24:16 A small correction: The Shield only grants the AC Bonus when you use the 'Raise shield' Action for the round and you may only use 'Shield block' reaction with a raised Shield.
The reason why druids don't wear metal isn't because it's "civilized", it's because traditionally in many european and asian cultures, iron is a ward against natural spirits. Technically druids should also be unable to wear metal talismans and amulets. Metal tools and weapons aren't supposed to be wards, they are, well, tools. It's essentially real-life lore from the time when D&D had a lot of it.
Interesting. I always figured it was a combination of wooden/hide armors being closer to nature and metal being more industrial and anti-nature. But I guess since it was armor-specific that wouldn't have really made much sense.
Druids became allowed to wear metal when the Plane of Metal was restored, along with the Plane of Wood, with the release of Kineticists. Metal is natural, afterall, though the Plane of Metal and metal kineticists tend to be very rusty.
The mechanical difference with having "spell attacks and spell DC" instead of "primal spell attacks and primal spell DCs" is that if you multiclass with a different spellcasting tradition it will scale off of your normal proficiency instead of having a separate spellcasting proficiency for that tradition.
It’s been two months, but 11:50 yeah the reason behind the omission of certain classes is known. Alchemist is gone because they want to completely remake the class and wanted more time, the rest are because they have dragon based subclasses and, while dragons aren’t an OGL thing, chromatic/metallic dragons are, and needed to be removed. So dragons are getting a big restructure.
A friend once talked about a Leshy they played. It changed names based on what it was CURRENTLY doing (Like, at the moment) So it had to announce its name every time it did something so others knew what to call them and it got angry when they got it wrong. For instance, once it walked away from the party after an argument and shouted "'SQUATTING ANGRILY IN THE GRASS' WON'T TALK TO YOU NOW!"
@6:33 If you just have the Core book, it's a perfectly valid point - but Pathfinder 2e most definitely has "a wide variety of well-defined human cultures within their game world that they could potentially draw on for interesting human Heritage options"... ... they are just represented as Ancestry Feat options and are found in the Lost Omens: Character Guide book.
I have more than 200 sessions of pathfinder and a lot of ancestries appear with some frequency. Also all of them have their "personality archetype" but all are pretty much human in nature, so Goblins would easily accept a quest even more if requires someone to pass trough a dangerous area(they love danger)
Honestly, I wouldn't sell yourself short for coming up with the name "Dusty Sunset". It genuinely goes kinda hard, is memorable, fits the theme you were going for and can be handily shortened to "Dusty" for the ease of the rest of the party. So pretty much the perfect player character name.
For the classes: The 8 remaining classes are coming in Player Core 2 and the reasoning for the Alchemist is due to it getting more Remaster changes than any other class. The Sorcerer and Barbarian are in Player Core 2 due to the changes to the New dragons, which matters for Bloodlines and Rage types. Champion is in player core 2 due to the big changes to alignment and gods, as the most affected by these changes Monk is there for... Reasons probably :P
Also The In-lore reasoning for Druids being able to wear metal is the opening of the Plane of Metal. This is also the off-game reason as they found it weird that Druids couldn't wear metal when Metal was now a raw Elemental Power in Golarion.
The scaling per level is quite useful. Someone trained in a skill with loads of experience wont make many mistakes on minor tasks. Setting up camp in adverse conditions? DC 20 is no sure thing for a Wisdom +0 charakter trained in survival. It is a sure thing for a experienced one at lvl 8.
I feel like there are ways of doing that with out such large numbers Especially since such large numbers make player characters the only ones capable of dealing with a lot of threats which doesn’t jive well with the fiction imo
Sure, but the DC *isn't* always 20, a lot of things call for "a standard DC for your level".... which scales at +1 per level canceling out the proficiency increase
This is exactly what I was gonna say it makes a lvl 5 guy and a lvl 10 guy with the same ish prof feel different cuz the level 10 guy has 5 more points. Also it’s easier to keep the game in power between the players close as long as they are same lvl and have some type of prof the only real difference is about 8 ish points maybe. Then it gates out the non trained guys from doing the trained guys thing. Like in 5e wizard breaks down the door and like breaking down the door was the barbs thing. I love it imop
@@Kingdomkey123678it makes it so the guy that specializes in the task is the only one or the best on for the task. But as long as you are at least trained in the skill the difference is about 8 points at most. In my opinion I love it I don’t want my guy who invested into a skill to be out shined but a guy who didn’t
Adding level to proficiency means that instead of bounded accuracy, difficulty is relative to level, since pretty much every DC/modifier (including enemy attack bonuses/AC/saves) also scale with level. This means that as you level up, easier tasks (and lower level enemies) become less challenging for your character, while harder tasks become more feasible.
and at some point things impossible to normal humans became possible like swimming up the waterfall, climbing up the glass wall, balancing on razor edge, squeezing through seemingly solid wall etc. and that's just skills
@@mateokirstine9782 what are you talking about ? armies aren't made with random commoner with 0 training. when I say "you can't kill a dragon with 100 peasant" I'm talking about peasant, not trained soldier with adequate equipement.
I will say they told us alchemist need more time in the oven and barbarian and sorsoer had to wait until they figured out dragons with the new beastiairy. Monk I got no idea
I think they wanted a clean set of 8 classes in each Player Core, and with the PC1 being the main core experience, wanted to represent a little bit of everything. So there's a caster of each tradition (bard for occult, cleric for divine, druid for primal, and wizard for arcane), plus a tradition-flexible caster (witch with all traditions), then fighter for a strength martial, rogue for a dex martial, and ranger for a str OR dex martial. Then PC2 gets all the more advanced/oddball core classes, plus the ones that needed the context of the bestiary and more time to cook.
The change from specific spell attack rolls and DCs to using more generic spell attack roll and DC proficiency does actually have an impact on the mechanics of spellcasting, specifically when taking spellcasting archetypes and gaining spells from outside your class (such as from ancestries and general feats). Pre-remaster, spellcasting archetype and non-class spell DCs wouldn't scale at the same rate as your main class's spell DCs (or at all for the latter), so spells from those, and especially more offensive spells that rely on those attack rolls and DCs, would be weaker compared to your main class's spells. Additionally, you would have to take the basic/expert/master spellcasting feats from those archetypes to even allow those spells to scale in the first place. Now, they all use the same DCs and attack mods, and you aren't as pressured into taking those basic/expert/master spellcasting feats and can instead take those if you want a greater breadth of spells. They still possibly varying in strength based on the spellcasting stat of the spell however.
If you ARE a competent DM, you absolutely can say yes to a player wanting to be something that isn't in the book. As the DM, you CAN say no to any rules you want to.
Will say the paladin/champion is a personal favorite namely the more exotic flavors (oath of ancients , conquest, watchers and redemption) all of which aren't the typical "Good vs evil " as much as "Doing what I feel is the right thing for divine reasons "
Even in an alignment system, you can't just say, "My Alignment says I'm Good, and thus all my actions are automatically good." Thsts... Never.... How it worked. Like ever.
The level to proficiency thing is mostly there for balance I think. The way they set it up makes it really, really easy for a gm to balance encounters. Basically: While proficiency is increasing by level the thing you roll against often increases by level aswell. So basically what's left is just the difference in level + all the other boni to the roll. So at first glance it might seem that those +2s and so on are irrelevant looking at how high those numbers get, but actually they are what's making the difference from the base chance. Now what's making the balancing easy is that unlike in dnd5e, pf2 has some pretty robust math from what I can tell, so the guidelines on how to a balance encounters actually mostly work and those expected differences in proficiencies are baked into that. Hence why the optional rule of removing the level from proficiency has a warning that balancing will be a bit more wonky.
There's also a video by a youtuber called Kaleb Herington about how level to proficiency adds to the feeling of getting stronger through your adventures.
There is actually a rules variant where you just add the Proficiency mod, not your level. It's called Proficiency without Level in the Gamemastery Guide in the Variant rules section. I haven't done a deep dive into the Game Master Core to see if they have it in there as well.
If I remember correctly, they "removed" it in the Gm Core. Let's remember, tho, that the Remastered doesn't cancel the old rules. So you can still use the PwL variant rule even in remastered
I'm playing a Dwarf/Tiefling Barbarian with a Kineticist and Wrestler dedication. With a criminal background, he accidentally ended up being the most morally complex "hero" in the party, as well as the one who de-escalates from violence the quickest. I managed to pin an undead T-rex at level 8 followed by helping to rebuild a town by pulling worked worked bricks directly from the plane of earth. I love that Pathfinder 2e has so many more choices in each level compared to 5e, and the combat seems much less centered around dps and more about maneuvering and controlling the field.
"Very few versatile heritages/backgrounds fit a Leshy" is hilarious to me. Those options are here to expand your character, not reinforce a one-note cardboard cutout. Looking at the options in player core alone, I can find a character idea for all versatile heritages (Aiuvarin and Dromaar grouped under mixed ancestry of course), and most, if not all (only spent about 30 seconds looking at them) backgrounds. Here's one idea: A coven of hags has been performing rituals in the Drumish town of Macridi, cursing births in the the town and its surrounding forest in an attempt to make their coven grow with changelings. A druid of Macridi begged the primal forces of nature to help, creating a vessel for a protector spirit. Unfortunately, the leshy born that way was not spared from the hags' curse, making them a changeling. The leshy set off to find the hags' hideout, while getting to know the forest and its denizens from a mortal perspective. There you have a changeling, animal whisperer leshy, that would work great as a druid, ranger, beast eidolon summoner, sorcerer, or thaumaturge, and with a backstory and motivation for free. You can even expand on this simple idea to create an actual character, how cool is that? And that's by relying on the ancestry for a character concept, which is completely optional; a street urchin Leshy can work just as well
30:43 that's wrong no matter the level +1 is exactly the same let say that DC is 10 and you got your bonus incresed form 0 to +1 that's +5% chance to succeed and let say DC is 50 and your bonus moved from +40 to +41, this is exactly tha same +5% increase and due to +10/-10 crits this +1 really matters
I would personally allow changeling and nephilim heritages as an outer influence on the vessel or the nature spirit itself. Thinking about it I would allow mixed-ancestry even, because the vessel might be made to embody an orcish strength or elven grace
The thing about humans losing heritage options is even more perplexing sense they do exist in the supplementary lost omens material but then again i think there's something like 16 of them. Tbh i feel like they need to have the skilled and versatile traits be universal and just completely re-think the human race in a 3rd edition. They did change it so that you can pick the given attributes and flaws for the race OR just take a bonus in any 2 like the orc/human. Makes it a lot easier so that you dont feel like you can't play say, a dwarf cleric or druid with a handicap.
The only human heritage which was published since the Core Rulebook was the Wintertouch heritage from the Lost Omens: Character Guide. Whilst it would be nice to have gotten more human heritages for this book, I do understand why they didn't want to have these two really generic options and "You're really good against cold because of Baba Yaga", and I'm guessing with the Remaster being kind of really speed done, they didn't want to really spend their time focusing on that instead of other things. There a whole ton of different and for humans in the various Lost Omens books, but heritages =/= ethnicity (For example with elves having a heritage for "You're old", a feat which lets you change your heritage every week, and several feats which mention specific in-universe elven ethnic groups), so that doesn't really work here
I watched this as a palate cleanser between all the FATAL videos (morbid curiosity got me in for the long haul, lol), and it's really refreshing to hear opinions on PF2 from someone with much broader TTRPG experience and less investment in the edition war. It was also nice to see how you handled a system I'm personally familiar with, as it gives me a good idea of how your tastes compare to my own, so I can take that with me while watching your videos on stuff I've never played before. I've personally found the whole "add level to everything" bit that PF2 does to be really helpful for combat-as-sport encounter design--it makes for easy balancing and more frequent spicy crits--but the incredibly linear power scaling makes it hard to craft natural-feeling sandboxes. You can tell it's made to support the kind of products Paizo likes to sell: semi-episodic adventures on a predictable release schedule. Very strong on the "gamist" part of the gamist-narrativist-simulationist three-way spectrum, a bit weak on the other two.
if i understand your what you mean about the power scaling id actually say it makes sandbox design relatively intuitive though granted very rpg esk, by having weaker areas that are filled with lower level challenges, and stronger areas that are filled with higher level challenges you can be very clear about which areas the players can be in while also allowing them to clearly see how much their characters have grown, ie the level 5 party goes back to their homeland for a week to help out and when they get there they can help around the town a lot more than they could when they left to go become adventurers maybe old farmer gillin needs some fences repaired and so the party send over their beefy inventor to make the crafting/athletics checks or the town needs to expand into a new area but there are some dangerous vermin in the area so the party goes and stomps what previously would have been a moderate to hard encounter it allows for the narrative of zero -> hero quite easily and if the natural-feeling is the thing you're struggling with potentially have the different areas sea bound and so while sea farers and trade can be common the extent to which non humanoid creatures move between area is limited, similar to the irl, assuming you live in the 1st world you've probably met 1 or more african people or people of african descent but outside of a zoo you've not likely seen a lion in person the above works best in a setting where people are generally cooperative and the main enemy types are monstrous, a monster hunter style world would work well here if you instead want to make a game with more humanoid enemies then thats easy to achieve with classism seperating the areas
Paizo is not really there for momey as all the rules are up for free on Archives of Nethys. Seriously as long as you have an internet connection you can find any rule for spells, creatures, ancestries, feats, and so on.
7:10: Er, what? Why would a competent GM not let leshy character take versatile heritages? Sure some don't make sense at face value, but as a GM and player of the Pathfinder games for over a decade, one of my favorite ideas I saw a player bring was a spooky Jack-O-Lantern looking leshy with further backstory to justify them having the tiefling heritage. It's all about creativity and I've always felt encouraged by 2E especially to let my players reflavor things that result in really fun ideas for how their characters express certain mechanics.
Hellspawn and Angelkin are lineages inside Nephilim those already existed in the core as lineages for tiefling and aasimar. Planar versatile heritages(geniekin and nephilim) can be applied to any ancestries as per the lore of Golarion. Planarscions occurs when someone is exposed to the energies of a plane normaly before they are born. Alchemist needed more time because of the rework of the alchemical items which weren't many in the core 1 and GM Core because they are still working on it. The large numbers make the game extremely balanced since it scales with level you can garantee that players will be able to take creatures of certain levels. The change on spell DC and Spell attacks make so when you take an multiclass archetype that give other traditions it scales with your normal spellcasting simplifying things and making caster archetypes better with each other.
Champion isn't a paladin though. Pre-remaster, you could already use any of the good or evil alignments, they were only missing out on the neutral alignments, but those were supposed to be coming later down the line. Champion is about being the representative of you deity, sticking to their moral code instead of society's, which makes sense in a world where deities are factually existent.
Like, you’re right, but they’re factually based on paladins. Paladins are a subset of champions. That is the function they fulfill within the system, a Paladin with the serial number scrubbed off and painted in the colors of the non-neutral alignments.
"That +1 wont make difference" yeah, it does, it does a **LOT** +1 in PF2e can do a lot, those numbers are not arbitrary everything is based on you having X in something if you can gain bonuses outside X you will have a great time if you have lower than X you will fall behind a lot. So casters basically must increase their key attribute or else your magic is useless.
Can confirm, in PF2e the math is really tight, so +1 or +2 changes can really matter. Otherwise conditions like frightened basically wouldn't do anything. If it helps people to think about, another way to look at it is through the lens of the way PF2e handles critical successes and failures. You get a crit if you succeed the check by 10 or more, that's it. So every modifier of 1 or decreases your chance to crit by 5%, or same thing for the enemy to land a crit on you if you're taking penalties. It gets challenging quick without some tactical thinking.
And with the 4 Degrees of Success, the +1 is important. You get a Critical Success when you exceed the DC by 10 or more. A +1 is comparable mathematically to gaining Advantage in D&D.
Why did the make the "cactus" ancestry all about the spines and not about the, y'know, "surviving and thriving in an environment that's otherwise absolutely hostile to plantlife"- thing? I mean common nettles have a more effective defense mechanism than cacti, so maybe create an ancestry based on them if you want a more "aggressive" plant?
literally 2 days ago i came to your channel looking to learn 2e and was like "damn they only have the old version" so its cool to see this now in my frontpgae
To clarify a little bit about ranged attacks: Ranged attacks never add an ability modifier to the weapon's damage, as a general rule. The exceptions to this rule are attacks using ranged weapon with the "thrown" or "propulsive" traits. "Thrown" weapons add your full strength mod to the damage, and "propulsive" weapons add half of your strength to damage if your mod is positive or full strength if it's negative. Unarmed strikes typically list their tags (if any) in their entry, and as the Seedpod has neither of those traits, it only does 1d4 damage. Edit: And as an objection to your objection against Leshies with Versatile Heritages, I say nay! It's entirely reasonable for a leshy to be built with a versatile heritage! Changelings and Nephilim and such are simple - your shell was created by a being of considerable connection to those heritages, or even built within a site that has substantial influence, or perhaps your spirit resides in such places of power for a while - for example, a nature spirit who stalks the Worldwound could easily be given a leshy form with connection to the Outer Rifts and their demonic inhabitants! Even humanoid heritages could be explained away - perhaps the druid who created you had a friend or loved one whom they wished to honor with a familiar shape, or you were born in the influence of a large settlement of a certain ancestry! It's entirely reasonable to describe a leshy created by druidic magics around Kyonin to be described as "almost elven" due to the influence of the society and local nature there - especially if the creator in question gave them pointy, ear-like leaves!
Also, on the topic of "Leshy druids with leshy familiars", it's actually more common than you'd think. One of the premades for Fistful of Flowers is, in fact, that exact thing. They have a sort of father/daughter relationship, as the familiar was a weaker nature spirit that needed an outside source of power in order to anchor them. The quote from his sheet says: *“Bottlespeaker is a fierce advocate for embodied nature spirits of all sizes and strengths as well as a self-appointed protector of other leshys. After learning the fundamentals of leshy creation from his ritual mother, Bottlespeaker used them to grant a body to a spirit that would've been too weak to manifest without his aid. This spirit became his familiar, Twinsprout, whom he treats like a beloved daughter and often carries around inside his hollow head.”*
I dont get it either. They are thematically really cool and most people i have played with who choose paladin in any system where its an option are generally good players. (Literally was only in 1 short-lived game where the paladin was a scumbag and he lost his oath because of it
@earthbound9999 I've come to not trust anyone who chooses Champion/Paladin as their least favorite class. From what I've seen, they actually go put of their way to make sure Paladin/Champion players have as little fun as possible.
13:39 It's for if you take a feet or archetype that let you learn new spells, if you choose the new spells from the Primal Spell-list, You keep this modifier, otherwise you need to be trained with the appropriate spell attacks / DC and that proficiency lvls up separate from your Primal spell attack proficiency. I don't think anyone's going to miss that tbh.
Pretending that Level Prof is "just there to make the number bigger" while also giving the reason why its done at 23:31. Bounded accuracy erodes character identiy so I am glad that people actually get to be good at stuff in PF2.
Okay just a few thoughts: The pessimism and at times blatant mischaracterization of the system, whether intentional or not, is really not a good look. It just seems like you're trying to join in on a trend of hating it, rather than really trying to understand it. I'm not saying you need to be a seasoned veteran to form an opinion, or that you can't have a negative opinion, but the misinformation about certain topics, that you could google search in less than 5 minutes, is just really frustrating. The goblin and leshy rants were really unnecessary, I understand you might not like the ancestries but they work, and make sense, despite you seeming to think otherwise. Not being able to imagine goblins do quests is a non argument, it is a game of make believe so if you have even a smidge of creativity you can think of reasons why they would. A half orc leshy might be a little more weird but still plausible to pull off with some ingenuity, and calling someone incompetent because they think that, is not really valid criticism. As others in the comments mentioned, Pathfinder 2e does have a variety of well defined human cultures, which are represented by the ancestry feats in the Lost Omens book. I understand if you don't have it, but then again considering all pathfinder content is available online for free (and a quick search would let you find this), it's a really poor comment. I don't understand the hate on Paladins/Champions at all. Outside of the fact that Pathfinder 2e Champion is quite different from the D&D 5e Paladin to begin with(again just do basic research please), even if they were almost the same, I don't understand calling them "dead weight that is only in the game because it has been in the game". The holy warrior is a common archetype that people enjoy whether you realize it or not, and is one of the most widely recognized fantasy tropes even completely outside of the D&D space. The reason why you add level to proficiency is also very widely known and it isn't just number bloat, the math in the game is actually very tightly designed so that obstacles scale to your level (this makes the job very easy for a GM), so things that used to be hard become easy and things that use to be impossible become hard, a +1 bonus is very significant since it's not only increasing hit chance by 5% but also crit chance. I'm saying all of this because I usually really like your content, and I do agree with some of the takes in this video such as the weird identity crisis of the Witch class, or the unnecessary distinction between Class DC and Spell DC outside of rare circumstances, but I just can't get past the feeling that this was done in poor taste. It is fine to dislike something, but it's not okay to mischaracterize it whether it be intentionally or due to poor research.
With Player Core 2 having come out, a lot of those classes have had some decent retooling compared to the PC1 classes. It seems like the PC1 classes were the ones that they felt were good out the gate; even the witch, which saw the most changes, didn't see a major retooling of their chassis, only minor additions to better secure their niche within the class-space.
Adding level to proficiency isn't there just to make numbers bigger, but to make higher level creatures higher level threats. A dragon will feel like an actually untouchable beast for a measily commoner for reasons outside of the commoner dying within a single swipe of it's claws or it's breath weapon, and the same thing applies to the player. If you're a battle hardened, level 20 warrior, you're gonna wanna feel like you're in a completely different ballpark to a measily goblin, to the point where it's essentially as threatening as a bug would be to the average commoner. It serves to properly convey a greater creature's might within combat, and thus better reflecting how great of a feat it is to defeat, or even just survive an encounter with such dreadful beasts.
okay so about adding the LV to proficiency while it doesn't matter when you are fighting equal level monster but 1 level difference makes monsters noticeably weaker/stronger and this is fundation of balancing the encounters and one of the resons why it works really well also with +10/-10 crits it helps to separete low level barely an adventures form legendary heroes
I feel like this Remaster was likely rushed out faster then intended thanks to Hasbro deciding that DnD was "undermonitized", and starting off the whole OGL fiasco. There's a few aspects that scream that (Like Humans having no real Heritages, Alchemists being missing, the high stat inflation, or Tiefling and Aasimar lore being deleted over rewritten), but the Leshy are definitely the biggest flag that they scrambled to get what they could out the door to capitalize on the backlash. They're supposed to be one of the main races of the world now, one that most people in the world should at least baseline know-of, yet they have no way of being produced naturally. They're supposed to be able to be halfkin and have unusual heritage, yet no possible method of obtaining those backgrounds are given. They're supposed to have backstories, yet a Leshy player can literally be conjoured up by a druid as the first action in the story. Seed pods are straight up unfinished, and its very unclear how a Leshy familiar is different from a Leshy player. I do trust that these issues will be fixed/addressed, especially with how easy it would be, and i can't blame Paizo too much for rushing this out, no one was really prepared for Hasbro to just gut their golden goose like that (Not sure why that was, though... I mean one look at what they've done to MTG would have been a massive red flag for things to come), but still, releasing an unfinished product is releasing an unfinished product. Its just a little disappointing that the edition meant to fully differentiate it from DnD... Doesn't actually do that, and explicitly because it was rushed out *to do that.* And as far as fixing the issues around Leshies being purely artificial; there's actually already a solution in the game! Your Leshie druid can create another Leshie, thats it, thats reproduction! We can even use this to give Leshies some cultures/settlements across the map based on heritage to give them a more solid foot in the world; Its said that Leshies enjoy life, and maybe, some enjoy it so much they refuse to die, instead growing into giant Elder leshie and becoming obsessed with Spawning more of their Kin to experience the joys and wonders that are life! You can have a Giant Siguaro Leshie in a desert, a Humongous Mushroom Leshie in some dark, dank, wet caverns, a massive Fruit Leshie in the middle of a massive Orchard, a spread-out Vine Leshie occupying an entire abandoned castle, and plenty more possible source points for non-Familiar Leshies. And as far as the universal heritages are concerned, maybe a Changling leshie was Created by a hag, an outsider Leshie was forged from plants from heaven/hell, and a Leshie half-breed could be born primarily from plants that feasted on the decay from the race in question. The Leshie are both the Remasters' biggest strength and biggest weakness; They clearly have a *lot* of love, thought, and heart put into them, and the charm is through the roof. But they're also not fully fleshed out, and need more work done before they're fully ready to become a major new *base* race. They're a microcausm of the whole thing.
the new thing about the mixed heritage, is that yeah, basically they're half elves/half orcs. But you can easily create a Half Dwarf Half Iruxi or Half Halfling half Gnome or an Half Hobgoblin and Half Goblin (an Hobgoblingoblin?)
There are few things cooler than Leshy. So many fun and cute and scary options. The Adventure Path “a fistful of flowers/ a few flowers more” have a team of awesome characters.
the “primal spell proficiency” to “spellcasting proficiency” change is to make multiclassing as a spellcaster better. now if you multiclass into a class with a different spell list, your spellcasting with that other list won’t suck anymore, i.e., if you’re a bard multiclassing into an oracle, your dc’s and bonuses will be the same instead of only ever being trained in your divine spells all the way to level 20.
also, the class dc/spellcasting dc split is because some features (mostly archetype features are the problem) use your class dc. most spell-casters get up to legendary with their spell-casting dc so if they weren’t different dc’s, spell-casters would just be inherently better at those things than martials. messing with class dc is something paizo has been really hesitant to do. (though now with the kineticist and commander, it seems they’re letting it get to legendary for some classes)
The reason why Leshy became a core ancestry was beause they were extremely popular in organized play (personally, I would've preferred Kobolds, who are about as popular, but I guess Paizo wasn't to add a distinctly 'Paizo' ancestry) The human cultures in Pathfinder aren't heritages, partly because I think Paizo is hesitant to stat 'Asian Culture' but they do still exist via feats humans can take. A number of human feats are 'Ethnicity locked', though it's almost never enforced at tables in my experience. Honestly heritages don't really follow any strict rules in what they are; some are based around culture and land (like orc) while some are based more off occupations and ranks (hobgoblins) and others are based off cultural trends (goblins). I do agree that humans being the generic option is lame, especially when elves already fill the role of being the broad ancestry anyway given their longevity feats. Alchemist was removed from PC1 because it had a lot of problems and they're taking more time to try to revise it. Same with Barbarian to a lesser extent. Champion needs a lot of reworking to fit with the new rules, and Monk is apparently getting an overhaul to their magic (it was really messy and convoluted) as per revealed in a recent blog post. I do like how this comment section is filled with different 'truths' as to why Druids don't use metal armor. The real reason is the reason why so many norms in TTRPGs make no sense: it's because Gary Gygax said so. Why do spears and polearms in almost all TTRPGs work differently than IRL spears and polearms? Because Gary Gygax misunderstood how they worked. Why do Clerics use maces? It's because Gygax wanted them to. Though with this there are a few documented instances of Christian monks defending themselves or even going into battle with maces so who knows. Holy shit I truly have no life... sorry for the long comment, I'm kinda sick this morning and needed a distraction lol.
I bet you add your level to your rolls so that your level as a number has an immediate use instead of just being a signifier of your advancement. It does generally flatten itself out numerically but adding your level to rolls feels good, like in a specific situation where two characters who are equal in every way relevant to a particular task other than level, I like that the difference in level gives a small edge.
Honestly all the pc2 classes need way more help than the pc1 ones. Alchemist is so versatile that it's never the best user of it's own items, aberrant sorc just doesn't work, champions lost alignment, oracle curses and refocusing, etc....
The original goblins were definitely more like the stereotype, but, just like any group of people, there were others that wanted something different in life. We see them ultimately connecting to civilizations, looking to grow like any other people, especially in Absalom. Will they have some old habits based off of this tradition or that "old saying"? Yes, just like with any other people. However, this is what I like about Pathfinder in that they continue to move the history of the world, and its peoples, forward with all that entails.
I think they are saving barbarian/sorcerer for player core 2 is due to them having dragon themed subclasses and dragons were not remastered by the time PC1 came out
I'll be honest, never liked the lol you need two boosts to get higher bonuses from this point on, I tend to just ignore that myself, I want my Epic Hero's and VIllians to be Epic after all lol
Barbarian and Sorcerer most likely got held back because their most popular subclasses are both Dragon related and the new dragons weren't fully defined yet when they were putting together Core 1
a company that gives its game for free in a very convenient format (AoN) is excused for dividing the remaster in 2~4 books. and everything that distances itself from WotC and Hasbro has my approval... besides , for who already plays the game or wants to get into it, the remaster is full of great changes, in quality of life, balancing, fun and player options. now that the final remaster book is out, you maybe could do a quick follow up for this one?
Druids not being able to wear metal armor never felt right, like we already can use metal weapons and, in nature the only rule is might makes right, so if a bear could make armor it would make armor and wear it. So why couldn't we? Like if you said you cannot wild shape in metal armor I could get it...
the way pf2e is balanced, your level basically doesn't matter for things of your level that you are proficient in, so every extra +1 matters. the level is relevant for things with a different than you, which usually is the majority of stuff; making them not only easier or harder to succeed, but more/less likely to critically fail or succeed. I myself think that every number growing every level is annoying, but it not only works, but tells better stories. a lvl 1 wizard has 0% chance of hitting an ancient dragon with a sword, let alone criting. the best chance it has is a 5% chance of not critically failing, which generally works way better than how dnd does. though of I were the designer I'd have gone for ½ level proficiency, or having a 4th type of bonus, a level bonus, that is applied to basically everything that has a level difference from your character equal to thwt difference; but as you can see, these "solutions" are just more convoluted versions of how the game already works, and the biggest problem with ½ level (although I still think it could work, maybe I'll try some day) is that half of the levels become a more noticeable bump in power for no reason, depending on how you round them
btw, don't know if you read my comments, but despite I criticising and complaining a lot, I actually really like your videos, specially these character making ones, and I _(usually,_ sometimes I too annoying even for my standards) try to criticize and correct what I have a reasonable argument for, and isn't pure preference. ex: I don't agree with your opinion on goblins and monstrous races, but eh, at the end of the day, it's just preference
As someone who "likes" Pathfinder 2e and don't like the level tied proficiency progression, let me say, that extra +1 at level 10 matters, simply because in Path 2e everything levels with you (and the game is balanced assuming you'll get this +1). When you level up, monster will get weaker compared to you but your GM will just put new higher level monster to compensate (and their modifiers are determined by their levels too), the DC for challenges will increase (as I've seem someone saying : "As you get stronger the bolder you're pushing gets bigger"), basically making the level in your proficiency redundant. People argue that this makes you feel stronger because at higher levels you can on-shot a lot of weaker monsters, but let be honest, how many times do you fight goblins and bandits when you're level 10+?
Agreed remember adding level makes this game very balanced and every pluse 1 matters is a thing (although this makes sense if you know your not playing past level 9)
His second point, "You can't know if this campaign will even go to level 10," is perfectly fair. Yeah, missing the +5 at level 10 hurts, but sometimes it pays to be the pessimist who gets to use that +1 early because they assume the campaign will peter out around level 8.
Considering that the GMG (and possibly GM Core, haven't eaten all the way through it yet) *does* suggest to GMs that they should throw Easy and Trivial encounters into the adventuring day on a semi-regular basis to really cement that feeling of progression, pretty often I'd hope! It really does feel good to go into an encounter with seven xulgaths that would have wiped the floor with me and my party a couple levels ago if we weren't careful and just absolutely blindside them with a few well-placed spells and attacks. Even in official APs it's not even uncommon to find creatures lower than your level - especially the more recent ones that follow their own suggested design philosophy a little closer than their old ones. The idea is that your experience makes your character grow and makes challenges they would've found difficult yesteryear into things that they can do reasonably well now, and trivially easy in the future. A small, uncoordinated group of goblins would've been hard for your team when you first started, but given a couple levels you'll find it MUCH easier. Your Rogue may no longer need to roll to unlock simple locks because they're just THAT good at it now. Or, on the flip side, a creature that's 2 levels higher than you becomes a MUCH bigger threat because of its innate power relative to you. That's the thing you're missing here - the DCs for "challenges" will increase because the frame of reference for what is a challenge increases along with the party's capabilities. But that doesn't mean that things that came before suddenly stop existing. You will still need to occasionally cross a river or pick some simple lock or wipe away a few bandits from your travelling cart. That's where you're able to show growth.
Okay, it seems I've always missunderstood the class DC calculation. I thought it was 10 + Lvl + Class Proficiency wich would be 14 at level 1. Also, did they change the part of the Leshy where their nurishment depends on their heritage? Because I seem to remember that fungus Leshi explicitly don't need sunlight.
It's only offhandedly mentioned in the Solar Rejuvenation feat, "Leshies whose plant nourishment does not rely on photosynthesis require a similarly suitable environment. For example, fungus leshies need dark, damp environments and a pile of decaying plant matter." Honestly, some of the Leshy stuff feels a bit rushed.
@@zigmenthotep alot of the PF2E stuff felt rushed. I own the previous versions of the Player Core, Advanced Player Core and GM Guide and somethings are really diffifult to find. Class DC really should've had a seperate paragraph isntead of being buried in another one.
Level is included only in your Proficiency Bonus. If you're proficient in something, your bonus is [CharacterLevel + 2/4/6/8 (for Trained/Expert/Master/Legendary)]. To calculate a DC, it's [10 + appropriate Ability Mod + Proficiency Bonus]. So to calculate your Class DC, at first level, you'd be Trained, and the rest depends on whether you have a maxed Key Ability/Attribute or not. (ex. If your Fighter has a STR of 4, then they'd start with a 17 (10 + 4 + 3).)
6:33 Does this guy ACTUALLY know Pathfinder or is he just trying to jump on a bandwagon?! 6:59 And now I'm being called incompetent because I don't see any issue with a Demonic or Angelic Plant person! Half orc is bit more weird though!
yeah those two remarks scream "skill issue". There's heaps of lore books about different regions of Golarion, most of which have a good number of humans. And yeah the Leshy could be any of those versatile heritages lmao, they're just confused because in their head nephilim is "human with horns". Even mixed ancestries work; imagine a mad, necromancer-like druid trying to raise undeads through parasitic plants, and instead having those corpses be inhabited by a spirit of nature
so, would you(or anyone else) recommend getting Pathfinder 2nd next time the core stuff comes up in a humble bundle or something? (crossposted from the old 2nd vid for visiblity among non-zigmenthotep users)
Maybe, but I don't have high hopes that they'll actually make even the slightest attempt to fix any of the problems with the game. I mean, they didn't in 2001 for After the Bomb.
18:10 It's probably just like being an android with a robot dog familiar kind of thing. Leshy in this case sounds like it just generically means "plant based animal" instead of "meat based animal"
wait, so none of the core classes provide a strength bonus by default? is this one reading that right? you'd have to use your 'any' boost(s) on str? that 's an interesting choice
I'm not very convinced that the remastered 2e actually solves the alignment problem you mentioned, since a player character can just gain the Holy trait to the same effect, I also don't really get the hate for champion, like having a martial class parallel to the magical cleric
If we're cutting Champion, we're cutting Flumphs. Champion is the only divinely linked martial class. It does not cast spells, in the traditional sense.
Player Core 2 comes with the remaining 8 classes in the start of August. They announced this with the remaster, so it is easy to miss :) @matthewschultz7390
I was brainstorming with a friend about how he would make a half-Orc Leshy, and ideas included "the ancient nature spirit is a reincarnated orcish druid hero" and "this leshy is a plant type that is culturally significant to a group of local orcs, and has lived among them within their society for generations" (the latter of which basically equating to the Adopted Ancestry feat in a flavor sense, but in the heritage space mechanically). Nephilim would require even less explaining. Why shouldn't you have, for instance, a plant species originating in Hell?
i think from the anathemas standpoint, the druid should be allowed to use metal, but not iron specifically. given that traditionally, iron (and maybe lead) was harmful to fairies and nature spirits
It is now allowed as the Elemental plane of Metal has been opened last summer (Together with the Elemental Plane of Wood, adding the last two Elements from the more Asian Elemental Cycle) This is the in-world reasoning why Druids can use metal now :)
Could you do a video on Wraith: the Oblivion? It's probably the coolest WoD setting and I don't see one, at least not in your "build a character" playlist.
If a Leshy is a plant, and is an herbist, does that count as cannibalism? Asking for a friend. Great video, Remastered Pathfinder seems to be a better game overall, so I’m considering picking up the Remasters.
the alchemist is a class well known in optimizer circles for being.... underpowered and complicated for little return on investment? so I'm certain that's why they are keeping that in the oven a bit longer, although your proposition doesnt seem UNLIKELY.
It has been announced with the Remaster almost a year ago to be in Player Core 2 with the rest of the missing 8 classes. The reasoning for the Alchemist is that they wanted to give it a full overhaul.
I m heavly playing with the idea for a Fungi-Leshy Leaf-druid who is harmlessly cute and sits himself in almost every corpse then grows nuts or sone fruit for my companions..they are going to be so grossed out😂 but i just a cute little mushroom
I feel like this guy just doesn't get Pathfinder, and under normal circumstances, that'd be totally fine, but why are you claiming to make a tutorial video for a game you clearly don't understand? Just look at all the comments correcting you.
24:16 A small correction: The Shield only grants the AC Bonus when you use the 'Raise shield' Action for the round and you may only use 'Shield block' reaction with a raised Shield.
The reason why druids don't wear metal isn't because it's "civilized", it's because traditionally in many european and asian cultures, iron is a ward against natural spirits. Technically druids should also be unable to wear metal talismans and amulets. Metal tools and weapons aren't supposed to be wards, they are, well, tools.
It's essentially real-life lore from the time when D&D had a lot of it.
Interesting. I always figured it was a combination of wooden/hide armors being closer to nature and metal being more industrial and anti-nature. But I guess since it was armor-specific that wouldn't have really made much sense.
Druids became allowed to wear metal when the Plane of Metal was restored, along with the Plane of Wood, with the release of Kineticists. Metal is natural, afterall, though the Plane of Metal and metal kineticists tend to be very rusty.
@@KyouTGD they better polish their skills up then
And armor is armor, no?
The mechanical difference with having "spell attacks and spell DC" instead of "primal spell attacks and primal spell DCs" is that if you multiclass with a different spellcasting tradition it will scale off of your normal proficiency instead of having a separate spellcasting proficiency for that tradition.
It’s been two months, but 11:50 yeah the reason behind the omission of certain classes is known. Alchemist is gone because they want to completely remake the class and wanted more time, the rest are because they have dragon based subclasses and, while dragons aren’t an OGL thing, chromatic/metallic dragons are, and needed to be removed. So dragons are getting a big restructure.
A friend once talked about a Leshy they played. It changed names based on what it was CURRENTLY doing (Like, at the moment)
So it had to announce its name every time it did something so others knew what to call them and it got angry when they got it wrong.
For instance, once it walked away from the party after an argument and shouted "'SQUATTING ANGRILY IN THE GRASS' WON'T TALK TO YOU NOW!"
That's precious.
@6:33 If you just have the Core book, it's a perfectly valid point - but Pathfinder 2e most definitely has "a wide variety of well-defined human cultures within their game world that they could potentially draw on for interesting human Heritage options"...
... they are just represented as Ancestry Feat options and are found in the Lost Omens: Character Guide book.
I have more than 200 sessions of pathfinder and a lot of ancestries appear with some frequency. Also all of them have their "personality archetype" but all are pretty much human in nature, so Goblins would easily accept a quest even more if requires someone to pass trough a dangerous area(they love danger)
And fire!!!
Yeah, also why would selecting a background be hard for a leshy? You are born, and then go and do stuff
Honestly, I wouldn't sell yourself short for coming up with the name "Dusty Sunset". It genuinely goes kinda hard, is memorable, fits the theme you were going for and can be handily shortened to "Dusty" for the ease of the rest of the party. So pretty much the perfect player character name.
or sun and sunny
For the classes: The 8 remaining classes are coming in Player Core 2 and the reasoning for
the Alchemist is due to it getting more Remaster changes than any other class.
The Sorcerer and Barbarian are in Player Core 2 due to the changes to the New dragons, which matters for Bloodlines and Rage types.
Champion is in player core 2 due to the big changes to alignment and gods, as the most affected by these changes
Monk is there for... Reasons probably :P
Also The In-lore reasoning for Druids being able to wear metal is the opening of the Plane of Metal.
This is also the off-game reason as they found it weird that Druids couldn't wear metal when Metal was now a raw Elemental Power in Golarion.
The scaling per level is quite useful. Someone trained in a skill with loads of experience wont make many mistakes on minor tasks. Setting up camp in adverse conditions? DC 20 is no sure thing for a Wisdom +0 charakter trained in survival. It is a sure thing for a experienced one at lvl 8.
I feel like there are ways of doing that with out such large numbers
Especially since such large numbers make player characters the only ones capable of dealing with a lot of threats which doesn’t jive well with the fiction imo
Sure, but the DC *isn't* always 20, a lot of things call for "a standard DC for your level".... which scales at +1 per level canceling out the proficiency increase
@@Kingdomkey123678I would presume it actually makes it a bit easier for DMs to keep checks around the same difficulty as players level up
This is exactly what I was gonna say it makes a lvl 5 guy and a lvl 10 guy with the same ish prof feel different cuz the level 10 guy has 5 more points. Also it’s easier to keep the game in power between the players close as long as they are same lvl and have some type of prof the only real difference is about 8 ish points maybe. Then it gates out the non trained guys from doing the trained guys thing. Like in 5e wizard breaks down the door and like breaking down the door was the barbs thing. I love it imop
@@Kingdomkey123678it makes it so the guy that specializes in the task is the only one or the best on for the task. But as long as you are at least trained in the skill the difference is about 8 points at most. In my opinion I love it I don’t want my guy who invested into a skill to be out shined but a guy who didn’t
4:44 i just noticed that you put the Leshies ability flaw as (-1 Str) in the graphics box on the botem right of the screen insted of (-1 Int)
Yeah, I saw that as well.
Adding level to proficiency means that instead of bounded accuracy, difficulty is relative to level, since pretty much every DC/modifier (including enemy attack bonuses/AC/saves) also scale with level. This means that as you level up, easier tasks (and lower level enemies) become less challenging for your character, while harder tasks become more feasible.
+
and at some point things impossible to normal humans became possible like swimming up the waterfall, climbing up the glass wall, balancing on razor edge, squeezing through seemingly solid wall etc. and that's just skills
true, it also mean you can't get like 100 peasant to throw javelin at a dragon to kill it
@@fleic2262yep! Standing militias and armies are a thing of the past. Every country’s military is like 20 guys of level 10 or above.
@@mateokirstine9782 what are you talking about ? armies aren't made with random commoner with 0 training. when I say "you can't kill a dragon with 100 peasant" I'm talking about peasant, not trained soldier with adequate equipement.
I will say they told us alchemist need more time in the oven and barbarian and sorsoer had to wait until they figured out dragons with the new beastiairy. Monk I got no idea
Champions too. Honestly, paizo decisionmaking with new core classes is questionable at best
I think they wanted a clean set of 8 classes in each Player Core, and with the PC1 being the main core experience, wanted to represent a little bit of everything. So there's a caster of each tradition (bard for occult, cleric for divine, druid for primal, and wizard for arcane), plus a tradition-flexible caster (witch with all traditions), then fighter for a strength martial, rogue for a dex martial, and ranger for a str OR dex martial. Then PC2 gets all the more advanced/oddball core classes, plus the ones that needed the context of the bestiary and more time to cook.
The change from specific spell attack rolls and DCs to using more generic spell attack roll and DC proficiency does actually have an impact on the mechanics of spellcasting, specifically when taking spellcasting archetypes and gaining spells from outside your class (such as from ancestries and general feats).
Pre-remaster, spellcasting archetype and non-class spell DCs wouldn't scale at the same rate as your main class's spell DCs (or at all for the latter), so spells from those, and especially more offensive spells that rely on those attack rolls and DCs, would be weaker compared to your main class's spells. Additionally, you would have to take the basic/expert/master spellcasting feats from those archetypes to even allow those spells to scale in the first place.
Now, they all use the same DCs and attack mods, and you aren't as pressured into taking those basic/expert/master spellcasting feats and can instead take those if you want a greater breadth of spells. They still possibly varying in strength based on the spellcasting stat of the spell however.
If you ARE a competent DM, you absolutely can say yes to a player wanting to be something that isn't in the book. As the DM, you CAN say no to any rules you want to.
Will say the paladin/champion is a personal favorite namely the more exotic flavors (oath of ancients , conquest, watchers and redemption) all of which aren't the typical "Good vs evil " as much as "Doing what I feel is the right thing for divine reasons "
Very partial to the oath of ancients, Like that one a lot.
Even in an alignment system, you can't just say, "My Alignment says I'm Good, and thus all my actions are automatically good." Thsts... Never.... How it worked. Like ever.
The level to proficiency thing is mostly there for balance I think. The way they set it up makes it really, really easy for a gm to balance encounters. Basically: While proficiency is increasing by level the thing you roll against often increases by level aswell. So basically what's left is just the difference in level + all the other boni to the roll. So at first glance it might seem that those +2s and so on are irrelevant looking at how high those numbers get, but actually they are what's making the difference from the base chance.
Now what's making the balancing easy is that unlike in dnd5e, pf2 has some pretty robust math from what I can tell, so the guidelines on how to a balance encounters actually mostly work and those expected differences in proficiencies are baked into that. Hence why the optional rule of removing the level from proficiency has a warning that balancing will be a bit more wonky.
There's also a video by a youtuber called Kaleb Herington about how level to proficiency adds to the feeling of getting stronger through your adventures.
There is actually a rules variant where you just add the Proficiency mod, not your level. It's called Proficiency without Level in the Gamemastery Guide in the Variant rules section. I haven't done a deep dive into the Game Master Core to see if they have it in there as well.
If I remember correctly, they "removed" it in the Gm Core. Let's remember, tho, that the Remastered doesn't cancel the old rules. So you can still use the PwL variant rule even in remastered
I'm playing a Dwarf/Tiefling Barbarian with a Kineticist and Wrestler dedication.
With a criminal background, he accidentally ended up being the most morally complex "hero" in the party, as well as the one who de-escalates from violence the quickest.
I managed to pin an undead T-rex at level 8 followed by helping to rebuild a town by pulling worked worked bricks directly from the plane of earth.
I love that Pathfinder 2e has so many more choices in each level compared to 5e, and the combat seems much less centered around dps and more about maneuvering and controlling the field.
"Very few versatile heritages/backgrounds fit a Leshy" is hilarious to me. Those options are here to expand your character, not reinforce a one-note cardboard cutout. Looking at the options in player core alone, I can find a character idea for all versatile heritages (Aiuvarin and Dromaar grouped under mixed ancestry of course), and most, if not all (only spent about 30 seconds looking at them) backgrounds. Here's one idea: A coven of hags has been performing rituals in the Drumish town of Macridi, cursing births in the the town and its surrounding forest in an attempt to make their coven grow with changelings. A druid of Macridi begged the primal forces of nature to help, creating a vessel for a protector spirit. Unfortunately, the leshy born that way was not spared from the hags' curse, making them a changeling. The leshy set off to find the hags' hideout, while getting to know the forest and its denizens from a mortal perspective.
There you have a changeling, animal whisperer leshy, that would work great as a druid, ranger, beast eidolon summoner, sorcerer, or thaumaturge, and with a backstory and motivation for free. You can even expand on this simple idea to create an actual character, how cool is that? And that's by relying on the ancestry for a character concept, which is completely optional; a street urchin Leshy can work just as well
30:43 that's wrong no matter the level +1 is exactly the same
let say that DC is 10 and you got your bonus incresed form 0 to +1 that's +5% chance to succeed
and let say DC is 50 and your bonus moved from +40 to +41, this is exactly tha same +5% increase
and due to +10/-10 crits this +1 really matters
I would personally allow changeling and nephilim heritages as an outer influence on the vessel or the nature spirit itself. Thinking about it I would allow mixed-ancestry even, because the vessel might be made to embody an orcish strength or elven grace
Honestly why can't there be a literal Hell-Weed?
The thing about humans losing heritage options is even more perplexing sense they do exist in the supplementary lost omens material but then again i think there's something like 16 of them. Tbh i feel like they need to have the skilled and versatile traits be universal and just completely re-think the human race in a 3rd edition. They did change it so that you can pick the given attributes and flaws for the race OR just take a bonus in any 2 like the orc/human. Makes it a lot easier so that you dont feel like you can't play say, a dwarf cleric or druid with a handicap.
The only human heritage which was published since the Core Rulebook was the Wintertouch heritage from the Lost Omens: Character Guide. Whilst it would be nice to have gotten more human heritages for this book, I do understand why they didn't want to have these two really generic options and "You're really good against cold because of Baba Yaga", and I'm guessing with the Remaster being kind of really speed done, they didn't want to really spend their time focusing on that instead of other things.
There a whole ton of different and for humans in the various Lost Omens books, but heritages =/= ethnicity (For example with elves having a heritage for "You're old", a feat which lets you change your heritage every week, and several feats which mention specific in-universe elven ethnic groups), so that doesn't really work here
I watched this as a palate cleanser between all the FATAL videos (morbid curiosity got me in for the long haul, lol), and it's really refreshing to hear opinions on PF2 from someone with much broader TTRPG experience and less investment in the edition war. It was also nice to see how you handled a system I'm personally familiar with, as it gives me a good idea of how your tastes compare to my own, so I can take that with me while watching your videos on stuff I've never played before.
I've personally found the whole "add level to everything" bit that PF2 does to be really helpful for combat-as-sport encounter design--it makes for easy balancing and more frequent spicy crits--but the incredibly linear power scaling makes it hard to craft natural-feeling sandboxes. You can tell it's made to support the kind of products Paizo likes to sell: semi-episodic adventures on a predictable release schedule. Very strong on the "gamist" part of the gamist-narrativist-simulationist three-way spectrum, a bit weak on the other two.
if i understand your what you mean about the power scaling id actually say it makes sandbox design relatively intuitive though granted very rpg esk, by having weaker areas that are filled with lower level challenges, and stronger areas that are filled with higher level challenges you can be very clear about which areas the players can be in while also allowing them to clearly see how much their characters have grown, ie the level 5 party goes back to their homeland for a week to help out and when they get there they can help around the town a lot more than they could when they left to go become adventurers maybe old farmer gillin needs some fences repaired and so the party send over their beefy inventor to make the crafting/athletics checks or the town needs to expand into a new area but there are some dangerous vermin in the area so the party goes and stomps what previously would have been a moderate to hard encounter it allows for the narrative of zero -> hero quite easily
and if the natural-feeling is the thing you're struggling with potentially have the different areas sea bound and so while sea farers and trade can be common the extent to which non humanoid creatures move between area is limited, similar to the irl, assuming you live in the 1st world you've probably met 1 or more african people or people of african descent but outside of a zoo you've not likely seen a lion in person
the above works best in a setting where people are generally cooperative and the main enemy types are monstrous, a monster hunter style world would work well here
if you instead want to make a game with more humanoid enemies then thats easy to achieve with classism seperating the areas
Paizo is not really there for momey as all the rules are up for free on Archives of Nethys.
Seriously as long as you have an internet connection you can find any rule for spells, creatures, ancestries, feats, and so on.
7:10: Er, what? Why would a competent GM not let leshy character take versatile heritages? Sure some don't make sense at face value, but as a GM and player of the Pathfinder games for over a decade, one of my favorite ideas I saw a player bring was a spooky Jack-O-Lantern looking leshy with further backstory to justify them having the tiefling heritage. It's all about creativity and I've always felt encouraged by 2E especially to let my players reflavor things that result in really fun ideas for how their characters express certain mechanics.
Hellspawn and Angelkin are lineages inside Nephilim those already existed in the core as lineages for tiefling and aasimar.
Planar versatile heritages(geniekin and nephilim) can be applied to any ancestries as per the lore of Golarion.
Planarscions occurs when someone is exposed to the energies of a plane normaly before they are born.
Alchemist needed more time because of the rework of the alchemical items which weren't many in the core 1 and GM Core because they are still working on it.
The large numbers make the game extremely balanced since it scales with level you can garantee that players will be able to take creatures of certain levels.
The change on spell DC and Spell attacks make so when you take an multiclass archetype that give other traditions it scales with your normal spellcasting simplifying things and making caster archetypes better with each other.
Also since starfinder2 will be compatible with pf2 having class dc on casters means they'll be able to use guns that work with class dc
Champion isn't a paladin though. Pre-remaster, you could already use any of the good or evil alignments, they were only missing out on the neutral alignments, but those were supposed to be coming later down the line. Champion is about being the representative of you deity, sticking to their moral code instead of society's, which makes sense in a world where deities are factually existent.
Champion is the paladin class, as Paladin was the LG subclass of Champion.
I can't wait to see how they detatch it fully from allignments :)
Clerics simp for gods. Gods simp for champions
Like, you’re right, but they’re factually based on paladins. Paladins are a subset of champions. That is the function they fulfill within the system, a Paladin with the serial number scrubbed off and painted in the colors of the non-neutral alignments.
"That +1 wont make difference" yeah, it does, it does a **LOT** +1 in PF2e can do a lot, those numbers are not arbitrary everything is based on you having X in something if you can gain bonuses outside X you will have a great time if you have lower than X you will fall behind a lot.
So casters basically must increase their key attribute or else your magic is useless.
Can confirm, in PF2e the math is really tight, so +1 or +2 changes can really matter. Otherwise conditions like frightened basically wouldn't do anything.
If it helps people to think about, another way to look at it is through the lens of the way PF2e handles critical successes and failures. You get a crit if you succeed the check by 10 or more, that's it. So every modifier of 1 or decreases your chance to crit by 5%, or same thing for the enemy to land a crit on you if you're taking penalties. It gets challenging quick without some tactical thinking.
And with the 4 Degrees of Success, the +1 is important. You get a Critical Success when you exceed the DC by 10 or more. A +1 is comparable mathematically to gaining Advantage in D&D.
Really fail to understnad how is a goblin wierd but gnomes are super duper normal okay as a base race based on your logic.
Why did the make the "cactus" ancestry all about the spines and not about the, y'know, "surviving and thriving in an environment that's otherwise absolutely hostile to plantlife"- thing? I mean common nettles have a more effective defense mechanism than cacti, so maybe create an ancestry based on them if you want a more "aggressive" plant?
literally 2 days ago i came to your channel looking to learn 2e and was like "damn they only have the old version" so its cool to see this now in my frontpgae
I came to this channel looking to learn how to play D&D 2e :P
To clarify a little bit about ranged attacks: Ranged attacks never add an ability modifier to the weapon's damage, as a general rule. The exceptions to this rule are attacks using ranged weapon with the "thrown" or "propulsive" traits. "Thrown" weapons add your full strength mod to the damage, and "propulsive" weapons add half of your strength to damage if your mod is positive or full strength if it's negative. Unarmed strikes typically list their tags (if any) in their entry, and as the Seedpod has neither of those traits, it only does 1d4 damage.
Edit: And as an objection to your objection against Leshies with Versatile Heritages, I say nay! It's entirely reasonable for a leshy to be built with a versatile heritage! Changelings and Nephilim and such are simple - your shell was created by a being of considerable connection to those heritages, or even built within a site that has substantial influence, or perhaps your spirit resides in such places of power for a while - for example, a nature spirit who stalks the Worldwound could easily be given a leshy form with connection to the Outer Rifts and their demonic inhabitants!
Even humanoid heritages could be explained away - perhaps the druid who created you had a friend or loved one whom they wished to honor with a familiar shape, or you were born in the influence of a large settlement of a certain ancestry! It's entirely reasonable to describe a leshy created by druidic magics around Kyonin to be described as "almost elven" due to the influence of the society and local nature there - especially if the creator in question gave them pointy, ear-like leaves!
Also, on the topic of "Leshy druids with leshy familiars", it's actually more common than you'd think. One of the premades for Fistful of Flowers is, in fact, that exact thing. They have a sort of father/daughter relationship, as the familiar was a weaker nature spirit that needed an outside source of power in order to anchor them. The quote from his sheet says:
*“Bottlespeaker is a fierce advocate for embodied nature spirits of all sizes and strengths as well as a self-appointed protector of other leshys. After learning the fundamentals of leshy creation from his ritual mother, Bottlespeaker used them to grant a body to a spirit that would've been too weak to manifest without his aid. This spirit became his familiar, Twinsprout, whom he treats like a beloved daughter and often carries around inside his hollow head.”*
Seriously, the hate that Paladins/Champions get from so many people is getting really frustrating.
I dont get it either. They are thematically really cool and most people i have played with who choose paladin in any system where its an option are generally good players. (Literally was only in 1 short-lived game where the paladin was a scumbag and he lost his oath because of it
Right? Like if you don't want to play a paladin/champion, no one's forcing you to.
@earthbound9999 I've come to not trust anyone who chooses Champion/Paladin as their least favorite class. From what I've seen, they actually go put of their way to make sure Paladin/Champion players have as little fun as possible.
13:39 It's for if you take a feet or archetype that let you learn new spells, if you choose the new spells from the Primal Spell-list, You keep this modifier, otherwise you need to be trained with the appropriate spell attacks / DC and that proficiency lvls up separate from your Primal spell attack proficiency.
I don't think anyone's going to miss that tbh.
Pretending that Level Prof is "just there to make the number bigger" while also giving the reason why its done at 23:31. Bounded accuracy erodes character identiy so I am glad that people actually get to be good at stuff in PF2.
Happy to be the lone Investigator stan.
Okay just a few thoughts: The pessimism and at times blatant mischaracterization of the system, whether intentional or not, is really not a good look. It just seems like you're trying to join in on a trend of hating it, rather than really trying to understand it. I'm not saying you need to be a seasoned veteran to form an opinion, or that you can't have a negative opinion, but the misinformation about certain topics, that you could google search in less than 5 minutes, is just really frustrating.
The goblin and leshy rants were really unnecessary, I understand you might not like the ancestries but they work, and make sense, despite you seeming to think otherwise. Not being able to imagine goblins do quests is a non argument, it is a game of make believe so if you have even a smidge of creativity you can think of reasons why they would. A half orc leshy might be a little more weird but still plausible to pull off with some ingenuity, and calling someone incompetent because they think that, is not really valid criticism.
As others in the comments mentioned, Pathfinder 2e does have a variety of well defined human cultures, which are represented by the ancestry feats in the Lost Omens book. I understand if you don't have it, but then again considering all pathfinder content is available online for free (and a quick search would let you find this), it's a really poor comment.
I don't understand the hate on Paladins/Champions at all. Outside of the fact that Pathfinder 2e Champion is quite different from the D&D 5e Paladin to begin with(again just do basic research please), even if they were almost the same, I don't understand calling them "dead weight that is only in the game because it has been in the game". The holy warrior is a common archetype that people enjoy whether you realize it or not, and is one of the most widely recognized fantasy tropes even completely outside of the D&D space.
The reason why you add level to proficiency is also very widely known and it isn't just number bloat, the math in the game is actually very tightly designed so that obstacles scale to your level (this makes the job very easy for a GM), so things that used to be hard become easy and things that use to be impossible become hard, a +1 bonus is very significant since it's not only increasing hit chance by 5% but also crit chance.
I'm saying all of this because I usually really like your content, and I do agree with some of the takes in this video such as the weird identity crisis of the Witch class, or the unnecessary distinction between Class DC and Spell DC outside of rare circumstances, but I just can't get past the feeling that this was done in poor taste. It is fine to dislike something, but it's not okay to mischaracterize it whether it be intentionally or due to poor research.
I'd love to see you make more character builds.
With Player Core 2 having come out, a lot of those classes have had some decent retooling compared to the PC1 classes. It seems like the PC1 classes were the ones that they felt were good out the gate; even the witch, which saw the most changes, didn't see a major retooling of their chassis, only minor additions to better secure their niche within the class-space.
Adding level to proficiency isn't there just to make numbers bigger, but to make higher level creatures higher level threats. A dragon will feel like an actually untouchable beast for a measily commoner for reasons outside of the commoner dying within a single swipe of it's claws or it's breath weapon, and the same thing applies to the player. If you're a battle hardened, level 20 warrior, you're gonna wanna feel like you're in a completely different ballpark to a measily goblin, to the point where it's essentially as threatening as a bug would be to the average commoner. It serves to properly convey a greater creature's might within combat, and thus better reflecting how great of a feat it is to defeat, or even just survive an encounter with such dreadful beasts.
okay so about adding the LV to proficiency
while it doesn't matter when you are fighting equal level monster but 1 level difference makes monsters noticeably weaker/stronger and this is fundation of balancing the encounters and one of the resons why it works really well
also with +10/-10 crits it helps to separete low level barely an adventures form legendary heroes
I feel like this Remaster was likely rushed out faster then intended thanks to Hasbro deciding that DnD was "undermonitized", and starting off the whole OGL fiasco.
There's a few aspects that scream that (Like Humans having no real Heritages, Alchemists being missing, the high stat inflation, or Tiefling and Aasimar lore being deleted over rewritten), but the Leshy are definitely the biggest flag that they scrambled to get what they could out the door to capitalize on the backlash.
They're supposed to be one of the main races of the world now, one that most people in the world should at least baseline know-of, yet they have no way of being produced naturally.
They're supposed to be able to be halfkin and have unusual heritage, yet no possible method of obtaining those backgrounds are given.
They're supposed to have backstories, yet a Leshy player can literally be conjoured up by a druid as the first action in the story.
Seed pods are straight up unfinished, and its very unclear how a Leshy familiar is different from a Leshy player.
I do trust that these issues will be fixed/addressed, especially with how easy it would be, and i can't blame Paizo too much for rushing this out, no one was really prepared for Hasbro to just gut their golden goose like that (Not sure why that was, though... I mean one look at what they've done to MTG would have been a massive red flag for things to come), but still, releasing an unfinished product is releasing an unfinished product.
Its just a little disappointing that the edition meant to fully differentiate it from DnD... Doesn't actually do that, and explicitly because it was rushed out *to do that.*
And as far as fixing the issues around Leshies being purely artificial; there's actually already a solution in the game!
Your Leshie druid can create another Leshie, thats it, thats reproduction!
We can even use this to give Leshies some cultures/settlements across the map based on heritage to give them a more solid foot in the world;
Its said that Leshies enjoy life, and maybe, some enjoy it so much they refuse to die, instead growing into giant Elder leshie and becoming obsessed with Spawning more of their Kin to experience the joys and wonders that are life!
You can have a Giant Siguaro Leshie in a desert, a Humongous Mushroom Leshie in some dark, dank, wet caverns, a massive Fruit Leshie in the middle of a massive Orchard, a spread-out Vine Leshie occupying an entire abandoned castle, and plenty more possible source points for non-Familiar Leshies.
And as far as the universal heritages are concerned, maybe a Changling leshie was Created by a hag, an outsider Leshie was forged from plants from heaven/hell, and a Leshie half-breed could be born primarily from plants that feasted on the decay from the race in question.
The Leshie are both the Remasters' biggest strength and biggest weakness; They clearly have a *lot* of love, thought, and heart put into them, and the charm is through the roof. But they're also not fully fleshed out, and need more work done before they're fully ready to become a major new *base* race.
They're a microcausm of the whole thing.
the new thing about the mixed heritage, is that yeah, basically they're half elves/half orcs. But you can easily create a Half Dwarf Half Iruxi or Half Halfling half Gnome or an Half Hobgoblin and Half Goblin (an Hobgoblingoblin?)
22:50 adventures pack also includes bagpack which allows you to skip first 2 bulks
I love goblins as a core ancestry
There are few things cooler than Leshy. So many fun and cute and scary options. The Adventure Path “a fistful of flowers/ a few flowers more” have a team of awesome characters.
the “primal spell proficiency”
to “spellcasting proficiency” change is to make multiclassing as a spellcaster better. now if you multiclass into a class with a different spell list, your spellcasting with that other list won’t suck anymore, i.e., if you’re a bard multiclassing into an oracle, your dc’s and bonuses will be the same instead of only ever being trained in your divine spells all the way to level 20.
also, the class dc/spellcasting dc split is because some features (mostly archetype features are the problem) use your class dc. most spell-casters get up to legendary with their spell-casting dc so if they weren’t different dc’s, spell-casters would just be inherently better at those things than martials. messing with class dc is something paizo has been really hesitant to do. (though now with the kineticist and commander, it seems they’re letting it get to legendary for some classes)
The reason why Leshy became a core ancestry was beause they were extremely popular in organized play (personally, I would've preferred Kobolds, who are about as popular, but I guess Paizo wasn't to add a distinctly 'Paizo' ancestry)
The human cultures in Pathfinder aren't heritages, partly because I think Paizo is hesitant to stat 'Asian Culture' but they do still exist via feats humans can take. A number of human feats are 'Ethnicity locked', though it's almost never enforced at tables in my experience. Honestly heritages don't really follow any strict rules in what they are; some are based around culture and land (like orc) while some are based more off occupations and ranks (hobgoblins) and others are based off cultural trends (goblins). I do agree that humans being the generic option is lame, especially when elves already fill the role of being the broad ancestry anyway given their longevity feats.
Alchemist was removed from PC1 because it had a lot of problems and they're taking more time to try to revise it. Same with Barbarian to a lesser extent. Champion needs a lot of reworking to fit with the new rules, and Monk is apparently getting an overhaul to their magic (it was really messy and convoluted) as per revealed in a recent blog post.
I do like how this comment section is filled with different 'truths' as to why Druids don't use metal armor. The real reason is the reason why so many norms in TTRPGs make no sense: it's because Gary Gygax said so. Why do spears and polearms in almost all TTRPGs work differently than IRL spears and polearms? Because Gary Gygax misunderstood how they worked. Why do Clerics use maces? It's because Gygax wanted them to. Though with this there are a few documented instances of Christian monks defending themselves or even going into battle with maces so who knows.
Holy shit I truly have no life... sorry for the long comment, I'm kinda sick this morning and needed a distraction lol.
Champion is not outdated baggage. Clerics are divine casters, so why are only divine martials contradictory to the complex morality?
I bet you add your level to your rolls so that your level as a number has an immediate use instead of just being a signifier of your advancement. It does generally flatten itself out numerically but adding your level to rolls feels good, like in a specific situation where two characters who are equal in every way relevant to a particular task other than level, I like that the difference in level gives a small edge.
Its easy to justify, a nephilim or changeling leshy, is just dependent on the source of magic that animated your body.
Honestly all the pc2 classes need way more help than the pc1 ones. Alchemist is so versatile that it's never the best user of it's own items, aberrant sorc just doesn't work, champions lost alignment, oracle curses and refocusing, etc....
1:56 - "Assassination is murder with political intent. Stealth is not required!"
The original goblins were definitely more like the stereotype, but, just like any group of people, there were others that wanted something different in life. We see them ultimately connecting to civilizations, looking to grow like any other people, especially in Absalom.
Will they have some old habits based off of this tradition or that "old saying"? Yes, just like with any other people. However, this is what I like about Pathfinder in that they continue to move the history of the world, and its peoples, forward with all that entails.
Ah, yes, _Pathfinder 2nd Edition (2nd Edition)_
I think they are saving barbarian/sorcerer for player core 2 is due to them having dragon themed subclasses and dragons were not remastered by the time PC1 came out
I'll be honest, never liked the lol you need two boosts to get higher bonuses from this point on, I tend to just ignore that myself, I want my Epic Hero's and VIllians to be Epic after all lol
The thing about using spell DC and class DC as different things is not for the casters really, but for champions, monks and other focus users
Barbarian and Sorcerer most likely got held back because their most popular subclasses are both Dragon related and the new dragons weren't fully defined yet when they were putting together Core 1
a company that gives its game for free in a very convenient format (AoN) is excused for dividing the remaster in 2~4 books. and everything that distances itself from WotC and Hasbro has my approval...
besides , for who already plays the game or wants to get into it, the remaster is full of great changes, in quality of life, balancing, fun and player options.
now that the final remaster book is out, you maybe could do a quick follow up for this one?
Yeah, D&D is chained by its history. 4E is the best example of this. They tried to change things and it did not work.
Druids not being able to wear metal armor never felt right, like we already can use metal weapons and, in nature the only rule is might makes right, so if a bear could make armor it would make armor and wear it. So why couldn't we? Like if you said you cannot wild shape in metal armor I could get it...
the way pf2e is balanced, your level basically doesn't matter for things of your level that you are proficient in, so every extra +1 matters.
the level is relevant for things with a different than you, which usually is the majority of stuff; making them not only easier or harder to succeed, but more/less likely to critically fail or succeed. I myself think that every number growing every level is annoying, but it not only works, but tells better stories. a lvl 1 wizard has 0% chance of hitting an ancient dragon with a sword, let alone criting. the best chance it has is a 5% chance of not critically failing, which generally works way better than how dnd does.
though of I were the designer I'd have gone for ½ level proficiency, or having a 4th type of bonus, a level bonus, that is applied to basically everything that has a level difference from your character equal to thwt difference; but as you can see, these "solutions" are just more convoluted versions of how the game already works, and the biggest problem with ½ level (although I still think it could work, maybe I'll try some day) is that half of the levels become a more noticeable bump in power for no reason, depending on how you round them
Looking at pronouns & the Leshie names i could not help of a wow shaman guide of all things that parodied druids. "my pronouns are tree/trem"
btw, don't know if you read my comments, but despite I criticising and complaining a lot, I actually really like your videos, specially these character making ones, and I _(usually,_ sometimes I too annoying even for my standards) try to criticize and correct what I have a reasonable argument for, and isn't pure preference. ex: I don't agree with your opinion on goblins and monstrous races, but eh, at the end of the day, it's just preference
Is betting on a squirrel fight considered anathema?
Only if your forcing the squirrels to fight. If they're start it it's their problem.
i would play a leaf order druid with the leshy familiar being their offspring.
I would totally play a leshy druid with a leshy familiar. They're your apprentice!
As someone who "likes" Pathfinder 2e and don't like the level tied proficiency progression, let me say, that extra +1 at level 10 matters, simply because in Path 2e everything levels with you (and the game is balanced assuming you'll get this +1). When you level up, monster will get weaker compared to you but your GM will just put new higher level monster to compensate (and their modifiers are determined by their levels too), the DC for challenges will increase (as I've seem someone saying : "As you get stronger the bolder you're pushing gets bigger"), basically making the level in your proficiency redundant. People argue that this makes you feel stronger because at higher levels you can on-shot a lot of weaker monsters, but let be honest, how many times do you fight goblins and bandits when you're level 10+?
Agreed remember adding level makes this game very balanced and every pluse 1 matters is a thing (although this makes sense if you know your not playing past level 9)
His second point, "You can't know if this campaign will even go to level 10," is perfectly fair. Yeah, missing the +5 at level 10 hurts, but sometimes it pays to be the pessimist who gets to use that +1 early because they assume the campaign will peter out around level 8.
Considering that the GMG (and possibly GM Core, haven't eaten all the way through it yet) *does* suggest to GMs that they should throw Easy and Trivial encounters into the adventuring day on a semi-regular basis to really cement that feeling of progression, pretty often I'd hope!
It really does feel good to go into an encounter with seven xulgaths that would have wiped the floor with me and my party a couple levels ago if we weren't careful and just absolutely blindside them with a few well-placed spells and attacks. Even in official APs it's not even uncommon to find creatures lower than your level - especially the more recent ones that follow their own suggested design philosophy a little closer than their old ones.
The idea is that your experience makes your character grow and makes challenges they would've found difficult yesteryear into things that they can do reasonably well now, and trivially easy in the future. A small, uncoordinated group of goblins would've been hard for your team when you first started, but given a couple levels you'll find it MUCH easier. Your Rogue may no longer need to roll to unlock simple locks because they're just THAT good at it now. Or, on the flip side, a creature that's 2 levels higher than you becomes a MUCH bigger threat because of its innate power relative to you.
That's the thing you're missing here - the DCs for "challenges" will increase because the frame of reference for what is a challenge increases along with the party's capabilities. But that doesn't mean that things that came before suddenly stop existing. You will still need to occasionally cross a river or pick some simple lock or wipe away a few bandits from your travelling cart. That's where you're able to show growth.
Okay, it seems I've always missunderstood the class DC calculation. I thought it was 10 + Lvl + Class Proficiency wich would be 14 at level 1.
Also, did they change the part of the Leshy where their nurishment depends on their heritage? Because I seem to remember that fungus Leshi explicitly don't need sunlight.
It's only offhandedly mentioned in the Solar Rejuvenation feat, "Leshies whose plant nourishment does not rely on photosynthesis require a similarly suitable environment. For example, fungus leshies need dark, damp environments and a pile of decaying plant matter."
Honestly, some of the Leshy stuff feels a bit rushed.
@@zigmenthotep alot of the PF2E stuff felt rushed. I own the previous versions of the Player Core, Advanced Player Core and GM Guide and somethings are really diffifult to find. Class DC really should've had a seperate paragraph isntead of being buried in another one.
Level is included only in your Proficiency Bonus. If you're proficient in something, your bonus is [CharacterLevel + 2/4/6/8 (for Trained/Expert/Master/Legendary)].
To calculate a DC, it's [10 + appropriate Ability Mod + Proficiency Bonus].
So to calculate your Class DC, at first level, you'd be Trained, and the rest depends on whether you have a maxed Key Ability/Attribute or not.
(ex. If your Fighter has a STR of 4, then they'd start with a 17 (10 + 4 + 3).)
6:33 Does this guy ACTUALLY know Pathfinder or is he just trying to jump on a bandwagon?!
6:59 And now I'm being called incompetent because I don't see any issue with a Demonic or Angelic Plant person! Half orc is bit more weird though!
yeah those two remarks scream "skill issue". There's heaps of lore books about different regions of Golarion, most of which have a good number of humans.
And yeah the Leshy could be any of those versatile heritages lmao, they're just confused because in their head nephilim is "human with horns". Even mixed ancestries work; imagine a mad, necromancer-like druid trying to raise undeads through parasitic plants, and instead having those corpses be inhabited by a spirit of nature
Goblins have really expanded in the lore over the last decade
so, would you(or anyone else) recommend getting Pathfinder 2nd next time the core stuff comes up in a humble bundle or something? (crossposted from the old 2nd vid for visiblity among non-zigmenthotep users)
You going to make a redux of the tmnt rpg character with the remastered version of their rpg when it comes out ?
Maybe, but I don't have high hopes that they'll actually make even the slightest attempt to fix any of the problems with the game. I mean, they didn't in 2001 for After the Bomb.
18:10 It's probably just like being an android with a robot dog familiar kind of thing. Leshy in this case sounds like it just generically means "plant based animal" instead of "meat based animal"
wait, so none of the core classes provide a strength bonus by default? is this one reading that right? you'd have to use your 'any' boost(s) on str? that 's an interesting choice
I just, freaking LOVED this video!
I need to incorporate betting on squirrel fights into my next campaign.
Great video as always
I thought that Leshy takes -1 to Str.
I'm not very convinced that the remastered 2e actually solves the alignment problem you mentioned, since a player character can just gain the Holy trait to the same effect, I also don't really get the hate for champion, like having a martial class parallel to the magical cleric
I think you underestimate how much a Pf2e GM wil let you get away with in Character Creation.
Champion is not a paladin class. I would compare more to a martial defender from 4e than to 5e paladin
Paladin is literally a Sub-class of Champion.
So like… 2.5e?
>Versatile heritage
Oh thank fucking god.
If we're cutting Champion, we're cutting Flumphs. Champion is the only divinely linked martial class. It does not cast spells, in the traditional sense.
I hope Champion isn't cut when they eventually decide to make 3rd edition down the line.
Player Core 2 comes with the remaining 8 classes in the start of August.
They announced this with the remaster, so it is easy to miss :)
@matthewschultz7390
@@matthewschultz7390 It will literally arrive in less than 5 months :)
They avoided adding Alchemist because they wanted to remaster them more. Aaaand it was a very very good idea.
Why is it bad for a leshy to be a half elf, for example? I'm starting a new campain and I told one of my players to be that lol. Looks fun, tbh.
I was brainstorming with a friend about how he would make a half-Orc Leshy, and ideas included "the ancient nature spirit is a reincarnated orcish druid hero" and "this leshy is a plant type that is culturally significant to a group of local orcs, and has lived among them within their society for generations" (the latter of which basically equating to the Adopted Ancestry feat in a flavor sense, but in the heritage space mechanically).
Nephilim would require even less explaining. Why shouldn't you have, for instance, a plant species originating in Hell?
Thanks for the content.
Good stuff.
Merry Chrisler btw
After watching this . Im glad im sticking to 3.5 and pathfinder 1ed
i think from the anathemas standpoint, the druid should be allowed to use metal, but not iron specifically. given that traditionally, iron (and maybe lead) was harmful to fairies and nature spirits
It is now allowed as the Elemental plane of Metal has been opened last summer (Together with the Elemental Plane of Wood, adding the last two Elements from the more Asian Elemental Cycle) This is the in-world reasoning why Druids can use metal now :)
Could you do a video on Wraith: the Oblivion? It's probably the coolest WoD setting and I don't see one, at least not in your "build a character" playlist.
If a Leshy is a plant, and is an herbist, does that count as cannibalism? Asking for a friend.
Great video, Remastered Pathfinder seems to be a better game overall, so I’m considering picking up the Remasters.
If you eat a fish, are you a cannibal? A fish is an animal and so are you.
We eat mammals.
the alchemist is a class well known in optimizer circles for being.... underpowered and complicated for little return on investment? so I'm certain that's why they are keeping that in the oven a bit longer, although your proposition doesnt seem UNLIKELY.
It has been announced with the Remaster almost a year ago to be in Player Core 2 with the rest of the missing 8 classes.
The reasoning for the Alchemist is that they wanted to give it a full overhaul.
I m heavly playing with the idea for a Fungi-Leshy Leaf-druid who is harmlessly cute and sits himself in almost every corpse then grows nuts or sone fruit for my companions..they are going to be so grossed out😂 but i just a cute little mushroom
I feel like this guy just doesn't get Pathfinder, and under normal circumstances, that'd be totally fine, but why are you claiming to make a tutorial video for a game you clearly don't understand? Just look at all the comments correcting you.
1:56 You need to read about Zusgut and the Crookedtoes Tribe then!!!
Leshy is pretty neat tbh