Player Core 2 Classes REVEALED
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ต.ค. 2024
- #paizo #pathfinder2e #pathfinderrpg #pathfinder2 #PlayerCore2
It's here! Player Core 2 is out for many people, and I got my hands on a review copy! So I'm bringing you as much information as I can. I wrote this fast, and its my longest video to date (I think) so there may be a mistake or too, but I wanted to get this out to you as fast as possible!
The @DungeonDudes explanation of the OGL Scandal: • The OGL Explained
Video Game footage from @FaisalDante • The Combo That Made Me...
And finally, we have a complete remaster
I’m still hoping for PC3 for classes like Magus, Summoner, Psychic, Thaum, Gunslinger, and Inventor.
I don't think Paizo is actively working on it. Next books are Tian Xia Character Guide, Divine Mysteries, all the Godsrain/War of Immortals stuff, and NPC core.
Inorite!?
@@BlueSapphyre afaik there is no plans for pc3. But it was said we can expect erratas for classes which are not covered in pc1-2.
will there be a Monster Core II, or how do they intend to update the rest of the bestiaries?
Tbh I'm one of those people who likes the new changes to Oracle. Yeah it became more like "normal" spell caster, but it became easier to play for newbies (which is totally fine in my opinion) and using your focus is more about consequences and not just spamming focus to get your buff faster.
Bravado Lets you gain Panache even on a failure (until the end of your next turn). That's the biggest change to Swashbuckers that buffs them so much
yeah Panache generation was buffed at every step, you basically get to max out a skill for bravado actions for free, get the +1 to bravado actions all the time, and get Panache on a non-crit failure anyway (but only for a round, so remember to do a finisher)
@@lawrl777 for two rounds actually (your current round and your next one)
I doubt there will ever will be turns without panache
Oh, I see, that's what that means. I was confused by the wording and didn't realize that the panache lasted only until the end of the turn. Cool.
@@PsiPrimeProductions1 until the end of the next turn, so it’s even better!
These changes are fine. Remember people, if something really bothers you, you can tweak it. It's your game.
Truer words . . .
I just wanted to say you're my number one Pathfinder and Starfinder channel. Keep up all the great, informative videos. Super keen to see you break down a lot of the new Starfinder 2e playtest when it's out!
Wow, thanks!
The life oracle seems interesting, being able to play an Undead who can be healed normally is quite interesting. I'm mostly interested in Swashbuckler and Monk, but I might give Oracle a try for once!
I think it'd be funny to play a skeleton life oracle.
Villain: "DIE FOUL UNDEAD!"
You: "Thanks for the healing, mate!"
The remaster has been such a cool project and I think overall they handled it really well. Thank you for covering this!
A friend of mine would disagree, but I certainly agree with you.
I haven't realised there is a hate-controversy about the remaster oracle.
The old one had it's flaws and sometimes it was realy hard to play some misteries especially if you wanted to do anything else other than your shtick. (When a flame oracle try to heal someone and stuff lile these)
I think the remaster oracle made it more wierd with the cursebound feats, but made it more player friendly and I fan-boy all over for it XD
I mean, it's the internet, there's gonna be a hate controversy over anything and everything. Remember when there was a hate controversy over the color of a picture of an overexposed dress?
@@PsiPrimeProductions1 oh you're absolutly right!
Haters gonna hate! :)
The important thing is we can cherish the things we love or excited about! :)
As someone who isn't a huge fan of the remaster Oracle, let me explain the why.
I will preface this with: It is a definite improvement over the Premaster Oracle. That's not a comparison imo. But the issues with Oracle is that the Mysteries don't feel nearly as unique as I'd like. Before, the Premaster did make each Mystery feel unique (even if it was horribly Under Powered) and now it's more of "what downside do you want". And most of its power is from Feats that many of them share, which hurts it.
I think an errata that makes each Mystery feel different from any other Mystery would do it wonders. As that's my real issue. Mechanically, it's much better (except Life Oracle got a nerf bat from hell) but the flavor and diversity got obliterated imo.
@@hellfrozenphoenix13 A friend of mine who also got the book early had a similar complaint. I do agree that they feel a bit less flavorful, but (something I didn't mention in the video) is that there is a LOT more flavor in some of the feats. Also, while the life oracle can't heal as much, they also can now be healed by allies, and don't take damage every time they cast a 5th level or higher spell. And more survivability can lead to more healing, so I don't think it is it is SO much of a nerf. Most of the complaints I have heard about come from Battle Oracle.
@@PsiPrimeProductions1 Battle Oracle is still possible too. You just don't get the innate armor proficiencies - which is pretty easily fixed by choosing the right archetype.
minor corrections:
- an alchemist's quick vials (the at-will ones you make with Quick Alchemy w/o spending a versatile vial) can only be used as that basic Xd6 bomb, they can't be turned into other bombs you have formulas for
- if you deity requires holy or unholy then you must take that sanctification, but you can still take a "neutral cause", it's just that holy causes require you to pick holy (and the same for unholy), while a "neutral" cause can pick holy or unholy if their deity allows
To be fair, the ability reads "You create a versatile vial that can be used only as a bomb . . ." That can be read as 'a bomb' a.k.a. any bomb (because any versatile bomb can be turned into an alchemical item including a bomb) or just the acid bomb. Could have been worded clearer.
As for Champion:
Again, the wording is unclear. It says "You have one of the following causes. Some are limited to sanctification, as noted in parentheses." That can be read as 'If you are sanctified, the limit is taking one of these sanctified causes,' or 'the limit is you can only have access to these causes if you have that sanctification.' I would have prefered if it was spelled out. You are probably right, though hopefully you can see my confusion!
@@PsiPrimeProductions1 Yeah, at least for "Bombers" I will let them be "any bomb" (That they know)
I've watched many other youtubers depiction of the class changes and I think you manage to state it in a clear way that really helps!
Thank you!
After reading Oracle changes, I'd say oracle is now better gameplay wise and power wise. But it lost a decent amount of flair and thematics.
Reminder that Paizo is completely fine for you to play legacy oracle. Just ask your DM.
the way i see it is that the debatable loss in flavor comes with balance, a buff, and also more customizability, the feats themselves are pretty flavorful and each mystery accesses a different slice of them
I don't mind the removal of the AC penalty from Rage. Sure, you could see it as losing a tactical option, like you could choose not to rage if you need that AC... but in every game with a barbarian I've run, which is as of right now has been 4 full campaigns (two 1-20, two 1-11), the first thing my barbarians have done, every fight, on the first turn, has been to rage... unless they physically can't close to melee.
It is theoretically a tactical choice. In practice, at least in my experience, if you're playing a Barbarian, you want to do the thing Barbarians do.
I have a barbarian that I flavor as hyperfocusing on dueling instead of rage. There have been a couple of times against a boss with a redonkulus to hit where I have decided not to rage and instead started parrying so I didn't get crit to oblivion. That said, it's a small thing. Not a huge deal.
I kinda feel like the "Holy shit! Two cakes!" meme, because while the legacy Oracle was a bit too complex and potentially punishing to be considered a core class (hence why it was in Advanced Player's Guide), it's still a perfectly functional class with a fun risk/reward style of play. And while the remaster Oracle did lose some of the nuanced flavor and mechanics that made it unique, it still got a lot of really cool features and changes, and is much easier to jump into.
It's like we got two similar, but still distinct Oracle classes. One that resists its curse to where it's not as detrimental, and the other that embraces its curse and makes it a part of them to the point where they can use it to their benefit.
That intro sounds like my alarm bell and it messed me up
It's a royalty free bell sound that I got from Da Vinci resolve's free audio library, so there's a chance it's used by a lot of people as a royalty free bell.
Another good video. Thank you for the summary. I had not looked into the Remaster stuff too much.
Glad I could help!
Little bummed about missing out on battle oracle but honestly this makes me want to try out some of the different mysteries now
I'm super excited to actually have a playable ancestors oracle now.
Great Video!
I feel like I need to point out that Quick vials does not let an alchemist create bombs from formula. As written in the ability you cannot use these for the create a consumable option.
It is strictly a thrown Versatile Vial or the Field Vial ability.
You have a nice voice for this kind of content, can't wait for more starfinder stuff!
Thank you. I messed with Audacity (audio software) for 2 hours to try and get something that wasn't grating.
Very nice overview.
Thank you!
Nice thing about sorcerer, they rework focus spell requiring to go melee.
Huzzah🎉🎉🎉 i can finally start playing the new rules for alchemist🎉🎉🎉🎉
I have one friend who really wants to give them a shot.
Yeah, I really liked Alchemist Pathfinder 1e, and 2e. But Dang! 2e did not deliver, now I think an Alchemist is a very good character choice.
I already talked to my Master to switch my Laborer's Bastion Warpriest to a Glory Paladin in our Highrealm game.
Disclaimer: I can't say the explanation of the Champion's causes and holy/unholy selection seems off without seeing the text for myself in a week-ish.
That said, the way it was phrased does not sound right. If that's the case as described, Seelah as the Champion iconic can't take the Justice cause because Iomedae requires holy sanctification, and she was the iconic Paladin, which translates into the new Justice cause. It's a bit of a feels-bad if so.
My impression up until now was that the 'neutral' causes were more universal and allowed you to sanctify yourself as either Holy or Unholy, but if your god required it you had to sanctify on their side. Again, I haven't seen the full text, so maybe I'm wrong here.
That's exactly how Paizo described it in previews. Psi's claim that neutral causes are inaccessible to sanctified champions is wrong.
Yeah he said it backwards basically. Being Holy gives you access to holy ones not locks you to them
nah you're not wrong to be confused, how it actually works is for example if your deity says "may be holy", then you can pick holy or unsanctified, if you picked holy you can take any holy or "neutral" cause, and if you picked unsanctified you can pick any "neutral cause", but either way you can't pick unholy or an unholy cause, another example is than a "neutral cause" like "chaotic" liberation or "lawful" obedience can be holy, unholy, or neither, if their deity allows
It is VERY poorly worded there. That was the best way I could make heads or tails of it, but I could be wrong. I read it over three or four times, and that was the best I could get out of it. But then again, I was going over 8 classes too.
I had a whole bit about how champions interact with holy or unholy sanctification that I had to cut because I DID NOT understand it.
That being said . . . I would NOT be opposed to Sellah being redesigned as a redeemer champion. Her depiction in the videogame Wrath of the Righteous would be fine for Redeemer at least.
@@PsiPrimeProductions1 I can understand, it's a lot of material to cover in a short time, and I'm not here to take a shot at anyone, that part just confused me.
I wasn't expecting a reply, though, so thank you!
Edit: Re: Seelah. I could definitely see that too for her personally, but it just feels weird conceptually that Justice might not even be an option. At least, for me.
Oh hey, I guessed right! He did get a review copy!
Yeah, shout out to Paizo for getting it to me. I didn't think I was big enough to warrant one.
We know that Divine Mysteries will replace Lost Omens Gods and Magic
True, but it wasn't part of the initial 'Core' (eh? eh?) remaster lineup. Plus it has new stuff that isn't only 'remaster' in it. Stuff like Arazni being a new core god, and new archetypes that haven't been seen before. So it's a weird kinda corner case.
To be honest, I am actually really excited by the new oracle. I like that all the Cursebound feats are just really cool ways of cheating the action economy.
👍🏻
As a certified old stick in the mud, I absolutely LOATHE changes to my game systems... but WotC did this to themselves. I am totally in favour of distancing ourselves from a bunch of greedy idiots. I will always cherish my old experiences in older Dnd, but Pathfinder was the solution to continuing that experience. I'll never go back to DnD as long as Pathfinder sticks to their guns. ♥
Another issue with new life oracle, it doesn't get increased healing either. So why play life oracle when cleric does just as much if not more without any negative?
Also, the life oracle curse is FAR worse now. Yes, it lets others heal you at curse 2 even if you aren't down, but the loss in healing applies not only to outside healing, but your own healing.
At level 10, with curse 2, it would get 5 less healing from its first curse, and then none from magical outside sources unless it was down, but still it would only lose 5 from self heals.
New oracle at level 10 with curse 2? That's a massive 20 less healing from ALL sources including yourself. So that idea of becoming a health battery with life link and using stronger 2 action heals on yourself? Completely destroyed. Because your self healing penalty just got reduced by 4 times as much as before. Also, when playing as a life oracle, you are the main healer of the team. The vast majority of the time, you would be healing yourself. Which again, because of the new oracle, is drastically far worse than before.
Life oracle got a straight up nerf with this remaster and is strictly worse than a cleric in all ways.
I mean, you aren't wrong about the healing, but I think you are forgetting that focus spells no longer trigger your curse. So you can life link WITHOUT needing to go into your curse state. In other words, you can life link (a focus spell Clerics don't get BTW) and still heal just fine. Plus, there are some other cool abilities oracles get, like choosing to be treated as a living creature if undead. Their other focus spells give them some straight up healing touch (something clerics don't get) or turning into a life battery (again, something clerics don't get.)
Look, I'm not saying you're wrong for disliking the Oracle changes. I'm not even saying it isn't a downgrade. I'm saying that it isn't 'nerfed to hell.' I just think you are focusing on the negatives and discounting any of the stuff they got. You don't want to play a new life Oracle, don't play one . . . that's fine! Play what you like. Don't like the changes? Also okay. I'm just arguing devil's advocate.
I guess the Inventor will be in the next one or something.
Only classes in core rulebook and advanced players guide are getting full remaster versions in new books. Any change to the other classes will come with the errata in august.
That is the current plan, who knows what the future will hold. Maybe in a year or two, they will do something like the unchained book (from PF1) for the other classes.
Keep the comments civil, eh? Well, I won't comply you.. you.. ... ... Damn! I forgot to pick Bon Mot IRL =-/
Thank you for this condensed video.
I think Bon Mot is supposed to be civil or, like, maybe passive aggressive? Maybe demoralize is the uncivil way?
@@PsiPrimeProductions1 : It's usually quite civil, I suppose, but when used in combat I imagine it more like what U.S.ians call a "sick burn".
It's a reason the target takes -2 to will saves, after all :)
would love if they updated the witch class, its just a worse wizard at this point. overall i agree with the class changes a lot are just streamlining.
Witch was updated in Player Core 1
@@PsiPrimeProductions1 oh man was it? It still seems like a worse wizard.
@@Apheleion To each their own. Remember, witches can choose from any spellcasting tradition, and they can get many abilities that wizards can't, such as handing out fast healing, or having a familiar who has powerful abilities outside of combat (their familiars get more abilities than a wizard's familiar). I mean, wizards get stuff that witches don't get too. That's why they are two different classes. But if you don't like witch, don't play a witch. That's up to you.
This might be a stupid question but, What's happened to the Gunslinger?
Still exists. The remaster only changed up the classes from the core rulebook and the Advanced class guide. Gunslinger doesn’t really need updating.
@@PsiPrimeProductions1 Thanks, bro. I'm really digging your channel. Yours is pretty much my go to channel for pf2 info.
onerous sounds like bonerous