the math on scaling a creature, it turns out that the jump height remains exactly the same, no matter if the creature becomes larger or smaller.
Not quite, or your ant would be able to jump feet into the air. His ballpark isn't far off. A huge creature is 8 times the size, but only 3 times the jump height, which is a lower percent of the creature's height.
@@yellingintothewindFleas can jump very high though. So I see their logic. Just haven't come up with a satisfying fix tho
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG Hm, somehow I don't think making fleas secret level 20s with legendary prof in athletics is quite the answer either...
Unfortunately, it is in handling all the edge cases that rules complexity tends to explode to unusable levels.
Elephants are one of the only mammals that can't jump, while mice have a huge jump height compared to their body which can rival humans. Rats have a larger objective jump height than mice and most humans, but things start hitting diminishing returns pretty close to there.
@@yellingintothewind The way GURPS handled it was to say "If your throwing distance with an object that weighs as much as your body would be greater than the jump distance determined by your Speed, treat your 'jump' as a throwing object that happens to be you."
Hulk and Marvel's Thor both use their super strength to propel themselves at distance, for fictional examples. Thor doesn't fly so much as he throws Mjolnir and holds onto it as it flies.
I see the fascinated condition as a strong roleplay status to apply, with it not meant for combat. I think this is a good move since there are plenty of abilities and conditions that are aggressive and can only be used in conbat
20:20
Regarding Unleash Psyche and Violent Unleash, my understanding was that the free action "trigger" for Unleash Psyche (and thus Violent Unleash) occurred before any Stunned or Slowed conditions reduced a character's action count. Thus, the Stunned condition, from Violent Unleash, would only take away an action on your turn as opposed to your entire turn.
I do agree with you that the Stunned condition should be revised, however.
Great video, as per usual.
That's how it's played RAW, yes.
CRB p.468 :
On the beginning of your turn, the following events occur :
- your turn begins
- the trigger for Unleash Psyche is met, so you Unleash.
- as you Unleash, the trigger for Violent Unleash is met, so you gain the stunned 1 condition
- after all the things that could happen during this phase, as a LAST STEP : you regain your actions. Your stunned condition wears off and you regain only 2 actions.
Good clarification on the ordering events for Unleash Psyche trigger versus when Stunned is counted
@@benalias9118 That is so fucking confusing, but I think you're right. Not sure why they chose Violent Unleash to be worded so confusingly. Wouldn't it have just made it more sense to make Violent Unleash take 1 action, and just have its requirement be that you use it as your first action in the turn you used Unleash Psyche?
Edit: Wait a minute... On page 468 it says that before you regain your actions: "You can use 1 free action or reaction with a trigger of “Your turn begins” or something similar. " This makes sense for Unleash Psyche, since it's a "your turn begins" free action, but Violent Unleash isn't... So, does that mean you can use as many free actions you want, as long as they're linked to one free action with the "your turn begins" trigger? Shouldn't this rule specify that? Because this text on page 468, to me, makes it seem like you use the Violent Unleash free action AFTER regaining your actions... Idk, this whole thing is just written so confusingly.
@@benalias9118 So you're all in agreement, then, that "you can't act" is only flavor text? And it doesn't stop reactions like Attack of Opportunity/Reactive Strike?
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG I don’t think that’s what they’re talking about. They’re talking specifically about the order of events at the start of a turn that interacts in such a way that violent unleash doesn’t actually take away your entire turn
I play Aid with the DC being the Easy DC for the level of the task
I really like pair of Locate action and “Be Located” reaction. The enemy covers the battlefield in magical Darkness, so it’s time for a game of Marco Polo.
I definitely agree that archetype at level one should be a variant rule. My first pathfinder character I played a vampire. It was the first time any of us had played Pathfinder 2E and we were very hesitant to Homebrew right out the gate, and I almost ended up switching character concepts. Luckily, we ended up deciding that The Homebrew was relatively minor, considering that it would be fixed by level 2 if any problems did come up, so we ended up doing that.
For Aid, I always set the DC = to an easy DC. So if there is an Athletics DC of 20, the Aid DC is 18. I’ll adjust it further depending on the relevance of the skill used.
The way me and my group run the Aid DC is using the level based DC for every aid check except for Fake out which instead uses the enemy AC. While the Fake out DC ends up being higher it's arguably less costly as instead of needing to invest a "void" action to ready it all you need to do is have your gun loaded, which for a gunslinger usually coincides with a secondary action on top of the reload, and it also has a built in "boost" from hitting on your previous turn and it's affected by AC reductions like flat footed or frightened. I do hope Aid gets more accessible in the future as right now a handful of classes can really make great use of it and the others don't really have a reason to invest the action.
Re point 13.. by RAW in the PATHFINDER 2E TRAVEL GUIDE.. all spells give off a rune effect of somesort (Think Dr Strange) .. These runes or glyphs can tell you 1) What school of magic is being cast 2) roughly when the spell was cast (lament energies which give off a timeline) and a unique signature that can show WHO cast the spell. There are feats in the game which sudue this effect.. but as RAW it should be an obvious thing happening.
What I think will still be unclear after the Remaster is whether your spellcasting can be heard behind a door before kicking down a door. Can you pre-buff before an ambush?
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG That's an interesting point.. perhaps if you had to shout the verbal component.. and if there's an instance of magic lights being seen under the door for example. The Spellcaster could mitigate the light of the spell by casting next to a bright object.. like a torch.. but for verbal .. I can see Silent spell being more useful.
Pages 76 and 77 in the Travel Guide for people interested in looking up spell runes whilst casting.
Re verbal: A verbal component is a vocalization of words of power. You must speak them in a strong voice, so it’s hard to conceal that you’re Casting a Spell. The spell gains the concentrate trait. You must be able to speak to provide this component.
@@AeromancerOffical The Remaster is removing Verbal components, hence the lack of clarity on this point atm (at least until we see the final book)
I really don't get the point of any of the 'espionage' spells as they're written in this system, when the designers were so worried about spellcasting that they make triple sure that everyone within striking distance will immediately know you're casting a spell, whether it's from components or the oh-so-vague spell 'manifestations.'
It feels especially bad as a psychic, because they don't get conceal spell on their feat list! So the very idea of playing a subtle user of mental power is shot in the face because you're still marred by manifestations, even with a lack of verbal components (and as a kicker they made sure to add in aural manifestations so if you thought you could cast a spell without making noise, think again. Really fits in the class fantasy of being a psychic.. to have a lot of flashing lights and random noise whenever you use your mental powers?).
I can understand the idea behind these choices, it just isn't very satisfying.
Fantastic video. All great suggestions.
For your falling/jumping down suggestion, I've always operated under the assumption that intentionally grabbing a ledge and lowering yourself down will bring you closer to the ground, and thus less distance to fall. If you are on a 6' tall ledge, then hang down from it lowering your feet toward the ground, you are only falling 3 feet or less in most cases.
I have allowed that too while requiring they use their Grab Edge reaction
No notes. This is great.
I have run into the fascinated, disarm, and free archetype clunkiness all already and we've only been playing for 4 months-would be cool to get a little QOL polish on them.
For aiding, I give a very easy DC (-5) to aid vs whatever the DC of the real check is
I want them to fix item DC. Item DCs should all scale based on the Standard DC table, and all items made with infused reagents should use class/spell DC. It's the main house rule I always use and it's SO MUCH BETTER. It improves quality of life dramatically (you don't need to keep looking up items every single time you want to use them, and they remain useful for more than one level of gameplay) without affecting game balance at all (the effects don't change, so they still aren't particularly great as levels increase). Paizo could even put a small box labelled Item Save DC on the first page of the character sheet for even easier reference. This is the one change I've asked for since the 2e playtest and the one thing they've constantly ignored, even though it's objectively superior to what exists now.
The only thing it affects negatively is the Toxicologist, but let's be honest here, that research field is an absolute pile of hot shyte and should be removed from the game entirely.
I think a more ideal way to handle it would be items having their own Proficiency (Trained/Expert/etc.) and "stat bonus", but then adding their user's level. This can sort of be currently done by just adding the difference between the user's level and the item's level.
This change makes it so items where increased DC is part of the benefit to upgrading still have better DCs than lower versions, but neither of them become totally useless.
Take a Frost rune and Greater Frost rune fir example. The DC is only for the crit effect which is otherwise identical, but with something like this the Greater Frost rune has a DC 2-3 higher.
@@xdragoonzero0 I honestly don't completely understand what you're even suggesting. It seems way too clunky for actual play.
Fascinated is a condition I really want to get a fix/buff. Only things I found interesting for Fascinated is redirecting spells and possibly prolonging an ally's Bon-mot on an enemy.
In the playtest for exemplar, there was a Body Ikon, Eye-catching Spot, which fascinates a creature if they failed their Will save with the added effect of the condition ending if you use a hostile action against them but not their allies, which is great. Though my fear stems from the wording as it implies the effect as an exception. So it also implies that certain restriction on the original Fascinated condition may not change.
Granted, it is a playtest and there was no explicit mention in the playtest of certain changes to the Fascinated condition. Just gotta hope I guess.
I would further change the free archetype to make all of those feats on odd levels and that way they are not at the same levels as class feats
Interesting note on jumping. In the real world the bigger you are the harder it is to jump. Compare a rabbit to an elephant; elephants cannot jump, whereas rabbits can jump multiple times their own body length from a standing start. I'd rule it that smaller creatures have a lower DCs to jump, so a halfling or goblin migth get a -5 to the DC on a long jump, whereas a huge creature would get a penalty to the DC upwards of +10 but I'd probably rule that they'd get a bonus to the distance travelled simply due to the amount of power they'd have to generate. There's probably a simple way of writing and applying these rules. The end result would be that small creatures have an easier time jumping, whereas larger creatures have to generate more power but travel further by default.
Instead of the gigantic barbarian jumping onto the roof, I'd have made them climb it like an oversized staircase.
Fascinating
And we all know fleas can jump huge distances. Must have something to do with cubic vs square numbers.
Still unsure about a specific fix tho that would be elegant
How to fix aid. Add the success/fail effects from aid to any readied action that is triggered by another's action. IE If you want to aid another player's strike, ready to do something (grab, trip, strike, demoralize) the target as that player strikes as an example. Yes I know it's worded terribly but I hope you all get the idea. Also I do 10 less than the DC to aid for things like breaking down a door.
Funny thing you looked up for a solution to falling on 4e, when they also kind of did your solution to level 1 lethality. If I remember right, on 4e you started at level 1 with something around 3 to 4 levels worth of HP, depending on your constitution.
A couple of things, as a blind person, I can promise you finding someone with an arms reach, takes actual effort. I don’t always reach out and touch someone even wanna know where they are.. they really don’t need to do anything to disarm coming in first edition. It was one of the most overpowered combat maneuvers. You could perform that and trip.
Very neat - I also am very frustrated about the Conceal and Silent spellshape things in the revision. I also hope both of the feats are available to every spellcasting class ('Silent spell' being a Wizard-only spellshape is very frustrating - I really want my Shadow Sorcerer to be able to just Suggest or Dominate NPCs without consequences from their immediate surroundings)
I will say the 'threat' of falling distance is often underestimated by people. 5' is like the height of a minivan, so it doesnt seem all that high at first glance. Yes, an average person could very easily drop from a 5' height and stick the landing if they were doing it intentionally - if they picked a spot on the ground, gauged the height, and focused on the action. But if you slipped off a ladder or got pushed off a ledge when you weren't expecting? No, your falling on your butt (as a best case scenario).
I replied to someone else but will post in its own comment so hopefully you can see it.
I believe you've missed the rules on the flow of actions at the start of your turn, which is causing the confusion over violent unleash.
Pathfinder 2e Core Rule Book - Page 468:
"At the start of your turn do the following in any order you choose:
- If you created an effect lasting a certain number of rounds, reduce the remaining rounds by 1.
- *Use 1 free action or reaction with a trigger of "Your turn begins" or something similar* .
- If you're dying, roll a recovery check.
- Do something else that is specified to happen at the start of your turn.
*The last step of starting your turn is always the same*
- Regain your 3 actions and 1 reaction. *Some abilities or conditions (Such as quicked and slowed) can change how many actions you regain and whether you regain your reaction* ."
Pathfinder Core Rule Book - Page 662:
"Stunned:
You've become senseless. You can't act while stunned. *Stunned usually includes a value, which indicates how many total actions you lose, possibly over multiple turns, from being stunned. Each time you regain actions (such as at the start of your turn), reduce the number you regain by your stunned value* ."
Therefore the flow of events is:
Turn begins
Unleash Psyche
Violent Unleash
Stunned 1
Regain 2 actions due to stunned.
I think this makes the most sense out of all the possibilities on how Violent Unleash. However, I do have one issue with this, and it's the "You can use 1 free action or reaction with a trigger of “Your turn begins” or something similar." Like, this rule works completely fine with Unleash Psyche, since it has the "your turn begins" trigger, but, Violent Unleash does not have this. So, since it states you can only use ONE free action, wouldn't it mean that you can't use Violent Unleash before you regain your actions? And what does the "or something similar" mean? Does Violent Unleash count as "something similar"? If it does, then that would also mean that you can't use it before regaining your actions.
I think in order for you to be completely right, there would have to be some kind of specification on this rule, like after saying that 1 free action thing, it'd say that you can also use additional free actions that are tied to a free action that has the "your turn begins" trigger. Yes, it is confusing, but it's the only way to convey the rule clearly.
@@eamk887 Violent unleash has the trigger "You unleash your Psyche" meaning you can use it as a free action when you unleash your psyche. The rule already exists right there in the action.
Thanks, I'll add to the pinned comment. I still think Stunned needs clarifying however.
@@ASJames Idk, I think it's still a bit confusing. I think adding some kind of clarification on either the rule on turn starts, or Violent Unleash would be a good idea.
Regarding confusion about Stunned: I don't like it, but I think the authors did indeed intend the stunned 1 condition to be powerful enough to take an enemy's entire turn away when used off turn as described in the video. Most spells and effects have the "incapacitation" tag when they inflict even low amounts of stun in a way that doesn't really exist for slow. In RAW we still need clarification, but this interpretation is at least consistent with the power balance that seem to apply to things that inflict stunned.
I put the DC for Aid and Treat Wounds from levels 1-2 at DC 12 and when they get to lvl 3 I’ll adjust them to 15
My reddit thread appeared in this so I'm going to count this as a collaboration. :3 jk
Regarding the subtle spell topic i think that requiring every spell to be spelled loud is a bit of nonsense.
Enchantment and illusion spells sits in a branch of magic where most of the utility is squeezed by being "stealthy" to work at the fullest (excluded the brute force commands usable in combat).
Maybe they can create tags on the degree of the manifestation appearing in the casting, for example:
Lesser manifestation: the casting of these spells produces only minor glyphs, arcane sigils, murmurs and similar effects.
The caster can try to hide them with a Stealth Check with a hard level DC based on the observers.
Medium Manifestation: same as lesser, but more loud, or with brighter sigils or voices, hiding them uses a incredibly hard DC.
Extreme Manifestation: casting generates a powerful aura in a radius around the caster (think it as the kinetic aura magnitude) and cannot be hidden.
Using metamagic like concealed spell or Silent spells reduce the stealth DC by 2 for concealed and by 4 with Silent.
The Blood component substitution feat of sorcerer make possible to attempt a Hard Stealth DC for hiding the casting of Extreme Manifestation Magic, or cancel the check for Lesser and Medium manifestation spells.
In this way it's possible to makr impossible to cast stealthy a nuke as Chain Lighting, or give inexpected low level of manifestation to high level non damaging spells that require some cunning to be used, like Illusory scene.
That's a practical idea, if someone have the time to tag all the spells...
I don't let people roll to avoid falling damage (if they fail to grab a ledge), but I do let them use Acrobatics to avoid landing prone, the DC is 10+ the damage taken.
My big wish would be editing for conciseness and clarity. Reduce the amount of text by 25 - 50% and make it easier to see the relevant information at a glance (just some bold text would go a long way as many keywords are buried in paragraphs of text and are written in lowercase letters). I hope at least they make stealth rules less clunky...
I'm curious what your aid fix is that requires another video. Personally in my game, I've been using a level DC of the player's level as the standard (and even applying the easy and hard modifiers to it as needed) and it's worked like a charm
As a GM, my standard rule is "the dc the check being aided, or 20, whichever is lower," which is usually but not always the level dc.
Given Golarion's gods tend to be somewhat active, I could see a compact of the gods that provides a boost to level one adventurers, to avoid the death spirals, and as they become stronger and can stand on their own feet, that blessing fades.
And if the PC is godless: All the Golarion Gods “*sigh* everyone chip in”
@@slb797 As a favourite priest once said "Atheists are just believers who haven't been enlightened yet..."
Also wondering if we all just never read Leap properly, and that there's a fundamental difference between *falling* 10 feet and Leaping Vertically 10 feet *except down not up*?
Without feats, you can only leap 3 feet vertically though?
@@ErikLevin, 10 feet becomes 7 and you don't fall prone?
And with feats like Cloud Jump or cat fall it gets to a silly level of just jumping off castles and really screwing with the GM :p
@@ErikLevin Plus, it puts jumping itself back into the realm of Athletics, which means your basketball types don't need the investment in Acrobatics to be that high and can still dunk and land without breaking a hip :p
I think they just need to reword stun so that it prevents you from regaining actions and reactions? That kinda feels like that's how a lot of the design team thinks it works, based on how it's been used.
The condition for being Stunned is pretty clear about what it does, and it's right after the description in the entry. I'll quote it below, directly from Archives of Nethys...
"Stunned usually includes a value, which indicates how many total actions you lose, possibly over multiple turns, from being stunned. Each time you regain actions (such as at the start of your turn), reduce the number you regain by your stunned value, then reduce your stunned value by the number of actions you lost. For example, if you were stunned 4, you would lose all 3 of your actions on your turn, reducing you to stunned 1; on your next turn, you would lose 1 more action, and then be able to use your remaining 2 actions normally."
Psychic ability Violent Unleash specifies "Stunned 1," so the psychic will unleash psyche, violent unleash, and then still have 2 actions remaining on that turn
Not only is the Stunned condition's description written poorly, you also wrote an extremely bad explanation as to how it works. You just copied the description, and then said what happens with Violent Unleash, without giving any kind of explanation as to how you come to the conclusion. Luckily, there are others in this comment section that explain both Stunned and Violent Unleash much better than you.
But ignoring that, I have an issue with this conclusion. At first, it makes sense that when a Psychic uses Violent Unleash, they immediately lose 1 action, since they use the feat before regaining any actions, but here's the issue: the rules don't specify that you can use Violent Unleash before regaining your actions.
On page 468 of CRB, it says that before regaining your actions: "You can use 1 free action or reaction with a trigger of “Your turn begins” or something similar." This makes sense for Unleash Psyche, since it has the "your turn begins" trigger, but Violent Unleash doesn't work here, since a) you have already used your ONE free action on Unleash Psyche, and b) Violent Unleash doesn't have the "your turn begins" trigger. So, by these rules, I don't think you are able to use Violent Unleash before regaining your actions, since it is not specified that you can do so.
In order for what you said to work, the rule of using 1 free action should be specified. Maybe, idk, after saying that rule, it'd say "You can use additional free actions or reactions if their trigger is a free action or a reaction with a trigger of "Your turn begins."", or Violent Unleash could itself specify at the end of its description something like "This effect happens before you regain your actions and reactions." I know this sounds confusing, and there probably is a better way to communicate this, but something like this should be written there.
Would like to add a special mention for High Jump being impossible to not crit fail at low levels + the jump boots gadget an Inventor can make _starting at 4th level_ requiring a Jump (not Leap) to function and being wasted on a crit fail. Also I agree the falling rules are pretty busted, IRL it's easy to take "fall damage" (strain your legs rather a lot) without landing on your face or your back or your arm or your butt or whatever.
In point 13, how does that affect psychic’s non verbal casting? It’s also not clear about whether psychic casting makes sound it seems as I have seen it debated elsewhere.
Disarm, however, is a nice way for the party frontliner to give cover for allies to Move around an enemy with Reactive Strike options, even on just a Success.
Since Grab an Edge reduces damage, can't you use that to interrupt your fall and break it up into 2 smaller ones that won't damage you?
To #10, IME GM's do enforce targeting friendlies but most waive the target self.
Another thing I'd add is that little excerpt under taking damage while dying that says you add your wounded value to your dying condition when you take damage while dying.
There is only that one small place where it's mentioned but games where it is enforced are EXTREMELY lethal and turn up the difficulty of any monster that inflicts persistent damage by orders of magnitude because PC's can die instantly. Wounded 2 becomes a death sentence.
It also just doesn't seem intentional. No where else in the dying or wounded information is it mentioned. So I would like clarification on that and if it is intended, for it to be included in the rules on Wounded.
I don't see how anyone could have that reading re: Wounded. Wounded reads "If you GAIN the dying condition while wounded, increase your dying condition value by your wounded value."
Since you're already Dying, you don't "gain" the condition when you take damage...
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG I tried to send this earlier and it didn't go for some reason.
It's on pg 459 of the CRB under the heading "Taking Damage while Dying":
"If you take damage while you already have the dying condition, increase your dying condition value by 1, or by 2 if the damage came from an attacker’s critical hit or your own critical failure. If you have the wounded condition, remember to add the value of your wounded condition to your dying value."
It's only in that one spot but it sure seems to indicate with that last clause that if you take damage while dying you increase your dying value by 1 + your wounded value. Which if you are wounded 2, dying 1, means you die instantly on a tick from persistent damage.
I think the flat check for targeting creatures doesn't apply when you're not making an attack role, as per 2-action Heal. Would be the same as Suggestion (etc) - if you can more or less see them, you can affect them. The idea is for "miss chance" which is why it's for attack rolls only. Perhaps that's not explicit enough, for sure, but flat check misses come from 1e's percentage-chance miss rules, which were only for attack rolls.
in my current game, I started my characters at 2nd level but with a negative level. they were beefier, but still effectively 1st level, and it was easy to remove when they hit the milestone.
locating nearby allies that are otherwise hidden to you. if i remember there the 5th lvl human feat sense allies. tho it doesnt remove the flat check it does lower it to 5
The Violent Unleash issue doesn’t actually happen. By the rules for the structure of a round, abilities and effects that happen at the start of your turn, like Violent Unleash, happen before you gain your actions for the round. Gaining your actions is always the last thing that occurs in starting a turn. So, you Violent Unleash, then become Stunned 1, then gain your actions, lose 1 of those actions, and lose the Stunned condition.
I'd like to see more guidance re: Critical Fails/dubious knowledge with recall knowledge. Should incorrect information be merely wrong (I.E. a claiming a creature has a weakness it really doesn't), or should it be actively harmful (I.E. encouraging players to use electricity on flesh golems to "disrupt the arcane processes")?
Why wouldn't you just let the DM decide? By being wrong it could be actively harmful or not. But not all knowledge is actively harmful
Not so monsters have information that can be actively harmful,*
I feel like the Stunned thing isn't as big of an issue as you made it out to be. Violent Unleash applies Stunned 1 (you regain 1 less action at the start of your next turn). The "You can't act while stunned." is just flavor text.
Edit: I was wrong, definitely needs a bit of clarifying, but it's not a severe issue.
Agreed, make it a 1 turn slow that takes away reactions and everything is in balance again.
@@yaothemaothat's already how stunned works
If the "you can't act while stunned" is flavor text it should be removed or clarified.
the "you can't act while stunned" is a pretty important distinction, especially when it come to reactions. "Stunned 1" doesn't just mean "you lose 1 action next turn", it means "you are stunned, and at the start of your turn it goes away at the cost of 1 action," which is different. And therefore that sentence has an important mechanical meaning.
if an enemy is stunned 1 (like you crit them with daze), are they allowed to do attacks of opportunity if you move away from them? by RAW they cannot because they are stunned and they can't act while stunned.
you start your turn and as your first act, you unleash, you become stunned 1. That stun effect doesn't go away until the start of your turn. that means you are definitely stunned for the "remainder" of your turn, the rest of the combat round, all the way until the start of your next turn. and again, that's because you can't get rid of the stun, RAW, until the start of a turn (more specifically, until you waste your first action... so something giving you stunned 1 has ramifications on something like Effortless Concentration). so suddenly your turn ends (so you have to unleash as a final action essentially).
You can certainly *house rule* it that "you can't act while stunned" is just flavor text and that it's just equivalent to slow 1 that goes away at the next turn, but then you've made a house rule that it's flavor text because it's written otherwise.
edit: if they wanted to clarify it that it's just flavor text or that it's otherwise text without a mechanical impact, they should phrase it differently. more like "Being stunned makes it harder to act." and then continuing with the rules of stunned.
edit 2: if you interpreted "you can't act while stunned" as mere flavor text, it has the odd ramification that e.g. a stun 3 would still permit free actions in that turn where you lose all 3 actions, which doesn't make sense to me. this interpretation would also mean a stun with a duration, e.g. stunned for 2 rounds would still permit characters to do reactions, which also doesn't make sense to me.
I just can't accept this as the intended effect of stunned when paralyzed exists
ngl i strongly disagree on #8, PF2 doesn't give you an Acrobatics roll to "land well" and reduce fall damage because it gives you the Grab an Edge reaction when you start falling or fall past a tree branch or similar, which reduces the distance you count as having falling just like you want, having both (even if they don't stack) would be cumbersome
Leaf Leshy agrees!
8:00
I m colourblind... I m not complaining)
It's a cool sheet, the only thing i would need for myself =] more space for m attack penalty, yes.
I hope it will be more comfortable for colour-perceiving folk!
paizo really does roll of the tongue better than "what, see"
I disagree with #7. I feel that an adventurer at lvl 1 SHOULD be more fragile. They are just starting out in thier adventuring career and things should be dangerous. If you give the players things that make things easier at lvl 1, whats the point? You basicly kill and Risk vs. Reward for the players because being able to easily best any lvl 1-2 encounter it dosent give the players any sense of accomplishment. And death spirals, in my experience, happen because of bad decisions of the players, not from anything inherent to the mechanics of the system itself. Pcs by level 3 become able to take on tougher challenges without much concern, as there should always be a sense of danger no matter what the level.
As I read it, the example you give of fascination of one of the three fascinated guards hitting another guard would not work. The guard must use a hostile action against you or *your* allies. Am I missing something?
I want the lockpick rules fixed. As it is, the only real penalties for failing to pick a lock are wasting an action and/or breaking your lockpick. In my own campaign, I use a houserule where you get two tries per lock: one that's three actions and one that's ten minutes, and if you fail them both, you have to wait until your Thievery permanently improves somehow (usually by leveling up) and then you get your two tries back.
Is it perfect? Nope, I'm still not entirely happy with it, but it's better than the existing system imo.
This is part of a bigger issue which is: activities that are written with Encounter mode in mind, but are really more likely to come up in Exploration mode.
In a combat, you don't Pick Locks super often but it can happen. In that case, the action works great, failing to Pick a Lock and wasting two actions without accomplishing anything is a big cost.
But in exploration mode, failing to Pick a Lock and wasting four seconds of time is irrelevant.
The same problem exists for Force Open and Climb (especially when climbing *up* from ground level).
It would be nice if all of these would get Exploration versions of the activities, where all the outcomes are relevant in that game mode.
The way I read the stun condition, inflicting stun 1 on a creature would not immediately "end their turn" just their current action. So if inflicted at the beginning of a creature's turn where they regain actions and was hit with stun 1 than they still would have 2 more actions.
It actually depends on when you gain the Stunned condition. If you gain it before regaining your actions, like with Violent Unleash, then it just takes away that amount of actions from you that turn (with Violent Unleash it takes 1 action from you, meaning you have 2 actions left that turn). However, if you gain the Stunned condition *after* regaining your actions, your turn actually immediately ends. Yes, rules specify that you can't lose or gain actions during your turn, but the Stunned condition isn't just making you lose actions, it also prevents you from doing them.
So, if you become Stunned on your turn before you have regained your actions, even if it was just 1 or 2, your turn immediately ends, since Stunned specifies that you cannot use any actions while you have the condition.
Of course, I don't think there is a way for a character to become Stunned on their turn before regaining actions, so all of this is just hypothetical, at least for now.
Question: Can Flurry of Blows actually be readied? It has the Flourish trait, and "You can use only 1 action with the flourish trait per turn." But is this turn only the player's or could it also be an enemy's?
Oh my god I just want the hyperlinks. It'd make the PDFs so much more usable.
#11 Fix wounds. Make wounds to be ... wounds. Or at least an optional system for implementing more durable wounds.
How about when a first level character gets hit with a critical it suffers maximum normal damage instead of double damage?
Jumping scales with size in real life... in the opposite direction. Square to cube ratio, that giant is lucky he can stand up without breaking his legs. There's a reason elephants can't jump.
I think I would like just Artisan tools. Not the dozen odd tools, just like 1 set like, 3-4 bulk, covers all of the tools you might need. Hell, make it a level 5 magical item. And the current magical workshop should not be set to one type, like you can only deploy it x number times a day, but every time you deploy it it can change which type of workshop it is. If your the only crafter in the group it feels like you are unable to craft more than a tiny handful of the items you might need. Maybe make the item for all mundane tools (leatherworking, woodworking, etc), so keep alchemical tools separate and make a special set of magical tools for magical item crafting that you use alongside the mundane tools.
IDK, maybe these aren’t the right but my point is that Crafting at launch was horrible and it is only slightly better complex crafting. It needs more attention.
On jumping, smaller jump heights for larger creatures actually makes sense. There's a reason that elephants can't jump. It's a square-cube law thing.
That might be too far to go* in your fantasy game, but there you go.
* Mixing physics or economics with fantasy is fraught with peril. 8-)
I was nonplussed with your Leap action changes until you mentioned Tiny creatures. I agree that things should change, but in my mind I treated a PC being Large and Huge PCs as temporary, so the rules don't need to describe them. But Sprites, who are probably 8 inches tall, can still jump up 3 feet? The same as your Huge giant instinct barbarian? Something in the rules ought to address this, surely.
In real life, smaller creatures tend to have similar jump heights/distances to small and medium ones, and far better in comparison to their size. Mice can easily jump three feet, rats can jump four or so, rabbits can jump several, fleas can basically jump from ground to head height. Elephants, meanwhile, cannot jump at all.
I like to think that help at lower levels is harder because the party doesn’t know each other yet-it gets easier as they become more in-tune. That being said, I feel like the whole “action AND reaction” thing is high key confusing and too much effort for new players.
Does anyone know if they are fixing wild shape combat with the remaster
i think the falling damage is fair, but maybe something to limit the prone. If you fall 5 feet taking 2 points of damage (even for us non superheros) is fair. Even a 5 foot jump you feel it. But maybe some type of acrobatics check so you dont fall prone. You still take the damage, but dont fall prone. DC could be 5+distance.
For aid what I do if its vs a monster then it is a lvl dc of the said monster if not than it is of player dc
On #2, I'm on the fence about tweaking Aid too much. On the one side I understand the need for balance between an already quite deadly early game and the easier late game, but on the other it makes more sense thematically that Rookie Rando attempting to help his fellow adventurer very well might screw them both over, especially if they're untrained, and likewise the accomplished hero does wonders in helping his mates, especially when trained. Perhaps a more reasonable DC like 15 might suffice in making it not so daunting during the lower levels.
With the Subtle spell (and similar issues the various systems have had for years with components) I feel like part of the problem is that they don't want to actually clarify it, because how a spell is cast is tied so strongly to worldbuilding that any rules about it (especially any that spill over from pure mechanics into role-play) risk ruining people's subjective ideas about how the fantasy is supposed to play out (in general, it seems that the editions have been more and more vague with how spell casting actually works in-universe, while mechanically expanding everything as much as possible; they're really tying to have their cake and eat it too with this half-vancian-half-every-other-fantasy-type-of-spellcasting-in-one-system thing that they're obsessed with).
Re Verbal/Somatic/Physical components.. all.. most spells in the remaster have the "manipulate" trait.. so this could explain things.
#6 I think fascinated should make you off-guard and unable to use reactions to anything other than what you're fascinated by. However, it can be broken *after* you get attacked or spend an action with the concentrate trait. This is what a similar condition does in my TTRPG.
#8 This could be fixed by changing the Arrest a Fall reaction so you can use it without a fly speed. Success reduces the fall damage, critical success negates it completely, and a fly speed lets you treat successes as critical successes.
#10 Maybe fix this by having Seek automatically succeed against allies and ignore the the hidden/concealed flat check?
#13 This has grinded my gears for so long and has made playing trickster or enchanter characters so annoying. I've never understood why there isn't an easily available skill feat that let's you use Deception checks to conceal your spellcasting. It would fix a lot of problems and give Charisma casters an interesting advantage. I always felt like Charisma casters get screwed on skills because all magical skills are Intelligence or Wisdom.
#15 Have powerful fist also add the parry trait to your fists. This would add a fun niche for fists over stance feats, and we could get feats that interact with it. I'm always the player that gets the shield spell for most of my martials.
Is stunned supposed to stop actions? When you keep reading it says you lose a value equal to the value of stunned? The example Archives gives is you are stunned 4, you lose 3 actions on your turn, next turn you lose 1 action but have two actions left. I don’t see why you wouldn’t be able to use reactions unless all 3 of your actions were gone. So far I’ve never encountered anything that stuns more than stunned 2, I haven’t played with a monk so idk
Yep, it says directly “You can't act while stunned.” Which is clarified elsewhere to mean that you can’t take ANY actions, including reactions. Note that this is different from paralyzed where you can still take mental-only actions like Recall Knowledge.
As the other person said, Stunned does indeed stop actions, including reactions. What many people are disregarding about the description on Stunned, is this line: *"You can't act while stunned."*
At first, this might seem like flavor text, but it isn't. "You can't act" is actually defined in CRB page 469; *"If you can’t act, you can’t use any actions, including reactions and free actions."*
So, this means that while you have a Stunned condition that's higher than 0, you cannot use any kind of actions. You can only use actions after you have dropped your Stunned condition to 0.
@@eamk887 ok see I get what you are saying but on archives of Nethys it states
in the example of how stunned works that:
For example, if you were stunned 4, you would lose all 3 of your actions on your turn, reducing you to stunned 1; on your next turn, you would lose 1 more action, and then be able to use your remaining 2 actions normally. Stunned might also have a duration instead of a value, such as “stunned for 1 minute.” In this case, you lose all your actions for the listed duration.
If the case is that whole you are stunned you can’t make any actions, then is this a mistake on the side of archives? Because if the intention was to not be able to use any actions for “Stunned X” turns, why say something else in the example?
@@nikolaj.andresen Core rule book page 623, under what it defines as stunned the example Paizo says very clearly states that you can still you actions while you are stunned, if you are stunned 1 then you can still use your remaining two actions. This is why I am quite confused as their example of how it’s intended to work is they clearly mention that it’s supposed to still allow you to use actions, otherwise why include the line on you gaining back actions if you can’t use them??
@mynamehere69 I actually don't see how that example goes against what I said. The example you referenced only talks about how the Stunned X part of the Stunned condition works, like how you reduce X and what happens when you do reduce it. The example doesn't touch or overlap with the other "you can't act" part of Stunned.
Reading your other comment you made in response to the other person, I think you're a bit confused. When we say that while you are Stunned, you can't do any actions, we mean that you can't do any actions while your Stunned condition is more than 0.
For example, if you become Stunned 1 during an enemy's turn, that means that you can't do any actions from that point on, including reactions. This doesn't change until your turn begins, and you regain your actions. And when you regain your actions at the start of your turn, you gain 3 actions, but you also lose 1 action due to the Stunned condition, which then means that your Stunned condition is reduced to 0. At that point, you are no longer Stunned, so you can now use actions, including the 2 actions you regained at the start of your turn.
In the end though, I think we can both agree that the Stunned condition is very poorly written. As I mentioned, I thought the "you can't act" part was always just flavor text, but it isn't. I mean, it could be, but how fucking confusing would it be that they used this specific wording that has a clear definition?
In either case, the Stunned description needs to be changed. If they did intend for Stunned to stop you from acting, they should replace the sentence with something like "You can’t use any actions, including reactions and free actions while stunned." Or if it was meant to be just flavor text, then it should be straight up removed.
I would like to point out, that the interpretation of unleash psyche is incorrect. According to rules as written reactions and free actions that are triggered off the turn begging, happens prior to you regaining actions. This means, that upon using the unleash psyche you become stunned 1, and then regain actions, which you reduce by the stunned condition. So unless i am missing some convoluted interaction, the stunned condition from violent unleash does not remove all actions on that turn. There are however other niche consequences of this being "stunned 1" and not "slowed 1 untill the end of your turn", but that hardly matters.
Not sure if I understood the problem you see in fascinated.
I always played fascinated like the "enemy" is the one that has to attack you to break it.
There's a feat (Snap out of it) that allows you to break it on allies with a medicine check.
I guess you could allow to have fascinated removed with an ally slap, but I'd make the player roll damage at least, and they would have to be aware that their ally is under it's influence (from a roleplay perspective).
Even with that reading, Fascinated is too weak - the side that imposed it can only maintain it by refraining from attacking
They're not changing the rules for recall knowledge, they're just making it clear that Creature Identification is for exactly that, creature identification, and then you can use Recall Knowledge to gather more information.
This is currently in the rules:
Pathfinder Core Rulebook pg. 239
" *You attempt a skill check to try to remember a bit of knowledge regarding a topic related to that skill.... For example, Arcana might tell you about the magical defenses of a golem, whereas Crafting could tell you about its sturdy resistance to physical attacks* "
Creature Identification is meant for "What is this thing?"
Recall Knowledge is meant for "Do I know what this thing is weak to?"
The updates are just making that clearer for the people who seem to have conflated the two.
How can you do the second without doing the first?
“I have no idea what kind of creature that is, but it seems to be kind of slow and lumbering. I bet it won’t be able do dodge my fireball very easily.”
When it comes to fall damage:
The game already lets you reduce fall damage if you intentionally dove into "soft substance".
I'd say not being able to apply that to all landings feels like an omission.
Maybe reducing it to ignoring the first 5ft on solid terrain would be more appropriate. This way a player could jump down 10ft without consequence.
Just feel like rolling acrobatics there is needless complication.