Check Out the Core Remaster Preview! (Pathfinder 2nd Edition)

A summary of the Core Remaster Preview for Pathfinder 2nd Edition!
The complete preview document may be downloaded here: paizo.com/pathfinder/corepreview
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to help support the channel?
Get your name listed at the end of my videos by joining my Patreon :
▶️ / howitsplayed
Thank me with a cup of coffee!
▶️ ko-fi.com/HowItsPlayed
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Follow me on social media:
Twitter: @How_Its_Played_ (include the last underscore)
Facebook: / howitsplayed
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBSCRIBE: bit.ly/2FOaoZh
#Pathfinder2e #Pathfinder #RPG

[@HowItsPlayed]

The complete preview document may be downloaded here: paizo.com/pathfinder/corepreview

[@questmarq7901]

Thank you for all of your hard work 🙏

[@adelineesther17]

Love the changes and the naming makes more sense to me as a new PF2E player.

[@officialgoosestudios7151]

I remember being disappointed that there wasn't a illusion cantrip like minor illusion in pathfinder 2e, because I love just pulling random stuff out of my sleeve, so Ghost sounds getting a buff immediately makes all arcane/occult spellcaster way more fun

[@Baraz_Red]

It's funny how the improvements I have in mind (though I am a 5e player) are very often what Paizo ends up doing! And I never told them: we just reach similar conclusions. Like Spell Ranks to help reduce the confusion with the term Levels in written rules. Or how many games could just write the attribute bonuses without attribute scores. Oh, and the better terminology is of course attributes rather than abilities. A few years ago, I was dreaming of writing RPG rules that would have used 3 segments, like the 3 actions in PF2.

[@SwiftPawFatFox]

Kind of like how I have thought up ideas for playable awakened animal pcs and next thing I know Paizo is giving us awakened animal ancestry in Howl of the Wild next year

[@StellasStreaming]

Sounds like you need to try out pf2!!!

[@Baraz_Red]

@@StellasStreaming One day for sure.

[@bmwd4000]

That's because unlike a corporate full of investors and money-mongers, Paizo actuaply plays it's game and values it's customers feedback/community input.

[@kryptonianguest1903]

I'm surprised the Material Plane is being renamed. I'm sure I've heard that outside of DND and PF. Similarly surprised about mithril, since that's from Tolkien.

[@Fionor01]

Well, Thieves of the Mountains might definitely try to challenge that anyway, so it's better to be distinctively different and safe.

[@FireBowProductions]

I can't wait to see what they do for the Spell Schools in the full release and future books. Now with no limit of nine, the spell combinations for curriculums is near infinite.

[@barbariandude]

I made my own spell curriculum just with the 1 page of rules they showed on a stream. It's actually really trivial to make one! Just pick 2-3 spells that match the theme for each spell rank, and every time they gain a new spell rank via leveling up they choose a curriculum spell and gain a spell slot just for that spell every rest. Done. The spell school I made was a goblin poison+dark school all around poisons, darkness and stealth.

[@BasementMinions]

Thank you for this quick update!

[@BakerLegate-zh6bh]

When I first started learning about stats, the numbers that determined your +stats were so confusing to me because I'd literally look at them and think "what is the point of this stupid number?" Lmao

[@lugh.i]

I'm so happy with the changes, specially the inevitable death of alignment and Runic Weapon/Body. Thanks for the upload!

[@PunsRDum]

really happy with runic weapon, always thought it should be able to be heightened.

[@cidlunius1076]

It's definitely a spell that makes clerics and support oriented wizards more useful.

[@DargorV]

You're the best Dave! Thank you :)

[@RicardoPM777]

Highly anticipated

[@scottread2979]

looks good!

[@castigo1986]

I'm having a bit of a hard time adjusting to alignments being gone, they were an easy shorthand for GM to place deities and items, but I get what Paizo is doing, even though I might not use all of the remaster material in my games. The thing that worries me is how much of this effort will be lost in translation in non English books.

[@Vendavalez]

I think that alignment in particular is gone because of legal reasons, but I think that edicts and anathema work as a not much longer shorthand that is much deeper and prevents dumb alignment arguments. However, if you still like alignment, the game will not become incompatible with it, so you should be able to continue to use it to communicate things as usual. As for your second point, I am curious, what do you mean by things getting lost in translation? The “remaster” is happening first and foremost for legal reasons and the rest is just taking advantage of the opportunity. What I mean is, in other languages, if the phrasing of things is already adequate, and the phrasing in that language is not causing issues for its players, and the phrasing does not have any legal baggage in that language, then it will probably not change there. My first language is Spanish so if you can think of any concrete examples for that, I would love to hear them.

[@Olimar92]

@@Vendavalez Alignment isn't gone for legal reasons. It's gone because everyone has been throwing a fit that it was still a thing when the game released. Trust me, people will still have stupid arguments about the Edicts and Anathemas. There are people who believe Undead can be good. So Destroying Undead can be an Edict or Anathema, and you can't really say why that is.

[@Vendavalez]

@@Olimar92 I was pretty sure that alignment went away first and foremost for legal reasons. Like I seem to remember someone mention it pretty unambiguously for that change in particular, but I may be misremembering. I'll have to look it up some other time because there are hours of interviews on the remaster. And sure, people can have stupid arguments about anything, but I do think that more concrete things can help with that. Essentially, at least when it comes to the people I know and would have such conversations, I think that the arguments would deal more with the actual background and personality of the character. But that will definitely change between tables. And I don't understand your final point about edicts and anathemas. Yes there are people who can believe that the undead can be good and so destroying undead can definitely be bot an edict or an anathema depending on the character and their background. But what do you mean about "you can't really say why that is"? Why would you need to beyond background/personality?

[@Coffeewings334]

The primary reason alignment is disappearing is in fact legal. Paizo dropping the OGL license after the WotC fiasco has resulted in many changes moving away from things that were previously covered under the OGL. This includes names such as Magic Missile and Burning Hands, schools of magic, and alignment.

[@evanobrien9262]

Good changes! Hoping thunder strike isn’t replacing shocking grasp. That’d be an L, especially for magus

[@vhs_jdr8882]

thx🎉

[@boris_bulletdodger9109]

Positive comment

[@totallynuts7595]

So, uh... we calling this 2.5e? I honestly wouldn't remove attribute scores though, I like the granularity of it. Getting a single point of STR might not be enough to increase the modifier, but it might just let you wield a bigger sword. Wait so all this is caused by the OGL crap Wotc tried to pull?

[@lincr.1988]

I love the new Refocus rules, but I'm afraid that won't help Oracles in anything for how the Curse work.. let's see what they're gonna change in the class

[@vittoriolanziani8141]

Oracle is one of the classes that will get changed the most

[@lincr.1988]

@@vittoriolanziani8141 I hope they keep all of the Class's coolness. I wonder when they're gonna release more information about it

[@Coffeewings334]

Psychic and Oracles are the ones who “lose” the most because of this change. I believe (don’t quote me on this) that Psychic has been confirmed to get some kind of errata after the remaster. We also know Oracle is one of the classes getting the bigger changes in the remaster.

[@lincr.1988]

@@Coffeewings334 I so can't wait for that @_@

[@Dudeman715]

I don't see why mythril had to be changed that's tolken not dnd.

[@tuffn00gies]

Mithril is Dwarven for Dawnsilver. Or maybe Dawnsilver is Elven for Mithril. Make it your own.

[@christophemortier5878]

@@tuffn00gies Don't care, Mithril is Mithril

[@Sebaran_]

"dusk"wood - "dawn"silver; that's the more obvious part (and I really like it, tbh) Still waiting for the street date of rage of elements to read into it, but from "Changed to update world lore." I would take that the plane of wood and metal will give insight on why we have these two. I assume that they wanted their own name for the metal from the metal plane and didn't want to go with mithril.

[@moekitsune]

I'm guessing that to protect themselves from Hasbro Paizo had to rename anything that could remotely be connected to D&D.

[@user-fp9hu6xk8x]

Are they getting rid of the chaos trait or rolling that into unholy?

[@NormalesEinhorn]

I cannot keep waiting, somebody please also give me an early copy

[@guedeto1995]

Based on the the spells that you show I see they have not fixed one of the major annoyances. Why the hell do i have to target a creature when i have to hit AC? I have to manually aim the damn thing the same as how a martials would have to aim ranged attacks, so why cant i shoot a soda can off a table?

[@tuffn00gies]

Curious the discrepancy about focus points. I wonder if the rules changed after Luis made his post. Guess we'll find out. Personally I hope the document is right. If you have the feats I think you should have the focus points, even with the new Refocus.

[@devcrom3]

No.

[@Coffeewings334]

Most likely the remaster document simplified the focus point rules and the full remaster had the correct rules all along, given the remaster summary is so brief.

[@waragh]

you got it wrong on clerics, Depending on the deity, some requires you to be sanctified others don't.

[@CraigSteinhoff]

What does "Defense" vs "Saving Throw"? I saw defensive with both ac and basic reflex save? Is one an attack roll and the other a saving throw? Or is the spellcaster rolling against reflex dc?

[@Ein0r10]

The Defense part just shows you what you need to resist the spell. Check the Stat blocks for example for "Breath Fire" which states that the target defends against it with a basic reflex save. Compared to "Blazing Bolt" where the target's defense is AC, since you make a spell attack roll.

[@CraigSteinhoff]

Seems some what confusing to me personally....should have left saving throw and added a different term.

[@Ein0r10]

@@CraigSteinhoff maybe Saving Throw was A problematic phrase for copyright reasons. At least it's only one change you have to remember, compared to three if they had changed Fortitude, Reflex and Will 😅

[@CraigSteinhoff]

@@Ein0r10 oh right...is that one of the changes mentioned? Remove of the term Saving Throw?

[@Khunkurisu]

@@CraigSteinhoffolling against AC is already just rolling against a DC. Saving throws are just checks that reverse who rolls (in all other cases the person acting rolls). So changing the term to a catch-all like “Defense” works fine. If it says AC, the caster rolls against AC. If it says Reflex, Fortitude, or Will then the target rolls against the spell DC. Not confusing in the slightest if you just accept it’s an umbrella term.

[@aaronjung5502]

I’m a little confused. Do all spells now have verbal components? None? Unclear?

[@erful]

I was also looking on it, turns out verbal component gave "concentrate" trait to the cast a spell action. The interesting part is: I don't see any spell in that list dropping concentration or manipulate traits... So no more spell components whatsoever? Just both traits to all?

[@Olimar92]

@@erful Spell Components only ever served to be a visual of the spell happening, and give clues to how it is done. The Rules for components were hidden. Spells can trigger abilities that are triggered by the Concentrate or Manipulate actions. Paizo is just putting them in the traits directly.

[@erful]

@@Olimar92 specifically important was to consider verbal components, as in situations where you can't speak but you can move your arms freely to do somatics. In a magicly silenced area, you could use Heal 1-action, but not 2-actions or 3-actions because you can't speak.

[@derskalde4973]

I don't get some of the changes. I mean, I get stuff like flat-footed, especially as a non-english speaker (flat-footed was translated as "Auf dem falschen Fuß" in German, which is a bit long, and kinda weird and awkward in some circumstances from a grammatical standpoint). And while I understand english pretty good and have no Problem reading stuff like books in english, I prefer reading Game Rules in my native tongue, just to safe a little time from translating it in my head to apply to my table. But I don't understand why they changed the Genies, for example. Djinn, Ifrit and Marid are from middle eastern folklore, so changing their names due to Copyright reasons wouldn't make sense. That'd be like trying to Copyright a fairy tale like Red Riding Hood, or a Name like George.

[@Olimar92]

What's ironic about the Genie changes, is that Ifrit was used for the Geniekin, and now it's the Fire Genie. Which is closer to the origins. Just what the hell is with the other names?

[@Vendavalez]

On the last point, you are right that the names of monster types are not really copyrightable, but the way that a monster using that name, having certain types of stats, general look, behavior, and feel, may be. And that’s a problem because you don’t have to be legally right in court to have the people you are suing spend themselves out of business in legal fees before the legal matter is ever settled. And, as we should have learned recently, thinking “oh that’s too crazy/dumb/petty/frivolous/illogical/evil/whatever for even Hasbro/WotC to try to do!” is a mentality that will get you in trouble sooner or later. Assuming the worst and leaving no possible openings was the only path forward for everyone and not by Paizo’s decision.

[@derskalde4973]

@@Vendavalez But by that logic, wouldn't they have to change the Name of every other creature, that is not a Paizo/Pathfinder original, as well? Those creatures are inspired by ancient folklore, so there isn't much you can change in how a creature works before it stops being that creature. That'd be just like saying, "I'll sue you, because the wolves in your RPG are too similar to the wolves in our RPG". You can only change so much , before that creature wouldn't be a Wolf anymore, but a Lion. And then you'd be right back at the beginning. You'd have to change Minotaurs, Centaurs, Nymphs, Mummies, Ghouls, Zombies, Giants, Elves, Dwarves, etc, because Hasbro could just as well decide to sue them, because those feel "too similar" to the ones in DnD.

[@Vendavalez]

@@derskalde4973 maybe? I don’t know. There may very well be something related to historical use in other games prior to dnd that makes them feel safer with those than with the ones being changed. But that is merely speculation. Maybe I’m entirely wrong and this is something they are doing simply because they want Pathfinder to have more of its own flavor. But every interview I’ve seen from Paizo employees implies to me that they would not be doing most of these things if it were not for legal reasons. And I tend to believe that because a lot of these feel strictly inferior and forced.

[@Olimar92]

@@Vendavalez It's called Public Domain. After a certain amount of time after the original creator dies, the creation enters the Public Domain so anyone can use and profit from said idea. Creatures from ancient Myths and Legends are Public Domain.

[@Olimar92]

I'm still surprised the Attribute Flaw still exists.

[@Sturmjaeger]

Considering you always have the option of just using 2 free +1 attributes instead, it's not a big deal. Some people like the flaw for RP purposes.

[@Olimar92]

@@Sturmjaeger Yes, but they made the Voluntary Flaw rule for that reason. Well they changed it to that for that reason. So if people want the Flaw for RP, it's there. I've never understood the wording for the Flaw. Like why act like anything else can grant a Flaw. Nothing gives you an Attribute Flaw other than Ancestry.

[@user-fp9hu6xk8x]

Why would they call it reactive strike? That just confuses me with the Champion's retributive strike, when AOO is a gaming/industry standard term. Oh right -- they want to distance themselves from D&D after the OGL 1.1 debacle.

[@trdgpanther4464]

I have to wait and see the whole thing in November, But I think Alignment and stats will still be in my games, not really feeling the "tags" replacing Alignment and seeing an 18 instead of just a +4 just feels more satisfying to me, other changes not an issue Tom

[@trdgpanther4464]

Update: just noted cantrips will no longer use stat bonus for damage , instead a base 2D4 damage and other things have changed like produce Flame no longer can be used at range so looks like magic is getting more of a changing revamp that we thought. I'll have to see all the spell changes and the get all focus points back in one go is attached to a feat, not sure about that one and only some classes get that option....

[@moekitsune]

I feel like those two things specifically are extremely easy to slot in to the remaster, plus I'm pretty sure they were only removed due to Paizo wanting to separate from the OGL as much as possible

[@trdgpanther4464]

@@moekitsune Not sure as we need to see the full changes in all the spells, looking like a bit of reduced damage for more versitility in some cases be in range, different effects and so forth. did they get this rebalance right?? time will tell

[@devcrom3]

Did you have to sign your comment?

[@trdgpanther4464]

@@devcrom3 You bet :)

[@eyedoc8567]

Is this going to be released in book form?

[@danacoleman4007]

No. I believe it will only be available in mug form.

[@Ein0r10]

Thanks for that. Man, these legalese copyright changes will be quite the pain in the butt. Especially when mixing newer and older players. Some play with ability scores and points, the others with attribute bonuses. some with flat footed, others with off-guard. Sure, it's minor, but annoying nonetheless, especially when you want to look up stuff on Nethys and get confronted with the new wording, that goes against the wordings you have used for years. I don't mind the removal of alignment, or renaming spells. And it could make it harder to get some of my older friends to try p2e, because the "it's basically the same just a little different" argument doesn't work as well as it would have before the ogl disaster. Some of that just irks me more than it should.

[@Olimar92]

They completely changed Wish. It's now a Ritual that takes a day to cast, requires two other people, Legendary in all 4 Tradition Skills, A secondary Check in Crafting and Diplomacy and can do anything the person wants. The Divine, Occult and Primal equivalents are gone because Wish does everything. I want to know why Crafting of all things. What are you making during a Ritual that alters reality?

[@Ein0r10]

@@Olimar92 They put the old Wish into Manifestation. As for the ritual, maybe that's just poorly written and they forgot the 'or' between the Traditions and you only need to be legendary in one of those Traditions. At least I'd handle it that way. Or maybe I'd change it that all legendary requirements must be covered, just not by a single caster. And the primary check can be made by whoever wants to, or whose Tradition fits the type of wish they want to cast. It could make for a decent party goal. "A group of adventureres exploring the world to fullfill their dream: Casting one of the most powerful rituals out there, yada yda." Diplomacy and Crafting for secondary seem reasonable. For example crafting the Wish Ritual site, and Diplomacy for better convening with the cosmic powers. Then again, I never had a party without a single Crafter. And I also never reached a level where Wish would be a readily available spell. Except purchasing it somehow, or a story related occurence. I like the change, it is very flavorful. And ultimately a lot more powerful. If I will handle it like it has been shown in this preview is debatable. Maybe they'll add a few more changes or clarifications later. The whole preview seems a bit unprecise. But good enough for a quick overview.

[@Olimar92]

@@Ein0r10 It's actually impossible for a character to have Legendary in all Four Tradition Skills, outside of Rogue and Investigator. Can't remember if any other Class gets a Skill Increase at each level. Unless they changed the rate at which you can get Legendary Proficiency, you can only get 3 (It starts at 15 at goes every 2 levels). And that's going to be difficult as you only have 9 total Skill Increases for any Class that Isn't like the Rogue. Let's say you get Trained in all 4, you need 12 total Skill Increases to get them all to Legendary. So I'm going to take a guess that the Wish Ritual only needs one of the four instead of all four. Especially since it would be weird that no Spellcaster could actually cast the spell if they required all 4. Manifestation is Alter Reality, Miracle, Primal Phenomenon and Wish in the same spell. All of them did the same thing, just with different Traditions. As a petty aside, I hate that Traditions are the defining feature of Dragons. They haven't been powerful beasts in these TTRPGS, just Demigods. I do miss Dragons just being beasts that existed as the most Apex of Apex Predators. Creatures so powerful it takes a group of Legendary Heros to fell them. Now they're mostly just powerful Spellcasters, like a Lich or something.

[@Ein0r10]

@@Olimar92 Just goes to show how powerful rogues are 😅 And I never really cared for that aspect of the dragons, I kept using them lake apex monsters the same way as I did in D&D 3.5. Sometimes as beasts, sometimes more as masterninds with good to amazing magic abilities. They are just too fun not to use.

[@Olimar92]

@@Ein0r10 I do hope Wish gets an or placed in the Primary Check. Like, why shouldn't a Wizard be able to cast Wish? It was originally an Arcane Spell. Plus I don't want to try and figure out all the ways to get Skill Increases on the off chance I could even get the Ritual. It's a Rare Ritual as well. You have to plan on having that Ritual if you need all four. Which would be interesting, having a Rogue or Investigator pouring over random tomes of every magic possible so they can be capable of casting the most powerful spell in existence. Actually, requiring all four makes sense for Wish. It's like the Ultimate Spell. It can warp reality to the point even the Gods Themselves can't easily reverse the effect. Hell, it's in the Ritual Description that if what you want is big enough, the Gods will try and stop you. So no, they should not have the OR. You need Legendary in 4 Skills to pull off this Ritual. That's how I'll do it. A Rogue dedicating 12 of their 18 Skill Increases to the Tradition Skills seems to be a reasonable start for the Ritual.

[@bobr4024]

Are they still doing the same concept with leveling - adding your level to all your abilities and skills? I never liked this concept and part of what keeps me away from Pathfinder. This gives that 6-7 level range where you can’t hit a certain level above you and certain levels below, you will never be able to hit you. Just wondering if this has been tweaked at all.

[@HowItsPlayed]

That hasn't been changed, but there is an optional rule included in GM Core called "Proficiency Without Level" that removes character level from the calculations.

[@brianm7321]

I love how people see the monster ability grab and how it says it does not "apply or count towards" map and they are interpreting it that it does not have a map from the strike itself and that it never gets a map penalty even if the make multiple strikes. Hopefully this can be clarified further in future videos.

[@devcrom3]

It doesn't apply or count towards MAP. There's literally one way to interpret that. There is no MAP. You do not apply MAP. It doesn't increase MAP. Is this clear to you yet?

[@brianm7321]

It reads that the Atheletic check does not apply a map or does not count towards your map. It doesn't say it ignores previous maps from the strike itself, not the athletics check. I guess reading is hard. The strike that had the grab trait still has the attack trait. It sounds like it does not double dip with the attack adding to the map and then getting a second map from the athletic check. Thus does not apply a map or count toward your map penalty. It is apparent you do not realize that the strike that has the grapple trait and the grapple (athletics check) are two separate actions under one strike. 🤦 I guess reading is hard for some. 🤣

[@BeastFoundry]

@@brianm7321you are not quoting the text fully and its causing you confussion. The quote is "This attempt neither applies nor counts toward the creature’s multiple attack penalty." So they are saying the attempt does not apply the MAP nor does it count towards MAP. If we seperate these thoughts it becomes even more clear: 1) This attempt does not APPLY the creature’s multiple attack penalty. 2) This attempt does not COUNT toward the creature’s multiple attack penalty. You are merging this thought into "This attempt does not apply toward the creature’s multiple attack penalty." Which if this is what they meant they would not have said "applies nor counts towards" as they would mean the exact some thing.

[@devcrom3]

@@brianm7321 I guess reading is hard for the guy in your mirror.

[@Olimar92]

The spell changes seem weird, and Wish was changed from a Spell to a Ritual, so not all changes were cosmetic.

[@Twigggggy]

wish spell still exists it is called manifestation it is in there on page 8, the wish ritual is actually nice bc it functions like old wish spells of later editions.

[@Olimar92]

@@Twigggggy Manifestation is all the "Wish" spells from all traditions. Makes sense because they all do they same thing. Hate the change to Burning Hands. What was wrong with spewing flames from your hands? There is a Dragon Breath Spell! Granted it's a Sorcerer Bloodline Spell, but it still Exists.

[@aliud9904]

​@Olimar92 probably copyright unfortunately. You can always flavor it differently than how the rules are written though! For example, I have a player who has a wand, but we flavor it as a pipe that she uses to exhale her spells.

[@Olimar92]

@@aliud9904 I don't know whether to hate WotC for making people scared of using the name Burning Hands, or just upset with Paizo for making poor naming choices because WotC used the words first. I mean Thalassic? Yeah it's a zone of the Ocean, but how many people know that? Aqua meaning Water is more widespread, and used in the spell Aqueous Orb. Will it be Thalassic Orb? And who was getting confused with Positive and Negative in regards to Math? Void used to be the Negative reflection of the Plane of Air. Now it's an energy type? Void is absence of everything, how does that create Undead? Undead have changed haven't they?

[@BlueSapphyre]

@@Olimar92i’ve had new players think that Negative damage meant healing.

[@dhunter2ful]

A bit dissapointed that you still require a feat to recharge more than 1 focus point. At the 12th level you can now recharge all 3 of them, which is an improvement, but it's basically still a tax.

[@9652769]

There is now no upper limit on focus points.

[@lorenzovaletti4951]

@@9652769 luis Loza said no. Max 3 points like before. Which means very very very bad news.

[@shaundickey4598]

The feat just makes it so you can recharge all your focus points with a single refocus activity in 10 minutes. Without the feat you would refocus a separate time for each missing focus points, so it would take 30 minutes to recharge 3 instead of 10 minutes.

[@dhunter2ful]

@@9652769 there is, a dev has said the maximum of 3 stays.

[@dhunter2ful]

@@shaundickey4598 henceforth why i said it's an improvement, because now you need one feat instead of 2, and why i said that while the tax is cheaper, it's still a tax.

[@vileone13]

I think I'm sticking with the originally printed books. I feel the biggest change aside from the name changes I reaaaally don't like is the removal of Alignments. Not so much because of mortal beings though it is a good for roleplay guidance, but more for Outsiders. Angels, Azatas, Agathions, Archons, Demons, Devils, Daemons, Aeons and Proteans all rely upon alignment both as their function, identity and purpose. These creatures are LITERALLY manifestations of their particular alignment and I feel it sorta spits in the face of these beings by getting ride of their alignment distinctions. All I can say is fuck Wotc for basically forcing Paizo to go this route and it's very upsetting and infuriating for older Roleplayers like myself.

[@Jenthura]

Why does KZbin think MTG is the game being shown here? 🤣

[@Olimar92]

Why were Mephits changed? I'm also perplexed by the names of all the Genies, aside from Ifrit as that's a type of Genie from mythology. I'm guessing the other names are as well. And the Language names for the Elemental languages? Aquan is changed to Thalassic? Who's going to know that's related to water? And what happened to the Shadow Plane that they needed to change it's name? I'm more wondering what Void Damage is since Void is the absence of everything. How does Void create Undead, or are Undead altered as well? Every time they drop more information, they create more questions than answers. It would have been better to just keep us in the dark until the damned release.

[@SolStJohn]

You'd find answers to all of your questions if you tried thinking about them for a few minutes instead of expecting a KZbin comment section to do it for you.

[@OakenTome]

Thalassic and derivatives of it are fairly commonplace in my fantasy experience.

[@Sebaran_]

Mephits are wotc ip. Because of that, they not only got a name change, but an appearance change as well. The old genie names are wotc ip as well (at least that's what I assume) and they "reimagined [them] to better match folklore", so they probably would have received new names nonetheless. The elemental languages are now Greek based instead of Latin based. The fact that you relate Aquan to water is because you are familiar with the Latin version, others may as well be more accustomed to the Greek version. Void: "The vast void of the Negative Energy Plane is a merciless, lightless expanse of manifest destruction and nothingness. [...] Yet the Void contains its own form of anti-life." (GMG pg. 139)That's from the CURRENT text of the Negative Plane. In lore it already was the void all along. btw: the positive plane was Creation's Forge all along, as well. "Known as Creation’s Forge, the Positive Energy Plane is [...]" (GMG pg. 139) Shadow Plane: Same as with negative and positive plane, the name was already established, so going with it is an easy switch (and furthers the distinction to dnd) Undead were and are in a state between vitality (positive) and void (negative). They are corrupted by the void (negative). "The black depths also swarm with undead, creatures doomed to a mockery of life by the interaction of their souls with the plane’s entropic energy." (GMG pg. 139) Pure void creatures see them as unnatural as well: "[Void raptors] react violently not only toward creatures sustained by positive energy, but also toward undead, whom they view as unnatural parasites unworthy of their plane’s energies." (GMG pg. 139) All in all: I honestly don't think that they are creating new questions (ok, granted, there are a few mechanical ones, but these were there since the first announcement) and rather streamline what is already there to better suit the vision they had in mind when creating pf2e in the first place; getting rid of all the dead weight that only was there to appeal to players coming from dnd and pf1e.

[@Olimar92]

@@SolStJohn I'd be doing a lot of google searching just to find something related to the name changes. I'm not a Paizo writer, so I don't know the reason they changed words that are not owned by WotC. Plus, Netherworld has mostly been a word for Hell or the Afterlife. Both are not what the Shadow Plane is described as. Though I highly expect a lore change.

[@devcrom3]

Some people really just like to bitch, huh?

[@BestgirlJordanfish]

These changes across the board rule, but especially death to alignment and ability scores. As someone who didn’t start with D&D/PF, always hated those and found them just bad vestigial mechanics. Alignment’s not even good for character creation or description. Rather just say what concept your character values or embodies, or use Virtue + Vice from world of darkness (Root + Bloom / Needle + Thread are other faves).

[@Survive_PACNW]

I just wish they would be honest, the amount of changes essentially makes it PF 2.5.

[@Almighty_Mage]

I don’t like the removal of attribute scores

[@Twigggggy]

they aren’t used in the monsters stat blocks b4 the change it just makes sense to shift it especially sonce there isnt ability damage in the system.

[@Sturmjaeger]

I'm fine with it. They were always kind of pointless. It's the mods everyone cares about, anyway.

[@christophemortier5878]

I also dislike that a lot, byebye pf2e, I'll go back to 1e

[@Twigggggy]

@@christophemortier5878 like this seems like such a moot point to just stop playing, it isnt even that mechanics heavy. You never use you ability score it is always the modifier that is important. especially since everything is fairly fixed when it comes to ability score progression.

[@Olimar92]

@@Twigggggy The progression hasn't even changed. They talked about the trouble of increasing past +4 as the scores would be gone, but it still takes two boosts.

[@ICLHStudio]

I'm on the fence about some of these (I think 'void' and 'vitality' feel more generic and lack the distinct connection of 'positive/negative energy' for example), although some I do like; the biggest problem is just how much you have to do all the terminology conversions to use pretty much any of the other content (mostly a problem for new players, but as I was gearing up to try and start a couple campaigns in the coming months, that is a problem I'm going to run into). Other than that probably the thing that annoys me is not so much the actual change in removing alignment, but between this and WotC also dropping it, I find it kind of frustrating how all the comments and explanations by the designers show that they don't seem to understand what alignment even is or what it's supposed to represent or the value that it brings. I mean, I get that players and GMs often mis-interpret or mis-apply alignment, but the fact that the people who actually make these games don't even understand it baffles me.

[@waylonoconner9121]

No thanks, I’ll just keep rolling with what I am used too. Besides, it removes a lot of the flavor and just seems like a way to make all the classes feel the same. That’s OK, it’s one of the great things about TTRPG’s, you don’t have to if you and your players don’t want to

[@Eccelsed]

I got much shit because I said this was going to be 2.5 and in ended up being 2.5

[@IndieGoFigure]

I see this more as a 2.1, there seams to be a lot more renaming and moving stuff around than their is actual changes. The shouting down the 2.5 claims got was somewhat unfair though and the book ain't published yet.

[@Eccelsed]

@@IndieGoFigure all those spell changes (not only names) class reworks, rebalances, talisman changes, alignment removal, holy unholy reworks, refocus changes. And the books are not out yet, this is already so big, definetively 2.5

[@moekitsune]

Does it matter what it's called?

[@lorenzovaletti4951]

7:26 you killed me with that note about Loza's comment. This is very bad. They have indeed nerfed casters even more, as a result of the rest of the changes then... that's... horrible.

[@thedruski85]

Have they given any reasoning behind all the genie changes? I don't believe WoTC owns any of the rights to words like djinn, ifrit, marid, etc. Those are all words based on Islamic legend. I guess what I'm asking is why did they feel the need to focus so much of their energy to update something that really didn't need any updating?

[@Olimar92]

To distance from D&D. Why else would they change the name of Aquan to Thalassic?

[@thedruski85]

@@Olimar92 is that the reason they gave? Or the one you believe?

[@Coffeewings334]

What you have to keep in mind is that while WotC doesn’t own words like Marid, Alignment, Djinni, Flat-Footed, etc, that is by no means a foolproof defense in this case. It’s not the words themselves that are legally problematic, it is using them to describe terms and creatures identical or similar to the corresponding unique concepts in DnD. WotC does not own the word “Djinn”, but they do own the “DnD Djinn”.

[@Olimar92]

@@thedruski85 it's my best guess.

[@Olimar92]

@@Coffeewings334 Djinn is an actual thing from mythology. Arabic myth if I remember.

[@ren_dhark]

Didn't think that I would hate the Remastered version so much. It looks like they have changed even fundamental stuff not because it didn't work or had it's flaws, but because they try to avoid as much references to D&D and the OGL license as possible for legal reasons. Abolishing the Alignment systems take a lot of variety out of the game reducing it to a binary system of holy or unholy, as if moral had anything to do with religion in the first place. What about the alignment planes, will Hell, Abaddon and the Abyss merge together to the unholy planes or what will be the dividing factor of the 9 planes when it is not the alignment / ideals of it's inhabitants? And what is the reason for abolishing Magic Schools after they've made such a great work differentiating them in the Secrets of Magic Book, it feels like Harry Potter having only potion classes at Hogwarts because it's all magic anyway. It was fun playing different courses in Strength of Thousands and I've grown up with these categories since the BECMI edition over 40 years ago. I really see no valid reason to dumb the magic system down so much and making the wizard completely generic by it, not to forget the Runelords and the sins corresponding with these schools. There wasn't even a single thing in the changes you've shown that I would consider a good idea and an improvement to the game mechanics or it's Golarion Lore.

[@Olimar92]

Most answers I've found for removing the schools are: D&D started it and that the Schools were far to restricting in regards to making Wizard options. Like the new "Schools" couldn't just pull from a couple different lists. Ironically Illusion still exists, just not a School. It's a Trait. A lot of Spells traits are now just Manipulate and Concentrate.

[@moekitsune]

Honestly I like the removal of alignment and schools. It's a lot more freeing to know that your characters personality doesn't have to be pigeonholed into a 3x3 grid or that your wizard could only specifically study one eighth of magic. Plus I feel like the new schools make much more sense.

[@moekitsune]

Also Paizo needed to cut as many ties with D&D as possible to prevent Hasbro from doing anything stupid. The OGL debacle showed that it wasn't safe for them to use anything remotely associated with D&D anymore.

[@Khunkurisu]

Change is so scary when you get old huh.

[@ren_dhark]

@@Khunkurisu Are you talking about climate change now? In that case change is scary, indeed! Or the rise of right-wing fascist parties, that's scary af. But changes to a game? I've played more than 50 different RPG over the last 40 years and if I would fear change (whatever this really means anyway) I would still play the BECMI edition, which in fact I sometimes do. I've liked the changes Pathfinder had made from version 1 to Pathfinder 2 as they were for the better of the system, not just some legalese crap or oversimplifications of game mechanics I really liked and that made sense for Pathfinder in my personal opinion.

[@ThePromptWizard2023]

How annoying all these things had to be renamed because of copyright issues and greed. But that's okay, I have house rules so I'll keep alignments around as well some other things and of course never buy another product from wizards of the Coast

[@lordbachus]

To much change… currently many dnd players switching to the more advanced and indepth pathfinder system will quickly feel at home because so many things are named the same…. With all the name changes this will be much less the case.. the impact will be much larger then expected to new players then it will be to pathfinder veterans..

[@Twigggggy]

still not a fan of scamp it sounds like a slur like someone who is not mephits title of mephits

[@Twigggggy]

everything else looks amazing though cant wait for the books

[@Olimar92]

It's not entirely positive anyway. A Scamp is usually someone who is rambunctious and misbehaves. Granted an apt description of Mephits, but that's not their entire existence. It's just calling them one facet of their existence.

[@Sturmjaeger]

It's not a slur, though. It's literally just means a mischievous child.

[@Twigggggy]

@@Sturmjaeger yh im sure a whole group of entities like being called mischievous children

[@Alex-cq1zr]

Ig the justification behind it can be that they are more so esoteric beings like demons or celestials, so there is less association with racism. After all, golarion's demons are usually explicitly manifestations of sin and such. Altho there are some pieces about how they can redeem themselves, ig it probably isn't as problematic due to this distance from mortal stuff and being more esoreric / like manifestations of an idea?

[@johnharrison2086]

Some necessary changes but a lot more that are completely and utterly unecessary. Changing easily understood terms to different, far stupider terminology is not a good idea. My purchase of PF2 stops with Treasure Vault. I won't accept this nonsense.

[@Pistonrager]

Vitality damage? Holy shit that sounds terrible.

[@daved.8483]

Im an Asvanced 5th edition GM The biggest turn-offs for me ( so it is what I think and not facts) were: A magic system, which is overcomplicated and way too rigid. To many unnecessary rules (my humble opinion), which do not make it a beginner friendly system. The math behind it is also a bit too much for a game. I would also like to point that Paizo is an amazing company, and I do love Starfinder! You all enjoy your games, cheers!🫡