ADDITIONS/ERRATA: -I used to have a comment here saying that Blessed Shield worked immediately on any replacement shield you pick up, but the Level 20 Shield Paragon feat makes clear that this isn't true. (This capstone feat says you can designate a new Blessed Shield after 1 minute of focusing.) Currently, Blessed Shield as written can be read either way and I think its text needs to be clarified.
I'm not so sure on this one, since (according to BadLuckGamer's comment on his video) the level 20 feat Shield Paragon states "...While [your true] shield is gone, you can spend ***1 minute*** to infuse a different shield with your blessed shield benefit until your true shield returns." It sounds to me like the intent is possibly that you may only have 1 shield blessed at a time that is chosen upon daily preparations. This technically doesn't negate that you could have a spacious pouch full of spare shields, just that there's conflicting writing in how quickly you can swap shields and gain the Blessed Shield benefits.
@@LaceNWhisky I don't have it yet myself, but the stickied comment on this video th-cam.com/video/Y7DSIruDbWk/w-d-xo.html has the updated remastered wording, which is where I pulled my earlier quote from.
Perhaps worth pointing out - It appears the Champion Dedication does not gain an Aura like the actual class does, which by RAW means your Champion's Reaction is worthless since all of them reference your Aura. Pretty clearly an oversight by the designers and almost certainly not intended, but who knows what the actual intent is. A 15ft aura that has no effect other than enabling reactions perhaps?
I feel like they could make the aura you get from the dedication to be 10 feet instead of 15. This protects the Champion's niche and nerfs the Archetype as well.
I'm glad to see you shouting out bad luck gamer. One thing I've really liked from his coverage of PC2 is to encourage people to like and comment any pathfinder content they see, to try to bring pathfinder content up the whole algorithm
Something I realized about the new shield blessing is that it would work with the kineticist impluses that give you a shield. So if you architype into that you can get an entirely expendable sturdy shield that is replaced with one action that gets a little more hardness as you level. If you destructive block using the old bastion archetype (dunno if its in remaster) then you can block some huge damage with no worry for your shield.
I think the Shield Change is definitely a buff. If before you would gravitate towards only Sturdy Shield and had very little reason to try out specific shields. Now, you can grab the strongest specific shield available AND still slap a rune on that to keep it as close to a sturdy shield as possible. The loss of 50%HP stings, but being able to grab shields with strong effects definitely offsets it. You can also simply by an indestructible shield and not cry about the 50%HP at higher levels (when presumably the extra HP might make a difference). Overall, I think this makes options other than Sturdy much more attractive. EDIT: The shield change is even better than I imagined. You don't need to swap the shield each day. The benefit just says "On your hands [...] the shield gains the reinforced property rune]". This changes EVERYTHING.
good point, tho perhaps more of a sidegrade? what stings tho is that the benefits of the remastered shields extend to all classes, and makes this class feature not really rise much above of what others get (unless you find good ways to use the unspent gold)
I think it's definitely a sidegrade leaning into upgrade. It just says "a shield" gains the reinforcing rune. This doesn't have the "select one" language from Blessed Armament, meaning that it should apply to all shields you grab and use. So, it makes carrying multiple shields much more viable since you don't need to grab runes for each shield. And if a shield breaks but you pick one up off a defeated enemy, you now have a fairly competent shield to use. So, while it weakens the individual effect on the shield, it gains a ton of power and usefulness by spreading its benefits out to all shields.
@@leetaeryeo5269 Holy shit. That's true! You can literally swap shields mid combat. It says "On your hands" a shield gains the benefits. Holy. Shit. Why bother with extra 50%HP when you can swap out for an unbroken shield.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG I think another bonus for the new shield blessing that's kinda been slept on is it says "a shield in your hands", and doesn't say you need to attune a shield during daily prep. You can carry spare non magic shields in sleeves of storing or something and swap out broken ones. You could swap mid fight and probably avoid needing to sink all those skill boosts and feats into repairing.
@@yeetcannon2551 If the effects specifically apply to a shield in your hands, what happens to a broken shield that you stop wielding? Does it lose its reinforcing? If it had 30/64 HP and loses the 44 hit points from reinforcing, does it just disintegrate on the spot? As a GM, I'd be inclined to read this in a beneficial way for the Champion player (i.e. an interpretation where their shield doesn't instantly fall apart when they stop wielding it) because I do think allowing them to switch shields on the fly is a fun idea, but I'm curious how this would actually work rules as written.
Don't have time right now to double check, but with the new focus spell I'm pretty sure attack refers to making an attack roll. This is reinforced by the language "even if it misses." Spells that cause saves don't miss. Thank you for your coverage!
I'm not so sure. First, I'm concerned people won't take this because it competes with Lay on Hands. Then there's the fact that saying "attack" is to attack rolls only, means it includes Strikes but not Athletics maneuvers. I'd rather avoid all that semantic nonsense! A thread for context (it's one thing I'm unhappy Paizo didn't clarify in the Remaster): www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/zp8gh8/attacking_seems_to_have_two_meanings_in_pf2e_and/
@TheRulesLawyerRPG Fair enough. As one comment on the thread you linked pointed out, it was mentioned in the first errata for the old CRB that "an attack is any check that has the attack trait," which would include athletics maneuvers but still not save spells. It's a shame that that doesn't seem to have made it into the books. It makes me wonder if they're deliberately keeping it vague, akin to what SwingRipper talked about with reaction timing. Whatever the case, thank you for taking the time to respond! Edit: Realized it might have sounded like I was implying no one should allow it to work other ways. I couldn't really care less. It's a game. Unless you're running Society, you're only beholden to your group. Happy gaming, all!
@@davidhigdon794 I am in the camp of being unhappy about Paizo's vagueness here. Unlike with the reaction timing issue, I think this is completely avoidable, and it comes up more often.
I'm starting the Kingmaker campaign in a couple of weeks, and one of my players is pretty excited about playing as a Champion. I think he'll love the changes!
1/2 level weakness is crazy, the feat may as well read "Oh you done ***fucked*** up now." Flurry ranger + paladin + agile weapon thaumaturge is gonna go crazy as a combo
Just reading the "1/2 level weakness to all strikes" is nasty. A flurry ranger (or a fighter) will be having a party with blessed counterstrike. All it takes is a single crit from a weapon with an elemental damage rune
I think that the prerequisite for Blessed Counterstrike should just be errata'ed out entirely. Needing the enemy to have triggered your champion's reaction is, IMO, enough of a requirement that any of the champions should be able to use this. I think in my games I will be ignoring the prerequisite regardless.
fun fact for all the people wondering if you can take one of the agnostic/neutral subclasses if you're sanctified! the champion iconic (Seelah) is sanctified with a neutral subclass. her deity, Iomedae, requires her clerics and champions to sanctify as holy, and she is a champion of justice, a neutral/agnostic (flexible?) cause
Curious about your ruling on something. Grandeur says "under the effects of revealing light for 1 round." does that go away at the start of your champions turn or the start of the turn of the creature that triggered it? Cause that could mean the non concealment and off guard (if you take the lvl 1 feat) may not actually apply at all if the triggering creature is the turn before your champion.
Searched for Player Core 2 pathfinder and only your alchemist video showed up way, way down. Maybe you should mention that these are from the Player Core 2 in your video descriptions.
Grandeur Champion captain of the guard. All of the guardsmen must look immaculate at all times and thus the thieves guild knows all they have to do to get away is duck into the nearest manhole and they won't be followed.
Ah, ha ha…! While the subclass goes out of its way to stipulate that a Grandeur Champion CAN get grimy; they just have to shower afterwards… …this is pretty funny. (and also re-asserts the Skyrim trope that all Thieves Guilds are filthy bastards that operate out of sewer systems). Making a Grandeur Champion who is compulsively a neat-freak will be something I plan to do in the near future…
I'm really excited to get to try out Grandeur champion. I have an idea for a former cultist of Urgathoa who was redeemed, and I feel like that's a good cause to still enjoy some of the more hedonistic teachings from her upbringing, even now that she's swapped sides
Champion is definitely my favorite class and it definitely sucks not being able to get 2 of the 1st level devotion spells, shields of the spirit is exactly what I want to do when playing champion but I love lay on hands too.
Annoyingly, my current campaign has a champion of Pharasma in it, and preremaster she could play as a neutral good Redeemer Champion. With the remaster, Pharasma no longer allows for her worshippers to be sanctified, and the redemption cause requires sanctification. I will be hand waving it probably so she can keep her cause, but it is kinda frustrating that there are still arbitrary subclass restrictions for champion.
@TheRulesLawyer - Can you provide some clarification as to why the shield champion's HP buff was considered "too strong" in your opinion? I am playing a redeemer champion and I feel like enemies are eating through my sturdy shield insanely fast. Am I only supposed to be using shield block as a last resort?
Interesting... in my games I usually saw the shield champion blocking maybe 50-75% of the time, because they knew that if the shield breaks they lose access to that +2 AC bonus. But also I would usually have intelligent foes focus-fire on other PCs who were less tanky afterward, to try to take more squishy PCs out of the fight. I do think that sturdy shields are already quite strong (not broken) even without the shield champion feature imho. Still, for the Shield Ally I do think they overcorrected here.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG Also I am a Redeemer champion with a few melee party members before the level I get an extra reaction to shield block with so most of my reactions end up being used for allies, but there are the times where I use shield block and get critted for a lot of damage to the point that it brings it past BT level. Overall I don't mind the HP reduction as much as the feeling of being penalized for spending money on a nice shield early on when I could just grab a crappy shield and make them disposable. Kind of takes the attachment to my Paint Pallet shield (I am a shelyn redeemer artist) and it being a long term investment instead of dealing more damage.
The Liberation cause in the remaster is any sanctification, so it is possible to take it while sanctified as unholy. Although the edicts and anathema of your deity (Asmodeus) would clash with your cause's (Liberation), so it seems more or less impossible in practice to be that.
Yeah, shield ally giving 1 hardness really seems to be pretty useless. When the enemy start making 20+ dmg everytime, it isnt a 1 reduction of dmg when using an action AND a reaction to raise shield and shield block that will change much. At this point, that little +5ft speed with fleet can make your tank running fast toward those small mages or archer that keep shooting his allies.
I definitely think this is the best option for what to do with paladin in a alignment free system. D&D going agnostic basically gives Warlocks more thematic connections to their patrons than paladins and clerics have with their gods. Renaming it champion also makes it feel more natural for non lawful good character as paladin was a specific concept.
Pretty disappointing how they handled blessed shield. They could have said your shield gains the stats of a sturdy shield that scales instead. That would have freed champions up to use any of the many cool shields with different abilities and effects without sacrificing shield hp. It also would have been something actually unique to the class.
blessed armament is also disappointing given it no longer applies the effect of its runes and thus no loger ignores rune limits. Blessed shield and blessed armamant are both just a flavor of "here have some extra money to spend, lol" now and i think thats really lame for the class fantasy of the champion
Grandeur (Holy) -- Don't mistake Holy for good. One example comes from Lorwyn Elves, from Magic: the Gathering lore. Elves are the most beautiful creatures of the world, and they know it. They built an entire civilization based on this concept; a caste system in which the most beautiful elves have the most power. To them, merfolk and kithkin (halflings) are ugly, and goblins are so ugly that they should be killed on sight. Yes, these elves want to make the world a more beautiful place-by killing all that is ugly. Elves in Lorwyn are evil. But even so, them taking up the Grandeur subclass makes a lot of sense. Just showing a way how you can look at these subclasses in a different light, to give you inspiration on what is possible.
Grandeur Champion had my thoughts immediately shift to Fulgrim from the “Warhammer 40k” lore. Essentially a Demi-god who started out as a consummate master of statecraft before being corrupted by a dark god of beauty & indulgence. It’s curious, since this seems to be the D&D equivalent of a Glory Paladin; which is intentionally alignment-vague…ranging from a vainglorious bastard to a shining exemplar.
One of my players is a Neutral Good Redeemer of Gozreh, which doesnt work under the new rules. Wondering what I should recommend for him, or if i should just grandfather him in.
Having done too many religious debates. I would be opposed to the use of agnostic for the neutral causes. Agnostic or a-gnostic is a word meaning not knowing or without knowledge. It is often misused in religious debates as well as it only says you don't know, but doesn't describe what you don't know. I believe that neutral causes are the best way to describe them.
I suppose there's no perfect word. I'm not someone who participates in religious debates, and so I use agnostic in the common way I've heard it used which is to not commit to a cause. Neutral can be read as abstaining from the two sides: true for the cause, perhaps, but not for the champion who takes up the cause (who can be holy or unholy).
Given wording on the two if the Obedience Cause edicts (enforce proper hierarchies, topple illegitimate hierarchies) I wonder how a person perceptions might altar the effect of those two edicts, say an Obedience Cause Champion from Andoran (the republic of freed slaves).
So my homebrew game has an overarching theme of celestials vs fiends, but instead of them being forces of good/evil, it's more to do with law/chaos. My games are biweekly, and between every campaign session, one of my players likes to run one shots in the same world. The first one we did had me playing a champion, except the tenants of good and evil really threw off the whole character concept I was trying to go for. I wasn't happy with the restrictions at all, especially since the god that my character followed was effectively a chaotic neutral god of the hunt (also homebrew). I'm so happy that the new champion isn't necessarily bound by those restrictions anymore
Hmmm, I didn't notice how rare status bonusses to AC are. I think most status bonus effects come from spells. bardic rallying athem, occult/divine forbidding ward cantrip. I assume there are a couple of spells that also give a status bonus to AC but I can't think of any on the top of my head.
It looks like all those special little titles based on alignment are gone now too, like no one's a "Paladin" by name any more. "Iniquity" is an interesting one. It doesn't seem like it's NECESSARILY a cause for a completely evil character, at least as written. I can imagine the kind of champion that fights for the rights of people BY lying, cheating, stealing, and otherwise being a right bastard. If destroying that which offends involves those who are truly evil, and not binding to a law other than your diety means, say, not binding myself to the authority of The Church for example, we have room here for a Final Fantasy XIV style Dark Knight mixed into all this (or if you prefer, a figure like DC's Constantine if he was a knight instead of a wizard). Of course, someone following that very narrow path of using dark powers and guile for a good cause is going to be very close to crossing the line at all times, but it's a fun way to play it, if only there's a god to match that sort of background. I have to admit I will miss all those little titles though. Also, and this is just me, but I feel like "unholy" is the laziest name for that side of things they could have picked. "Fel", "base, "vice", or simply "null", or anything like that I feel would have been more interesting words, rather than all of that side of spirituality defining themselves by what they're opposed to instead of what they actually are.
For the Shield you do have "less HP" on your Shield than pre-remaster, though you could have any piece of metal in your backpack round enough to be called a Shield (basically a few po for basic Steel Shields), and get them out when the first one break. Sure, you wouldn't get the +1 hardness, but any Shield you wield is sacred now so no need to have anything else than 3-4 Steel Shields in your backpack! _ERRATA_ the 20th capstone feat Shield parangon seems to contradict this "exploit", since it can designate a new shield in 1 minute. The "Shield designation" process appear to be unclear at the time
I do have to mention though that the reinforcing runes you auto get with shield champion, are weaker than a sturdy shield (which is the "max" entry on the said runes). Still good though, just not Sturdy Shield good
@@olhristov Sanctification is subscribing to holy war, so you could hypothetically have a champion of laws of mortality who wants to liberate people, but will not engage in the holy war. Not sure how plausible that is, but it is listed under deities on Archives of Nethys.
Liberation edict: oppose slavery and tyranny Liberation anathema: force or threaten someone to act a certain way Wouldn't opposing slavery/tyranny mean that you are forcing someone to act a certain way? Seems like a trap...
I think that the change to the shield ally is actually a buff. Yes, it loses on raw numbers, but how it is now is that you can take any shield with a cool ability you like and play it until high levels. You are no longer stuck into the boring mathematically correct shield.
Am I the only one that feels... underwhelmed with the changes to Champion and Oracle? not necessarily negative, just... uninspired? like, I was hoping that Champion would be getting more powerful feats in exchange for creating a set of rules you need to live by. instead we get... basic roleplaying restrictions that amount to "your supposed to be playing a character that is devoted to doing good/evil" like... duh? but I'm not just a good/bad person, I'm a religious fanatic whose devotion to his god and their world view is the very source of my divine magic. Shouldn't I be expected to live in a specific fashion and gain power from that kind of devotion?
The only worry I have about all these changes, or well it's kind of more of a personal preference, is that the loosing up alignment stuff likely means you'll have a bunch of PIGGIES just taking this class and it's archetype and putting in all the RP finesse of a wet rag. Just like it is in 5e. Maybe it's because the setting I'm experienced with (a westmarch), but there you just have people barely playing out the oath and just taking it for divine smites and disgusting Cha caster multiclasses. It sucks so bad. The same couldn't happen in 2e until now because the tenets and oaths actually MEANT SOMETHING FOR ONCE, so I'm not looking forward to all the munchkin behaivour on the horizon. Of course people complained about this aspect of the class, because it gave DMs ground to refute their FOOLISHNESS. BUT NOW? We are entering a wasteland of 5e proportions... Now you will have a lot more SHAMELESS and RESPECTLESS martials chomping at your heels to get blade ally or a free mount and pick the most True Neutral nothing god to not pray to. This feels especially silly because they barely changed the oaths to reflect the new stuff. I feel the same way about all the alignment removals though that's more understandable because of OGL issues. But entering back into an environment where people are BABIED because they CAN'T HANDLE playing an actual OATHSWORN WARRIOR is not what I signed up for. I don't know. Just putting my two cents 😃
The new patfinder, should be called WOKEMASTER. And why 4 books instead of 3, im not buying, more of there books. I think 3rd edition of Pathfinder Will come in a couple of years. The remastered edition is not good😢
ADDITIONS/ERRATA:
-I used to have a comment here saying that Blessed Shield worked immediately on any replacement shield you pick up, but the Level 20 Shield Paragon feat makes clear that this isn't true. (This capstone feat says you can designate a new Blessed Shield after 1 minute of focusing.) Currently, Blessed Shield as written can be read either way and I think its text needs to be clarified.
I'm not so sure on this one, since (according to BadLuckGamer's comment on his video) the level 20 feat Shield Paragon states "...While [your true] shield is gone, you can spend ***1 minute*** to infuse a different shield with your blessed shield benefit until your true shield returns." It sounds to me like the intent is possibly that you may only have 1 shield blessed at a time that is chosen upon daily preparations. This technically doesn't negate that you could have a spacious pouch full of spare shields, just that there's conflicting writing in how quickly you can swap shields and gain the Blessed Shield benefits.
@@EllisanLeonhardt I can't find Player Core 2 online just yet. Has "Shield Paragon" not been readjusted to match the remastered wording?
@@LaceNWhisky I don't have it yet myself, but the stickied comment on this video th-cam.com/video/Y7DSIruDbWk/w-d-xo.html has the updated remastered wording, which is where I pulled my earlier quote from.
@@EllisanLeonhardt Thanks for this and I only read this now. Updating my comment
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG Hi! Blessed armament gives a free extra rune? Or it takes a slot on the weapon and supress any other property rune?
Perhaps worth pointing out - It appears the Champion Dedication does not gain an Aura like the actual class does, which by RAW means your Champion's Reaction is worthless since all of them reference your Aura. Pretty clearly an oversight by the designers and almost certainly not intended, but who knows what the actual intent is. A 15ft aura that has no effect other than enabling reactions perhaps?
Good catch! Yeah, definitely an oversight
I feel like they could make the aura you get from the dedication to be 10 feet instead of 15. This protects the Champion's niche and nerfs the Archetype as well.
@@viktorwik You don't gain the reaction from the dedication, but a 6th level feat. Same problem but a different location.
@@brianlane723 I never claimed you did. Champion's Reaction is the name of the feat. I could perhaps have been clearer.
it has to be 10ft, or even 5ft
Liberator of Asmodeus: "Oh I wouldn't say saved, more like under new management"
Just thought that.
Liberating the local peasants from the tyranny of making choices
12:00 A nice change to Glimpse of Redemption is that those options have been given names, so that follow-up feats or features can refer to them.
I'm glad to see you shouting out bad luck gamer. One thing I've really liked from his coverage of PC2 is to encourage people to like and comment any pathfinder content they see, to try to bring pathfinder content up the whole algorithm
[camera zooms in] "He's making a point!"
Something I realized about the new shield blessing is that it would work with the kineticist impluses that give you a shield. So if you architype into that you can get an entirely expendable sturdy shield that is replaced with one action that gets a little more hardness as you level. If you destructive block using the old bastion archetype (dunno if its in remaster) then you can block some huge damage with no worry for your shield.
I think the Shield Change is definitely a buff. If before you would gravitate towards only Sturdy Shield and had very little reason to try out specific shields. Now, you can grab the strongest specific shield available AND still slap a rune on that to keep it as close to a sturdy shield as possible. The loss of 50%HP stings, but being able to grab shields with strong effects definitely offsets it. You can also simply by an indestructible shield and not cry about the 50%HP at higher levels (when presumably the extra HP might make a difference).
Overall, I think this makes options other than Sturdy much more attractive.
EDIT: The shield change is even better than I imagined. You don't need to swap the shield each day. The benefit just says "On your hands [...] the shield gains the reinforced property rune]". This changes EVERYTHING.
good point, tho perhaps more of a sidegrade?
what stings tho is that the benefits of the remastered shields extend to all classes, and makes this class feature not really rise much above of what others get (unless you find good ways to use the unspent gold)
I think it's definitely a sidegrade leaning into upgrade. It just says "a shield" gains the reinforcing rune. This doesn't have the "select one" language from Blessed Armament, meaning that it should apply to all shields you grab and use. So, it makes carrying multiple shields much more viable since you don't need to grab runes for each shield. And if a shield breaks but you pick one up off a defeated enemy, you now have a fairly competent shield to use. So, while it weakens the individual effect on the shield, it gains a ton of power and usefulness by spreading its benefits out to all shields.
@@leetaeryeo5269 Holy shit. That's true!
You can literally swap shields mid combat. It says "On your hands" a shield gains the benefits.
Holy. Shit. Why bother with extra 50%HP when you can swap out for an unbroken shield.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG I think another bonus for the new shield blessing that's kinda been slept on is it says "a shield in your hands", and doesn't say you need to attune a shield during daily prep. You can carry spare non magic shields in sleeves of storing or something and swap out broken ones. You could swap mid fight and probably avoid needing to sink all those skill boosts and feats into repairing.
@@yeetcannon2551 If the effects specifically apply to a shield in your hands, what happens to a broken shield that you stop wielding? Does it lose its reinforcing? If it had 30/64 HP and loses the 44 hit points from reinforcing, does it just disintegrate on the spot?
As a GM, I'd be inclined to read this in a beneficial way for the Champion player (i.e. an interpretation where their shield doesn't instantly fall apart when they stop wielding it) because I do think allowing them to switch shields on the fly is a fun idea, but I'm curious how this would actually work rules as written.
Don't have time right now to double check, but with the new focus spell I'm pretty sure attack refers to making an attack roll. This is reinforced by the language "even if it misses." Spells that cause saves don't miss. Thank you for your coverage!
I'm not so sure. First, I'm concerned people won't take this because it competes with Lay on Hands. Then there's the fact that saying "attack" is to attack rolls only, means it includes Strikes but not Athletics maneuvers. I'd rather avoid all that semantic nonsense! A thread for context (it's one thing I'm unhappy Paizo didn't clarify in the Remaster): www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/zp8gh8/attacking_seems_to_have_two_meanings_in_pf2e_and/
@TheRulesLawyerRPG Fair enough. As one comment on the thread you linked pointed out, it was mentioned in the first errata for the old CRB that "an attack is any check that has the attack trait," which would include athletics maneuvers but still not save spells. It's a shame that that doesn't seem to have made it into the books. It makes me wonder if they're deliberately keeping it vague, akin to what SwingRipper talked about with reaction timing. Whatever the case, thank you for taking the time to respond!
Edit: Realized it might have sounded like I was implying no one should allow it to work other ways. I couldn't really care less. It's a game. Unless you're running Society, you're only beholden to your group. Happy gaming, all!
@@davidhigdon794 I am in the camp of being unhappy about Paizo's vagueness here. Unlike with the reaction timing issue, I think this is completely avoidable, and it comes up more often.
I'm starting the Kingmaker campaign in a couple of weeks, and one of my players is pretty excited about playing as a Champion. I think he'll love the changes!
1/2 level weakness is crazy, the feat may as well read "Oh you done ***fucked*** up now."
Flurry ranger + paladin + agile weapon thaumaturge is gonna go crazy as a combo
Weaknesses don't stack, so I don't see what Thaumaturge would be adding here. Flurry Ranger with their animal companion tho 👌
Just reading the "1/2 level weakness to all strikes" is nasty. A flurry ranger (or a fighter) will be having a party with blessed counterstrike. All it takes is a single crit from a weapon with an elemental damage rune
I love how desecration has no anathema.
"I do what I want, when I want, no matter what"
the edgelord murderhobo option
The sly dig at 8:00 on 5e. Love it
I think that the prerequisite for Blessed Counterstrike should just be errata'ed out entirely. Needing the enemy to have triggered your champion's reaction is, IMO, enough of a requirement that any of the champions should be able to use this. I think in my games I will be ignoring the prerequisite regardless.
7:58 D&D called OUT
fun fact for all the people wondering if you can take one of the agnostic/neutral subclasses if you're sanctified!
the champion iconic (Seelah) is sanctified with a neutral subclass. her deity, Iomedae, requires her clerics and champions to sanctify as holy, and she is a champion of justice, a neutral/agnostic (flexible?) cause
Curious about your ruling on something. Grandeur says "under the effects of revealing light for 1 round." does that go away at the start of your champions turn or the start of the turn of the creature that triggered it? Cause that could mean the non concealment and off guard (if you take the lvl 1 feat) may not actually apply at all if the triggering creature is the turn before your champion.
Searched for Player Core 2 pathfinder and only your alchemist video showed up way, way down. Maybe you should mention that these are from the Player Core 2 in your video descriptions.
Grandeur Champion captain of the guard. All of the guardsmen must look immaculate at all times and thus the thieves guild knows all they have to do to get away is duck into the nearest manhole and they won't be followed.
lol
Ah, ha ha…!
While the subclass goes out of its way to stipulate that a Grandeur Champion CAN get grimy; they just have to shower afterwards…
…this is pretty funny. (and also re-asserts the Skyrim trope that all Thieves Guilds are filthy bastards that operate out of sewer systems).
Making a Grandeur Champion who is compulsively a neat-freak will be something I plan to do in the near future…
I'm really excited to get to try out Grandeur champion. I have an idea for a former cultist of Urgathoa who was redeemed, and I feel like that's a good cause to still enjoy some of the more hedonistic teachings from her upbringing, even now that she's swapped sides
Big nerf for the shield... Goodbye 96HP shield...
Champion is definitely my favorite class and it definitely sucks not being able to get 2 of the 1st level devotion spells, shields of the spirit is exactly what I want to do when playing champion but I love lay on hands too.
The cheesiest way is to free archetype the blessed one dedication, if you're into that kind of thing
@@gmphiljuth That's a good suggestion, thank you
Liberstor of Asmodeus: You have been liberated and are free to worship Asmodeus and embrace his glorious rule...or you are free to chose death.
Annoyingly, my current campaign has a champion of Pharasma in it, and preremaster she could play as a neutral good Redeemer Champion. With the remaster, Pharasma no longer allows for her worshippers to be sanctified, and the redemption cause requires sanctification. I will be hand waving it probably so she can keep her cause, but it is kinda frustrating that there are still arbitrary subclass restrictions for champion.
@TheRulesLawyer - Can you provide some clarification as to why the shield champion's HP buff was considered "too strong" in your opinion? I am playing a redeemer champion and I feel like enemies are eating through my sturdy shield insanely fast. Am I only supposed to be using shield block as a last resort?
Interesting... in my games I usually saw the shield champion blocking maybe 50-75% of the time, because they knew that if the shield breaks they lose access to that +2 AC bonus. But also I would usually have intelligent foes focus-fire on other PCs who were less tanky afterward, to try to take more squishy PCs out of the fight.
I do think that sturdy shields are already quite strong (not broken) even without the shield champion feature imho.
Still, for the Shield Ally I do think they overcorrected here.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG Also I am a Redeemer champion with a few melee party members before the level I get an extra reaction to shield block with so most of my reactions end up being used for allies, but there are the times where I use shield block and get critted for a lot of damage to the point that it brings it past BT level. Overall I don't mind the HP reduction as much as the feeling of being penalized for spending money on a nice shield early on when I could just grab a crappy shield and make them disposable. Kind of takes the attachment to my Paint Pallet shield (I am a shelyn redeemer artist) and it being a long term investment instead of dealing more damage.
14:56 Actually, Asmodeus says that you to "Must be Unholy", so it's already impossible to take Liberation, as far as I can judge.
Edit: ignore me
The Liberation cause in the remaster is any sanctification, so it is possible to take it while sanctified as unholy. Although the edicts and anathema of your deity (Asmodeus) would clash with your cause's (Liberation), so it seems more or less impossible in practice to be that.
@@Can-uj5pv Ah, I thought that sanctified can't take "agnostic" causes.
Yeah, shield ally giving 1 hardness really seems to be pretty useless. When the enemy start making 20+ dmg everytime, it isnt a 1 reduction of dmg when using an action AND a reaction to raise shield and shield block that will change much. At this point, that little +5ft speed with fleet can make your tank running fast toward those small mages or archer that keep shooting his allies.
Ronald: Evil champions can now get the justice cause.
Me: Can’t wait to play a D&D version of Darth Vader.
I definitely think this is the best option for what to do with paladin in a alignment free system. D&D going agnostic basically gives Warlocks more thematic connections to their patrons than paladins and clerics have with their gods. Renaming it champion also makes it feel more natural for non lawful good character as paladin was a specific concept.
Thanks for the content.
Pretty disappointing how they handled blessed shield. They could have said your shield gains the stats of a sturdy shield that scales instead. That would have freed champions up to use any of the many cool shields with different abilities and effects without sacrificing shield hp. It also would have been something actually unique to the class.
this was what I expected to happen, instead it looks like I will be taking 5 speed when I play champion from now on
blessed armament is also disappointing given it no longer applies the effect of its runes and thus no loger ignores rune limits.
Blessed shield and blessed armamant are both just a flavor of "here have some extra money to spend, lol" now and i think thats really lame for the class fantasy of the champion
Grandeur (Holy) -- Don't mistake Holy for good. One example comes from Lorwyn Elves, from Magic: the Gathering lore. Elves are the most beautiful creatures of the world, and they know it. They built an entire civilization based on this concept; a caste system in which the most beautiful elves have the most power. To them, merfolk and kithkin (halflings) are ugly, and goblins are so ugly that they should be killed on sight. Yes, these elves want to make the world a more beautiful place-by killing all that is ugly.
Elves in Lorwyn are evil. But even so, them taking up the Grandeur subclass makes a lot of sense.
Just showing a way how you can look at these subclasses in a different light, to give you inspiration on what is possible.
Holy has specific requirements in PC2 that essentially make it the same as good.
Grandeur Champion had my thoughts immediately shift to Fulgrim from the “Warhammer 40k” lore.
Essentially a Demi-god who started out as a consummate master of statecraft before being corrupted by a dark god of beauty & indulgence.
It’s curious, since this seems to be the D&D equivalent of a Glory Paladin; which is intentionally alignment-vague…ranging from a vainglorious bastard to a shining exemplar.
One of my players is a Neutral Good Redeemer of Gozreh, which doesnt work under the new rules. Wondering what I should recommend for him, or if i should just grandfather him in.
Hell yeah i always live in fear of antipal deletion but it continues to live and thrive
I like the idea of the grandeur champion losing their subclass power until they clean themselves.
With the Asmodeus example, he requires you to be unholy. Can you take an 'agnostic' cause if you are holy/unholy?
Yes, you still sanctify as unholy even with a 'agnostic' cause, you just can't choose the holy-locked causes
Having done too many religious debates. I would be opposed to the use of agnostic for the neutral causes. Agnostic or a-gnostic is a word meaning not knowing or without knowledge. It is often misused in religious debates as well as it only says you don't know, but doesn't describe what you don't know.
I believe that neutral causes are the best way to describe them.
I suppose there's no perfect word. I'm not someone who participates in religious debates, and so I use agnostic in the common way I've heard it used which is to not commit to a cause. Neutral can be read as abstaining from the two sides: true for the cause, perhaps, but not for the champion who takes up the cause (who can be holy or unholy).
Given wording on the two if the Obedience Cause edicts (enforce proper hierarchies, topple illegitimate hierarchies) I wonder how a person perceptions might altar the effect of those two edicts, say an Obedience Cause Champion from Andoran (the republic of freed slaves).
So my homebrew game has an overarching theme of celestials vs fiends, but instead of them being forces of good/evil, it's more to do with law/chaos. My games are biweekly, and between every campaign session, one of my players likes to run one shots in the same world. The first one we did had me playing a champion, except the tenants of good and evil really threw off the whole character concept I was trying to go for. I wasn't happy with the restrictions at all, especially since the god that my character followed was effectively a chaotic neutral god of the hunt (also homebrew). I'm so happy that the new champion isn't necessarily bound by those restrictions anymore
I could totally make She-Ra in PF2 now a lot more easily.
I’m a bit sad they replaced the Steed with being fast, I really really liked the steed.
Hmmm, I didn't notice how rare status bonusses to AC are. I think most status bonus effects come from spells.
bardic rallying athem, occult/divine forbidding ward cantrip.
I assume there are a couple of spells that also give a status bonus to AC but I can't think of any on the top of my head.
I would have loved to hear about diefic weapon from you.
It looks like all those special little titles based on alignment are gone now too, like no one's a "Paladin" by name any more.
"Iniquity" is an interesting one. It doesn't seem like it's NECESSARILY a cause for a completely evil character, at least as written. I can imagine the kind of champion that fights for the rights of people BY lying, cheating, stealing, and otherwise being a right bastard. If destroying that which offends involves those who are truly evil, and not binding to a law other than your diety means, say, not binding myself to the authority of The Church for example, we have room here for a Final Fantasy XIV style Dark Knight mixed into all this (or if you prefer, a figure like DC's Constantine if he was a knight instead of a wizard). Of course, someone following that very narrow path of using dark powers and guile for a good cause is going to be very close to crossing the line at all times, but it's a fun way to play it, if only there's a god to match that sort of background.
I have to admit I will miss all those little titles though. Also, and this is just me, but I feel like "unholy" is the laziest name for that side of things they could have picked. "Fel", "base, "vice", or simply "null", or anything like that I feel would have been more interesting words, rather than all of that side of spirituality defining themselves by what they're opposed to instead of what they actually are.
Retributive Stike disappeared? I don't understand can someone explain to me?
For the Shield you do have "less HP" on your Shield than pre-remaster, though you could have any piece of metal in your backpack round enough to be called a Shield (basically a few po for basic Steel Shields), and get them out when the first one break. Sure, you wouldn't get the +1 hardness, but any Shield you wield is sacred now so no need to have anything else than 3-4 Steel Shields in your backpack!
_ERRATA_ the 20th capstone feat Shield parangon seems to contradict this "exploit", since it can designate a new shield in 1 minute. The "Shield designation" process appear to be unclear at the time
Then you pick up a candle and lose ten feet of movement
@@kendrajade6688 haha one bulk is not that Bad, considering strength (Can) be your Key ability
You might have cracked the code! I will add to my pinned comment.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG honored 🥰🥰
I do have to mention though that the reinforcing runes you auto get with shield champion, are weaker than a sturdy shield (which is the "max" entry on the said runes). Still good though, just not Sturdy Shield good
Just gonna mention that agnostic means without knowledge. That would not mean not unholy or holy. Neutral would be a better word
Can't do my cleric/champ combo for heavy anymore X)
(Non-warpriest anyway)
hoping i can have shield of the spirits and lay on hands via blessed one
Doesn't Azmosdeus require unholy sanctification basically invalidating any cause that doesn't allow for one like Liberation?
Liberation allows for sanctification, it just does not require it.
@@scottread2979 thank you.
@@olhristov Sanctification is subscribing to holy war, so you could hypothetically have a champion of laws of mortality who wants to liberate people, but will not engage in the holy war. Not sure how plausible that is, but it is listed under deities on Archives of Nethys.
Liberation edict: oppose slavery and tyranny
Liberation anathema: force or threaten someone to act a certain way
Wouldn't opposing slavery/tyranny mean that you are forcing someone to act a certain way? Seems like a trap...
youre not forcing them to act a certain way, you are just making sure there are consequences for their actions.
Champions being 'tanky'!? My kobold champion/rogue scoffs at such a nonsense stereotype!
I think that the change to the shield ally is actually a buff. Yes, it loses on raw numbers, but how it is now is that you can take any shield with a cool ability you like and play it until high levels. You are no longer stuck into the boring mathematically correct shield.
You can still do that with the reinforcing runes post-Remaster. But yeah if you don't want to deal with that or want to save money it's a positive
Yeah, but it’s not tyrannical when *I* do it.
Thank you, Richard Nixon.😊
Correct me if I'm wrong (I'm new to Pathfinder), but Asmodeus Champions can't be liberator because they "must choose unholy" sanctification.
Nope. Liberators can chose to be Unholy or Holy. Asmodeus requires them to chose Unholy if they want to follow him.
Am I the only one that feels... underwhelmed with the changes to Champion and Oracle? not necessarily negative, just... uninspired? like, I was hoping that Champion would be getting more powerful feats in exchange for creating a set of rules you need to live by. instead we get... basic roleplaying restrictions that amount to "your supposed to be playing a character that is devoted to doing good/evil" like... duh? but I'm not just a good/bad person, I'm a religious fanatic whose devotion to his god and their world view is the very source of my divine magic. Shouldn't I be expected to live in a specific fashion and gain power from that kind of devotion?
Algorithm food
The only worry I have about all these changes, or well it's kind of more of a personal preference, is that the loosing up alignment stuff likely means you'll have a bunch of PIGGIES just taking this class and it's archetype and putting in all the RP finesse of a wet rag. Just like it is in 5e. Maybe it's because the setting I'm experienced with (a westmarch), but there you just have people barely playing out the oath and just taking it for divine smites and disgusting Cha caster multiclasses. It sucks so bad.
The same couldn't happen in 2e until now because the tenets and oaths actually MEANT SOMETHING FOR ONCE, so I'm not looking forward to all the munchkin behaivour on the horizon. Of course people complained about this aspect of the class, because it gave DMs ground to refute their FOOLISHNESS. BUT NOW? We are entering a wasteland of 5e proportions...
Now you will have a lot more SHAMELESS and RESPECTLESS martials chomping at your heels to get blade ally or a free mount and pick the most True Neutral nothing god to not pray to. This feels especially silly because they barely changed the oaths to reflect the new stuff. I feel the same way about all the alignment removals though that's more understandable because of OGL issues. But entering back into an environment where people are BABIED because they CAN'T HANDLE playing an actual OATHSWORN WARRIOR is not what I signed up for. I don't know.
Just putting my two cents 😃
Bad players are bad players. The game having pointless RP restrictions doesn't make them good players.
I See...Grandeur seema Like the official lgbtq Option xD
The new patfinder, should be called WOKEMASTER. And why 4 books instead of 3, im not buying, more of there books. I think 3rd edition of Pathfinder Will come in a couple of years.
The remastered edition is not good😢